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

lancest
September 3rd, 2007, 10:20 PM
Hey -Windows is not for everybody! If you want a fast, safe and easy software system go back to your Linux. You deserve it. Go cry to $MS and see if they care. ha ha

jso2897
September 4th, 2007, 12:33 AM
Part of the problem I believe, has to do with literacy. I have no computer smarts (and not too many brains period) - but I am old, and was schooled at a time when literacy and good reading comprehension were literally beaten into one. And the ability to read, understand, and follow written instructions is crucial in learning from the Linux community.
While you can do a great deal more with Linux, it's not like OSX or Windows, where the few things you can do are laid out for you in little pictures, like the cash registers at McDonalds that have little pictures of hamburgers on them.
When I read some of the negative posters here, and see their level of grammar, spelling, vocabulary and syntax, it amazes me that they ever manged to get Ubuntu loaded onto their machine to begin with.
What really worries me is what's going to happen if everything goes blooey one of these days and we have to build civilization all over again. How are a bunch of illiterate and semi-literate people going to be able to do it? Or will we just sink back into the stone age?
Oh well. There's probably some re-runs of American Idol on.:(

HermanAB
September 4th, 2007, 12:37 AM
Hmm, people who want a completely pointyclicky system, should use Mandriva, not Ubuntu. The Ubuntu wizards will eventually get there, but at the moment there still is a little bit of Bash-ing to do.

uputer
September 4th, 2007, 02:11 AM
I would like to know why some linux users are so unfriendly with people who criticize it?

I know I won't get an answer but I am curious why it's such a taboo thing to criticize both 1) Linux and 2) the respective distro of the related forum

I've noticed this countless times. No one will change my mind in the idea that Linux is not user-friendly. You need to spend way more time at it than Windoze. Linux is NOT ready for the desktop. The idea that it is ready is a perspective from a 'computer geek's p.o.v. aka someone who has spent countless hours tweaking, has a computer (programming) background or is just adept at utilizing computer stuff. It is time-consuming. I dislike Windows and the MSoft corp. and don't get me started. I could probably 'go there' and bash it without getting warnings but it's a different criticism. I know Ubuntu/Kubuntu and all other Linux distros are very useful and the fact that it's opensource, is great. But, why do so many people insist on how user-friendly it is? If it was, MS would be dead right now. They would be gone. Finito.

rsambuca
September 4th, 2007, 02:22 AM
uputer, I think the biggest difference is that Windows is pre-installed for probably 95% of computer users. Until recently, linux was not. I have installed ubuntu on my mother's computer, it works perfectly and she is 100% happy with it. Could she have installed it herself? I can honestly say absolutely not (I had to try different boot options just to rev up the CD!).

The last time I was there I noticed that she had actually installed a couple of programs herself, without even checking with me first! OK, they were just from the 'add/remove programs', but hey, it's a start.

I fully believe that ubuntu IS ready for the desktop, if somebody does the installation. Windows is no different in that regard, and by my experience, is actually much more difficult to install than ubuntu.

aysiu
September 4th, 2007, 02:26 AM
I would like to know why some linux users are so unfriendly with people who criticize it? They aren't. Take a look at the Gutsy Idea Pool subforum. It's full of criticisms from many of these same Linux users you think are unfriendly to those who criticize.


No one will change my mind in the idea that Linux is not user-friendly. And therein lies the problem. It's not that you criticize Linux. It's that you generalize based on your experience. Your experience is valid, but it is only your experience. You had a tough time, and I'm sorry about that, but not everyone has a tough time with Linux, and not everyone has an easy time with Windows.

And many of the criticisms are unfair. For example, people will often compare a preinstalled Windows to a self-installed Linux. How is that fair? Seriously. Or people will compare "intuitiveness" based on twenty years of Windows experience and two weeks of Linux experience. How is that fair? For more details, read https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CriticismFAQ
The idea that it is ready is a perspective from a 'computer geek's p.o.v. aka someone who has spent countless hours tweaking, has a computer (programming) background or is just adept at utilizing computer stuff. On what basis are you saying that? I don't fall into that category, and a lot of other users who do not either. Those are your own baseless assumptions.

You will also tend to find that those who think they are "criticizing Linux" are actually not doing anything practical to improve Linux. For more details, read What's better than whining on the forums? Making a difference. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=78741)

uputer
September 4th, 2007, 03:10 AM
They aren't. Take a look at the Gutsy Idea Pool subforum. It's full of criticisms from many of these same Linux users you think are unfriendly to those who criticize.
I'm talking more about the seemingly emotional connection to a particular distro. You don't really notice too much connection to a Windows OS. One can bash Windoze and someone might defend it but I don't think it's as emotional.



And therein lies the problem. It's not that you criticize Linux. It's that you generalize based on your experience. Your experience is valid, but it is only your experience. You had a tough time, and I'm sorry about that, but not everyone has a tough time with Linux, and not everyone has an easy time with Windows.
I see your point but it's not entirely accurate. Read the forums? Read forums in other distro sites? There will be a population of posters who are very frustrated and can't get their particular task/program/operation to work. Many people have trouble with Windows and I think these same people wouldn't give two glances towards Linux. It is not restricted or limited to only my experience. It might be my experience but it's also safe and rational speculation, I think.


And many of the criticisms are unfair. For example, people will often compare a preinstalled Windows to a self-installed Linux. How is that fair? Seriously. Or people will compare "intuitiveness" based on twenty years of Windows experience and two weeks of Linux experience. How is that fair? On what basis are you saying that? I don't fall into that category, and a lot of other users who do not either. Those are your own baseless assumptions.
How is it fair? Windows was designed that way and some of the reasons that it's a poor OS is coincidentally which makes it 'easier' in comparison to Linux. Although, there are many similarities when you compare the GUI methods, the fact that much of Linux is oriented towards the Command Line and gives the user the option to 'see what's going on' is also a weakness in many ways.

Even if you have problems with Windoze, you can reinstall yourself. There are problems with drivers and HDD stuff but there are enough people who have explained solutions online. You don't have to learn a command line or 'dependencies' or other requirements to get it installed. The learning curve is different. When Linux becomes more popular or more people become disillusioned and frustrated with the closed source, imperialist culture policy and ways of MS, people may put more time and effort into learning Linux. Maybe but then again, people might not be prepared to invest that time. They might be willing to use a dumbed-down GUI-style Linux distro but then we're having a different discussion, aren't we?

I'm talking about the current state of Linux.


You will also tend to find that those who think they are "criticizing Linux" are actually not doing anything practical to improve Linux.
People who report bugs or email suggestions, maybe they're helping? I don't know. I know I have seen 'bugs' or flaws not fixed. Again, many developers are not overly concerned with complaints or at least that is my impression. It is free/open source and while they would like it to 'work well,' complaints don't seem to make much difference. I could be wrong and I hope I am, though. They probably even get a lot of complaints. If someone welcomes or wants my complaints, I'll happily offer them. It would be good if I can contribute to any improvements or if anyone welcomes my suggestions.

rsambuca
September 4th, 2007, 04:17 AM
Even if you have problems with Windoze, you can reinstall yourself. There are problems with drivers and HDD stuff but there are enough people who have explained solutions online. You don't have to learn a command line or 'dependencies' or other requirements to get it installed. The learning curve is different.
I stand by my previous statement that most Windows users can not reinstall themselves. Also, with ubuntu you do not need to learn anything about dependencies or the command line unless you are trying some obscure piece of software.

uputer
September 4th, 2007, 05:44 AM
I stand by my previous statement that most Windows users can not reinstall themselves. Also, with ubuntu you do not need to learn anything about dependencies or the command line unless you are trying some obscure piece of software.
Most people I know (who use computers) use Windows and there might be some who cannot reinstall but I think the majority do even if there are problems. But, like I have said before, the support is widespread. You need to configure IP or router or software, you have tech support who only know Windows and only support Windows.

I have heard before that there are situations in which the GUI is not the best way or best suited to solve a problem or get something work. In that case, you use the command line. Therefore, in those cases, if you are not sufficiently familiar with the command line, you are done unless you can find someone who knows Linux. Most likely, you are seeking support on a forum unless you personally know a linux user.

ontik
September 4th, 2007, 07:55 AM
All this shouting is interesting. It's interesting because its sounds like nothing more than the echo of the shouting I got myself involved in about 5 years ago.

That was my first crack at Linux. It drove me nuts and I found the response I got to my frustration nothing short of rude from the advocate crowd. Ah, the irony is priceless isn't it? But I decided about a week ago to revisit and see how/if things had developed. I can see the build up and slow transition in the corporates to Linux back ends, and had continued to wonder how its progressing on the desktop. Hey its free so why not take a look?

Ubuntu is the first truly grown up attempt I've seen at trying to make linux palatable to a wider audience. My experience this time has been supported with GOOD help available via the ubuntu supplied forum that has provided a resolution to every issue I had setting up the box, which mostly involved the wireless NIC and some resolution problems I had. Easy to find easy to read and they worked. I didn't understand a lot of it but it worked, and I learnt some stuff along the way.

Ubuntu has some polish about it, and I imagine some of the other distros will have matured too, but one thing I have found that really blew me away is BERYL. I've installed Ubuntu & BERYL on a 5yr old PC (512Mb SD RAM etc) with a Radeon 9200 card. How can this machine deliver stella perfomance whilst running such a rich an capable (and thus far stable) graphic environment? Its more than snappy enough to impress any windows user but with an outstanding interface to boot.

I reckon BERYL could be the killer app. Its the one thing I've been showing people since that gets "WhooaAH!" as a response.

I work in the industry and managed to get all of this done in about 12Hrs. I wouldn't recommend my mum try it but I would be happy to set up a machine for her because since I've set up these few items, I haven't need to return to the CLI. If I give her an app for each task she want to perform (already got her on GIMP) she'll be no worries after a 5 minute intro, and I'll get less supoprt calls.

All I need XP for now is Ableton Live, but I'm happy to use Linux primarily at home from this point on.


ontiK.

Coldkill
September 4th, 2007, 02:54 PM
Uputer, please stop trolling

rsambuca
September 4th, 2007, 03:59 PM
Most people I know (who use computers) use Windows and there might be some who cannot reinstall but I think the majority do even if there are problems. Really? I am referring to a fresh installation or re-installation, not a simple restoration from big-box XP restore discs.

Alex Fernandez
September 4th, 2007, 04:10 PM
Most people I know (who use computers) use Windows and there might be some who cannot reinstall but I think the majority do even if there are problems. But, like I have said before, the support is widespread. You need to configure IP or router or software, you have tech support who only know Windows and only support Windows.

I have heard before that there are situations in which the GUI is not the best way or best suited to solve a problem or get something work. In that case, you use the command line. Therefore, in those cases, if you are not sufficiently familiar with the command line, you are done unless you can find someone who knows Linux. Most likely, you are seeking support on a forum unless you personally know a linux user.

And its our fault that the Indian support workers for Netgear/Belkin/Dell/etc are un-educated and cannot help you solve a problem if you use Linux? Or that some hardware companies are ignorant and only release Windows drivers natively...

I've had "GREAT" fun talking to BT (UK Telecom/ISP) support who are in India and can "only" help if you use Windows - even though my OS of choice has no effect on thier crappy router (which runs on Linux mind you) or the crappy phoneline not working. I've had to speak to the manager of crappy call center on almost every occasion because if I have a fault with the actual "telephone" line the call center stuff insisnt asking me what OS/Browser etc I use - and then say "it does not work on Linux/Firefox" ... its an internet connections, not some rocket science software ...

On a number of occasion I've had BT "compensate" me for the trouble with 3 months free service after I had to spend 1 hour arguing with moronic call center workers.



As for GUI vs Command Line - there is only one thing I've configured via GUI - and thats my Samsung printer to work with CUPS via the KDE Printer System thing

uputer
September 4th, 2007, 04:14 PM
I never said there aren't lots of people who don't know how to re-install XP. But, there are many websites that explain how. I know a guy from work who didn't know how to re-install his Windoze computer. Another co-worker knew and did it for him. I think I am the only one there that has used Linux.

From a newbie's P.O.V.:
When you need to re-install Linux, you have to do the same web search and find the specific installation to your particular distro. For XP, it is all the same and for pure volume or numbers of users, it's a lot so there are going to be many sites with examples and explanations. In comparison, I don't see how XP will be that much more difficult to re-install. Even from a total newbie or computer illiterate person.

For the previous poster, I am not trolling. Why do you care if I am being critical? I'm just explaining the facts. I want to be proficient at Linux as I think it can be a superior system overall and it's free. I'm not hiding or making excuses, though. I find it very difficult when you need to tweak. I'm trying to become more accustomed to the command line and not do GUI stuff all the time.

vexorian
September 4th, 2007, 04:20 PM
I look in synaptic, and lo! and behold, I have gtk+ 2.0 AND glib 2.0 already installed. So what's the problem? The problem is you people write software that returns error messages that have nothing to do with the solution.
you didn't have the -dev packages.

Please, don't blame the whole of Linux just because you wanted to install source packages for no reason, you should be using synaptic or choosing the binary package, you are not a developer, you shouldn't expect to be able to install a source package, or at least you shouldn't expect source packages to be helluva easy for you to install. If there was only a source package then it was probably a test version or a not well polished program, things that a newbie shouldn't be using anyways.

Apps in windows get unfriendly to install as well, ever heard of windows installer errors? I once had an error message "Windows installer error 1405" that halted the installation, perhaps it was another random number I don't remember and not 1405 but yep, some random windows application out there can get even harder to install than a source package. How do you fix those? Oh yes, you go to microsoft and complaint for making the whole windows so user UNfriendly...

Tomosaur
September 4th, 2007, 04:34 PM
The areas people complain most about - installing unsupported software to name one, are the way they are because the Linux developers made a conscious decision to do it that way. Here's the rationale:

Windows' method of installing software is stupid, dangerous, and inefficient. Yes, it works, almost all of the time - but anyone who looks into WHY it works with any depth will criticise it because it's absolutely horrendous, and should really be a crime. It is the reason why Windows is so infested with viruses, spyare, malware, conflicts etc. Such things do not happen on Linux - not because Linux isn't popular, but because Linux is DESIGNED to avoid such issues.

On Windows, a Setup.exe file is nothing more than a glorified .zip. They usually contain all of the information a program needs to be able to run - images, documentation, etc etc - except when this isn't feasable - such as for massive programs like games or whatever. Great - self-contained software, sounds amazing. Well yes, except that doing it this way means that almost every single setup.exe contains everything it needs to run, and will install these files on your system without any checks to see whether the file is already there. Usually, this isn't a real problem - for another very bad reason: developers don't share. If you install different two video-creation applications on Windows - then both of these programs will probably have incredibly similar features. Regardless, they will both contain their own code to do the same thing and will install it on your system. This means that, over time, your machine will build up large amounts of libraries of code which all perform the same tasks. This wastes space, memory, and time. It makes far more sense for developers to use common tool-kits and libraries to write their software.

This is what dependencies are. Rather than just including the libraries that a piece of software requires inside the .deb file - more often than not, the .deb file will just have a list of other .deb files it needs to download. This is why we have package managers on Linux. At the end of the day - it is better for you and your machine if you only download and install one library to do something, rather than installing 10 libraries which do the same thing in different ways.

The package management system also allows all software to be vetted and checked. This means that it is almost impossible for you to unwittingly install malicious code.

Now - the reason why installing stuff from outside the repositories is troublesome is usually because of these dependencies. That is just the nature of the beast. I'd rather have to read on occasion and go looking for some other package than to invest in resource-hungry anti-virus, anti-spyware, Crap-Cleaner style applications. It is RARE that you need to look outside the repositories for software on Linux, but on Windows - you have to manually keep your system in check and look out for garbage building up etc.

Sure, error messages COULD be clearer sometimes, but that's trivial compared to reinstalling Windows just because it inexplicably grinds to a halt.

rsambuca
September 4th, 2007, 04:39 PM
Windows' method of installing software is stupid, dangerous, and inefficient. Yes, it works, almost all of the time - but anyone who looks into WHY it works with any depth will criticise it because it's absolutely horrendous, and should really be a crime. It is the reason why Windows is so infested with viruses, spyare, malware, conflicts etc. Such things do not happen on Linux - not because Linux isn't popular, but because Linux is DESIGNED to avoid such issues.

Oh please! Let's cut the melodramatics!

LaRoza
September 4th, 2007, 04:41 PM
...Sometimes I am too literal...

rsambuca
September 4th, 2007, 04:48 PM
My comment had nothing to do with security. Did you notice the red highlights? I was laughing at the preposterous statement that it "should really be a crime" to create a Windows style installer.

ticopelp
September 4th, 2007, 05:01 PM
I have heard before that there are situations in which the GUI is not the best way or best suited to solve a problem or get something work. In that case, you use the command line. Therefore, in those cases, if you are not sufficiently familiar with the command line, you are done unless you can find someone who knows Linux. Most likely, you are seeking support on a forum unless you personally know a linux user.

You could say the same of having to edit the Windows registry.

Henry Rayker
September 4th, 2007, 05:01 PM
For the last week I've been trying to install a single program. That's it, just one. Not an entire office suite or high-end graphics package. Just simple, little Disc-O-Matic 0.3. And you know what? I don't even know if it would have done what I was looking for. All I wanted to do was burn data to a bunch of CDs using multiple CD drives at the same time (and don't reply saying this or that program would do it. I'm DONE with linux.). But I have no earthly idea what this program does because linux and discomatic fought me tooth-and-nail all week long keeping me from installation. One step forward and two steps back. It was frustrating. It made me angry. And nearly made me cuss.

I tried asking for help in this forum (here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=169401) and here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=162925) ). But I soon learned that help from people so entrenched in this kind of software are by nature user-unfriendly themselves. They honestly tried to help me. rsambuca, splintercellguy and schorsch did the best they could. Thank you. Really.

But the real "bad guys" are those that make this operating system and write software for it. In their quest to get out from under the world-wide domination of Microsoft, they make it impossible for those of us with the same desire to follow.

Why should it take me a week to try and figure out how to install a single program? It shouldn't. The only help the author gave was a text file included in the package that basically said type ./configure, type make and type make install. How am I supposed to interpret the gobbeldy-gook that gets regurgitated in the terminal window? The author's help file was no help at all.

You people should police each other and make some basic requirements for your programs. Simple error messages would be a great place to start. You know, the configure process halts and says, "ERROR: Please install "libglib2.0-dev" and "libgtk2.0-dev" through your package manager." But no. The terminal window displays

checking for gtk+-2.0 >= 2.2 glib-2.0 >= 2.2... Package gtk+-2.0 was not found in the pkg-config search path. Perhaps you should add the directory containing `gtk+-2.0.pc' to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable No package 'gtk+-2.0' found
configure: error: Library requirements (gtk+-2.0 >= 2.2 glib-2.0 >= 2.2) not met; consider adjusting the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable if your libraries are in a nonstandard prefix so pkg-config can find them.
I look in synaptic, and lo! and behold, I have gtk+ 2.0 AND glib 2.0 already installed. So what's the problem? The problem is you people write software that returns error messages that have nothing to do with the solution. I re-installed those two packages 3 separate times. Still getting the same message after each installation. It wasn't until I did a search on this forum that I found I needed to install the -dev packages. HOW IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT'S HOLY AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW I NEED TO INSTALL A BLOODY -DEV PACKAGE?!? Is it so hard, really, to include error/info messages in the installation process!? Even in the days of MSDOS there were error messages in all the command line installations. Even if the terminal window just displays an alpha-numeric code and I have to look that up in a text file. That would be SO much better than what I just subjected myself to.

I don't care to read any of the rest of this thread. I read this much of your original post and decided this would be the best place to chime in.

Different distributions handle things differently. Not all distros have -dev packages. Hell, some distros don't even have PACKAGES. The messages sent out are to the lowest common denominator: they assume you installed from source (because you are installing this package from source) and provide the help from there.

It took me some time to learn this, but when you think about it that way, it makes total sense. If anything, I'd say this is the fault of the distros and the way they package things.

armandh
September 4th, 2007, 05:28 PM
Many developers create software for thier own use, and then release it for others to use "as is", you should be thankfull they are releasing software for free in the first place
not assigning any blame but if one tries to use such he is on his own and should not blame any.
I understand there is a lot of "as is" code and would not think to try it at my level of expertise.
I have every respect for those who write it and give it, none for those who look in the mouth of a gift horse.
[complain about the gift]
in the context of the whole post it is a bit different

1peter318
September 4th, 2007, 06:49 PM
In addition to most of the things listed, "Desktop" to me means you can easily read and write to entire NTFS drives and creates links from such without having to learn and run scripts. Personally, i do not think Ubuntu can be considered a viable desktop OS replacement until it at least will do that. As well as resolve any question about legality of audio/video codecs. And with Vita pushing extremes of unasked for permissions, i would rather have a Linux distro that is not so paranoid but just as capable as Ubuntu. Thanks.

jso2897
September 4th, 2007, 07:07 PM
I never said there aren't lots of people who don't know how to re-install XP. But, there are many websites that explain how. I know a guy from work who didn't know how to re-install his Windoze computer. Another co-worker knew and did it for him. I think I am the only one there that has used Linux.

From a newbie's P.O.V.:
When you need to re-install Linux, you have to do the same web search and find the specific installation to your particular distro. For XP, it is all the same and for pure volume or numbers of users, it's a lot so there are going to be many sites with examples and explanations. In comparison, I don't see how XP will be that much more difficult to re-install. Even from a total newbie or computer illiterate person.

For the previous poster, I am not trolling. Why do you care if I am being critical? I'm just explaining the facts. I want to be proficient at Linux as I think it can be a superior system overall and it's free. I'm not hiding or making excuses, though. I find it very difficult when you need to tweak. I'm trying to become more accustomed to the command line and not do GUI stuff all the time.

I think it's a pretty good illustration of the fact that different people have different experiences, and also tend to interpret the same experiences differently.
I am a "noob" - only about a year on Ubuntu, and not very computer savvy to begin with. My last two or three Ubuntu installs have been walks in the park, complete with little birds fliiting around my head dropping flower petals, Disney -style.
By contrast, the last couple of Windows re-installs I have done were NIGHTMARES. On one of my machines, it installed the right drivers for a couple of pieces of hardware, the wrong ones for a couple of others, and none at all for a couple more. I spent HOURS on the web and frantically sifting through my own disc library. Then, several updates froze on install, and would not complete. I even got so desperate that I went to a Windows "help" forum, where I received many helpful comments along the lines of "F**K off, Noob!" and "Google it!". Before I was done, a day out of my life was gone, and it still was messed up. I finally gave up, installed Ubuntu, and was fully functional - all in about two hours time. And while I was successful with the other machine in question, it still took the better part of a day.
And I don't even want to talk about my visits to a Macforum looking help with an old Imac somebody gave me. It took about a hours worth of that snot-nosed elitism before I was burning the Xubuntu disk I finally made the machine work with.
So, I guess it boils down to the fact that different experiences make us all different folks, and different strokes...etc.

BLTicklemonster
September 4th, 2007, 07:22 PM
it could also say a lot about people who try to do something they dont know how to do, then complain because they can't do it. if you don't have the willingness to learn, or the forethought to read about something ebfore installing yet, then I have no sympathy for you when you try to use it. linux is not windows, there are differences between the two. just because you cant understand the differences does not mean there is a problem with the os, there is a problem with you

Now that's just really helpful. Good job. Way to go. Nothing like being unhelpful to make people feel wanted, there, bucko.

Soarer
September 4th, 2007, 07:25 PM
In addition to most of the things listed, "Desktop" to me means you can easily read and write to entire NTFS drives and creates links from such without having to learn and run scripts. Personally, i do not think Ubuntu can be considered a viable desktop OS replacement until it at least will do that. As well as resolve any question about legality of audio/video codecs. And with Vita pushing extremes of unasked for permissions, i would rather have a Linux distro that is not so paranoid but just as capable as Ubuntu. Thanks.

Well, it really doesn't seem sensible to require an OS to read & write in the proprietary (patent protected?) file system format of another OS - I understand it will, though I haven't tried it.

And you can fix the legality or otherwise of the codecs quite simply, by having the law changed in your country (you DO live in a democracy, don't you?) or buying a licence. I hardly think the law of the USA is the fault of Ubuntu either.

So, I guess it IS viable :)

aysiu
September 4th, 2007, 07:33 PM
In addition to most of the things listed, "Desktop" to me means you can easily read and write to entire NTFS drives and creates links from such without having to learn and run scripts. What an odd criterion. Guess Mac OS X isn't ready for the desktop, either, then.

p_quarles
September 4th, 2007, 07:43 PM
What an odd criterion. Guess Mac OS X isn't ready for the desktop, either, then.
I had the same thought. Plus, my father has an old laptop running Win 98. I guess I should call him up and tell him it isn't a viable OS. :) He's been around computers since the days of punch cards, though, so he probably wouldn't believe me.

Tomosaur
September 4th, 2007, 08:47 PM
My comment had nothing to do with security. Did you notice the red highlights? I was laughing at the preposterous statement that it "should really be a crime" to create a Windows style installer.

I wasn't saying a Windows style installer should be a crime - I was TRYING to suggest that creating a system which is inherently dangerous, can cause data loss, can introduce viruses / malware etc etc should be a crime. It is amazing that the system is still in place, given the massive popularity of Windows. It's like using a pen with a scalpel attached to the end of it. Sure, you can write with it, but if you push it too hard you'll ruin the whole damn thing.

Frak
September 4th, 2007, 10:14 PM
What an odd criterion. Guess Mac OS X isn't ready for the desktop, either, then.
I thought the exact same.

popch
September 4th, 2007, 10:20 PM
... "Desktop" to me means you can easily read and write to entire NTFS drives and creates links from such without having to learn and run scripts. .

You can not do that in Windows. You can read from and write to partitions. Also, there are no links from or to drives, with or without scripting.

I guess that makes Windows not quite ready for the desktop, which I personally do not find all that surprising.

3rdalbum
September 5th, 2007, 06:45 AM
Anyone who thinks that Linux is less user-friendly than Windows should have a look at Microsoft's Knowledge Base for Windows. Most of the KB pages have huge long command strings that you have to paste in, with no explanation of what they do or how they work... horrible stuff.

ezelivin
September 5th, 2007, 07:15 AM
I have to be honest I can see both sides of the argument here. I consider myself a linux/ubuntu newbie and ubuntu is the best linux system that I have come across. The system I am running has never crashed and I feel frustrated at times. I even have friends that I can talk to face to face about linux, but they seem to drift off talking another language at times and have found that I need to try other programs or just keep beavering away until i resolve the problem. I do have a pc running windows which rarley gets booted these days and my main pc is the one running ubuntu.

prizrak
September 5th, 2007, 01:07 PM
You can not do that in Windows. You can read from and write to partitions. Also, there are no links from or to drives, with or without scripting.

I guess that makes Windows not quite ready for the desktop, which I personally do not find all that surprising.

Actually you can create partition links in NTFS on Windows. I don't remember exactly how it works and what to do but basically you can mount NTFS volumes as folders.

DeadZedz
September 5th, 2007, 02:41 PM
I know, statements like "linux doesn't work" and "MS windows JUST WORKS" anger linux people but we have to face the reality.
Dont get me wrong - I like all linux based and GPL operating systems ..
I like the idea of GPL, the idea of people all over the world working and collaborating on operating system superior to any other, I like the fact you can install debian or mandriva or ubuntu for free and use it instead of Windows or OSX.
I like the idea of package management and apt and rpm, etc, etc
I can use linux + mysql + apache as a webserver just fine and that box just works with no problem, thats nice too.

Now, I have used linux based distros for 5 years and I have realised that none of the linux based distros "just work".
when I started, even simple things, like getting cd-rom to work on mandrake, took days
At the moment I'm having trouble with ethernet - I have to reconfigure ethernet connection manually every time ubuntu starts - that started after dist-upgrade 6 months ago and hasnt been fixed with later upgrades.
I dont even expect to get TV-card working which works just fine in MS win XP - I have tried every single howto on the internet and Im convinced its just not going to work.
Half of ubuntu forums consists of threads about not getting ATI or NVIDIA to work and I cannot see it is going to end.
So, is there hope that linux based operating systems will ever going to "just work" as desktop OS?

wireddad
September 5th, 2007, 02:51 PM
I think linux IS moving in that direction even with low paying to none paid developers. Definitely agree with you that for linux to be more mainstream it will have to just work.

atlfalcons866
September 5th, 2007, 02:57 PM
the $10million mark put into ubuntu is backup money in case something happens to canonical INC

Trash_Gordon
September 5th, 2007, 03:01 PM
I think the problem is that hardware manufacturers are soley focussing on Windows XP as Operating system. For instance, I never got my Fritz! Wlan USB Stick running, until the manufacturer released a Linux driver. Now it's working fine, but it's a long way until all companies go there.

por100pre1
September 5th, 2007, 03:06 PM
It seems you have hardware issues. My previous PC was a problem with Linux distros. My current one, by the other hand, is perfect with Ubuntu and other distros. Maybe some hardware changes can do the trick. :)

LaRoza
September 5th, 2007, 03:08 PM
At the moment, no (modern) distro failed to work "out of the box" on my computer, and most worked with one or two issues on my other.

Vista failed horribly.

Of course, I paid money for Vista, all of my Linux's are free...

frodon
September 5th, 2007, 03:10 PM
Buy linux compliant hardware, it makes life easier ;)

Depressed Man
September 5th, 2007, 03:12 PM
Windows doesn't work for me. When I first reinstalled it on my desktop my sound, pvr card, video card, ethernet (both ports), and wireless didn't work. They only worked after I tracked down all the drivers for it (which is a pain to do since I had lost the driver installation discs)

Installed Ubuntu for the FIRST time on my desktop and to my surprise everything worked!

Perhaps I should be saying the opposite? Why is it that Microsoft invests millions into their OS and can't get all this hardware working? The answer is because they have their OS preinstalled on each computer so they get the driver support. While in Linux because it's not preinstalled on each computer sold the hardware companies don't bother, leaving it to people to create the drivers.

Steve1961
September 5th, 2007, 03:14 PM
I have Linux installed on multiple desktops and laptops, and for the most part they do 'just work'. Where problems occur it's usually due to lack of driver support from hardware manufacturers. This is still a big issue in Vista, and compared to my experiences with that OS Linux is way ahead in the hardware support stakes. It would be funny to see what windows users thought of their OS if no, or very few, third party drivers were available.

kelvin spratt
September 5th, 2007, 03:15 PM
Well I've used Ubuntu, Debian, pclinux , fedora, Elive and all Ubuntu Flavours, Sabion Pardus Etc and never a problem, all work straight from the box, I have more problems with Xp on both laptops and desktops than with Linux. And i use an ATI card with 3d with no problems. and i'm no Linux geek

Neobuntu
September 5th, 2007, 03:18 PM
Look, if you want to be pessimistic about it (which is somewhat understandable given the reality), then NO OS "just works". A select GNU/Linux distributions though, just work better; overall, than anything else.

I can think of countless issues with Windows that just don't work. Mac OS certainly fails a strict evaluation of "just works", as well.

Some things work better on each of them; some things work poorly on each of them. Overall, more things work for me with open software.

I would think, people would start to notice their OS and total software system is key; to their own information freedom. I would hope that people can see by now, this total software system is dynamic; not static.

So while I would agree that we (and all systems) have a long way to go; to achieve real user friendliness (for the non-technical), I think the highest issue is which system best deals with security, ever changing code, upgrading and least we forget, hardware compatibility.

You are defiantly myopic about hardware setup. You see, a GNU/Linux software system has the greatest challenge of any other. It has to work on darn near EVERYTHING. The amazing fact is, it does work on almost every system and device.

So what's the problem? Well it seems no one has told you yet. Monopolistic powers are fighting for closed driver (and many other) standards to lock you in to a lack of choice and competition.

This is all about openness. Right now, closed standards are in play; that you may want to use. The driver in your direct 3D video card, Flash and Java are three left over and desired items that you may want but need to add, to you open system, to utilize. Meanwhile, people think it's a failure of open software developers. That is backwards. In fact, many closed drivers have been reverse engineered today anyway. Yet, why not use devices with native open drivers (they are automagic) when one can?

This will all pass. People left and right, have now discovered the better way. It is snowballing and the rate of success depends on the mind war that the monopolist are waging. I'm betting that if you are reading this, you are not stupid. These issues will stop. Device manufacturers who hold the monopolistic line, will fail to get my dollar, when they finally give in. Please, help you friends.

That said, even closed devices such a an NVidia GPU or an Intel wireless device have drivers that even though they are closed, work well. One does have to take that extra step (if the given distro has not done it for you) . But they then work. I do not think much of ATI. I would not buy a computer with ATI graphics. Yet, if you get stuck with one, progress is being made with direct 3D.

In the end, nothing "just works" or as close to it, as a GNU/Linux system. Especially, when you consider dynamic (free) upgrades. This, and the fact that you don't have to run just one OS.

If you do want to keep it simple and use only one. Do your homework. Compare your devices on-line. Consider replacing inexpensive devices rather than fighting (wasting time) with them.

Gremlinzzz
September 5th, 2007, 03:23 PM
http://uk.theinquirer.net/?article=42151
improvements are being made i for one fixed any problems i had seems nothings really free you have to do some work.

philipbakerclarke
September 5th, 2007, 03:29 PM
3 days ago I purchased a new laptop, well spec'd and all that. Preinstalled with Windows Vista.
Its slick i will give you that, but no it doesnt just work. It was easy to set up within reason. It booted up super quick, I thought this was great. After a number of updates the booting up procedure is much slower than XP, and considerably slower than ubuntu.

This OS has been 5 years in the making through the alpha/beta stages and still it needs work.
Why dont error messages describe the problem that is causing the error!! NOT "COM SURRUGATE" blah blah. What the error message was really trying to say is "I dont have the correct Codec to thumbnail this video".

Taking my hat off to the linux community, fighting everyday to build and create new drivers for their operating systems. Where microsoft have theirs built by the manufacturers!

There is work needed for the linux operating system, but its good, its close.
Times are changing thanks to Dell and Intel and many other manufacturers that slowly changing direction.

Finally, I am waiting for gutsy, before I install it on my laptop.

Good luck and thanks

notwen
September 5th, 2007, 03:30 PM
You can't expect developers, who are in a sense coding drivers blind since hardware manufacturers aren't giving them the needed info, to create linux drivers that just work. As stated above, double check your hardware and it's compatibility w/ your systems hardware before installing.

Gremlinzzz
September 5th, 2007, 03:42 PM
I removed vista basic that came with my computer. I found it was slow always writing to my hard drive and the theme was just royale theme i use to install with XP.
http://www.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Royale-Theme-for-WinXP-Screenshot-13027.html
if anyone wants it
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Desktop-Enhancements/Themes/Royale-Theme-for-WinXP.shtml
vista made XP look good.

Nythain
September 5th, 2007, 04:03 PM
darn got moved before i could replay... oh well ill still give it a go.

Linux for me Has and Does "Just Work". Examples
Linksys Wireless PCI adapter (note, not some fancy new usb, or onboard laptop, but desktop pci from like 5 years ago)
Very plug and play in ubuntu... i put it in, rebooted, and bam, there i was... Fast forward to install of windows for gaming purposes... 169 ip... for those of you who know much about networking, 169 is not your friend for the most part.

Another example... my nvidia card.
Ubuntu's default nv drivers are great, they lack 3d accelleration, but out of the box they outperform anything xp has in its incredibly outdated driver cab.
Installing the proprietary drivers is simple... and getting even more simple with every major ubuntu release. Now i understand its equally as simple in windows, so they are on even ground there. Most users struggling to get thier video card drivers to work right or install correctly usually involve automatix or envy to begin with, or trying the complicated way as described on the manufacturers web site... blame that on the manufacturer, there are easier ways in ubuntu.

Hmm... lets see... another example... well i dont really have anymore at the moment except that overall installation of ubuntu is quicker and easier than windows... there's about 20K+ different FREE programs ready to be installed at the click of a button vs. my broke need to pirate anything for xp.

Yes, ubuntu/linux will eventually require any serious user to edit and modify config files (oh my!) but at least thats an option in most linux software, whereas majority of windows software doesnt give me that power.

The only real downfall to linux/ubuntu is gaming, wich with the exception of like 2 games in the last 2 years, hasnt actually proven a problem for me. So, "Is linux Desktop Ready"... It's sure as hell close enough for me... in fact its more ready than Windows XP or Vista

prizrak
September 5th, 2007, 09:44 PM
I know, statements like "linux doesn't work" and "MS windows JUST WORKS" anger linux people but we have to face the reality.
Dont get me wrong - I like all linux based and GPL operating systems ..
I like the idea of GPL, the idea of people all over the world working and collaborating on operating system superior to any other, I like the fact you can install debian or mandriva or ubuntu for free and use it instead of Windows or OSX.
I like the idea of package management and apt and rpm, etc, etc
I can use linux + mysql + apache as a webserver just fine and that box just works with no problem, thats nice too.

Now, I have used linux based distros for 5 years and I have realised that none of the linux based distros "just work".
when I started, even simple things, like getting cd-rom to work on mandrake, took days
At the moment I'm having trouble with ethernet - I have to reconfigure ethernet connection manually every time ubuntu starts - that started after dist-upgrade 6 months ago and hasnt been fixed with later upgrades.
I dont even expect to get TV-card working which works just fine in MS win XP - I have tried every single howto on the internet and Im convinced its just not going to work.
Half of ubuntu forums consists of threads about not getting ATI or NVIDIA to work and I cannot see it is going to end.
So, is there hope that linux based operating systems will ever going to "just work" as desktop OS?

I can tell you the same kind of stories about WIndows and also be 100% correct. OS X just works because it's an embedded OS for all intents and purposes. Windows just works when you get a preinstalled system, XP won't work with latest hardware out of the box and even with alot of legacy stuff. VIsta hardware support is infamous. When I installed Linux on my laptop it just worked. When I did it on my desktop it just worked and the same for the other laptop. Had I bought a System 76 or a Dell Ubuntu box it would just work from the moment I pressed the power button. Your hardware is the problem not the OS itself

Rockmore
September 6th, 2007, 12:21 AM
[SIZE="3"]REALITY CHECK

Let me start briefly to state, after monts and months of reading, research, and decision making, the thought of being able to actively run Ubuntu or any other "usable" Linux version as a day-to-day USABLE alternative to any version of MS Windows was exciting and promising. IN REALITY, Ubuntu and any other version is nothing but a nightmare pain in the ^%$#$% and makes MS Windows, even Vista which is currently barely usable and full of compatibility and usaability issues, look like gold. That's a bold statement, but fact (not truth).

- EVERYONE everywhere has wanted a usable alternative to MS Windows for decades. The COMMON user, at home, small business etc. The billions of day-to-day masses that DO NOT have to become Linux and programming experts to do the simpliest of things using a non-networked personal computer at home of office. That is what made BG and Microsoft Billions, and still is. Ubuntu and all the other version have failed miserably, and continue under the competing guise and ruse of the "Community based" support and programming, and always being a "work in progress".

- It is 2007, not 1947. It is 2007, not 1995. The same old issues with the contunual beta testing and compatibility/usuability issues are the Cantra of Ubuntu and every other attempt.

- ANY time, any where in modern times, any OS that is public domain and open source to the public is a blank check to the bad guys, organized oir not, and the most serious reality based security issue yet known. REGARDLESS of user "practices', mostly based on MS Windows usability and learning by the common user and consumer, Ubuntu is thr worst thing that can and could happen to toe common day-to-day user.

- What % of the populas that uses any PC in the home or office enviornment is a tenured , educated, and experienced Linux programming professional? It is a MICRO percent of the world wide populas and and what is practically needed to run and use Ubuntu. The bad guy hacker/crackerguys know that, and relish in the number of common day-to-day users that use or attempt to use Ubuntu in the same way they us MS windows. Especially the elderly, whom assume Ubuntu has all the same basic security features MS XP and above encorporates.

- What % of common everyday users are kids in their teens and 20's, who see the free price tag of Ubuntu, and have been experimenting, hacking, cracking, testing vulneribilities in Ubuntu and any other puiblic domain version of Linux etc etc for a looooooooong time now? A HUGE percentage. That's Ubuntu's demographic and market, regardless of the "professional community" that codes, writes, programs, and tests each version. Anything free is targetted by the bad guys and hacking /cracking kids first. It is reality, not the way the we all want it to be, and using Ubuntu based on that fact alone is the #1 reason for the common user/consumer not to even think about using anything in the public domain. How many times have you heard the public domain Linux community cheerleaders state that "... No one has ever heard of a virus written for Ubuntu or spyware that effects Ubuntu..."? That could not be further from the truth.

-School educators, especially in the grade and middle school environments, who rave over the interface and usage of Ubuntu and other versions with and by themselves and students are the most uninformaed and scariest of the entire PC using populas. They are soley restricted to network and individual PC enviornments "maintained" by low budgeted IT quasi-professionals. especially in any public school system, and also a prime target for any hacker/cracker and Linux "expert" to modify the Ubuntu OS and network from the get-go.

- The common home and small office experienced PC user is using MS Windows. They are right now. Not by choice, but by the world BG and Microsoft created. What the Ubuntu and Linux community does not want the same demographic to know is just how many MILLIONS have read, read, and read some more about Ubuntu and it's features and avaliability, obtained the OS through public domain resources, followed either included or out-sourced installation and usage documentation, and had thier entire exsisting MS based OS wiped out or ruined. This is known as the most wanted DUAL (or more) BOOT OPTION that is necessary for the PC populas to experiment or try Ubuntu or others, but still have a needed access to MS Windows. This is by the Ubuntu and Linux communities own hand. Maybe not by desire ior design, but is a reality based fact. This has put millions and billions of consumer dollars back into the undesired Microsoft beast, from consumer spending trying to correct the issues and problems stated, and for hardware (non) compatibility issues.


-Take 10 PC home or small office users from all experience levels, ages, and walks of lfe. Hand them a Ubuntu Live DVD and have them INSTALL it using thier paid for and exsisting MS Windows PC. (NOTE: Install. Not merely use via the CD\DVD interface soley). Seven will have corupted MS OS and hard drives, and have to start from scratch. The 7 will have hardware compability issues and not have access to decent video screen resoloutions or internet/network access. Especially modem based dial-up. They will not/do not have the time or inclination to research and try and fix what Ubuntu's included documetation and programming ruined or broke (The MS Windows Dual boot problem and the hardware compatibility problems), will not report the same via Ubuntu's forums, support, or message boards, and will be FORCED to spend needless consumer diollars on professional or quasi-professional help to GET MS Windows back in place even at the most miniimul level, . Two will attempt fixes through countless hours of fruitless efforts. and one in the two will have a quasi-working PC. The remaining one cheated and does not. did not fit the criteria above.

THIS HAS BEEN STATED, AND REPEATED AND REPEATED a billion times over: The home and small business PC user/consumer to staer wants to fully dump MS Windows for something better. better as in not letting MS rule the world, easier and better PC compatibility, easier user friendly interfaces, and CURRENT day-to-day security features built in or easily accessable. WITHOUG BEING A LINUX OR OTHER PROFRAMMING/OS LANFUAGE PROFESSIONAL. Ubuntu, and all of the other same Linux version and attemopts have failed miserably and actually made MS Windows more profitable and successful. REALITY CHECK./SIZE]

LT1Caprice57L
September 6th, 2007, 12:32 AM
Rockmore, Ubuntu/Linux =/= Windows. It NEVER WILL. That's the POINT.

If you want a stable, easy-to-use UNIX platform, that isn't in a "constant beta testing state", get a Mac w/ OS X.

I must say, though, I haven't had ANY problems with Ubuntu. I don't know what you're doing or needing to do, but apparently it's not very supported. Prehaps your hardware isn't supported. Prehaps you're mad at us (well, them, I'm certainly not a developer, I'm just some n00b) because your Lexmark printer won't work.

Don't be mad at Linux for that. Instead, go to the hardware manufacturer and give them an earful about how they're sellouts to Microsoft and only write their drivers for Microsoft Windows. That might just go further than just bitching us all out.

If you are implying that the "COMMON HOME OR BUSINESS USER" should not have to know what they're doing by reading up, that says something for the state of our society. 50 years ago, it was all about reading before doing. Should still be that way, but apparently it isn't.

If you're going back to Winbloze, good. Don't let the door hit you in the *** on the way out. Windows XP isn't THAT bad anyways.

K.Mandla
September 6th, 2007, 12:36 AM
The same old issues with the contunual beta testing and compatibility/usuability issues are the Cantra of Ubuntu and every other attempt.
Cantra? What's a Cantra?

Oh, never mind. I found it.

http://www.cantra.ca/

See you later, alligator.

Frak
September 6th, 2007, 01:07 AM
Nope, this post is wrong from the first paragraph.

That's a bold statement, but fact (not truth).

That is opinion, and opinion only. Which technically deems your entire post wrong. Though, lets recap.


- EVERYONE everywhere has wanted a usable alternative to MS Windows for decades. The COMMON user, at home, small business etc. The billions of day-to-day masses that DO NOT have to become Linux and programming experts to do the simpliest of things using a non-networked personal computer at home of office. That is what made BG and Microsoft Billions, and still is. Ubuntu and all the other version have failed miserably, and continue under the competing guise and ruse of the "Community based" support and programming, and always being a "work in progress".

All OS's are a work in progress.


- It is 2007, not 1947. It is 2007, not 1995. The same old issues with the contunual beta testing and compatibility/usuability issues are the Cantra of Ubuntu and every other attempt.

Good, you know math :)
Again, all OS's are a work in progress and they all have compatability/usabilty issues. If some hardware doesn't work, guess what, its not our fault, gripe to your hardware manufacterer, not us.


- ANY time, any where in modern times, any OS that is public domain and open source to the public is a blank check to the bad guys, organized oir not, and the most serious reality based security issue yet known. REGARDLESS of user "practices', mostly based on MS Windows usability and learning by the common user and consumer, Ubuntu is thr worst thing that can and could happen to toe common day-to-day user.

More users = More developers = Holes being patched faster.


- What % of the populas that uses any PC in the home or office enviornment is a tenured , educated, and experienced Linux programming professional? It is a MICRO percent of the world wide populas and and what is practically needed to run and use Ubuntu. The bad guy hacker/crackerguys know that, and relish in the number of common day-to-day users that use or attempt to use Ubuntu in the same way they us MS windows. Especially the elderly, whom assume Ubuntu has all the same basic security features MS XP and above encorporates.

My mother can install Ubuntu on her Laptop, she's 52 and has a mental conditition.
Ubuntu is more secure than Windows.
Next



- What % of common everyday users are kids in their teens and 20's, who see the free price tag of Ubuntu, and have been experimenting, hacking, cracking, testing vulneribilities in Ubuntu and any other puiblic domain version of Linux etc etc for a looooooooong time now? A HUGE percentage. That's Ubuntu's demographic and market, regardless of the "professional community" that codes, writes, programs, and tests each version. Anything free is targetted by the bad guys and hacking /cracking kids first. It is reality, not the way the we all want it to be, and using Ubuntu based on that fact alone is the #1 reason for the common user/consumer not to even think about using anything in the public domain. How many times have you heard the public domain Linux community cheerleaders state that "... No one has ever heard of a virus written for Ubuntu or spyware that effects Ubuntu..."? That could not be further from the truth.

1. I can guess your a teenager
2. Have you ever heard of a virus or spyware on Linux? I've heard of Viruses, but they do close to nothing. Just post annoying things in the terminal.
3. I also come to the point that you have provided no proof in your post, prove that there are dangerous viruses. Prove that there is spyware in Linux. Prove it.


-School educators, especially in the grade and middle school environments, who rave over the interface and usage of Ubuntu and other versions with and by themselves and students are the most uninformaed and scariest of the entire PC using populas. They are soley restricted to network and individual PC enviornments "maintained" by low budgeted IT quasi-professionals. especially in any public school system, and also a prime target for any hacker/cracker and Linux "expert" to modify the Ubuntu OS and network from the get-go.

I'm a Sys Admin/IT Admin for the school I work for. Guess what, a third of our computers run Ubuntu. Our servers run RHEL. We have never been hacked once, and the other admins always look after the code to make sure it never changes without permission.



- The common home and small office experienced PC user is using MS Windows. They are right now. Not by choice, but by the world BG and Microsoft created. What the Ubuntu and Linux community does not want the same demographic to know is just how many MILLIONS have read, read, and read some more about Ubuntu and it's features and avaliability, obtained the OS through public domain resources, followed either included or out-sourced installation and usage documentation, and had thier entire exsisting MS based OS wiped out or ruined. This is known as the most wanted DUAL (or more) BOOT OPTION that is necessary for the PC populas to experiment or try Ubuntu or others, but still have a needed access to MS Windows. This is by the Ubuntu and Linux communities own hand. Maybe not by desire ior design, but is a reality based fact. This has put millions and billions of consumer dollars back into the undesired Microsoft beast, from consumer spending trying to correct the issues and problems stated, and for hardware (non) compatibility issues.

There is more and more businesses writing programs for Linux along with the Windows and OS X ports.
Dell is one of our largest supporters.
Again, Hardware is the Manufacterers problem, not ours. (In fact, due to pushin by Dell, ATi is actually releasing drivers for Linux that will be equivilent to those on Windows.)



-Take 10 PC home or small office users from all experience levels, ages, and walks of lfe. Hand them a Ubuntu Live DVD and have them INSTALL it using thier paid for and exsisting MS Windows PC. (NOTE: Install. Not merely use via the CD\DVD interface soley). Seven will have corupted MS OS and hard drives, and have to start from scratch. The 7 will have hardware compability issues and not have access to decent video screen resoloutions or internet/network access. Especially modem based dial-up. They will not/do not have the time or inclination to research and try and fix what Ubuntu's included documetation and programming ruined or broke (The MS Windows Dual boot problem and the hardware compatibility problems), will not report the same via Ubuntu's forums, support, or message boards, and will be FORCED to spend needless consumer diollars on professional or quasi-professional help to GET MS Windows back in place even at the most miniimul level, . Two will attempt fixes through countless hours of fruitless efforts. and one in the two will have a quasi-working PC. The remaining one cheated and does not. did not fit the criteria above.

See above.
And the risk of corrupting your HD is almost 0 unless you somehow put in the disc, restarted, installed, and went through the basic setup ACCIDENTALLY.


THIS HAS BEEN STATED, AND REPEATED AND REPEATED a billion times over: The home and small business PC user/consumer to staer wants to fully dump MS Windows for something better. better as in not letting MS rule the world, easier and better PC compatibility, easier user friendly interfaces, and CURRENT day-to-day security features built in or easily accessable. WITHOUG BEING A LINUX OR OTHER PROFRAMMING/OS LANFUAGE PROFESSIONAL. Ubuntu, and all of the other same Linux version and attemopts have failed miserably and actually made MS Windows more profitable and successful. REALITY CHECK.

Nope, your just plain wrong there. I know alot of businesses that use RHEL on their servers and SUSE on their client desktops.
NOTE: Employees are uneducated in Linux. They didn't have to take a class.

Also, you NEVER through the entire post placed evidence or proof of your statements.



Frak

leo_rockway
September 6th, 2007, 04:12 AM
Rockmore... did you make a double post? if so... why? why does your been count still say zero after the double post? why do you use pink? why do you use such a huge font size?

ok... now on to your post:

first of all...i am a translator. i don't do kiddy scripting or petty hacking. I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO CODE.

i had a copy of vista included in my comp and i formated that partition. i had a pirate copy of xp i did not use and i'm using kubuntu gutsy instead. gutsy, yup... and it is much more stable than vista.

so... if you want to bash linux and the community, fine... you're free to do so and no DRM will stop you. but please... don't use huge pink colored fonts when you do that. thank you.

1peter318
September 6th, 2007, 04:30 AM
Well, it is good to see so many responses, even if i am duly reproved! What i was more reacting to was Linux being promoted as a desktop replacement for Windows, and i find such an expectation unrealistic if it cannot R+W to NTFS volumes by default. But you are right, Macs (which i am entirely unfamiliar with) will not either, though like Ubuntu Feisty (http://www.ubuntugeek.com/widows-ntfs-partitions-readwrite-support-made-easy-in-ubuntu-feisty.html) there is a way for MAC to R+W such files:
http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifehack/how-to-read-and-write-ntfs-windows-partition-on-mac-os-x.html

And though NTFS is a MS proprietary format, it sure has helped OpenOffice to be able to R+W MS word .docs

But permissions to do such is another story, and the hindrance i was more reacting to (as a Linux novice) was trying to gain full permissions to both read and write to entire NTFS drives (i run two with Ubuntu on a third) and to Ubuntu from such, as in migrating my W/Thunderbird profile. I know it is expected that we learn chmod and chown commands, and i'll have to get more into that, but i think it would make Linux more attractive if one could actually right click and gain permissions, which has not worked for me yet. Vista also has it's hoops you must jump through to get full permissions over some files and folders that one does actually own (though takeown.zip helps: http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=499870&st=0), but as a safe surfing single user, i have never found the need for such a degree of security in over 7 years of intensive internet use (thank God).

I really do hope to see Linux be even more viable, and i am sure others who hope the same can justify the things i find work against it, so these are just my novice preferences. Thanks for any help.

p_quarles
September 6th, 2007, 04:41 AM
Well, it is good to see so many responses, even if i am duly reproved! What i was more reacting to was Linux being promoted as a desktop replacement for Windows, and i find such an expectation unrealistic if it cannot R+W to NTFS volumes by default. But you are right, Macs (which i am entirely unfamiliar with) will not either, though like Ubuntu Feisty (http://www.ubuntugeek.com/widows-ntfs-partitions-readwrite-support-made-easy-in-ubuntu-feisty.html) there is a way for MAC to R+W such files:
http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifehack/how-to-read-and-write-ntfs-windows-partition-on-mac-os-x.html

And though NTFS is a MS proprietary format, it sure has helped OpenOffice to be able to R+W MS word .docs

But permissions to do such is another story, and the hindrance i was more reacting to (as a Linux novice) was trying to gain full permissions to both read and write to entire NTFS drives (i run two with Ubuntu on a third) and to Ubuntu from such, as in migrating my W/Thunderbird profile. I know it is expected that we learn chmod and chown commands, and i'll have to get more into that, but i think it would make Linux more attractive if one could actually right click and gain permissions, which has not worked for me yet. Vista also has it's hoops you must jump through to get full permissions over some files and folders that one does actually own (though takeown.zip helps: http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=499870&st=0), but as a safe surfing single user, i have never found the need for such a degree of security in over 7 years of intensive internet use (thank God).

I really do hope to see Linux be even more viable, and i am sure others who hope the same can justify the things i find work against it, so these are just my novice preferences. Thanks for any help.
I understand why you find it frustrating. All the same, the blame falls on software patents, and not on Linux.

Easiest way to get read/write permissions on NTFS drives:

sudo apt-get install ntfs-3g
Ubuntu does not ship this utility with the standard installation because it would raise legal questions.

leo_rockway
September 6th, 2007, 04:47 AM
hey 1peter318. i don't know what you mean by not been able to R+W to ntfs... i've been doing it since i installed ubuntu. it is not available by default because there are legal implications, but it is as easy as installing smth from synaptic.

anyways, lignux doesn't need to be able to R+W by default to be a windows replacement. i don't know why you think that's necessary.

and i don't think lignux is a windows replacement, but an alternative. in linus' words: "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect."

1peter318
September 6th, 2007, 04:52 AM
Thanks but i found ntfs-3g early on (see link above), and while that gives me access to NTFS drives, i cannot always write to them, nor copy to Ubuntu program type folders. Nor make a link from a folder in a Windows drive (operation cancelled). Strangely, i can copy to an external NTFS drive. That is what i meant by permissions being another story. Thanks.

p_quarles
September 6th, 2007, 05:00 AM
Thanks but i found ntfs-3g early on (see link above), and while that gives me access to NTFS drives, i cannot always write to them, nor copy to Ubuntu program type folders. Nor make a link from a folder in a Windows drive (operation cancelled). Strangely, i can copy to an external NTFS drive. That is what i meant by permissions being another story. Thanks.
ntfs-3g will certainly not allow you to write to Linux filesystems from Windows. You need the ext2/3 driver for Windows:
http://www.fs-driver.org/

And, yeah, permissions are another story. Linux and MSWindows use completely different permissions structures.

1peter318
September 6th, 2007, 05:32 AM
anyways, lignux doesn't need to be able to R+W by default to be a windows replacement. i don't know why you think that's necessary.


Well, i would think that a lot of Linux users would want to be able to both access and write to Windows NTFS drives. for instance, I like to save all my documents and audio/video to a large separate NTFS drive.

Next time i am in Ubuntu i will try smth. Thanks.

1peter318
September 6th, 2007, 05:39 AM
Thanks. i just downloaded that, as well as one from paragon. I used to use Linux reader in the past, but cannot agree to their politicallty correct EULA.

leo_rockway
September 6th, 2007, 06:39 AM
Well, i would think that a lot of Linux users would want to be able to both access and write to Windows NTFS drives. for instance, I like to save all my documents and audio/video to a large separate NTFS drive.

Next time i am in Ubuntu i will try smth. Thanks.

to want != to need

i said necessary. it is indeed not necessary to write to ntfs partitions to be an alternative to window$.

it may be desirable, that's a different thing.

gnuskool
September 7th, 2007, 12:30 AM
People wwho are just beginning really should hang around here, but don't forget the irc support channels. IRC is the last frontier on the net, go have a look. Real-time chat is just what nips frustration in the bud.

oky
September 7th, 2007, 04:41 AM
Let me start by saying that I am writing this from ubuntu.

I hate windows. But unfortunately I am productive with it.

Everyone know that life expectancy of a windows machine is inversely proportional to how many programs you install and remove. The more you install and remove apps the sooner it will auto destroy. I think its all because of the registry. Thats why you need registry optimizer and unistallers.

The last drop was 3 days ago, while working on a project, everything stop working. toad,oracle-xe,php oracle connections. I copy everything to a windows home machine an it worked. Thats when I decided to reformat my sony vaio 260 with a full ubuntu install.

All my hardware has been recognized except for the memory stick reader. Any ideas?

But things are not easy in Ubuntu. Things that IMHO have to change. The idea here is being as productive as you can be.

Now for my biggest questions and complains:
l those
1. why have 2 windows managers. GNOME AND KDE?? I have been using linux since v1. (but not for work, just out of curiosity). I remember tha QT libraries where proprietaries. Maybe thats why gnome was born. I dont know. But the fact is that the amount of double work, 2 office suites, 2 notes pad, 2 calculators, 2 of everything , is JUST AMAZING. All this
applications are not written in 5 minutes. They takes month or even more. Why not just decide on one and integrate the features of the others. Can you imagine everyone working of just one of them? The progress that will be made on the whole Linux movement.


2. Everyone I know is using the sierra celular wireless cards. Thats what you get with sprint and att. Still no good support for Linux. Although sierra have some linux drivers they are not supported . I have not been able to make it work. I need this for work. This basically puts a stop on my ubuntu transformation.

3. why can I just drag and drop files into system directories? Ubuntu should detect this and ask me for my passord. I should not have to open the browser window with some sudo command.

4.TOAD, TOAD, TOAD. Unless I am wrong, no linux developer works with ORACLE. What do you guys use? sqldeveloper works on linux(and every other platform since is java based) but it is a joke. I will think that oracle will have the best oracle developer tool. But it does not. Why, will always be a mystery to me. Maybe they too use TOAD. There seem to be no TOAD replacement in linux. Coming from a mostly developer community, this is pretty surprising.

5. command lines. My first os was linux. I really dont mind(that much) BUT. you have to stop making everything command based. Just hide it(the way is done with automatix. Sincerely, I see no reason why I have to copy paste commands from a web site to install and configure stuff. I am sorry but this is one of the biggest complains people have about linux. You cant expect some one accustom to the NEXT->NEXT->NEXT in windows or the drag and drop in mac to feel great while typing all those command. Please accept that this method is obsolete. For programmers is OK, NOT for the normal user that just want top play a movie or hear a song.

6. Talking about movies. I love stage6.divx.com and I cant watch it under ubuntu firefox. It works on mac, it works on windows, why not on linux??

7. The whole look and feel should feel more updated. Kind of a 3rd generation look and feel( ex. mac x and vista). Right now many applications feel like 2nd(windows 98) and some 1st(windows 3.1). I think all this old applications should be put to pasture. If they are not up to par. They should die. Just include new applications on default installs.


thats about it, for now. I hope someone in ubuntu listen to my comments. I think they are all valid and they are meant to improve Ubuntu and Linux in general. I really feel that this KDE vs GNOME is a big, big waste of resources. Resources that are obviously needed to improve Linux(Just look at the amount of post of this forum). We now Linux works on the server, but for day to day desktop use still a bit a pain.

BrendanM
September 7th, 2007, 04:42 AM
Off topic. This part of the Ubuntu forums is for support requests. Mods, can this be moved to the appropriate section?

KCPokes
September 7th, 2007, 04:57 AM
4.TOAD, TOAD, TOAD. Unless I am wrong, no linux developer works with ORACLE. What do you guys use? sqldeveloper works on linux(and every other platform since is java based) but it is a joke. I will think that oracle will have the best oracle developer tool. But it does not. Why, will always be a mystery to me. Maybe they too use TOAD. There seem to be no TOAD replacement in linux. Coming from a mostly developer community, this is pretty surprising.


I wont get into the argument as to why people think Windows is better then Linux, as it never seems to accomplish anything. What one deems as being important may not mean much to me. For example, if Windows is so stellar, why can't it tail a logfile realtime? Talk about annoying for a developer!

Anyway, In regards to TOAD, have you looked into Tora? I've heard a lot of TOAD users who chose to move to Linux have been using Tora.

jlambeth1
September 7th, 2007, 04:57 AM
I second the motion for movement of this thread.

dwhitney67
September 7th, 2007, 05:04 AM
Answers:

1) Because people want a choice.

2) Contact Sprint and AT&T and ask them to provide support. They will laugh at you of course, just like I am right now. Why do you expect someone to provide you with free support?

3) Yes, that would be a nice feature, not that I would ever use it. To damn slow to interface with the UI. The command line is a lot faster.

4) Oracle, if I recall is available for Linux, as it is for other Unix distros. Generally people who use Linux at home are not wealthy enough to throw money for a product (that cost hundreds if not thousands of dollars for a licence) when they can use something that is free (mySQL).

5) I'm personally comfortable with the command line, more so than with the UI. I have over 18 years experience with Unix and Linux. Maybe you just need to spend more time with Linux. If you choose not too, then there is Windows.

6) Ask the folks at divx.com.

7) The look-n-feel is customizable. Why it doesn't come out of the "box" with a snazzy interface is anyones guess. But it probably is because not everybody likes a flashy UI.

In conclusion, if you want a feature under Linux, it can be added. If this feature is not available, then in your copious spare time perhaps you can write that device driver or that application, and share it with the World, knowing full well that you will not reap one cent for your efforts. Doesn't sound appealing? Then stop bitching.

Artificial Intelligence
September 7th, 2007, 05:07 AM
Merged

oky
September 7th, 2007, 05:07 AM
While you decide to move this thread , I just found how to make stage 6 work

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2591939

Thank you


BTW. I am not saying that windows is better. I think Linux is superior and is the whole reason I am moving away from windows. I am just pointing out some of the trouble I had since started using Ubuntu as my only platform

oky
September 7th, 2007, 05:12 AM
So If a make a suggesting I am bitching?? What the hell is wrong with you. I too have my fair share of Unix experience. But I know how easy is to just point an click for an installation. People should not have to type commands to install an application. That all I am saying . I am a programmer and I type the whole day.
I am already paying ATT for the service. They already have mac, and windows drivers , they should have linux drivers too. And yes, I asked them about the drivers , thats how I found out they had unsupported ones.

KCPokes
September 7th, 2007, 05:17 AM
2. Everyone I know is using the sierra celular wireless cards. Thats what you get with sprint and att. Still no good support for Linux. Although sierra have some linux drivers they are not supported . I have not been able to make it work. I need this for work. This basically puts a stop on my ubuntu transformation.


The problem we do see time to time is that people are unwilling to look for solutions, rather they expect them "out of the box". This is not the case for everyone, and I'm not specifically stating that is the case here, but does seem to be a common trend.

As for wireless cards, you might check out http://www4.sprint.com/pcsbusiness/downloads/Sprint_Mobile_Broadband_Setup_Guide.pdf if you are a Sprint customer. I have the Pantech PX500 card and it works without issue on my Ubuntu laptop. One more step complete toward removing Vista completely from this machine.

amazingtaters
September 7th, 2007, 05:19 AM
To contribute:

1. If you wan't to get picky, why did I download an unoffical version of uxtheme.dll for Windows XP and then install various themes. Why do people use programmes like Windows Blinds? People like different looks and feels for their desktops. Surprisingly you forgot that there are several more deskop environs that work with Ubuntu. I use gnome and fluxbox, some prefer KDE, openbox, or XFCE. To each their own. The beauty of freedom is unparalled.

2. Complain to the manufacturer about drivers. Or, alternatively, since you could reverse engineer proprietary drivers. It should be easy right?

3. I drag and drop all the time. Of course, not to certain directories, but that is fine, as it provides a more idiot proof system. While eventually a better idiot will evolve, it helps.

4. No comment here, as I don't programme.

5. How in the world is everything command line based? I would say I use the command line on occasion because it is quicker for me to do so, but by and large I use the GUI. The command line is not as ubiquitous as you seem to think.

6. The world may never know...

7. What defines the feel of an applicaton? The style of it's GUI? And should a fully functional application be thrown to the wayside simply because the GUI doesn't have as much eye candy as some other one? I should think not. Most people want something that just works. There is plenty of eye candy in linux, and many programmes have competitors that look different but do the same thing. Perhaps you should shop around a bit for applications.

Just my thoughts on your thoughts. Focus more on freedom of choice and substance, as opposed to "oooohhhhh, that looks so pretty!" for that is the essence of Linux. There is room for eye candy, but there must be functionality beneath it.

prizrak
September 7th, 2007, 12:54 PM
While you decide to move this thread , I just found how to make stage 6 work

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2591939

Thank you


BTW. I am not saying that windows is better. I think Linux is superior and is the whole reason I am moving away from windows. I am just pointing out some of the trouble I had since started using Ubuntu as my only platform

Well nothing is perfect. I do hear that if you get an Emperor Linux machine their custom kernel has support for those WAN cards. Do have to say that installing software in Ubuntu is one of the easiest things ever. Of course there is always random software that is not available in the repositories or is not up to date there. For that we generally have getdeb.net, which are all double click installs. On occasion there is a need for diving to the CLI but I have honestly not seen a whole lot of it in my time with Ubuntu.

BLTicklemonster
September 7th, 2007, 01:16 PM
Uputer, please stop trolling

He had a reasonable response, that wasn't trolling.

Coldkill
September 7th, 2007, 02:45 PM
He had a reasonable response, that wasn't trolling.

Fine, then I apologize. It's become a habit to tell him to stop trolling in other topics.

Tzustrategy
September 7th, 2007, 03:46 PM
Aww, how can you say Linux is unfriendly? You must have seen the picture of the penguin, Tux, that's used to represent Linux... how can you say that lil fella's unfriendly? :)

Seriously though, Linux isn't unfriendly. It's just different to what you're used to using. I'm assuming you've come from Windows. And Linux isn't Windows. It is based on UNIX (an OS that's way older than Windows!), and it does stuff the UNIX way... the Linux way now... not the Windows way.

Downloading apps is, 9 times out of 10, easy-peasy. You go into Synaptic, do a search, click on the packages that you want, hit Apply, and go grab a Coke while the system sorts it out for you. With Synaptic, you don't get the dependency hell, cos Synaptic grabs what you'll need automagically.

Unfortunately, sometimes you want something that you can't find in the repositories. So you download a tarball or something and have to mess with make install and ./configure and stuff. But, quite often, you don't really need to do that. There are a lot of repos out there, a lot more than the default ones. And there's a wealth of software, all packaged up in .debs, waiting for Synaptic to grab em.

It is frustrating when the app you want just does not seem to be available as a .deb, and the configure or install scripts are all wrong. I grabbed a game off http://www.tucows.com/Linux last week, and the install.sh file had an error in it that I don't know how to fix. I got mad, and muttered vile things about the developers who make a game then can't even write a crappy little install script so it'll run right. But then I got over it, and found something else instead.

You're mad at Ubuntu and Linux right now, you're gonna wipe it off your hard drive and go back to XP, right? That's a shame. What would be an idea, is if you did a dual-install, so you have XP and Ubuntu both on your hard drive. So you can get back to Windows - to what you know - and just do stuff. But Ubuntu will be there too, waiting for when you get over being mad at lil Tux. Then maybe you could log in again and see if you can get it to do something else for you?

Ubuntu ain't right for everyone. If it's just too damn stupid and weird for you, then yeah, maybe you should bin it. But wouldn't you like to know that you tried your damndest before you kicked it out?

Take care!

You sir, are an example of why the Internet is awesome.

:guitar: on!

jenachdem
September 8th, 2007, 08:07 PM
I see no chance for Ubuntu or any other distribution. Contrasted to Linux Windows or OSX is for the most everyday tasks more performant, ergonomic, flexible and became over the last years more and more smoothly.

The available Windows applications, the GUI appearanceare or colorfull splash screens are matter of no consequence.

Linux ist still a big construction lot and even basic things for a basic desktop pc are not working as it should be. I don't know what the all the Linux developers are doing the day long? I'm sure they are working on big things like a new 4KS-EBC Protocoll for XSKCD. :biggrin:

I Installed Ubuntu 7.04 some time ago and it was worse. Such as? The Rythmplayer needs up to 50% CPU on a P4-1,6Ghz. Or the Firefox Browser have scrolling problems which are bog down the system. Such a OS is useless. As I mentioned other distributions are not much better.

The community of the majority is useless too. The most users there have no clue and give trivial answers to everythng in order to push up their number of posts under their avatar. ](*,)

karellen
September 8th, 2007, 09:46 PM
I see no chance for Ubuntu or any other distribution. Contrasted to Linux Windows or OSX is for the most everyday tasks more performant, ergonomic, flexible and became over the last years more and more smoothly.

The available Windows applications, the GUI appearanceare or colorfull splash screens are matter of no consequence.

Linux ist still a big construction lot and even basic things for a basic desktop pc are not working as it should be. I don't know what the all the Linux developers are doing the day long? I'm sure they are working on big things like a new 4KS-EBC Protocoll for XSKCD. :biggrin:

I Installed Ubuntu 7.04 some time ago and it was worse. Such as? The Rythmplayer needs up to 50% CPU on a P4-1,6Ghz. Or the Firefox Browser have scrolling problems which are bog down the system. Such a OS is useless. As I mentioned other distributions are not much better.

The community of the majority is useless too. The most users there have no clue and give trivial answers to everythng in order to push up their number of posts under their avatar. ](*,)

so why don't you just stick with what works best for you?...:)

Billy_McBong
September 8th, 2007, 11:00 PM
Linux ist still a big construction lot and even basic things for a basic desktop pc are not working as it should be
such as what?
it is very easy to browse the web, check email, use open office, ext. what basic things dont work?(and all systems have problems just because something doesn't work right for you doesn't mean everyone else has the same problem)


The community of the majority is useless too. The most users there have no clue and give trivial answers to everythng in order to push up their number of posts under their avatar. ](*,)
the people here try there best they are not paid to help you, we do it out of the goodness of our hearts

also you have 0 beans which i think means you haven't posted in support category asking for help so how can you say we are useless when you haven't even asked us to help you solve your problem

KIAaze
September 9th, 2007, 12:48 AM
I see no chance for Ubuntu or any other distribution. Contrasted to Linux Windows or OSX is for the most everyday tasks more performant, ergonomic, flexible and became over the last years more and more smoothly.

The available Windows applications, the GUI appearanceare or colorfull splash screens are matter of no consequence.

Linux ist still a big construction lot and even basic things for a basic desktop pc are not working as it should be. I don't know what the all the Linux developers are doing the day long? I'm sure they are working on big things like a new 4KS-EBC Protocoll for XSKCD. :biggrin:


I admit that some things are better in Windows or OSX, but GNU/Linux has one big advantage: It gives you freedom (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/).
And apart from some hardware problems, I find Ubuntu very usable for everyday use. And it's always improving.
Actually, it allows me to do things that I couldn't do with Windows (or not as easily at least) like ssh -X, sed, grep, ... I need it for work!


The community of the majority is useless too. The most users there have no clue and give trivial answers to everythng in order to push up their number of posts under their avatar. ](*,)

Maybe you should try the gentoo forums (http://forums.gentoo.org/) then. ^^
Otherwise, there are always the general GNU/Linux forums like linuxquestions.org (http://www.linuxquestions.org/) or linuxforums.org/ (http://www.linuxforums.org/).

And as said by the previous poster:
The people here try there best they are not paid to help you, we do it out of the goodness of our hearts.
I haven't tried the paid support for Ubuntu yet, but maybe it's better. ;)

Frak
September 9th, 2007, 12:54 AM
I use Windows and OS X daily, ATM, I find them better because I have work to get done that cannot be done in Ubuntu. But Ubuntu is well on its way to fame.

Anonii
September 9th, 2007, 01:13 AM
I see no chance for Ubuntu or any other distribution. Contrasted to Linux Windows or OSX is for the most everyday tasks more performant, ergonomic, flexible and became over the last years more and more smoothly.

The available Windows applications, the GUI appearanceare or colorfull splash screens are matter of no consequence.

Linux ist still a big construction lot and even basic things for a basic desktop pc are not working as it should be. I don't know what the all the Linux developers are doing the day long? I'm sure they are working on big things like a new 4KS-EBC Protocoll for XSKCD. :biggrin:

I Installed Ubuntu 7.04 some time ago and it was worse. Such as? The Rythmplayer needs up to 50% CPU on a P4-1,6Ghz. Or the Firefox Browser have scrolling problems which are bog down the system. Such a OS is useless. As I mentioned other distributions are not much better.

The community of the majority is useless too. The most users there have no clue and give trivial answers to everythng in order to push up their number of posts under their avatar. ](*,)
I would quote and comment on this, 'till I saw this "I don't know what the all the Linux developers are doing the day long?" and this "The community of the majority is useless too.".

KIAaze
September 9th, 2007, 01:27 AM
I would quote and comment on this, 'till I saw this "I don't know what the all the Linux developers are doing the day long?" and this "The community of the majority is useless too.".

I don't understand the first sentence either.
But in the second one, he might have meant the Windows community...

uputer
September 9th, 2007, 02:49 AM
Thanks to everyone and anyone who was sympathetic and/or tried to help. Thanks to those who didn't accuse me of being a 'troll' and realized the frustrations and perspective (of a user having difficulties learning Linux).

Even though I've had much confusion with it, I don't want to give up. I just have to consider the time I'll need to spend on it and try to set aside some time accordingly. I agree, a dual boot of Windows and Linux is a good idea but a better one I plan on using is having two computers side-by-side (at my disposal). One machine will be left on Linux, even if I have more than one distro installed. The other machine will be a Windows system. That way, I can experiment and use Linux on one and if I need to do standard stuff, I can let the Windows machine do it. But, the point is, the frustration should be a bit less when I have something to fall back on.

However, make no mistake about it, the plan is to gradually move over to using Linux primarily but I hope the idea (of having two computers) will make the adjustment a bit less painful and allow the substantial learning curve. So thank you to all who wanted to help despite my complaints. Thanks in advance to those who try in subsequent posts.

AWC
September 9th, 2007, 02:59 AM
I must agree with you sir. I have been tying to just install real player and it is not very cut an dry. I have no idea why I can't just download a program and simply click install. I am not a Windows fan but Ubuntu has a long way to go to be as user friendly as Windows. I should be able to dowload and install but I can't even find step by step instructions on how to install realplayer. I am frustrated.

prizrak
September 9th, 2007, 03:11 AM
PFFT. I just switched my g/f to Gutsy and she couldn't be happier. She has no more problems adjusting to Ubuntu than she would adjusting to Mac (which she wanted to get at some point).

aysiu
September 9th, 2007, 03:14 AM
While you can download a file a click to install it, using the repositories system (which is also point-and-click) is actually easier than tracking down an installer file from somewhere on the internet.

That said, if you're using Ubuntu 7.04, try downloading this file (http://archive.canonical.com/pool/main/r/realplay/realplay_10.0.9-0feisty1_i386.deb) and double-clicking it.

djchandler
September 9th, 2007, 03:20 AM
I never said there aren't lots of people who don't know how to re-install XP. But, there are many websites that explain how. I know a guy from work who didn't know how to re-install his Windoze computer. Another co-worker knew and did it for him. I think I am the only one there that has used Linux.

From a newbie's P.O.V.:
When you need to re-install Linux, you have to do the same web search and find the specific installation to your particular distro. For XP, it is all the same and for pure volume or numbers of users, it's a lot so there are going to be many sites with examples and explanations. In comparison, I don't see how XP will be that much more difficult to re-install. Even from a total newbie or computer illiterate person.

For the previous poster, I am not trolling. Why do you care if I am being critical? I'm just explaining the facts. I want to be proficient at Linux as I think it can be a superior system overall and it's free. I'm not hiding or making excuses, though. I find it very difficult when you need to tweak. I'm trying to become more accustomed to the command line and not do GUI stuff all the time.

There's a lot you can do through the GUI, and there are more GUI front-ends all the time. The day is coming when command line will be all but unnecessary. But even XP has things that must be done from the CLI. And it's just as easy to run chkdsk from there as anywhere.

djchandler
September 9th, 2007, 03:30 AM
you didn't have the -dev packages.

Please, don't blame the whole of Linux just because you wanted to install source packages for no reason, you should be using synaptic or choosing the binary package, you are not a developer, you shouldn't expect to be able to install a source package, or at least you shouldn't expect source packages to be helluva easy for you to install. If there was only a source package then it was probably a test version or a not well polished program, things that a newbie shouldn't be using anyways.

Apps in windows get unfriendly to install as well, ever heard of windows installer errors? I once had an error message "Windows installer error 1405" that halted the installation, perhaps it was another random number I don't remember and not 1405 but yep, some random windows application out there can get even harder to install than a source package. How do you fix those? Oh yes, you go to microsoft and complaint for making the whole windows so user UNfriendly...

This kind of stuff isn't particularly easy in Windows either. All of us at some time or another has gotten an error message about not finding a dll file. But it seems easier to fix stuff like that ourselves just because we've been solving those kinds of problems for 16+ years, going back to at least Windows 3.0 or so. Ever try to use Windows 1.0 or 2.0? I think not. Those people are few and far between. I sure didn't. I was on a Mac!

I can't believe what this is about. Get real!

DJ
:guitar:
PS Sorry, couldn't rest the bad joke.

thorwood
September 9th, 2007, 03:37 AM
Not to sound like mean or anything, but my mom uses linux at her house and she is one of those people who can never do command line or install, but Fedora 6 is very stable so it works. My little bro (aged 11) can do all tech support. When I come over i see him solving dependencies(amongst swearing "what the heck is GTK?!). Linux just takes more.

Frak
September 9th, 2007, 03:38 AM
This kind of stuff isn't particularly easy in Windows either. All of us at some time or another has gotten an error message about not finding a dll file. But it seems easier to fix stuff like that ourselves just because we've been solving those kinds of problems for 16+ years, going back to at least Windows 3.0 or so. Ever try to use Windows 1.0 or 2.0? I think not. Those people are few and far between. I sure didn't. I was on a Mac!

I can't believe what this is about. Get real!

DJ
:guitar:
PS Sorry, couldn't rest the bad joke.
Linux user 10 years.
I used Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.1, Workgroups, 386, 486, NT, and of course DOS.
I've also used Mac OS 7, 8, 9, 10.1/2/3/4 and I've used a developer version of 10.5

They all have their downfalls
Linux can have missing dependencies
Windows has DLL Hell
Mac's Darwin Kernel can corrupt upon a Delta or Combo update, causing a Kernel Panic, and forcing a reinstall (Mac is still my fav)

They all develop, they all have problems, nothing is perfect.

leo_rockway
September 9th, 2007, 08:07 AM
i thought it was obvious that the linux developers were working really hard on a text editor for emacs! .:lol:.

idk what they are really working on... maybe it is gimp 2.4? kde 4? openoffice 2.3? just to name a few well known projects.

jouniP
September 9th, 2007, 06:12 PM
After 47 reboots in last 10 hours due to hanging ubuntu (newly installed:confused:), I decided to install fedora. It is difficult to say what is the reason for unstablity; sometimes it happend in SW update, most of the time without visible reason. ](*,)

Win XP used to run in this same machine without problems for couple years. Ther reason the change to Linux was, that my PC (Lenovo) dealer in Beijing installed me pirate copy of XP and obviously it is not good behaviour (felt guilty all the time;-); and I cannot get security update anymore.

I was dreaming to decrease my "IT manager" work using "state of art" Linux instead of WinXP but opposite happened: computer is super-unstablie. WLAN does not find my basestation (all other devices find it without problems including my other XP (legal), MAC, Nokia 9300i and Nokia N75). Only Ubuntu have no idea of it.

Yes. I don't fix my cars anymore either, so priority is not to look under the hood anymore; including home computers.

I have to admit that Fedora has not started very well but it is stabile, not need for reboot if e.g. SW package is not downloading fast enough.

For you entertainment I list my favourity Operation systems: WinXP (realiable and stabile), MAC OS X (more fine tuning required but almost as stabile as Windows), and Symbian 60 (the best OS for mobile devices). Linux is not yet in the list; and Vista will stay away from my computers!

- good night!
- Jouni

Artificial Intelligence
September 9th, 2007, 06:24 PM
merged

prizrak
September 9th, 2007, 06:49 PM
After 47 reboots in last 10 hours due to hanging ubuntu (newly installed:confused:), I decided to install fedora. It is difficult to say what is the reason for unstablity; sometimes it happend in SW update, most of the time without visible reason. ](*,)

Win XP used to run in this same machine without problems for couple years. Ther reason the change to Linux was, that my PC (Lenovo) dealer in Beijing installed me pirate copy of XP and obviously it is not good behaviour (felt guilty all the time;-); and I cannot get security update anymore.

I was dreaming to decrease my "IT manager" work using "state of art" Linux instead of WinXP but opposite happened: computer is super-unstablie. WLAN does not find my basestation (all other devices find it without problems including my other XP (legal), MAC, Nokia 9300i and Nokia N75). Only Ubuntu have no idea of it.

Yes. I don't fix my cars anymore either, so priority is not to look under the hood anymore; including home computers.

I have to admit that Fedora has not started very well but it is stabile, not need for reboot if e.g. SW package is not downloading fast enough.

For you entertainment I list my favourity Operation systems: WinXP (realiable and stabile), MAC OS X (more fine tuning required but almost as stabile as Windows), and Symbian 60 (the best OS for mobile devices). Linux is not yet in the list; and Vista will stay away from my computers!

- good night!
- Jouni

Which version did you use?
I installed Gutsy testing for my girlfriend on her ThinkPad R61i and it works very well.

Bothered
September 9th, 2007, 08:02 PM
Installing an unstable build for a new (I assume?) linux user seems a bit risky.

prizrak
September 10th, 2007, 12:48 PM
Installing an unstable build for a new (I assume?) linux user seems a bit risky.

Had to take the risk, her laptop is too new for Feisty to support it properly. I do run Gutsy myself so it's not that bad.

ukripper
September 10th, 2007, 03:04 PM
Had to take the risk, her laptop is too new for Feisty to support it properly. I do run Gutsy myself so it's not that bad.

My Girlfriend will do my headin if I change something from edgy now...It was already hard time for me to convince her to use ubuntu at first place. :lolflag:

danny joe ritchie
September 10th, 2007, 05:11 PM
bsmonks and uputer
I'm sorry to hear that you feel like Ubuntu is unfriendly, I hope you stick around!

I understand the frustration of trying to compile a program from scratch, It's hard for us newbies, I don't even feel comfortable with rpm. packages yet!

I've really enjoyed Ubuntu so far, but I stay with whats in the repositories or I look for a deb. file to get the software that I need!

I guess we're all different, so we like different things!

ctcarton
September 10th, 2007, 08:32 PM
The first problem is that you're inaccurately assigning the blame for this difficulty to the OS authors instead of the author of the actual program you're trying to install. This seems very illogical to me but new linux users seem to do this all the time, even those who never do the same thing when evaluating windows apps. If the app is core to the platform then it makes sense but this 'disk-o-matic' certianly isn't core.

The second problem is that in Windows you're used to having only two possibilities: Either the program you're looking for exists and is easy to install/use or it doesn't exist at all. I consider it a strength that linux isn't restricted to those two choices. In Windows if you tried that task (or some other uncommon task) you might find that no program exists at all and you'd be done. However in linux, if somebody somewhere has thought about doing something then the information or code needed to do it is probably available somewhere. It might not be easy to use or install, but that's better than not being there at all.

tenshi-no-shi
September 10th, 2007, 10:40 PM
I hate the word user-friendly. What makes software user-friendly, really what does. point and click GUI? well some people grew up with Command line interfaces and find navigating all of the folders and options with a mouse cumbersome. heck there will be a day when your children or grandchildren sit down with you and ask if you really used a mouse and keyboard, and how horrible that was. As well as how was it that you could understand information on a two-dimensional screen.

I have been using Linux for over two years now and in my experience I have made a mantra for myself. If I can't find it or get it to work, I can do without it. I mean before I got my nvidia card I was using an old ATI 7500 that 3D acceleration was not fully supported, so you know what I did. I stayed away from anything that would demand a lot of my graphics card. When my sound was not working properly till I restarted the sound server EVERY TIME I started up my computer I did exactly that. May not have been the greatest thing to do every time, but hey I later found out that it was the crappy hardware implementation on my motherboard and disabled it and installed a new sound card.

I know that linux is not what you are used to and that it isn't like windows, but the thing is, it's not supposed to be. It's hard to install things because that is how it was designed, so that viruses and malware cannot install onto your computer automatically.

Finally don't blame the OS for the programs deficiencies.

djchandler
September 11th, 2007, 06:34 AM
Threads like this make me wonder if it's become too user-friendly. Let those who want everything done for them while their hand is held use a Mac.

DJ

wheredidrealitygo
September 14th, 2007, 03:46 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118963540721725614.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

A review of Ubuntu I found at the Wall Street Journal Online. Treating us unfairly I find, with no mention of why codecs aren't included in Ubuntu, what workarounds (albeit imperfect ones, like automatix) exist for this. He does mention pros and cons I agree, but doesn't mention why they're there.

If anyone is interested I may include a copy of the email I tried sending him (their mail server wouldn't accept it for some reason, maybe other Ubuntu users have been blasting at him and they blocked us already lol).

LowSky
September 14th, 2007, 04:01 PM
I just read the article.

I think Mossberg is right to say that ubuntu isn't ready to replace Windows or even Mac yet. He even quotes that Shuttleworth feels the same way. I do think he should have stated why the codecs are not included, but he did mention that they are availible. what I would love to see in future verisons of ubuntu is a prompt screen asking if we will need certain plugins and how to get them easily.

What Mossberg fails to mention is that Windows cannot play these things automatically either, Windows now hides that fact and installs codecs when needed in the background.

I think Linux, maybe Ubuntu needs two more years before it is stable/ready for prime time. By then we might see things that the low tech user might like to use.

danny joe ritchie
September 14th, 2007, 04:10 PM
I agree, the review stinks! Can we really expect anything good from the Wall Street Journal ? I doubt it!

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 04:11 PM
he is right, he mentions the pros and cons. linux is still not ready for the average desktop and, if you ask me, it won't me nowhere in the near future

Lord Illidan
September 14th, 2007, 04:20 PM
I'm not surprised at the review.

Ubuntu still has some way to go before I recommend it to any new users who aren't very advanced.


There is no control panel for adjusting the way the touch pad works, and I found it so sensitive that I was constantly launching programs and opening windows accidentally by touching the thing. Every time the computer awoke from sleep, the volume control software crashed and had to be reloaded.
When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be "bad" or "ugly."


I had the same problem with the touchpad on my Sony Vaio and sleep/hibernation problems are also wellknown. Also, regarding the codecs, the warning message is quite scary.

Lord Illidan
September 14th, 2007, 04:21 PM
he is right, he mentions the pros and cons. linux is still not ready for the average desktop and, if you ask me, it won't me nowhere in the near future

Near future, well, who can say? I bet it might get quite good in a few years time. But, yes, ready for the average desktop, it isn't!

rzrgenesys187
September 14th, 2007, 04:29 PM
If he decided to use the dell laptop 1420, they just released ubuntu that has been optimized for the laptop. For an average user who doesn't want to tweak, which seems to be his target audience, he should've tried that one out

http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archive/2007/09/10/29517.aspx

Lord Illidan
September 14th, 2007, 04:31 PM
Still, until Linux runs perfectly on almost all hardware out there, it will never be ready for the average desktop.

buntunub
September 14th, 2007, 04:41 PM
I fail to see how this review is "unfair", except perhaps in what he defines as what an "average user" is. In sheer market terms, he is correct however. Its a fairly strait forward concept -- In order for Linux to dominate the worlds desktops, it must must must must be able to do every single thing that BOTH MacOS AND Windows can do, in every single area of functionality, PLUS be able to do much much more! Otherwise, there is no reason for why anyone should get excited at switching to an OS that does less? Even if its free, you pay a larger price with the time it takes to get things working, and thats even if you can!

1. How about those new Windows based games? Do they run out of the box on Ubuntu like the do on Windows?.. Erm...Uhmm..

2. How about proprietary codecs/drivers? Can you legally load them like you can with Windows or MacOS?.. Whups!

3. How about that iPod?.. Can you buy/download your songs from Apples iTunes store?.. Ahem!

4. How about that USB drive or webcam you just bought that works flawlessly, out of the box, on Windows?.. Hmmmmmmm!!!

Oh gee. I just listed 4 HUUUUGE reasons for why Linux still has a loooong long ways to go yet to hit the big time. Im sure others would have no troubles listing even more. Linux must be able to appeal to the masses...Yep, that means even Billy Joe Bob freshly dropped out of Grade School too! And anything requiring a brain would not appeal to good 'ol Billy Joe. Nope. But windows works for him just perfectly dont it. In all probability, Linux will never be like that, and thank god for it IMHO, because I dont want an OS thats like that.

por100pre1
September 14th, 2007, 05:04 PM
IMHO the columnist is right. The columnist clearly stated that he evaluated Ubuntu strictly from the point of view of an average user. The average user doesn't want to learn Bash commands, doesn't want to read a long how-to in order to enable proprietary media types, doesn't want to spend time tweaking its PC. Let's face it, Ubuntu users are NOT average users. Once we liked Ubuntu, we became "advanced users".
:guitar:

pm124493
September 14th, 2007, 05:20 PM
In my opinion any discussion around using a product designed to be used on 90% of machines running Windows is fruitless. Those products are sold with a disclaimer identifying what operating systems it will work on and a driver disk is usually included to support that product. The manufacturer warrants that product and it's drivers.

As an Open Systems operating system where most drivers are created by developers and not by the manufacturers, expecting the same operability as Windows is not reasonable. Notable exceptions are Nvidia and HP.

If manufacturers develop products that include drivers for Linux one may expect guaranteed functionality.

Even Windows will tell you it can not find a driver and leave it up to you to load the proper driver. Ubuntu is not much different.

As an Open Source operating system Ubuntu is adequate for the average user depending on your definition of an average user. We all have one.

the.dark.lord
September 14th, 2007, 05:39 PM
IMHO the columnist is right. The columnist clearly stated that he evaluated Ubuntu strictly from the point of view of an average user. The average user doesn't want to learn Bash commands, doesn't want to read a long how-to in order to enable proprietary media types, doesn't want to spend time tweaking its PC. Let's face it, Ubuntu users are NOT average users. Once we liked Ubuntu, we became "advanced users".
:guitar:

Couldn't have said it better myself :KS

:guitar:

wolfen69
September 14th, 2007, 06:14 PM
he is right, he mentions the pros and cons. linux is still not ready for the average desktop and, if you ask me, it won't me nowhere in the near future

the average desktop is where linux would shine. what does the average person do? check email, surf, play music/video. how hard is that to do with linux? get a grip. distros like ubuntu ultimate, linux mint, and sabayon are so easy to setup, it's pitiful.

can the average user install and setup windows? no. that's why they come to me. i can give someone a copy of linux mint and they have a usable pc right away. try that with windows. windows isnt ready for the average desktop. it's just that people have been brainwashed/forced into the "microsoft way" of doing things.

a member of the podcast team for PC MagRadio recently told a story about fixing his sons windows machine. he basically says that it took him 3 hrs. to clean out all the junk, spyware, viruses, and fix windows files. how is an OS that allows this to happen, ready for the desktop?

if that podcaster had installed linux on his sons PC, he would have none of the problems i stated. most people i know can't stand windows, but are ignorant of the fact that there is an alternative out there.

i find linux so much easier to install and maintain than windows. enough already. all you gates supporters run along to the windows message boards. (bring your wallet with you)

wolfen69
September 14th, 2007, 06:27 PM
IMHO the columnist is right. The columnist clearly stated that he evaluated Ubuntu strictly from the point of view of an average user. The average user doesn't want to learn Bash commands, doesn't want to read a long how-to in order to enable proprietary media types, doesn't want to spend time tweaking its PC. Let's face it, Ubuntu users are NOT average users. Once we liked Ubuntu, we became "advanced users".
:guitar:

i've never had to learn bash commands, or read a long how to in order to get proprietary media. where do you get your info from? and btw, windows needs tweaking too, unless you want to live with the god awful defaults windows gives you. geez.

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 06:28 PM
the average desktop is where linux would shine. what does the average person do? check email, surf, play music/video. how hard is that to do with linux? get a grip. distros like ubuntu ultimate, linux mint, and sabayon are so easy to setup, it's pitiful.

can the average user install and setup windows? no. that's why they come to me. i can give someone a copy of linux mint and they have a usable pc right away. try that with windows. windows isnt ready for the average desktop. it's just that people have been brainwashed/forced into the "microsoft way" of doing things.

a member of the podcast team for PC MagRadio recently told a story about fixing his sons windows machine. he basically says that it took him 3 hrs. to clean out all the junk, spyware, viruses, and fix windows files. how is an OS that allows this to happen, ready for the desktop?

if that podcaster had installed linux on his sons PC, he would have none of the problems i stated. most people i know can't stand windows, but are ignorant of the fact that there is an alternative out there.

i find linux so much easier to install and maintain than windows. enough already. all you gates supporters run along to the windows message boards. you heard me. go. (bring your wallet with you)

the average user wants also to use all his multifunction printer's features, to use his webcam or to send a file via an im. he may also want to play games. I'm not a "gate supporter" but I'm not a Linux zealot either. I can see its shortcomings and things that can be improved. I've used linux since 2004, beginning with suse 9.3, fedora core 4, 5 and 6, sled, opensuse 10.2, ubuntu dapper, edgy and feisty. so you see....I''m not a newbie or an ignorant in linux stuff. it's just that things are the way they are: driver support is still lacking, not all open-source apps are as good as their proprietary counterparts and I could continue...
and changing the discussion trend to windows' virus/spyware won't change the substance of the problem

Old *ix Geek
September 14th, 2007, 06:42 PM
1. How about those new Windows based games? Do they run out of the box on Ubuntu like the do on Windows?.. Erm...Uhmm..I have no problem running the windoze games I want to play--on Ubuntu. Yes, it's via wine, but they work--in fact, they work perfectly.

2. How about proprietary codecs/drivers? Can you legally load them like you can with Windows or MacOS?.. Whups!I don't know. I guess I've never needed any...because everything I install works right away. See my post on this board, It just keeps getting better and better (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=548531) for details.

3. How about that iPod?.. Can you buy/download your songs from Apples iTunes store?.. Ahem!I don't know, nor do I care, as I don't have an iPod.

4. How about that USB drive or webcam you just bought that works flawlessly, out of the box, on Windows?.. Hmmmmmmm!!!See the link I put in my answer to #2. Yes, everything worked, out of the box--and without ever having to open the CDs included...for windoze.


the average user wants also to use all his multifunction printer's featuresSee my link in #2. My HP Deskjet F4100 All-in-One (printer, scanner, copier) worked like a charm when I set it up a few days ago.

he may also want to play gamesSHE may also want to play games...and I do...and they work great.

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 06:50 PM
My HP Deskjet F4100 All-in-One (printer, scanner, copier) worked like a charm when I set it up a few days ago.
my hp inkjet also is recognized and works well. but what about epson, canon or lexmark? from what I've seen they are not so "linux-friendly" as hp

See the link I put in my answer to #2. Yes, everything worked, out of the box--and without ever having to open the CDs included...for windoze.
?? what sense would have made to "open the CDs included...for windoze" on a linux platform? to run the .exe-s?!
and you can't be serious about playing games with wine. especially since not all games can be run via wine ;)
not speaking about mobile phones/smartphones and their proprietary programs...

Lord Illidan
September 14th, 2007, 06:59 PM
the average desktop is where linux would shine. what does the average person do? check email, surf, play music/video. how hard is that to do with linux? get a grip. distros like ubuntu ultimate, linux mint, and sabayon are so easy to setup, it's pitiful.

can the average user install and setup windows? no. that's why they come to me. i can give someone a copy of linux mint and they have a usable pc right away. try that with windows. windows isnt ready for the average desktop. it's just that people have been brainwashed/forced into the "microsoft way" of doing things.

a member of the podcast team for PC MagRadio recently told a story about fixing his sons windows machine. he basically says that it took him 3 hrs. to clean out all the junk, spyware, viruses, and fix windows files. how is an OS that allows this to happen, ready for the desktop?

if that podcaster had installed linux on his sons PC, he would have none of the problems i stated. most people i know can't stand windows, but are ignorant of the fact that there is an alternative out there.

i find linux so much easier to install and maintain than windows. enough already. all you gates supporters run along to the windows message boards. (bring your wallet with you)

First, I am not a gates supporter. I've been using Linux for 5 years now, and I don't even use Windows anymore.

Linux can work very easily on certain computers. However, try going outside the norm. Let's throw in an ATI graphics card, a lexmark printer, an anonymous brand of webcam, and broadcom wifi. All of these are popular products, and most average people have them. Yet, how easy is it to get up and running then, without delving into the command line?

I am not against the command line, mind you. I use it very well, and I like it. However, I don't believe the average joe will ever like the command line, especially if he has never used it before. Before I used Linux, I never had any cause to use the CLI.

Sure, otherwise, if you have a computer setup that fits, then Linux runs like a dream. Otherwise, you're in for a very hard time, indeed.

And what about gaming? Not all games run with wine. And as regards Ipod/Itune, the statement :


I don't know, nor do I care, as I don't have an iPod.is seriously flawed, as like it or not, the Ipod is the most successful mp3 player out there, and the average joe is most likely to own one.

EDIT : I am just trying to be realistic. If you are thinking about calling me a gates supporter or a MS fanboy, take a look at the number of Linux related posts I have, and think again.

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 07:16 PM
...I observed a thinking pattern of certain persons here on these forums, something like
"if I can(and want) to make linux run/use linux /tweak linux, everybody can"
"if you don't have time to lose with an os, you're a leech unwilling to learn anything"
"if my rig is fully supported by a linux distro, linux is perfect and needs no improvements whatsoever"
"have a problem with windows (or a windows application). install linux, it will solve all your problems"
"windows users are stupid/brainwashed"
"don't you dare say anything critical about linux. go back in your swamp, fanboy!"
"drivers. blame the oem" - as if the end-user cares why. they just can't use their hardware at 100% capacity. period
I don't want to continue on this road...Just want to say that posts like these gives an interesting "insight" about somebody's way of thinking and makes me wonder who's really brainwashed...
open-source but no open-mind...and that's really sad :(

por100pre1
September 14th, 2007, 07:30 PM
i've never had to learn bash commands, or read a long how to in order to get proprietary media. where do you get your info from? and btw, windows needs tweaking too, unless you want to live with the god awful defaults windows gives you. geez.

Go right now to the Beginners Forum and tell that to those who are having issues at this moment... if you dare!
:guitar:

rsambuca
September 14th, 2007, 08:01 PM
I still think that ubuntu is perfect for the average user *if it is installed, with necessary codecs by someone that knows what they are doing*. I installed ubuntu on my 67 year old mother's computer, and she couldn't be happier. I have just installed it on my Aunt's computer, so we'll see how that goes.

Yes, neither one of them could have installed and set it up properly themselves, but using it? Easy.

Old *ix Geek
September 14th, 2007, 08:20 PM
Let's throw in an ATI graphics card, a lexmark printer, an anonymous brand of webcam, and broadcom wifi. All of these are popular products, and most average people have them. Yet, how easy is it to get up and running then, without delving into the command line?Been there, done that. Almost--I've never used a Lexmark printer, but I have used Canon--which supposedly isn't Linux-friendly--with no problems whatsoever.

Anonymous brand of webcam? How's this: An OLD Alaris webcam I found in my garage the other day, and brought in and plugged into one of my Ubuntu boxes. Recognized straight away. I had put it away, but I just plugged it into my laptop so I could post its lsusb output:

grace@HPLaptop:~$ lsusb
Bus 002 Device 001: ID 0000:0000
Bus 001 Device 002: ID 0620:0004 Alaris, Inc.
Bus 001 Device 001: ID 0000:0000
grace@HPLaptop:~$

ATI card? Done it.

Broadcom 4311 wireless? Done it. (I definitely WILL grant you on this one, however, that it took a lot of CLI tweaking...no doubt about it!)



Quote:
See the link I put in my answer to #2. Yes, everything worked, out of the box--and without ever having to open the CDs included...for windoze.

?? what sense would have made to "open the CDs included...for windoze" on a linux platform? to run the .exe-s?!The point being that you MUST use the CDs that come with these peripherals if you're putting them on windoze boxes, but they're unnecessary [as a rule] on Linux. I've heard--and perhaps even done this at some point in the past--that there are times when drivers on those CDs (NOT the 'doze exe files) can/should be used on Linux.

and you can't be serious about playing games with wine. especially since not all games can be run via wineWould you like to see my screenshots of Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 in the WineHQ database? (I've also submitted a 'platinum' review, but it hasn't been posted yet.) Go to this page (http://appdb.winehq.org/screenshots.php?iAppId=2594&iVersionId=3766) and look at the two screenshots named RCT2 in-game shot #1 & 2. Those are mine, taken on one of my Ubuntu boxes last week.

not speaking about mobile phones/smartphones and their proprietary programs...Nope, I'm certainly not referring to those.

por100pre1
September 14th, 2007, 08:27 PM
I still think that ubuntu is perfect for the average user *if it is installed, with necessary codecs by someone that knows what they are doing*. I installed ubuntu on my 67 year old mother's computer, and she couldn't be happier. I have just installed it on my Aunt's computer, so we'll see how that goes.

Yes, neither one of them could have installed and set it up properly themselves, but using it? Easy.

Exactly. Once it is properly configured it's a piece of cake, but most users out there don't have an experienced friend or relative who can setup everything for them. Besides, no OS is perfect, and issues can arise. Sooner or later those users will need to learn Bash commands and how to setup their PCs or they will end up running scared back to proprietary OSs.

danny joe ritchie
September 14th, 2007, 08:37 PM
The whole issue seems pointless too me! neither Windows or Ubuntu is ready for the average user!

I'm not sure that either will ever be ready for the so called average user,

The only difference is that Windows comes preinstalled, until now Ubuntu has not!

in the end one is free , one is not, take your pick!

sloggerkhan
September 14th, 2007, 08:37 PM
I thought it was funny, if off base ona few things. However, from my experience in IT, there is one single MAJOR things he didn't mention:

WINDOWS ISN'T READY FOR REGULAR USERS TO USE IT EITHER!!!!

Let's face it: There are relatively few people who can use computers with any level of competence no matter what the OS...

danny joe ritchie
September 14th, 2007, 08:40 PM
:lolflag:

rsambuca
September 14th, 2007, 08:52 PM
Let's face it: There are relatively few people who can use computers with any level of competence no matter what the OS...

Now that is a rather silly statement if I have ever heard one!!! What does that have to do with anything?

You do realize that computers are a tool created by people to be used for desired tasks. Your last comment implies that people exist to use a computer.

Whether a person never uses more that 8% of the cpu or maxes it out everyday is irrelevant. For each of these users, the computer merely exists to do what the person wants.

If Joe Smith just wants to surf the net and send a few emails, then, if they can do that, they ARE competent for their own needs. Not everyone is, or wants to be, an IT guy!

wolfen69
September 14th, 2007, 09:48 PM
as far as some hardware not being compatible, BUY NEW STUFF! how hard is it to buy a new webcam? if you cant do it, STAY WITH WINDOWS! what is the cost of security suites? apps? what is the cost of spending time fixing/maintaining or taking your pc into the shop? people dont hesitate to spend money on windows, but, OH NO! I CANT BUY ANOTHER WEBCAM OR PRINTER FOR LINUX! people need to get real.

P.S. im done for now. my blood pressure is up.

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 09:48 PM
Would you like to see my screenshots of Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 in the WineHQ database? (I've also submitted a 'platinum' review, but it hasn't been posted yet.) Go to this page and look at the two screenshots named RCT2 in-game shot #1 & 2. Those are mine, taken on one of my Ubuntu boxes last week.
my point's being made. I was talking about Games. all of them. not a particular one that you could run.
and anyway, why use wine to run a windows game with modest performance when I can simply run it in its native platform?:confused:

Lord Illidan
September 14th, 2007, 09:55 PM
as far as some hardware not being compatible, BUY NEW STUFF! how hard is it to buy a new webcam? if you cant do it, STAY WITH WINDOWS! what is the cost of security suites? apps? what is the cost of spending time fixing/maintaining or taking your pc into the shop? people dont hesitate to spend money on windows, but, OH NO! I CANT BUY ANOTHER WEBCAM OR PRINTER FOR LINUX! people need to get real.

P.S. im done for now. my blood pressure is up.

Hey, most people use Linux because it is free. They DON'T want to BUY new stuff for it to work. Either it works, or they stay with something which already works.

I had the good fortune to start with most of my hardware compatible with Linux, but many people don't.

Another thing which is also relevant is that most people solve all their technical issues by getting a technician..and most of them only know Windows.

por100pre1
September 14th, 2007, 10:00 PM
Want to read a really biased article? Read PCLOS Magazine Sept. issue: "Ubuntu's Hype is Misleading (http://mag.mypclinuxos.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=45&Itemid=26)". It seems the new PCLOS Mag editor wants to start an useless distro war. :(

karellen
September 14th, 2007, 10:23 PM
Want to read a really biased article? Read PCLOS Magazine Sept. issue: "Ubuntu's Hype is Misleading (http://mag.mypclinuxos.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=45&Itemid=26)". It seems the new PCLOS Mag editor wants to start an useless distro war. :(

it has already been discussed over and over again in the cafe...

Old *ix Geek
September 15th, 2007, 12:11 AM
my point's being made. I was talking about Games. all of them. not a particular one that you could run.What WOULD satisfy you? Screenshots of ALL the games I run? I picked one, but I never said that was the ONLY one. Or screenshots of ALL games on the market? Sorry, but I'm not going to go out and buy windoze software just to satisfy your curiousity.

and anyway, why use wine to run a windows game with modest performance when I can simply run it in its native platform? :confused:Your choice of smiley is very apropos, as you're clearly confused. Modest performance? I think not. The games I run on Linux not only run very well, they run at least as well, if not better than, they do on windoze. And I know I'm not alone because I've seen similar remarks from many other people in various forums. If YOU'RE unable to get that kind of performance out of them, don't blame Linux and/or wine, as the problem most likely is the user. ;)

Lord Illidan
September 15th, 2007, 07:20 AM
Can we close this chapter of arguments and contine with a civilised thread?

We were having a friendly discussion..can we continue it? And can the mods remove all irrelevant posts and put them in the backyard, please?

Anyway, to continue with the subject..

It's evident that for a lot of people, Ubuntu is already ready for the desktop - theirs. It's the same for me, too. I have very little problems with Ubuntu on a laptop or on a desktop.

However, when approaching it with the eyes of a newcomer, it can be quite scary, unless you have the prescribed hardware, and don't stray out of apt-get. Of course, some newbies don't even know about apt-get, and try to get most software from the internet immediately, and fall into the first of many hoops by :

1. What to download? RPM? DEB? Source?
2. Funny file formats...tar? gz? bz2? Rar not supported out of the box.
3. Let's say they download a source file. Most applications not in the repo are distributed like this. Now, how the heck do they install it? It took me quite some time to figure out the ./configure && make && make install routine, which doesn't even work sometimes...since a different install script is used.

In this case, if a program is not in the repositories or packaged in a binary, I dare anybody to say that the "windows way" of distributing in an exe is worse than compiling from source. I am not referring to the technicalities, I am referring to the ease of use. Clicking an exe is easier than going into the terminal.


Now, of course, if there is an Ubuntu geek in the vicinity, life gets quite easier. Or the forums in this instance..but it is still not 100% ready, in my opinion.

buntunub
September 15th, 2007, 07:36 AM
Its pointless to argue the merits of a review that was done by one guy. An OS stands by its merits. XP is a great OS. No denying it, even no matter how much you hate M$, it IS a very good OS when not plagued by virii and worms. Same can be said of MacOS and Linux. Each has very strong merits, and each has a very fanatical following. You can classify us as being Linux fanboys/girls, simply by the fact that we love it, cant get enough of it, and no matter how truly difficult it can be, it matters not! We are drawn to it because it is not Windows or MacOS, and because we make it work to our individual likings, usually much more efficiently than the proprietary OS's can ever accomplish.

Can an "average user" grow to love Linux as we do?.. I think so.. Yes. But alot of people shy away from it because they dont want to learn something new. Many also wont use it because of incompatibilities such as Windows games. Power Gamers especially, who must have every new game the instant it hits the shelves, and every new piece of high powered hardware to support them. Linux fails in this area, and this is a very well known fact. I am a power gamer in that sense, and even though I am no newb to Linux, I cannot get some, even most, new Windows games to run on Ubuntu... Nobody can... Yet. To say otherwise is just a wild tale. There are many people who use Linux and try thier best to make these games run, most of which are Linux experts, yet they cant get them running without tremendous effort, and even then they cant get them to run even half as well as they run on Windows in DirectX.

As far as new hardware is concerned, it is also well known that Linux lacks support in things like usb plugins, usb 2.0, and wireless. Getting some of these devices to work takes herculean effort, and this is completely unnaceptable in the larger market where things are just expected to work without any hassles, as they do in XP.

Lord Illidan
September 15th, 2007, 07:54 AM
As far as new hardware is concerned, it is also well known that Linux lacks support in things like usb plugins, usb 2.0, and wireless. Getting some of these devices to work takes herculean effort, and this is completely unnaceptable in the larger market where things are just expected to work without any hassles, as they do in XP.

Regarding usb2.0, I was unaware of any problems, although there are problems with usb devices.

But yes, wifi remains a huge problem...with some devices like broadcom. Chose an intel card and you're fine, ready to go.

The most infuriating thing is that game developers and hardware manufacturers refuse to support Linux as it is such a small market, yet Linux would undoubtedly increase if more games and hardware were supported. It is a vicious circle from hell!

And it's more infuriating when you consider that for some devices Ubuntu shines. Take my HP Psc 1110 for instance. In Windows, I have to either hunt down my hp disk..or else download a huge 83 mb installation pack from HP with lots of unnecessary fluff. In Ubuntu, and indeed most Linux distros with a recent version of cups, it's a simple matter of adding a new printer, as the driver is included already.

Also, the restricted-driver application in Feisty lessened the hassle to install nvidia drivers by a good 70% in my opinion.

What is good about Linux is that development is stonkingly fast. In 5 years, we've come a very long way...in another 3 years time, I daresay it will be very exciting.

JonathanRRogers
September 15th, 2007, 07:56 AM
I still think that ubuntu is perfect for the average user *if it is installed, with necessary codecs by someone that knows what they are doing*. I installed ubuntu on my 67 year old mother's computer, and she couldn't be happier. I have just installed it on my Aunt's computer, so we'll see how that goes.

Yes, neither one of them could have installed and set it up properly themselves, but using it? Easy.

Yes, that's often the case. My sister's IBM laptop was infected with a worm, which I discovered by noticing a large amount of SMTP traffic coming from it. I convinced her to let me install Ubuntu on it instead. There were a couple of sticky hardware issues which I wouldn't expect her to be able to work through by herself. However, she has been successfully using OpenOffice and Firefox, syncing her Palm, and listening to music for a while now. I'm sure I'll need to work on it once in a while, but she needed very little help getting up to speed once I got the hardware working. If she were using a machine with better supported hardware, such as a typical desktop, she may have been able to install Ubuntu herself.

misfitpierce
September 15th, 2007, 08:00 AM
wallstreet journal works for Microsoft! Ahhhhh.... just messin :) lol

karellen
September 15th, 2007, 08:00 AM
I totally agree with what you've said, buntunub
other thing that I'd like to point out is that I believe that Linux does lack proper marketing, word of mouth is not enough. I'm looking forward for a day when you can enter any IT store and find on the shelves Linux distros besides Windows boxes. about beginners...for example my girlfriend heard about Linux from me (I was using dapper then) but no matter how hard I've tried I couldn't convince her to give Linux a try. she uses often photoshop (an older version) and Corel, as she's very fond of photography and image editing....and when she wasn't very impressed by the alternatives that can be found in Linux. plus she hasn't too much time to spare for adapting to a new os, and I can understand this. I've given up Ubuntu for a time, at least until Gutsy Gibbon is released. I tend to get bored pretty fast and I constantly need a change. so, for now, that change was Vista and it's not that bad. but I know it won't last...and sooner or later I'll come back to Linux to see how are things going. both windows and linux have their weak and strong points, none is perfect and none is ultimately, more than a tool (even if I often forget this when losing time tweaking the os...)

bigboy_pdb
September 15th, 2007, 09:43 AM
Old *ix Geek and wolfen69, you are both arguing a general statement from specific instances of the statement (which is what karellen is implying) and that means that your arguments are invalid. For example, if I say 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 are even numbers so therefore all numbers are even, this is incorrect because there are still odd numbers (i.e. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and so on). In other words, stating that you didn't have to do certain things to get Linux working is irrelevant with respect to the average Linux user.



as far as some hardware not being compatible, BUY NEW STUFF! how hard is it to buy a new webcam? if you cant do it, STAY WITH WINDOWS! what is the cost of security suites? apps? what is the cost of spending time fixing/maintaining or taking your pc into the shop? people dont hesitate to spend money on windows


Not everyone spends money on Windows. There's a lot of software piracy. Also, people who know other people who know about computers will get those people to fix their computers for them. Regarding buying new hardware, people won't do that if they have an operating system that it works with (and as a result they do stay with Windows).



I still think that ubuntu is perfect for the average user *if it is installed, with necessary codecs by someone that knows what they are doing*. I installed ubuntu on my 67 year old mother's computer, and she couldn't be happier.


Most Windows users know how to install programs using the installation CDs and a number of them can install programs from the internet, meaning they don't need someone to help them to install software provided that the initial system is working. With Linux, the people who needed you to install the system would later need you to install other software for them as well (unless they learn how to do it themselves).

danny joe ritchie and sloggerkhan, you're wrong that Windows isn't ready for the average user particularly because the average user is trained to use Windows on a basic level.

There's no such thing as an interface that a person isn't trained to use. Often people learn from observing other people so it is easy to think that people are doing things intuitively when they are not. In other words, since Windows is commonly used, it is easier to pick up because people see it so often. Also, there is an abundance of people to ask for help from due to the number of people using it. Furthermore, most of the basic concepts don't change too much from version to version so people don't have to relearn most of what they've previously learned.

From the article:


there's no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs


I don't remember Windows XP Home having this capability. I had to find and install software to do that.

Overall, I agree with most of the article.

kelvin spratt
September 15th, 2007, 11:54 AM
i'm very sorry most people don't know how to install software in any OS, the average user relies on other people to do that for them and then its usually messed up then taken to some one else which they pay, the average user does not know anything about the working of their computer, car washing machine or whatever, and to imply the average user is trained in basic knowledge of windows is totally inaccurate,

lancest
September 15th, 2007, 02:22 PM
Most people do not know how to install Windows! They are in the same boat with any operating system. Windows is not perfect either.
If you set someone up to use Linux they should have fewer problems. Click Click is fine!
Command line is great (but end user need not).
Linux does not need to support every device to be a great operating system! Some hardware vendors don't support open source. So What?
Its the wrong idea to bad mouth Ubuntu over this.
Many of us choose to buy Linux compatible, and we don't need to cry about anything! I won't cry if someones Windows only junk does not work on my superior OS. Ubuntu software is good enough or better then what most people need. Hey lets be fair: Windows is not suited for everybody nor is Linux or Apple!

karellen
September 15th, 2007, 03:10 PM
the discussed subject is complex...The people I know can handle windows pretty well (installing the os, application, even maintenance) but they are almost clueless when it comes to Linux. and that doesn't mean the windows is easier to use or more user-friendly. it's just that it has been around like almost forever and the user had all the time in the world for getting used to it. it's just a matter of "who has been on their desktops first". and it was windows. or mac os, in small numbers. that was the history and it can't be changed. people are accustomed to something, being it good or crap. if you get them out of their "crap habits" they'll feel lost and unsecured, because for them an os si merely a tool to do some stuff, they don't enjoy using it, they don't care which one is technically superior etc...I believe this is one of the main reasons for the Linux very small desktop market share: reluctance to change of the end-users

Kratos
September 15th, 2007, 03:46 PM
Disregarding the argument as to what an "average user" is capable of doing, there are two sticking points to Mossburg's statements.

1. Codecs for Proprietary Media Formats: Because of current legality issues surrounding these formats, there's no easy way to include them in Ubuntu or install them without informing the user of these legality issues. Because users aren't paying for Ubuntu, and Canonical doesn't pay licensing fees for these codecs, the users have to know that, by installing these codecs, they may be breaking the law.

2. Driver support: Sadly, not every hardware manufacturer is willing to spend time and development money on drivers for a platform that they don't think has any real user base. And, not all companies are willing to release hardware specs to third parties for FOSS drivers.

While it's fair that Mossburg points out these two large problems, it's not entirely fair that he blames Ubuntu for them. These issues are the direct or indirect result of Bug #1 on Launchpad. (Here (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1))

There are several things that are helping this change. First, being Dell's recent work with Ubuntu pre-loaded systems. With hope, Dell will put the needed pressure onto hardware makers for native Linux drivers. Second, is the resent announcement of AMD's. Whether or not AMD follows through on their promise of FOSS drivers that actually work on all chipsets, other manufacturers will won't like being one-up'ed by AMD on the Linux front.

Codecs are a more unique and irritating problem. We can only hope that alternatives become more widely used (Ogg Vorbis/Theora) or that the patent holders of these codecs loosen the restrictions.

Either way, there are still barriers of entry into the Linux market. Some are willing to deal with them, others are not so willing. This is their choice. I'm happy enough with Ubuntu and will keep using it as long as my hardware will boot it.

danny joe ritchie
September 15th, 2007, 04:00 PM
the discussed subject is complex...The people I know can handle windows pretty well (installing the os, application, even maintenance) but they are almost clueless when it comes to Linux. and that doesn't mean the windows is easier to use or more user-friendly. it's just that it has been around like almost forever and the user had all the time in the world for getting used to it. it's just a matter of "who has been on their desktops first". and it was windows. or mac os, in small numbers. that was the history and it can't be changed. people are accustomed to something, being it good or crap. if you get them out of their "crap habits" they'll feel lost and unsecured, because for them an os si merely a tool to do some stuff, they don't enjoy using it, they don't care which one is technically superior etc...I believe this is one of the main reasons for the Linux very small desktop market share: reluctance to change of the end-users

I agree with you, but my question is, How far do we have to go to make Ubuntu an OS that is satisfactory for those who know only Windows?
I think we need to focus on Ubuntu's strengths and not try to be anything like Windows!
Just my opinion!

karellen
September 15th, 2007, 04:05 PM
....probably the biggest barrier in Linux adoption is driver support.and unfortunately, it's been a never ending vicious circle. oem don't release drivers for Linux because of its small market share and the tiny market share continues because of the lack of drivers (among other reasons)

kelvin spratt
September 15th, 2007, 06:57 PM
danny joe ritchie i totally agree with you Ubuntu and Linux is not windows and never will be i used windows from 3.1 so i know windows well, i left Windows March this year this year with my eyes open Linux is a techniclogical achievement against all the odds on a Cd you not only get a operating system and an Office system that is secure all for free that works from the box for a majority of people, but its not windows that why i left windows, its Linux in all its glory easy to fix if i break it backups are a doodle security is second to none and its free as in free,

moredhel
September 15th, 2007, 07:02 PM
When you say it is not ready how so? Because if you mean software/hardware isn't supported, who's fault is that?

rsambuca
September 15th, 2007, 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsambuca View Post
I still think that ubuntu is perfect for the average user *if it is installed, with necessary codecs by someone that knows what they are doing*. I installed ubuntu on my 67 year old mother's computer, and she couldn't be happier.

Most Windows users know how to install programs using the installation CDs and a number of them can install programs from the internet, meaning they don't need someone to help them to install software provided that the initial system is working. With Linux, the people who needed you to install the system would later need you to install other software for them as well (unless they learn how to do it themselves).


All I showed them is the Add/Remove Programs and Synaptic Package Manager. I have noticed my mom has actually installed a couple of things on her own, without asking me first. Pretty much just point and click all the way. Given what they used with XP, in their case, there is no way they will ever need anything outside the standard repositories. I am getting a little nervous about the upgrade to Gutsy, though! Guess we'll see what happens.

karellen
September 15th, 2007, 07:21 PM
I agree with you, but my question is, How far do we have to go to make Ubuntu an OS that is satisfactory for those who know only Windows?
I think we need to focus on Ubuntu's strengths and not try to be anything like Windows!
Just my opinion!

as far as I'm concerned Linux should stay Linux and Windows the same, I have no problems whatsoever using both. though I don't know about the others

bsmonks
September 16th, 2007, 02:05 AM
Aww, how can you say Linux is unfriendly? You must have seen the picture of the penguin, Tux, that's used to represent Linux... how can you say that lil fella's unfriendly? :)

Seriously though, Linux isn't unfriendly. It's just different to what you're used to using. I'm assuming you've come from Windows. And Linux isn't Windows. It is based on UNIX (an OS that's way older than Windows!), and it does stuff the UNIX way... the Linux way now... not the Windows way.

Downloading apps is, 9 times out of 10, easy-peasy. You go into Synaptic, do a search, click on the packages that you want, hit Apply, and go grab a Coke while the system sorts it out for you. With Synaptic, you don't get the dependency hell, cos Synaptic grabs what you'll need automagically.

Unfortunately, sometimes you want something that you can't find in the repositories. So you download a tarball or something and have to mess with make install and ./configure and stuff. But, quite often, you don't really need to do that. There are a lot of repos out there, a lot more than the default ones. And there's a wealth of software, all packaged up in .debs, waiting for Synaptic to grab em.

It is frustrating when the app you want just does not seem to be available as a .deb, and the configure or install scripts are all wrong. I grabbed a game off http://www.tucows.com/Linux last week, and the install.sh file had an error in it that I don't know how to fix. I got mad, and muttered vile things about the developers who make a game then can't even write a crappy little install script so it'll run right. But then I got over it, and found something else instead.

You're mad at Ubuntu and Linux right now, you're gonna wipe it off your hard drive and go back to XP, right? That's a shame. What would be an idea, is if you did a dual-install, so you have XP and Ubuntu both on your hard drive. So you can get back to Windows - to what you know - and just do stuff. But Ubuntu will be there too, waiting for when you get over being mad at lil Tux. Then maybe you could log in again and see if you can get it to do something else for you?

Ubuntu ain't right for everyone. If it's just too damn stupid and weird for you, then yeah, maybe you should bin it. But wouldn't you like to know that you tried your damndest before you kicked it out?

Take care!

Thanks for the thoughts, razorednight. It was the posts like yours that gave me second thoughts. Yes, I did keep tabs on this thread even though I said I was going back to Windows. I wanted to see what others in the community had to say about my troubles/difficulties.

Oh, I did ditch linux for Windows for the project I was working on. But I will keep a box with Kubuntu installed (I like the look and feel of the Ku version better than the U version.) and just play with it without any stress of "having" to make it work.

For those of you who offered criticism without any constructive help <cough>diatribe</cough> maybe you guys should limit your posting to the threads of those who are experienced linux users. You and your posts are no better than the idiot who wrote the software I tried to install. You both went off half-cocked and you do nothing to help new users with their problems and, more than likely, drive them away from linux.

I happen to be the kind of person who looks at one who helps as a much bigger man than one who simply berates those with problems. Really, are you helping anyone, anyone at all, when you say stuff like "It can't be the fault of the software. So it must be your fault." Or "Good riddance. Don't let the door hit you on the way out." You people I just dismiss as being truly ignorant. Because if you really knew what you were talking about, you would be able to assist those who don't; instead of just kicking them while they're down.

Thank you to the ladies and/or gentlemen that provided assistance and alternatives. If I need any help with my Kubuntu box, I know where to look for help.

bigboy_pdb
September 17th, 2007, 02:46 AM
This thread should not have been merged with the desktop readiness thread (although I'd agree that it should have been moved out of the Ubuntu testimonials category). Two threads falling under the same category and having identical content are two completely different things. The previous thread was about an article regarding a person's experience with using Ubuntu pre-installed on a Dell computer. This thread was intended to ask about a generic question about whether or not Ubuntu is "desktop ready" and what a person thinks being desktop ready is, as well as, whether or not Ubuntu meets that definition. These both fall into the same generic category but not the same thread. Just because one person mentioned desktop readiness does not mean they should have been merged.

bigboy_pdb
September 17th, 2007, 02:57 AM
i'm very sorry most people don't know how to install software in any OS, the average user relies on other people to do that for them and then its usually messed up then taken to some one else which they pay, the average user does not know anything about the working of their computer, car washing machine or whatever, and to imply the average user is trained in basic knowledge of windows is totally inaccurate


I'll admit that I might be wrong about most people knowing how to install software. I based my statement on all the people that I know (and most likely you did the same). If you had simply said that most people don't know, you could have easily defended yourself and I might have agreed with you (if you would have provided adequate evidence or a good argument), but you went on to make an even more elaborate statement that I'm certain you cannot defend easily. Please provide a reliable source or good argument for your extensive claims.

Also, I never claimed that people know the basic workings of their computers. You're making it sound as though people should have to understand things like stacks and system calls.

The statement that I made regarding the average user cannot be inaccurate. Most computer users use Windows. The definition of basic knowledge is based on the average user. If the average computer user uses Windows then he/she must have basic knowledge of Windows.

I'm sure that that wasn't what other people were referring to, but we were talking about an article that was written with respect to Windows users. Most people use Windows and people learn to use Windows to get things done. Many of them might not be doing advanced things and for a number of people what they're doing might not be done efficiently and their computer might be in a poor state, but they are completing the tasks that they want to complete using Windows. In other words, if most people can do what they need to do using Windows (regardless of whether or not they ask for guidance or help at times) and they don't feel that there's a need for an alternative, what gives other people the right to claim that they don't have the basic skills needed?

bigboy_pdb
September 17th, 2007, 02:58 AM
Most people do not know how to install Windows!


The article wasn't about installing Ubuntu. It was about using Ubuntu pre-installed on a Dell laptop.



Linux does not need to support every device to be a great operating system! Some hardware vendors don't support open source. So What?
Its the wrong idea to bad mouth Ubuntu over this.


You're missing the point of the article. He's writing from the perspective of whether or not Ubuntu is ready for the average computer user. The average computer user is a Windows user. His main points were that it will be missing software that they'd expect to be there and that the majority of people would find it too complex. The average person is not going to care about why the software isn't there.

bigboy_pdb
September 17th, 2007, 03:00 AM
rsambuca, I thought you were implying that your mother only used pre-installed software (which isn't necessarily what the average Windows user does). What I was really trying to say in response to your post is that your mother is most likely not the same as the average computer user. Your post sounded as though you were making a hidden implication stating that if someone who's elderly and is who is not the average computer user can use Ubuntu over Windows then other people should be able to do the same. I think that Ubuntu's methods for installing programs are easier than their counterparts in Windows. If your mother hasn't been conditioned to expect her OS to behave like Windows then it might be easier to get her to use Ubuntu than the average computer user (Windows user) who expects certain things from Ubuntu.

LookTJ
September 17th, 2007, 09:04 AM
does k3b do the same job?

lancest
September 17th, 2007, 10:59 AM
Nothing personal. People express opinions. Many of us feel strongly a certain way and can't understand the logic behind certain anti Ubuntu statements. If everyone agreed the world would be very boring. The media in general is biased against Linux desktop (they lack true user experience). We present Ubuntu and former/ current MS users understand better because we have used both systems for long periods! How can we just accept these kind of statements "Linux is so user UNfriendly" when we know them to be false. For those of use who stick with it long enough to make easy adjustments, Linux is much easier and maintenance free. The internet workstation appliance experience! Now when I shut my computer down it obeys me.

OzzyFrank
September 17th, 2007, 12:41 PM
"I don't know how to use it, so it must be broken"

I'm SOLD!

(no, really, I am...)

Celegorm
September 17th, 2007, 03:41 PM
Thanks for the thoughts, razorednight. It was the posts like yours that gave me second thoughts. Yes, I did keep tabs on this thread even though I said I was going back to Windows. I wanted to see what others in the community had to say about my troubles/difficulties.

Oh, I did ditch linux for Windows for the project I was working on. But I will keep a box with Kubuntu installed (I like the look and feel of the Ku version better than the U version.) and just play with it without any stress of "having" to make it work.

Glad to see you'll still be giving it another chance. I've been there with the compilation problems myself, and it is very frustrating. Actually I had a worse time trying to compile something from source on a windows machine (though that was years ago).

Peter6218
September 17th, 2007, 05:16 PM
it could also say a lot about people who try to do something they dont know how to do, then complain because they can't do it. if you don't have the willingness to learn, or the forethought to read about something ebfore installing yet, then I have no sympathy for you when you try to use it. linux is not windows, there are differences between the two. just because you cant understand the differences does not mean there is a problem with the os, there is a problem with you

That's exactly the kind of comment I would expect from a Linux phreak

Linux is being promoted as the "better" OS. Maybe it is? But not if installing software require a programmers course. I've got acquaintances who are seniors, not technically competent in the least, who are having great success using Windoze.

Until Linux achieves the ability to do that it's still a "toy for the boys" .NOT a serious competitor!

Just try getting Feisty to install the latest Java version for Firefox and you'll maybe get a glimmer. For Windoze it's a couple of mouse clicks!

Celegorm
September 17th, 2007, 05:34 PM
Linux is being promoted as the "better" OS. Maybe it is? But not if installing software require a programmers course.

*ahem* If you are referring to the OP's problems, compiling from source is a programmer's task. However there is no need for a typical user to do such a thing unless they have their heart set on using a program which is only available as source code, in which case the program in question is likely the most bleeding edge version of a program that just came out and no one has made a .deb package for it yet, or it is very obscure, or it is still in early development stages.

Also with installing the latest java for firefox... Are you installing from the repositories or trying to download the firefox plugin? Because it's far easier if you get the java runtime environment (JRE) using add/remove or synaptic.

Peter6218
September 17th, 2007, 05:46 PM
"Are you installing from the repositories or trying to download the firefox plugin? Because it's far easier if you get the java runtime environment (JRE) using add/remove or synaptic."

Trying to do the Firefox non-plugin version. There are at least two versions on the Sun site. One is labeled as an "rpm" self-extractor. Feisty wants no part of it !!

Neither did Xandros by the way.

Windoze is a snap.

Java is very, very common. This is, however, very typical of Linux. What is a snap in Windows is a major tussle in Linux.

What is needed is a common, across all platforms, installer protocol.

So it doesn't matter if you are on Xandros, Ubuntu, Linspire or any other Linux version it all works the same.

Celegorm
September 17th, 2007, 06:03 PM
Trying to do the Firefox non-plugin version. There are at least two versions on the Sun site. One is labeled as an "rpm" self-extractor. Feisty wants no part of it !!

Instead of getting it from the sun site, try opening up add/remove programs (located in the applications menu, I believe) or synaptic package manager and installing java from there (this is the usual way to install any program in ubuntu, it downloads and installs packages from centrally maintained repositories specifically designed for ubuntu). RPM's are a different type of package than what ubuntu uses, so that's why you're having a problem trying to install it.

rsambuca
September 17th, 2007, 06:04 PM
"Are you installing from the repositories or trying to download the firefox plugin? Because it's far easier if you get the java runtime environment (JRE) using add/remove or synaptic."

Trying to do the Firefox non-plugin version. There are at least two versions on the Sun site. One is labeled as an "rpm" self-extractor. Feisty wants no part of it !!

Neither did Xandros by the way.

Windoze is a snap.

Java is very, very common. This is, however, very typical of Linux. What is a snap in Windows is a major tussle in Linux.

What is needed is a common, across all platforms, installer protocol.

So it doesn't matter if you are on Xandros, Ubuntu, Linspire or any other Linux version it all works the same.

Have you tried just using the add/remove java? All you have to do is click it to install it. Not very difficult. An alternative is to Open Synaptic Package Manager, and select ubuntu-restricted-extras. Click Apply. Again, pretty easy.

With regards to you cross linux-platform installer, it really isn't possible at the moment as they all use different packaging systems. Because they all use the linux kernel does not mean that they are the same Operating System.

Peter6218
September 17th, 2007, 06:08 PM
"Have you tried just using the add/remove java? All you have to do is click it to install it. Not very difficult. An alternative is to Open Synaptic Package Manager, and select ubuntu-restricted-extras. Click Apply. Again, pretty easy."

I looked all over Feisty for something for Java. Nada. Zilch. Can you explain more? Maybe step by step?

rsambuca
September 17th, 2007, 06:24 PM
"Have you tried just using the add/remove java? All you have to do is click it to install it. Not very difficult. An alternative is to Open Synaptic Package Manager, and select ubuntu-restricted-extras. Click Apply. Again, pretty easy."

I looked all over Feisty for something for Java. Nada. Zilch. Can you explain more? Maybe step by step?

I was thinking that perhaps you do not have all of your repositories enabled (repositories are the software package sources). To enable your repositories, go to your top menu bar and select "System -> Administration -> Software Sources". On the first "Ubuntu Software" tab, make sure that you have the 'multiverse' repositories selected.

Then, from your top menu bar, select "Applications -> Add/Remove". In the top right of the window that opens, make sure you select "All Available Applications"

You will find it under "Sun Java"

theDaveTheRave
September 17th, 2007, 06:58 PM
Just thought I would add my penies worth!

I'm a Windows / Ubuntu / SuSe user, I'm not entirely sure which I prefer!? ..... well actually Ubuntu is my personal preference, but I shy away from suggesting others use it unless they are up for a certain amount of "fun" and "sleepless nights".

Windows can be great, but my neighbour has some "anti spy ware" that is a real pain. I've tried removing it via the windows "add / remove" thing but no joy.... then the other day he searched for it on the net and found the solution.... use the "add / remove" button..... :confused: and guess what, all worked and anti spy ware is now gone!

I really didn't get that one at all!

But this seem to be typical of my experience, I tried the "files and setings transfer wizard" to absolutely no effect whatsoever once - and I followed the instructions in the XP "MCP" book - go figure??!

When I used to get PC's I allways insisted on a full working CD version of all the software that I was gong to use, as I knew that at some point I would get a severe case of the runny noses and have to do a disk format and re-install, thankfully this doesn't seem to be such an issue with windows these days.... thank god, as I dare anyone to get a copy of the OS on CD with a new computer, you have no choice but to by a separate disk and they charge an extra bunch for what you allready have - I really don't understand, instead the give a "recovery" partition and tell you to make recovery disks, so it now becomes your expense and your problem if things go wrong!

Bive my a "free" software system any day, I can download as many copies as I like, I just need to "backup" my work to a USB key and if all systems fail I can simply re-install..... then play with the wireless, touchpad, movie playback.... *yawn*, I'm getting quite good at this now, and I've written myself little "help manuals" for the even I need to do it again!

All in All I would say Stick with it, almost everyone as heard of Linux, and as soon as you say "oh I run Linux at home" you become the local <geek> and people start asking you stuff about computers..... and when it is a windows problem just roll your eyes and say "if you were using linux I would be able to help you out.... there may be an open source solution to your problem, I'll check it out" all sounds very clever!

Lets just not tell too many people how easy things actually are!! :lolflag:

Dave

Peter6218
September 17th, 2007, 07:05 PM
I was thinking that perhaps you do not have all of your repositories enabled (repositories are the software package sources). To enable your repositories, go to your top menu bar and select "System -> Administration -> Software Sources". On the first "Ubuntu Software" tab, make sure that you have the 'multiverse' repositories selected.

Then, from your top menu bar, select "Applications -> Add/Remove". In the top right of the window that opens, make sure you select "All Available Applications"

You will find it under "Sun Java"

Worked and Thank You. This is the thing it just isn't intuitive like Windoze so directions are always needed. Solved a big problem for me so Thanks again :)

kshane
September 17th, 2007, 07:37 PM
I have been a computer user since the early '80s. The only times I purchased Windows was when I bought a Packard-Bell computer in the early '90s (Windows 3.1) and this past December I bought Vista (what a nightmare!!!). I am very upset with Vista. I bought it mainly for running games for my wife. I installed Ubuntu for the first time about 5 months ago. I was so impressed that I immediately installed it and made my box a dual boot.

About 2 months ago I completely removed Vista and was running only Linux. I ended up putting it back on my box 'cuz the anti-piracy stuff they (game companies) do to the discs make it impossible to actually run under wine, although the installs work great and actually go in (in my experience) MUCH smoother than with Windows Vista (or any other version of Windblows). Funny thing is that (I swear this is true) They do not run well under Vista, either! In fact, my wife's Sims will not run stably under Vista at all! Not one single purchased "Windows" game (Sims, Civ IV, Call To Duty, etc, ad infinitum) runs well under Vista (Micrshaft's 'flagship' OS)..

I also agree that Linux is not for everyone. It requires a learning curve that many Windows users are just not up to. I like the fact that Linux is the way it is! It's stable, secure, fun, VERY customizable and safe (once set up) for inexperienced users, i.e. children.

I am on my 5th or 6th installation on the same box. The only reason that I have done so many installations is because I take chances and do things one probably should not do! And I had fun doing it!

As far as hardware support - yes, it leaves something to be desired at times, but this is not the fault of Linux/Ubuntu. It IS the fault of hardware manufacturers that totally IGNORE Linux! I have an ATI Radeon X1650. It was sort of expensive when I bought it (around $240) and comes with 500mb RAM. And it isn't worth a pi$$ on Ubuntu, though I am aware some have no problems at all with it. Yeah, that is frustrating, but it isn't the fault of Linux or Ubuntu. It IS the fault of AMD (ATI)...

Do a search under my username for my threads and you'll see the multitude of problems I have had. And, with the exception of some snotty responses, I have had wonderful support from the users. More than I received from years of Microshaft...

So for my money, It's Ubuntu. I am still totally amazed that it's actually free!!!

Ubuntu for LIFE!!! :KS

Kevin

fraser_m
September 17th, 2007, 07:58 PM
<rant>
When I first tried the ubuntu 6.10 livecd, in my parent's pc, nothing worked except the mouse (and even then the scrollwheel was busted.)

When I bought myself a second hand laptop (Dell Latitude D600,) everything worked, except the two most important things. External USB modem and wireless. I gave up (after blasting XP from it.)

Then I tried the Feisty CD. And still, they didn't work. Then, we got an ethernet/wireless router. I could surf the web with ubuntu! But the wireless still didn't work, so there was only one pc online at a time. I kept ubuntu on my pc and kept using Windows for a bit. For three months I kept posting on this here forums, trying to get ndiswrapper to work. But no.

I didn't give up, and got to the root of the problem. There already was a driver for my wireless card. I installed it (using synaptic) and it worked perfectly. I wiped windows from my pc, and it has never been back. I am only using windows in VirtualBox (innotek) and only yesterday got USB support in it. I love it.

I need to test iTunes virtualised to see if it will sync to my iPod.
</rant>

rustybronco
September 17th, 2007, 08:32 PM
This is the thing it just isn't intuitive like Windoze so directions are always needed.
I have to disagree on this point, my daughter who is not a linux user (win_xp with firefox) was over to the house sunday and I told her to use my desktop, she wanted to download some manga so she ran utorrent in firefox? (didn't know you could but the icon was on the task bar) the only few things I needed to do were enter my name/password and show her the kb3 icon to burn to cd's the rest she did. now about her rebooting because of a flaky wusb adaptor (it also was in windows)... got to get her out of the windows mentality.

rsambuca
September 17th, 2007, 08:53 PM
rsambuca, I thought you were implying that your mother only used pre-installed software (which isn't necessarily what the average Windows user does). What I was really trying to say in response to your post is that your mother is most likely not the same as the average computer user. Your post sounded as though you were making a hidden implication stating that if someone who's elderly and is who is not the average computer user can use Ubuntu over Windows then other people should be able to do the same. I think that Ubuntu's methods for installing programs are easier than their counterparts in Windows. If your mother hasn't been conditioned to expect her OS to behave like Windows then it might be easier to get her to use Ubuntu than the average computer user (Windows user) who expects certain things from Ubuntu.implying... hidden implications...??? I think you are making me out to be far more intelligent than I really am! No hidden meanings here. Just providing an anecdotal example of how ubuntu is easy to use if it comes installed. In any event, other than all the hidden implication comments, I think I agree with most of what you are saying. Regarding your last sentence, though, I would like to add that my mom has been using windows since it's inception, so I think she is as 'conditioned' as anyone.

zetetic
September 18th, 2007, 04:25 AM
Worked and Thank You. This is the thing it just isn't intuitive like Windoze so directions are always needed. Solved a big problem for me so Thanks again :)

If this isn't intuitive perhaps you have a literacy problem...

You don't even bother to learn the very basics of a linux system and come here making stupid and false comments about linux, like this?:

«Just try getting Feisty to install the latest Java version for Firefox and you'll maybe get a glimmer. For Windoze it's a couple of mouse clicks!»

For Ubuntu it's also a couple of mouse clicks, or, better yet, it's just a matter of introducing a couple commands!

If I were you I would be now ashamed!

You are spreading lies about Ubuntu and Linux just because you don't read anything, you have a literacy problem and you are dealing with Ubuntu as if Ubuntu was Windows!

If you want to learn Linux, forget everything you've learned on Windows! If you are at Linux you must think Linux, not Windows!

How can't you understand something so simple as this???

anemptygun
September 18th, 2007, 05:34 AM
Ubuntu needs better monitor detection. Users don't weant to go in and edit .conf files to use their widescreen monitor.

aysiu
September 18th, 2007, 05:57 AM
Ubuntu needs better monitor detection. Users don't weant to go in and edit .conf files to use their widescreen monitor.
Good thing the developers have implemented this for Ubuntu 7.10 (to be released next month):
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/displayconfig-gtk

CptPicard
September 18th, 2007, 08:35 AM
Oh... quitcherbitchin', n00bs. My first Linux was Slackware 3.4 in 1997, it came on 15 floppies I downloaded by modem off a BBS (yeah, I know this was a bit archaic even for the time). It was a huge victory to get PPP working to my ISP so I could actually get on the net, and browse the web using Lynx, as I couldn't get XFree86 working. That's where I started learning about the OS and went from there. Been Windows-free except for games since then!

I have compiled Linux From Scratch, been a Gentoo user... finally I figured I wanted something that works a bit more out of the box, as I wasn't getting the kick I used to from all the system administration anymore, and felt like I had done most of my learning. Ubuntu fits the bill and it is just unbelievably slick and user-friendly compared to what Linux used to be a decade ago.

This is still a DIY hacker OS, and you need to get into the ethos if you're going to use it, instead of coming to complain that the community actually owes you something for making things available you would have serious trouble finding for Windows. It doesn't owe you anything. Actually it still goes out of its way to help beginners, who face much less of a hurdle to get into Unix-like systems than I did 10 years ago.

The OP for example would have done well to just understand the simple point that if you want to compile your package from source, you need the library headers. These are generally inside the dev package. This is just common knowledge if you are going to compile your own software, and this would hold just as well on Windows, with the exception that there you do not have the luxury of autotools that makes the job generally a three-command process.

Now that when Linux does make this a possibility, what do people do? They generally seem to ignore repositories, get a .tar.gz off some random site, and then cry when their build pukes... which is not uncommon or unexpected, and in the end, compiling from source is far more of an advanced power user task than anything you'd ever see Windows "supporting".

simonn
September 18th, 2007, 08:50 AM
CptPicard... well said!

CptPicard
September 18th, 2007, 09:05 AM
I like your signature. :) Apparently I am not the only person around who has noticed the truly weird aversion a lot of beginners have to apt or even Synaptic.

Way too many people are attempting compilation from source, or installing external .debs from all sorts of sources. Then they run into dependency problems, which is all of a sudden the fault of Linux. All they would need to do is to use the repositories, which are a remarkable feature... but I suppose the idea of downloading a package off some website and clicking on the "installer" sits too deep in the minds of many.

I'm a bigger Linux power user than most, and there is nothing outside of repositories on my box except Eclipse and Netbeans, which sit nicely in /opt...

Mr lerame
September 18th, 2007, 09:35 AM
Fortunately, I still have XP on my computer. I've not used it for a while until today. I've been using ubuntu for a couple of months but unfortunately have had problem after problem. All have been overcome by visiting the forums and discovering that someone else has had the same problem. Until today.....Programs refusing to open. No errors, no reason. (as far as I could tell)
I got fed up searching through the forums for answers and couldn't be bothered to ask the question myself and waste an evening rectifying it, so I booted XP, did a restore to an earlier time, rebooted ubuntu and everything worked ok again. I don't know why and I'm not interested.
Ubuntu is great...lots of people willing to help and it's all free! Just like getting a free car and spending every evening repairing it with help from lots of willing people.
Computers are merely a tool to get things done. I shouldn't know how to fix a problem when it comes along, I just want to use it. How many drivers can fix their car when it breaks down?
Windows cost money...it works. Ubuntu doesn't. Personally I've never had a major problem with Windows. Used it for many years, never called another person to fix it and rarely used a DOS command.
Biggest problem with Windows is viruses, security, etc. Where do they come from?....geeks that play with computers too much with no respect for other people.
I might keep ubuntu as a toy but as a serious alternative to Windows? No chance. I wish you all happiness in your environment but I'm too busy reacting with people in the real world.

dark_harmonics
September 18th, 2007, 11:42 AM
Way too many people are attempting compilation from source, or installing external .debs from all sorts of sources. Then they run into dependency problems, which is all of a sudden the fault of Linux. All they would need to do is to use the repositories, which are a remarkable feature...


Its unreasonable to expect everything you need to be in the repositories. This is especially true if you have a very specific want or need. I will agree that the repositories do have like 90% of the stuff i use.

My experience is, that almost all linux programs have either a .deb source especially for ubuntu feisty, or have repos that you can add.

Anyway, it isn't the designers of Ubuntu's fault when the programmer doesn't design their software to install easily onto your platform.

Peter6218
September 18th, 2007, 01:52 PM
"This is still a DIY hacker OS,"

Did you get that? Unlike others Picard says it correctly.

Feisty is pretty decent for Linux. So is Xandros. But neither yet approaches the ease of use of Windoze.

Getting closer, not there yet.

I still say that until the Linux industry gets close to Windows in ease of use it has no chance of breaking the Microsoft monopoly.

Which is sad.

Coldkill
September 18th, 2007, 02:29 PM
couldn't be bothered to ask the question myself
There's your first problem

Edit: I think he's trolling

Artificial Intelligence
September 18th, 2007, 04:23 PM
"This is still a DIY hacker OS,"

Did you get that? Unlike others Picard says it correctly.

Feisty is pretty decent for Linux. So is Xandros. But neither yet approaches the ease of use of Windoze.

Getting closer, not there yet.

I still say that until the Linux industry gets close to Windows in ease of use it has no chance of breaking the Microsoft monopoly.

Which is sad.

What is ease of use? Is it a system where every user and programs have admin access? Or a paperclip that bounch up'n'down everytime you do something?

Peter6218
September 18th, 2007, 04:43 PM
Going to call on your expertise again.

Using Add/Remove installed Wine. How do I get it to install the program I want? Can't figure that out.

Trying to get it to run Eudora 6, it should be able to.

Also tried to get RAID. No luck there from repository, or is it built in??

karellen
September 18th, 2007, 06:03 PM
There's your first problem

Edit: I think he's trolling

well he is...probably without intention

rsambuca
September 18th, 2007, 07:19 PM
Going to call on your expertise again.

Using Add/Remove installed Wine. How do I get it to install the program I want? Can't figure that out.

Trying to get it to run Eudora 6, it should be able to.

Also tried to get RAID. No luck there from repository, or is it built in??

Peter, I was happy to help you, but I think you had better post in the appropriate forums for help. This is not a support thread.

Also, perhaps before starting a new thread you could just have a quick read through the wine documentation. They are pretty straight forward.

http://www.winehq.org/site/docs/wineusr-guide/index

yama108
September 18th, 2007, 07:44 PM
I've used Windows for the last 10 years and am now slowly transitioning to Linux. And even I know better than to write off an entire OS because some 4 year old freeware wouldn't run on my system. Like Windows is any different. Advice? Do what I did. Spend $20 for a book on Linux/Ubuntu. Learn it. Compromise occasionally. Don't give up.

Celegorm
September 18th, 2007, 09:10 PM
Feisty is pretty decent for Linux. So is Xandros. But neither yet approaches the ease of use of Windoze.

Am I the only one who had an absolutely flawless transition to Ubuntu? I picked this distro because I wanted to ditch windows right away and still have something I could use easily. I was using my computer for web browsing and music playing within minutes of finishing the installation. Although it took a while to really get familiar with the OS, I still think it's just as easy as windows (though certainly a lot of ex-windows users get frustrated with it because it's different), and I think it's tons more user friendly. Though my viewpoint on user friendliness is that it should not only apply to the new users, but the experienced ones as well. In Ubuntu you can do things the easy way (poking around through menus without really knowing what you are doing, which is the way I always did things in windows) or the "hard" way (command line). Once you have learned your way around the command line, it can sometimes be easier to use than a GUI, and it is a lot more powerful.

theDaveTheRave
September 18th, 2007, 09:11 PM
AARGH.

It's comment like




what do people do? They generally seem to ignore repositories, get a .tar.gz off some random site, and then cry when their build pukes...



from cptpicard that put people off of the forums and start saying that linux is too much of a "geek" thing.

get real, if you are a new user how are you supposed to know about synaptic?? you do an install, use synaptic, then need a new package 3 months later, but can't remember how you loaded new stuff on!

I find a simple solution to be to add a "downloads" sub folder in my system, add this to the location of repositories then if you find something on the web, download it then simply

sudo apt-get blahblahblah.deb
and bingo... I go straight to the forums for help:lolflag:

personally I like apt-get, it is much quicker if you happen to know the package you are after. Example you downloaded something, broke it (by accident, or maybe on purpose!), removed it then re-installed much quicker with Sudo blah blah blah blah, and no nasty problems of (now where is the synaptic link - especially when you have purposely moved it to somewhere more (or maybe less) obvious!

The real problem is that it is such a steep learning curve for most people, the command line isn't so much the problem, it is more that because they have never had to use it they are scared of messing up their system.

I remember an old job I had we were trying to ftp something onto/off of a customer site, and windows was going so slowly it was painful. So I simply opened a dos prompt, started old fashioned FTP put in a few commands (wrongly the first couple of times as it had been a while using command line ftp for me!) then let it get on with it, this did seem to impress the boss - but I'm not entirely sure why!?

The other advantage of the command line is that you can make "strange" directories that don't technically exist, this is rather amusing. I created directories using unicode symbols, and DOS / Windows didn't like them and hence didn't display them, but it did recognise them to copy too and from, and even changed the disk usage values correctly, very odd, and highly amusing.

Admitedly it isn't something I have ever tried on Ubuntu..... maybee I should??

Hmmmm??:KS

Dave

rsambuca
September 18th, 2007, 09:15 PM
Am I the only one who had an absolutely flawless transition to Ubuntu? I picked this distro because I wanted to ditch windows right away and still have something I could use easily. I was using my computer for web browsing and music playing within minutes of finishing the installation. Although it took a while to really get familiar with the OS, I still think it's just as easy as windows (though certainly a lot of ex-windows users get frustrated with it because it's different), and I think it's tons more user friendly. Though my viewpoint on user friendliness is that it should not only apply to the new users, but the experienced ones as well. In Ubuntu you can do things the easy way (poking around through menus without really knowing what you are doing, which is the way I always did things in windows) or the "hard" way (command line). Once you have learned your way around the command line, it can sometimes be easier to use than a GUI, and it is a lot more powerful.My transition was basically the same as your. Everything basically just worked, but it was just different. I think the bottom line is that a lot of new linux users do not actually want ubuntu (or whatever linux distro) to be "easy", they want it to be "not different than Windows", and that is wherein the problem lies. It seems many new users just want a Windows box with a different logo on the start button.

Most people just do not like change, and are happier complaining about the status-quo.

karellen
September 18th, 2007, 10:02 PM
It seems many new users just want a Windows box with a different logo on the start button.
Most people just do not like change, and are happier complaining about the status-quo.
and you could say they want a free version of windows ;) (as if it hasn't been pirated enough...](*,) )

greymongrey
September 18th, 2007, 10:13 PM
Maybe it's not that Linux is so hard but you've picked the wrong distro to start with. I'd recommend PCLinuxOS or Xandros if you need something more like Windows. It'll still be different but some distros hold your hand more than others.

Lividity
September 18th, 2007, 10:47 PM
What a silly title...

Linux is the best community supported OS I can think of. Try installing OpenBSD and asking a question that has already been asked.

Linux is not unfriendly it's just different from windows.

simonn
September 19th, 2007, 01:10 AM
I still say that until the Linux industry gets close to Windows in ease of use it has no chance of breaking the Microsoft monopoly.

I disagree.

When my mum stays with us she uses either OS X or linux and has Vista at home (grrr! I told her to buy a mac!! And then she calls me up for support "Mum, I have never even seen vista let alone used it"). When I ask her what she thinks about the difference between them... "They are all the same really."

My trouble ('n' strife), uses OSX and Linux at home and XP on her work laptop and has even done projects moving between all three using the same documents with MS, Open & Neo Office (retraining costs my @rse!).

Neither of them are what I would define as anywhere near "Power Users". They use what is put in front of them - computers are a tool, a means to an end, not the end in itself. In other words if they were given a computer with any OS installed (properly!) they would just get on and do what ever they needed to do with it working around problems or asking for help as they need it.

Power Users IMHO are the problem. I define a "Power User" as someone who considers hacking to be changing registry settings, knowing what the "cool" apps are etc, but not really knowing or understanding what is really going on under the hood. The sort of people who spend hours tweaking bios and registry settings to get "better performance". This is all done on windows of course. They then move to another operating system, e.g. Linux, and realise that they do not know anywhere as much as they thought they did/do - permissions/the concept of a multiple user system is the usual kicker - and their ego takes a hit. IOW ricers. As they are a "Power User" it must be Linux, not them.

CptPicard
September 19th, 2007, 01:20 AM
from cptpicard that put people off of the forums and start saying that linux is too much of a "geek" thing.

Actually, I like Linux being a bit of a geek thing.. it means that it evolves faster and is easier to adapt and use from a developer and system administration perspective than than if everything had to be polished to GUI perfection before release. After all, having a GUI for everything restricts the speed you get features out greatly, and also locks different development paths into presenting a unified interface to the user :)

If people enjoy monoculture, they shouldn't have taken the red pill... this is actually what I said above about Linux being a DIY OS, it's not a statement about its quality, but a statement about its philosophy :)


get real, if you are a new user how are you supposed to know about synaptic?? you do an install, use synaptic, then need a new package 3 months later, but can't remember how you loaded new stuff on!

I hope you're being sarcastic.. :) Using apt through Synaptic is far easier than hunting stuff off the net for Windows, plus it takes care of dependencies for you.

Of course, using apt off the command line is even faster if you know what you want. (As you probably know, Synaptic is just a front-end to apt)

When you do go get stuff off the web as external .debs, then my monoculture argument applies... if you believe it should always "just work" on your random Linux distribution, go back into the Matrix, please :)

And if you do choose to compile your own... just be grateful you can. Very, very grateful indeed.



The real problem is that it is such a steep learning curve for most people, the command line isn't so much the problem, it is more that because they have never had to use it they are scared of messing up their system.

And I'm starting to feel that with the increased uptake of Linux, we're seeing an Endless September (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September) of sorts evolving. More and more n00bs try Linux, asssume it's some product with which they can sue the manufacturer if it bites them, and then come whine at those who are actually quite predisposed to help if there was some willingness to put in some learning and effort...

chessercizes
September 19th, 2007, 03:52 AM
sigh. correct me if i'm wrong, but these always seem to turn into flamewars before the first page is over -.-

I honestly think you should give linux another chance (whenever you're ready). The ubuntuforums are the best place on the planet; almost every time you ask a question, someone is willing to redirect you or give you an answer. So don't give up; keep asking questions and finding out what you can.

and tux is your friend!!!!
your really really cute friend.

=D

dn_desaku
September 19th, 2007, 04:13 AM
Tux came with open arms and you shoved him over to the corner, he's crying :( . I know compiling is not easy but its compiling. Just stick with .DEBs at http://packages.ubuntu.com and I know, I love my Windows apps and Games. That's why WINE came in. The Ubuntu community is people helping people and you can't really get that with MS. Besides, what will happen when your Windows install dies?

Good luck with your troubles

djchandler
September 19th, 2007, 04:52 PM
I disagree.

When my mum stays with us she uses either OS X or linux and has Vista at home (grrr! I told her to buy a mac!! And then she calls me up for support "Mum, I have never even seen vista let alone used it"). When I ask her what she thinks about the difference between them... "They are all the same really."

My trouble ('n' strife), uses OSX and Linux at home and XP on her work laptop and has even done projects moving between all three using the same documents with MS, Open & Neo Office (retraining costs my @rse!).

Neither of them are what I would define as anywhere near "Power Users". They use what is put in front of them - computers are a tool, a means to an end, not the end in itself. In other words if they were given a computer with any OS installed (properly!) they would just get on and do what ever they needed to do with it working around problems or asking for help as they need it.

Power Users IMHO are the problem. I define a "Power User" as someone who considers hacking to be changing registry settings, knowing what the "cool" apps are etc, but not really knowing or understanding what is really going on under the hood. The sort of people who spend hours tweaking bios and registry settings to get "better performance". This is all done on windows of course. They then move to another operating system, e.g. Linux, and realise that they do not know anywhere as much as they thought they did/do - permissions/the concept of a multiple user system is the usual kicker - and their ego takes a hit. IOW ricers. As they are a "Power User" it must be Linux, not them.

Mate, you are so right on the button with that comment about "power users." They tend to be deluded quite a bit of the time, and argue amongst themselves even when they're arguing about the same OS, usually Windows. Check out the ZDNet blogs, and you'll see the biggest bunch of whiners. It's like listening to a bunch of people gripe about getting their housecleaning done, and how best to do it.

I vacillated back and forth between Windows and Macs for years, actually having both, and made a few dollars helping people bridge the gap from one platform to the other for a while. My help is no longer necessary, even for the most unsophisticated users, because external media has standardized, besides the ease of emailing data files, and most mission critical office applications can read data files and translate file formats cross-platform just fine.

The biggest problem with the unsophisticated Windows user is they have no idea how vulnerable they are. There are bot networks available to those who know that can crank out spam faster than the fastest of supercomputers, on demand, to any level of performance necessary. If some people would just check their sent box once in a while, they would know they've been compromised. And then there's the adware, spyware, and viruses, besides the trojans with the bot payloads.

If you want to just play games, get an Xbox 360, Wii, or Playstation 3, and leave Linux for the Linux users. If you don't like it, don't use it. You have choices after all. The others just cost A LOT more money and freedom.

DJ

UI-Freak
September 19th, 2007, 10:55 PM
8800+ posts do not help. Improve the product and understand the potential users. They are NOT like the average user here, and they never will be.

karellen
September 19th, 2007, 11:12 PM
8800+ posts do not help. Improve the product and understand the potential users. They are NOT like the average user here, and they never will be.

correct me if I'm wrong but Linux is the fastest evolving OS around here. compare the 5 years+ release cycle of windows to the one of 6 month for Ubuntu, for example

Frak
September 19th, 2007, 11:21 PM
8800+ posts do not help. Improve the product and understand the potential users. They are NOT like the average user here, and they never will be.


OK ,they are, if you have a suggestion, put it in the Idea Pool (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=253)

bsmonks
September 20th, 2007, 02:34 AM
does k3b do the same job?

k3b?? :confused:

alvarez1900
September 20th, 2007, 02:34 AM
I love ubuntu since being turned on to it and the many spins of linux. I think the main reason Linux isn't able to keep pace with Mac and Windows is because the support issues are bad. Many people develop constantly for linux but people who have trouble can't find the answers they need and they eventually throw it out the window.

I have seen multiple posts in this forum and others by people who need help and no one replies to them. I have one where I asked about compiz but this isn't a rant about me, I will figure out the answer to my question.

There are posts like this one (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=3392379) all the time and either there aren't enough knowledgeable who frequent the forums or they just don't wanna bother. :shrug: disheartening because Ubuntu and Kubuntu are real contenders and the best contenders yet.

aysiu
September 20th, 2007, 02:55 AM
People have Windows problems all the time that can't be solved, and yet they stick with Windows anyway. Just ask my co-workers.

yabbadabbadont
September 20th, 2007, 03:26 AM
People have Windows problems all the time that can't be solved, and yet they stick with Windows anyway. Just ask my co-workers.

Isn't that the definition of insanity? :lol:

alvarez1900
September 20th, 2007, 03:30 AM
People have Windows problems all the time that can't be solved, and yet they stick with Windows anyway. Just ask my co-workers.

Yea people have mac and linux problems no one knows the answer to and they live with those too. However when they go out and talk to people who do know the answers (like forums) and get ignored it drives them away.

I have been given more help with Mac then any other system/OS actually. Windows guys know the answer they get annoyed when people ask though. In linux I heard multiple times from people "linux may not be for you" or "linux might be too hard for you" I have learned a ton pretty fast but I learn by sight. I see it done and then I understand.

aysiu
September 20th, 2007, 03:34 AM
People on these forums are just users like you. We often do know the answers, but we often don't. I think you'll find the same on any forum. In fact, I could point you to a number of unanswered Mac forum posts regarding WPA on G4 Powerbooks, because I've searched for months for a way to get it working on my wife's Powerbook and haven't found an answer, so we moved our household to the less secure WEP.

I can't tell you how many times I've had "unknown" or "fatal" but always vague Windows errors. The "solution" always exists, which is to reinstall, but that's not a real solution, of course.

I still haven't seen you explain how Mac or Windows has fewer problems than Linux except that you isolated one post about Compiz-Fusion that went unanswered.

Frak
September 20th, 2007, 04:13 AM
k3b?? :confused:
CD/DVD burner

djchandler
September 20th, 2007, 06:50 AM
"This is still a DIY hacker OS,"

Did you get that? Unlike others Picard says it correctly.

Feisty is pretty decent for Linux. So is Xandros. But neither yet approaches the ease of use of Windoze.

Getting closer, not there yet.

I still say that until the Linux industry gets close to Windows in ease of use it has no chance of breaking the Microsoft monopoly.

Which is sad.

Where does this bull [expletive deleted] come from? I have no idea why some techno-nerds think they're hackers just because they can enter a memorized series of characters at a command prompt. They couldn't program their way out of a wet paper bag.

You can set up Ubuntu straight off the Live CD and not have to do a thing else to it to be productive. It's almost too easy, which is scary to me. The office applications work, all the software that comes with the distribution work, no hacking/programming required. If you want to inter-operate with data using copyrights and which require royalties, then it will take a little effort on your part. If you can ask a question here, you will get it answered, and a solution easily provided either using Add/Remove or Synaptic, which is really the same thing, 99% of the time. Either way, just ask! And it's free. You don't even need to go shopping.

The second part of my response is this. Who says Vista, or any Windows OS for that matter, is worry-free, and so easy to use a "caveman" could use it? There's a bunch of compromised Windows boxes out there right now, and the owners don't even know it. It's so easy to use, Windows installations can be remotely compromised without the owner even knowing somebody else uses their computer while they're asleep. People should be required to get a license before getting on the information highway, or at least an always-on connection. They're jamming up my email inbox and costing us billions and they're ignorant about what's happening right under their noses. Their compromised bot computers are spamming the heck out of the rest of us who know to check our "sent" boxes in our email client periodically. Plus they should understand firewalls, adware, spyware, and know how to protect their computers from trojans and viruses. Easy? Not if you want it secure.

The last point is, why is Linux supposed to save all these Windows users from their own ignorance? If they migrate to Linux, I'm doing something else, may even go back to Windows 100% of the time. There'll be too few left for the criminal hi-jackers and crackers to bother with.

DJ
:lolflag:

aysiu
September 20th, 2007, 07:00 AM
Where does this bull [expletive deleted] come from? I have no idea why some techno-nerds think they're hackers just because they can enter a memorized series of characters at a command prompt. They couldn't program their way out of a wet paper bag. Well, some of these people may actually be hackers or programmers. But you're right--it's not rocket science (or hacking or programming). Setting up Ubuntu is ridiculously easy as long as you have an open mind and some compatible hardware. I am no programmer or hacker. I was not a computer science major in college. I'm not a system administrator or network administrator. Somehow, though, I've managed to not only install Ubuntu and use it, but also help out other new Ubuntu users.

I tried Linux three years ago, and it was unusable for Windows power users. Years before that, it was even worse. Try to imagine downloading a distro on ten floppy disks, compiling things, tracking down dependencies, having no way to test hardware compatibility before installing, not having Grub automatically install to the MBR and add Windows to the boot menu. I couldn't even imagine switching back then.

Now you have a live CD that is also an installer CD. The live CD has the full desktop environment and applications. It gives you a sense of what hardware issues you'll encounter after installation. The live CD also includes a partitioning tool as part of the installer. The installer lets you use the OS while it's installing. Package management allows you to install, remove, and upgrade software without having to Google around and weed out spyware/adware/nagware/trialware. gDebi allows you to double-click-install .deb files you do happen to find around the web. Why do people think that isn't user-friendly?

Edit: By the way, this thread has moved way beyond one user's experience, so I've merged it with the general Linux Desktop Readiness thread.

karellen
September 20th, 2007, 07:12 AM
all OS-s have problems and nothing if perfect. they change, evolve (or should) and become more and more user-friendly, bug-free and easy to use. when I think backwards I can't believe what long way Linux has come. from release to release one can see all those improvements, maybe not revolutionary but nevertheless important and well-received (at least by me). I say: choose and use what you like and - if you've chosen Linux - stop a moment and think of those who make possible this.

simonn
September 20th, 2007, 07:38 AM
I tried Linux three years ago, and it was unusable for Windows power users. Years before that, it was even worse. Try to imagine downloading a distro on ten floppy disks, compiling things, tracking down dependencies, having no way to test hardware compatibility before installing, not having Grub automatically install to the MBR and add Windows to the boot menu. I couldn't even imagine switching back then.

A bit of an exaggeration! There were plenty of distros three years ago that involved none of the above, e.g. Fedora Core, Red Hat, Knoppix etc. apt is far far far older than 3 years and yum definitely existed back then on FC3 (or even FC2?). Koppix could be installed to the harddrive from CD as far back as at least 2003.

The main thing that has improved is hardware support. This has little to do with any distro and everything to do with the kernal. The advent of wireless networking, the lack of support for linux amongst chipset manufacturers and the inconsistency of chipset usage amongst OEMs has been the real 'linux problem' lately. This is not going to be a trivial problem to solve.


gDebi allows you to double-click-install .deb files you do happen to find around the web. Why do people think that isn't user-friendly?

Because it will encourage noobs to do the wrong think and f**k their system up rather than just drum a different (i.e. repository based) mindset into them.

IMHO the main thing Ubuntu has going for it is debian-like controlled repositories, but with a lot of goodies that debian may not have and more up to date versions of software in them. gDebi (and Automatix and the like) will cause far more problems than they solve in the long run.

What is really needed is a kind of level based layer to dpkg (or rpm or whatever) packaging system, so that noobs can stay at a higher level and just see Gimp, OpenOffice, Totem or whatever and not have to wonder what the hell libobscurename is and wonder why they have to install it. Hackers can stay at the low level and remove libirrelleventforwhatiwant if they want to. Have a huge icon which says "click here to install all the free software you could possible want" on the desktop which starts it up... easy!

Linux is better than windows. Why do so many people seem to want to make it be inferior to what it already is by emulating windows?


Edit: By the way, this thread has moved way beyond one user's experience, so I've merged it with the general Linux Desktop Readiness thread.

:(

theDaveTheRave
September 20th, 2007, 10:27 AM
Hi guys.

Sorry if my previous post was a little "tongue in cheek"!

Anwyay the one thing that would really help me, as a relatively "new" user, would be a better search system.

I recently "broke" my VLC, lost all the sound, and it took an age to find the post that had the solution, with lots of other posts that came up in the search.... in fact this is one of them.

That said, I love the way that searching throws up interesting threads all the time, so maybe keep it as it is!

in all honesty any form can be a real pain trawling through for solutions, and there is probably not a good solution, unless people are able to tag threads that have solutions to their problems with the search terms they have used.

for instance if someone now searches for "no sound with VLC" it will find this thread.... which unfortunately wont help them at all, but I can tell them that it is out there, just keep looking!

I don't know how the system works for performing searches in the forums, maybee we just need more sub headings (one for each major package type, (eg Media > DVD playback > sound > Real / VLC ...) or have it heavily cross referenced??

who knows the best way for a new user, it just needs time for that user to get used to the method of finding the results!

lets just all keep smiling at the poor windows users, and see how things start to change now that dell are shipping with an Ubuntu option!

Dave M

armandh
September 20th, 2007, 11:57 AM
1) the install is no harder than XP
2) supports more hardware than Vista
3) a learning curve no worse than going from 98 to XP

that is what made 7.04 a keeper on several of my desktops.

a Linux version of quickbooks and a dds-32 printer driver would move my "work desk top" as well.

aysiu
September 20th, 2007, 02:46 PM
A bit of an exaggeration! There were plenty of distros three years ago that involved none of the above, e.g. Fedora Core, Red Hat, Knoppix etc. apt is far far far older than 3 years and yum definitely existed back then on FC3 (or even FC2?). Koppix could be installed to the harddrive from CD as far back as at least 2003. I said years before that (meaning years before 3 years ago even), it was even worse.

rsambuca
September 20th, 2007, 02:52 PM
What is really needed is a kind of level based layer to dpkg (or rpm or whatever) packaging system, so that noobs can stay at a higher level and just see Gimp, OpenOffice, Totem or whatever and not have to wonder what the hell libobscurename is and wonder why they have to install it. Hackers can stay at the low level and remove libirrelleventforwhatiwant if they want to. Have a huge icon which says "click here to install all the free software you could possible want" on the desktop which starts it up... easy!
:(

Ubuntu already has that with the built-in "Add/Remove" software utility.

djchandler
September 22nd, 2007, 04:00 AM
all OS-s have problems and nothing if perfect. they change, evolve (or should) and become more and more user-friendly, bug-free and easy to use. when I think backwards I can't believe what long way Linux has come. from release to release one can see all those improvements, maybe not revolutionary but nevertheless important and well-received (at least by me). I say: choose and use what you like and - if you've chosen Linux - stop a moment and think of those who make possible this.

Well said, my friend!

DJ
:guitar:

Coyote21
September 22nd, 2007, 04:10 PM
I know, this is an thread about how to make ubuntu more easy for the average-desktop-user, but don't forget, that it's also bad that ubuntu becomes too much easy and adapted to the average-desktop-user. Because, software developers (like me), still use ubuntu to program, so how about to also think in how, to make ubuntu more easy for software developers, for exemple:

Make it easier to convert programs in source code form, to debian packages (so that we can also create debian packages of our programs more easy);

Have the documentation of how to use the library's that are installed on our system (for, exemple, there are hundreds on mine, but I've only know, how to use the standard C/C++ and other languages standard libraries...);

More tools to help us not to program code, but to design our programs.

After all, the average-desktop-user could also be use this, because it would be easier for him to start to program not only traditional programs but also websites.

wolfen69
September 23rd, 2007, 04:18 AM
all OS-s have problems and nothing if perfect. they change, evolve (or should) and become more and more user-friendly, bug-free and easy to use. when I think backwards I can't believe what long way Linux has come. from release to release one can see all those improvements, maybe not revolutionary but nevertheless important and well-received (at least by me). I say: choose and use what you like and - if you've chosen Linux - stop a moment and think of those who make possible this.

i agree, well said.

on a side note, a neighbor of mine that i had given a copy of linux mint to, came over and said he wanted me to turn his pc into a dual boot setup with ubuntu. he said that mint saw all his hardware and even his printer. he liked it alot.

ive noticed that once people use it, they really like it.

spread the word!

Knad
September 25th, 2007, 10:26 PM
New user to ubuntu, used windows for years.,.

Needs universal way to install software, at the minute there are RPMs, DEBs, BINs etc etc, all with different methods to install etc. I just want one type, that gets what it needs automatically and if it wants configuring, to ask me during install, simply!

Better detection and setup of hardware, i still cannot get my graphics card (Radeon x300) to display 1680x1050, read its impossible....

Just my opinion, as i am not a linux guru

leo_rockway
September 25th, 2007, 11:00 PM
Needs universal way to install software, at the minute there are RPMs, DEBs, BINs etc etc, all with different methods to install etc. I just want one type...

that'll never happen. and i don't see the point either.
debian is happy with the debs, red hat is happy w/ the rpms, gentoo is happy with the emerge, etc... there are different choices for different people. why join them all together? just pick the one you like and use that one. if the one you want is not available you can always compile (diversity is good... gives you more than one answer to a certain issue)



Better detection and setup of hardware, i still cannot get my graphics card (Radeon x300) to display 1680x1050, read its impossible....
that's ATI to blame, really. hopefully their new drivers will improve that.
still, changing your xorg.conf settings should let you get the resolution you want.

SonicSteve
September 26th, 2007, 07:32 PM
I know this isn't exactly what your all talking about right now but...
I thought this belonged in this thread.
It's about will Linux ever catch on from Techrepublic

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/helpdesk/?p=103&tag=nl.e103

Mainly it points to application support/applications force you to windows or Mac.
I expect the reasons will be debated forever.

lancest
September 27th, 2007, 05:14 AM
Linux doesn't need to completely catch Windows in software application development. (We have the most needs covered though) Anything else we can use Virtual Machines running Windows for any specialized software. Auto Cad or any Adobe product can run on a VM.

SonicSteve
September 27th, 2007, 10:38 PM
Linux doesn't need to completely catch Windows in software application development. (We have the most needs covered though) Anything else we can use Virtual Machines running Windows for any specialized software. Auto Cad or any Adobe product can run on a VM.

Like I said we will debate the reasons till the cows come home.
My 2cents are this. It's not about covering needs. It's about people who are using software for years with files from programs that they don't want to loose. While there may be in many cases a program that would cover their needs, to use it would possibly mean loosing all those files.
Like I said it's not about covering needs it's about properly migrating them.

SonicSteve
September 29th, 2007, 01:18 PM
Anything else we can use Virtual Machines running Windows for any specialized software. Auto Cad or any Adobe product can run on a VM.

I should add to this that Microsoft is making it harder and harder to run a VM of windows. Also to run a VM means that you have to have windows, either a legal or pirated version. Then you have to have the expertise to setup the VM. I just don't see a VM as being a viable option to bring someone to Linux. It's like saying Linux is better but in order to keep you happy you'll need to still run windows.

Frak
September 29th, 2007, 03:20 PM
I should add to this that Microsoft is making it harder and harder to run a VM of windows. Also to run a VM means that you have to have windows, either a legal or pirated version. Then you have to have the expertise to setup the VM. I just don't see a VM as being a viable option to bring someone to Linux. It's like saying Linux is better but in order to keep you happy you'll need to still run windows.
Actually its quite easy now, especially easy since there are programs such as Win4Lin (not the best, I now, but a moron could use it) and VirtualBox, which now has Coherence built in.

svdb
October 13th, 2007, 09:49 PM
Hi all,

I was recently looking to buy a PND. The vast majority of them, if not all, have update capabilities. Connect the device to your pc's USB port, download new maps from a website, start its proprietary sofware and update your favorite PND.

Well, if anyone can point me to a PND brand name that provides their software for Linux, please let me know. I couldn't find any!
They all either provide software for Windows and/or Mac.

How does this relate to the topic of this thread?
Very simple:
Linux will be ready for the average user the day a majority of mainstream consumer products producers provide drivers and software for Linux just like for any other OS out there without ever having to think about it.

I'd like to know what the Linux/Ubuntu representatives are doing to convince the mainstream hardware producers that making software for Linux is a good thing. If they're doing something, I wonder what, because I certainly don't see the effects on the consumer industry even though Linux has been around for more than a while now.

p_quarles
October 13th, 2007, 10:03 PM
I'd like to know what the Linux/Ubuntu representatives are doing to convince the mainstream hardware producers that making software for Linux is a good thing. If they're doing something, I wonder what, because I certainly don't see the effects on the consumer industry even though Linux has been around for more than a while now.
Richard Stallman is very persistent in pressuring some of the hardware vendors to open their specs. Others as well, but he's certainly the most visible one.

Apart from that, the kernel developers are constantly trying to add and improve drivers for proprietary hardware (video cards, printers, sound cards, wireless adapters).

Gadget software doesn't belong in the kernel, so that's a separate issue. There are several projects that aim to replace proprietary synching applications, but they're generally for the most in-demand devices, like iPods and mobile phones. But, yes, a lot of them simply won't work without the proprietary software.

There's not much the developers can do to convince gadget makers to produce Linux-compatible interface software. The vendors will be far more convinced by consumer demand. Even if you decide not to switch to Linux, you can help by sending a quick note to the PND's manufacturer asking for Linux-compatible software.

Frak
October 13th, 2007, 10:06 PM
Hi all,

I was recently looking to buy a PND. The vast majority of them, if not all, have update capabilities. Connect the device to your pc's USB port, download new maps from a website, start its proprietary sofware and update your favorite PND.

Well, if anyone can point me to a PND brand name that provides their software for Linux, please let me know. I couldn't find any!
They all either provide software for Windows and/or Mac.

How does this relate to the topic of this thread?
Very simple:
Linux will be ready for the average user the day a majority of mainstream consumer products producers provide drivers and software for Linux just like for any other OS out there without ever having to think about it.

I'd like to know what the Linux/Ubuntu representatives are doing to convince the mainstream hardware producers that making software for Linux is a good thing. If they're doing something, I wonder what, because I certainly don't see the effects on the consumer industry even though Linux has been around for more than a while now.
That is exactly why ATi released OSS drivers for Linux, because nobody convinced them to do it.

Here's the thing, it is not Linus Torvald's, Richard Stallman's, or Canonical's job to convince companies to release drivers, it their job to convince people to use it.

Canonical convinced Dell to preload Ubuntu on some of its PC's, Dell then pressured ATi to create Linux and/or OSS drivers or their distribution of ATi cards would be bottlenecked on Ubuntu PC's.

Its not Linux as a whole to do it, its the manufacturers that include Linux to pressure companies to create drivers.

They may try to convince, but its not their job to do it.

svdb
October 13th, 2007, 10:52 PM
I read the sticky about Linux being powerful and reliable, but not being accountable for anything, and it's all someone else's fault, etc etc etc...

OK, I think understand your point and it makes sense from the Linux perspective, and we're a small community and we're helping each other, but so what? How is that going to win over the big mass of "very-average-end-users-of-Windows"??

The History of the world has shown that people a willing to give away their freedom if they think it's gonna make their lives easier: that's also why they stick to Windows despite the fact that they hate to pay for it!

Its so easy for them, they don't have to think about what they're buying 'cause "its all windows compatible anyway"!
It is equally easy for consumer products producers because they don't have to think about what to be compatible with: "EVERYONE uses Windows anyway"!

"There are no hardware issues because we have a list of compatible hardware you can choose from..."
sounds like Windows 3.x back in the time (except this is 2007!), but also sounds the same as
"Your problem doesn't exist because otherwise we would have found a solution for it"!
And here's your typical very-average-user answer: "You know, I think I'll choose Windows xp/vista, so I won't have to choose from a limited hardware list at all..." Windows:1, Linux:0
Sad, but true.

How is complaining about the hardware producers being evil (because they ignore Linux), and blaming "the others", gonna change their minds and break this vicious circle of "everyone-uses-windows-because-everyone-else-does" ?

Marketing isn't free. It is very effective though and that's why M$ is using it so much. Apple is able to compete against M$ because it's using the same marketing weapons.

Unfortunately, Ubuntu won't even come close to being able to compete with windows as long as its main advantages remain ONLY its "security" and "power", while its "industry support" remains crippled and its "ease of use" remains limited to a couple of default icons.

svdb
October 13th, 2007, 11:02 PM
That is exactly why ATi released OSS drivers for Linux, because nobody convinced them to do it.

Here's the thing, it is not Linus Torvald's, Richard Stallman's, or Canonical's job to convince companies to release drivers, it their job to convince people to use it.

Canonical convinced Dell to preload Ubuntu on some of its PC's, Dell then pressured ATi to create Linux and/or OSS drivers or their distribution of ATi cards would be bottlenecked on Ubuntu PC's.

Its not Linux as a whole to do it, its the manufacturers that include Linux to pressure companies to create drivers.

They may try to convince, but its not their job to do it.

OK, I understand your point, however, "convincing people" doesn't seem to be a very effective strategy: over the past 10 years Windows has taken over the world, Linux hasn't.

p_quarles
October 13th, 2007, 11:03 PM
First of all, it's not about "blaming" anyone. It's just about where the possibility of interoperability comes from. The Linux kernel developers aren't going to spend time making GPS devices work in Gnome. That is really the responsibility of the GPS maker.

Again, the best way to convince vendors to support Linux is to contact them. They don't make software for Windows because Bill Gates told them to but because they are aware of the demand for Windows support. Likewise, Mark Shuttleworth can't go to Nokia and convince them to support Linux. They will only do it if the demand is sufficient. So: demand it.

As for marketing, Canonical has actually been very aggressive about getting Ubuntu preinstalled on OEM computers (Dell, System76, possibly Lenovo soon). By itself, that's not enough, but it is the first step -- you can't "sell" a DIY operating system to the typical desktop user. Once it's easily available, I'm sure that Canonical will do what they can to market it more aggressively.

Frak
October 13th, 2007, 11:43 PM
I read the sticky about Linux being powerful and reliable, but not being accountable for anything, and it's all someone else's fault, etc etc etc...

OK, I think understand your point and it makes sense from the Linux perspective, and we're a small community and we're helping each other, but so what? How is that going to win over the big mass of "very-average-end-users-of-Windows"??

The History of the world has shown that people a willing to give away their freedom if they think it's gonna make their lives easier: that's also why they stick to Windows despite the fact that they hate to pay for it!

Its so easy for them, they don't have to think about what they're buying 'cause "its all windows compatible anyway"!
It is equally easy for consumer products producers because they don't have to think about what to be compatible with: "EVERYONE uses Windows anyway"!

"There are no hardware issues because we have a list of compatible hardware you can choose from..."
sounds like Windows 3.x back in the time (except this is 2007!), but also sounds the same as
"Your problem doesn't exist because otherwise we would have found a solution for it"!
And here's your typical very-average-user answer: "You know, I think I'll choose Windows xp/vista, so I won't have to choose from a limited hardware list at all..." Windows:1, Linux:0
Sad, but true.

How is complaining about the hardware producers being evil (because they ignore Linux), and blaming "the others", gonna change their minds and break this vicious circle of "everyone-uses-windows-because-everyone-else-does" ?

Marketing isn't free. It is very effective though and that's why M$ is using it so much. Apple is able to compete against M$ because it's using the same marketing weapons.

Unfortunately, Ubuntu won't even come close to being able to compete with windows as long as its main advantages remain ONLY its "security" and "power", while its "industry support" remains crippled and its "ease of use" remains limited to a couple of default icons.
The best form of advertising is peer pressure, its true.

Ubuntu is not for profit, that means little $$$, which means NO ADVERTISING. Let people use it, if they are happy, they will spread the good word. If it benefits OEM's, like Dell, let them advertise it.

Also, look at some ads for Ubuntu from Dell, they're quite good.

Tuxoid
October 13th, 2007, 11:52 PM
I chose other. I am very computer savvy; yet, I have had unsolvable troubles with Ubuntu. The biggest problem with Ubuntu, is the amount of things that have to be done in the terminal. I've found that in Ubuntu, in some cases, using the terminal is not an option; it's a necessity. For ease of use, that should not be the case; it's just not fair. It artificially takes away the users freedoms through them not knowing what to do while not knowing how to get the necessary knowledge to obtain that freedom. Yes, there is a ton of support options online, but the problem I've noticed, is that many people who help others online seem not to understand the level of computer knowledge some users have. They may use terminology that the average user does not understand or tell a user to do something with enough instruction for someone who is computer-savvy, but without enough information for the average user.

Frak
October 13th, 2007, 11:56 PM
I chose other. I am very computer savvy; yet, I have had unsolvable troubles with Ubuntu. The biggest problem with Ubuntu, is the amount of things that have to be done in the terminal. I've found that in Ubuntu, in some cases, using the terminal is not an option; it's a necessity. For ease of use, that should not be the case; it's just not fair. It artificially takes away the users freedoms through them not knowing what to do while not knowing how to get the necessary knowledge to obtain that freedom. Yes, there is a ton of support options online, but the problem I've noticed, is that many people who help others online seem not to understand the level of computer knowledge some users have. They may use terminology that the average user does not understand or tell a user to do something with enough instruction for someone who is computer-savvy, but without enough information for the average user.
Lack of knowledge is not taking away a freedom, its the lack of demanding it.

lancest
October 14th, 2007, 12:05 AM
OK, I understand your point, however, "convincing people" doesn't seem to be a very effective strategy: over the past 10 years Windows has taken over the world, Linux hasn't.
Linux hasn't taken over the world? Do you use Google? How about IPOD, Motorola phones, subway cash machines etc etc etc all Linux. Linux is everywhere! Also Linux does not have to be marketed in the same manner as Windows or Apple. Word of mouth will do fine for now. Innovation does not depend only on commercial marketing.

Tuxoid
October 14th, 2007, 02:24 AM
Lack of knowledge is not taking away a freedom, its the lack of demanding it.

Yes, but in some cases people feel hopeless. Feeling hopeless causes them not to see an end to the means. They also know, they don't have to choose Linux over Windows and Mac OS. They are going to choose Windows or Mac OS, 10 times out of 10, because they don't know that they can demand freedom or knowledge on how to run Linux well. In fact, some average users I've met are Linuxophobic (afraid of using Linux). I respect your point, but average users don't see why they should even try demand knowledge if they have other OS options.

p_quarles
October 14th, 2007, 02:37 AM
Yes, but in some cases people feel hopeless. Feeling hopeless causes them not to see an end to the means. They also know, they don't have to choose Linux over Windows and Mac OS. They are going to choose Windows or Mac OS, 10 times out of 10, because they don't know that they can demand freedom or knowledge on how to run Linux well. In fact, some average users I've met are Linuxophobic (afraid of using Linux). I respect your point, but average users don't see why they should even try demand knowledge if they have other OS options.
The fear of the command line is one of the things that Ubuntu is trying to deal with. The developers are doing a great job -- with every new release -- of making it easier for people who never want to type in commands.

And, no, it's not completely there yet. Ubuntu's goals have not yet been reached. That said, the vast majority of things that cannot be done from within the GUI involve configuring proprietary hardware. If you have fully compatible hardware, you'll never need to touch the CLI. If you buy an OEM preinstalled computer (which is what the vast majority of people do with Windows and Mac), then you'll have fully compatible hardware.

To recap:
1) No, Ubuntu is not ready for everyone.
2) It's a work in progress.
3) I really wish people would stop saying "the average user" when they mean "I" or "the people I know." I was never a Windows power user, but when I got fed up and switched, I found it perfectly easy.

Boaslad
October 14th, 2007, 06:08 AM
O.k. So Linux is not for EVERY ONE. Show me one thing that is? I have friends who can't even keep a pen and paper from crashing. Point is this: there will NEVER be and OS that is right for EVERY ONE. Even Windows isn't. That's why WE have chosen Linux. The only thing we can do is work together to create the best OS we can. And then get the word out that, "yes, Virginia, there really are alternatives to Windows". One known fact is that as many as 85% of all Windows users are NOT satisfied with their OS, and a staggering majority of them either don't know that there are alternatives, or they are misinformed about Linux. Our job, then, is to inform the ignorant, convert the willing, and ignore the rest. Because if we continue trying to make a OS for EVERY ONE we will end up with a poorly working Windows clone. And no body would want that.

Soarer
October 14th, 2007, 06:55 AM
O.k. So Linux is not for EVERY ONE. Show me one thing that is? I have friends who can't even keep a pen and paper from crashing. Point is this: there will NEVER be and OS that is right for EVERY ONE. Even Windows isn't. That's why WE have chosen Linux. The only thing we can do is work together to create the best OS we can. And then get the word out that, "yes, Virginia, there really are alternatives to Windows". One known fact is that as many as 85% of all Windows users are NOT satisfied with their OS, and a staggering majority of them either don't know that there are alternatives, or they are misinformed about Linux. Our job, then, is to inform the ignorant, convert the willing, and ignore the rest. Because if we continue trying to make a OS for EVERY ONE we will end up with a poorly working Windows clone. And no body would want that.

Beautifully put. :)

Frak
October 14th, 2007, 07:24 AM
O.k. So Linux is not for EVERY ONE. Show me one thing that is? I have friends who can't even keep a pen and paper from crashing. Point is this: there will NEVER be and OS that is right for EVERY ONE. Even Windows isn't. That's why WE have chosen Linux. The only thing we can do is work together to create the best OS we can. And then get the word out that, "yes, Virginia, there really are alternatives to Windows". One known fact is that as many as 85% of all Windows users are NOT satisfied with their OS, and a staggering majority of them either don't know that there are alternatives, or they are misinformed about Linux. Our job, then, is to inform the ignorant, convert the willing, and ignore the rest. Because if we continue trying to make a OS for EVERY ONE we will end up with a poorly working Windows clone. And no body would want that.
Great Post=D>

tgm4883
October 16th, 2007, 03:31 PM
O.k. So Linux is not for EVERY ONE. Show me one thing that is? I have friends who can't even keep a pen and paper from crashing. Point is this: there will NEVER be and OS that is right for EVERY ONE. Even Windows isn't. That's why WE have chosen Linux. The only thing we can do is work together to create the best OS we can. And then get the word out that, "yes, Virginia, there really are alternatives to Windows". One known fact is that as many as 85% of all Windows users are NOT satisfied with their OS, and a staggering majority of them either don't know that there are alternatives, or they are misinformed about Linux. Our job, then, is to inform the ignorant, convert the willing, and ignore the rest. Because if we continue trying to make a OS for EVERY ONE we will end up with a poorly working Windows clone. And no body would want that.

+1

stoodleysnow
October 18th, 2007, 11:52 AM
Gyyahahahaaha!!!!!:-o:eek:
This thread is huge! reply number 8999 unless someone else gets in first!
:guitar::guitar::guitar::lolflag:

socceroos
October 18th, 2007, 11:53 AM
O.k. So Linux is not for EVERY ONE. Show me one thing that is? I have friends who can't even keep a pen and paper from crashing. Point is this: there will NEVER be and OS that is right for EVERY ONE. Even Windows isn't. That's why WE have chosen Linux. The only thing we can do is work together to create the best OS we can. And then get the word out that, "yes, Virginia, there really are alternatives to Windows". One known fact is that as many as 85% of all Windows users are NOT satisfied with their OS, and a staggering majority of them either don't know that there are alternatives, or they are misinformed about Linux. Our job, then, is to inform the ignorant, convert the willing, and ignore the rest. Because if we continue trying to make a OS for EVERY ONE we will end up with a poorly working Windows clone. And no body would want that.

+2

socceroos
October 18th, 2007, 11:54 AM
Whohoooo! I got post 9000!!!! do I get a prize?