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

Artificial Intelligence
February 23rd, 2006, 03:09 PM
Pixel32 is worth it IMHO, bought it a half year ago though it's still in beta it looks very promising :cool:
And it's fast, it take my computer 0.5 sec to fully load pixel32

DrFunkenstein
February 23rd, 2006, 03:10 PM
I want to thank you all for your responses. Really.

You are welcome.



To respond to some of the questions that are brought up. I think the usability issue everyone is so confused about is that I can run KDE apps inside Gnome, and the interfaces are different.

Yep, that's far from ideal, however it's also partly an ubuntu problem as ubuntu doesn't set up kde and gnome with a common theme and also doesn't use other techniques to better integrate the two, as for example Mandriva does.



Also, then open up VLC program, this doesn't look like gnome or KDE, but like some java application.

Also an ubuntu problem, as VLC isn't compiled with the newest wxgtk version, that would give you a consisten look with Gnome. However, this will change in the next release.

And as someone already mentioned, you'll be treated to the same inconsistency on other platforms too.



Re: Firestarter
I'm used to an application level firewall control. Firefox comes up for the first time and attempts to access the internet, a pop shows up and asks me if I want to allow it or deny it, and make it temporary or a permanent rule. Firestarter doesn't have application level control from what I can grasp of it. I want this because I like knowing what is making an internet connection and why.

Application firewalls are insecure and useless toys and firestarter is a frontend to netfilter/iptables, which is something completely different from an application firewall. That said, if you want an application firewall, check out Mandriva. They ship one.



MP3
Like I said I haven't found a great mp3 application that can handle a large library. I want a library function for searching, and playlists, amarok again just isn't my cup of tea. Rythmbox I wouldn't mind if it could handle my library.

Try bmp, quod libet, banshee or something like madman+xmms. I'm sure I fogot many options and personally I never had any problems when it comes to mp3 players on linux.



I would like to try out this "Listen" software but I'm having trouble tracking it down. Can someone point me in the right direction. Maybe, better yet, is there some central resource that lists all the best linux software including this Listen.

Listen is in very early developement, so I really wouldn't recomend it, though it looks promising.

Brunellus
February 23rd, 2006, 03:13 PM
It didn't come off hostile, and I understand just by looking at your bean count that you are obviously very active in the community so you've seen the arguments presented before. That's why you quickly respond with the troll alert.

I for one, haven't, I'm new to all this. I follow the the news closely and article after blog all the raving about how ready Linux is, you can't help but get your expectations soaring. Sometimes people need to blow off some steam. So where does that leave me. I'm appalled by the licensing that Microsoft has taken to the point where I've sworn them off, throw in security attacks, viruses, and its easy to come to the conclusion of abandoning windows.

So where does that leave me? I'm not about to plunk down $4000 for a Mac that I'm not certain I want or will like, especially while they are in the middle of an archeticture change.

So my other educated option is to go with Linux. Your reply comes off as "tuff s**t, you gotta deal with all our issues too." Maybe I just needed to read that, but that doesn't make me any happier. It also doesn't make the software any better.

Good for you for deciding not to use Windows any more. But now that you've made your bed, I'm afraid you have to lie in it. Just as you have to deal with myriad exploits and flaws in Windows, you must also deal with Linux. Living in Linux is like life in a gold-rush boomtown: ramshackle buildings go up, are extended, fill with all sorts of people. It's a rowdy, disordered place.

As others on this thread have already said, your options are limited:

1) Develop. If you can write code and are willing to commit, this is a fine way to get involved.

2) Donate. Someone has to pay bandwidth costs, developer time, etc.

3) Discuss. File bug reports in appropriate fora (not this one, btw--there's a bugzilla link in the top right for filing bugs).

4) Document. Write manuals, howtos, treatises.

If you feel that none of the above will help you, and you're still frustrated, I implore you: use the OS that makes you most productive.

Linux gets oversold in the greater community. Enthusiasts (myself included, often as not) tend to accentuate the benefits while not necessarily preparing prospective new users for the challenges. While desktop Linux has come a very long way since the first time I encountered it (maybe Redhat 6, on a friend's computer in college), the progress has been uneven, and focused mainly on general office/productivity work. Specialized fields--audio, video, and to a much lesser extent, drawing--have not been as aggressively developed.

Again: if your particular needs are not being met by any solution, the rational choice is to abandon an unworkable solution and seek another one which does fulfill your needs.

Kernel Sanders
February 23rd, 2006, 03:23 PM
To be honest, the *ONLY* thing that disappoints me about Ubuntu is that its "not quite" as user friendly as i'm ready for yet. Needs more GUI/wizards for it to become a viable desktop OS for the majority. (It needs a few years yet, but whats sure is it WILL get there, its no longer a question of "if")

I'm not slating Ubuntu by any means, but as a pretty much windows expert, I have simply been spoilt by the "point and click" usability of windows. Had I started on Linux however, there'd be no problem, but with windows stupidly simple GUI (eg. No command line usage needed) and way of doing things embedded into my brain, the switch to Linux is proving a little too difficult for me to make right now. :cry:

DrFunkenstein
February 23rd, 2006, 03:27 PM
To be honest, the *ONLY* thing that disappoints me about Ubuntu is that its "not quite" as user friendly as i'm ready for yet. Needs more GUI/wizards for it to become a viable desktop OS for the majority. (It needs a few years yet, but whats sure is it WILL get there, its no longer a question of "if")

I'm not slating Ubuntu by any means, but as a pretty much windows expert, I have simply been spoilt by the "point and click" usability of windows. Had I started on Linux however, there'd be no problem, but with windows stupidly simple GUI (eg. No command line usage needed) and way of doing things embedded into my brain, the switch to Linux is proving a little too difficult for me to make right now. :cry:
I think you should really give an other distro a try then. As great as ubuntu is, it's really lacking in the gui config tools departement. I agree.

However, check out Suse, Mandriva, PCLinuxOS and you will see that this is largely an ubuntu problem, not a linux problem per se.

nocturn
February 23rd, 2006, 03:28 PM
To respond to some of the questions that are brought up. I think the usability issue everyone is so confused about is that I can run KDE apps inside Gnome, and the interfaces are different. Also, then open up VLC program, this doesn't look like gnome or KDE, but like some java application. It just seems that some applications I open have the nice gnome theme I've set, then others have some strange KDE theme, and then others still are all gray and boxy. This is the inconsistency I'm talking about. Try opening up Firestarter, Firefox, amarok, and VLC. Notice how only firefox applys my gnome theme?


Firestarter follows my Gnome theme fully. I think the problem for you is that your themes are installed in .themes in your home directory and not in /usr/share/themes. Apps that run as root look for the theme there (system wide).

VLC is an unfortunate example, yes. It was not compiled with Gnome support (GTK2) by accident which makes it look out of place. This will be fixed in the next Ubuntu release. This doesn't affect Totem though, which is the standard player supplied with Ubuntu. (If you install totem-xine and w32codecs, it can play most formats).

Other than that and with themes installed system wide, your interface can look as consistent as on windows (where GTK and QT apps also look different).



Re: Firestarter
I'm used to an application level firewall control. Firefox comes up for the first time and attempts to access the internet, a pop shows up and asks me if I want to allow it or deny it, and make it temporary or a permanent rule. Firestarter doesn't have application level control from what I can grasp of it. I want this because I like knowing what is making an internet connection and why.


Yes, but application level firewalls are not better than firestarter.



MP3
Like I said I haven't found a great mp3 application that can handle a large library. I want a library function for searching, and playlists, amarok again just isn't my cup of tea. Rythmbox I wouldn't mind if it could handle my library.

I would like to try out this "Listen" software but I'm having trouble tracking it down. Can someone point me in the right direction. Maybe, better yet, is there some central resource that lists all the best linux software including this Listen.


I tracked it down here: http://listengnome.free.fr/, but it is offline for now because they didn't credit the projects they used code from. It should be back soon.

Mr.X
February 23rd, 2006, 04:04 PM
If you dont like the software, program it yourself.
The only programs i use on windows (my other computer i hardly use) is just photoshop and dreamweaver, i dont play games often anymore, so I have no point to windows.
Sure there is crossover or whatever its called, but thats just Dreamweaver MX, not DW8 :p

I love linux and what it can do, sure there can be an improvement with a few things, but the support is great, there is so many addons, so many extra things you can do.
I use VLC for nearly EVERYTHING with MP3, and its great.
I love going on the IRC, everyone helps, everyone is really nice and stuff. \\:D/

WalterDirt
February 23rd, 2006, 04:06 PM
I don't understand why everyone is beating on application level firewalls. They have saved my butt countless times. The instant some program tries to make a connection I'm alerted, how can you guys not see the benefit of that. Let's say you install some program from a questionable source, that program has a call back home, I'm a big proponent of privacy, and I don't want that call back to occur. Unless I have application level firewall control I have no way of controlling application by application internet access.

Don't tell me I don't need that level of security, call me paranoid, but its what others have, (windows has countless #'s including Tiny, Zone Alarm, OSX has Little Snitch). These exist for a reason.

And don't tell me in Linux that doesn't happen since if there isn't a program that can tell me that info how do you know it doesn't?

nocturn
February 23rd, 2006, 04:12 PM
I don't understand why everyone is beating on application level firewalls. They have saved my butt countless times. The instant some program tries to make a connection I'm alerted, how can you guys not see the benefit of that. Let's say you install some program from a questionable source, that program has a call back home, I'm a big proponent of privacy, and I don't want that call back to occur. Unless I have application level firewall control I have no way of controlling application by application internet access.

Don't tell me I don't need that level of security, call me paranoid, but its what others have, (windows has countless #'s including Tiny, Zone Alarm, OSX has Little Snitch). These exist for a reason.

And don't tell me in Linux that doesn't happen since if there isn't a program that can tell me that info how do you know it doesn't?

I'm not saying your level of security is too high. I'm suggesting that firewalls based on application checksums are not specificly a good thing.

One thing to start with is not to install software from questionable sources. The second is that packet filters can do a very good job of protecting your system and that the default kernel firewall on Linux is very good.

Not running as admin user (root) only adds to your security and will prevent a lot of malware from running.

DrFunkenstein
February 23rd, 2006, 04:13 PM
I don't understand why everyone is beating on application level firewalls. They have saved my butt countless times. The instant some program tries to make a connection I'm alerted, how can you guys not see the benefit of that.

Any *evil* program worth it's salt will use an other, non-suspicious program to access the net. You however will feel safe, because you are running this great application firewall. Not good.



Let's say you install some program from a questionable source, that program has a call back home, I'm a big proponent of privacy, and I don't want that call back to occur. Unless I have application level firewall control I have no way of controlling application by application internet access.

Simple. Don't install programs from questionable sources. In fact, the repository concept in Linux largely solves this problem anyway, much better than any application firewall.



Don't tell me I don't need that level of security, call me paranoid, but its what others have, (windows has countless #'s including Tiny, Zone Alarm, OSX has Little Snitch). These exist for a reason.

See above. And at least my point is not that you are paranoid, but that application firewalls don't offer security.



And don't tell me in Linux that doesn't happen since if there isn't a program that can tell me that info how do you know it doesn't?
There are more than enough programs that will tell you exactly what is going on on your network and nobody stops you from using something like privoxy. Also, as I said, Mandriva ships with an application firewall.

Stormy Eyes
February 23rd, 2006, 04:22 PM
Let's say you install some program from a questionable source, that program has a call back home, I'm a big proponent of privacy, and I don't want that call back to occur.

If I don't trust the source, I don't install the program. You're thinking of Linux in terms of Windows, which is a mistake.

nocturn
February 23rd, 2006, 04:23 PM
as I said, Mandriva ships with an application firewall.

Just curious, which one are they shipping?

nocturn
February 23rd, 2006, 04:26 PM
And don't tell me in Linux that doesn't happen since if there isn't a program that can tell me that info how do you know it doesn't?

What prevents this scenario.

# You download and install a questionable package foobar
# You regularly use SSH, so the SSH binary is allowed to connect out
# foobar opens a connection to the outside using SSH (shell command).

On windows, do you let your appl. firewall trust IE? What about applications that use IE to access the net?

DrFunkenstein
February 23rd, 2006, 04:39 PM
Just curious, which one are they shipping?
Sorry, no idea what it's called. I think it's something mandriva themselves developed.

Kerberos
February 23rd, 2006, 04:44 PM
On windows, do you let your appl. firewall trust IE? What about applications that use IE to access the net?
Personaly I dont, IE is a POS that should die, but afaik applications that use IE call it through a DLL linked in so the application level firewall would still prompt for access despite IE itself having access. I think thats the case anyway.

nocturn
February 23rd, 2006, 04:45 PM
Sorry, no idea what it's called. I think it's something mandriva themselves developed.

Where did you find this information?

DrFunkenstein
February 23rd, 2006, 04:47 PM
Where did you find this information?
Reading some reviews, I guess.

megamania
February 23rd, 2006, 04:50 PM
If you dont like the software, program it yourself.


Can I ask you one thing? If you find the train service in your country inefficient, do you have the right to say "I don't like the service"?
And if somebody replies to that with "start your own train company", what would you think?

Not everybody has the time/knowledge/will to program, but still everybody has the right to complain, especially when it is done in a polite, useful way.

That sounds like such an obvious and basic rule to me that I'm always surprised by replies like that.

nocturn
February 23rd, 2006, 04:52 PM
Can I ask you one thing? If you find the train service in your country inefficient, do you have the right to say "I don't like the service"?
And if somebody replies to that with "start your own train company", what would you think?

Not everybody has the time/knowledge/will to program, but still everybody has the right to complain, especially when it is done in a polite, useful way.

That sounds like such an obvious and basic rule to me that I'm always surprised by replies like that.

You are right. And if people have constructive critism of projects and file bugreports, that is off great value for the future of the project!

Brunellus
February 23rd, 2006, 04:58 PM
Can I ask you one thing? If you find the train service in your country inefficient, do you have the right to say "I don't like the service"?
And if somebody replies to that with "start your own train company", what would you think?

Not everybody has the time/knowledge/will to program, but still everybody has the right to complain, especially when it is done in a polite, useful way.

That sounds like such an obvious and basic rule to me that I'm always surprised by replies like that.
your analogy is flawed. I prefer to think of free software like this:

A man, who loves to eat apples, plants an apple tree in the public square, and encourages his neighbours to take apples from it to eat.

His neighbours come, and pluck apples from the tree, and eat. Some like them.

One neighbour, though, went to the man to complain. The apples, said the neighbour, are too sour.

"Don't you like apples?" responded the tree planter.

"Yes. But not these apples," said the neighbour.

"Well," said the tree planter, "There are the seeds--go away and grow your own apple trees."

"But it would take so much time," complained the neighbour. "And I don't know the first thing about apple trees!"

"Then don't eat my apples," said the tree-planter.

Stormy Eyes
February 23rd, 2006, 05:02 PM
Not everybody has the time/knowledge/will to program, but still everybody has the right to complain, especially when it is done in a polite, useful way.

And those who do have the time/knowledge/will to program have the right to say, in return, "I am giving you this program for free. Don't try my patience."

megamania
February 23rd, 2006, 05:04 PM
your analogy is flawed. I prefer to think of free software like this:

A man, who loves to eat apples, plants an apple tree in the public square, and encourages his neighbours to take apples from it to eat.

His neighbours come, and pluck apples from the tree, and eat. Some like them.

One neighbour, though, went to the man to complain. The apples, said the neighbour, are too sour.

"Don't you like apples?" responded the tree planter.

"Yes. But not these apples," said the neighbour.

*STOP HERE* :-)

"Well," said the tree planter, "There are the seeds--go away and grow your own apple trees."

"But it would take so much time," complained the neighbour. "And I don't know the first thing about apple trees!"

"Then don't eat my apples," said the tree-planter.

"Well", said the planter, "what's wrong with my apples?"

"if you water the plants more [or whatever] they'd be more juicy", replied the neighbour.

the planter took his suggestion, and he improved the quality of his apples (or maybe the quality didn't improve, but at least he tried).

aysiu
February 23rd, 2006, 05:04 PM
You know, Brunellus, it's even better than that. You can complain to the apple tree owner... it's called a bug report.

In your analogy, complaining on these forums is like complaining to the apple tree owner's neighbor who happens to really like the apples.

Why do that when the apple tree owner is telling you, "If you have a problem, tell me directly, and I'll work on it"?

megamania
February 23rd, 2006, 05:07 PM
You know, Brunellus, it's even better than that. You can complain to the apple tree owner... it's called a bug report.
[...]
Why do that when the apple tree owner is telling you, "If you have a problem, tell me directly, and I'll work on it"?

exactly, aysiu. That's the alternative ending in my previous post.

aysiu
February 23rd, 2006, 05:12 PM
And those who do have the time/knowledge/will to program have the right to say, in return, "I am giving you this program for free. Don't try my patience." But the wonderful thing, Stormy Eyes, is that most of the time they don't. Developers aren't saying "don't try my patience"--they just shouldn't have to be bothered to scour these forums looking for complaints when they've already set up a bug report system.

Brunellus
February 23rd, 2006, 05:21 PM
You know, Brunellus, it's even better than that. You can complain to the apple tree owner... it's called a bug report.

In your analogy, complaining on these forums is like complaining to the apple tree owner's neighbor who happens to really like the apples.

Why do that when the apple tree owner is telling you, "If you have a problem, tell me directly, and I'll work on it"?
the point of the parable was to explain the "build it yourdamnself" response that often pops up.

Note that the planter points to the appleseeds--source! the GPL (the square) does not compel the planter to follow any suggestions. He might do so, to get along with his neighbours, but at the end of the day, his neighbours are free to plant their own apple trees if they really want (the freedom to fork).

aysiu
February 23rd, 2006, 05:40 PM
the point of the parable was to explain the "build it yourdamnself" response that often pops up.

Note that the planter points to the appleseeds--source! the GPL (the square) does not compel the planter to follow any suggestions. He might do so, to get along with his neighbours, but at the end of the day, his neighbours are free to plant their own apple trees if they really want (the freedom to fork). No, you're totally right. I just wanted to point out that the developers are often a lot more open to suggestions than people think, and they don't (even though they have a right to) insist users create forks instead of giving suggestions. They've very open to suggestions. Community Chat is just not the place to give those suggestions.

joflow
February 23rd, 2006, 06:15 PM
I think you bring up a good point that needs to be addressed.

Linux (and particularily Ubuntu) is great for newbies who just need basic web browsing, IM, Word processing.

Linux is great for the ultra technical uber geek who wants total control over his system, prefers CLI over GUI because its leet, has detailed technical knowledge of the system and can troubleshoot compile problems, etc

Linux need works for the middle guy. The guy who may not be satisfied with the programs in the repo like the newbie but isn't knowledgable enough (and may not care to ever obtain that knowledge) to find, fix, or atleast understand why his program failed to compile.

One thing Ubuntu could do for the middle guy is install build-essential and everything else needed to compile by default. I know it took me a while to figure how that I needed that to even attempt compliation.

Other then that the whole compliation process is a crap shoot for people not totally familiar with the system. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Cross your fingers and hope libabc 2.3 which is installed with Ubuntu meets the dependancies. If 2.4 is required then you either try to find and compile that from source (and any dependancies that might have) or find a debian deb on the net and hope to God it doesn't break your system.

Kerberos
February 23rd, 2006, 06:40 PM
I think you bring up a good point that needs to be addressed.

Linux (and particularily Ubuntu) is great for newbies who just need basic web browsing, IM, Word processing.

Linux is great for the ultra technical uber geek who wants total control over his system, prefers CLI over GUI because its leet, has detailed technical knowledge of the system and can troubleshoot compile problems, etc

Linux need works for the middle guy. The guy who may not be satisfied with the programs in the repo like the newbie but isn't knowledgable enough (and may not care to ever obtain that knowledge) to find, fix, or atleast understand why his program failed to compile.
Exactly!

I don't want to compile my own software, I dont want to learn obscure command lines, I dont want to tinker with the system. I just want it to do what I want it to do with as little fuss as possible.

I find I either get treated like the newbie bracket should satisfy my needs (it doesn't) or that I should progress to the Uber-technical bracket, which I dont have the time for or the interest in. Time I spend trying to get things working is time I consider wasted and I don't enjoy hunting for patches, trying things and the like.

Maybe Linux isn't for me (I dont think it is) but I doubt it will ever gain serious traction in the non-technical world (that is, computer as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself) unless it is made more accessible and requires less tinkering. I use my toaster for making toast, I use my kettle for heating water, I use my computer for web design and occasional games - not tinkering with the OS.

aysiu
February 23rd, 2006, 06:53 PM
Even though so-called "middle users" make up only a small fraction of the general computing populace, they (unfortunately) make up a rather large percentage of the migrating-from-Windows-to-Linux populace.

For example, even though only 10% of computer users worldwide use Firefox, over 70% of Ubuntu users used Firefox before migrating to Linux. (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=88085)

And only just under 40% of Ubuntu users use the Firefox 1.0.7 that came from the Ubuntu repositories, while almost 60% use the 1.5 from Mozilla. (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=103393)

The profile of this "middle user" joflow describes is someone with high needs and medium skills--wants the latest software right away and installed in the easiest fashion (not too easy, but easy enough for someone to point and click through).

The basic user has low needs and low skills (that's me), while the expert user has high need and high skills (some folks on these forums).

Thankfully, there are things like Automatix for middle users. Otherwise, yeah... for now, if you're a middle user, you have a few choices:

1. Dumb down your needs (probably not an option).
2. Pump up your skills (an option but undesirable).
3. Use a non-Linux OS (a definite option... maybe undesirable).

ice60
February 23rd, 2006, 06:53 PM
Don't seem that much different from Firestarter
thanks, i'm thinking of trying it out, i'll probably try it at some point.

WalterDirt
February 23rd, 2006, 09:33 PM
Wow, I actually found gmusicbrowser and its great. Very customizable, and without the amarok overhead.

http://www.gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=1052

aysiu
February 23rd, 2006, 09:40 PM
Wow, I actually found gmusicbrowser and its great. Very customizable, and without the amarok overhead.

http://www.gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=1052 Some of those features are very impressive:
* fast even with 10,000s of songs (developped with 16000 songs on a duron800)
* powerful browser which doesn't interfere with the playlist
* fully featured tag editor (support all id3 versions, limited support for APE & lyrics3 tags)
* simple mass-tagging and mass-renaming
* customizable weighted random mode (based on rating, last time played, flag, ...)
* tray icon, with tip window
o fetch cover from google image
o simple lyrics Those in particular jumped out at me. Do you know if it supports global keyboard shortcuts?

saads
February 26th, 2006, 05:20 AM
This guy, Dave Rosenberg, wrote an article on Tech World. Here's what he says:
"Linux tends to be perceived as Unix's geeky, more in-your-face younger brother. Bolder and brasher, but the user interface is still immature compared to Mac OS or Windows."

"immature"? who is this guy kidding? Someone send him the xgl/compiz video and then let's have a chat about immature. It's very unfortunate that this ignorant perspective persists amongst a large number of people and that columnists like this only serve to maintain it.

http://www.techworld.com/applications/features/index.cfm?FeatureID=2278

--One ticked off Ubuntu user

drgreborn
February 26th, 2006, 05:26 AM
immature? how much easier is it to customise your Ui in linux then in MS/MAC? The fact that almost no two person's desktop Ui looks the same tells you something.

Stormy Eyes
February 26th, 2006, 05:27 AM
Try not to waste so much time raging at human ignorance, or you'll end up a bitter, irreligious misanthrope with a sledgehammer -- like me.

saads
February 26th, 2006, 05:28 AM
And then he goes on to say:

"While it's highly unlikely that we'll see Microsoft applications running on Linux in the near future, credible replacements for applications that are Windows-oriented are needed."

Wine? Cedega? Crossover? Helloooooo!!! *bubbling*

DigitalDuality
February 26th, 2006, 05:29 AM
you forgot cynical, jaded, angst ridden, and misanthropic

aysiu
February 26th, 2006, 05:34 AM
"Linux" is immature in the interface?
I think it depends... it greatly depends on what desktop environment you're using, what icons, what theme, what wallpaper, etc.

For example, this Gnome desktop (http://puggy.symonds.net/~praveen/journal-images/gnome-desktop.png) is what I would call mature.

This Gnome desktop (http://www.cosmin.com/globex/images/desktop-gnome.png), however, is immature.

Here's a mature KDE desktop (http://www.kefk.net/Linux/Desktop/KDE/Screenshots/liquid3.png) and an "immature" KDE desktop (http://einsteinsbreakfast.com/images/screens/kde-desktop-debian.jpg).

SuSE's default KDE looks rather professional--a lot moreso than XP I think (http://www.flexbeta.net/images/linux_comparison/suse_kde.jpg), and while this KDE desktop may look a little cluttered (http://www.tictoc5150.com/screenshots/snapshot15.png), it seems as slick to me as Mac OS X's aqua interface.

briancurtin
February 26th, 2006, 05:37 AM
"immature"? who is this guy kidding? Someone send him the xgl/compiz video and then let's have a chat about immature.
while XGL/compiz is cool ****, is it really mature? was it just born mature?

drgreborn
February 26th, 2006, 05:44 AM
"Linux" is immature in the interface?
I think it depends... it greatly depends on what desktop environment you're using, what icons, what theme, what wallpaper, etc.

True this. ^^ keep it clean and keep it simple.

GreyFox503
February 26th, 2006, 11:32 AM
As far as I'm concerned for home use, the Linux desktop is already there. The question is, are they ready for it?

Bandit
February 26th, 2006, 12:03 PM
Techworld,, Ahh.. Another bought out full of M$ FUD website...
Only Idiots should belive anything they say anyway.
Linux Desktop has far exceeded Windows Desktop time and time again.
Cheers,
Joey

Derek Djons
February 26th, 2006, 12:10 PM
I really stopped reading, trying to understand or bookmark such sites. Interested people, switchers, they usually don't land on these sites first anyway.

prizrak
February 26th, 2006, 12:13 PM
I think his point was more along the lines of ease of use and discoverability. For the most part Linux is not GUI driven when it comes to administration, which shouldn't make a difference to business users who would have their IT department set everything up with some nice script. Might be an issue for home users. Its hard to judge maturity and maturity of UI (for me especially) as everyone has a different idea. I for one get used to just about any UI fairly quickly.

lotusleaf
February 26th, 2006, 12:21 PM
It's all about marketing, getting the name and message into the minds of the people.

But you also have to fight what I like to call the name gobbling effect. For example, when you tell people about X Windows, what is their response? "you mean Windows XP?" how about Linux Live CDs? "you mean Windows Live?" Or how about, I run X on my box? "you have an xbox?"

Getting people to remember the name is important, but often difficult, look what happened to Corel Linux before it even had much of a chance? Sure, it's now Xandros, but you see, people knew Corel, and a name like Corel Linux would've stuck easily. It was Debian based and even had a GUI installer. But you see, here again the name was too powerful, and sure enough "Corel Sells Out To Microsoft" (http://www.forbes.com/2000/10/03/1003corel.html)* and following shortly after with "Corel to Spin Off Desktop Linux Unit" (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,39122,00.asp) and "Xandros Buys Corel's Linux" (http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,46421,00.html).

"The terms of the Microsoft investment included an option under which Microsoft could request that Corel translate Microsoft's next-generation .Net server software to Linux. Hanlon said that regardless of the restructuring options it selects, the company will fulfill its contractual requirements." - (http://news.com.com/2100-1001-248876.html) Yeah, I bet. :-#

* = "It isn't quite as strange as Microsoft 's investment in Apple Computer several years ago, but it ranks right up there."

In tin foil hat speculation mode, look what erupted in the press about Google via the censorship/China/web issue, even though Microsoft itself and Yahoo were also mentioned in news articles regarding the same issue, but the outcry was all against Google, and what did this follow? The wide news coverage of a possible "Goobuntu".

Sirin
February 26th, 2006, 12:26 PM
While it's highly unlikely that we'll see Microsoft applications running on Linux in the near future
Like hell we won't. :rolleyes:

seriously, why not go into the serious stuff, like the serious required tweaking? What about ease of use? I have to drive all the way across town because my sister's internet connection couldn't work, and then her monitor went crazy, and then kernel failure? Why can't we be Mac easy instead of DOS-hard? I'm compatible with the advanced Linux geek tools, but millions of innocent people aren't. :-k

nickle
February 26th, 2006, 01:50 PM
As far as I'm concerned for home use, the Linux desktop is already there. The question is, are they ready for it?

I agree partly in that for office work it has been there even longer!!! i.e. for office work most need an office suite, email, calander, spreadsheet, etc.

The difficult Geeky image will take time to pass though. The availability of Live-CD's has been an excellent development. People can try it without much hassle. If it works wonderful, if it doesn't and you are not interested in understanding why, leave it and either try another distro or wait for a new version... That's what I tell people...

Over the last 10 years, Linux has kept improving and I have every confidence it will continue to do so...

Will they come.... more will, but never the majority. I would be satisfied if the critical threshold is enough that software and hardware developers cannot easily ignore Linux as many still do...

Teroedni
February 26th, 2006, 02:22 PM
Try not to waste so much time raging at human ignorance, or you'll end up a bitter, irreligious misanthrope with a sledgehammer -- like me.


Hehe Good one
And so True!!!

Teroedni
February 26th, 2006, 02:26 PM
It's all about marketing, getting the name and message into the minds of the people.

But you also have to fight what I like to call the name gobbling effect. For example, when you tell people about X Windows, what is their response? "you mean Windows XP?" how about Linux Live CDs? "you mean Windows Live?" Or how about, I run X on my box? "you have an xbox?"

Getting people to remember the name is important, but often difficult, look what happened to Corel Linux before it even had much of a chance? Sure, it's now Xandros, but you see, people knew Corel, and a name like Corel Linux would've stuck easily. It was Debian based and even had a GUI installer. But you see, here again the name was too powerful, and sure enough "Corel Sells Out To Microsoft" (http://www.forbes.com/2000/10/03/1003corel.html)* and following shortly after with "Corel to Spin Off Desktop Linux Unit" (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,39122,00.asp) and "Xandros Buys Corel's Linux" (http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,46421,00.html).

"The terms of the Microsoft investment included an option under which Microsoft could request that Corel translate Microsoft's next-generation .Net server software to Linux. Hanlon said that regardless of the restructuring options it selects, the company will fulfill its contractual requirements." - (http://news.com.com/2100-1001-248876.html) Yeah, I bet. :-#

* = "It isn't quite as strange as Microsoft 's investment in Apple Computer several years ago, but it ranks right up there."

In tin foil hat speculation mode, look what erupted in the press about Google via the censorship/China/web issue, even though Microsoft itself and Yahoo were also mentioned in news articles regarding the same issue, but the outcry was all against Google, and what did this follow? The wide news coverage of a possible "Goobuntu".


Yeah exactly

If people ask what i use i say Ubuntu
That makes them wonder;)
It creates interest, they wonder what ubuntu is and perhaps google it.
Hopefully:)

Virogenesis
February 26th, 2006, 04:25 PM
Linux is harder for a home user to adapt to purely because if something goes wrong they can't just take it to the shop.

Linux isn't as mature as windows in terms of configuration use, ubuntu for example gets you to write xorg config files to enable you to make good use of dual monitor cards and tv out which alot of top end graphics cards have this has been fixed in fedora core but this is still a problem for ubuntu maybe nvidia should make an app for linux users to get the most out of their cards same goes for ATI.

Linux has many mature Desktop envioments for users to use such as the most famous two available Gnome & KDE.

Both serving a different purpose and a different types of users this is very much a flaw in a way as users often get confused about the two having a distro like ubuntu which uses one as standard stolves part of this problem.
Linux has always been known for years to have a bad UI now linux destktop distros are getting UI experts in to study how users interact with their computer.
Studies have shown users look for programs relating to each other for example a user would normaly go into a email client to find a contact in his/hers address book.
A good UI is important for desktop users and I know both KDE and Gnome undersand this, Gnome provides a great UI very clean, things are found in the right locations these days.
Microsoft makes good use of UI they structure things in such a way and Linux will go this way I believe with good UI, Linux will put alot of pressure on Microsoft with their Windows products.

Apple have problems Linux over comes such as:
Double click or single click?
Window focus annoyances I.
Window focus annoyances II.
Drag-and-drop inconsistencies.
Moving a window.
Resizing a window.
Poor file type identification.
No desktop switching.
Lack of codecs.

Those are taken from a website about a Linux who switches from KDE to apple.
Read the article about When a Linux user buys Apple's Mac mini (http://www.bitrot.de/macswitch.html)

Now over time Linux will become a desktop killer purely because Microsoft can not buy out Linux so they can't use embrace and extend tactics.
Companies will choose Linux in the future due to the price.
Money Talks
Those on a budget such as the NHS have to watch what they buy Microsoft for instance have just lost themselves a contract with the NHS to Novell.
Others are doing the same we will in years to come see Linux enabled pcs in places like PcWorld for instance due the bump up Linux will get in the business center.

But for now users will find it easier dealing with Microsoft as the local computer store knows nothing about Linux they just know.

Mac users can walk into a mac store with a problem and get it stolved, same goes for Windows users but you will start seeing companies providing support for the home user I'm certain of that.

The desktop market is worth so much and the driving force right now seems to be right now behind Linux to make the desktop work.

Gaming will come to Linux Loki first made a stance to port games over to Linux years ago but at that time back in 2000 I believe it was but Linux at the time wasn't as mature as it is now I think now they would stand a go chance in the linux gaming market but due to users back then they never really hit it off big and because of this Loki software went bankrupt.

ID software have had success in the linux community with many users supporting their ideas about doing business.
Linux gamers do feel the need to buy games for linux rather than just using warez because of the companies efforts.

Adobe will sooner or later provide binary we will see dreamweaver and photoshop on linux as there is a big demand and with more and more contracts being lost by Microsoft to the Linux market due to TCO things will change like they did back in the day.

Linux will need security products in the future with the success it is having so once again we shalll we a opening in the market for some sort of security.

Linux = $$$$

I truely don't believe Microsoft will not remain the big boy for much longer with the support the Linux kernel is getting and the price of OSS.

Heres something interesting........

Software
Microsoft Windows XP Pro £149.97
Office 2003 Standard £295.97
Cost: £445.94

Custom Built PC:
Asus A8N-E SKT 939 NFORCE 4 AUDIO LAN PCI-Express ATX £65.97
Gainward 6600GT 128mb Powerpack! Ultra/1960PCX TV-DVI PCI-£77.99
PCICASE CS2600-BKS1 Hyperline II Black/Silver ATX Tower Case - No PSU £21.98 inc VAT
AMD (Venice) Athlon 64Bit 3200+ Socket 939pin 512k L2cache 90nm Retail Boxed £106.21 inc VAT
CRUCIAL 1GB DDR PC3200 400MHz 184-PIN UNBUFF 128MX64 Memory Modules £58.00 inc VAT
Pioneer DVR-110D 16x DVD±RW Dual Layer Internal IDE (Black) - OEM £29.74 inc VAT
Seagate ST3200822A Barracuda Plus 200GB 7200RPM ATA/100 8MB Cache - OEM £58.16 inc VAT
Hiper 480W Type-R Black PSU £43.12 inc VAT

Total cost without P&P: 461.97

Please not I haven't included a monitor, mouse and keyboard in the hardware list NOR have I included anti virus software and various other things needed to run windows at its best and most secure state.

All parts on the hardware list are well known branded parts except for the case.
As you can see I've used fairly decent manufacters for the hardware so TCO is much less than if you built a windows box I feel this is important.

Sources for the list provided: amazon.co.uk and ebuyer.co.uk

aysiu
February 26th, 2006, 06:01 PM
In many ways, I don't see desktop Linux as that different from desktop Mac OS X, seriously.

First of all, the hardware support thing is a non-issue, because Mac users don't have to install and configure Mac OS X--it's made for the hardware and vice versa. If Linux came preinstalled, too, then it would be a non-issue. It's nothing lacking in the kernel or the accompanying OS.


I think his point was more along the lines of ease of use and discoverability. For the most part Linux is not GUI driven when it comes to administration, which shouldn't make a difference to business users who would have their IT department set everything up with some nice script. Might be an issue for home users. Its hard to judge maturity and maturity of UI (for me especially) as everyone has a different idea. I for one get used to just about any UI fairly quickly. I'm going to have to disagree with you there a little. Linux is mostly GUI-driven for administration--it just depends on what you want to administer. Having spent some time on a Mac-zealot site, I can tell you that many of the things Window users consider "basic" administration require the editing of .plists in Mac OS X.

The truth is that many users just don't care to "administer" their computers. They just want to use them. My wife and I were frustrated that we had to download a third-party plugin to turn off the startup noise on her Mac Powerbook, but I think the majority of Mac users just don't care. They turn on their Macs and here the loud "Oooo" and are almost comforted by that noise.

Users just need to assess what they need. That's all.

A more interesting Linux desktop article is this one about Steamboat Springs (http://news.com.com/Rocky+Mountain+high+for+open+source/2008-7344_3-6043007.html):
Despite being steeped in tradition, the city administration is open to new technologies and for some time has been using OpenOffice.org, Firefox and various other open-source applications. It's been using Linux servers for five years and is considering a move to Linux desktops.

On a related note, last night my wife and I were trying to track down and watch the European version of the Keane video "Everybody's Changing," and the only sites we could find it one required Internet Explorer. So we thought we'd use User Agent Switcher. No go. My wife on her "everyone accepts that it's 'ready for the desktop'" Mac couldn't view them in Internet Explorer 5, Firefox 1.5, or Safari (whatever version number they're on now). One site (AOL) required ActiveX (for some strange reason). Another site required Flash 8 (which they don't make for Linux yet), so I tried using IEs4Linux to view it, and it thought I was using Windows 95 ot 98 instead of 2000 or XP, so it wouldn't let me view it.

What did I have to do? Boot into Windows.

I don't share this anecdote to say that Linux isn't ready for the desktop. I share it to say quite the opposite. No one challenges Mac's readiness for the desktop (okay, maybe for business, but certainly not for home), but my wife, with her G4 Powerbook running Mac OS X Tiger faced the same limitations I did (worse, in fact, because she didn't have Internet Explorer 6 using Wine on hers).

If viewing every video you can dig up is of utmost importance to you, don't get a Mac or a Linux PC. Get a Windows PC. It doesn't make Mac or Linux "not ready for the desktop." It also doesn't make it "immature" because it can't use a site that requires ActiveX for some strange reason.

There are some ways in which Mac and Linux differ in terms of desktop "readiness," though. Almost every Mac user had Mac preinstalled. We can talk about if Linux is preinstalled, but most of the time it isn't.

Mac also has slightly better third-party support. I was watching TV and a stupid DirecWay ad said "it'll work with your Mac or Windows computer." No mention of Linux.

If you buy a piece of hardware (say, a printer), it may say it works with Mac. It may not. It will almost definitely not say it works with Linux.

nickle
February 26th, 2006, 06:23 PM
Aysiu

Your points on the Mac/Linux comparison are food for thought. The hardware/software combo has shielded Mac from many of the problems Linux confronts. This I hadn't thought about. The painful path Linux has had to take will in the long run pay off in terms of functionality and maturity. Growing up is hard..LOL..

However, most computer related products (hardware/software) state whether they are Mac compatible or not. This is not the case yet for linux usually, although I have noticed some on-line stores here to mention Linux compatability. I would think there are probably more linux users now than Mac, particularly if you count the dual booters. This will have an impact.

It is intersting that for the first time this year, Inland Revenue in Switzerland has issued tax return software for Windows, Mac AND Linux...

Things are moving....

aysiu
February 26th, 2006, 06:31 PM
Things are definitely moving.

I know some of the hardcore Linux users may think there will be no big breakthrough, but I think there will. If you've been using Linux for five or seven years, you may be a bit jaded now ("Oh, yeah, every year is the year of desktop Linux... *yawn*"), but I came to desktop Linux in the summer of 2004, and I can tell you it was not ready then. Hotplugging and software package management were not refined. It simply did not have basic functionality.

Then I came back in the spring of 2005. It was ready, software-wise.

Now that it's ready software-wise, it needs to be ready business-wise and socially. Businesses need to start adopting it. Hardware manufacturers need to start selling it. Schoolchildren need to start learning it. Home users have to start using it.

The breakthrough won't come, though, until a confluence of random things occurs:

1. A major exploit for Vista is announced and exploited on a large scale.

2. No such exploit is exploited for Linux around the same time.

3. Some major hardware manufacturer begins selling (visibly--in an easily discoverable part of the webpage) Linux-preloaded desktops.

4. A distribution guide or quiz (like the one from Zegenie Studios (http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/)) is featured in PCWorld or some other mainstream computer magazine.

If those all happen within months of each other, all of a sudden, there will be third-party support, and everything else Linux needs.

Even though #4 would be great, my guess is that some distribution will come out on top, and every other distribution will have to somehow be made compatible with that distribution. There will be one distro that gets the most press coverage or gets the most adoption in schools or... whatever.

It could be Ubuntu. It could be. Ubuntu does get a lot of press coverage. Ubuntu is #1 at DistroWatch (which statistically means little, but sociologically means a lot). Mepis has even decided it's going to base itself on Ubuntu and not Knoppix any more.

I don't know. It could be Linspire. Even though a lot of Linux users have disdain for Linspire, they are making deals with hardware vendors (think KooBox). They are making deals with school districts (think Indiana, US). They're making things happen. And a lot of computer users don't trust "free" stuff. They almost would rather pay for a subscription to CNR than get stuff free through Synaptic Package Manager.

endersshadow
February 26th, 2006, 06:55 PM
And a lot of computer users don't trust "free" stuff. They almost would rather pay for a subscription to CNR than get stuff free through Synaptic Package Manager.

This is the most important thing in your post.

It's true: People don't trust anything that they can get for free. It's really weird. The problem that free software has is that people don't think that it's supported, that it's a shoddy product, and that it's not reliable. People need brand names on a broad consumer basis. "The guy in the basement" is not exactly a brand name. Once that guy in the basement gets hired by a software company, and they brand and ship his software, then people will adopt it. Rather odd, isn't it?

mstlyevil
February 26th, 2006, 07:01 PM
This is the most important thing in your post.

It's true: People don't trust anything that they can get for free. It's really weird. The problem that free software has is that people don't think that it's supported, that it's a shoddy product, and that it's not reliable. People need brand names on a broad consumer basis. "The guy in the basement" is not exactly a brand name. Once that guy in the basement gets hired by a software company, and they brand and ship his software, then people will adopt it. Rather odd, isn't it?

Some of it is from experience in the Windows world. I know several people alone that bought shoddy basement computers with pirated Windows that had nothing but trouble. Also most of the free software in the Windows world comes bundled with third party apps, spyware, malware, trojans and viruses. These kind of experiences make people gun shy about going any route but a major manufactuer or software vendor.

Kerberos
February 26th, 2006, 09:46 PM
As far as I'm concerned for home use, the Linux desktop is already there. The question is, are they ready for it?
Unfortunatly 'good enough' isn't good enough. To surpass Windows, Linux needs to be significantly better for people to justify the change. Linux has come a long way but before it can make any significant headway there needs to be a good reason to switch from whats known and comfortable.

Linux is still a geek OS. The network adapter defaults to 'static' with no ip set (rather than DHCP) and the reliance on the command line - want to install a .deb, run an app that symantic didn't add a shortcut for (which is most of them in my experiance), you need the CLI. Out of the box multimedia support sucks (I know why but end users dont care about the 'why') and associating files with software that can't handle them - such as Totem, which can't play anything and the file archiver which is associated with .rar's etc yet can't handle them.

It needs polish, attention to detail and better integration of apps. Declaring it 'good enough' and then flaming anyone who thinks there is room for improvement is an incredibly shortsighted and unconstructive attitude. Of course its improving, but imo its not worth switching to since matters of freedom, gpl and having access to the source code don't really matter as much to end users as they do to the typical Linux user and the advantages of it don't outweigh the problems associated with switching.

aysiu
February 26th, 2006, 09:52 PM
The network adapter defaults to 'static' with no ip set (rather than DHCP) I haven't found this to be the case with any Linux distribution I've used.


Out of the box multimedia support sucks (I know why but end users dont care about the 'why') and associating files with software that can't handle them - such as Totem, which can't play anything and the file archiver which is associated with .rar's etc yet can't handle them. Once again you equate Ubuntu with Linux. Not all Linux distros are like that. Just because you refuse to use them doesn't mean they don't exist.

By the way "good enough" means it's... good enough. It doesn't mean it can't be or won't be improved. It's constantly being improved--as we type, as we speak. There's no point in complaining about it. It is "good enough," and it will get even better, regardless of whether naysayers would rather complain on these forums than file bug reports and give suggestions directly to the developers.

You can't make blanket statements about whether it's "worth" switching to or not for everybody. For some, it won't be worth it. For others, it will. No OS or kernel is for everybody--yes, not even Windows.

Kerberos
February 26th, 2006, 10:10 PM
I haven't found this to be the case with any Linux distribution I've used.
Ubuntu 5.10. If the cable is plugged in when it boots its fine, if not it defaults to 'static, no-ip' and you have to enable it to get it to see the network. I find myself fiddling with Ubuntu's network config much more than I'd really like.


Once again you equate Ubuntu with Linux. Not all Linux distros are like that. Just because you refuse to use them doesn't mean they don't exist.
Its like punching smoke - Ubuntu isn't Linux, Distro xyz does that (but doesn't do other things that this one does). No wonder adobe and other companies haven't released anything for Linux - theres no fixed standard or platform to actually do it on.

By the way "good enough" means it's... good enough. It doesn't mean it can't be or won't be improved. It's constantly being improved--as we type, as we speak. There's no point in complaining about it. It is "good enough," and it will get even better, regardless of whether naysayers would rather complain on these forums than file bug reports and give suggestions directly to the developers.
I am confident it will improve to a point surpassing Windows on a long enough timescale and dont deny the fact its improving I just reckon it has further to go than people make out and that people are too accepting and too willing to gloss over problems as its considered 'not the done thing' to be critical of Linux.

That is all.

poofyhairguy
February 26th, 2006, 10:57 PM
No wonder adobe and other companies haven't released anything for Linux


You mean besides the Acrobat Reader software that works on every distro I have tried?

Kerberos
February 26th, 2006, 11:06 PM
You mean besides the Acrobat Reader software that works on every distro I have tried?
Yes. Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign mainly. I can't live without them and would be more than happy to pony up the dosh if they were made available.

OT but is there anything Linux based (that isn't inkscape) that does the same job as Indesign?

GreyFox503
February 26th, 2006, 11:32 PM
I suppose that's what's good about having so many choices. Some people don't care about mainstream acceptance and therefore their distros require more knowledge to use. Most distributions are like this, they ultimately rely on the command line to get things done. Which is fine, that's the way I like it.

Thankfully, other people really see the need to make Linux usable by people with only prior Windows experience. This is great, because it would bring all Linux users more ported applications and better hardware support.

Hopefully, we can get some versions that do everything for you by default, flash, codecs, the whole shebang. Some middle versions (I consider Ubuntu to be an average-knowledge level distro) will do some nice things but not others. And then some will let the user do everything themselves.

Stormy Eyes
February 26th, 2006, 11:39 PM
To surpass Windows, Linux needs to be significantly better for people to justify the change.

********. It wasn't much better than Windows in 1999, but I switched all the same.

aysiu
February 26th, 2006, 11:40 PM
Hopefully, we can get some versions that do everything for you by default, flash, codecs, the whole shebang. Apart from the fact that it can't detect my hardware well, PCLinuxOS looks pretty promising. And if Mepis is really going to start being built on Ubuntu, that could be one to look out for, too.

Mainstream adoption won't happen through installing and configuring an operating system. People didn't massively start adopting Windows because it was "easy to install." They massively adopted it because it didn't require installation. It was just on the computer they bought.

GreyFox503
February 26th, 2006, 11:43 PM
When Kerberos wrote "To surpass Windows," I think he meant in the eyes of mainstream computer users, or "To surpass Windows in marketshare".

And even if is clearly superior, many people still will not switch. Look at AOL's remaining customers, paying $26/month to stay on dialup.

dada1958
February 26th, 2006, 11:45 PM
OT but is there anything Linux based (that isn't inkscape) that does the same job as Indesign?

Not yet, though the development of Scribus is going really fast. With the latest stable version 1.2.4.1 I see similarities with good old PageMaker and Quark XPress 3 and 4 but with a story editor. The CVS, 1.3.3 is already a leap forwards but it still lacks features like a imnsho opinion the most important: a paragraph composer that made InDesign a killer app. It's based on the way how TeX handles text, with a very homogenous text image as result.

GreyFox503
February 26th, 2006, 11:46 PM
They massively adopted it because it didn't require installation. It was just on the computer they bought.
Oh right, it's too easy to forget about that.

If most people bought a new computer that had Linux preinstalled and it didn't do everything they were used to, they would call it broken. So any pre-installed version better have as much of those nice extras as possible, for all our sakes.

aysiu
February 26th, 2006, 11:50 PM
Oh right, it's too easy to forget about that.

If most people bought a new computer that had Linux preinstalled and it didn't do everything they were used to, they would call it broken. So any pre-installed version better have as much of those nice extras as possible, for all our sakes. I believe Linspire's preinstalleds (http://www.koobox.com/) are like this. I don't know about the Ubuntu-preinstalleds (http://www.system76.com/)--I would guess not.

dada1958
February 27th, 2006, 12:01 AM
Computer! Totaal, a major Dutch computer magazine tested 8 Linux distros in its February edition. Big winners were Suse and Ubuntu with a rate of 8,8 respectively 8,6, out of 10. Windows XP ended with a 7, but of course that OS isn't a Linux distro :D

GreyFox503
February 27th, 2006, 12:03 AM
Something in the back of my head rings a bell. Didn't I read something awhile ago about a new Ubuntu-based distro that would have all the proprietary stuff included? Impilinux or something.

BTW nice sites, aysiu. I didn't know about those. And they look like a pretty good value.

EDIT:

Found this page (http://www.linspire.com/products_linspire_whatis.php?tab=compatibility) which shows all the file formats supported on Linspire out-of-the-box.

nickle
February 27th, 2006, 12:35 AM
Does anybody sell computers with linux preinstalled? It would be a neat idea. Once could preselect the hardware to ensure compatability and hey, know whats best... it would cost nothing...
I do wonder about lisences for codecs though...

Arktis
February 27th, 2006, 12:39 AM
Does anybody sell computers with linux preinstalled? It would be a neat idea. Once could preselect the hardware to ensure compatability and hey, know whats best... it would cost nothing...
I do wonder about lisences for codecs though...

http://www.gnu.org/links/companies.html

http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/desktop.html
http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/laptop.html

HP also did this for laptops with ubuntu for a while, but I don't know if they are still at it or not.

There are also various other small time companies out there. Just search for them.

aysiu
February 27th, 2006, 02:46 AM
Does anybody sell computers with linux preinstalled? It would be a neat idea. Once could preselect the hardware to ensure compatability and hey, know whats best... it would cost nothing...
I do wonder about lisences for codecs though... You must have missed the two posts above yours. Check out post #35.

Edit: Microtel also sells desktops with Xandros preinstalled:
http://www.microtelpc.com/Default.aspx?tabid=281

arctic
March 13th, 2006, 02:15 PM
If you want Linux to be successful, adopt the Macintosh-credo. Sell machines with preinstalled Linux (e.g. Ubuntu, Mandriva, Fedora or SUSE) with all plugins included and sell hardware (printers, scanners,...) that is 100% compatible with the system you sell out of the box in your store. Then add some marketing "horray", tell everything is Linux-certified/designed for Linux and you have a chance to make a small impact on the market.

Leo_01
March 13th, 2006, 02:34 PM
The Wal-Mart Linspire Laptop add is pretty funny.



WOOHOO. Thanks a bunch, Linspire.
Does Linux even hang?
LOL.
System restore is a pain the the rear...
Whenever a virus/malware/trojan attacks you got to deactivate system restore and clean the system...
Real dumb.

DigitalDuality
March 13th, 2006, 03:07 PM
The world would be a saner place IF most consumers were on linux. And no this isn't fanboy b.s. This is why.

Most people using a computer.. are in a work environment. If they're not in a work environment, they're above the age of 40 (baby boomers) and the majority have no idea what the hell they're really doing. They don't even have an understanding of Windows enough to understand. Nor do they want to. They just know when you click here this happens, and when this goes wrong, i do this. But 99% of the machines i work on (family, friends, family friends, and every single day at work..) are screwed up for one of several reasons:

1) user installed bonzi buddy, or some other "fun/useful" program that's nothing but spy/ad/malware.

2) User gets infected with tons of spyware, simply by browsing.

3) User gets infected with a virus

4) User decided to "clean up their own machine" and went through system files and folders and deleted crap they really shouldn't have.


Linux in my work environment would be great. They'd get zero media formats/codecs (java and flash would probably be necessary), they would have access to their home folder and a share folder and that's it. And i'd delete all icons for synaptic or any user friendly way to install software. If i did that.. it's quite possible after it was all set up.. i might be out of a job b/c of lack of stuff to fix. And when you consider the built in tools in the up coming Gnome, i'd be able to lock the user account down even more.

This situation is great for the elderly and children too i find. In fact, the average user on a computer and an elderly person or a child on a computer.. is not all that different.

Master Shake
March 13th, 2006, 03:24 PM
I love the arguement that Windows "works". No it doesn't! What do you get out of a $200 Windows install?


*An Image Viewer that is nearly useless and allows nearly no actual editing of photos.

Don't EVEN get me started on this one.

I support a proprietary faxing program for win. When a fax gets sent or recieved, it saves the fax as a .TIF image. Well, since all Win systems we support are 2K, XP or newer, they have the 'Fax and Image' viewer set as the default image viewer.

The thing that really ticks me off is that when you even just VIEW a .TIF image in theviewer, it always changes the compression to LZW compression (our program requires uncompressed). It doesn't even ask to do this!

Granted, our program pretty well sucks too (Its written in VB for crying out loud), but when all you are doing is VIEWING an Image, the image viewer shouldn't make any damn changes to it AT ALL.

Bandit
March 13th, 2006, 03:41 PM
I have a real good friend back home who runs his own computer store.
Pretty smart guy, but what he found trying to offer linux to even non-gamers was that many times people want to run out to the local wal-mart and grab the cheapest computer item on the shelf (I.e: Lexmark printer) and they expect it to work. Never mind the fact they could have spent 20bucks more and got a HP that would work perfect. So there is the delima.
It would be great for him if most his customers used Linux, he wouldnt have to spend hours trying to convenice his customers that all that spyware, adware and what not is what cuasing there PCs to mess up.
So until I can blindly walk into any store and purchase a computer part that comes with linux drivers, most computer stores will not sell it.
Sad but true... :(

Cheers,
Joey

m00nd0g
March 13th, 2006, 04:11 PM
The world would be a saner place IF most consumers were on linux. And no this isn't fanboy b.s. This is why.

Most people using a computer.. are in a work environment. If they're not in a work environment, they're above the age of 40 (baby boomers) and the majority have no idea what the hell they're really doing. They don't even have an understanding of Windows enough to understand. Nor do they want to. They just know when you click here this happens, and when this goes wrong, i do this. But 99% of the machines i work on (family, friends, family friends, and every single day at work..) are screwed up for one of several reasons:

1) user installed bonzi buddy, or some other "fun/useful" program that's nothing but spy/ad/malware.

2) User gets infected with tons of spyware, simply by browsing.

3) User gets infected with a virus

4) User decided to "clean up their own machine" and went through system files and folders and deleted crap they really shouldn't have.



Hey ... I would have to disagree with you there bud , I am one of them "(baby boomers)" that doesn't use my computer for work resaons , Ever since I own xp pro back in Oct of 2001 , I have found it at the begin some what difficult but , not hard to use , I did ask around what i should use and do with this comp and In my time using it ? I have never had a virus , I make sure my definitions are updated regularly , I don't have a problem with spyware or even spam , I have 7 email accounts with my ISP , Out of the 7 ? Only 2 accounts I get spam with , The rest are spam free , I make sure I use a firewall ( router type ) and software one as well , I have anti- spyware programs running and up to date , I find using windows when it comes to loading drivers VERY easy to do , I have now a fair good idea what using windows computers are like , The way I see it ? You just need your basic 4 drivers in windows ( chipset , audio , video and the net ) All else can come later ... Now I am just started to use Linux Ubuntu 5-10 Breezy Badger and I am finding it harder to understand all these codes and how to use them in the terminal , Though I do have to say I do enjoy the challenge trying to understand it but , Its not as easy as you guys/gals might think , With the knowledge that I have now with computers ? Windows is by far alot easier to use then Linux , That just my opinion , Though I am getting somewhat addicted to Linux , Maybe becasue of the challenge but for the average Joe blow thats never used a computer before I wouldn't recommend Linux ...

PS: To whom it may concern , My suggestion for Linux >>> Would be to have more tech support available


I should add I don't mean because I know windows much more , I am referring to it at the beginning stage , Windows is easier for beginner then using Linux in my opinion ...

m00nd0g
March 13th, 2006, 04:57 PM
One other thing I should mention is , How many user's would there be if Linux wasn't free , Lets say you take the average Linux box over the average Windows and compare similar pricing with the Windows box , How many do you think would be using Linux ? Remember I am referring to you not knowing what you do now with Linux , When you first started off with it ...

PS: Don't get me wrong here and I am not trying to offend anyone in any ways , Also I am starting to enjoy using this software even if it is very difficult to understand , Though I wouldn't say Linux sucks , Just need more understanding / support for it

Brunellus
March 13th, 2006, 05:16 PM
One other thing I should mention is , How many user's would there be if Linux wasn't free , Lets say you take the average Linux box over the average Windows and compare similar pricing with the Windows box , How many do you think would be using Linux ? Remember I am referring to you not knowing what you do now with Linux , When you first started off with it ...

PS: Don't get me wrong here and I am not trying to offend anyone in any ways , Also I am starting to enjoy using this software even if it is very difficult to understand , Though I wouldn't say Linux sucks , Just need more understanding / support for it
Depends. I actually *bought* my first Linux distro--I saw it as a cheap way of saving a windows computer.

But you've more or less answered your own question, becasue for most users, Windows *is* free as in gratis. OEM preinstalled Windows is included in the price tag of mass-market computers for mass-market users like yourself. The only people who really pay for single-user licenses are people who assemble their own computers, or users seeking to upgrade.

In the latter case, the system requirements of the new version of Windows have historically been so cripplingly huge that there is questionable benefit in upgrading.

I am comfortable in linux because I learned to use computers back in DOS 3.3. A lot of the same issues that affected MS-DOS 3.3 (a lot of nasty proprietary drivers that might not work on your system, for instance, and the need to use a commandline and text editor) exist in Linux today, so I feel like I've gone back to my roots. I've been editing config files all my life, I guess When windows 95 came out and abstracted a lot of things away from me (moving from nice .sys, .bat, .txt and .ini textfiles that were human-readable towards a binary-only Registry), I quit understanding my computer.

After using Linux for about a year and a half, I can say that I actually prefer it to Windows. My non-computer-literate family uses it just fine, but then, their experience with it has been just like their experience with Windows, in that they didn't have to isntall/configure it: I did that.

So we come to the usual consensus: Joe Average never installs operating systems, and so has no OS install heartaches. Once up and running, Linux is as good as Windows for most users.

aysiu
March 13th, 2006, 05:17 PM
m00ndog, the very fact that you're posting on these forums means you're not a typical Windows user for your demographic.

Sorry.

Kerberos
March 13th, 2006, 05:33 PM
Now I am just started to use Linux Ubuntu 5-10 Breezy Badger and I am finding it harder to understand all these codes and how to use them in the terminal , Though I do have to say I do enjoy the challenge trying to understand it but , Its not as easy as you guys/gals might think , With the knowledge that I have now with computers ? Windows is by far alot easier to use then Linux , That just my opinion , Though I am getting somewhat addicted to Linux , Maybe becasue of the challenge but for the average Joe blow thats never used a computer before I wouldn't recommend Linux ...

Its down to usability & discoverability. The basic idea is that you shouldn't be expected to know anything that there is no way of figuring out from the information provided. Power vs ease-of-use really.

Compare vi to wordpad. Put a new user down in front of both and you'll find that they will probably have an entire document written in wordpad before they've even managed to quit vi, let alone written anything. Sure, for the experienced user they can probably write documents in vi faster than wordpad, but it requires significant prior training to be as productive and isn't just pick-up-and-go.

This is why I personally don't like Linux. If I want to get something done its never really possible to just figure it out, you pretty much have to go searching for howto's and documentation, whereas the Windows and MacOS approach is they give you enough information and options that if you have a clear idea of what you want to achieve, you can achieve it without having to search online for a solution.

With my friends I compare it as Turntables vs CD players. For a DJ, you want vinyl (with the accompanying mixer, amps, monitor etc) and it is much better, but the bulk of normal users just want it to work (anyone can figure out how to work a CD player in a few seconds) and things like the terminal, software installation and drivers on Linux are totally non-intuitive. This is the Linux way though (and I am sure Stormy will be in here shortly to say why its 'better') but I really dont think it will hit mainstream until this isn't the case. If you read the 'I love Linux' posts they are mainly by people who have discovered the joys of tweaking, fiddling and researching (which there is nothing wrong with) but if you don't want to do it, and just want to get things done, you shouldn't be forced to tweak and fiddle (as you inevitably are).

m00nd0g
March 13th, 2006, 06:03 PM
m00ndog, the very fact that you're posting on these forums means you're not a typical Windows user for your demographic.

Sorry.
Thats exactly my point , I was in the beginning with windows but with what I know now with windows ? I can pretty well do anything , I am now building computers for others , trouble shooting them too , I learn all this from all the available tech chat sites for windows , Again with what I now know with computers , I still can't figure out how to install certain programs with Linux ( flash player , java ) ,Understanding the command lines/Terminal/Synaptic/Repositories ,Though I don't give up to easily , I will try to keep at it , I tell you one thing if I never learn how to use windows ? there is no way I would of understood all this technology in Linux

PS: Remember I am your average user or even a little more familiar with comps and I am having difficulty understanding it , So what would that tell you about non computer user's that would want to try to use it ?

Mr_J_
March 13th, 2006, 06:27 PM
This sort of arguments are just a small change in consumer practices away to make it all work.

A store to sell linux computers would have to do loads of background work to check they aren't recomending anything they can't make work.

A sticker with "linux Friendly" on it next to the price tag would be the best way to go. Or maybe "Ubuntu Friendly" with the logo on the side.

Sort of look for this logo to find out if the hardware will work with Ubuntu.


A good sell point would be that you are also buying quality when you buy things that work in Ubuntu.

Bandit
March 13th, 2006, 06:51 PM
One other thing I should mention is , How many user's would there be if Linux wasn't free , Lets say you take the average Linux box over the average Windows and compare similar pricing with the Windows box , How many do you think would be using Linux ? Remember I am referring to you not knowing what you do now with Linux , When you first started off with it ...

PS: Don't get me wrong here and I am not trying to offend anyone in any ways , Also I am starting to enjoy using this software even if it is very difficult to understand , Though I wouldn't say Linux sucks , Just need more understanding / support for it
Actualy I used to be a hard core SuSE user and I still have a place in my heart for that distro. I used to purchase each major version. Last one I purchased was 9.3 and it cost me $80 USD. Since SuSE got bought out by Novell it has had a few bump in the road I guess you could say.
Many people on the forum think "Linux is Free".. Actualy your very lucky to have such a great distro as ubuntu and it be free of cost. This whole "linux free of cost" is a new thing. Yes you have always been able to download most distros from the internet. But the top-dogs back in the day like RedHat, SuSE, Mandrake charged anywhere from 29.99 to 89.99 depending on what you get. Even some of the RedHat highend enterprise level linux software cost you about $300 USD.. :)

Cheers,
Joey

m00nd0g
March 13th, 2006, 06:58 PM
You know I remember the days when I neve even used a computer and I always would say to my buddies , I got to learn how to use a computer , My buddies would say the samething , Yeah me too,Ok lets say you take 100 people like me that never back then used a computer and you take these people into a room and say to them what kind of computer would you like to have , Do you actually believe that the word LInux will ever come up ?

Bandit
March 13th, 2006, 07:13 PM
You know I remember the days when I neve even used a computer and I always would say to my buddies , I got to learn how to use a computer , My buddies would say the samething , Yeah me too,Ok lets say you take 100 people like me that never back then used a computer and you take these people into a room and say to them what kind of computer would you like to have , Do you actually believe that the word LInux will ever come up ?
They probelly dont even know were the power button is on the PC. There is a stronge chance most will not even know about windows unless they saw a freinds or family members PC with it on it. Then, they are stilll not sure what the heck it is..
Windows has become a common name. Thats a fact. Most all people who have computers or know someone how has a computer know the name windows.
But you take those same guys you refered to, stick them in a room with a linux based PC and they will have no harder time learning it then they would windows.
Cheers,
Joey

mstlyevil
March 13th, 2006, 07:20 PM
They probelly dont even know were the power button is on the PC. There is a stronge chance most will not even know about windows unless they saw a freinds or family members PC with it on it. Then, they are stilll not sure what the heck it is..
Windows has become a common name. Thats a fact. Most all people who have computers or know someone how has a computer know the name windows.
But you take those same guys you refered to, stick them in a room with a linux based PC and they will have no harder time learning it then they would windows.
Cheers,
Joey

Most people I know that never used a computer thinks Windows is the computer. It is amazing what relentless advertising does.

DigitalDuality
March 13th, 2006, 07:23 PM
Hey ... I would have to disagree with you there bud , I am one of them "(baby boomers)" that doesn't use my computer for work resaons , Ever since I own xp pro back in Oct of 2001 , I have found it at the begin some what difficult but , not hard to use , I did ask around what i should use and do with this comp and In my time using it ? I have never had a virus , I make sure my definitions are updated regularly , I don't have a problem with spyware or even spam , I have 7 email accounts with my ISP , Out of the 7 ? Only 2 accounts I get spam with , The rest are spam free , I make sure I use a firewall ( router type ) and software one as well , I have anti- spyware programs running and up to date , I find using windows when it comes to loading drivers VERY easy to do , I have now a fair good idea what using windows computers are like , The way I see it ? You just need your basic 4 drivers in windows ( chipset , audio , video and the net ) All else can come later ... Now I am just started to use Linux Ubuntu 5-10 Breezy Badger and I am finding it harder to understand all these codes and how to use them in the terminal , Though I do have to say I do enjoy the challenge trying to understand it but , Its not as easy as you guys/gals might think , With the knowledge that I have now with computers ? Windows is by far alot easier to use then Linux , That just my opinion , Though I am getting somewhat addicted to Linux , Maybe becasue of the challenge but for the average Joe blow thats never used a computer before I wouldn't recommend Linux ...

PS: To whom it may concern , My suggestion for Linux >>> Would be to have more tech support available


I should add I don't mean because I know windows much more , I am referring to it at the beginning stage , Windows is easier for beginner then using Linux in my opinion ...

You do realize the majority of baby boomers have $2000 systems sitting on their desk so they can fwd jokes and play solitaire right?

No insult to your generation (and what i said was a fallible generalization based on a largely true stereotype), but you all simply were not raised with computers in your lives. I had my hands on a keyboard by age 5.

A good example of you breaking the stereotype, how many people over the age of 40 have ever made a post on an internet message board? I created a board of my own once for political debate..it welcomed both liberals and conservatives and anyone in between. I tried to get my father to post on it. It took me 2.5 hours just to get him to register an account and make one post. One.

Studies done by the BBC note that a majority of users (like 70%+) still don't comprehend terms such as spam, spyware, adware, drivers, etc. A great deal of people your age, maybe younger, mayber older... don't even know that there ARE other operating systems. They just think.. computer = windows.

This is not to say there isn't a huge mass of non-tech savy users my age and younger though.

There's a reason things like "Geeks on Call" exist. These guys don't do anything overly complex. They're setting up basic home routers, installing wireless cards and doing hard drive upgrades at a whopping 60 bucks an hour. I don't know a single soul my age who has called them.

Off the top of my head, i could tell you 20 people 15-20 yrs older than me that have.

For my last job i have travelled as much as 100 miles (to a branch office) to simply turn a printer on. Even tried making sure of all the basics over the phone before hand. Asked them if they turned it on, if it was plugged in, etc. I've done tech support for several doctor's office in the area part time, and drove around simply to turn on the power button on a computer that turned off during a storm that knocked power out that night. My parents call me over when they are simply moving their desk from one side of the room to the next, b/c those new fangled COLOR CODED DELL CABLES/PLUGS are just too complex.

Everyday, i have to print these stupid copies of this douche bag's powerpoint presentations, b/c he doesn't know how to print things.. and since i'm the "guru" i get stuck with being his printer "bitch".

Sorry to be abrasive, but i could rant for hours about this. I personally want my career to expand and grow, and i'm never going to do that with "job experience" alone..b/c 80% of my time is doing stupid crap.

mstlyevil
March 13th, 2006, 07:42 PM
You do realize the majority of baby boomers have $2000 systems sitting on their desk so they can fwd jokes and play solitaire right?

No insult to your generation (and what i said was a fallible generalization based on a largely true stereotype), but you all simply were not raised with computers in your lives. I had my hands on a keyboard by age 5.

A good example of you breaking the stereotype, how many people over the age of 40 have ever made a post on an internet message board?

Studies done by the BBC note that a majority of users (like 70%+) still don't comprehend terms such as spam, spyware, adware, drivers, etc. A great deal of people your age, maybe younger, mayber older... don't even know that there ARE other operating systems. They just think.. computer = windows.

This is not to say there isn't a huge mass of non-tech savy users my age and younger though.

There's a reason things like "Geeks on Call" exist. These guys don't do anything overly complex. They're setting up routers, installing wireless cards and doing hard drive upgrades at a whopping 60 bucks an hour. I don't know a single soul my age who has called them.

Off the top of my head, i could tell you 20 people 15-20 yrs older than me that have.

I am 37, and bought my first computer in 2001 yet I can do all those things. I would never call the "Geek Squad" because I can either do it myself or find someone to show me how to do it. (I am Gen X not a Baby Boomer.) My first exposure to computers happened in high school but you had to know basic or you had to be trained to use the various DOS based operating systems out at the time. It was just a geek thing back in the mid 80's so there are many Gen Xers that did not have their first exposure to computer until they were adults. The MAC, Windows, games and the Internet changed that and all of the sudden it was cool to own a computer. I honestly do not think I would have learned as much as I have about computers had it not been for the advent of the GUI and the Internet.

I guess what I am trying to say is the computer has to be more than just an appliance for someone of any age to desire to learn more about it. I know a lot of people over 40 that are very knowledgable about computers because the computer is more to them than just a word processor and email client. In fact it was a uncle of mine who is a truck driver that taught me how to build a computer and he is in his 50's. Most of the Kids I know can barely turn the thing on much less set it up, configure it and maintain it.

I don't think you can put an age group on who is and who isn't computer savvy. It comes down to the desire of each individual to want to learn more about his/her own computer.

DigitalDuality
March 13th, 2006, 08:03 PM
I do think it's fair to say, the older you are (i'm thinking in terms of adults here), the less likely you will have an indepth knowledge about a computer.

I wouldn't expect my great grandparents (still alive) at 99 years old, to even know the difference between left and right click.

mstlyevil
March 13th, 2006, 08:05 PM
I do think it's fair to say, the older you are (i'm thinking in terms of adults here), the less likely you will have an indepth knowledge about a computer.

I wouldn't expect my great grandparents (still alive) at 99 years old, to even know the difference between left and right click.

Probally past a certain age, you are right. But younger Baby Boomers are very open to the new technology.

facefur
March 13th, 2006, 08:20 PM
Over the years that it took me to adopt Linux, I've had this online discussion with many people. This thread is probably the closest to identifying why Linux of any flavor has not really disprupted the Windows market to any degree. Here's some observations of mine.

The real issue is NOT Windows vs. Linux. As an OS, Windows has undergone some pretty significant changes over the years, and with XP, has actually begun to resemble a true OS, as opposed to a program that runs other programs. Linux has been an OS from the start. The fact is, however, that the typical consumer does not see the OS beyond the desktop (or the BSOD). True, issues with printer and peripheral compatibility do affect them, but I've found the limitations in driver functionality are being quickly overcome; careful selection of hardware suites as Linux systems would make them nearly invisible.

The end consumer sees the applications - office applications, graphics programs, games, etc. While there are some very sophisticated Linux application suites like Open Office, GIMP, and the Firefox/Thunderbird browser/e-mail/news programs, I've found myself dual booting back to Windows to use my CAD program, Quicken (no, WINE cannot handle it properly, thank you), Noteworthy Composer (music writing program), Print Shop and a fairly simple check printing application. I'm just enough of a geek to not care, but few home computer users are willing to go through that.

To the benefit of the Linux community, the Open Source process has enabled many people to become involved with the software. To the detriment of the Linux community, the Open Source process has enabled many people to bceome involved with the software. Not just a few of the response I have received when I addressed the inadequate recognition of the low-end consumer were downright snobbish - some bordered on intellectual arrogance.

It may be my perception, but it seems that Linux developers are more fascinated with the OS and clever apps that are tightly OS linked than with consumer applications that dazzle like most of the Windows software. It is most unfortunate that the typical end user has come to accept the periodic restart that comes with Windows use - even at work, we have been told that the control center will reboot our machines weekly because "It's good practice to reboot Windows periodically." That's a tacit admission of bad software, but we've learned to live with it. Sadly, most of the problems come from the Windows programming environment, and it forces certain practices that make simple porting of source code very difficult. That alone keeps many of the better applications from being adapted to Linux because there's little economic incentive to do the work for a niche market. Ask Apple Computer why they write so much of their own software.

There is, however, growing recognition that Linux will remain a niche market until the community begins to build application software for the average Joe who buys his computer from the Dell online store or the local CompUSA - painless to install, built for the non-CompSci major, usable without reference to terminals or man pages.

commodore
March 13th, 2006, 08:32 PM
Veritas you talked about free software like the free of charge thing is important. Free software is not always free of charge. And I think free software is more important than freeware.

Bandit
March 13th, 2006, 08:53 PM
Most people I know that never used a computer thinks Windows is the computer. It is amazing what relentless advertising does.
I have seen that as well.
I got my boss to let me install Ubuntu onto one of his spare computers.
But one of the silly things he asked me, or at least I thought it was silly.. He asked me: "If linux is so good, why dont I see any advirtisments on TV about it?"
So I had to explain to him that most of the linux software is free and it doesnt get the cash flow that M$ gets from selling its products.
No money = no TV adds.
Of course then I had to be a smart butt and tell him if M$ spent as much money fixing Windows as it did advertising it, then they just might have a great OS. :)

Cheers,
Joey

BWF89
March 13th, 2006, 09:13 PM
ou'd have to advertise
it just right, but for someone who just wants email and web
browsing...maybe some word processing and printing, it could be viable.
And really, if marketed correctly, you could find others willing to try
it, I think.
I hate it when people try to pass Linux off as some ghetto, scraped together OS that you can really only use for basic computing tasks like web browsing and writing papers.

mstlyevil
March 13th, 2006, 09:14 PM
I hate it when people try to pass Linux off as some ghetto, scraped together OS that you can really only use for basic computing tasks like web browsing and writing papers.

They usually are just ignorant of it's capabilities.

Brunellus
March 13th, 2006, 09:15 PM
I hate it when people try to pass Linux off as some ghetto, scraped together OS that you can really only use for basic computing tasks like web browsing and writing papers.
yeah, but it makes us sound more hardcore.

(to the tune of Thee 6 Mafia)

It's HARD out here with the gIMP...

RedeyesUK
March 13th, 2006, 10:23 PM
I have to say though, linux is definately getting better on the 'user friendly' front.

When I first attempted a linux install in 1998, I needed to set up seperate partitions for /root, /home, /bin and so on. It also expected me to know what size partitions I wanted! Bear in mind that I had (iirc) a 500mb HDD back then, so wasn't exactly flushed for drive space.
After getting past that, I had the system installed, and spent the next two days trying to get the x server to start, in any mode!
As you can imagine, I gave up shortly after that.

Compared to that experience, a modern linux distro is a breeze to set up, and seems to be going from strength to strength.

Imagine how it'll be in a couple of years from now!

polo_step
March 14th, 2006, 12:28 AM
I can easily understand the reluctance of any retailer to touch any variety of desktop Linux with a ten-foot pole. It makes no sense from their standpoint. Personally, I'm surprised that those low-ball boxes come with Linspire (a distro I utterly detest from the ground up), but that's mainly because they don't have adequate memory to run on anything else. The OS is so drastically stripped that it will perform the three or four basic grandma functions reliably if you don't try adding any hardware or software. I suppose that's a valid approach, but people get ticked when they find what a hole they're in when they try to expand and upgrade things and it all goes south on them.

For the first time in about three months, I have my Ubuntu 5.04 box turned on, mainly because a fancy power supply I bought cheap on sale would not physically fit in any computer here and the Ubuntu box required the fewest modifications to accomodate the oversized gamer-idiot glowing cabling terminals (go ahead and have a free laugh on me!). I had to fire it up to see if the PS was functioning.

Though I tried for many months, I could never get Ubuntu 5.04 to do most of the stuff I needed, though we all tried to get to the bottom of a lot of my problems. I spent untold hours screwing with stuff to clear the trouble, but it only worked out about 20%-30% of the time. I never ever got the A/V playback to work properly with any player in any file format with any codec, for example. There was always some glitch. Eventually, like most people, I just got tired of beating my head against a wall and hung Ubuntu up for a while.

I've spent the last five months trying to get any of at least thirteen Linux distributions to do the stuff I need on any of my boxes. The big nosebleed is wireless and video on my new notebook.

The works-on-install hardware support just plain isn't there for most current devices. I was looking at the wireless modules in some distros last night and noted that they were about two and a half years obsolete. The modules were for chips that were no longer even made. Ubuntu's better, but the transparent support for native WPA2/AES, etc. isn't there on install. I've never been able to get wireless running properly with any Linux, though I can do it in five (5) minutes with XP. After a while you just get sick of screwing with it.

I'm looking forward to the next (delayed) Ubuntu release because I understand that it will have better support for this stuff.

I want a less labor-intensive Linux. I have real work to do and I consider every hour I spend struggling with any program or OS to get it to do what I need as a chunk of my life wasted, and badly, painfully wasted, forever. I'm sure 95% of experienced computer users feel exactly the same way, never mind what new users feel.

I've been working with computers every day since the Z80 days on CP/M, and I feel that stuff should be simpler and quicker over time. When I'm working with Linux, sometimes I get the creepy feeling it's 1985 again.:-k

jchutcheson
March 14th, 2006, 12:38 AM
You know I thought when I first started to use a computer with windows xp , I thought this is going to be difficult , Well after trying ,trying , I finally got really good with this OS , Now with this Linux OS , All I can say is WOW , There no way in the world will this OS ever get publicize in the normal household family , Its not for the average novice user . Something that should be VERY VERY easy to do , installing java is impossible with this OS , Everyone so far , and I thankful for your time to assist but so far I have seen everyone has different ways to install java , there no one simple way to do this , with step by step instruction , From the begiining to the end ,Everyone seem to just add the methods as to how its done but there no one person yet and I have try to serach for this but none yet that provides from the beginning to the end as to what should be done one at a time like you would find in Windows , So with that being said , Its time for me to pass this OS off and hit back to something that is really simple to use ( Windows xp )

PS: Thanks everyone that try to help !! But its going to be a very long time before it gets recognize as a choice to choose OS :-?

colo
March 14th, 2006, 12:39 AM
It's ok. Now troll elsewhere, genius :)

matthew
March 14th, 2006, 12:44 AM
It's ok. Now troll elsewhere, genius :)Okay...let's be kind as we wish jchutcheson well elsewhere. Play nice, everybody.

Iowan
March 14th, 2006, 12:46 AM
Well, threatening to quit and run back to Windows seems to be a GREAT way to bring people out of the woodwork to convince you otherwise.
installing java is impossible with this OS I suspect you're wrong. I've learned that just because "I" can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done.

matthew: You're right, of course, some of us tire too easily.

nalmeth
March 14th, 2006, 12:53 AM
automatix, automatix, or automatix.. http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=114251
or maybe, easy ubuntu... http://easyubuntu.freecontrib.org/
sigh if this is too difficult for you, then I wonder how you got interested in getting into linux in the first place

sad to see you so discouraged, at such trivial difficulties.
happy trails

jchutcheson
March 14th, 2006, 12:53 AM
It's ok. Now troll elsewhere, genius :)

First off bud i ain't no Troll , If your so smart ? Why don't you provide from the beginning to the end like you would find in windows operating steps that need to be done to install and I mean right from booting up the computer until it finally gets loaded , One step follow by the next until its working , Or maybe i am wrong it is easy but so far I haven't seen any...

darkmaze
March 14th, 2006, 12:57 AM
the ignorant will always be until they open their eyes and see help is over flowing around them. giving up is always the way of ignorance.

matthew
March 14th, 2006, 12:57 AM
First off bud i ain't no Troll , If your so smart ? Why don't you provide from the beginning to the end like you would find in windows operating steps that need to be done to install and I mean right from booting up the computer until it finally gets loaded , One step follow by the next until its working , Or maybe i am wrong it is easy but so far I haven't seen any...Okay, colo wasn't very nice in his post. Let's let it go now, okay? I really don't want to have to wield the "you people can't play nice so I'm locking the thread" power, but I will.

jchutcheson, sorry this hasn't been as easy as you would like. I hope you find something more suited to your needs.

Seriously, everyone, keep it friendly or don't post.

jchutcheson
March 14th, 2006, 12:58 AM
if this is too difficult for you, then I wonder how you got interested in getting into linux in the first place


2 reasons , one to make money from it and the second , because its free , though its not easy to use ....
Mattew I thank you and I am not trying to offend anyone , I am just saying its not for the average Joe

NeghVar
March 14th, 2006, 01:00 AM
If Windows suits his needs then thats great, if Mac OS X is the greatest thing since sliced bread for him then fine. Its all about choice, thats what I see Linux and Ubuntu as, the freedom to chose. I may disagree with his choice, but hey, Linux isn't for everyone.

Good luck with using Xp and such. Glad you found something that you liked, I know I have.

rfruth
March 14th, 2006, 01:05 AM
I suspect this will become a he said she said quickly so I better get my 02 cents worth in now ... XP is easy but dodging all the malware is like a helicopter (ya spend as much time on the ground doing PM as you do flying it) Ubuntu takes more effort but then its easier, does that make sense ? No more Windows for me :)

nalmeth
March 14th, 2006, 01:05 AM
2 reasons , one to make money from it and the second , because its free , ok, so those are some pretty good reasons :D

thought its not easy to use .... I quite disagree here though, is there some reason you can't use automatix? AMD64/PPC user or something?
If so there are definately ways to get your SIMPLE stuff setup, although at first sight it may not look totally simple..
I will grant you that Ubuntu is not as easy as windows.. Ubuntu doesn't cost hundreds of dollars, and for that much Windows had damn well better be easy to use.
I will also grant you that it is easy to be confused by people trying to help you in forums.. Many times I have been led around all kinds of crazy fixes and routes, when there was a much easier solution, and it was right under my nose. People figure things out in their own way, and try to impart what they've learned to others in their own way aswell.
The result is, you learn a lot about how your computer works. Of course, if you don't want/need to know, there are apps like automatix.
The choice is yours --> get dirty with terminal / let someone else do the work for you with automatix

aysiu
March 14th, 2006, 01:07 AM
Use what works for you. I just wish you'd read the sticky first (Is Ubuntu for You?) before wasting your time.

jchutcheson
March 14th, 2006, 01:44 AM
Use what works for you. I just wish you'd read the sticky first (Is Ubuntu for You?) before wasting your time.
You know your right but I did this test on a website which the life of me can't find again but any ways it pointed me to this software , To be honest ? I never knew how many Linux software is out there , You see in my line of work I find used computers all the time and it would be nice to install an simple OS for the average joe could use and I thought this was it but again I know from past experience selling these computers to the average joe , I always had to convince them to buy an Operating system ( Windows ) but now I know that they can use a free software , I figure to learn to see how it works And from the outcome ? There no way the people I sell used computers are going to understand this OS , I have problems explaining to them about Windows never mind this OS , So now I will search on the web for a much easier to use OS which is free , maybe

dvarsam
March 14th, 2006, 01:49 AM
Hello!

I have read your thread & understand your concerns.

Ubuntu is a nice OS & good for somebody who is willing to sacrifice some of his time & effort to learn it.

Indeed, there are many times where it is hard to do stuff...
But I guess this whole community is trying to do its best...

I do NOT suggest that you totally abandon it...
Just give it a try for another week, with patience & effort from your side, and we will try to do our best to help you...
Besides, that is why we are called a "Community"!!!

If worst comes to worst, you can temporarily leave it & wait for either Dapper or some future releases that will probably be more straitforward (to you) & to the whole community...

Do not forget that EVERYBODY is trying to do their best!!!
From programmers, users & support staff!!!

In the END, Ubuntu is goint to be the LEADER...

If it can not work for you currently, it will work for you in the near future.

My Advice:
Keep up your efforts & do NOT surrender...


Hope to hear from you soon...

dvarsam.


P.S.> Do not think that this steep learning curve is easy for me too!...
The older I grow, the harder its going to be for me...
So I prefer to sacrifice some of my time NOW & do better in the future...

P.S.2> I live in Greece.
Do not think that getting support in my Country is easy...
Ubuntu is hardly known here! But I buy some Linux magazines, read
through them, follow this Forum's threads & every single day, try do learn
something new... I even sometimes create some Tutorials to help people
like you to get acqainted faster...
From my side, I try to help people the best way I can & according to my
knowledge I have accrued up to this moment... and I have been using
Ubuntu for only 1,5 month !!!
If you read through some of my posts, YES, I have sometimes been harsh
on Ubuntu too, but in some circumstances I was wrong & did not really
know how to what I really wanted... So, maybe this is the time where I
should apologize to the creators of Ubuntu:

I am really sorry if sometimes I am harst to you guys!
It is only because I lack the knowledge to be able to do stuff...
But I am willing to try & hopefully if you are willing TOO, we could finally
create an OS we could one day be ALL proud of!
Take care!!!

pizzach
March 14th, 2006, 01:52 AM
You know I thought when I first started to use a computer with windows xp , I thought this is going to be difficult , Well after trying ,trying , I finally got really good with this OS , Now with this Linux OS , All I can say is WOW , There no way in the world will this OS ever get publicize in the normal household family , Its not for the average novice user . Something that should be VERY VERY easy to do , installing java is impossible with this OS , Everyone so far , and I thankful for your time to assist but so far I have seen everyone has different ways to install java , there no one simple way to do this , with step by step instruction , From the begiining to the end ,Everyone seem to just add the methods as to how its done but there no one person yet and I have try to serach for this but none yet that provides from the beginning to the end as to what should be done one at a time like you would find in Windows , So with that being said , Its time for me to pass this OS off and hit back to something that is really simple to use ( Windows xp )

PS: Thanks everyone that try to help !! But its going to be a very long time before it gets recognize as a choice to choose OS :-?
I didn't find installing java difficult. :-k

jchutcheson
March 14th, 2006, 01:59 AM
Yes I like thank everyone who has help with me and with others , I am grateful honestly but , You have to admit for someone that has never used Linux before and has only used xp that this software can be very frustrating , Yes you are correct Dvarsam that I do need to be patience and maybe you are right that i do need to walk away from it for a while to cool down ...

IYY
March 14th, 2006, 02:02 AM
Installing Java in Ubuntu? Difficult? There are two steps:

1. download the automatix script
2. run the automatix script and select 'Java'

This made you give up on the OS?

az
March 14th, 2006, 02:22 AM
I always send people to the Restricted formats wiki page so they get standardised advice.

As for "But its going to be a very long time before it gets recognize as a choice to choose OS "

You are most definitely wrong. Sorry someone gave you bad advice. I'm also sorry that java is proprietary and that makes it a little harder to install from the repos.

You know, in 2001, Microsoft and Sun had a falling out and anyone who installed windows98 that year would have to jump through a whole bunch of hoops when they clicked on a java link in IE5 for the first time.

Anyone remember that?

maddog39
March 14th, 2006, 02:26 AM
I sort of agree with him. Installing programs is a huge pain, every other main stream OS, Linspire, Mac, Windows, all have auto-installers or easy ways to install applications. Pfftt... on mac you just download a program and drag the .app file to where ever u want it and double click. On windows you have an installer .exe that you download and auto-installs the programs, moves files, runs all the command for you. On Linspire, a paid, however cheap linux distro, the easiest distro you can get, has a program which takes linux tars and auto-installs them also. I also agree with what he said that this OS (or any other distro) is not for the novice user, and its not, you just have to face the reality of it. Its also a pain to install and some hardware isnt supported, etc, etc. Although i dont quit as easily because i went through 2 weeks of troubles just to get Ubuntu to boot to the desktop. :S

woedend
March 14th, 2006, 02:31 AM
surely you don't mean the java runtime environment? Takes me 2 clicks. One to mark for installation, and one to apply. If you want an in depth way of doing these things, check out http://stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_4_installation_notes.html. Keep in mind that isn't for ubuntu, but the methodologies work fine(ie ignore anything telling you to install an rpm and double check directories)

aysiu
March 14th, 2006, 02:31 AM
Pfftt... on mac you just download a program and drag the .app file to where ever u want it and double click. Coming from years of Windows experience, I did not find this an intuitive way to install applications: go through the setup wizard, find a white disk icon, open that white disk icon, drag whatever's inside to the applications folder. Huh?


On windows you have an installer .exe that you download and auto-installs the programs, moves files, runs all the command for you. What's wonderful about Windows is that almost everyone who packages software follows this .exe model.

It doesn't get much easier than Synaptic Package Manager, though. The issue of "difficulty" comes up only when one wants to install software outside of the repositories.


Its also a pain to install and some hardware isnt supported, etc, etc. Same could be said for Windows. Of course, few people actually install Windows.

Can someone buy a Ubuntu computer from http://www.system76.com, use it for a while, install Windows on it as a dual boot and then try to tell me which one is "easier"?

darkwarrior0404
March 14th, 2006, 02:40 AM
Well, I was a hardcore microsoft guy.. and at first Linux was frustrating and I didn't know what anyone in here was talking about, but I'm on here alot and read/ask questions and experiment around with the terminal.. and I'm slowly getting used to it, windows is easy, but i also find learning linux to be a bit.. oh i duno.. "Addicting"? lol i suggest giving it one more shot with some of the links they give, they are great and explain in great detail it took me a couple days to figure out how to install a driver for a soundcard, and i figured it out, but the soundcard isnt compatible, BUT i do know how to do it once i get a new one :) give it another shot it cant hurt :mrgreen: I love it, and the support from everyone is great too : )

aysiu
March 14th, 2006, 02:46 AM
Any Linux OS has at least two strikes against it (if not three, four, or more):

1. It's almost never preinstalled on the machine of the user who's trying it.

2. Its methods and interface are usually wholly unfamiliar to the user who's trying it.

For some interesting reading, check out this article (http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxvwindows.php) I wrote about my first experiences with Linux. In October 2004, I wrote the original article, and the responses to that article (in bold) I wrote in September 2005 to myself.

A lot of my reservations about desktop Linux stemmed from sheer ignorance.

az
March 14th, 2006, 02:48 AM
Although i dont quit as easily because i went through 2 weeks of troubles just to get Ubuntu to boot to the desktop. :S


Why?


http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/freesoftware/20060109-00.html
"It's been interesting to see non-hackers finding inspiration in the free/open source software movement. In particular, I've been watching this phenomena for a couple years in the the non-profit and NGO sector. Folks in these groups are often very philosophically aligned with the freedom movement behind free software and there are a number of organizations that are involved in promoting free software and the ideas behind it to NGOs and beyond."

...

"It's nice when taking a principled position also means you get to do what is most convenient. But there's little principle in taking a principled position only when it's convenient."

WoodyMahan
March 14th, 2006, 02:55 AM
Been on Ubuntu for a few days now and I am having to study like crazy. Linux, simply put, is not windows. It looks a little like windows, but it definitely does not act or operate like windows. I am as frustrated as the next convert, but I am finding myself capable of following a lot of the conversations and documentation by this point (I may have a little more time than some to study). It's just a matter of adjusting to the new interface. Some people may not have the time to put into it. Certainly doesn't mean it isn't user friendly, but there are things conceptually that have to be changed in your approach to this OS. I believe that if you really want to dedicate yourself to it, you may be glad you did in the end.

abu-fatu
March 14th, 2006, 03:07 AM
i will tell you from personal experience that ubuntu is worth learning. i had some problems in the beggining mostly with sound but after installing a sound card (pci) ubuntu picked it up right away, printing was just as easy, my external cdr drive was recogniced as soon as i plugged it in, for word proccessing abi-word and neo office suffice, i can play all of my mp3s with any nuber of players amarok,mmx,etc...
my digital camera was recognised instantly iam given the choice to import or not,i am able to play the movies filmed with the camera in mplayer or totem i can burn cds with the system burner or gnomebaker, i can dable in website desing with nvu wich is not bad i have not yet tried the other programming software but iam willing to learn, the gimp will never be photoshop wich i use on my mac os x but it suffices for basic stuff and more if i knew it as i do ps as for games i dont really use my pc for games wich are best played on a xbox or playsstation. so with ubuntu i can
1.surf the web : firefox.
2.email: thunderbird.
3.write a letter : abiword noeoffice.
4.desing a bussines card or flyer : glabels.
5.print.
6.view my pictures and movies: guewnview,mplayer.
7.listen to my cds: amarok etc..
and iam sure much more.
and the best thing it is all free.

for me it is not a thing between windows or else because i have not used windows
in years thanks to mac os and now ubuntu. so please stick with it if an idiot like me can make it work you can also. good luck

Buffalo Soldier
March 14th, 2006, 03:09 AM
You know I thought when I first started to use a computer with windows xp , I thought this is going to be difficult , Well after trying ,trying , I finally got really good with this OS , Now with this Linux OS , All I can say is WOW , There no way in the world will this OS ever get publicize in the normal household family , Its not for the average novice user . Something that should be VERY VERY easy to do , installing java is impossible with this OS , Everyone so far , and I thankful for your time to assist but so far I have seen everyone has different ways to install java , there no one simple way to do this , with step by step instruction , From the begiining to the end ,Everyone seem to just add the methods as to how its done but there no one person yet and I have try to serach for this but none yet that provides from the beginning to the end as to what should be done one at a time like you would find in Windows , So with that being said , Its time for me to pass this OS off and hit back to something that is really simple to use ( Windows xp )

PS: Thanks everyone that try to help !! But its going to be a very long time before it gets recognize as a choice to choose OS :-?First, no matter what other people might say... for me, I think it takes a lot of guts to try learning a 2nd or new OS. You should be proud that at least you gave it a try :)

Perhaps months or years from now you will muster the courage to try it again. And when that happens... just remember that mostly everyone here did not use Linux or Ubuntu as their first OS. Everyone was a first timer before and went thru the same hardship. So eventhough you may read some harsh words in here... believe me, most here understand what you're going thru.

Lastly, all the best in your endevour, safe computing and visit us in here once in a while.

GreyFox503
March 14th, 2006, 03:12 AM
Can someone buy a Ubuntu computer from http://www.system76.com, use it for a while, install Windows on it as a dual boot and then try to tell me which one is "easier"?
Heh. I'd never thought about it that way.

Last time I checked, installing Windows will obliterate whatever is on the MBR of your drive without asking or notifying you, booting only Windows. Then it's your job to install GRUB again. That's not very user-friendly.

And then you'd have to visit each hardware manufacturer's site to download drivers. And Windows Update, several times. And don't forget, you don't have many useful applications, so you'll need to download OpenOffice and GIMP yourself.

Throw down some anti-virus and anti-spyware, and the whole process will take you a good 20 reboots. I just had an experience updating a brand-new Dell computer, which required about 12 reboots for updating McAfee alone! I am not kidding.

somerville32
March 14th, 2006, 03:16 AM
"You got to admit it's getting better, all the time - oh yeah!"

Jucato
March 14th, 2006, 03:52 AM
Hmm... simple question:
Why give up with this OS based only based on experience with Ubuntu?
Ubuntu is a distro. Linux is the OS.
Seems that what you are looking for mostly are propriety codecs. There are distros out there that include these by default (just not sure about java).

But really, to say "I hate ice cream" just because you didn't like the chocolate flavor...

Oh, and I recommend you do a bit of research before hand. If you did, you'd probably know that Ubuntu doesn't ship propriety codecs as a matter of principle, that this is not Linux's fault at all, and that there are other distros out there that will probably cater to your needs.

About Windows being easy to install (pre-install, installation proper, and post-installation), I've seen/been through installations of almost all Windows versions (3.1, 3.11, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP) and I can say that it certainly isn't easier. Most people find it "easier" because 1) Windows came pre-installed or had an OEM "restore" disk, or 2) the hardware was made to "play nice" with Windows. Neither of this can be blamed on Linux, though.

az_human
March 14th, 2006, 04:10 AM
I'm sure that the input I am about to give is nothing original, but here it is anyway:

There must be some type of purpose behind converting from a Windows user to a Linux user; even if that purpose is nothing but pure interest. Other times that purpose may be to immerse yourself into a stable and secure environment that is immune to many of the ailments such as viruses and other malicious software that affects Windows. In my case, I do a lot of work with PHP and MySQL. In all of my experience, Linux works beautifully for this type of development environment. Windows doesn't even come close.

No matter what the purpose for the conversion is, it must be a persistent determination to make it work. Be ready for a learning curve! Be ready for frustration! It is an entirely different operating system than Windows! Just because it has a graphical user interface that is in some ways similar to Windows doesn't mean that it is either meant to or is planned to work as Windows does! By fooling yourself into believing this, it will only be that much more difficult for you in the long run.

I started messing with Linux when Red Hat was at version 5.0. At the time, I worked in a small computer repair shop fixing PC's and building new ones. This was my first job in "the field". Anything geeky I could get my hands on and investigate -- I was there. Out of the box with minimal assistance from documentation, I could install Red Hat and configure my modem for an internet connection... but past that -- Yuck! I wasn't very aware of all the different window managers and how they worked... but it looked NASTY! Hardware support? Don't even think about it. I was using Windows 98 at the time (vomit) and was not about to give that up for this foreign and nasty looking beast.

Fast-forward a couple of years... I believe it was Mandrake that I tried next -- Version 7 I believe. Wow! I couldn't believe the changes I saw in the appearance of the overall Linux presentation. Many more things worked "out of the box" that a would make a Windows convert more comfortable in this foreign environment. Still, there were odds and ends that made me come back to Windows. Fast forward a couple of years to Fedora Core 2(?) and Mandrake 10... both of them greatly improved from their predecessors once again!

Question: Who could NOT be interested in this great operating system and the massive changes ongoing?

Answer: Those who believe Linux is trying to imitate Windows. Those who believe that LInux has no chance unless it strives to imitate Windows.

I once held that mindset. I believed that if a Windows user could not come over seamlessly that it wouldn't stand a chance.

Years later, here I am in Ubuntu as my primary OS with Windows ONLY in a VMWare image for any odd item I may need it for. It has taken me years and plenty of headaches and frustration to achieve my little spot in the LInux world, but here I am... and I continue to learn each and every day. I continue to struggle with the differences... but for me, it is all worth it. I have a great development environment. My OS has an AWESOME support community at Ubuntu Forums. My OS is secure and stable. My OS is OPEN SOURCE. My OS is FREE.

Sorry for blabbering. I just wanted to share my views and limited experience.

bobpur
March 14th, 2006, 04:12 AM
I see someone finally got around to voicing the frustration I've been feeling lately. That makes me feel better. I've been stumbling through the Linux learning process for about 5 months and was beginning to feel like "One step forward and slide back two." Oh Well, I leave on business in a day or so (With a bunch of printed "How to's" and Whatnot). Maybe getting away from the computer for awhile is what I need. In a month or two when I get back, It'll make more sense.(Yeah! Right!)

NeghVar
March 14th, 2006, 04:24 AM
I don't know, comng from being a major Windows user since Windows 95 and having worked with them all up to XP pro I kind of like the command line with Linux. No matter what the problem is, there is probably a CLI fix that doesnt matter what GUI frontend you use for something.

And Synaptic, thats genious really, just go in and do a search for something and install it. Add that with the minimal Virus, Spyware issue and you have a really nice concept. Plus its free, they will even send you the discs without charge. I don't have to "reactivate" when I make a change in hardware. I don't have to deal with those update solitaire restart your computer.

I would honestly say that Ubuntu is eaiser than Windows, and I've only been using it for a few days now.

az_human
March 14th, 2006, 04:24 AM
In a month or two when I get back, It'll make more sense.(Yeah! Right!)

That's exactly how it worked for me... not to say I'm some Linux genius -- I'm far, FAR from that, but I have become comfortable enough to use it as my primary OS now. Finally! If you have enough determination, patience and the willingness to accept the new environment then you can make it happen!

ladofnod
March 14th, 2006, 04:38 AM
I am 23 and have used Windows since I was 7 or 8. I'm not the most tech savvy person, but I do pride myself on the knowledge I do have. Dec '06 a series of Windows problems destroyed years worth of music recordings of mine. This ticked me off to say the least. Linux will be hard at first for anyone used to the other OS's. The same thing could be said about anything though. I play guitar, but that doesnt I can expect to pick up a violin and play it well within a short period of time, "just because I play another stringed instrument".

My belief is that if anyone sticks to Linux long enough, the long term results are far more in value than if they were to stick solely to Windows. But that's just my opinion. Windows laid the ground work for many awesome things, Linux is a strange non-derivative that used the models of Windows as a base of ease of function. Mr Gates and Mr Apple-folks have fed this idea for years into our culture. Watch the 1984 Apple commericial for any reminders.

Linux is slowly but surely going to feed another mentality. Now that we can transfer data over several mediums efficiently (wire,disc,hf) computers have a great deal of potential. They will always get faster and more efficient with data. But what do we do when we can store a petabyte on a dime and render any video on screens without a lack of hardware? Linux seems to be going in the right direction. Once we can do anything with any computer Linux will solve problems.

Let me pose a question: If a computer is nearly infinite in speed, and storage is never a question, then who can you trust? Microsoft (security problems up the wazoo) or Linux (easily maintained security).

My answer is I don't want my personal information to be stored on such a computer if at all possible. Then we'd have Citibank problems times a million.

Stick with Linux for a while, it's worth it.

jchutcheson
March 14th, 2006, 05:14 AM
Well thanks to Griff for telling me about " Automatix " has solve my problem , This program was easy to install , easy to select other programs , Now this is what I was looking for , simple

when it comes to using the terminal to load the program ? It seem that the command line or whatever isn't working ..

BTW My experience with computers only goes as far back to windows xp , thats it , No dos , or 98 or whatever , just xp and it can't get any easier to install from a retail disk , not preinstall , I find a retail is to easy ...

Any ways thanks to all that has help and for those other ones ? I never take anything personally , no matter what they say , think about it , why would you ?

Jucato
March 14th, 2006, 05:25 AM
when it comes to using the terminal to load the program ? It seem that the command line or whatever isn't working ...

What program are you trying to load? How is the command line not working. Anyone would be happy to help you, if you would take the time to provide the details. You'll find that people here are very willing to help.

I must warn you though. Ubuntu is not really your typical point-and-click Linux distribution. While it does offer many graphical alternatives to doing things, you might, at one time or another, have to use the CLI (Command Line Interface as opposed to the GUI or Graphical User Interface). It may not necessarily be a bad thing, as you will increase your knowledge about Linux. But it might not be something you want.

If you are coming completely from a Windows XP background, there are distributions out there that would make your transition to Linux a bit easier. I've heard that PCLinuxOS is one such distro.


Any ways thanks to all that has help and for those other ones ? I never take anything personally , no matter what they say , think about it , why would you ?

Btw, my comments were not directed at you. :D

I hope you enjoy your stay! :D

Bandit
March 14th, 2006, 07:17 AM
I've been working with computers every day since the Z80 days on CP/M, and I feel that stuff should be simpler and quicker over time. When I'm working with Linux, sometimes I get the creepy feeling it's 1985 again.
1985 = Good ole days :D

EwwBunToo
March 14th, 2006, 07:19 AM
I too have found this not to be the "easiest" OS to work with.. then again, my earlier computers came pre-installed with Windows. I can truthfully say this much... time to install XP home with SP2 and updates.. about 2 hours, time to install Ubuntu, about 75 minutes, this being on a P3 667 w/ 128M. Drivers are a b**** to find for XP at times... I've not ran into a driver issue in linux YET... I'm sure my day shall come and I'll be letting loose a string that'll make a sailor cringe. In addition to XP SP2 there are still several more tweaks to put in place before I will send a customer's machine home... this taking a couple more hours.

This is not you Wal-Mart buyer's OS. You need to be able to rub a couple of brain cells together to use this. I'm still in the dark with this one, but I do see the light ahead, and they don't want $25 per incedent to get there.

warbux
March 14th, 2006, 07:47 AM
I just read post from beginning to end..very humorous, anyways.. I find it odd you started out trolling and "Automatix" made you stay with Ubuntu..I guess thats the Catch 22 with Linux, Why do we, as windows users choose to go with Linux? Me personally..I was fed up with Windows and I am a security auditor for a major corporation and Linux was something I had to learn to succeed! I by no means have anything against Windows though, it just wasn't cutting it for me anymore. I could seriously talk to you for hours about how many times I've applied patches for Windows various OS's compared to the amount on Open source ones (AIX,Solaris, all Linux Distros etc..I really would like too, so if you want to talk, PM me! :mrgreen:) I now use it for work and play..I am learning new things here everyday and the community is by far the nicest group I have ever came across on the internet (im 21 now, been using the internet for 11 years..as far back as when BBS systems were popular)

What I am trying to get at basically is..don't look at Linux like the red headed step child that a lot of people already do. Back in 1999, I wanted to jump into Linux and decided to attempt to install Red Hat..it was the most hassle ever! NOTHING was supported, and that put a very sour taste in my mouth for open source..Finally, 7 years later I decided to give it a go again..and I am so happy that I did.

mrgnash
March 14th, 2006, 08:09 AM
I sort of agree with him. Installing programs is a huge pain, every other main stream OS, Linspire, Mac, Windows, all have auto-installers or easy ways to install applications. Pfftt... on mac you just download a program and drag the .app file to where ever u want it and double click. On windows you have an installer .exe that you download and auto-installs the programs, moves files, runs all the command for you. On Linspire, a paid, however cheap linux distro, the easiest distro you can get, has a program which takes linux tars and auto-installs them also. I also agree with what he said that this OS (or any other distro) is not for the novice user, and its not, you just have to face the reality of it. Its also a pain to install and some hardware isnt supported, etc, etc. Although i dont quit as easily because i went through 2 weeks of troubles just to get Ubuntu to boot to the desktop. :S

Compiling from source is about as difficult as it gets. But the times I've only done this once or twice on my system, and that was to try alpha or beta software -- something that your average user would likely not want to touch anyway.

But the other install methods? Easy.

CVS and SVN releases are probably the hardest thing after compiling from source yourself, but even then they're automated with scripts that virtually anyone who takes a little time to familiarize themselves with the CLI should have no difficulty with. But once again, these are only for lovers of bleeding-edge, not average desktop users.

Untarring to the /opt/ directory =
tar -c /opt/ -xvf filename.tar.bz2 - this is the method for installing Firefox 1.5 from Mozilla.org, and I'd argue that it's hardly difficult. Or for programs like Last.FM it's just a matter of extracting the binary for the program to a location in your home folder.

Then there's installing via binaries. Contrary to popular mythology, Linux does have installation programs, similar to .exes under Windows. I installed Deer Park Alpha and Seamonkey this way. Once again, very easy.

Apt-get =
apt-get install application automated and easy. Synaptic makes the process even easier.

And of course, if all of these methods are too hard for you, there's always Automatix. For anything harder than this, there are tonnes of how-tos and helpful users on this very forum. I don't see what the problem is, honestly.

MrDan
March 14th, 2006, 08:53 AM
For me, Linux is a lot like an old car in the garage that you work on as a project. I mean, I currently haven't the foggiest idea what half the stuff does and sometimes get so frustrated at it that I fantasize(sp?) about different and creative ways to "do my computer in":twisted:

I tinker with linux on my machine but we still have WinXP on the other box (Although I have a spare HD with Ubuntu Breezyon it that I change to when I feel like playing with more power) I learn stuff not to do by doing it. Like messing with stuff without backing up. (Bad idea!) Right now I am playng with dapper as the primary OS as I don't have much at stake on my box. It wouldn't be that much of a pain to re-install. But as absolutly haked off I get at this computer, I still persist. Call me saddistic.

My 2 cents.

nocturn
March 14th, 2006, 08:58 AM
Well, threatening to quit and run back to Windows seems to be a GREAT way to bring people out of the woodwork to convince you otherwise. I suspect you're wrong. I've learned that just because "I" can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done.

matthew: You're right, of course, some of us tire too easily.

If you add the PLF repositories, adding Java is as easy as using synaptic. It eliminate the need for third party tools like Automatix.

Huggy
March 14th, 2006, 09:00 AM
I love Linux, and once you learn how to use it. It's like having all the freedom Windows never let you have. So now, I have a killer machine that has the capability to do many things, at 1/15th the cost of having a Windows machine and all it's crappy software.

As far as Ubuntu goes, I'm just getting into it. It's my first time playing with Debian, but it's a great learning experience.

spnkybnky
March 14th, 2006, 10:28 AM
Just loaded this today on my 8 year old pc to see what I could do with it. I retired and now I have time to experiment with other systems. My other machine is an XP machine as I still work part time and unfortunately, the programs I need only run on windows or a windows emulator.

I hate to see someone giving up after a short time. I began on a DOS 1.2 machine (yes I am an old guy) and I remember friends of mine saying that about DOS. The work needed do things is not unlike those days and I am having fun. I will be back for advice as I have not figured out much yet. It looks like there will be plenty of info here (like how the heck to get to a command line). I am going to replace this computer soon and I was thinking of building my own and using an OS on it other than Windows. I still will have to integrate it into the Windows world so I can conduct business on it as well. The big issue is being able to load a printer driver that can identify the letter and legal trays on my Brother printers. I print a lot of loan documents and it needs to automatically print between those two sizes. The driver in Ubuntu won't do that (or I haven't figured it out yet) Oh well, it's only been 4 hours since I loaded Ubuntu, so at least I have it printing . Thanks in advance for your help.

_simon_
March 14th, 2006, 10:48 AM
As far as my OS history goes it's like this...

Workbench (Amiga), Dos, Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 98SE, XP Pro. I've had a brief encounter with ME *shudder* and used NT/2000.

In the past I have "tried" SuSe and Red Hat. I was trying these on an old spare machine and had numerous problems with the built in graphics and I gave up. I ordered some Ubuntu CD's just before I gave up. A month later the CD's arrive in the post, I'd already junked the spare pc so the only way to give Ubuntu a try was to install it on my main pc. After googling the distribution and finding this forum I felt it worth my time to give Linux one last try. To my complete joy it installed without a single hitch, I wished i had tried SuSe and Red Hat on my main machine rather than an old one as I think I would have had more luck.

This was 4 months ago and I now use Ubuntu daily, it's my main OS on my home pc. I do dual boot XP as many games will not run in Linux which is the only reason XP remains on my machine.

I've cursed and sworn many times and resorted to reinstalling Ubuntu twice but it's been worth it. I've learnt from my mistakes and now know how to recover if i mess up rather than reinstalling.

I've seen a few posts comparing the ubuntu install to the windows one. I don't think either are complicated in any way. The windows one does take longer as it requires more user input. I guess it depends how many times you have had to install an OS - you soon get used to what needs doing.

I know I still have a lot to learn but I feel comfortable with Ubuntu and it currently does almost everything I need it to do. I say almost due to gaming :( The day I can install and run F.E.A.R. without a hitch i will be removing XP!

therunnyman
March 14th, 2006, 11:28 AM
Hi All,

The Big Bummer of Linux strikes again: it's fantastic once you're done fiddling, but you have to learn to fiddle, which is extraordinarily challenging (ask any bluegrass violin player). Add to that many of us come from GUIs, and haven't seen a command line (or haven't seen a command line since '98 or thereabouts, and then, only rarely).

Choosing to leave the mainstream is never easy, but it is ultimately worthwhile. I mean, where would we be if Thomas Jefferson or Abbie Hoffman wore ties to work?

therunnyman

Max Roswell
March 14th, 2006, 03:56 PM
If you want Linux to be successful, adopt the Macintosh-credo. Sell machines with preinstalled Linux (e.g. Ubuntu, Mandriva, Fedora or SUSE) with all plugins included and sell hardware (printers, scanners,...) that is 100% compatible with the system you sell out of the box in your store. Then add some marketing "horray", tell everything is Linux-certified/designed for Linux and you have a chance to make a small impact on the market.

This makes a lot of sense. I don't know that there's any way to implement any sort of official "Linux-Certified" campaign, but you're definitely heading in the right direction.

skirkpatrick
March 14th, 2006, 04:16 PM
To get a command window:
Use the menu Applications->Accessories->Terminal


As far as Java and a lot of the other things that Automatix will install, I went to System->Help and clicked on Ubuntu 5.10 Starter Guide.

Brunellus
March 14th, 2006, 04:18 PM
Hi All,

The Big Bummer of Linux strikes again: it's fantastic once you're done fiddling, but you have to learn to fiddle, which is extraordinarily challenging (ask any bluegrass violin player). Add to that many of us come from GUIs, and haven't seen a command line (or haven't seen a command line since '98 or thereabouts, and then, only rarely).

Choosing to leave the mainstream is never easy, but it is ultimately worthwhile. I mean, where would we be if Thomas Jefferson or Abbie Hoffman wore ties to work?

therunnyman
TJ did wear a tie to work...after a fashion. You should be asking about Tom Paine, really.

Bandit
March 14th, 2006, 04:30 PM
This makes a lot of sense. I don't know that there's any way to implement any sort of official "Linux-Certified" campaign, but you're definitely heading in the right direction.
It does make sense. Matter of fact I was looking to do the same with Ubuntu.
Only problem is nVidia has the better cards and if I remember correctly thier (nVidia) license agree ment will not allow for a retailor to pre-install the linux drivers for the consumer.

Cheers,
Joey

EDIT: Looks like I will have to correct myself.. I went to find the license and noticed it no longer has that clause in it anymore. Or at least I dont see it anymore.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/nv_swlicense.html

jam'ez
March 14th, 2006, 05:33 PM
I have used windows for a long time now, i have had 3.2, 95, 98, 2000, xp home, xp pro, server Nt, 2000 Server, and even got 2003 Server.
Now i have Ubuntu i hardly use windows!
I have had ubuntu since 5.04 and now running daper.
I think all the installing of programmes is some what a challenge and normally is easy...
Its all good fun, and after a while with most things it becomes second nature.
I cant remember the amount of times i have had to battle with Adaware, virus, spyware etc. its a constant on going nightmare with windows, but linux there NOTHING. :D
Life in the long run is alot easier. i prefer ubuntu anyday over windows and at the start of using ubuntu i thought the same, whats the point of this when windows is so easy. but you learn everything as you go along. and ubuntu forums is the best, your so much help too.
i dont think i will buy another windows again! EVER! :)
Any problem i see as a challenge, in the end its all good fun to be honest!

People shoudnt give up so easy i think, in the end there is no contest in which OS is better. LINUX!

az
March 14th, 2006, 06:24 PM
I think there are three things that are relevant to this issue:

1. This software used to be really really hard to use. Just five years ago, debian LInux was regarded as the linux distribution that was the hardest to install. Now it powers ubuntu which is recognised to be the distro that most people seem to get love from.

2. It is a goal to improve the user experience. This goal is working out really well. From someone who has been using GNU/linux for a number of years, the pace at which the functionality and ease of use is increasing is breathtaking.
Gnome put in place guidelines which improve the human being's ability to use a computer. That is paying off. Many people recognise that gnome is more intuitive and easier to use than other desktop enviroments.

3. This is free-libre software. The one thing that distinguishes this OS from Mac OS or Windows is that it is gpl-compatible free-libre software. You get the freedom to know what you computer is doing and the ability to improve it and pass it along.
This is the reason why so many talented people have contributed to this software. They are committed to software freedom (software is not property)
The downside of that developmental model is that sometimes less-common problems take longer to get reported and fixed. The fact that some software is not redistributeable because of licencing incompatibilities with free software is another facet which will change along with the software landscape.

jjf
March 14th, 2006, 07:35 PM
I think the original poster's frustrations are not unusual, are well founded, and ought to be heeded more by the Linux community.

Debates over which OS is "easier" objectively speaking (that is, to someone with no prior Windows experience) are missing the point. The vast majority of Linux converts will be prior Windows users. To be fair, they cannot expect Linux to be "Windows, but free"; but the Linux community does need to listen to where they're frustrated and try to improve those areas.

Compare the "out of the box" experience of your fresh Windows install and your fresh Linux install. I just bought a Thinkpad T23 that came preloaded with WinXP. I booted into XP just to be sure that everything worked as expected, and it did. Then I shrank XP's partition to a paltry 6 GB (enough for a game or two, I figured) and installed Linux.

Here's what didn't work out of the box (that is, after successful install including Automatix):
- wireless card (2 days to configure, and I still have to manually edit a file whenever I want to join a new SSID)
- printing to my inkjet (a couple hours of researching to find the right driver)
- DVD playback (a couple hours to get it working at all, a few more hours to fix the jerkiness, and I'm still stuck using Totem because VLC won't work)
- Internet video & audio
- a weird Gnome bug where I cannot change the "Open With" setting of a file

I know that there are plenty of reasons why these don't work with Linux, most of them involving unfair practices used by the industry. But that doesn't matter to the average user. These are things he expects to work because they work automatically under Windows. The user forgets that he's got a load of free software pre-installed and no need to worry about spyware and viruses, but people tend to remember the bad experiences. Just how it is.

I love Ubuntu, and I don't mind spending time learning how to get it working, but I can understand the new user's frustration with things that used to work under Windows but don't anymore, and with learning a new way to install programs. Mac OSX does the best job of that, IMO. It is incredibly intuitive to just drag the application icon to my Applications directory. Synaptic can be simple, but remember that it requires adding repositories, often throws frightening errors (can't stat source package ...), and doesn't always place the newly installed program in your menus. And installing a program that isn't in the repos is a nightmare for a newbie.

IMO, for Linux to gain a wider following, it needs simplified (preferably graphical) installation, better hardware support, and non-free codecs. There's not much anyone can do about the last two, but I think progress is being made with the first.

knalle
March 14th, 2006, 07:37 PM
installing java is impossible with this OS , Everyone so far , and I thankful for your time to assist but so far I have seen everyone has different ways to install java , there no one simple way to do this

thats to bad you can't get java to work for you, you may slam the door when you leave...

aysiu
March 14th, 2006, 07:50 PM
In other words, jjf, most of what's stopping Linux from being adopted is not Linux's fault, but people who encounter difficulties have a point when blaming Linux...?

No, you do have a point. In some ways, it doesn't make sense to talk about things that are impractical (finding these mythical people who are migrating to Linux with no Windows experience--maybe Linux users' children make up most of this category), but if we're going to be practical, we should just tell people up front:

Installing an operating system is an endeavor.
Using a new operating system will give you some culture shock.
Combining the two may be too much for you to handle!

For more information, read The Chinese Language is not "Ready for the Desktop." (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=120489)

knalle
March 14th, 2006, 07:57 PM
In other words, jjf, most of what's stopping Linux from being adopted is not Linux's fault, but people who encounter difficulties have a point when blaming Linux...?

yeah i don't see ho the OP is right, i do agree that Linux isn't easy peasy, and i am one of those idiot windows users that have switched and met the culture show, and i too had enormous problesm getting sun java into my linux.

BUT, i found good howto's and wiki's on the subject so i was able to solve if after a while, OP seems to want everything put in his lap without any effort and thats not fair to linux and opensource imo, plenty people figured out how to get java running, just not OP

if this was a comerical product i would agree wholeheartly with OP, but Linux is free, and Op is free to chose something else

therunnyman
March 14th, 2006, 08:09 PM
TJ did wear a tie to work...after a fashion. You should be asking about Tom Paine, really.

Yeah, yeah. Point being, you can pick your ties, and you can pick your nose, but you can't pick your tie's nose. Or your cravat's nose, for that matter. Or Paine's or Jefferson's cravat's nose.

az
March 14th, 2006, 09:19 PM
IMO, for Linux to gain a wider following, it needs simplified (preferably graphical) installation, better hardware support, and non-free codecs. There's not much anyone can do about the last two, but I think progress is being made with the first.

1. The Espresso installer rocks. Wait a few weeks!
2. Better hardware support comes with greater market share. Market share is increasing exponentially.
3. If Mark Shuttleworth were to appear on the Oprah Winfrey show and talk about software freedom, I am sure the "after the show" links would start to offer ogg along with WMP and RealPlayer. Again, it's a question of marketshare. It's the chicken and the egg and by spreading Ubuntulinux (free cds = not a dumb idea, kick-*** free support, involved commuity, etc...) we are all trying to lay some eggs although we are not chickens (ouch!)


it doesn't make sense to talk about things that are impractical (finding these mythical people who are migrating to Linux with no Windows experience--maybe Linux users' children make up most of this category

Klaus Knopper once said in an interview that he disliked windows but that was because he had never used it.

My babysitter is another another example of someone who never used a computer before, but needs something to correspond via email with some people. Ubuntu is the best choice for someone like her.

Papa-san
March 15th, 2006, 02:44 AM
Ya know... I can understand the frustration this person has expressed. (And, YES I am STILL banging my head against the wall here) I guess the main difference here is the way linux has been and is being built: there is no big- for profit corporation behind it all. Support isn't going to be a consistent 'beginning to end' thing. Most of it comes from good-hearted people who understand the difficulties, and try to help. Those suggestions are not always going to help, and I think this is the crux of this person's issue. There is NO 'easy' fix. (But I hear there are a lot of people working on that!)

I wiped win XP off my hard drive less than two weeks ago, and am completely serious about the fact that I will throw my laptop in the trash before I go back to it.

For those of us with the 'Plug 'n Play' mentality, this OS is very confusing. Microsoft has put together packages that virtually 'idiot-proof' most installations. Plus, most of the time there is an 800 number you can call if the installations aren't 'Papa-san proof' \\:D/

However, not everyone who tries it is going to research it and keep trying. I myself have managed to screw it up enought to make it less functional than when I first started crying in these forums. (hehehe!) However, I am still learning, and I am saving all the vital information I think I will need on disc and/or on my off-site server, so that it will be easy enough to get at it again when I re-install this distro.

MetalMusicAddict
March 15th, 2006, 03:04 AM
Every time threads like this come up I wonder "Why do people need to announce that their leaving?".

If its an attempt to get help why not just post on what you need help with?

wdbreen
March 15th, 2006, 10:00 AM
As you can see i've only had one cup of Ubuntu! Two weeks it has been installed and i'm loving it. The other day, i installed Frostwire and it didnt work until Java was installed. It wasnt that bad. I went to the package manager, marked j2re1.4 and applied the changes.
Java was installed and Frostwire took off.
Please reconsider, try Linux and then spread the word

Breeny

meborc
March 15th, 2006, 10:46 AM
i disagree to the point made here earlier as the linux developers should listen to people migrating from windows and making it more *convenient* for them...

i don't want to be hard, but if you don't like the linux way, use windows... there is a choise... don't chose milk and try to change it to icecream, when you could have chosen the icecream in the first place...

the *love* i feel towards linux is the love towards linux way, which is different from the windows way... i love cli and i love the complecity of the system... if you take that away from me i have to move to slackware :???:

so - learn the linux way and be proud, or use windows... the whole community helps you (newcomers), but if you just come to make suggestions to change everything to windows... well... it grinds my gears :evil:

EDIT: just read my post... hope it doesn't sound too strickt :D ... just my thoughts about migrating from windows... the question is... why migrate when you love it already... ?

dvarsam
March 15th, 2006, 11:14 AM
Hello All !!!

I hope I can help with some input:


Quote by "azz":
"...Now ubuntu which is recognised to be the distro that most people seem to get love from..."

True, very True !!!

Quote by "azz":
"...sometimes less-common problems take longer to get reported and fixed..."

(suppose I agree), but then when the community grows a lot, you are going to get to the other end - there are going to be SO many reports, that it is going to take forever to fix... and everybody is going to END up reading a HUGE pile of problems reported...

Quote by "jjf":
"...Compare the "out of the box" experience of your fresh Windows install and your fresh Linux install..."

Well, for something you get for FREE, you better appreciate what you are getting.

WE DO NOT WANT THE UBUNTU PROGRAMMERS TO WORK ON THE "LOOKS" FOR NOW!!!

WE CARE MORE about functionality & Easyness to use...

For Me, When I first installed Ubuntu, It went straightforward...

The only problem I that I had, was to get acqainted with Partition's handling...

A little confusing there, the way listed, & the way to work on them...

At the same time, I did NOT know about the SWAP ability...
...and when I tried to install, I got a window telling me IF I want to go back & create a SWAP Partition...
SWAP should be upfront when installing - a suggested size should be listed (I read through a magazine that it should be twice the size of my installed memory) & more importantly what it exactly does... (I was confused a bit...).

AND do not expect the newbies to install Ubuntu by themselves...
ONLY a more "advanced" guy (with some knowledge) can install the Ubuntu...
NOT that is not easy, it is VERY easy...,
but if they do NOT know how to enter the BIOS or Format Partitions man, where are they getting themselves into...


Quote by "azz":
Better hardware support comes with greater market share. Market share is increasing exponentially.

YES !!!
We are the Ubuntu's Support Team, for problems, etc.
So, we are in charge to bring people in...

Let the programmers just try to make something better...

Market share is going to grow, as more people come in...

WHICH IS GOING TO HAPPEN... FOR SURE


Note:
I just saw the NEW design of this FORUM.
It is good that they have put the "Absolute Beginners" on TOP.
Because that is what we want now...

IT HELPS bring new people in...
(Before, it was "burried" deep deep down...)


I ALSO EXPECT THE UBUNTU FORUM STAFF to fix the "Customization Tips & Tricks" Forum's Page...

For a start, they can JUST create "2 sections":

a. BASIC BEGINNERS Tutorials !!!
b. ADVANCED Tutorials.

Example:
a. BASIC BEGINNERS Tutorials:

1. How to setup the "Keyboard Indicator"
2. How to install a different "Language Keyboard"
3. How to install "Windows Fonts"
4. How to play DVD's
5. How to install "w32 codecs"
6. How to install the "Mozilla's Firefox Plugins"
7. How to install an Antivirus (I know it is NOT really needed, but that is what people expect when migrating from windoze...)
8. How to setup your Printer
9. How to use the Synaptic Package Manager
10. How to install with "dpkg -i XXXXX.deb"
11. ...
12. ...

ALL the above is what a beginner NEEDS to get started...


(I do NOT want to SEE it ALL blended there !!!...)

b. ADVANCED Tutorials:

1. Compiling from source (<- I can NOT imagine a begginer doing this!!!)
2. Install E17 from Shadoi (<- I do NOT know what this is, but as a begginer I am getting goose bumps....)
3. Setup a VNC Server (<- Is this meant for everybody to read?)
4. ...
5. ...

These last 5 are "ADVANCED" stuff man, don't keep them ALL Blended...


This is just the Beggining suggestion...

You can then have:

a. BASIC BEGINNERS Tutorials !!!
b. ADVANCED Tutorials.
c. Server Software or Network Stuff
d. ...
e. ...

Such categorization is MUCH MUCH better than having ALL the "Customization Tips & Tricks" Articles blended man....


Hope I helped a bit...

meborc
March 15th, 2006, 11:30 AM
Example:
a. BASIC BEGINNERS Tutorials:

1. How to setup the "Keyboard Indicator"
2. How to install a different "Language Keyboard"
3. How to install "Windows Fonts"
4. How to play DVD's
5. How to install "w32 codecs"
6. How to install the "Mozilla's Firefox Plugins"
7. How to install an Antivirus (I know it is NOT really needed, but that is what people expect when migrating from windoze...)
8. How to setup your Printer
9. How to use the Synaptic Package Manager
10. How to install with "dpkg -i XXXXX.deb"
11. ...
12. ...

ALL the above is what a beginner NEEDS to get started...


all that a beginner needs to get started is this link:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com

and the search button in the forum... :mrgreen:

Sef
March 15th, 2006, 12:55 PM
all that a beginner needs to get started is this link:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com

and the search button in the forum...

That is true. But would be nice to have something saying "Beginner's Set up/Tutorial." Make it as easy as possible for someone, so they know where to go to set up their computer how they want it.

meborc
March 15th, 2006, 01:03 PM
welll the wiki is for those who don't know... and has a lot of beginners info...

AND there is a sticky thread in here (beginners forum) called How To Help Yourself... which i believe has all that is needed for a start...

read the stickies guys!

jjf
March 15th, 2006, 03:06 PM
In other words, jjf, most of what's stopping Linux from being adopted is not Linux's fault, but people who encounter difficulties have a point when blaming Linux...?


i don't want to be hard, but if you don't like the linux way, use windows... there is a choise...

the *love* i feel towards linux is the love towards linux way, which is different from the windows way... i love cli and i love the complecity of the system... if you take that away from me i have to move to slackware

I guess it depends on what long-term goals you have for Linux. If your goal is to provide a free (as in beer and speech) OS for hobbyists or people willing to spend time tinkering, then I think Linux is right there already and has succeeded fabulously. I'm not saying this is an unworthy goal. After all, as some one else pointed out, Linux is FREE. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. If you tried it and didn't like it: fine, go back to Windows or OS X or whatever floats your boat. Those of us who do like it will continue to use it. (But then, to be consistent, we can't complain too stridently about lack of hardware support since we have consciously decided to remain a niche market.)

But if your goal is to provide a free, stable, and safe OS for the average user; or to further a social agenda by getting people to migrate away from proprietary software to free; then, yes, the fact that "it isn't Linux's fault" doesn't matter. Linux might be David to Microsoft's Goliath, but David still needs to kill the giant for the people to be free. :D

And one of the great things about Linux is that it can maintain both goals in different distributions. Slackware for the console jockies and something else for your average desktop user. (And the "average desktop user" is not Uncle Joe who just wants to play solitare and check email -- he's already well taken of. The "average desktop user" wants to watch DVDs, stream music, play games, try out some cool new software when it comes out, etc.)

meborc
March 15th, 2006, 03:25 PM
i see your point... but for complete windows clone, there is already linspire, which costs a little, but does all installing by double-clicking... plays all media out of box...

slackware is the cli-geek home... linspire is the MS-hater, but windows-way-lover place... ubuntu is something in between... and there is no point in changing it... cuz it just is perfect in balance between those two extreems

so the choise is so BIG... there is no need to change ubuntu... ;)

WoodyMahan
March 15th, 2006, 04:00 PM
In my line of business all we do is replace one software system with another. We always believe that ours is better. And it is, but that is beside the point. The point is the end-user. They see this new software system and look at what they are getting from it and say, "Where is X report and where is Y report?, How do I know it is working if I don't have X or Y reports?"

Well we just have to show them, X report is actually now Q. You have to turn the paper on it's side and then you can match up the columns on Q to the rows on X and see the data that you are looking for. The data on your Y is actually now split between A and Z. Here is where it's at.

The question is inevitably, "Can't you just provide me with X and Y from your system?" Comfort zone, see? All the end user wants is comfort. Within a month they are clocking along with our system and using our reports and finding all the nifty new things our system can provide as well. The have achieved their level of comfort with the new system.

MS converts to Linux are exactly the same. I am in this new environment and looking for a comfort zone. I am now my own customer. All the little things that seem like major aggravations right now, will be smooth sailing next year. So MS converts, just be patient and let it come to you.

And that concludes todays moment of Zen.

aysiu
March 15th, 2006, 05:10 PM
I've said it before (many times), and I'll say it again: Anyone who wants to treat her computer as an appliance will never want to install and configure her own operating system, no matter how "easy" it is to do so.

The answer to making Linux distros "user-friendly" for the "average" user is getting them pre-installed on computers they buy. There's no other way.

OBnascar
March 15th, 2006, 05:38 PM
Its not for the average novice user.

I remember when I went to tech school (a long, long time ago) the computer I trained on had dos and windows 3.1. I got so mad at computers and myself, there was no way I would ever learn this. Then came window 95 & 98, and I swore off computers again for sure when WinXP came out, ha ha !

But I got brave because I was curious about Linux and hearing an occasional person talking about it. I first installed Linspire, which I thought was a fairly easy transition from WinXP, but yet it was not what I really wanted I guess.

Then came ubuntu 4.10, after installing it I just did not understand the file system and what in the world was that "sudo" thing ??? After struggling for a few days I wiped it off my HD, that was the end of my trying Linux adventure.

It wasn't one week later I installed unbuntu again and just took one issue at a time, with help from these forums and using the different unbuntu guides, how-to's, and documentation. And trust me, I am not anything more then an average user. I have found my home here at ubuntu, unless I find a distro that I like better, but that distro will always be Linux for me.

Even though Linux is not trying to be easier, I think they have already gotten the attention of Mr Bill. Remember, Mr Bill has been at this a long time. Right now most computers are preinstalled with Mr Bill's OS, it is the system most people are raised with. I can vission this changing sometime in the future, not now !

joehill
March 15th, 2006, 08:23 PM
These "I'm frustrated and leaving" threads often generate the most response--everyone here has something to say about it one way or another. Here is my response to those whose answer is "go back to Windows, GNU/Linux is a niche market for us computer geeks":

Yes, everyone is free to use Windows or any other OS out there--that's the point of software freedom. But GNU/Linux is a very, very, very big tent. Yes, it started as a niche for geeks with little use for a tail-wagging dog in their file manager (I swiftly put that dog out of its misery, but only years later did I put that whole OS behind me), but it is now a global social movement that serves innumerable purposes, with desktops graced by everything from Harleys to pink roses, Lawrence Welk to Barny the Dinosaur. Ubuntu is "Linux for Human Beings," not just "Linux for Geeks." The whole idea of Ubuntu, it seems to me, is to circumscribe Windows to a niche (I'm not sure exactly what its niche would be, but they're free to sell and people are free to buy) and to make the FLOSS (Free/Libre/Open-Source Software) model the default.

To those who love the CLI: it's great, I have grown to love it too, and I encourage all serious computer users to learn it well. But Linux is sweeping the world and needs to incorporate all kinds of people to succeed, including the CLI-phobic. GNU/Linux is great because it fills such a huge variety of needs and tastes and is infinitely configurable, unlike any other OS I know. It's a social movement as well as an OS, an experience that everyone should feel free to participate in regardless of their technical abilities or experience.

I think we need to get over the attitude that someone should abandon Linux simply because they haven't found the answers to their questions or aren't tech-savvy enough for this rarified OS. GNU/Linux still has a way to go before every user could install it without problems, but it's ready for a much wider audience than it has, and the more users it has the more the open-source movement will succeed in its goals. We need to take these posts seriously, as a reminder of what we've all likely fel at some stage and as suggestions for how things could be changed to make this a bigger tent.

With more open doors, there will be little use for windows.

aysiu
March 15th, 2006, 08:29 PM
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it's not a Windows vs. Linux issue.

It's mainly a "preinstalled operating system you're used to" vs. "operating system you're not used to that you also have to install and configure yourself" issue.

If you already have Windows installed and configured, and you're used to using it, and you don't have the time and energy to...

1. Install and configure an operating system
2. Learn a new interface and a new way of pointing and clicking and new kinds of software

...then you don't have time for Ubuntu.

Cousindaddy
March 15th, 2006, 09:03 PM
No one has ever learned to drive a car by riding in a taxi.

Many years from now it will be revealed that Microsoft gave the US Government a back door into their software as a settlement to anti-trust violations. (Can you conceive of someone like George Bush not wanting access to 90% of the world's desktop computers?)

If you want to continue to use Windows, go ahead.

I think I'll stick with open source - even if I do get a bit exasperated at times.

chadmichael
March 15th, 2006, 09:23 PM
J.,

I really would like to encourage you to keep trying with linux. If Window's seems more natural, I assure you its only because everyone in our culture kind of knows about windows already. I'm definitely not a geek. Well, maybe, but not the kind that likes to be arcane or anything. I'm 100% for clear, accurate information. And this is exactly why I don't like to use windows. After you learn the concepts of how Linux is organized ( which I'm afraid most people skip over; for instance the how to install docs try to get you through without even indicating what is going on ), then Linux will be the simplest thing in the computer world. In Linux, you have access to everything. There are no secrets. In Windows, I'm pretty sure there will always be secrets.

As for your example of the java installation. Its pretty simple. Alot of people on these forums will just tell you a sequence of steps, which can indeed vary from person to person according to tastes, but the core concepts of what you are doing when you install any software will NEVER change. And they are kind of simple actually. Here they are.

1) get the thing you want to install
2) decide where ( in the filesystem ) you want to put it ( yes, its your
choice - but there are some "conventions" that man people follow )
3) put it there
4) make it's location known to potential users ( if you want to be able to
execute the program from the shell command line, you need to add the
location to the PATH environment variable )

For java, you can download the "JDK 5.0 Update 6" ( or whatever version you like ).
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/download.jsp


There is a link called "installation instructions" that will tell you what youre doing, in particular it will give you the command line instructions to unzip and install the java stuff. The only things you need to understand is where you want to put the java stuff in your file system. You may read many different locations in different sources. Its all about convention or personal choice. You could put it in your nose, as long as your system could find your nose.

Locating you nose, or /opt/java/, or /usr/local/java, or whatever you decide upon, all comes down to the settint of the environment variable PATH. It simply has to include the java directory. This is similar to Windows. You might here about other environment variables such as $JAVA_HOME -- this is just a environment variable commonly used by applications that want to be able to find java.

So . . . installing java, or any program, is pretty much as simple as

1) downloading
2) deciding where to put it, and putting it there ( by executing the install script -- see readme in java download, or on download pages instructions )
3) setting PATH so that your shell can find the programs when you type them on the command line


Ask me if you have some questions.

Kersus
March 15th, 2006, 11:35 PM
I certainly haven't had much luck with Ubuntu. Can't even get it to install and wasn't overly impressed with the Live CD. I've only installed Xandros before, but have used Red Hat and tampered with some CD run OSs. Xandros certainly seems head and shoulders to be the best IMO for newbies to Linux, but I just had a bad break with hardware compatibility that they're uninterested in fixing. The biggest problem is it now costs money ;)

I figure I'll either try VectorLinux, a BSD or wait until I stumble on some more free Linux CDs (as I did with Ubuntu).

I really did like Xandros though. Who knew I'd find sound so hard to be without. :-#

Then again, I miss OS/2 Warp 3 too...

Kersus
March 15th, 2006, 11:37 PM
Oh, I thought I'd add that you can definately tell on the quality of a community when you see the replies to posts like the one that started this thread. Certainly the support you can recieve with problems is a big one, but response to negative comments about your product tells your character through and through.

gymsmoke
March 16th, 2006, 12:54 AM
Having had over 25 years in this industry, and most of it in Unix (that's the way you really spell it) LOL - the conclusion i come to is that, the reason why M$ has made things so seemingly 'bulletproof' is to keep you pinned. Unix, from it's inception,has been about 2 things - Build on the work of others , and having multiple ways of solving the same problem. Both of these ideals serve to constantly evolve its community(ies) into more functional products. Realistically, if it weren't for Unix (actually VAX, DEC, UNIVAC, and good ol IBM) , M$ wouldn't exist. So, as a matter of capitalistic psychology - if you paid someone at M$ for the "incident" , or, if you are willing to buy someone's solution to a particular rub, then maybe M$ is the place to be. Personally, I always liked having the freedom to be logged on as root, go to the top of the tree (/) and type rm -rf * ... wait about 20 seconds and think - "hrmm... I wonder if that was a good idea?" ...

evilregis
March 16th, 2006, 01:59 AM
I normally don't chime in much on opinion threads... however:

I'm writing this in Ubuntu on a Toshiba notebook. I installed Ubuntu a few weeks ago.

Before I go into that, let me say something about Windows. Windows works great when you buy a computer that has Windows pre-installed by the manufacturer with their hardware-specific drivers pre-installed along with it.

This notebook shipped with XP Home. I hate Home. But I dealt with it for a while until Windows absolutely threw up all over itself. It was a blessing in disguise... or so I thought. I have an XP Pro disc and figured I would just cut my losses and install that.

Or at least try. I did the install. However, there were hardware issues with several components on my laptop. Windows Update did not fix them. Trying to track down the drivers for the particular hardware was ridiculous at best. Getting USB to work properly was a pain in the ****. Then, despite a fresh install on a freshly formatted drive I was having one helluva time getting Photoshop to run. My girlfriend's games (Sims 2) ran worse than they did in Home for whatever reason.

I had to run the Ghost image installer on my hard drive to get things useable in the timeframe that I had to work with at the time. Not ideal.

A couple of months after that, I installed Ubuntu in a dual-boot configuration and I'm quite enjoying it. It handled my hardware far better than XP did. Within a very short period of time I had Ubuntu running, wine installed running a few minor Windows apps that I wanted. I could customize it however I wanted. I was thoroughly impressed.

I have, in the past 4 years or so, tried Slackware, Mandrake, RH and Suse and none of them came even close to "just working" like Ubuntu did.

Windows has its fair share of problems the same as Ubuntu or any other OS does. I think that it just so happens that the end-user when purchasing a system from Toshiba, Dell, Gateway, etc. have the luxury of that OS being installed with the drivers needed.

As for installing software... I can't imagine an easier system than Synaptic. Search. Mark for installation. Apply.

Synaptic is infinitely better than Windows' Add/Remove Programs.

That's just my 2 cents.

In a nutshell: People have a false sense of ease-of-use with Windows because the grunt work is usually already done for them when they get their systems and things that don't work they just tend to ignore or work around. It's as though people have higher standards for Linux at times. Though that's not to say Linux is without its faults.

elithrar
March 16th, 2006, 02:08 AM
I'm not sure what the OP expected from Ubuntu; in terms of a Linux distro, it does have a large GUI element and is relatively user-friendly. However, it is Linux, and things are vastly different from Windows. There is always going to be a learning curve for a new OS.

aysiu
March 16th, 2006, 02:16 AM
Every time threads like this come up I wonder "Why do people need to announce that their leaving?".

If its an attempt to get help why not just post on what you need help with? Based on the many threads I've read like this, I would say it's one or more of the following:

1. The misperception that Ubuntu developers scour these forums for "constructive" criticism and will somehow wake up and improve the OS (because, of course, all they do is sit around twiddling their thumbs all day)

2. The need for attention. Just a desire to be heard.

3. Just wanting to stir up the pot (close to trolling, but not necessarily).

henriquemaia
March 16th, 2006, 02:30 AM
I know it's not easy at first try. My anecdote with my first linux install (Mandrake Linux, some 5 years ago) was:

after messing some things up on the drakeconf tool, I managed to turn off X from init. So, on my next reboot, I got this terribly cold command line and no desktop! What do I do then? Having just drop from windows to this completely new world, I reinstall Mandrake again... yes, a full install just to get X running. A few days later, a friend of mine told me that I just needed to run startx on the terminal.

Linux was hard to me not because it was difficult, but mainly because I had my mind formated to other kind of OS.

zubrug
March 16th, 2006, 02:54 AM
If you only knew how many times I have screwed linux up completely. It took me two weeks to get the internet working on mandrake in 2001. Partition your hard drive, keep windows/osx and goof around with all the distro's of linux. I used to have to unplug my monitor from the graph. card and use the motherboard monitor plug just to get to the GUI. I did this for weeks untill I got brave and started asking for help on these forums, still having to try several solutions to find the one that works for me.
It is uphill partly, but you will be completely swallowed by the experience in the end. Linux rocks, Ubuntu rocks.

zubrug
March 16th, 2006, 02:56 AM
Try linspire, it is very windows user friendly.

DiscoKiller
March 16th, 2006, 03:01 AM
well over the last few days i have realised just how wonderfully simplistic ubuntu actually is with the likes of automatix there to set u up nice and smooth and the synaptic package manager to make sure all ur dependencies are met. there was me thinking, wow i really have got my head round this linux malarky.....then i installed redhat 9......hmmm.....now theres a massive difference between ubuntu and something like redhat and that is ubuntu jumps through hoops to make sure everything is in order for you. i tried several different installations of various different programs in redhat and was met with a blank stare from my os. no reasons why it wasnt working, no synaptic package manager to make things simple. just a pretty gui and very little to do with it (dont worry i havent given up, i`m just biding my time with it :D)

having used windows since i was like 10 or something (oooh 11 years...i feel old) my switch to ubuntu was not so much frustrating (the 6 full reinstallations didnt phase me one bit) as....rewarding. ok i couldnt get things to work first time and i had trouble getting used to the terminal. a little DOS experience went.....well not very far at all.....but all that said and done, every new installation wiped away any gremlins in the system and any progress i had made previously was quickly restored and i would progress further. when i tried redhat i lasted about 3 hours and quickly returned to ubuntu which felt really familiar and cosy as i ran about configuring it to how i have it today (still not perfect but getting there)

it took literally about 2 weeks for me to cut the chord with windows and finally say goodbye, i tried reinstalling it recently and i hated it. for one it looked like something my dog had hurled onto the carpet and for two i had hardware issues and lots and lots and lots of crashes (6 crashes within the first hour)

well anyway i spose my point is this. as free operating systems go....i really think u would have to go a long way to beat Ubuntu, i feel i will be spending a lot of time with this Os and keep it as my main OS until something better shows up......hahahahahahahaha.....yeah right, like there`ll be something better


Peace

DK

aggiechemist
March 16th, 2006, 03:04 AM
I'll add my $0.02 -

The fact that it can be kinda tough is the FUN part for me. To get everything just right, you have to spend some time learning and digging and trying and messing up. But I love doing that, its why I'm a nerd!!! I now know so much more about computers and the fundamentals of kernel architecture and hardware/software interface than I could have ever gained any other way.

On the other hand, it doens't have to be that way. Every day nerds like me and nerds far more talented than I are working to make Ubuntu "just work." I love knowing that my wife can sit down at the same computer that I was just browsing config files on and use the internet with no special help or effort on her part.

Ubuntu is great because it is the best of both worlds! Good for geeks, good for "civilians," safer than Windows in many ways, and all free.

I'm certainly never gonna give up this OS.

desiboston
March 16th, 2006, 04:29 AM
I have seen the message so many times.... " Your system cannot be restored to the .....time" when using the system restore.

jjf
March 16th, 2006, 03:37 PM
As to why these "it sucks and i'm leaving" threads (1) get written and (2) get so many responses, here's my theory:

People want to vent. They're frustrated by things not working, they see all the people in these forums that actually enjoy their operating system, they can't figure out how that is possible, and they just need to vent. And then the rest of us want to post our own difficult experiences and how we pulled through them, either as encouragement or just as the right place to tell it.

Open Source Therapy. :)

_simon_
March 16th, 2006, 05:05 PM
I was reading somewhere.. could have been Digg that Vista could be MS's last Desktop OS and that they were looking to concentrate purely on the server side of things.

If this is true I wonder how this will affect Linux in general. I guess manufactuers will start concentrating on drivers for Linux and hopefully making games for Linux!

meborc
March 16th, 2006, 05:25 PM
I was reading somewhere.. could have been Digg that Vista could be MS's last Desktop OS and that they were looking to concentrate purely on the server side of things.

If this is true I wonder how this will affect Linux in general. I guess manufactuers will start concentrating on drivers for Linux and hopefully making games for Linux!
hahahaha... please give me the link you read it from... :D

it might be true to the sence that VISTA will be supported infinately and no new windows version is born (which is a nice thing to think when going to bed)...

but i don't think MS will give up the $ received from OS licences...

_simon_
March 16th, 2006, 05:37 PM
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060314/BIZ04/603140305/1013

Sorry I got it slighty wrong, it's not the server side they are thinking of moving to but the service side.

Sirin
March 16th, 2006, 08:01 PM
"I believe that we should make EVERY SINGLE USER use the CLI. We as a community control the End User, and Linux should never wbe easy, instead, it should be getting HARDER for the end user. The harder it is, the better it is for the first-time user." - Diehard Gentoo Fan ;)

GolfGeek
March 16th, 2006, 11:38 PM
I hope you have taken advantage of the posting that recommends automatix. I was in the same boat as you. I spent the better part of 4 hours trying to install java (which should be an integral part of the OS) I followed scripts, etc, etc. Nothing worked. It seems insane that such an important internet tool is A:disabled B:left out or C:they forgot! I went to sun, searched for java on the net, did everything and nothing. I saw the thread for automatix, ran it (the code is absolutely correct) and 45 minutes later, have everything I wanted (lot of time uopdating open office, etc) Why this isn't included in the initial distro is beyond me. It should be the initial listing for new users. And finally, you're right that it can't go mainstream under these circumstances. It is a better OS but its in need of a system. The morons that tell you to go away and cry in your beer are just that (probably elitest at that!) This is a really great operating system. It is stable, works well, flies in the face of ms and really has a chance to get out there but you can't rely on command lines to get a system up to a basic level. If automatix were more integrated it would go a long way. I'm rambling here. What I really wanted to say was don't give up just yet.

matthew
March 16th, 2006, 11:56 PM
It seems insane that such an important internet tool is A:disabled B:left out or C:they forgot!

Why this isn't included in the initial distro is beyond me. It should be the initial listing for new users. And finally, you're right that it can't go mainstream under these circumstances. It is a better OS but its in need of a system. These two pages will help you understand the reasons behind this--it wasn't an oversight nor was it intended to frustrate. It boils down to a commitment to freedom.

http://www.ubuntu.com/
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RestrictedFormats

GolfGeek
March 17th, 2006, 12:54 AM
My aplogies but somewhere, somehowm sometime, there should be a page for NEW USERS and it should say, In order to appreciate this OS, to make the transition you should visit the following sites and read the following articles. I heard about Ubuntu, visited the site, downloaded the live CD ROM and played for a few days and said this is great. I had previously tried Suse but there were problems there as well. IMO, the objective of a newusers forum is to keep them (not drive them away in frustration) Nor should you have to spend days reading forums before you hit on something like automatix or the RestrictedFormats page (why would a new user click on that link when you're really trying to figure out how it all works). I've been in this business since CPM and 64K Z80 machines so I'm not intmidated by command lines. I really am interested in an alternative. I don't think Ubuntu has to be packaged in a cute bundle that nobody has to know anything about to screw things up. Someone made the effort to seek you out, took the time to download and install the system - don't drive them away. Give them a reason to hang in there. Tell them what they should read before getting started.

I do thsnk you for the response and information. I hope you'll understand how frustrating it can be.

aysiu
March 17th, 2006, 01:22 AM
My aplogies but somewhere, somehowm sometime, there should be a page for NEW USERS and it should say, In order to appreciate this OS, to make the transition you should visit the following sites and read the following articles. Take a look at the stickies in the Absolute Beginner section.

ibanez88
March 17th, 2006, 05:13 AM
I just went out and re-installed WinXP Pro, (keeping an Ubuntu Dapper partition, no worries)... mostly because of the wireless issue. Maybe it's user error on my part, but I've been trying damn hard for a year now and I still can't share my printer wirelessly or get a DHCP lease at a hotel or public park. These are things that I can do without the slightest thought in Windows. I also can't get my SD slot working for the life of me in Linux, but Windows is no prob.

To me, all political issues aside, it was making me feel like I wasted money on my laptop since I couldn't use it to its fullest capabilities. It was worth the re-install for these purposes, but that's not to say that I've given up on Ubuntu. There's still lots of great programs that I can't find anywhere else, like Audacity.. no wait... I mean Nvu... no that's not right... OpenOff-....er...

SchafKopf! \\:D/

aysiu
March 17th, 2006, 05:16 AM
To me, all political issues aside, it was making me feel like I wasted money on my laptop since I couldn't use it to its fullest capabilities. Well, you didn't really waste your money because you probably didn't buy your laptop with Ubuntu in mind. You probably bought it, used it, and then considered Ubuntu as an afterthought.

Next time you want a Ubuntu-compliant laptop, start here:
http://www.system76.com

or here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportMachinesLaptops

poofyhairguy
March 17th, 2006, 09:59 AM
Well, you didn't really waste your money because you probably didn't buy your laptop with Ubuntu in mind. You probably bought it, used it, and then considered Ubuntu as an afterthought.

Next time you want a Ubuntu-compliant laptop, start here:
http://www.system76.com

or here:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportMachinesLaptops

I will say that this is not easy as you make it sound.

I personally was in the market for a laptop recently. I had one demand of it- it had to work well enough with Linux (aka wireless support and basic ACPI support) and it had to be able to run XGL (this was what did me in, but I refused to carry Linux with me that was less usable than what I have on my desktop).

My first idea was just to get whatever I could find with an Nvidia card in it. This turned into quite a bad deal, as most laptop makers refuse to ship with Nvidia cards now. Even the laptops on the link you provided have either Intel cards (the best option for non eye candy nuts, but it won't run XGL yet) or icky ATI cards. The few laptops with Nvidia I found new all seem to have bad ACPI problems (as in all the threads I read about them had people recommending them to turn ACPI off). In the end I gave up- if I do get one it will because I buy some older laptop off ebay with an Nvidia card in it. But its almost impossible to get a new high end laptop without ATI and I would rather hit my hand with a hammer than try to use ATI + Linux again.

nocturn
March 17th, 2006, 10:16 AM
I will say that this is not easy as you make it sound.

I personally was in the market for a laptop recently. I had one demand of it- it had to work well enough with Linux (aka wireless support and basic ACPI support) and it had to be able to run XGL (this was what did me in, but I refused to carry Linux with me that was less usable than what I have on my desktop).

The same here. I searched for months to find a laptop for Ubuntu and still ended up with a compromise.

Also, buying from the net is not a good option for me as they mostly do not offer belgian keyboards, so that limits it a lot.

I ended up buying an end-of-line HP with Nvidia card at 200 € more then the new model (with better specs). It was the only one I could find at the time with an Nvidia card.

It is nice, but I regret paying for the WinXP license (no other choice) and suspend/hibernate and screen dimming doesn't work. The cardreader is also dead in the water (but I knew that).

This is not something a newbie can handle, it takes many hours of searching and reading technical specs to find out if the basic functionality is there.

nocturn
March 17th, 2006, 10:20 AM
You know what might be a nice idea...

Create a whitelist of hardware (including laptops) that will work fully with Ubuntu .

Just a manufacturer, modelnumber kind of thing where only fully working hardware gets on.

That way, users wanting to shop for Ubuntu can just print this and take it with them to the store.

BoyOfDestiny
March 17th, 2006, 10:30 AM
You know what might be a nice idea...

Create a whitelist of hardware (including laptops) that will work fully with Ubuntu .

Just a manufacturer, modelnumber kind of thing where only fully working hardware gets on.

That way, users wanting to shop for Ubuntu can just print this and take it with them to the store.

The link aysiu gave has that info,

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportMachinesLaptops

Basically lists what works & what doesn't (for example I haven't tried the memcard reader on mine, so I don't mind if it doesn't work...)

Anyway, I feel like the issues mentioned are more with manufacturers than with Linux. There is only so much that can be done with either "incomplete" closed drivers, or open drivers where things are being "figured out". They [manufacturers] should publish better specs (with that alone I doubt a company would even need to provide drivers), or publish open drivers, and let the community contribute.

I'm not sure exactly what the fear is, I doubt any random person can just start manufacturing video cards, and do well in the market... I guess it's just a sort of "the way things are". Eventually reverse-engineering or closed drivers will improve... It just keeps some of the bleeding edge stuff from being used to it's fullest...

I'm glad I don't care about bleeding edge as much as I used to (it was more vast improvements as I was growing up... CGA -> EGA -> VGA -> SVGA, huge differences... There was a much bigger difference IMHO between a pentium and a pentium II in terms of visible performance)... But I digress...

poofyhairguy
March 17th, 2006, 10:32 AM
The same here. I searched for months to find a laptop for Ubuntu and still ended up with a compromise.

Also, buying from the net is not a good option for me as they mostly do not offer belgian keyboards, so that limits it a lot.

I ended up buying an end-of-line HP with Nvidia card at 200 € more then the new model (with better specs). It was the only one I could find at the time with an Nvidia card.

Its a bad situation. Pretty much all the major online retailers that ship laptops with Linux pre-installed offer only ATI or Intel solutions. I would love to support these people, but I just can't unless I know I will get the support I want!

poofyhairguy
March 17th, 2006, 10:34 AM
The link aysiu gave has that info,

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportMachinesLaptops


I read about every laptop on there, and there was not a single one that made me think "my gosh, this thing was made for Ubuntu." Each required some sort of sacrifice (most often the lack on an Nvidia card).

Very frustrating.

nocturn
March 17th, 2006, 11:43 AM
The link aysiu gave has that info,

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportMachinesLaptops

Basically lists what works & what doesn't (for example I haven't tried the memcard reader on mine, so I don't mind if it doesn't work...)


I used this information (and posted there after my purchase), but it is not easy for a newbie to make sense of it and a lot of the machines there are no longer available (as is mine, I bought it in july of 2005).

What I propose is a clean whitelist with not much technical data of models that have full (or nearly full) Ubuntu support. Specially ones that you can buy with Ubuntu pre-installed of without WinXP license.



Anyway, I feel like the issues mentioned are more with manufacturers than with Linux. There is only so much that can be done with either "incomplete" closed drivers, or open drivers where things are being "figured out".

I agree with this. But for most hardware it is very possible to find pieces that work quite well or even fully with Linux (my Plextor DVD drive can even be flashed from Linux). I have all my hardware selected because it works 99% to 100% with Linux.

When I set out to buy a laptop, things changed dramatically. I couldn't have a model without Windows license (which I can for desktops) and the best I could fine is 85-90% supported.



I'm not sure exactly what the fear is, I doubt any random person can just start manufacturing video cards, and do well in the market... I guess it's just a sort of "the way things are". Eventually reverse-engineering or closed drivers will improve... It just keeps some of the bleeding edge stuff from being used to it's fullest...


The problem is that there are only a very limited number of manufacturers out there (while your average shop can assemble a desktop PC) and their contracts with Microsoft are so tight that shipping anything else is unthinkable without ditching the windows option completely.

I had one smaller brand willing to deliver a model (which was not interesting) without WinXP on it. The condition was that there name would not be mentioned anywhere and the laptop would have all branding and identification removed before delivery.... Even doing this was a breach of their contract, go figure...

Virogenesis
March 17th, 2006, 12:18 PM
well you can get barebone laptop set ups which you decide the parts its not cheaper but you select the parts.
Its still limitied but hey... you decide what you need which is the good thing o yeah i believe asus do machines without windows

BoyOfDestiny
March 17th, 2006, 12:41 PM
I used this information (and posted there after my purchase), but it is not easy for a newbie to make sense of it and a lot of the machines there are no longer available (as is mine, I bought it in july of 2005).

What I propose is a clean whitelist with not much technical data of models that have full (or nearly full) Ubuntu support. Specially ones that you can buy with Ubuntu pre-installed of without WinXP license.



I agree with this. But for most hardware it is very possible to find pieces that work quite well or even fully with Linux (my Plextor DVD drive can even be flashed from Linux). I have all my hardware selected because it works 99% to 100% with Linux.

When I set out to buy a laptop, things changed dramatically. I couldn't have a model without Windows license (which I can for desktops) and the best I could fine is 85-90% supported.



The problem is that there are only a very limited number of manufacturers out there (while your average shop can assemble a desktop PC) and their contracts with Microsoft are so tight that shipping anything else is unthinkable without ditching the windows option completely.

I had one smaller brand willing to deliver a model (which was not interesting) without WinXP on it. The condition was that there name would not be mentioned anywhere and the laptop would have all branding and identification removed before delivery.... Even doing this was a breach of their contract, go figure...


Oops, I don't think I was specific enough...

Actually, I was refering to manufacturers as in those who make the parts, not assemble them... I mean in terms of Ati and Nividia specifically.

I understand that a lot of hardware works with Linux. Everything on my desktop does (and I have a 9250 card so I can use open video drivers for 3D).

Can someone use Ubuntu with the latest ati card on the market, I believe the answer is no. I can't blame Linux for that. I blame Ati :P.

Some hardware works, some doesn't. With more info out, even more hardware can work or work better... That was the point I'm trying to get across. And yeah I know PC and laptop manufacturers have strict contracts, I notice that anyone who distributes machines with windows, even if they offer something else, have a notice saying "we recommend Microsoft Windows". I'm not sure if this is mandatory or for a discount...

When I got my Dell inspiron 6000 ($750 off thanks to online coupon). First thing I did was this. Boot the machine, download firefox, download an ubuntu iso, burn the iso, install ubuntu and wipe Windows. I can live with that.

Ideally, it wouldn't come with Windows, and I think in time we'll get that choice. :) If you build your own machines, you already have it... Although I've only done so for desktops...

timas
March 17th, 2006, 04:43 PM
You know, in truth, the "Linux vs. Windows" isn't so different from the "Firefox vs. Internet Explorer" .. Think about it.. a lot of, most of them, people use IE because they had it pre-installed and are unable to get rid of it. Firefox or really the Mozilla foundation is working really hard on promoting Firefox as a browser, and they are gaining ground.. Microsoft is forced to update IE in order to be able to play catch the better browser again.

Think about this, if Linux gets promoted, properly, first on the internet, eventually elsewhere as well what, or who, can tell where its going to end up?
Imagine http://www.getlinux.com with a straight forward "This is what we can do" and 4 very straight forward links with lists of "Go here to buy a computer that works with.." and "Here is a list with technical support companies" and "Check here for the user forums to find out all about Linux"

In the abovementioned, perhaps change Linux into "Ubuntu".. because truth to be told, each distro has its own face and one could perhaps even argument that each distro would have to be marketed as itself and not as one big "Linux" club..

Things to think about would be:
- Can retailers be interested in distributing Ubuntu out of the box
- Can we, as the existing users, make Ubuntu work so well that new users will be able to figure out everything in a few minutes, rather than a few weeks

Things to consider really well would be manuals (fun HTML manuals with comparing images perhaps) to place on the desktop with "Switching from windows 101" orwhathaveyounot..

Make a mini-app that gets run the first time you start your Linux and never again unless its selected in the menu in which the user selects how they would evaluate themselves.. "Beginner", "Regular user", "Knowledged user", "Expert", perhaps even add a "Ex-Windows user"..

The strength would lie in converting users, a convert that believes is twice as good as a new user that never touched Windows to start with.. a convert will have experienced both and if we can asure there experiences will be rock-solid and amazingly good they will quickly start converting other people..

Or perhaps, I'm overdoing it a bit and I shouldn't have had so much water.. its at least worth a cent or two :)

aysiu
March 17th, 2006, 06:15 PM
I will say that this is not easy as you make it sound.

My first idea was just to get whatever I could find with an Nvidia card in it. This turned into quite a bad deal, as most laptop makers refuse to ship with Nvidia cards now. Even the laptops on the link you provided have either Intel cards (the best option for non eye candy nuts, but it won't run XGL yet) or icky ATI cards. Poofyhairyguy, I'll admit my links probably don't solve your dilemma, but most people don't really care too much what kind of hardware they use--just as long as it works.

I know you're the eye-candy king around here, but not everyone runs XGL. A lot of users, especially beginners, just want something that will have sound, internet, video, etc. working "out of the box." For those folks, I'd recommend the links above.

tribaal
March 17th, 2006, 06:24 PM
Think about this, if Linux gets promoted, properly, first on the internet, eventually elsewhere as well what, or who, can tell where its going to end up?
Imagine http://www.getlinux.com with a straight forward "This is what we can do" and 4 very straight forward links with lists of "Go here to buy a computer that works with.." and "Here is a list with technical support companies" and "Check here for the user forums to find out all about Linux"

You got tht right mate, a getlinux.com website would really be an asset to our community.

Is that the kind of idea we could put up a bounty for?

- Trib'

Brunellus
March 17th, 2006, 07:51 PM
You got tht right mate, a getlinux.com website would really be an asset to our community.

Is that the kind of idea we could put up a bounty for?

- Trib'
this has been dealt with in innumerable threads, but I'll repeat it:

a browser installation is trivial; it's one piece of software. Very little depends on it.

OS installation, on the other hand, is non-trivial, and in many cases involves breakage.

You can get Firefox for windows, but there is not "linux for windows" that people can try out. Yes, I know, livecds, but that's not the same thing.

Master Shake
March 17th, 2006, 08:06 PM
You can get Firefox for windows, but there is not "linux for windows" that people can try out. Yes, I know, livecds, but that's not the same thing.

Not 'technically' true, as one can download DamnSmallLinux embedded, and try that in a Windows environment.

Brunellus
March 17th, 2006, 08:08 PM
Not 'technically' true, as one can download DamnSmallLinux embedded, and try that in a Windows environment.
you have a point there; I even have a DSL-embedded USB key in my pocket now. But in that form, it's not demonstrably better than Windows--simply cooler, which is another thing.

timas
March 17th, 2006, 08:35 PM
a browser installation is trivial; it's one piece of software. Very little depends on it.

OS installation, on the other hand, is non-trivial, and in many cases involves breakage.

You can get Firefox for windows, but there is not "linux for windows" that people can try out. Yes, I know, livecds, but that's not the same thing.

It wasn't a comparison towards the technical department of the two cases.. but more the fact that a 'unknown' product does get attention..

Your point is valid, however.. and I do realise that a windows user can try firefox and afterwards ditch it where-as a linux is harder to do..

This might be blasphemy and its not a simple thing to get real, but what are the thoughts on a Windows App that installs a Linux -next- to your existing installation?
- It'd include a partitioner that grabs exactly the space it needs, unless otherwise defined by the user
- It'd install Linux ([K]Ubuntu!) on that new partition
- Twiddles with the MBR and adds only one line (not the failsafe or other kernels).

KISS being the keyword here.

Give users a chance to try it out. Perhaps make it a DVD so that a few different types of installations could be prepped.. Basic, Multimedia, Developer(?), SysAdmin.. I dunno.. the works!

aysiu
March 17th, 2006, 08:50 PM
It's far more likely that an application that repartitions your drive installs a new operating system and tinkers with the Master Boot Record will destroy data (and that the changes will be irreversible or difficult to reverse without user intervention) than that an application that installs a new web browser will destroy data.

It's really the difference between saying something like, "Hey, you can do a free trial of Netflix" versus "Hey, you can do a free trial of this new industrial-flush toilet."

I don't see how the "test-drives" can be any better than embedded Linux or live CDs.

Arktis
March 17th, 2006, 08:54 PM
You can get Firefox for windows, but there is not "linux for windows" that people can try out. Yes, I know, livecds, but that's not the same thing.Man, I wish I could remember what it was called, but a couple years back I found this BSD variant that you could install from windows onto your fat32 file system. It had live demo and installation, both without the use of an ISO.

timas
March 17th, 2006, 09:36 PM
I realised that it wouldn't be really simple to do :P I'm just trying to think of a way that linux can be seen in its full glory, rather than via a slow live CD (while I ran the Kororaa live cd the other day to try out XGL, and it was -FAST-).. pre-installed USB sticks aren't much of an option either, that's a commercial distribution channel, unless we can (again with the installation program) make a linux install to a stick.. hrm.

Dunno.. just trying stuff out here..

Perhaps a free VMWare type of program combined with a linux installation?

Sirin
March 17th, 2006, 10:43 PM
Yeah...but only Windows needs one ;)

Say something goes terribly wrong with your Linux (driver failure, GUI messup, or even kernel problems) . The only way to restore it back to normal, is hours or even days of tweaking and kernel recompiling. But then if Linux had system restore, it would only take 3 clicks, and just minutes to repair (as you're not searching through the whole OS to diagnose the problem, but the Automated System Restore will undo all changes that you made to your system, and bring it back to what it was before the problem). Which one, hours of manual tweaking, or minutes of Automatic Restoration? Why do most Linux users think that they don't need something they do need?

Most Linux users are set on making Linux for them (less user friendly, forcing Linux newbies to Recompile the kernel, manual tweaking, they don't want to have to do that, they want to use it, they want Linux to be as easy as it can be. I will not recommend anything else but Suse, Mandriva, or Linspire to friends and family at this time). People say that if you want something free, you will have to sacrifice the goods of it. That shouldn't be true. Look at Firefox, it's true quality, and free. Linux is, as far as I see, only for power users and geeks only. ;)

aysiu
March 17th, 2006, 11:45 PM
Say something goes terribly wrong with your Linux (driver failure, GUI messup, or even kernel problems) . The only way to restore it back to normal, is hours or even days of tweaking and kernel recompiling. Usually you're supposed to take appropriate precautions before busting your system. That's why whenever I ask people to edit a config file, I always ask them to back it up first. That way you can just copy back the old config file.

P.S. I've never compiled (or recompiled) a kernel.

poofyhairguy
March 18th, 2006, 03:38 AM
Poofyhairyguy, I'll admit my links probably don't solve your dilemma, but most people don't really care too much what kind of hardware they use--just as long as it works.

As far as I can tell, the only laptops that work 100% are older Thinkpads.......



I know you're the eye-candy king around here, but not everyone runs XGL. A lot of users, especially beginners, just want something that will have sound, internet, video, etc. working "out of the box." For those folks, I'd recommend the links above.

Stuff like XGL is the future. I don't know about others, but I would not want to buy a laptop that might be obsolete within a year with the newest Linux stuff......

There are plenty of people in pain in the Dapper forum right now because their current laptops cannot do XGL. That SUCKS. I don't want to be in that group.

A 3d desktop is about more than eye candy. Its about using all the hardware (aka using the graphics card to draw the -shock- graphics)! On my desktop all it takes is a video card upgrade to fix the problem, but you can't do that with laptops. If a single part is not compatible, then the whole thing must be thrown out.

I looked at barebones, but they are not as "flexible" as one would think. In the end it seems the best option will be last years Vaio models (they have Nvidia 6200 cards). But then I have to screw with Ebay which is always a risk.

BoyOfDestiny
March 18th, 2006, 04:46 AM
Usually you're supposed to take appropriate precautions before busting your system. That's why whenever I ask people to edit a config file, I always ask them to back it up first. That way you can just copy back the old config file.

P.S. I've never compiled (or recompiled) a kernel.

Agreed, (although I've done a kernel compile once, when I tried gentoo once, on my crappy 'former' laptop...). I recommend /home on another partition, and if you don't have a good net connection, back up your .debs. I can have my machine up and running within 20 minutes without any tweaking required... The alternative, if I was very short on time, is to use a livecd, they have a repair option now... Have not had to try it... Clean installs (since I went to dapper flight 3)...

I should mention in the case of Window's System Restore, sometimes I tear up with laughter, because it also backs up malware and viruses... I hope they fixed the early behavior that windows ME had, which was keeping multiple copies of non-essential files (hope you don't have a lot of mpegs and mp3s if that's the case)...

easyease
March 18th, 2006, 06:44 PM
just the other day on a forum not related to computing i heard a conversation between a lady who runs a youth club and a internet site owner. she was asking for his help in setting up the youth club's pc's. He told her she would need a government grant to get licences for xp........lol.
of course i stepped in and put in a link to the shipit website and spoke my piece.
hopefully they will take note and see the light that is ubuntu.
"hallowed are the ubuntu"

easyease
March 18th, 2006, 06:48 PM
Do you work for microsoft Sirin?

DanielB
March 18th, 2006, 08:39 PM
Sadly it's true, Linux does suck for most consumers as a general purpose OS. This is not so much because it is hard to install, lacks drivers or support but because there is not a single distribution which makes it really easy to use. Installers have really cought up years ago. I cannot remember when I had to search for a Linux driver - most of the hardware works out of the box if it is not too special.

I am working as a network admin and I have been a Linux user for more than 10 years. I had most distributions installed at some point and decided to give Ubuntu a go so I installed Dapper Flight 5 a couple of days ago because I read that Ubuntu has a strong focus on ease of use and it is polished. I know Dapper is still in active development but so far I have run into the very same issues all distributions have. I know how to solve them but the point is, I should not have to.

This list is not exactly Ubuntu specific. Since Dapper is still a development release and that's the only Ubuntu I have used so far so some of these might not apply :

- I have to edit /etc/fstab to to be able to mount and access my Windows partitions.

- I have to manually configure my WLAN connection with WPA encryption.

- I have to download and install additional software to be able to do a lot of basic things like browsing the web, watching DVDs, playing MP3s, etc.

- SMB/CIFS integration is hardly useable. If I want to open a movie of a CIFS share the default media player displays an error. Also, the system keeps asking me for passwords. Why doesn't it use and store my login password ? Ideally, it would check for a logon script and connect the shares which are listed there.

- A lot of times the default application associated with a certain type of file is not the best choice in my opinion. Also, having 5 different applications installed that basically do the same thing is rather confusing. Letting the user figure out which application works for a certain type of file is also not the way to go.

- Translational issues. A lot of times applications are not translated or the translation is only done for 90% of the application. The quality of the translation is sometimes worse than keeping the English strings.

- Consistency and integration. KDE applications don't integrate well enough into Gnome and vice versa.

- Stability. While Linux and the GNU system are very stable a lot of the desktop software is not.

- Speed. Firefox takes at least 3 times longer to start on Linux than it does on Windows. OpenOffice startup time is a nightmare on both systems but it feels like it is taking even longer to load on Linux.

- Features. There are just too many. Provide reasonable defaults and hide the rest in some expert configuration dialog. Gnome is much more sane than KDE when it comes to this. KDE's Konqueror is a good example of how to drive away average users.

- Software availability / WINE
Of course it would be nice to have a native Linux port of every Windows application but that is not going to happen. In my opinion WINE plays a central role when it comes to Linux migration. E.g, there are a lot of small businesses which use very business related software of which a Linux port does not exist.

- Be easy on the users. Some wizzards or installers are asking questions that the average user does not know. E.g, an installer should ask the user to give his PC a cute name. It should not ask for a host- and domainname. (Ubuntu does this right as far as I can remember)

Don't get me wrong, I love Linux as much as the next geek but for Linux to be succesfull on the desktop you have to look at it from Joe Average's perspective :

The average user is not interested in how a computer works. He just wants to use it. He does not want to use Google to figure out how to solve issues, he does not want to read HowTo's. He does not want to configure the Kernel. He _expects_ the computer to work just like he _expects_ his TV and DVD player to just work. And to be honest - he is right. Oh, talking about the average users DVD player - it could very well be running some kind of embedded Linux - but the manufacturer managed what distributions did not - they abstracted complexity and made it useable for the average Joe.

The average user does not care that MS is evil - he probably does not even know it. Most users do not notice MS Windows costs 120 bucks because it comes bundled with the PC. Also, most users would rather pay 120 bucks for MS Windows, which works good enough for most people, than spending 4 hours reading Google to solve an issue they should not face in the first place. Sadly most users do not care about security as much as they should either. Since 2000/XP Windows is actually pretty stable on the average desktop.

I always read about free and great software as Pro's for Linux. Usually the list includes OpenOffice, Firefox, GIMP, Thunderbird, etc. Those applications are nice but they are available for Windows as well - there is no reason to switch to Linux to use them. Arguments like the one in this thread ("Notepad is a bad editor, MS Paint has hardly any features and is not suitable to edit photos and Windows does not include a video editing program") are void. If you buy a digital camera a Windows application, which is good enough for the average users needs is included. It is installed when you insert the CD - plain and easy. The same is true if you buy a camcorder and to be honest I have never seen the average user utilizing a text editor.

I could probably think of many more examples but I guess you get my point. Linux will be a viable desktop OS for the average user when things just work. Security, freedom, pricing, etc. are a bonus.

For the PC shop around the corner there is hardly a reason to sell Linux preinstalled on PCs. Currently the user saves 120 bucks by not buying XP and spends 300 bucks on the technican to install and customize Linux for him. While this might be good for the shop in principal it is hard to explain to the buyer :

"Hey, we can install Linux on your new PC if you want. You know, Linux and the applications it bundles are free. You will save 120 bucks on Windows XP. It will only cost you 300 bucks to make it remotely useable for you. Your games and applications will not work but there are alternatives available which we can also configure for you for an extra fee."

However, Linux can be used as a desktop OS today if you can provide support constantly. I am thinking about some business desktops where the user is given an Office suite and a Webbrowser.

As usual some of the zealots will tell me that I want Linux to be turned into Windows or that I cannot expect all that from a free OS. Well, I don't want to turn Linux into Windows but there a things that Linux distributions can learn from Windows. If you want to compile 20 kernels a day you should be able to. Also, I don't demand or expect any of the stuff I wrote about. Linux on the server is a pleasure to work with. Linux on the desktop is good enough for me, but is it for the average user ? Not yet.

Jessevl
March 18th, 2006, 09:03 PM
- I have to edit /etc/fstab to to be able to mount and access my Windows partitions.

While partitioning you can just set the mount-point of your ntfs/fat32 partition to something like "/windows" or "/media/windows".

But I have to agree with a lot of your points. Although I like figuring out things on my computer, many people don't.

aysiu
March 18th, 2006, 09:16 PM
DanielB, a lot of your criticisms of Linux are valid, but some of them are not--see my comments below.



- I have to edit /etc/fstab to to be able to mount and access my Windows partitions. A little bit of a double-standard there, isn't it? Windows hardly recognizes Linux partitions at all. If you're using Knoppix or Mepis, you need only click on the partition to have it mount.



- I have to download and install additional software to be able to do a lot of basic things like browsing the web, watching DVDs, playing MP3s, etc. This is Ubuntu-specific, as many Linux distributions do these things: Linspire, Mepis, PCLinuxOS, Blag. The DVD-watching needs codecs in Windows, too.



- A lot of times the default application associated with a certain type of file is not the best choice in my opinion. Also, having 5 different applications installed that basically do the same thing is rather confusing. Letting the user figure out which application works for a certain type of file is also not the way to go. This is true of many Linux distributions. Thankfully, Ubuntu is firmly committed to one application per task.

I think the rest of your criticisms are more than valid, though.

Honestly, people always look at "big picture" stuff, but what turns off most ex-Windows users would be the little stuff, I think. For example, needing a separate application in order to "remember" text copied to the clipboard from another app (that you've since closed) or not knowing whether the theme you just downloaded from http://www.kde-look.org is going to improve the look of your desktop or totally screw up Konqueror.

It's hard to make vast generalizations about users' needs. It really all depends on what you want to do. Many folks email, surf the web, do some light word processing, and listen to music... and that's about it. For those folks, Linux (and Ubuntu, specifically) would be more than enough to satisfy desktop computing needs.

Others are equally non-computer-savvy, but they have specialized needs--random peripheral hardware (the latest PDA, some printer/scanner/photocopier, some Bible study program or knitting program, or a sewing program that interfaces with a sewing machine). These folks are the least ideal for Linux because they couldn't give two S'es about why their computer doesn't work--they just want everything plug-and-play--maximum compatibility.

Then, there are the folk who are computer-savvy but total Linux novices. These make up a huge bulk of the Linux migrants from Windows, and these are tough converts. They generally like everything point-and-click, but they also like the absolute cutting-edge, latest software. They probably didn't understand much about their Windows sytem to begin with (concepts) but knew a lot of techniques (routines). Once they had to install and configure their Linux operating system, they realized they had to understand more conceptual stuff in order to get stuff to work, and they had to change routines.

Then, there are other categories... but they can fend for themselves.

Generally, there are three types of barriers to Linux desktop adoption:

1. Circumstance: Having a low marketshare breeds low marketshare. Everyone wants to use what "everyone" is already using. People like what they're familiar using, so they don't want to migrate to something else. Microsoft has a monopoly on major OEMs. We're living at the beginning of the 21st century. Such is life.

2. Third-party support: Related to circumstance, of course, but when it comes to drivers for hardware or just general commercial software, the support is either not there or is usually there in a weak fashion. Take, for example, Mozilla's Firefox for Windows vs. Mozilla's Firefox for Linux or TightVNC Viewer for Windows vs. TightVNC Viewer for Linux. Sometimes basic functionality, ease of installation, user-friendliness, etc. can vary greatly even for the same application put out by the same company... but for different operating systems. Now, of course, some of this has to do with the variety of Linux distributions (each is its own operating system and would need its own binary), but even after TightVNC Viewer is installed, you can tell right away which version (Linux/Windows) got more development.

3. Ready Availability: Again... related to circumstance, but Linux just doesn't come preinstalled in major venues. You have to be "in the know" already to stumble upon a Linux-preloaded desktop or notebook. Installing and configuring an operating system is too much work for the average user. Why do that when you can waltz into a store or go to Dell.com or HP.com and buy a Windows-preloaded one?

4. The Software Itself: I list this last because it really is not the major obstacle to mass Linux desktop adoption. There are some things that are wrong with Gnome and KDE interfaces that can be improved, but if you stop a random person on the street and ask "Why aren't you using Linux?" I can guarantee that most of the responses will be more of the "What's Linux?" variety than the "Yeah, I tried it, but the KDE interface offers too many confusing configuration choices." variety.

It doesn't mean there aren't usability issues, but most people don't even get to that step. Usability is not what's stopping most people from adopting Linux. Let's just agree on that, can we?

For usability issues, I'd say...

1. The aforementioned lack of clipboard sustainability. If I copy text or an image in one application and close it, it should be available in the next application to be pasted. I should not need Klipper (or whatever that application is) running in order for this functionality to exist.

2. It shouldn't be that hard to edit the Gnome menu (SMEG won't let you edit System or Places). KMenu's a bit more advanced here.

3. It shouldn't be that hard to install a KDM theme or a Gnome mouse cursor theme. Yes, you can install separate applications to provide a GUI for these, but most people won't know off the top of their heads where to get those apps or where /usr/share/apps/kdm/themes is.

4. Stability. The Linux kernel is solid as a rock. Unfortunately, KDE and Gnome are not, and they are the most popular desktop environments out there. Give me a crashed XP, and Control-Alt-Delete will get me out almost every time. Sometimes when KDE or Gnome crashes, no Control-Alt-Backspace or Control-Alt-F1 in the world can save it.

5. Lack of reliable GUI recursive permissions changing.

The list could go on, but it doesn't have to.

What's great is that Linux distros (Ubuntu and others) are constantly improving with every release. Anyone who doubts it should compare Warty to Dapper. Seriously. We're talking about the official release as of March 2005 versus the official release of June 2006--a little more than a year. Hasn't anyone else been blown away by the progress Ubuntu has made?

mstlyevil
March 18th, 2006, 09:47 PM
Aysiu, you should really write a book on the subject. I would love to buy a copy if you ever do decide to do it.

nickle
March 18th, 2006, 09:51 PM
What's great is that Linux distros (Ubuntu and others) are constantly improving with every release. Anyone who doubts it should compare Warty to Dapper. Seriously. We're talking about the official release as of March 2005 versus the official release of June 2006--a little more than a year. Hasn't anyone else been blown away by the progress Ubuntu has made?

Aysiu
It is a pleasure to read your informed and level-headed contributions.:)

I am not an IT expert and I like things to work easily and not break often. My experience over that last years with SUSE and more recently UBUNTU is just that. The major problems I have runs into have concerned hardware... well that is the commerical reality which can be generally avoided when you are aware of the issue.

Please remember Linux is an open software project that is developed for free in contrast to Windows which is produced by one of the richest Corporations in the world. I think Aysiu's illustration of the improvements within Ubuntu development bears witness to the fact that the open-source movemnet can produce fantastic products which can be used by non-IT people like me and my kids, without the risk of being wrecked by viruses, worms, spyware and the like. The fact that people are beginning to compare the Linux desktop to one of the most famous commercial products ever also bears witness to the fact that Linux is definitely on the right track.
Finally, what might be lacking in terms of huge coporate support is supplimented by wonderful forums like this one.

mstlyevil
March 18th, 2006, 09:56 PM
Aysiu
It is a pleasure to read your informed and level-headed contributions.:)

I am not an IT expert and I like things to work easily and not break often. My experience over that last years with SUSE and more recently UBUNTU is just that. The major problems I have runs into have concerned hardware... well that is the commerical reality which can be generally avoided when you are aware of the issue.

Please remember Linux is an open software project that is developed for free in contrast to Windows which is produced by one of the richest Corporations in the world. I think Aysiu's illustration of the improvements within Ubuntu development bears witness to the fact that the open-source movemnet can produce fantastic products which can be used by non-IT people like me and my kids, without the risk of being wrecked by viruses, worms, spyware and the like. The fact that people are beginning to compare the Linux desktop to one of the most famous commercial products ever also bears witness to the fact that Linux is definitely on the right track.
Finally, what might be lacking in terms of huge coporate support is supplimented by wonderful forums like this one.

Support forums like this one is what makes Linux/Ubuntu shine above any proprietary operating system. More and more average computer users are taking a hard look at Linux just because of this very reason.

aysiu
March 18th, 2006, 10:03 PM
Aysiu, you should really write a book on the subject. I would love to buy a copy if you ever do decide to do it. My hope is that, by the time such a book would be published, its content would be obsolete.

If I write something extensive on the subject, I'll likely post it for free on my website: http://www.psychocats.net/essays

I have a short treatment here:
http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktop

I can't program. I can't make cool graphics. I can write anti-FUD treatises for Linux, though. Thanks for the encouragement!

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 10:45 PM
So - I followed the instructions on a thread here about creating a backup - it just used tar, and was really straightfoward.

Today I try to read from the archive that I've burned to a DVD - and I keep getting an I/O error!!!

WTF! Doesn't ANYTHING IN THIS CRAPPY OS work?!?!?

I'm abot ready to go back to M$ (which I hate) - Linux is WAYYYY to unreliable!

DAMMIT!

Zelut
March 18th, 2006, 10:49 PM
Can you share which thread you used for creating a backup with tar? Also, what did you use to burn your DVD?

Any other specific errors would help.

Steve1961
March 18th, 2006, 10:57 PM
So - I followed the instructions on a thread here about creating a backup - it just used tar, and was really straightfoward.

Today I try to read from the archive that I've burned to a DVD - and I keep getting an I/O error!!!

WTF! Doesn't ANYTHING IN THIS CRAPPY OS work?!?!?

I'm abot ready to go back to M$ (which I hate) - Linux is WAYYYY to unreliable!

DAMMIT!

Things do work in Linux, and more so in Ubuntu than many other distros. However, if you've just moved across from MS you need to have a little patience and be prepared to learn Linux, including how to setup and configure it properly. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's getting there, and many of us (most of whom I would guess migrated from MS) have come to prefer it as our chosen OS. And members of this forum do all they can to help those who are trying Linux for the first time. That said, we have no obligation to help, and calling Ubuntu 'CRAPPY' and threatening to go back to MS is probably the best way of ensuring that you get no help.

DanielB
March 18th, 2006, 11:00 PM
1. Circumstance: Having a low marketshare breeds low marketshare. Everyone wants to use what "everyone" is already using. People like what they're familiar using, so they don't want to migrate to something else. Microsoft has a monopoly on major OEMs. We're living at the beginning of the 21st century. Such is life.

2. Third-party support: Related to circumstance, of course, but when it comes to drivers for hardware or just general commercial software, the support is either not there or is usually there in a weak fashion. Take, for example, Mozilla's Firefox for Windows vs. Mozilla's Firefox for Linux or TightVNC Viewer for Windows vs. TightVNC Viewer for Linux. Sometimes basic functionality, ease of installation, user-friendliness, etc. can vary greatly even for the same application put out by the same company... but for different operating systems. Now, of course, some of this has to do with the variety of Linux distributions (each is its own operating system and would need its own binary), but even after TightVNC Viewer is installed, you can tell right away which version (Linux/Windows) got more development.

3. Ready Availability: Again... related to circumstance, but Linux just doesn't come preinstalled in major venues. You have to be "in the know" already to stumble upon a Linux-preloaded desktop or notebook. Installing and configuring an operating system is too much work for the average user. Why do that when you can waltz into a store or go to Dell.com or HP.com and buy a Windows-preloaded one?

4. The Software Itself: I list this last because it really is not the major obstacle to mass Linux desktop adoption. There are some things that are wrong with Gnome and KDE interfaces that can be improved, but if you stop a random person on the street and ask "Why aren't you using Linux?" I can guarantee that most of the responses will be more of the "What's Linux?" variety than the "Yeah, I tried it, but the KDE interface offers too many confusing configuration choices." variety.


Well, I beg to differ. In my opinion useablity/stability/integration is everything for now. The other issues will eventually take care of themselves.

Linux on the desktop will not start at www.dell.com, I think we can agree on that. Instead it will start on business desktops since they have a well defined purpose (office apps, email, collaboration, etc). The support and marketshare issues cannot be solved by developers anyway. However, they will become less of a burden once a certain amount of businesses migrated their desktop machines to Linux.

What stops businesses to migrate to Linux ? Of course it's software and support availability for some machines and applications, but it's also useability/stability/integration issues for the machines where the software requirements can be met by Linux. Useablity/stablity and integration issues make a migration cost intensive since a lot of money has to be spend on training, customizing, integrating and managing the new system. Think about a sysadmin who shows his boss a Linux box. Now what would you think if you are presented with untranslated GUI parts, cluttered menus and applications that start so slowing that you can get a cup of coffee while it loads, etc ? Would you want your employees to use that ? Probably not. Even worse - you, as a third party, show the same desktop to a customer - with the same result. That's the issues Linux needs to overcome for now in my opinion.

In regards to stopping a random person on the street and asking about Linux : Here, in Germany, chances are you hear "No, I am not using it, but I have heard about it. I heard it does not suffer from virus outbreaks and spyware and it's free. I was told it's very good but it's also very difficult to use, right ?" Of course it's no as popular as Windows, but I would estimate that 20% of the people using a computer have heard about Linux, which is a start :)

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:04 PM
Actually, I was referring to Linux as crappy - not UBUNTU specifically.

To answer your questions: Here is the backup thread: (from Tips 'n Tricks)
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=81311

I used the ciommand line
growiso -Z /dev/dvdrw -R -J /backup.tar.bz2

to burn the backup to the DVD. I have an Hp lightscribe 640.

My complaints about Linux are justified - I have had multiple crashes with multiple machines (modern, up to-date hardware), and when Linux has crashed it has MORE THAN ONCE not only destroyed itself, but other, UNMOUNTED partitions as well (once it destroyed my Windows2000 partition on the same HDD, the last time a few weeks ago it wiped the partition table on a completely seperate HDD).

I am really getting sick of this. So pardon my frustration

Doesn'y anybody else have these ^(&% problems? Or am I just cursed?

christhemonkey
March 18th, 2006, 11:08 PM
i have never lost any data (that i didnt purposefully lose) and especially on unmounted drives! Maybe this is a dodgy harddrive?

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:10 PM
Oh - the I/O error is:
cp: reading '/media/cdrom/backup.tar.bz2' : Input/output error

from the GUI, when I double-click the bz2 package to bring up the Archive Mgr, I see: tar: unexpected EOF in archive

WTF??: It's binary file!!! That doesn't even make sense...

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:12 PM
This is so frustrating - look, as I've stated - this has happened on multiple systems for me.
The chances of ALL of them being dodgy hardware - and in such a way that Windows still runs just fine on them - is as close to zero as is imaginable.

Looks like I AM just cursed...

BTW: When the DVD was burning (it's a Memorex DVD-R), it went through the ...xx% complete... stuff all the way - never indicated any problems whatsoever. The file on the DVD is the same size as teh one on the HDD. I only found out about the problem when I went to MD5sum it to MAKE SURE it was OK before deleting the HDD version... I can't get an MD5 sum due to the I/O error...

beameup
March 18th, 2006, 11:18 PM
Can't help with your technical issue but maybe I can give advice on asking for help.

"Take two and think it through"

Maybe you should just go back to window$. There won't be many people willing to help you with posts like that. And if you do decide to tackle Linux again, you should try the dual boot scenario. That way you can jump back into Windows whenever you get frustrated. Most all of my issues with Linux are due to my lack of knowledge and there is nothing wrong with that. I get frustrated too, but I won't cut down the people who have the best ability to help me. I'm here to learn

Never mind, looks like you had ESP :)

aysiu
March 18th, 2006, 11:21 PM
What's really frustrating is your continual insulting of the operating system.

Focus on presenting the details of your problem and asking for help nicely, and you may actually solve your problem.

If you don't want to solve your problem, just use Windows. If you don't want to use Windows, calm down and let others help you.

aysiu
March 18th, 2006, 11:23 PM
You know, DanielB, I definitely disagree with you, but I hope you're right--I really do.

If you're right, Linux will be on people's desktops worldwide in no time, as its usability is developing at a far more rapid pace than its marketshare right now. Just keep filing those bug reports, donating money to development, and helping new users with documentation and online support.

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:25 PM
How Have I cut you ppl down???


I'm nto allowed to ashow my frstration|????

I am asking for help!! I'm not insulting anybosdy!!
But I need some convinving that Linux isn't unstable as my exoperiences prove otherwise

I'm so ******* livid I can't eben type...

Jesus Christ I have Tourettes and when I get bent I start shaking and twitching so it's reAlly unbelievably frustrating when I can't even get answers - everybody ignores my questions and focusseson my attitude -Look, I AM ASKING FOR YOUR HELP
Why would I "cut you down""?? I haven't typed anything negative about anyone. I JUST WNAT TO BURN SOME FRICKIG DVD
s - is that sso much to ask from an OS??

aysiu
March 18th, 2006, 11:31 PM
I didn't say you were insulting me or other forum members.
I said insulting Ubuntu (the operating system) doesn't help you solve your problem.

Something that may solve your problem, though, is this thread (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=329619) I dug up through a Google search.

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:37 PM
Thank you Aysiu

Zeroangel
March 18th, 2006, 11:40 PM
Also note, if your DVD drive has broken firmware then nothing can really save you but a firmware update. Unfortunately, most of the firmware updating programs offered by manufacturers only work in windows. You could try lowering your burn speed.

I've had pretty good experience with ubuntu and linux in general but I do have to say that some distros have been hellish for me. Linux is far from perfect with some configurations (god knows how much time I spent troubleshooting and working around mandrakelinux issues). But having tourettes or w/e is no excuse for acting disrespectful to the people who might help you. Nobody wants to help someone only to get a vague, emotional response in return.

Anyways, good luck with your problem dude.

spiritraveller
March 18th, 2006, 11:40 PM
This thread is funny.

I remember back in the 90s, about a year after slackware first came out, I heard about Linux. I was like "ok, cool, an alternative to this microsoft monopoly"...

Boy was I wrong. At that point, you had to compile just about everything, kernel, programs, everything from scratch. You had to bootstrap a compile environment (or whatever it was called). It was like installing Gentoo without any documentation. Never could figure it out... wasn't for mere mortals.

That experience turned me off to Linux for about five years. Then I heard about this snazzy new distribution called Mandrake, that I just had to try. Never really liked Mandrake, but I got hooked on trying different Linux distributions.

Ubuntu is by far the easiest distribution I have ever used. Debian as a base is excellent. But the most important thing is that you don't have to tinker with it too much. It just works.

The install is no harder than Windows. It is the exact same process: partition drive, create users and passwords, copy OS to harddrive. The colors are even the same! (blue background, grey text). With the Espresso live-cd installer, it will be even easier than Windows.

The only significant difficulties that people have with Ubuntu are caused by their familiarity with Windows. Windows works one way and they expect everything else to work the same way. Another problem is proprietary file formats. Scripts like Automatix are making that easier. But over time, hopefully people will move to more open formats, realizing that open formats are the only way to preserve their data for the long term.

Perhaps linux and Ubuntu are not yet ready for prime time... but they are closer than they have ever been, and with any luck will be there very soon.

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:43 PM
I DID NOT DISRESPECT ANYONE.
STOP SAYING THAT
Thanks for the sentiment, tho

PS> My thread title contains "...sick of this crappy OS":
LINUX is an OS: Ubuntu is a ditro - Therefore I called Linux crappy, not Ubuntu.

STOP SAYING I'm BERATING UBUNTU

(Actually, Linux is a kernel and GNU is an OS, but you get the point...)