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

aysiu
March 18th, 2006, 11:52 PM
Thank you Aysiu To be honest, I have absolutely no experience with what you're trying to do or what your problem is. That's why I Googled your error.

If that link I posted didn't help, write exactly what you tried and what further errors you get. Someone here probably will be able to help you. I'm not 100% sure, though.

seanmc42
March 18th, 2006, 11:58 PM
From your link it looks like maybe the write speed was wrong - so I tried re-writing it using -speed=1 and the /M instead of /Z to create another session... well, that failed, so I am about to try a new disk...
Since I've made changes to my base system since the last backup, I'm also recreating the arhcive first, tho... takes a bit...

adamkane
March 19th, 2006, 12:39 AM
Post the steps you've taken and the error messages you've received, and you are much more likely to receive useful advice or actual help. Berating the forums does not work.

To be honest, Ubuntu would suck without the guides that we all rely on to make it usable. Having said that, I've only had to re-install Ubuntu about 10 times to feel like I understand how to use it well, which is much less than what I experienced with Windows.

Please read as much as you can first, then post the details of the problem:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=145402
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=128383
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=329619

Helpful sites:

ubuntuforums.org
linuxquestions.org
google.com

saphil
March 19th, 2006, 12:57 AM
I think you hit the nail on the head.

The frustration stems from thinking that the new OS (Ubuntu) will work like the old familiar (Windows).

I heard a Foreign language student complain that he couldn't really understand why Spanish needed its own word for Computer, since we had a perfectly good English word for it.

I think it would be wonderful if there was a "universal installer" for Tars, Debs, RPMs and .bins because this would make the most sense to the Windows converts. Maybe the Gnome project needs more Win-converts making suggestions for GUI-izing the command-line stuff such as making simple synthetic links or installation helpers.

I also think it would be cool if Windows went Open-Source, but the former is much more likely, I fear, than the latter.

virgule
March 19th, 2006, 01:19 AM
(...) 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.

:-k :KS VNC! :-D
It is just a matter to get them install the client. There is some advantages to VNC compared to LiveCD as there is no need to even reboot!

seanmc42
March 19th, 2006, 01:29 AM
I Did Not Berate The Forums!!!

seanmc42
March 19th, 2006, 01:31 AM
I just tried re-burning to a brand new DVD; got this error:
:-[ PERFORM OPC failed with SK=4h/ASC=09h/ACQ=00h]: Input/output error

Here is the command line I used:

growisofs -speed=1 -Z /dev/dvdrw -R -J /backup001.tar.bz2

Now what??? I did this as root.

seanmc42
March 19th, 2006, 01:36 AM
Hmm... That first link you posted has someone saying they used /dev/hdc instead of /dev/dvdrw - I tried that, and it's actually burning now.

BUT - I noticed that even though my command line states explicitly -speed=1, the burn started with output: "Current Write Speed" is 2.5x1385KBps.

Now WTF?? Doesn't growisofs look at the parameters? It just IGNORES my command?

seanmc42
March 19th, 2006, 01:43 AM
OK - So some of you are sick of my pissing-and-moaning.
Apologies.

I wil try to post more civilied.

I understand that I have lots to learn, and if I get so frustrated so easily,
well, that's not good.

Thank you all for your suggestions... I will continue to update this thread with my progress.... which at the moment ... the newest DVD is burning, @2.5x1538KBps according to growisofs... we'll see if it coastered.

garner_nc
March 19th, 2006, 01:56 AM
I started running Linux (Slackware) at kernel 1.2.13. Anyone remember hand configuring your XFREE86 config file? Hunting down your monitor timings? Linux has come a LONG way.

My biggest gripe abount MS Windows is the freakin' registry. Every time you install something it's another re-boot. The more programs you install, the longer each re-boot takes. I fried a Windows2000 install one time thinking I could just install everything and then re-boot once. Bad choice.

Synaptic makes the install process very easy and once something is installed, it works. No re-boot required

I think running Linux is like appreciating fine food, wine, or old cars, it becomes a relationship. I know how my system works. I can hand configure a firewall. It's like knowing the exact torque on the main bearing bolts on that 454 in your truck because you pulled the wrench yourself. It's like knowing that clove flavor in the Merlot comes from the special yeast strain you used to ferment the juice you squeezed from the grapes. It's a hands on thing.

Some people turn the key and the engine starts. Other people know turning the key causes the starter switch to close, extending the starter drive to the flywheel which turns causing the ... You get my point. That's what I like about Linux.

Just some random thoughts.

All the best,
Doug White
Garner,NC USA

seanmc42
March 19th, 2006, 02:23 AM
Looks like that worked!!

Thanks very much!!
Now I still have the question of why the wrote speed was not as my cmd-line; I will go ask that back at the main forums...

Danny Boy
March 19th, 2006, 02:25 AM
I wouldn't give up, I almost did and just wound up reformatting and reinstalling. Then I compeltely messed something up so I reinstalled Ubuntu again.

Automatix is awesome, someone pointed me to it. I couldn't figure out how to install anything, for now Automatrix will do. Once I get a little bolder I'll try installing stuff via terminal. I'm no stranger to command line parameters I've beening using them since DOS 2.0. You have to realize learning a new operating system is like learning a new language, nothing is the same.

I'm able to do what I've always done with Windows within Ubuntu from the get-go; browse the web, email, photoshop, instant message and write letters. It's faster, supposedly more secure (I don't understand all the security stuff behind it yet), and pretty much easy to use.

This is my first venture into the Linux world, I've never used another distro. For the time being I'll stick with Ubuntu as training wheels later on down the road I may add another hard drive to my system and experiment with other distros just to learn more.

Don't give up, take your time and learn. The more who learn the better off the PC world will be.

BoyOfDestiny
March 19th, 2006, 04:57 AM
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.

Doesn't the knoppix live-cd come with qemu bundled? So you can run it without a reboot... I imagine it'd be slow, but for users with new hardware, I'd imagine it'd be useable...

EDIT: Maybe it was only version 3.8, http://www.knoppix.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=78849#78849

Damn small Linux has something similar
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/usb-qemu.html
I bet one could "burn" there own like this on cd or usb

dolson
March 19th, 2006, 12:27 PM
seanmc42, I'm glad it worked for you...

But can I ask why you don't just use the CD/DVD-burning capabilities built-in to Nautilus? Or did I miss something here that says you tried it and it didn't work?

I use it all the time and it hasn't failed on me yet, whereas sometimes command-line stuff has (perhaps my own fault, but still).

In GNOME, you go to Places > CD/DVD Creator to open the window up. Drag your file(s) into that window. Then select File > Write to Disc...

(At least that's how it is in GNOME 2.14, and I'm sure the older one in Breezy is similar.)

Using command-line for someone as new to Linux as yourself is really not something I recommend.

Kvark
March 19th, 2006, 01:58 PM
LOL! This thread is funny, thanks for the whole bunch of laughs i got from reading it. Stop cursing the kernel. If a DVD you burned didn't turn out well then it is not the kernel's fault. It is either the program you used to burn that is buggy or you that selected the wrong options. It is too easy to make mistakes when using CLI so try using a GUI burner program instead.

dolson
March 20th, 2006, 12:10 AM
Sorry these aren't in order. :)

1) Games. NWN2 will not be running on Linux. It's not being done by BioWare, but another company. A Linux-user (irc nick is Mongoose) is reportedly working on the game, but he told me that there is no Linux port planned. It sucks, yes. I own over 55 commercial Linux games, and I play none of them. I can count on my thumbs how many games were ported in the last 6 months. You are right; Cedega is a con. Wine isn't intimidating, it's just not a solution. But then again, GameCube isn't a "solution" for Linux, but that's the route I took because the games will all work.

2) MP3 support is as easy as enabling universe and then `apt-get install xmms` or whatever other app you like. At least for me, that's all I had to do. It seems rather silly to have MP3 stuff in universe, but not in main. How am I supposed to know that MP3 is illegal in such and such a country if there are NO warnings whatsoever when I try to install and run XMMS? Doesn't that mean that we can put anything into universe then? I don't know, there's no real good explanation, IMO.

3) Free software. Yeah, there is a ton of free software. There is actually a half-decent replacement for almost every Windows app. You'd likely be hard-pressed to find an app that you can't replace to some degree of satisfaction for free. And if someone complains that they need to have every feature of MS Office, Adobe Photoshop, ProTools, etc. well, then they must be rich or are using warezed versions. In the case of the former, put some of that money into Linux and pay those companies to port, or to get contracts for other programmers to port. In the case of the latter, you have no right to complain.

4) Device drivers are always a sore spot. Now, I think you're right about the hardware stuff. A little utility "Hardware Recommendations" or somesuch would be handy. "I want to purchase..." with options such as "...a new video card, ...a new sound card, ...a new printer, ...a new scanner, ...etc" as the first choices, which could move on to "what is your budget?" or something like that. Obviously with search functionality, by type, brand, etc. I think it'd be handy for new users. And convenient for experienced users who aren't sure. They key would be to have it databased, with a local copy for offline users, and a constantly-updated central db somewhere (Canonical/Ubuntu/Whatever).

5) Wireless does indeed suck.I now have ethernet running out of an upstairs window, out around the side of the house, and into a window on the main floor... Hey, at least it works, and I don't have to drill holes in the wall.

6) Webcams. Yeah, I have a Logitech cam that doesn't apparently work... Not with the Logitech quickcam driver anyhow.

7) Vista is going to suck. A system much higher than mine was rated 3.1 out of 5. WHAT?! Stupid. Also, if you buy your hardware wisely, you have no issues. Windows doesn't come with NVIDIA's accelerated drivers, last I tried it. Ubuntu doesn't even require that you manually download the driver, just apt-get install it and run another command to enable it. This could be easier, yes, but it is much faster than on Windows for those who know how to do it. Hardware is something that we need to vote for with our wallets. And hope that more big Linux users (Disney or whatever) demand hardware support.

Brunellus
March 20th, 2006, 12:29 AM
Doesn't the knoppix live-cd come with qemu bundled? So you can run it without a reboot... I imagine it'd be slow, but for users with new hardware, I'd imagine it'd be useable...

EDIT: Maybe it was only version 3.8, http://www.knoppix.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=78849#78849

Damn small Linux has something similar
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/usb-qemu.html
I bet one could "burn" there own like this on cd or usb


I have DSL-embedded, and, while it's quite cool for my use--and makes for a nifty demonstration of just how flexible a Linux operating system can be--it doesn't show desktop Linux in a very good light.

DSL is a distro targetted to a very specific set of uses, and taken with (or even running within!) a full-bore XP install, it really suffers by comparison.

The Ubuntu livecds up to this point have been good, but disappointing--dog-slow compared to other liveCD projects (although I understand dapper will be an improvement).

To the people who continue to insist that usability will continue to be a barrier to further adoption, let me warn you against conflating "usability" with "being identical to Windows." there are a number of quirks and gotchas in Windows 2000 and Windows XP that I have only really noticed since I've been using Linux for about a year.

User interface design will continue to lag slightly behind features because of the culture of development (backend first, then interfaces).

nocturn
March 20th, 2006, 08:28 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.

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.

Still, for people needing specific keyboards (non-qwerty), there are not so many options arround. I have the bad luck to be in a rather small country that uses its own keyboard layout, so shopping abroad is difficult.

Regarding the eyecandy, I partially agree. Buying a machine with integrated Intel graphics will do fine for a lot of people, but for heavier users, it's a shame to go for a higher machine with an ATI card instead of an Nvidia.
They cost just as much and ATI's driver have a bad reputation in Linux.

nocturn
March 20th, 2006, 08:52 AM
- I have to edit /etc/fstab to to be able to mount and access my Windows partitions.



This is only an issue if you are dual booting. If you make a full switch, this does not exist.
Besides that, during your dual-boot time, windows is not mounting your Linux drives either (maybe some mail is stored there).



- I have to manually configure my WLAN connection with WPA encryption.



They are in the process of fixing this. I agree this is a need though.



- 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 incorrect. Ubuntu comes preinstalled with a mailclient, webbrowser etc. You can play all media out of the box, except the ones that are crippled by patents.



- 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.


Again, this is a non-native protocol. It's to access data on you Windows machines and is not an issue in a Linux-only network. If you make the switch, it does not make sense to keep a mixed environment.

And your windows does not support the NFS shares on your Linux machines at all.



- 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.



Can you give specific examples of several applications being installed for one purpose?

Regarding the defaults, they are a selection made by the Ubuntu devs, you can change them if you dislike them, but there is a working set of apps for the new user.

WindowsXP on the default install does not offer much BTW (I found no office application etc).



- 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.



Can you list languages for which this is the case? I have only used Dutch translations (mostly English though) and it is complete.



- Consistency and integration. KDE applications don't integrate well enough into Gnome and vice versa.



I do not consider this an issue. The availablity of multiple desktops that compete is a strength. It would be nice if they found some comon interface guidelines for menus etc, but not a requirement.

This is the same on WinXP though, I have both win32 native apps, QT, GTK and java apps on it and they do not look consistent either.



- Stability. While Linux and the GNU system are very stable a lot of the desktop software is not.


Again, can you list specific apps that are causing you trouble? I have been using Linux as my only desktop at home since 1999 and I have experienced less application crashes then on Windows.



- 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.


That seems to be true from my experience too. I do not know why.



- 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.


Ambiguous. I find this to be true for the current KDE desktop, but certainly not for Gnome, which is the default Ubuntu desktop.

Again comparing it to MS, even KDE doesn't do worse in clutter. The finest example is the configation screen of Outlook.



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.

I agree that that is what they want, and that is what they get if they would buy Pre-installed computers with Ubuntu...
I recently did a reinstall of a laptop of a friend with WinXP and Office. Even with the recovery CD's, it took about 6 hours total. With multiple visits too Google to get things going. Not exactly newbie stuff either.



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.


On most hardware, they do not need hours of googling to get things solved.
I have Ubuntu on a server, a desktop and a laptop (used to be two laptops).
The server and desktop worked out of the box, without any tweaking of googling. The laptop required only 1 or 2 tweaks, much less then inserting an extra CD to install drivers, sorry to say.
Every install was finished in less then 1.5 hours.



"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."


That is nonsense, sorry to say. There is little work required to make a machine usable with Ubuntu. From a shop's POV, they could make install images for common models which would take 10-15 minutes to install, with only 2 minutes interactive time from a human.

What Linux really needs to become more mainstream is support from a major OEM.

bugmenot
March 20th, 2006, 08:53 AM
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.

Sorry, but this doesn't compute.
First off, your argument is inconsistent.
You started by arguing that linux sucks for most consumers because you were worried that you couldn't get pre-alpha software to work on the graphic chips that came with most laptops. Not very convincing and as XGL and AIGLX work with Ati cards and intel chips even less so.

Now you are arguing that these cards won't be able to support XGL in the future. However, this is not the case right now and if anything, all the information available on this matter points to this not being the case in the future. So it's an absolute non-issue.

@Sirin:
Seriously, people like you annoy me.
Why? Not because they say something critical about linux, but because they simply don't know what they are talking about. There is plenty of system restore software for linux and many distributions do offer it ootb, for example Suse. Just because you don't have a clue, doesn't mean this software doesn't exist.

@DanielB:
The things that apply to Sirin also apply to you.
Most of the things you mention are Ubuntu shortcomings, if they are shortcomings at all. The problem with this kind of argument is that Ubuntu is not Linux. If anything, your arguments show your lack of knowledge, not some Linux shortcomings.

timas
March 20th, 2006, 09:43 AM
- 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.

That seems to be true from my experience too. I do not know why.


Windows 'fakes' speed by keeping the application running after its being closed. Office startup time is unmatched by anything simply due to the fact that they boot up the core of the packet as soon as you login to windows.. You can turn it off, but you have to manually stop the process if you want it to really stop after you've exited the application.

I've seen them use this on other applications too, I would not be suprised if Firefox and OpenOffice get the same treatment where its possible..

And as far as Linux not having trouble with NTFS drives if you just stick to Linux as the native OS.. you have to view that a bit more open, I think.. Linux is going to have to increase its numbers by converting Windows users.. there is just too many of them.. I'm one too for that matter.. I'm turning into a believer, but a lot of people might be doubtful.. and it would make things a lot easier for them if they could just access there data.. Aside of the fact that there people who have apps that just wont run on wine & co and thus are forced to run Windows of any kind..

I just came across this by accident while browsing the dutch Linux group website.. Dell is a partner:
See: http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/alliances/en/linux?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz
And: http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/compare.aspx/desktops_n?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd

poofyhairguy
March 20th, 2006, 04:43 PM
Sorry, but this doesn't compute.
First off, your argument is inconsistent.
You started by arguing that linux sucks for most consumers because you were worried that you couldn't get pre-alpha software to work on the graphic chips that came with most laptops.

That was not my arguement. Someone else put forth the "Linux Sucks" idea. My arguement is that the commonly used "excuse" that "your laptop does not work well with Linux because you did not buy it with Linux in mind" does not always apply because its sometimes hard to find a laptop perfect for Ubuntu. The fact that ATI is the dominant video card maker in the laptop market (besides Intel) nowadays make it hard to find good solutions. I could have mentioned other problems with finding laptops for Ubuntu, like the fact that the HP's that are "made for Ubuntu" have broadcom wireless chips inside them. I just focused on graphics cards because thats where I run into problems.

Many companies that ship preloaded Linux laptops have to have ATI cards because thats all the market gives them to work with. As a former ATI user, all I can say is that that situation sucks!



Not very convincing and as XGL and AIGLX work with Ati cards and intel chips even less so.

Neither as well as Nvidia though. Intel chipsets don't seem to accerate video 100% (plus I don't trust anything that eats the main ram for my graphics needs) and ATI chipsets need what I consider to be "bad" hacks (like forcing display=1) to work. Even then it might not (I tried all weekend to get a 9200 to work with XGL and I never succeeded).

But the issue is bigger than some eye candy. I have had troubles getting TV out to work with ATI cards in the past. With Nvidia cards I know the Twinview settings for monitor cloning (my favorite option for TV out) by heart. Yet if I wanted I could do TV Out on any modern Nvidia chipset in at least one other way (two all together). With ATI (an Intel?) its harder to get one way to work!

Plus I think my point still makes sense. If stuff like XGL is the future, why would I want to buy a high end laptop that might not work with it perfectly?



Now you are arguing that these cards won't be able to support XGL in the future. However, this is not the case right now and if anything, all the information available on this matter points to this not being the case in the future. So it's an absolute non-issue.


I am very picky with these things so maybe my examples will not apply to all. For me support means "being able to do EVERY single little trick that can be done with full support with the least amount of hacks." I'm the guy who bought a 6600 GT just for Linux eye candy.

But the point stands that Nvidia has the best graphics solutions for Linux (if you care not about closed drivers) yet its nearly impossible to find a new laptop with an Nvidia card that supports Linux well otherwise!

nocturn
March 20th, 2006, 04:47 PM
its nearly impossible to find a new laptop with an Nvidia card that supports Linux well otherwise!

I'll second that!

bugmenot
March 20th, 2006, 04:52 PM
That was not my arguement.

Except that it was:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=833304&postcount=52



Neither as well as Nvidia though. Intel chipsets don't seem to accerate video 100% (plus I don't trust anything that eats the main ram for my graphics needs) and ATI chipsets need what I consider to be "bad" hacks (like forcing display=1) to work. Even then it might not (I tried all weekend to get a 9200 to work with XGL and I never succeeded).

Again, arguing about how good pre-alpha software runs on them is absolutely irrelevant.



Plus I think my point still makes sense. If stuff like XGL is the future, why would I want to buy a high end laptop that might not work with it perfectly?

Again, there is no reason whatsoever to think that ati and intel will not work perfectly with XGL in the future.



But the point stands that Nvidia has the best graphics solutions for Linux (if you care not about closed drivers) yet its nearly impossible to find a new laptop with an Nvidia card that supports Linux well otherwise!
Oh, I agree with that, however, this was not the main point in any of your previous posts.

nocturn
March 20th, 2006, 04:57 PM
Again, there is no reason whatsoever to think that ati and intel will not work perfectly with XGL in the future.


They will probably work, but...
Intel cards mostly use shared memory and are nowhere near as powerfull as ATI/Nvidia models. This does not apply to XGL alone, it's also an issue for things like games.

ATI does make powerfull cards, but the drivers have been a constant source of problems in Linux, and I'm not talking about XGL support.

If you want a laptop with powerfull graphics and good drivers (even though closed source), Nvidia is currently your only option. The sad part is that they are difficult to find.

poofyhairguy
March 20th, 2006, 05:37 PM
Except that it was:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=833304&postcount=52.

Not once in that post did I say "that linux sucks for most consumers because...." Heck, I did not use the word suck in the post at all. All I said was that it's not as easy to find a great Linux laptop as it was implied to be.



Again, arguing about how good pre-alpha software runs on them is absolutely irrelevant.

If I was a Windows user still, I would want any laptop I buy this year to work perfectly with Vista when its released even though its alpha software now. I constantly look to the future, like every good nerd should.



Again, there is no reason whatsoever to think that ati and intel will not work perfectly with XGL in the future..

Except for ATI's horrible track record with Linux eye candy and the fact that the excitement over all of this has shown that the Intel driver might need major reworking to work well with XGL, then yeah no reason what so ever.



Oh, I agree with that, however, this was not the main point in any of your previous posts.

No, my main point is that its hard to find "the perfect Linux laptop." If I wanted something like you get with an Apple laptop (composited desktop + all hardware works + all features work) then I have to REALLY work at it.

The graphics cards was just the example I used as that is what I know the most about.

seanmc42
March 20th, 2006, 06:21 PM
"But can I ask why you don't just use the CD/DVD-burning capabilities built-in to Nautilus? Or did I miss something here that says you tried it and it didn't work?"

...didn't know about it - I'll try that!
But - I have a "thing" for the command-line.

dolson
March 20th, 2006, 06:56 PM
I like the command line too :)

But sometimes, the GUI is better suited, or just works better. At least in my experience. It'd be cool to see how your experience compares.

DanielB
March 20th, 2006, 11:53 PM
This is only an issue if you are dual booting. If you make a full switch, this does not exist.
Besides that, during your dual-boot time, windows is not mounting your Linux drives either (maybe some mail is stored there).

That's true. A lot of people are dual booting though.
The fact that Windows does not mount my Linux partitions is still no excuse that Linux does not mount my windows partitions without user intervention in my opinion. I always read stuff like that whenever one brings up critism. Maybe we should not so much look at what XP does wrong but think about how Linux can do it better.



This is incorrect. Ubuntu comes preinstalled with a mailclient, webbrowser etc. You can play all media out of the box, except the ones that are crippled by patents.

Yeah, it comes with a webbrowser that is not 100% useable because essential stuff like Java, Flash, Real, Acrobat, etc. are missing. The casual user does not care about the reasons for that. I am not a lawyer and I don't know which format has patent issues. However, it would be nice to popup a dialog after installation that makes it a breeze to install all that stuff ala EasyUbuntu (adding repositories, downloading and installing packages) if that is possible from a legal point of view ?



Again, this is a non-native protocol. It's to access data on you Windows machines and is not an issue in a Linux-only network. If you make the switch, it does not make sense to keep a mixed environment.

And your windows does not support the NFS shares on your Linux machines at all.

Now that argument is totally flawed. I would expect something like that from a MS guy but not from an open source supporter. If I remember correctly it's the open source people who are cursing MS for not opening their protocols and file formats which leads to poor interoperability, etc.

First of all, with the issues I listed I am not necessarily refering to issues a Linux user faces on his home network. I am also thinking of Linux on business
desktops.

While CIFS may be not a native protocol it's an often used protocol. You are kinda forced to use it if you want to integrate a Linux desktop into a Windows network.

Nobody is going to throw away their Windows servers if they want to put Linux on a few desktops. Apart from that, NFS V3 is insecure and NFS v4 is not stable yet. CIFS may even be a good protocol to use when you are only using Linux and thanks to the UNIX extensions it even works for stuff like /home directories, etc. By the way,

With SFU Windows can access NFS - it can be downloaded free of charge from MS website. Sadly integrating a Linux server into an AD domain is much more hassle free than the other way around, but that's another issue.



Can you give specific examples of several applications being installed for one purpose?

Regarding the defaults, they are a selection made by the Ubuntu devs, you can change them if you dislike them, but there is a working set of apps for the new user.

WindowsXP on the default install does not offer much BTW (I found no office application etc).

As I said, the list was not Unbutu specific so it's possible that Unbuntu does it right and associates 1 application per MIME type. I don't necessarily dislike the defaults - I dislike the fact that the defaults don't work properly with the most common file types like MP3 and I have to manually install and configure things. Again, something like EasyUbuntu popping up after the installation could solve the problem.

Again you are referring to what XP does wrong. If MS was to bundle a crippled version of Office with XP you would probably start to cry about abusing a monopoly. Despise the fact that you would be right about abusing a monopoly we should probably drop the double standards.



Can you list languages for which this is the case? I have only used Dutch translations (mostly English though) and it is complete.

I am using the german translation. Launchpad lists the translation as mostly complete. Maybe the changes didn't spread to the updater yet though. Remember, I am using Dapper. Some translations are just looking weird ("Online Hilfe bekommen", "Uhren-Fabrik-Applet").



I do not consider this an issue. The availablity of multiple desktops that compete is a strength. It would be nice if they found some comon interface guidelines for menus etc, but not a requirement.

This is the same on WinXP though, I have both win32 native apps, QT, GTK and java apps on it and they do not look consistent either.

While the availablity of multiple desktops is definetly a good thing it also leads to issues. Linux big strength of choice is also it's biggest weakness from a vendors point of view when it comes to integration, hardware support, etc. While your Windows desktop might not be consistent, most people, especially in the business world are used to consistenty on the desktops.



Again, can you list specific apps that are causing you trouble? I have been using Linux as my only desktop at home since 1999 and I have experienced less application crashes then on Windows.

I don't remember Firefox or OpenOffice crashing under either desktop environment. However, Gnome and KDE in general but especially the little goodies that come with it. I am not sure which program or library was reponsible. Again, my list was not exactly Ubuntu specific. Also, I kinda just started using Ubuntu, so I cannot comment on it's general stability. I had a few issues with SPE hanging, but if I remember correctly (correct me if I am wrong), its not on the list of officially supported packages on Unbuntu ? On the bright side, I only had an issue with the clock applet crashing after chaning my hostname - everything else is stable so far.



Ambiguous. I find this to be true for the current KDE desktop, but certainly not for Gnome, which is the default Ubuntu desktop.

Again comparing it to MS, even KDE doesn't do worse in clutter. The finest example is the configation screen of Outlook.

Yes, as I said, Gnome is much more sane when it comes to being polished.
Again, Outlooks configuration dialog maybe cluttered - no excuse for Linux to do the same mistakes.



I agree that that is what they want, and that is what they get if they would buy Pre-installed computers with Ubuntu...
I recently did a reinstall of a laptop of a friend with WinXP and Office. Even with the recovery CD's, it took about 6 hours total. With multiple visits too Google to get things going. Not exactly newbie stuff either.

As it stands now, that is not the case. They won't be able to play MP3s or watch movies. They have to search the web for methods to install the required software. Again, displaying a notice after installation (through the user or OEMs) would make things much more comfortable.



On most hardware, they do not need hours of googling to get things solved.
I have Ubuntu on a server, a desktop and a laptop (used to be two laptops).
The server and desktop worked out of the box, without any tweaking of googling. The laptop required only 1 or 2 tweaks, much less then inserting an extra CD to install drivers, sorry to say.
Every install was finished in less then 1.5 hours.

I agree that hardware detection forcommon devices (WLAN WPA aside) works fine but there are issues like the ones mentioned in my post that are not hardware related. Again I will bring up the CIFS integration : Imagine a household with 2 PCs. 1 is running Linux and 1 is running Windows. The Windows user want to share data with the

Linux user. Creation of the network share aside, the windows can just map the network share conviently. Windows will remember the mapping after logging in. Windows won't ask for passwords every 5 minutes and applications can use data from the network drive without hassle. On the Linux side things are not that easy. Sure, Gnome includes a network browser but most apps cannot open the data from there. To make that work you have to manually mount the shares and even then they won't be restored

if you restart. For that to work you have to dive into PAM and get something like pam_mount setup and working. No prior knowledge on the user side, time required on the Windows - 10 minutes. Time to make the same thing work on Linux : Hours of frustration. The user will probably give up.



That is nonsense, sorry to say. There is little work required to make a machine usable with Ubuntu. From a shop's POV, they could make install images for common models which would take 10-15 minutes to install, with only 2 minutes interactive time from a human.

I think we have a very different understanding of "useable". Sure, you can quickly install the system and let the user figure out the rest. However, what happens if the user wants to use his laptop at work and on his home network ? You have to setup different profiles which is painful. You have to make sure he can access the data on the coperate LAN and his home network. Now imagine he also wants to work from home over an IPSEC line. Setting up a VPN client under Windows takes 10 minutes. On Linux you have to install OpenSWAN, usually recompile the kernel, configure the software and find a way to provide the user with a frontend for it. Add a few more "special" cases and you will end up with a lot of time required to set everything up.



What Linux really needs to become more mainstream is support from a major OEM.

No, Linux needs to become more mainstream for OEMs to support it - that's just not going to happen until it can be used in more than very specific cases convenietly.

Let's get real : no major OEM will suddenly start to sell Linux based PCs out of all sudden. That means Linux needs to be interoperable and easy to integrate into existing networks since the business desktop will be the target for Linux in the near future. Talking about interoperability : Sadly MS will not support ODF in the upcoming Office release, let alone making that the default format. Suppose that was to be expected though. This is another major point where Linux needs to provide good interoperbility to be succesful on the desktop.

Let me clarify : I am a happy Linux user and I will keep Ubuntu on my desktop, you guys did some nice work with it and I am excited about the final release of Dapper. Installation of the base system (WPA and additional software like plugins aside) was smooth. Hardware detection worked fine (except for my touchpad, it kinda works but the movement speed is _very_ slow). Also fonts look good and installating additional free software is convenient through apt. On the other hand I think pointing out where Linux is lacking in my opinion should not be taken as a flame or religously :)

MetalMusicAddict
March 21st, 2006, 12:00 AM
Let's get real : no major OEM will suddenly start to sell Linux based PCs out of all sudden. That means Linux needs to be interoperable and easy to integrate into existing networks since the business desktop will be the target for Linux in the near future. Talking about interoperability : Sadly MS will not support ODF in the upcoming Office release, let alone making that the default format. Suppose that was to be expected though. This is another major point where Linux needs to provide good interoperbility to be succesful on the desktop.Honestly I havnt seen where Linux doesnt. Ive had no problems with my multi OS environment except ones created by propritary formats. Usually MS ones.

Virogenesis
March 21st, 2006, 01:45 AM
That's true. A lot of people are dual booting though.
The fact that Windows does not mount my Linux partitions is still no excuse that Linux does not mount my windows partitions without user intervention in my opinion. I always read stuff like that whenever one brings up critism. Maybe we should not so much look at what XP does wrong but think about how Linux can do it better.
Why shouldn't it? Show me how many users know that they can install two or more different os systems?
Linux can read fat 32....if you need to share your data make a fat 32 partition.



Yeah, it comes with a webbrowser that is not 100% useable because essential stuff like Java, Flash, Real, Acrobat, etc. are missing. The casual user does not care about the reasons for that. I am not a lawyer and I don't know which format has patent issues. However, it would be nice to popup a dialog after installation that makes it a breeze to install all that stuff ala EasyUbuntu (adding repositories, downloading and installing packages) if that is possible from a legal point of view ? Since when?
Java doesn't come preloaded with xp.
Nor does flash, Nor does Acrobat and same goes with flash so thats flawed.
Same goes with divx and xvid



Again you are referring to what XP does wrong. If MS was to bundle a crippled version of Office with XP you would probably start to cry about abusing a monopoly. Despise the fact that you would be right about abusing a monopoly we should probably drop the double standards.
So true we would and you know why?
Because they would make it work with no other format look at mac right now mac intel users can not play WMV files due to microsoft's politics.





While the availablity of multiple desktops is definetly a good thing it also leads to issues. Linux big strength of choice is also it's biggest weakness from a vendors point of view when it comes to integration, hardware support, etc. While your Windows desktop might not be consistent, most people, especially in the business world are used to consistenty on the desktops.
Drivers are drivers.... so hardware support isn't a issue across multiply distros good example is the nvidia drivers.





As it stands now, that is not the case. They won't be able to play MP3s or watch movies. They have to search the web for methods to install the required software. Again, displaying a notice after installation (through the user or OEMs) would make things much more comfortable.
Total BS Novell has overcome this problem as they pay for the use of the patents its the patents that stop community based distros its not a linux problem.



I think we have a very different understanding of "useable". Sure, you can quickly install the system and let the user figure out the rest. However, what happens if the user wants to use his laptop at work and on his home network ? You have to setup different profiles which is painful. You have to make sure he can access the data on the coperate LAN and his home network. Now imagine he also wants to work from home over an IPSEC line. Setting up a VPN client under Windows takes 10 minutes. On Linux you have to install OpenSWAN, usually recompile the kernel, configure the software and find a way to provide the user with a frontend for it. Add a few more "special" cases and you will end up with a lot of time required to set everything up.
Wrong again....




No, Linux needs to become more mainstream for OEMs to support it - that's just not going to happen until it can be used in more than very specific cases convenietly. ermm well its funny that novell have tons of deals popping up



Let's get real : no major OEM will suddenly start to sell Linux based PCs out of all sudden. That means Linux needs to be interoperable and easy to integrate into existing networks since the business desktop will be the target for Linux in the near future. Talking about interoperability : Sadly MS will not support ODF in the upcoming Office release, let alone making that the default format. Suppose that was to be expected though. This is another major point where Linux needs to provide good interoperbility to be succesful on the desktop. ermm I suggest you go and have a look at novell yet again... also linux boxes have existed for some time now

Linux = kernel ubuntu = distro
Just because ubuntu has problems doesn't mean they exist in other distros

nocturn
March 21st, 2006, 09:35 AM
That's true. A lot of people are dual booting though.
The fact that Windows does not mount my Linux partitions is still no excuse that Linux does not mount my windows partitions without user intervention in my opinion. I always read stuff like that whenever one brings up critism. Maybe we should not so much look at what XP does wrong but think about how Linux can do it better.



I really disagree with this and with the CIFS integration. The availability of NTFS and CIFS is nice for people who have a windows legacy to take care of, but not a feature in itself. NTFS and the MS CIFS implementation are not open procols/formats and support for them is an addon, not a priority feature (like I would like NFSv4 to be).



Yeah, it comes with a webbrowser that is not 100% useable because essential stuff like Java, Flash, Real, Acrobat, etc. are missing. The casual user does not care about the reasons for that. I am not a lawyer and I don't know which format has patent issues. However, it would be nice to popup a dialog after installation that makes it a breeze to install all that stuff ala EasyUbuntu (adding repositories, downloading and installing packages) if that is possible from a legal point of view ?



Including something on the main CD like easyUbuntu or Automatix is illegal in the US, the DMCA is rather broad and punishments are harsh.
Java is included in the form of GNU Java, which is not up to speed yet.
Sun Java, Flash, Real and Acrobat are all incompatible with the license under which Ubuntu is released. That said, I have my Ubuntu systems installed since Warty and only one of the has Flash, none have Java or Acrobat (Evince takes care of PDF's just fine).



Now that argument is totally flawed. I would expect something like that from a MS guy but not from an open source supporter. If I remember correctly it's the open source people who are cursing MS for not opening their protocols and file formats which leads to poor interoperability, etc.

First of all, with the issues I listed I am not necessarily refering to issues a Linux user faces on his home network. I am also thinking of Linux on business
desktops.

While CIFS may be not a native protocol it's an often used protocol. You are kinda forced to use it if you want to integrate a Linux desktop into a Windows network.

Nobody is going to throw away their Windows servers if they want to put Linux on a few desktops. Apart from that, NFS V3 is insecure and NFS v4 is not stable yet. CIFS may even be a good protocol to use when you are only using Linux and thanks to the UNIX extensions it even works for stuff like /home directories, etc. By the way,

With SFU Windows can access NFS - it can be downloaded free of charge from MS website. Sadly integrating a Linux server into an AD domain is much more hassle free than the other way around, but that's another issue.



I'm not an open source guy, I'm a Free Software guy. I'm all for including support for as many formats and protocols as humanly possible in Linux, but they have to be completely open.
I know NFSv3 is insecure, but I would rather have the devs focus on NFSv4 support instead of CIFS. If I remember correctly, CIFS is not very secure either.

There are a lot of things that need improvement in Linux, like an easy installation of Kerberos and OpenLDAP, management tools etc. I prefer that the focus stays on these instead of integration with proprietary software.



I dislike the fact that the defaults don't work properly with the most common file types like MP3 and I have to manually install and configure things. Again, something like EasyUbuntu popping up after the installation could solve the problem.



The associations are fine except for those formats that we cannot support without legal implications. Unfortunately, MP3 is a patented format. So is WMV and some others. There is not much we can do about this without risking legal exposure.



Again you are referring to what XP does wrong. If MS was to bundle a crippled version of Office with XP you would probably start to cry about abusing a monopoly. Despise the fact that you would be right about abusing a monopoly we should probably drop the double standards.



We don't have double standards. If MS cripples Office (like not including OpenDoc support), they do so by choice and often with a specific agenda, like breaking interoperability with competitors.
If we do not support MP3 or Sun Java, we do so because their licenses are not acceptable, not to lock anyone out.
Ubuntu is a Free distro, this means we have to make decisions both on legal and moral grounds, not only practical ones.



I am using the german translation. Launchpad lists the translation as mostly complete. Maybe the changes didn't spread to the updater yet though. Remember, I am using Dapper. Some translations are just looking weird ("Online Hilfe bekommen", "Uhren-Fabrik-Applet").


You didn't make this nuance in your original post, so people reading this thread will think that translations in the production version are not complete.

Have you filed bug reports for these issues?



While the availablity of multiple desktops is definetly a good thing it also leads to issues. Linux big strength of choice is also it's biggest weakness from a vendors point of view when it comes to integration, hardware support, etc. While your Windows desktop might not be consistent, most people, especially in the business world are used to consistenty on the desktops.



Again, I would welcome more consistency, I would like to have a common set of human interface guidelines between major desktops. But I think that will not happen since the goals of Gnome and KDE are too far apart with either side leaning to an extreme. Still, strength comes from diversity and innovations on either desktop spur improvements on the other.

But still, when you choose a distro, say Ubuntu, you can stick for at least 90% to apps on one desktop. (I only need one QT app on Ubuntu).



I don't remember Firefox or OpenOffice crashing under either desktop environment. However, Gnome and KDE in general but especially the little goodies that come with it. I am not sure which program or library was reponsible. Again, my list was not exactly Ubuntu specific. Also, I kinda just started using Ubuntu, so I cannot comment on it's general stability. I...
everything else is stable so far.


I have been using Ubuntu since Warty on mulitple machines. The only instability I've had only once was caused by the closed Nvidia drivers.

Your previous remark about instability makes people reading this thread believe that you have regular application crashes on Ubuntu, which you now say isn't the case.



Yes, as I said, Gnome is much more sane when it comes to being polished.
Again, Outlooks configuration dialog maybe cluttered - no excuse for Linux to do the same mistakes.


That is why the Gnome project is putting such strain on interface guidelines, so this is an area where Linux is going the right way. Even KDE is coming arround to this line of thinking (though not so extreme as Gnome). KDE4 is supposed to have a much cleaner interface.

But I would still like to point out that Windows has by far the most interface clutter I've seen so far, yet it is the dominant system. Both Gnome and MacOS X seem to lead the way here.



As it stands now, that is not the case. They won't be able to play MP3s or watch movies. They have to search the web for methods to install the required software. Again, displaying a notice after installation (through the user or OEMs) would make things much more comfortable.



If you are an OEM in a country where DMCA-like laws do not apply, you can safely bundle both MP3 playback and DVD support with Ubuntu, so it will work for your users out of the box.

For now, Ubuntu cannot include these globally since that would require us to make sure nobody in the US could get their hands on this version. Each developer working on that part could be arrested when entering the US if they did.

This may be a problem, but it can only be fixed by removing the offending laws, it cannot be fixed withing the Linux community.



I agree that hardware detection forcommon devices (WLAN WPA aside) works fine but there are issues like the ones mentioned in my post that are not hardware related. Again I will bring up the CIFS integration : Imagine a household with 2 PCs. 1 is running Linux and 1 is running Windows. The Windows user want to share data with the

Gnome includes a network browser but most apps cannot open the data from there. To make that work you have to manually mount the shares and even then they won't be restored



Again, I do not think focussing on integration with a closed platform should be a priority.
But I do agree that the behaviour of being able to browse the network but not open apps from there is not consistent, so I would perfer this option is disabled completely until it is well supported by applications.



if you restart. For that to work you have to dive into PAM and get something like pam_mount setup and working. No prior knowledge on the user side, time required on the Windows - 10 minutes. Time to make the same thing work on Linux : Hours of frustration. The user will probably give up.


But again, you are talking about support for a closed, non native protocol. How long would it take a newbie to get a WebDAV share mounted on Windows, or an NFS one? Only SMB/CIFS works properly on Windows without jumping through hoops.




I think we have a very different understanding of "useable". Sure, you can quickly install the system and let the user figure out the rest. However, what happens if the user wants to use his laptop at work and on his home network ? You have to setup different profiles which is painful. You have to make sure he can access the data on the coperate LAN and his home network. Now imagine he also wants to work from home over an IPSEC line.


Yes we do. Buy a Windows XP CD with a PC and install it. You have to pop in numerous driver CD's before it completes. After about the same amount of time to install Ubuntu, your XP desktop appears. What do you have?
Where is the Office suite, where is the SIP phone? I do not consider that a useable system at all.

For that money and amount of time you invested, you can play patience and use notepad on your very expensive computer.

After a fresh Ubuntu install, you do have a functional desktop. If you require special setups you may have to do some work, but the default desktop is certainly functional.

That said, I find it much easier to fire up synaptic and add mp3 support and other apps then to go to webpages and download software that may be spyware infected to get my system to work... Not even to mention having newbie users deal with Anti-Virus and Anti-Spyware...

programgeek
March 21st, 2006, 12:07 PM
Whenever I post an argument or debate like this it gets deleted as "flamebait"

What makes this kid so special?

nocturn
March 21st, 2006, 12:10 PM
Whenever I post an argument or debate like this it gets deleted as "flamebait"

What makes this kid so special?

To who are you referring?

AndyCooll
March 21st, 2006, 03:07 PM
Whenever I post an argument or debate like this it gets deleted as "flamebait"

What makes this kid so special?

I'm not sure how you portray your arguments, but it seems to me that this "kid" is allowed to continue because he isn't trying to flamebait rather he is trying to put across a rational, thoughtful and alternative point of view. Some may disagree with what he says, however his views at least deserve equally thoughtful replies.

TeeAhr1
March 21st, 2006, 05:36 PM
PS: To whom it may concern , My suggestion for Linux >>> Would be to have more tech support available
I must say that I wonder at this statement. I find the quality and timeliness of the support I get here on these forums to be superior in every way to payed, by-phone support. These folks actually take the time to listen to my problem, and give me an answer for me, not a one-size-fits-all answer that they're reading off a script.

And really, even if you feel the burning, illogical need to pay money for it, you can get RHEL, or Linspire. Canonical will reportedly be providing payed support for Dapper.

Brunellus
March 21st, 2006, 05:39 PM
I must say that I wonder at this statement. I find the quality and timeliness of the support I get here on these forums to be superior in every way to payed, by-phone support. These folks actually take the time to listen to my problem, and give me an answer for me, not a one-size-fits-all answer that they're reading off a script.

And really, even if you feel the burning, illogical need to pay money for it, you can get RHEL, or Linspire. Canonical will reportedly be providing payed support for Dapper.
canonical already do provide paid support for all officially supported versions of ubuntu...but only for packages in the main repository (universe/multiverse not included). There is also Impi Linux (ubuntu's commercial sibling, also owned by M. Shuttleworth).

TeeAhr1
March 21st, 2006, 05:40 PM
One other thing I should mention is , How many user's would there be if Linux wasn't free?
Way more, without a doubt. They don't see it because they can't buy it at the store, and (here in America, anyway) if you can't buy it, it doesn't exist. People are phobic about free solutions, and assume that they must, by definition, be inferior.

Brunellus
March 21st, 2006, 05:48 PM
Way more, without a doubt. They don't see it because they can't buy it at the store, and (here in America, anyway) if you can't buy it, it doesn't exist. People are phobic about free solutions, and assume that they must, by definition, be inferior.
yeah. but then they tend to get a bit uncomfortable when you point out one loophole:

you can pay for sex, too, but does that make it better?

poofyhairguy
March 22nd, 2006, 06:54 PM
Whenever I post an argument or debate like this it gets deleted as "flamebait"

What makes this kid so special?

Its all about tone and response.

jimrz
March 23rd, 2006, 05:26 AM
I kind of like the slogan and agree that there are many ways (by design?) that it can be taken. However, to me, this thread, these formums and the people who populate them ARE what ubuntu is....and I love it

PS- Aysiu: be glad your cat only likes to sniff the keyboard. Mine thinks she is a far better typist than I and frequently attempts to demonstrate her point.

s_spiff
March 23rd, 2006, 07:21 AM
... brings the word Democracy to my head... and the word democracy suit well to ubuntu too.. by the people..for the poeple..

JoshHendo
March 23rd, 2006, 08:20 AM
Really, Ubuntu has to be the easiest to use free linux distro. Though if you don't know anything about computers, you can still use Ubuntu, though it would be good to have a computer literate person to set it up for you and show you how it works :)

aysiu
March 23rd, 2006, 08:31 AM
I guess it depends on what you consider "easy."

In terms of going through the steps, it doesn't ask you too many difficult questions, and it has one app per task, one desktop environment, and one starting user with one starting password. It has simplicity going for it.

But for point-and-click installation and configuration, Mepis and PCLinuxOS are far "easier" and are also cost-free. They also include a lot of proprietary codecs, which are popular among new users.

trent dillman
March 30th, 2006, 12:19 PM
... brings the word Democracy to my head... and the word democracy suit well to ubuntu too.. by the people..for the poeple..

Funny, I was thinking Communism...

lol

nauseaboy
March 30th, 2006, 10:19 PM
Funny, I was thinking Communism...

lol

Eric Raymond just got furious somewere. :-p

Stormy Eyes
March 30th, 2006, 10:43 PM
Funny, I was thinking Communism...

Do you really want to link Linux with an ideology that has been used to justify tyranny and mass murder?

nickle
March 31st, 2006, 12:17 AM
"for human beings" in its own right is kind of dumb. Like many marketing slogans, when you isloate it and view it in the harsh critical light it simply seems ridiculuous.

However, marketing rarely targets the intellect front on, humans are more complex and interesting than pure intelect. However, "dumb" the slogan may be, the ubuntu idea has caught on. We suddenly have a product and a forum that contributes to an idea AND best of all, this forum brings the best out in people that regularly contribute.
At the end of the day we are all suseptable to slogans. But rather than condem it from the outset, give it a chance and see what happens. It may continue to evolve it the positive way it has up to now, it may degenerate to a hollow ideal and will ultimately be surpassed in the evolution of ideas.

After all of that I guess I have to say, I am not sure what it means, but the positive sentiment expressed in the slogan, together with the collective work of many has contributed to someting positive.

I love this complicated world that will always be beyond my understanding...

Mikieboyblue
March 31st, 2006, 05:09 AM
To put it in simple terms. I know Windows very well. And can do everything on it that has been needed (servers for example) with all the same software installed in 1/4 the amount of time.

Now I am writing this from a Ubuntu box that I just set up. And let me tell you. Linux is behind. Way behind. There are too many distros, too many different types of packages, too many repos you need that aren't there by default to get the newest stuff, too many things that are left out (Firefox 1.5?? -- where's the deb?), GUI issues (text wrapping problems, confusing panels, limited themes [in Gnome - KDE is better for that but has other issues], ....).

Basically, the average Joe Sixpack needs a system that will run and let them do what they want, get updates and have the latest software that is easy to use and will be compatible with their friends, and so on.

Windows has a major advantage since it uses static binary distrobution. Makes updates a breeze.

From my experience, the Linux community needs to pay attention to detail from a UCD stand point and should standardize on some method for package distrobution and installation.

Have I had problems with my Windows server? No.

Does it cost me more money? No.

Does it save me time? When in a bind and it needs to be done and it needs the newest software, yes.

Does it run slow? No. Linux I have found is slower until you spend hours configuring it. (I have done Gentoo many times).

BSOD? I haven't seen one since Windows 2k - user error?

Virsuses? Sure a risk but if you have common sense they arn't.

...... and the list goes on.

I don't mean to offend anyone and am not looking to get into a heat arguement. I just feel the Linux community wants to be the desktop standard but just doesn't pay attention to the right spots (replace X already! -- yes I know it is comming soon).

It is just frustrating that there are many hoops to jump though and as in the first page of this post - users need less clicks, straight forward panels, ease of use...

I work on mainframes, when was the last time you saw you dad hope on a terminal...or DOS?

Even massive mainframes are moving to web-based administration. None of that replaces the power of the terminal and should always be available becuse it is better for many things, but sometimes the beauty of color and windows is handy.

If only everyone would work together...If you could combine Windows, OSx and Linux, hell you'd have a heck of a system.

Long live Linux! --- it's free and legal!

Mike

BoyOfDestiny
March 31st, 2006, 07:22 AM
To put it in simple terms. I know Windows very well. And can do everything on it that has been needed (servers for example) with all the same software installed in 1/4 the amount of time.

Now I am writing this from a Ubuntu box that I just set up. And let me tell you. Linux is behind. Way behind. There are too many distros, too many different types of packages, too many repos you need that aren't there by default to get the newest stuff, too many things that are left out (Firefox 1.5?? -- where's the deb?), GUI issues (text wrapping problems, confusing panels, limited themes [in Gnome - KDE is better for that but has other issues], ....).

Basically, the average Joe Sixpack needs a system that will run and let them do what they want, get updates and have the latest software that is easy to use and will be compatible with their friends, and so on.

Windows has a major advantage since it uses static binary distrobution. Makes updates a breeze.

From my experience, the Linux community needs to pay attention to detail from a UCD stand point and should standardize on some method for package distrobution and installation.

Have I had problems with my Windows server? No.

Does it cost me more money? No.

Does it save me time? When in a bind and it needs to be done and it needs the newest software, yes.

Does it run slow? No. Linux I have found is slower until you spend hours configuring it. (I have done Gentoo many times).

BSOD? I haven't seen one since Windows 2k - user error?

Virsuses? Sure a risk but if you have common sense they arn't.

...... and the list goes on.

I don't mean to offend anyone and am not looking to get into a heat arguement. I just feel the Linux community wants to be the desktop standard but just doesn't pay attention to the right spots (replace X already! -- yes I know it is comming soon).

It is just frustrating that there are many hoops to jump though and as in the first page of this post - users need less clicks, straight forward panels, ease of use...

I work on mainframes, when was the last time you saw you dad hope on a terminal...or DOS?

Even massive mainframes are moving to web-based administration. None of that replaces the power of the terminal and should always be available becuse it is better for many things, but sometimes the beauty of color and windows is handy.

If only everyone would work together...If you could combine Windows, OSx and Linux, hell you'd have a heck of a system.

Long live Linux! --- it's free and legal!

Mike

Ok, you just installed Ubuntu. Disadvantage Linux has too many distros... Irrelevant, I think, you picked one.

Too many different types of packages? Ubuntu uses .debs and usually you'll see tarballs for source files (not an issue for users just using the repos). That's all I've seen since using Ubuntu (I was linux n00b a little over a year ago.)

The repo issue seems much better with Dapper, you can enable what you need via gui, and the add/remove app has improved.

As for having backports, that is just the way it is with centralized package managment (and keeping things "stable" new software may be fine for you and me, but not on a mission critical system.) I'll mention this is a perk over windows, since you can literally install 50 or so apps in minutes (well selecting them, it helps if you have broadband when it comes to the downloading part.) Seriously, since I've done it, I can have my system tweaked and loaded in about 20minutes (especially if you put /home on a different partition, no stupid Windows registry...)

Linux is fast... Well Dapper is fast, breezy did feel more sluggish compared to it... Anyway, optimizations etc are being worked on.

As for xorg, it's improving in that respect as well.

Depends on your hardware, frankly I didn't have any hoops to jump through on my desktop.

About 20 years ago I think. Unless you count the fake "command" environment XP has.

Fine and dandy, web interface or terminal, at least you have a choice.

No BSOD since 2000? Could it be since XP (by default) will just reboot your machine with no warning?

There are more than just viruses, loads of malware, and exploits (ok I know this is normal for everything) but with Windows you normally have to wait until MS decides to release patches (every 2nd tuesday? Bah, why not go by the moon? :P)

As for combining all the different OS's I'll pass. I like cooperation, competition, and choice. Read the Mythical Man Month, in terms of just adding people and assuming it will get done better/faster.

EDIT: Corrected Book title. Thanks for the correction prizak, it's been a few years since I've read it. Between silver bullets, miracles, myths, lol something got mixed up :)

prizrak
March 31st, 2006, 08:44 AM
BoyOfDestiny,
It's "A Mythical Man Month" not "Miracle" :)
Mikieboyblue,
Yes you can do things with Windows incredibly fast, and an experienced Linux admin can do everything with Linux just as fast if not faster. Yes there is tweaking involved, which is very much WHY Linux is the OS of choice for servers, it will only run what you need it to and not have anything else.
I'm a bit confused in what terms you are talking tho. If you are talking professional applications like servers and such well there is very little argument since Linux has a huge market share there and many companies are switching to it from other OS's. Also if you are talking professional (business) use then length of setup time is irrelevant, Windows or Linux will take a long time to set up with all the software that is needed, user permissions and so on. Linux would be a better choice since there is no mandatory upgrade like there is with MS products. Personal use, if you are talking Joe Sixpack he don't need no latest software or anything, he won't care or know the difference. Joe Sixpack needs an OS to come with his computer simple as that, he wouldn't be able to install either OS and set it up right (unless he uses a restore CD, which is hardly an actual resintall). Now if you are talking Windows power users then yes Linux is HORRIBLE. You come from an environment where you know (almost)everything to an environment where you are as lost as an elephant in the north pole, get frustrated fast and leave. I was like that for a while but I'm one stubborn bastard so I even managed to run a Linux based FTP server for a while.

aysiu
March 31st, 2006, 08:47 AM
I'm with prizrak on this one, as can be evidenced by the many threads and articles I've written on the subject.

awakatanka
March 31st, 2006, 11:20 AM
I have installed some dual boots for some family members, i have done it because they always had spyware our virus on there windows and complained about not working our slow windows.

There experience was that linux is different but not hard if they used the installed programs.

1 of them bought a new printer without asking me, he installed it on windows with a breeze, cd in cdrom following the steps and done. He tryed to install it under kubuntu ofcourse he failed, he asked me to do it, luckly he had bought the same printer i used so it was easy to find the debs for it, but he found it way more work then under windows when he saw me do it. Conclusion from what he saw it was more work and more difficult to understand and to do even more difficult.

Also i have told them all they had to try to install some prg's i didn't installed because i wanted to see if it was easy for them. Al tryed to use adept / synaptic and found it easy but...... what they didn't like was the english discription's and they didn't know exactly what it was they installed because there where no screenshot's.This could also be the case ofcourse on websites for windows stuff in windows they surf to the website look at screenshots and installed it. Conlusion it was almost the same for them and both ways they found easy if they know what the search.

It has a learning curve but they found it easy to use if it was preconfigured for them. Installing software was almost the same and they could life with it our they just call me ( almost same as before ;) ). New hardware is a problem that only can be solved by someone that knows about linux. The persone that had new hardware couldn't understand why it was easier on windows then on linux. Tryed to explain but he didn't understand.

Also i showed some cli work but that's something they will never touch.

Overall experience is that it almost the same for them except the hardware part. And its better then i expected because i thought i would be more dificult for them. See my past posts from acouple of months ago.

Eyecandy isn't a problem because you can give linux more eyecandy on a easier way then windows with there 3th party prg's.

After seeing it myself i adjust my thought to a more positive way about linux userfriendlyness.

adamkane
March 31st, 2006, 05:24 PM
Linux isn't easier, just better.

aysiu
March 31st, 2006, 05:36 PM
awakatanka, thanks for sharing those experiences.

I've had only two experiences introducing Linux to the uninitiated.

In one case, I recommended it to someone I shouldn't have. She is a Windows-phile (with a Hotmail account, even), but she was open-minded enough to try a dual-boot. It turned out to not work out for two reasons:

1. She had a premium Hotmail account (the kind you pay for), which apparently didn't jive with the Thunderbird extension that lets you check Hotmail--all the messages were being entirely redownloaded every time she started the program. And she likes checking through an email client (she uses Outlook in Windows), not through the web.

2. I installed Mepis on a rather old computer, and it was buggy and kept freezing (I had no such problems using Mepis on a new computer or Ubuntu since on that old computer).

Apart from that, I heard no complaints. She figured out Synaptic easily enough (even installed and played Gnocatan). It's basically all point-and-click, once installed.


Another I introduced to Ubuntu because I thought it might save her dying laptop (in turned out to be a hardware failure, though). I popped a live CD in to another computer and had her play around with it. She dove straight in to the menus and started playing Gnometris. She started fiddling around with GIMP.


Based on those two limited experiences, I'm with awakatanka on this one: once you set up Ubuntu/Linux for people, it really isn't that hard for them to use. I've had random guests staying at our apartment just waltz up to my Ubuntu and start using it (even shut it down) without asking any questions. The Firefox icon is right there for them. They quickly realize the KMenu is the equivalent of the Start button in Windows.

I would not, however, just say to someone, "Yeah, go ahead and set up your new Samsung printer. Go ahead. You can do it easily." That's the sad thing. Even when there are Linux drivers (and there are for Samsung), new hardware can sometimes be a pain to set up.

I'll also say the intuitiveness of interfaces depends greatly on the program. It took me weeks to figure out Gtkpod--I'm not kidding. Now that I've figured it out, it seems simple, but I wouldn't say that you can just point anyone to Gtkpod and say, "Here, use this to add songs to your iPod." On the other hand, OpenOffice is just as "intuitive" as Microsoft Office.

People just need to learn stuff. Most stuff they can figure out. Some things you need to teach them. Please don't imagine people can figure everything out on Windows--because they can't. On a nigh-daily basis my co-workers at work ask me Windows questions they can't figure out. Even something so basic as how to get to My Documents from a fresh Windows XP install (we recently upgraded to XP from 2000) or to make the QuickLaunch toolbar visible ("It was there on my old computer..."). People are just used to what they're used to, and sometimes you have to guide them a little.

echo $USER
March 31st, 2006, 11:17 PM
I don't care what prople think about linux. I love it. I installed the vista transformation pack on my winblows box and my gui on ubuntu it still tighter than my M$ box. I use linux for the challenge, windows bores me. If I didnt play PC games I wouldn't have a need for M$.

Mikieboyblue
April 1st, 2006, 01:21 AM
My stand point was from that of the average Windows user. I think your new hardware example is a perfect example of what I am talking about.

But, something aparently wasn't clear....

I am not saying Linux is bad/good/better or that Windows bad/good/better.

For servers agreed, Linux would be key, however, it cannot be discounted that Windows cannot do the same - you pay for it though.

Perhapse some of the software packages out there could add documention to them that says ... "this is similar to Microsoft Money..." or whatever. Maybe that can also aid in the user experience.

Of course this thread is proof that even attempting to mention that Linux --- for the AVERAGE JOE --- is a long way off, is faced with negative responses.

The distro comment is pointing out that, not for me, but for AVERAGE JOE it would be confusing.

The packages issue again points out that, not for me, but for AVERAGE JOE it would be confusing.

That said, I have not played with Dapper since my Linux box is a server I need stable, but I have heard some good things.

Yes I am a Windows power user, but I am also realitively smooth at Linux and I am just trying to point out that there are quirks that make desktop manufactures for AVERAGE JOE, hesitent to provide Linux.

My only desire is to help Linux move forward but in a non-coding way since I lack that talent.

aysiu
April 1st, 2006, 01:37 AM
Perhaps you were missing the point of the aforementioned stories that dealt with real "average joes" we know from real life who did not find Linux confusing.

Why are you so self-gratified with the fact that suggesting something that's incorrect would get negative responses? Not everyone has to agree with you.

Sirin
April 1st, 2006, 04:44 AM
Why do most Linux people call Windows versions of Mac OS X features "copies", and Linux versions "equivalents"? :rolleyes:

prizrak
April 1st, 2006, 08:53 AM
Mikieboy,
The point that alot of us tried to make and that you successfully ignored is that the AVERAGE JOE will use ANY OS that comes with his computer. Put OS/2 Warp on an HP set it up with all the crap they are used to. They will not know the difference, if you tell em it's not Windows they will look extremely confused.
If you think Windows is that pleasant of an experience here is a read for you http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=151481
So far IMO the best OS for the average joe is OS X, doesn't even have a second mouse button.

aysiu
April 1st, 2006, 06:19 PM
They will not know the difference, if you tell em it's not Windows they will look extremely confused. Case in point, one time I helped my boss recover a file a co-worker of mine had saved locally to her hard drive (my co-worker was out sick, and my boss needed that file right away for a meeting--not enough time to wait for IT to come around). So I popped in Knoppix, used OpenOffice to double-check with her that it was the right file.

At no point did my boss question that anything was amiss until the Sun splash screen came up for OpenOffice, at which point she said, "We don't use Sun. That's odd."

Nothing else in Knoppix raised an eyebrow for her.

rhomsy
April 2nd, 2006, 03:35 AM
I would like to see gnu/linux adopt a more unified framework to make a more robust and fast development environment. IMHO, the MacOS/NeXT framework, cocoa is the easiest, quickest and most powerful way to develop. The GNUstep project pretty much ported OPENstep, but their website seems like it hasn't been updated since the Clinton admin. If the GNU put this together, I think that GNU/linux would progress at a much faster rate.

mrgnash
April 2nd, 2006, 03:57 AM
Since when does Linux not have 'pretty desktops?' We have transparent windows, drop shadows and all that other stuff up and running already (albeit in an experimental stage of development at the moment) before Windows users. And just look at Enlightenment DR17 - I'll be damned if that's not the best looking desktop environment I've ever seen.

Linux behing left behind.. poppycock :rolleyes:

Stormy Eyes
April 2nd, 2006, 04:42 AM
Another Linux vs. proprietary OS thread?

http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/6237/owlinotamused7ms.jpg

jobezone
April 2nd, 2006, 05:10 AM
With most computer magazines being funded by Microsoft and other corporations selling services and applications on top of windows, it's hardly surprising that they're touting Vista as the coming of the Christ.

commodore
April 2nd, 2006, 10:18 AM
I friggin hate it when people think of Linux as an OS! Linux is the kernel and different distributions are different operating systems. So everything that's made to work on Ubuntu does so. It's not Linux it's Ubuntu Linux and it runs Ubuntus apps. People should compare Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu, Red Hat, SuSE etc... not Windows, Mac OS X, Linux.

helpme
April 2nd, 2006, 10:29 AM
I friggin hate it when people think of Linux as an OS! Linux is the kernel and different distributions are different operating systems. So everything that's made to work on Ubuntu does so. It's not Linux it's Ubuntu Linux and it runs Ubuntus apps. People should compare Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu, Red Hat, SuSE etc... not Windows, Mac OS X, Linux.
Except that this isn't really true either, as software written for linux in general normally runs on all linux distributions.

entangled
April 2nd, 2006, 10:44 AM
Thankyou commodore. This is the heart of the issue about switching to 'Linux'. At the moment Windows and Mac users do not see an acceptable 'Linux' identity.

For a person who just wants a computer to work and entertain, it's frightening to see several varieties of OS, all called Linux, all with different installers, different packaging mechanisms, different ideas of what is the best filesystem structure, different desktops. Why should he consider Linux instead of Windows or Mac? Why do these differences exist?

I think the move to give Ubuntu a distinct identity is very positive and very important. If Windows/Mac users are to be attracted, Ubuntu must have a character and must be promoted. To this end I suggest that those who can, install Ubuntu on a laptop and use it publically, where ever they are. Make it visible, show it works (make sure it does!), give other people a chance to like it.

This thread will not be seen by non-ubuntu users, but a laptop could be.

mrgnash
April 2nd, 2006, 02:52 PM
I friggin hate it when people think of Linux as an OS! Linux is the kernel and different distributions are different operating systems. So everything that's made to work on Ubuntu does so. It's not Linux it's Ubuntu Linux and it runs Ubuntus apps. People should compare Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu, Red Hat, SuSE etc... not Windows, Mac OS X, Linux.

Oh so we shouldn't lump Linux distributions together, but we can file Windows XP, 3.11, NT, 2K, ME, 98, 95 under 'Windows?' Logic sir. Please. :rolleyes:

Joey French
April 2nd, 2006, 04:34 PM
I just wanna ramble abit about my most recent experiences. My girlfriend just recently spent a wad of cash on a new box for herself. Beast of a machine, newest everything. She has debated Linux vs. Windows for a long time, as I have been a Ubuntu user for some time now (since hoary). She uses my system at home, but Windows at work and school (GIS grad).
So, right after we got finished building it, it had no OS. Just for kicks, I popped in a Dapper Flight dvd. I thought my girlfriend was gonna cry. Video card- installed, with proper (restricted) driver and description in system info; Brand new flat panel- set up with correct driver, name in description, properties and even resolution!; Network, configured and working on boot. Wireless desktop, configured and working (except the windows multimedia, which by the way, even in windows requires an installation of drivers); USB card reader, mounted; Flash drive, installed on display port, mounted and ready; Printer- autodetected, select from list, done. Even my crap Creative NX USB webcam, installed and working properly. Soundcard, autodetected and configured, with surround functioning on boot, and sweet Ubuntu bells and chords at 75% volume.
Now, I know, my gf has a little bit of experience with linux from sharing my computer, but that has been with FF at the most. And she has no problem with most other things that she comes in contact with in linux. I just feel that if the majority of users were to experience the ease of use that we have recently, the market would shift dramatically.
Maybe it's just Dapper, maybe we got lucky, maybe the stars were aligned, who knows... but I don't want to see Linux in general, and Ubuntu specifically, become Windows. Ubuntu is just heading in the right direction. Forget the market share, that simply puts the focus on the commercial aspect. If this little distro keeps going like it is, I don't care how much like windows it -doesn't- become...or how many people decide to use it. It's free and it works! What other incentive does the public need? I've been able to do things with linux that I would not have dreamed of doing two years ago. I have learned tons of things in that time frame. Let Joe Sixpack continue about his merry way. I have no problem being in the minority.
No, Linux is not perfect, and neither is Ubuntu. But, in this environment of competition and constant progression, Linux (and Ubuntu) is far from "behind".

/tangent.

Joey French

aysiu
April 2nd, 2006, 05:35 PM
Oh so we shouldn't lump Linux distributions together, but we can file Windows XP, 3.11, NT, 2K, ME, 98, 95 under 'Windows?' Logic sir. Please. :rolleyes: Sure you can. They're all put out by the same company, as are Hoary, Wart, Breezy, and Dapper (all Ubuntu); unlike Linspire, Berry, SuSE, Mandriva, Blag, Damn Small, and Slackware.

mrgnash
April 2nd, 2006, 05:42 PM
Nice post Joey. Hardware does play a big factor in terms of whether Ubuntu 'just works' or not.

And I ask people to consider this... both Dapper and Breezy have installed *almost* flawlessly on my Acer laptop (a company which definitely do not go out of their way to make their products Linux-friendly) except for some issues with my graphics card, which only took a little bit of xorg editing to correct at any rate. If I was to perform a reinstall of XP on the other hand, I'd just to load in something like six CDs worth of hardware profile information, drivers and all the rest of it or there'd be a never-ending barrage of messages about 'unsupported' this and 'device not found' that.

mungy
April 2nd, 2006, 07:34 PM
I've used computers most of my life for all kinds of things and I consider myself competent using windows. By the time XP was installed on my machine, I knew where to find drivers for my PCI video capture card, which had always caused problems since Win98.

I decided to make the switch to Ubuntu as my hard drive was full of stuff I didn't use anymore and from a business point of view the software is just too expensive to keep upgrading.

The first time I installed WinXP it took something like 2 or 3 hours to get it up and running. Ubuntu took 30 minutes. OKay so wireless didn't work and still doesn't :D It took me about 10 minutes to import my Thunderbird emails. It took a lot longer to get anything to play my MP3s and I'm still not sure how that happened and I've got to decide which player I want to keep :D

I had help from a friend moving my home to a different drive - I'd have never managed that on my own. I've tried a few time to get wireless working, it's not really important though as my box is virtually on top of the router anyway.

All in all, as an ex windows user, I am very happy with Ubuntu. It seems it has a very steep learning curve underneath the bonet and I still can't work out how to install vmware player or mailwasher, even after following the guides as best I can. I'm not in any hurry though as all the things I need now work.

I'm seriously considering putting Ubuntu on the inlaws computer as they only need internet, email and office - it will save them some money.

crakkajakka15
April 3rd, 2006, 03:51 AM
as a new user to Linux, ubuntu in particular, i see ubuntu as a good web browsing, e-mail getting and Word processor. Now im coming from the world of apple and MS. Ive been using both for over 6 years now and currently a IT major in college. I think your on to something, but one of the major things i hate in ubuntu is have to install programs through this packet manager i think its BS personally. I guess im just used to self installing programs in windoze and OSX. Now this isnt going to make me give up on linux, im willing to cope. BUt like the guy said above i too would recomend OSX to anyone just wanting EASE OF USE. NOw while i have been playing on my new linux machine( p3 1.0gzh 512 ram) for a few days now, when my new semester starts back up it back to my trusty powerbook for school. I still am not yet convinced ot give up my MAC yet for linux, but i do see the good side of linux over windows, security is enough for me. Sorry for ranting just my 2 cents

aysiu
April 3rd, 2006, 03:53 AM
but one of the major things i hate in ubuntu is have to install programs through this packet manager i think its BS personally. Can you explain what your beef is? "BS" isn't very specific.

nocturn
April 3rd, 2006, 07:43 AM
-I guess im just used to self installing programs in windoze and OSX. N

Just a note, but the way OS X allows you to install programs right now is a problem.

It has been demonstrated before that the file system permissions are too open which make the system more vulnerable to attack.

Using a package manager is the right way to go about installations.

3rdalbum
April 3rd, 2006, 08:37 AM
one of the major things i hate in ubuntu is have to install programs through this packet manager i think its BS personally. I guess im just used to self installing programs in windoze and OSX.

That's strange. I've been using Mac and Windows for a decade now, and when I saw the package manager for Ubuntu I thought "This is the coolest piece of technology I've ever seen. Installing programs on the Mac is easy... but this is even easier!"

Please note that you don't have to use the package manager. You can download .debs, or download .rpms and convert them with the alien program, or you can even compile from source. However, all these things might be a bit too easy for your liking...

elamericano
April 3rd, 2006, 09:56 AM
He almost had a point about wireless support. Windows wireless zero configuration tool got uglier and less usable from it's original SP1 hotfix form. However, once again almost every card comes with a windows only utility that makes everything easy.

A Gui network connection manager that supports WPA and WPA2 is a big hole as far as I'm concerned - right next to no good VPN client. These are the only things that Ubuntu doesn't do well for me, so I'm hopeful that NetworkManager on Dapper will answer my prayers.

maprx
April 3rd, 2006, 11:26 AM
I love to mess with linux distros, But I have to agree. Fedora always crashes my dual boot systems. Suse, is a bit better. Xandros is even better, However, Linspire with the exception of printing to a network printer, works the best. Shocking, for $49 bux, I get support (not worse or better then microsoft). It seems the software just ids the hardware I have on my systems, Thus I could live with linspire and mom could as well.

Example, I have never really been able to run Ubuntu, I can get Kubuntu to configure, but like with dapper, I get funky graphics telling me my xconfig is not set up right. I have a nvidia gforce 3 card, nothing big. But this problem occurs in the installled and live cd. I have asked for forum help, and I have gotten none. Thus, does a user say with linux or just install windows. I love to hack, so that is my hobby messing with the different distros, but for me Ubuntu is the one distro that has always given me problems

any ideas

mimp
April 3rd, 2006, 12:13 PM
Well i'm currently in the process of getting ubuntu up and running and i have to agree with a lot of what the OP said.
I'm doing it as i want to mess about with supercollider, and the linux version seems to be more developed then the win32 version (didn't realise there even was a win32 version until i was half way thru installing. By that point i thought i may as well give it a go.)

Anyway, First impressions.

I think it would be ideal for the complete beginner providing somone else does the install as it can be set up to work in a very simple, bulletproof manner. It's also great for the expert user with time on their hands due to the extent it can be customised and the range of excellent free software.

Where it falls down is the intermediate user. Which is most people.
Say you want to use the internet to find and apply for jobs. Not all websites work properly under mozilla so you've allready hit a hurdle. This is the fault of microsoft and rubbish web designers, but who cares?
Now you come to write your CV, or download and fill in an application form. OpenOffice isn't compatible enough with word to design your CV - if it looks weird when they open it under word you're not going to get an interview, so it's not worth the risk. And opening the application forms you notice all the formatting is off - again this just wont do.
You cant play many games, you cant listen to MP3s.. all things most people want to do with the minimum of fuss.

Another problem is that as soon as you move away from what's included the learning curve is massive, and there's not much readily available to help you out. I needed to install drivers for a wireless USB stick, and it was a bit of a nightmare. Became apparent i was going to have to faff about in a terminal window but there doesn't seem to be any instuctions for this kind of affair. Or at least they're hidden well enough i couldn't be bothered and booted back into windows to look on the internet.

Not all bad news tho, things have come a long way. I faffed a little with SUSE 4 or 5 years ago and gave up more or less immediately. I'd been recommended SUSE as it was apparently the easiest distro to get working at the time, but things were still not exactly plain sailing, and didnt really feel worth it once i got there.
Ubuntu was a breeze by comparison although i could have done with the help available within the installer being a little more verbose. I was setting up a dual boot so had to go for manual partitioning and didn't really have a clue what was going on. Figured it all out but was guessing a few times which isn't nice when you're installing an OS.

On the bright side, I think it definately could compete - Things do change in the OS world. There was a time not very long ago where if you were doing audio work on anything other then a Mac (or maybe an atari) you'd get laughed at, these days windows is just as good if not better. No reason linux can't gain acceptence as a mainstream alternative OS, and it's getting close to the point where it might, it just isn't there yet.

commodore
April 3rd, 2006, 12:13 PM
Oh so we shouldn't lump Linux distributions together, but we can file Windows XP, 3.11, NT, 2K, ME, 98, 95 under 'Windows?' Logic sir. Please. :rolleyes:

As said before, those are the versions of Windows. We have versions of Ubuntu too. Ubuntu is not a version of Linux, but Breezy Badger is a version of Ubuntu.

I think that people who are worth Linux should use it. It's almost like that currently. I don't want bad Windows people to come over. If they will I have to move to BSD or OpenSolaris :)

nocturn
April 3rd, 2006, 12:33 PM
Where it falls down is the intermediate user. Which is most people.
Say you want to use the internet to find and apply for jobs. Not all websites work properly under mozilla so you've allready hit a hurdle. This is the fault of microsoft and rubbish web designers, but who cares?
Now you come to write your CV, or download and fill in an application form. OpenOffice isn't compatible enough with word to design your CV - if it looks weird when they open it under word you're not going to get an interview, so it's not worth the risk. And opening the application forms you notice all the formatting is off - again this just wont do.


I definately disagree with this. I have been on Linux only since 1999 and I had very few issues.
I made my first CV in OpenOffice and always got it to look right using the word export. But I usually send the PDF version, which is a great function in OO, one that MS sorely lacks.



You cant play many games, you cant listen to MP3s.. all things most people want to do with the minimum of fuss.


Adding MP3 support is not very hard. I had a very difficult time getting WinXP to play Xvid files, which are not that uncommon. It was definately not something the average user could do (as I noticed when my sister got an Xvid file). Compared to that, adding MP3 and w32codecs was easy.

mrgnash
April 3rd, 2006, 12:40 PM
As said before, those are the versions of Windows. We have versions of Ubuntu too. Ubuntu is not a version of Linux, but Breezy Badger is a version of Ubuntu.

But some of those 'versions' aren't even built on the same kernel. If Ubuntu is not a 'version' of Linux, then why does it share a kernel with other Linux distros?


I think that people who are worth Linux should use it. It's almost like that currently. I don't want bad Windows people to come over. If they will I have to move to BSD or OpenSolaris :)

How does one 'use' Linux if it's not an OS, as you contend?

Stormy Eyes
April 3rd, 2006, 02:00 PM
I think your on to something, but one of the major things i hate in ubuntu is have to install programs through this packet manager i think its BS personally.

So, rather than find the package you want and tell the computer to grab it and install it, you want to find it on the net manually, download it manually, run the installer, and click through a wizard -- only to risk getting pwned by a trojan? Now that is what I call BS.

Zodiac
April 3rd, 2006, 02:24 PM
Stormy Eyes cuts off heads but don't start threads.

;)

commodore
April 5th, 2006, 04:45 PM
Why can't u use Linux? It's not an OS but being a kernel you can still use it and you do it all the time.

How can you use apt-get if it's just a part of the OS not the OS itself? How can you use the shell if it's just a part of the OS not the OS itself?

BoyOfDestiny
April 5th, 2006, 05:27 PM
Linux is the core of the OS (the kernel). Things like gnu gcc, etc etc are the other part of the OS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_%28computer_science%29

Linux + Tools == OS :)

Anyway, you could certainly use some of the tools without Linux, I believe there is a debian based on BSD... After googling, indeed there is:

http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/

arnieboy
April 5th, 2006, 06:48 PM
Just to clarify: by linux I mean desktop distributions based on the linux kernel.

This topic has been beaten to death a million times before but I will still pitch in with what i personally believe in.. the problem that linux currently has nothing to do with user-friendliness. in fact in some things, its much more user friendly than windows and everything has a learning curve. I feel linux's curve is not any steeper than windows. Nobody was born a windows expert and same holds for linux. Its all about what you were exposed to first, and as kids, we tend to pick things faster than later.

Two real issues which linux faces currently are the following:
1) complete and non-reverse-engineered hardware support.
A few lobbies are working very hard to convince hardware manufacturers to release their hardware specs to linux. I do not feel that the effort has been hard and loud enough. More people need to join in and everyone needs to do something about this. Create more lobbies, use contacts.. get these guys to support linux somehow.

2) proprietary software support.
As we all know, some proprietary softwares like Adobe Photoshop and Dreamweaver are way ahead of their open source counterparts in terms of usability and capability. A few lobbies are desperately trying to make these software manufacturers port their softwares to linux, the most important among them being Novell. The status on their effort (in terms of the impact that they have had on these software manufacturers) is yet unknown, but my guess is that it will be known shortly.

I feel, it should not be just left to such lobbies to make these things work on linux. A sincere effort must come from every linux user who wants every piece of hardware and important proprietary software to work on linux to step in.

Such an effort should be skillfully co-ordinated to maximize the results.

BoyOfDestiny
April 5th, 2006, 07:10 PM
Just to clarify: by linux I mean desktop distributions based on the linux kernel.

This topic has been beaten to death a million times before but I will still pitch in with what i personally believe in.. the problem that linux currently has nothing to do with user-friendliness. in fact in some things, its much more user friendly than windows and everything has a learning curve. I feel linux's curve is not any steeper than windows. Nobody was born a windows expert and same holds for linux. Its all about what you were exposed to first, and as kids, we tend to pick things faster than later.

Two real issues which linux faces currently are the following:
1) complete and non-reverse-engineered hardware support.
A few lobbies are working very hard to convince hardware manufacturers to release their hardware specs to linux. I do not feel that the effort has been hard and loud enough. More people need to join in and everyone needs to do something about this. Create more lobbies, use contacts.. get these guys to support linux somehow.

2) proprietary software support.
As we all know, some proprietary softwares like Adobe Photoshop and Dreamweaver are way ahead of their open source counterparts in terms of usability and capability. A few lobbies are desperately trying to make these software manufacturers port their softwares to linux, the most important among them being Novell. The status on their effort (in terms of the impact that they have had on these software manufacturers) is yet unknown, but my guess is that it will be known shortly.

I feel, it should not be just left to such lobbies to make these things work on linux. A sincere effort must come from every linux user who wants every piece of hardware and important proprietary software to work on linux to step in.

Such an effort should be skillfully co-ordinated to maximize the results.

In terms of #1, I try to buy only hardware that is compatible. I favor open drivers as well. Just as fglrx would work with my 9250, I prefer to use the free ati driver.

I think it's something everyone can try, vote with your wallet. If a hardware manufacturer is unfriendly to Linux, either try to avoid it or petition them for specs/software.

In terms of #2, the "simple" way, use WINE or alternatives. Make contributions [read as code, bug reporting, suggestions, cash, etc] if neither is satisfactory consider virtual machines [qemu]. If that's still unacceptable, petition the company for a port. I think that's what lobbying (i.e. Novell) is trying to accomplish.

prizrak
April 5th, 2006, 07:20 PM
On the Linux is not an OS issue, there needs to be a pretty clear definition of what is considered to be an OS.
In terms of Arnieboy's post
#1) Drivers themselves are not the biggest issue, Lexmark makes Linux drivers but they are a huge pain to install (I should know I got a Lexmark). There needs to be an easy way to install the drivers. Possibly the move to userspace drivers (what Vista is doing AFAIK) as opposed to kernel modules.
#2) I think we are getting better support but I also think those companies are concerned with binary incompatibility across distributions.

arnieboy
April 5th, 2006, 07:40 PM
On the Linux is not an OS issue, there needs to be a pretty clear definition of what is considered to be an OS.
In terms of Arnieboy's post
#1) Drivers themselves are not the biggest issue, Lexmark makes Linux drivers but they are a huge pain to install (I should know I got a Lexmark). There needs to be an easy way to install the drivers. Possibly the move to userspace drivers (what Vista is doing AFAIK) as opposed to kernel modules.
#2) I think we are getting better support but I also think those companies are concerned with binary incompatibility across distributions.

Lexmark is an exception, not the rule. They probably need to write better drivers which they surely will someday.

Companies should not be concerned about binary incompatibility. They should simply release binaries for distros which have the highest user base.
a debian package, a suse rpm and a redhat rpm should suffice for the time being.
I know that other distros like gentoo and arch will start cribbing if they did that but then everyone pays for the result of creating something different which does not get wide user acceptability. Not-so-popular linux distros should not be any exceptions. Making 100 different binaries for 100 different package management systems is nothing but sheer craziness and it will not happen.

EDIT: as it appears however, these packages can be unzipped and packages, specific to the distro can be made out of them by the distro maintainers themselves leaving the testing part to the community.

Sidk
April 5th, 2006, 07:43 PM
Dead on arnieboy.

I for one have no problem paying for professionally written software. For me Linux is not about the price tag, it's about the privacy and security(although WiFi is pretty unsecure at this time).

Most people I know that have walked away from Linux, have done so not because of difficulty or learning curve but the fact that the software leaves a lot to be desired.

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 04:57 AM
I have used Unix and Linux on servers for about 4 years now, alongside Windows servers. When put side by side, the clear choice for a server operating system in my opinion is Linux. Most seasoned system administrators would agree with me on this point, I have little doubt. However, last year the I began to examine the potential of the Linux desktop. Now this writing will no doubt earn me a list of flames a mile long, and to be honest I don't care. Here goes.
For most of my life, I have been a huge fan of the Star Trek series and its children. One of, if not my favorite characters has always been Scotty, whom I had the privilege to meet in Las Vegas a few short years before his death. One of his sayings on the show and movies, has formed the very basis for my software and hardware choices in my professional and personal lives, “The right tool for the right job.” And so begins my most recent experiment in the search for the Linux desktop.
Before me are two systems, absolute identical in hardware; two Dell D610 laptops, fairly new with good processing power, 40 gig hard drives, and just over a gig of RAM. Installed on one I have Windows XP Pro, fully updated to the day, with a basic software package including anti-virus, messenger programs, and multimedia apps. One the second system I have Ubuntu Linux, Kubuntu to be exact, also fully updates with both the standard software repositories as well as a few custom ones to add some flavor. Now I'm going to spend 24 hours with each, and see how my daily life differs, and compare notes.
On work and productivity, I'm a simple kinda guy. Each has a suitable VPN allowing me to connect to my work and browse shared files and folders on my network, no real problem there. I don't use the particular features on Microsoft Office which make it different then OpenOffice, I'm a pretty basic office user. If it has a word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation maker I'm good. My only hitch as accessing some documents from work that were created in office, using downloaded Microsoft templates. Those were fairly mangled when opened under OpenOffice. However, I do love how OpenOffice does not feel it needs to think for you, auto correcting this and editing that. Yes, I know you can turn off such things in Microsoft, but it just feels better from the start. So on this front, either works for me, each having their minor annoyances.
On games, sigh, lets just get this out of the way. I have a good library of games I enjoy on a weekly basis, my most intense addiction being EvE Online. On Windows all games I like, work all the time, period. On Linux, I try both Cedega and Wine. Some games work perfectly, some kinda, and some not at all. Its a blindfolded dart throw on this one. For the foreseeable future, I'm keeping a dual boot at least for games. How many of you are now mentally flaming me for this? To those who are I pose a question. Sony is a proprietary company; who owns an Playstation? Microsoft is definitely a proprietary company; who owns an Xbox? Ok, then. You spend your $300 to play games, and so did I. Though Linux did have some of the most fun games I have played lately, including Frozen Bubble. Now, if EvE Online created a native Linux client, I'd be totally biased on Linux.
On multimedia, this one is good. With Windows I install the Divx codec, Realplayer, Quicktime, and one of any several thousand mp3 players, and all works well. On Linux, I use apt-get to install the DVD and Windows codecs, Realplayer, and VLC; all also works well. Personally I like Amarok best for audio, VLC works on Windows and Linux, and I have no real preference between Widows Media Player and Kaffeine/Totem/MPlayer, etc. In the end its a tie. They both do what I want in the way I want.
System and network administration is a category very near and dear to my heart. FTP, Http, Telnet, TFTP, Ethereal, Netstat, wireless detection and connection, ping, trace, whois, ssh, remote desktop, VNC, etc, etc, and etc. Windows and Linux do all of the above, and in my opinion equally. The only hitch on Linux is that its fairly complicated to configure a Linux box for Active Directory connection, which my company uses, despite any preference from myself. All in all, its basically a tie as well.
Last but not least is the software library. This dear friends is the burden of both Linux and Macintosh. While both offer solid competitors, neither has the market share of Microsoft. While Linux has a proverbial answer to everything in the software world, Microsoft clearly has the upper hand here via the loyalty of industry leaders such as Adobe, and the entire gaming industry. And while emulators do pick up some of the slack, its really not enough. As long as John Q. Public can walk into any Wal-mart, EBGames, or Target and find a couple hundred Windows only pieces of software, its going to be this way.
In the end, as I close this text, I see much potential in the road ahead for Linux on the desktop, and in some fields, such as Programming to name one, I can see Linux is indeed ahead of Windows. However, in the realm of the much quoted John Q. Public, I still see that Windows for the desktop and Linux for the server is the road to go. Why give up the software library and the seemingly universal compatibility? Linux has two answers for this, security and money. Linux is free, and does not suffer from the thread of Virus', spyware, malware, addware, etc. But if such things do not matter to you, such as if Windows game with your computer, and you have a solid anti-virus program, it seems to narrow the Linux market even further. I would still rather cough up blood then voluntarily install Windows on a server, but on the desktop, I can honestly say I don't feel Linux offers a solid competition yet for the general populous. Hate me if you want, but its my view. I respect yours, try to respect mine.

Stormy Eyes
April 7th, 2006, 05:23 AM
I'm not interested in trying to convince you. Use what you like, but don't tell me what to use.

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 05:46 AM
I have no intention of telling anyone what to use. I'm stating my opinion so far and looking for the opinions of others, and their experiences. I'm hoping to aviod the overall defensive posture of the OS communities and looking for genuine feedback.

woedend
April 7th, 2006, 05:54 AM
sounds like its just mainly the games that keep you off linux...thats cool, understandable. But on the benefit side - you do not need to run antivirus on linux, and on windows antivirus software is little more than a feelgood. You are right though, there is more software for windows by far. But this is because there are more users...the same as if you go to an autoparts store, you see many more filters for chevy and ford than you would for say fiat or saab. The only way to cure this problem is for more people to use linux simply. Use what works for you, you like windows, i'm currently entertaining myself with the xgl compiz goodies. But I think the future holds the best to come. Compare the strides between the two. For example, linux distros 4 years ago vs windows 4 years ago. Windows hasn't offered much other than security updates and an antispyware. I think in a couple short years or less linux will be far ahead.

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 06:02 AM
I definately agree with you on all counts. My thoughts were basically lodged in the here and now, in the future I definately see linux as having the upper hand in both markets. I think only three main barriers hinder it. User adoption to cause software market share, mainstream gaming, multimedia licensing.

whoa_551
April 7th, 2006, 06:32 AM
I'm not interested in trying to convince you. Use what you like, but don't tell me what to use.

I second that

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 06:38 AM
I third that. Please read the entire thread and try to understand my goal here amigo.:)

vayu
April 7th, 2006, 07:11 AM
I got up to Scotty in Las Vegas.....

fuscia
April 7th, 2006, 07:18 AM
as you say, you can dual boot and have both. i can't imagine anyone outside the 'party' objecting to that. btw, if you like games that much, you might want to try some outdoor games, sometime.

commodore
April 7th, 2006, 08:26 AM
I would pay for software too, but only for free software. I don't care about Linux that much. I want free software.

Linux is very hard to use. I actually don't recommend it to anyone. For me it's important that people would understand free software and why Microsoft is bad.

Vidar
April 7th, 2006, 09:08 AM
Well, if it's mainly the games you miss then why not use the money you would have to spend on a valid copy of MS Windows XP Pro (which would be the only semi-logical choice) to buy yourself a games console that will do the job much better? I understand you already own an xbox, so why not pick up a 360? Or you could wait for Nintendos Revolution if the 360 seems to pricey. :)

Although, there are good (proprietary) games that have linux support, mainly the UT and Doom-series but still. :)

poofyhairguy
April 7th, 2006, 09:44 AM
I would still rather cough up blood then voluntarily install Windows on a server, but on the desktop, I can honestly say I don't feel Linux offers a solid competition yet for the general populous.

Fine. Let it serve their web pages, record their TV shows (Tivo is Linux) and make their phone calls (many phones run on Linux).

Linux does not have to take over every market in which an OS is used to be a success.

Stew2
April 7th, 2006, 11:26 AM
I also met James Doohan once, I think I even have his autograph around here somewhere. He was a neat guy. I agree with using whatever works best for you and didnt feel that you were necessarily promoting Windows, just voicing your opinion. I myself have some hardware issues that prevent me from fully adopting Linux, but I find myself irresistably drawn back to it... its very addictive once you start fooling around with it. Plus the people in this forum are the best anywhere, bar none. :)

Kvark
April 7th, 2006, 11:39 AM
When you discover that you need a new program for a new task or situation. With Windows you go to the store and look around and talk to some salesman and come home with a shrinkwrapped box. Or you navigate websites or some p2p network to search for downloads. And then you go through an install wizard. With Ubuntu you type in a keyword in Synaptic, click on search results to read descriptions and mark checkboxes next to the ones you want.

Yeah there are probably more to choose from for Windows but the only area where you want as many different programs as possible for exactly the same task is games. On other areas you just want to find 1 program that does the job. I think it is much easier to find the program you need for Ubuntu then for Windows so IMO Ubuntu wins on the program library point unless you are a gamer or need a special Windows program for work.

DaMasta
April 7th, 2006, 11:45 AM
I just don't understand the incessant need for people to post their windows vs linux opinions.

openmind
April 7th, 2006, 11:54 AM
YAAAAWWWWWN!

<openmind goes about his business, not in the least bit interested why someone doesn't like his Car/House/Software>

angkor
April 7th, 2006, 01:59 PM
Interesting read. In your quite lengthy story I only see two reasons you choose xp over linux on the desktop: Gaming and Adobe (photoshop I presume).

Why do I use linux on my desktop? I don't game on my pc and I don't miss any software that's not natively available on linux.

I also use linux because it suits my style better. I don't feel 'locked in' when I use Ubuntu and I don't feel 'at home' when I have to do work in xp. But all that is off course just personal preference. Use what you like and suits you best.


System and network administration is a category very near and dear to my heart. FTP, Http, Telnet, TFTP, Ethereal, Netstat, wireless detection and connection, ping, trace, whois, ssh, remote desktop, VNC, etc, etc, and etc. Windows and Linux do all of the above, and in my opinion equally.

I really disagree with you here. In my opinion Linux beats the windows desktop hands down when it comes to sys and network admin once you get the hang of it. For me a linux box is easier and more user-friendly to maintain than a windows one. But to everyone his own of course.

helpme
April 7th, 2006, 02:16 PM
I just don't understand the incessant need for people to post their windows vs linux opinions.
/me claps his hands, hugs DaMasta, starts to dance.

To sum it up, I couldn't agree more.

mike998
April 7th, 2006, 02:29 PM
I'm not interested in trying to convince you. Use what you like, but don't tell me what to use.

Yep - I'll go with that as well.

Master Shake
April 7th, 2006, 02:54 PM
I don't know why everyone's so offended by the original post. Unlike most of the "Linux is teh suxx0rz" posts, he gave a balanced and reasoned opinion (albeit badly needing spaces between paragraphs)

And I have many of the same opinions..

But, I'm sticking with linux (on my dual boot) because Linux is so much more advanced than it was even two years ago. IMHO, its catching up fast to the Win-opoly.

Besides, if you do some searching, there really are some pretty cool games other than 2-d games or 3-D FPS...

I'll grant that the painting programs aren't as advanced, but the more I play with Pixel (imho, Gimp has a long way to go), the more I think I can use it as a (less expensive) replacement for Paint Shop Pro.

mrgnash
April 7th, 2006, 02:59 PM
I would pay for software too, but only for free software. I don't care about Linux that much. I want free software.

Linux is very hard to use. I actually don't recommend it to anyone. For me it's important that people would understand free software and why Microsoft is bad.

And his story changes once more.

The more fool am I looking for consistency where none exists:rolleyes:

Brunellus
April 7th, 2006, 03:03 PM
Why?

I'm not dependent on commercial or proprietary software at home, and I was sick of having to pay for Windows. I was sick of the viruses and malware.

I installed linux for the first time because my computer--which had been running windows--was unbootable. I have never looked back.

Now that I've been using linux, I find I prefer GNOME over windows' interface. I feel like I understand what I'm doing more. Even errors are meaningful--problems that can be solved, rather than cryptic "this program will now close" dialog boxes.

Free software supplies most of my needs. OpenOffice, AbiWord, the GIMP, evolution, slrn, xchat, gaim, firefox....most have been perfectly adequate for my use. In many cases, I have not needed to "unlearn" or "re-learn" anything.

Use whatever makes you happy. I'm happy that for 90 percent of my uses, maybe 99, I can use Linux and interoperate fine with the rest of the world.

Oh. And the price. for a cheap bastard like me, you can't go wrong with the price.

aysiu
April 7th, 2006, 03:51 PM
Linux is very hard to use. I actually don't recommend it to anyone. What's so hard about it? I have guests using my Linux box all the time, and they haven't complained that it's "hard."

Did they have to install and configure it? No. But they didn't have to do that for Windows either.

Mr_J_
April 7th, 2006, 04:07 PM
I believe you are right in your; the original; post.
Windows is and will be for quite some time, the holder of those pieces of software.
Generally software that is made in a way that it is too complicated, or the companies are just; in my eyes; lazy.
General soft, and games are a very large area of computing that has been neglected by linux users, probably because of the obvious amount of software in that area that has too firm a grip on it's users, or would just take a herculean amount of effort and money to rearrange into linux.

Adobe Photoshop is a platform all of it's own, and to engineer that entire app to linux would take years and gigantic fortunes to please what might seem to Adobe, a small bunch of users who are just as pleased in using Windows.

I think that if you know of a program that you absolutely have to have, and only runs in windows, then you should use windows. I see this like using a pacemaker. If you have too, then you have too.

On the subject of games I'm biased, since I see playing games all of the free time you have as an adiction, like drugs. I'm a computer technician so I had this adiction and I use Ubuntu as it is the easiest choice in linux distros today to kick that adiction.

I believe you're right in terms of your post.
Windows and Linux both have their own good sides, and in windows it sums down to what you said. Games and weird software...

K.Mandla
April 7th, 2006, 04:19 PM
I can honestly say I don't feel Linux offers a solid competition yet for the general populous.
Uh-oh. Don't tell my mom that.

htinn
April 7th, 2006, 04:23 PM
I'll give you a reason why:

When the cops kick in your door and point a gun in your face and haul you off to jail for "questioning" and you then discover it was because some hacker had rooted you and downloaded kiddie porn onto your computer.

You will THEN realize the value of an OS you can trust.

Of course, this didn't happen to me, but I know it will start happening to others. You mark my words. It will.

aysiu
April 7th, 2006, 04:23 PM
I can sum up the original post in one sentence:

The Linux desktop is awesome, but it doesn't have the marketshare Windows has.

GarethMB
April 7th, 2006, 05:03 PM
What's so hard about it? I have guests using my Linux box all the time, and they haven't complained that it's "hard."

Did they have to install and configure it? No. But they didn't have to do that for Windows either.
With no previous linux experience i'm now comfotable enough to use linux on a daily basis without confusion. The terminal can be daunting but its not like i have to remember the commands, just copy and paste, and the occasional bit of common sense with a cfg. file. Sure compiling the odd package can be a headache as i gather all dependencies but once thats done it really is just as easy as a self extracting archive. And you can all see how long i've been using ubuntu (look down). In a relatively short space of time i'm more or less as comfortable as i was on windows.

As a windows user my activities were almost identical to using linux. I've not had to stop doing anything (other than printing-lexmark x83 ;)) because of migration (although i use different programs on the whole). I don't understand any programming language, but i'm the most computer literate in my house, merely because i understand the importance of logic, common sense and the ability to follow instructions. If you can follow a series of instructions, there is no reason why migrating to linux should be hard.

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 05:38 PM
I can sum up the original post in one sentence:

The Linux desktop is awesome, but it doesn't have the marketshare Windows has.

Yep...maybe I should not type so late at night..tends to overcomplicate things I guess.

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 05:39 PM
I'll give you a reason why:

When the cops kick in your door and point a gun in your face and haul you off to jail for "questioning" and you then discover it was because some hacker had rooted you and downloaded kiddie porn onto your computer.

You will THEN realize the value of an OS you can trust.

Of course, this didn't happen to me, but I know it will start happening to others. You mark my words. It will.

This did happen at one of my previous jobs where I was a trainer, not an admin. Hacked, rooted, and started downloading pron. The OS of the server was Redhat Enterprise 4. Hacking linux is much harder, not impossible.

Stormy Eyes
April 7th, 2006, 06:40 PM
Uh-oh. Don't tell my mom that.

Or my wife. She's gotten pretty good with the old sledgehammer.

Stormy Eyes
April 7th, 2006, 07:03 PM
Hacked, rooted, and started downloading pron. The OS of the server was Redhat Enterprise 4. Hacking linux is much harder, not impossible.

Lemme guess: the admin did a crappy job of locking the machine down.

m.musashi
April 7th, 2006, 07:23 PM
“The right tool for the right job.”
Overall, a fair analysis. However, I think it would be good to really listen to Scotty here. If your job is web page admin and you use Macromedia or you are a graphics designer then maybe windows is the right tool - for now. However, if you are some average joe who surfs the net, does email, research, writes papers for school or work then I don't think Linux is the wrong tool at all and maybe more right than windows. Of course, my tool box doesn't have one screwdriver. I have both + and - and in several sizes. Likewise, my computing tools consists of both Linux and Windows (and I use Linux a lot more recently).

Since you seem to be a treker, I also wonder what type of OS the Enterprise would have used. I believe I saw somewhere where the MS license says something like you can't use if for anything serious like medical systems, space flights and such. Maybe someone can verify that. Maybe MS just doesn't want to get sued when something blows up and it turns out to be because the computer had a virus or bug.

Anyone know what the space shuttle uses?

** Andy **
April 7th, 2006, 07:37 PM
Gareth, I agree that it's relatively simple to follow instructions. The problem being that instructions tend to be on the Web, in fora, and to access them you require a connection to the Internet; this isn't particularly simple, in some cases, and requires instructions from the Web to set up. That was my situation. If I only had Kubuntu on my computer, I'd not have a connection with which to find instructions to set up a connection. I have a wireless connection and it's been a pain to get it to work in Linux!

I think that Linux distributions lag behind a little bit in some areas. In my opinion, they require:

easy plug-and-play access to the Internet and easy plug-and-play installation of hardware (I realise that this isn't the fault of Linux),

nicer G.U.i.s (first impressions count for a lot, in my experience). I know that environments can be configured to look stunning, but nicer environments out-of-the-box would help

and fewer trips to the command line interface.

Before I risk starting another angry debate about Linux vs. other operating systems, remember that this is only my opinion! Individuals perceive Linux in different lights. Linux is becoming a lot easier to use, in my opinion. :)

aysiu
April 7th, 2006, 07:40 PM
I agree with you about the hardware support--both that it's lacking and that there's not much the Linux developers can do about that.

nicer G.U.i.s (first impressions count for a lot, in my experience)

and fewer trips to the command line interface. These two vary greatly depending on the Linux distribution, though. PCLinuxOS and SuSE, for example, have very nice GUIs for just about everything. PCLinuxOS, Mepis, and Linspire also have few or no trips to the command-line, even when being set up.

Stormy Eyes
April 7th, 2006, 07:56 PM
Since you seem to be a treker, I also wonder what type of OS the Enterprise would have used.

Something called LCARS; but that might just be the UI. I'm not a Trekkie.


I believe I saw somewhere where the MS license says something like you can't use if for anything serious like medical systems, space flights and such.

The license used to say that Windows was not suitable for use in life support systems or for controlling nuclear reactors.


Anyone know what the space shuttle uses?

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle):

A primary concern with digital fly-by-wire systems is reliability. Much research went into the shuttle computer system. The shuttle uses five identical redundant IBM 32-bit general purpose computers (GPCs), model AP-101, constituting a type of embedded system. Four computers run specialized software called the Primary Avionics Software System (PASS). A fifth backup computer runs separate software called the Backup Flight System (BFS). Collectively they are called the shuttle Data Processing System (DPS).
In other words, it ain't Windows.

m.musashi
April 7th, 2006, 08:26 PM
In other words, it ain't Windows.
That's kind of what I expected. I suppose it's some sort of specialized OS but I thought it might be based on Unix.

I was searching the NASA site to try and find out and came across this:

"This test flight will more closely resemble technologies and operations on a future NASA spacecraft," said CANDOS Project Manager David Israel. "We'll have a full standard operating system (Linux) running on a standard processor (AMD 686), and the testing will encompass a complete set of simultaneous mission scenarios." The primary objective of the CANDOS project is to flight-test the transceiver hardware, he said
Not quite the smoking gun I was looking for but thought it was interesting that an orbiting web server would be Linux. I guess if it would be a rather long trip to reboot you want something that won't need to be rebooted.

Here (http://ipinspace.gsfc.nasa.gov/CANDOS/jan02-pr.html) is the full article.

htinn
April 7th, 2006, 08:31 PM
I could understand if there were better security tools for Windows, but right now the possibility of getting a rootkit is too high for me. Microsoft is slow to defend its users against rootkits, and there is literally *nothing* you can do to fix a rootkit except erase Windows from your hard drive (which is what I did).

To me, the only real issue is rootkits and DRM. Both of those things can have potential beneficial uses, but right now they are simply too dangerous. You are risking your future on a complete unknown, and that is simply unacceptable.

apsalyers
April 7th, 2006, 10:13 PM
Lemme guess: the admin did a crappy job of locking the machine down.

I would assume so. That is the primary means by which most systems are hacked, regardless of OS.

nalmeth
April 7th, 2006, 11:37 PM
Use what works for you.
I disagree completely on some points though.
There is a plethora of software available for linux, and with ubuntu, it is painfully easy to install. It's all at your finger tips.
Automatix is a huge key for your "John Q".
I happen to not be a "John Q", and like to do even the smallest things in my own way. I want my computer to run the way I want it to. MS doesn't understand or allow this, and with the advance of Ubuntu and its slowly chugging 3rd party apps, I can completely part ways with Windows. It worked for me for a while, but wouldn't allow me to ultimately do what I wanted with my computer.
If you really want to compare side by side windows and linux, install dapper right now, or wait until dapper is officially released. It's not very far away.
I've been testing it for a while, and there have been some huge improvements with speed, usabilitiy, looks, and everything. I could never stand the default desktop that either kubuntu or ubuntu gave you, and still can't stand the ubuntu dapper default look, but kubuntu is super slick, and everything is super fast. For me its just a matter of getting in there and tweaking things the way I want them.
You seem very reasonable and balanced in your experiments. An open mind is good.
You should check out dapper.
And tell people about it.

nickle
April 7th, 2006, 11:43 PM
Yes, I suppose it is an open forum and everyone is welcome to express their opinion or "story". But, really if you do follow this and other linux forums, unfortunately you see long posts like this repeated very often.
I don't find it offensive, but just uninteresting, unoriginal and not constructive. Quite frankly, I don't care about the differences between windows and linux. I don't use the former and I am happy with the latter for what I do.
More importantly though, over the last years I have seen great leaps in linux and I look forward to this keeping up in the future. It is this dynamicism that I love in linux. It is this utility and sense of evolution that makes linux great. Our developers are smart guys/gals who try to keep up with the times and hey you know what they are not perfect, but they are doing a great job.
If you are still asking why, hell don't bother, try it, if you don't like it thats fine, no offence, but don't feel obliged to tell the world about it. If you do like it then enjoy and contribute. Move on... and keep moving... thats linux

solcott
April 8th, 2006, 02:10 AM
I completely agree with the first post, I use Linux for almost everything, but have a Windows partition just for videogames because they just don't work as good under WINE. And about other squabbles about the Linux on the Desktop debate I look at that issue the same way Mr. Torvalds does.


Linux is not, and was never meant to be a free replacement for Windows, it is meant to be a free replacement for UNIX.

mrgnash
April 8th, 2006, 02:41 AM
It always gets me the way how people always mark zero-cost and security as the main, or even only, benefits of a Linux desktop.

How about the fact that instead of having to fill out countless registration forms and license agreements, proceed tepidly through installations where (if you're lucky) you have to look for all the steps where you need to 'opt-out' of various traps, and then get hit by a sales pitch asking you to 'UPGRADE TO THE FULL VERSION NOW!!' every time you start the application -- at least for the first 30 days, after which time the software will expire in most cases anyway. The only reason that Windows users don't kick up a bigger stink about this is because they're breaking the law by installing cracks, or hacking the registry, or whatever -- , you just hit the apt repositories and download whatever applications you need. No hassle and no questions asked.

Best of all, you're free to do what you want with the software that you download; this goes for the OS too of course, in that everything is open, most of it is presented in a way that is understandable to humans and easily accessible (i.e via a text editor) and configurable. In an age where companies like Sony, Apple and Microsoft are implementing increasingly draconian DRM measures, I think it's wise to move in the other direction; towards to open formats, software and standards. I know that a lot of open-source programs are available for Windows now, and also players that can play open-source formats like ogg vorbis and FLAC etc. but to me, it makes more sense to go the whole way, rather than remaining in the closed-source pen and hoping that the rancher doesn't decide to shut the gate. Just look at all the anti-competitive strategies that MS has attempted in the past, against dual-booting and the Mozilla/Netscape browsers for instance.

As far as I'm concerned, this is the real reason to use Linux.

mrgnash
April 8th, 2006, 02:54 AM
Since you seem to be a treker, I also wonder what type of OS the Enterprise would have used.

Definitely open-source. For starters, money has been abolished in the federation; so what you have is some sort of socialist utopia, I guess.

Ocxic
April 8th, 2006, 04:21 AM
i don't see a problem with the ubuntu gui's, after working with windows scince i was 8 (that's 3.1, 95, 98, ME oh god that was terrible, and XP) i can say i know ther inner workings of windows farly well, and cen even mange to keep it running for a few months at a time between formats.

\The sad part is the gui's if anything make useing widows harder. do you know how many time I've had to click next, next, next, and a one point accidentaly miss something, then have to go through the entire proccess again, or have 10 open windows just to change one thing.

Not to mention that if your computer ever crashes, windows recovery does more damage then good, after you've run windows upgrade, and there no way to configure/repair the system from the command line, no config files, hell the most advacne thing DOS can do is use edit, but what the hell am i going to edit on a windows machine????

After using ubuntu for 1 month, i had my system running, and learned enough to keep it that way, along with how to compile and install programs, (come-on ppl, ./configure, make, make install is not that hard, and theres synaptic), and everything was good, along with my ati drivers.
I'm still learning but, I have to say i'd rather have to use the command line every once and a while, then have to always have a working gui system just to repair a minor problem.

not to mention the software management system is decades boyond anything microsoft could hope to acomplish with there "add/remove programs" I find it 10x easer to just search click install and hit apply in synaptic, and when you uninstall something you can be sure it's gone, every program I've ever unistalled in wondows has always left some kind of folder, or config files.

One last thing about the windows gui, have you ever seen how much system resources or used to have all those, drop shadows, transparency, and effects in windows, go ahead a normal running systes has about 1/4 of the resources in use just by the windows OS. i bet that everyone has had to wait a second or 2 for the start menu to come up. windows just can't seem to handle multitasking like ubuntu can.

In all my experiance I've come to love ubuntu and linux in general, I'll never go back to windows (and the headaches).

Iandefor
April 8th, 2006, 04:27 AM
I enjoyed this post immensely. I feel like it was well thought-out.


Why give up the software library and the seemingly universal compatibility?

My use of software is pretty much restricted to: Firefox, OpenOffice, and music management (Software varies; using Rhythmbox atm), so the software library isn't a big concern.

The sacrifice of universal compatibility doesn't hurt too much, since, when I move a file from OO.O to Word (Which I will occasionally do, and is pretty much the only point where my computer needs to be compatible with others), I never have any trouble.

There are a couple advantages to Linux that give it an edge for me, a few of which are the lack of malware, the cost (free!), the ability to customise it to hell (but also having the option of leaving it in a default state that anyone can use), and the whole 'Openness/Free' thing.

For basic purposes, Linux tends to make more sense as a desktop solution, since it's free and rapidly becoming easier to use.

m.musashi
April 8th, 2006, 06:37 AM
Definitely open-source. For starters, money has been abolished in the federation; so what you have is some sort of socialist utopia, I guess.
Exactly. The MS model does not exist in the Star Trek future and I think to some extent that future is humanities future. The current model of capitalism, exploitation, greed and destruction cannot survive forever. If humanity is to continue it has to evolve into a more open, equal and supportive global society. MS does not fit this mold nor do most large and small corporations. MS just embodies all that is wrong and is most recognizable.

Embrace the future, embrace linux.

woedend
April 8th, 2006, 07:20 AM
some form of capitalism will always exist and has always existed. little problem they call scarcity...factored by overpopulation, things will be interesting. The problem with equality and openness you seem to me to speak of is incentive...if everyone is equal in value then why go to university for 8-12 years to become a doctor, or work in a mine for 80 hrs a week, when one would be just as equal to someone who say mops floors part time. On a side note, I do not see why everyone hates microsoft unless for personal problems with them. For the fact that the Xbox was a piece of junk or that they outsource too much is to me a valid reason. The fact that they are filthy rich or that they are closed source seems to be the problem most people have, which I do not personally find valid. This is what everyone - musicians, beer, soda, and food companies do...make a great product without telling you how its made to stay ahead. You've got to pay the overhead, the research, the incentive to continue to research.

mrgnash
April 8th, 2006, 07:38 AM
some form of capitalism will always exist and has always existed. little problem they call scarcity...factored by overpopulation, things will be interesting. The problem with equality and openness you seem to me to speak of is incentive...if everyone is equal in value then why go to university for 8-12 years to become a doctor, or work in a mine for 80 hrs a week, when one would be just as equal to someone who say mops floors part time. On a side note, I do not see why everyone hates microsoft unless for personal problems with them. For the fact that the Xbox was a piece of junk or that they outsource too much is to me a valid reason. The fact that they are filthy rich or that they are closed source seems to be the problem most people have, which I do not personally find valid. This is what everyone - musicians, beer, soda, and food companies do...make a great product without telling you how its made to stay ahead. You've got to pay the overhead, the research, the incentive to continue to research.

That's where technology comes into it. I'm not sure I believe that any sort of utopia can be achieved a-la Star Trek, but if it could, I'd imagine it'd occur pretty much along the lines posited by the show -- not so much in terms of its particulars, but rather using technology to resolve problems of scarcity.

Technology could even go a long way to resolving the second major problem you specified, namely: incentive. For instance, the reason I have spent upwards of 4 years at university is not so I could land a higher paid job, but rather, a more rewarding job, and in an ideal (utopian) world everyone would be able to pursue the vocation they find the most satisfying, without monetary runemeration being a factor. In order for this to occur, technology that could not only see to the provision of resources sufficient to meet everyone's needs, but also eliminate the need for human workers to perform tasks which are demeaning/menial/unsatisfying.

To a degree, the Linux world already operates on these principles. Very few people involved in the development of the software, writing of the documentation, assistance to other users (on these forums, for instance) are being paid for their labour -- they do it because they find it personally rewarding.

m.musashi
April 8th, 2006, 07:41 AM
some form of capitalism will always exist and has always existed. little problem they call scarcity...factored by overpopulation, things will be interesting.
I don't agree with this. I don't want to get all trekie but I don't think a future like that is out of the question. Given the current state of humanity it seems pretty unlikely but there are only two directions for us to go - evolve or devolve (there is no status quo as things are always changing). Over a long enough period of time (unless we kill ourselves first) I think it will be evolution and as technology advances the problems of scarcity will diminish or we will simply learn to share to survive. Perhaps that is overly optimistic but I think given time that is the logical direction. I don't suppose I'll be here though to be proven right right or wrong.

Perhaps I've just watched too much Star Trek but I think our future (or our children's children's...future) will be something like that - or, as I said, we will kill the planet and ourselves. Have a nice day:-D

m.musashi
April 8th, 2006, 07:45 AM
That's where technology comes into it. I'm not sure I believe that any sort of utopia can be achieved a-la Star Trek, but if it could, I'd imagine it'd occur pretty much along the lines posited by the show -- not so much in terms of its particulars, but rather using technology to resolve problems of scarcity.

Technology could even go a long way to resolving the second major problem you specified, namely: incentive. For instance, the reason I have spent upwards of 4 years at university is not so I could land a higher paid job, but rather, a more rewarding job, and in an ideal (utopian) world everyone would be able to pursue the vocation they find the most satisfying, without monetary runemeration being a factor. In order for this to occur, technology that could not only see to the provision of resources sufficient to meet everyone's needs, but also eliminate the need for human workers to perform tasks which are demeaning/menial/unsatisfying.

To a degree, the Linux world already operates on these principles. Very few people involved in the development of the software, writing of the documentation, assistance to other users (on these forums, for instance) are being paid for their labour -- they do it because they find it personally rewarding.
Actually, you beat me to it and said it better. That is what I really wanted to say. I read a book like this once (don't remember the name) but humans travel to another planet and it takes so long they forget about laws and such and machines take care of needs so everyone just does what they enjoy. I teach because I enjoy it, you build machines no one gets paid but we all have everything we need.

GarethMB
April 8th, 2006, 07:46 AM
Gareth, I agree that it's relatively simple to follow instructions. The problem being that instructions tend to be on the Web, in fora, and to access them you require a connection to the Internet; this isn't particularly simple, in some cases, and requires instructions from the Web to set up. That was my situation. If I only had Kubuntu on my computer, I'd not have a connection with which to find instructions to set up a connection. I have a wireless connection and it's been a pain to get it to work in Linux!
:)
I assume you are a home user? And i'll also assume that like the majority of people you're router had ethernet ports. IF you were totally unable to get linux to work out of the box and had to use the internet i'm willing to bet that it would have worked via a wired connection. Admittedly you could be a bit screwed if you only had dial up >_>

Stormy Eyes
April 8th, 2006, 01:47 PM
Definitely open-source. For starters, money has been abolished in the federation; so what you have is some sort of socialist utopia, I guess.

And that's one reason why I never liked Star Trek much. I'm all for greed as long as you're not violating other people's rights to get what you want. I don't care about inequality unless the government is granting special privileges to certain people (what happened to "equal justice under law"?), and I've found that a supportive society is a meddlesome society.

Iandefor
April 8th, 2006, 04:33 PM
some form of capitalism will always exist and has always existed. little problem they call scarcity...factored by overpopulation, things will be interesting.
What do you think of Marshall Sahlins' "Oirignal Affluent Society" hypothesis, then (There's a link in my signature)? And how do you define capitalism? Just a system of give-and-take or more like a complex laissez-faire system?



The problem with equality and openness you seem to me to speak of is incentive...if everyone is equal in value then why go to university for 8-12 years to become a doctor, or work in a mine for 80 hrs a week, when one would be just as equal to someone who say mops floors part time. Everyone is born equal, but the training they recieve is not. The necessity of a university education in the profession of being a doctor is that it's an incredibly complex profession. It takes a lot to become a proper doctor because it's a highly specialized field. It has aspects of training that mean you can't learn to be a doctor unless you specifically set out to be one.

In terms of differences regarding the rights of humans, it is true that we are all equal. But in terms of expertise, we are not. My advisor has been backpacking since she was five years old, and has expertise in that area of life that I don't have. On the other hand, I have been using computers in one form or another since I was six years old and have expertise in the field of computing that my advisor does not have; because of these differences, I have a hard time backpacking (I know for a fact!) and she has a hard time keeping her computers in order.

egon spengler
April 8th, 2006, 04:53 PM
I don't know why everyone's so offended by the original post. Unlike most of the "Linux is teh suxx0rz" posts, he gave a balanced and reasoned opinion (albeit badly needing spaces between paragraphs)

And I have many of the same opinions.

I doubt anyone is offended, just bored to tears of the same threads getting constantly repeated.

What resolution would this thread ever achieve? We all realise that despite our best efforts to covince ourselves to the contrary our Linux desktops aren't actually "Ready for the desktop" and we all finally give up the charade?

Or the the thread starter realises that there are thousands (probably millions) of people who use Linux everyday *gasp* as their desktop OS? That info was already available to him

** Andy **
April 8th, 2006, 11:25 PM
Yes, I'm a home user and my router has ethernet ports. However, my router is downstairs and my computer upstairs. Also, it's a desktop rather than laptop computer. If it were a laptop, I would have tried the ethernet route, but it isn't. Now that I know how to configure the wireless connection, I could probably have it up and running within 30 minutes. That's still longer than it took in Windows, but not too bad, considering.

Personally, I've never found the Windows way of installing to be a problem. I've never had an install fail nor have I had any problems navigating to a site, downloading the application and double-clicking it to run the install wizard. Adept and Synaptic are just as easy - perhaps slightly easier - but there isn't much air between them.

Linux involves some trips to the C.L.I. and changing configuration files, so I think that there's more scope for error. I've managed to ruin my Kubuntu installation a few times. Admitted, it's not too difficult to find and follow instructions, but it can be a bit daunting for a new user. I know that, for me, it certainly was. Cue comments about learning curves and so on. ;)

p.s. I heard about this new technology (it might have been around for a while, actually) where drivers are independent of operating systems. I can't recall the name of it, but would it not solve most, if not all, of the hardware problems associated with Linux? It was something associated with motherboards, as I recall...

prizrak
April 9th, 2006, 04:01 AM
Yes, I'm a home user and my router has ethernet ports. However, my router is downstairs and my computer upstairs. Also, it's a desktop rather than laptop computer. If it were a laptop, I would have tried the ethernet route, but it isn't. Now that I know how to configure the wireless connection, I could probably have it up and running within 30 minutes. That's still longer than it took in Windows, but not too bad, considering.

Personally, I've never found the Windows way of installing to be a problem. I've never had an install fail nor have I had any problems navigating to a site, downloading the application and double-clicking it to run the install wizard. Adept and Synaptic are just as easy - perhaps slightly easier - but there isn't much air between them.

Linux involves some trips to the C.L.I. and changing configuration files, so I think that there's more scope for error. I've managed to ruin my Kubuntu installation a few times. Admitted, it's not too difficult to find and follow instructions, but it can be a bit daunting for a new user. I know that, for me, it certainly was. Cue comments about learning curves and so on. ;)

p.s. I heard about this new technology (it might have been around for a while, actually) where drivers are independent of operating systems. I can't recall the name of it, but would it not solve most, if not all, of the hardware problems associated with Linux? It was something associated with motherboards, as I recall...
I must say Windows is not better it's worse when it comes to that. I enver had Linux not recognize a wired ethernet NIC as opposed to Windows that needs the actual drivers. Wireless is NEVER detected by itself w/o the manufacturer's drivers, which is not the case with Linux (my Atheros based card was up and running right away). As me and aysiu have been saying for a while now it's all about what is configured for you vs what is not. I will agree that driver installation is quite a bit easier in Windows but you can run into the same problem of not being able to get something working because you don't have net access on either OS. (in case you don't have a physical medium that contains the driver).
The technology you are talking about sounds like Ndiswrapper where you can load Windows drivers on Linux (I think it's wi-fi only tho).

** Andy **
April 9th, 2006, 05:39 PM
Extensible Firmware Interface is the technology which I'm thinking of. Needless to say, I don't know a great deal about it, but it's supposed to allow the creation of drivers that are operating system-independent, apparently.

Likewise, I've never had a problem with detection and installation of hardware under a Linux environment, which is quite an achievement, when you consider that almost no-one provides drivers for Linux systems.:D Actually, I have to admit that I'm quite impressed with Kubuntu 5.10. Another year or so and I might well feel confident enough to migrate to Linux permanently!

sagarp
April 17th, 2006, 12:20 AM
i had an interesting experience over spring break. i visited my dad's friend's brother. he's an engineer who has about 100 patents for various medical things, and thus he's a millionaire. he lives in this big mansion-type house with his wife and kids, and he owns a company with his partner, and basically they play around all day until they think of something to develop, or make better, and then they do it and make more money. he seemed like a nice guy, but it's his partner that this is about.

during dinner, he starts talking about how his computer fails a lot, which annoys him. what annoys him more, however, is when the network tech guy comes in and says it's because he's using windows. apparently, this engineer loves windows. i pointed out that the network tech is probably right, windows is known for it's frequent failures. "linux is much better," i told him. that made him upset.

"linux is a kid's toy, a science project!! there are no apps for linux. sure it's stable, but name one CAD program! name ONE accounting program! see! it's just a toy for college students to play with." that got me pretty mad (since i am a college student who happens to play with linux), but of course, i didnt say anything. i only thought of what to say much later, as is so often the case.

i mentioned newtek's lightwave 3d as a piece of software that runs admirably on linux (under wine), and he scoffed at that. "that's another kiddy toy, i'm talking about REAL cad programs, there are none." he also said mac osx was a toy for artsy developers and thus doesnt compare to windows either. what? excuse me? i guess he's never heard of george lucas running mac osx and using lightwave for his pre-processing.

i think what this genius multimillionaire failed to realize is that, as soon as he mentioned software, he stopped talking about linux vs. windows. just because windows has quickbooks and solid edge doesn't mean it's BETTER. all it means is that bill gates is a master business-man and a genius at marketing. in america, companies are driven by capitalism, and everyone wants to make money. apparently, contracts with microsoft to develop software brings both microsoft, and the software company money. that's all well and good, but what doesn't follow logically is that this some how makes linux a toy.

who is this guy to say linux is a toy anyway? he makes money by playing around all day until he discovers some new configuration of catheters or whatever, and then goes through patenting it. besides, isn't that how everything started in the first place? HP started in their backyard, messing around. so did dell. microsoft was just a couple guys with brilliant vision of the future. all just toys until they made billions.

he also seemed to think that all uses of a computer besides engineering were worhtless. i offered him this comparison. i used to run apache on a windows machine. i had that going for two years, because i hadn't even heard much about linux. this was in 9-10th grade. i had to reboot that computer at least once every month, and i constantly had problems updating it, and making sure it had no problems. connecting to it was a pain, because using RDP takes up a lot of bandwidth for my home connection. then one summer i moved it all over to linux. that was two years ago and i've rebooted it a total of maybe 10 times. most of those were because of power-outages or when i moved the actual box to a different room, or reorganizing the FS and moving to debian. i dont have to have a monitor attached to it any more, just in case, since it virtually never goes down. and connecting to it is a simple matter of ssh'ing in and doing whatever i need. i dont even have X installed, which is beautiful, so i dont need to waste bandwidth with RDP. i never have to defrag it either, which is a hurdle windows clearly hasn't overcome.

i dont think windows really compares to linux. all it has is a large market share. development of linux seems to be accelerating pretty quickly lately, and i think it wont be long before Mr. Rich MS-Loving Engineer will be eating his words. he may even be using linux somewhere down the line, when some cad software is ported over. there already is cad software for unix, so what's the problem? i never understood why people put up with windows until i talked to that guy. it's basically ignorance. nobody knows any better. i have windows dual booted, and last night i booted up to it to play half-life 2. it took about 10 seconds to boot up, but then another 30 minutes to load all the software after i had "logged in." then like 3 different programs tried to update simultaneously and my system froze up for about 2 minutes. finally, i tried mounting my ext3 hard disk to get some files off, and explorer.exe crashed lihe three times. it's such a pain to go through that every time i want to have to play a game. thank heavens for games like unreal, quake, doom, and more and more who are releasing installers for linux. and to wine of course! when i was waiting for my computer to stop locking up, i thought of something. i thought, "why is this even happening? i thought my computer was good.. maybe it's getting old, i should upgrade." then i checked myself. i realized that many computer users probably needlessly spend money upgrading their computers when windows locks it up. my computer runs perfectly under linux, i never get any lockups, even running dapper. i wonder how many perfectly useful computers are thrown out because windows locks up, and the users mistakenly assume it's their hardware.

don't get me wrong, i respect microsoft and bill gates for what he's done. surely without him, much of the world would not be how it is. he can be compared to edison maybe, someone with vision and the ability to market his work. i respect that microsoft puts restrictions on their software (like how windows limits the usage of the HOSTS file). i would want to do that too, to protect my hard work. i think people complaining about things like that don't have a basis for argument. that's the nature of capitalism, isn't it? users telling microsoft what and what not to include in their OS is like illegal immigrants demanding rights from a different government. if they dont like the way windows runs, they dont have to use it. use linux instead! that's what i did, and it's not just a toy or a hobby. i'll be using linux the rest of my life, as long as possible, not just while i'm a "kid in college." if linux is a toy, it's a damn good one.

ComplexNumber
April 17th, 2006, 12:26 AM
i think what this genius multimillionaire failed to realize is that....common sense and wisdom are often inversely proportional to the extent of someones academic genius :D.

also, if MS makes real software, its quite ironic that the majority of web servers make use of toys (ie apache) despite the vast amount of money that MS throws at companies to persuade them to use "real software" (ie IIS). *cough*

IYY
April 17th, 2006, 12:36 AM
Just a toy? So, all of the most stable webservers run on a toy? Most of the science professors in my university are using toys? The man may be good at what he does, but he clearly does not understand computers.


don't get me wrong, i respect microsoft and bill gates for what he's done. surely without him, much of the world would not be how it is. he can be compared to edison maybe, someone with vision and the ability to market his work.

Without Microsoft and more specifically our friend Bill, the world would be different. It would be much, much better. Microsoft very rarely invented anything, with the exception of MS Office. it was not the first, but it was at least better than what existed before it. But I guess in that sense, MS is a lot like Edison. The man spent most of his time not inventing, but destroying the competition; mainly Tesla, who would have invented much more impressive things given the funding.

sagarp
April 17th, 2006, 12:47 AM
Without Microsoft and more specifically our friend Bill, the world would be different. It would be much, much better.

well, what i mean is that if win wasn't so annoying, nobody would have much incentive to create an alternative. i guess it's a matter of debate, but seeing as windows revolutionized the desktop for users, i think it had a big hand in moving the world towards being more technologically inclined. without windows, maybe linux (or something similar) would be more prevalent, but it would just be the same. it would have turned into a large corporate institution just like m$, and if not, it would have taken longer to become widespread, i think.

ComplexNumber
April 17th, 2006, 12:56 AM
to give MS credit, if it weren't for them, hardware wouldn't be as cheap as it is now. they have also done a great job at making the PC accessible to as many people as it has. that doesn't mean to say that its a good product, though.

IYY
April 17th, 2006, 01:01 AM
Actually, all of the things you attribute to MS were done by Apple first.

ComplexNumber
April 17th, 2006, 01:19 AM
Actually, all of the things you attribute to MS were done by Apple first.
i'm not referring to who did so first, i'm referring to the extent to which they did so :)

IYY
April 17th, 2006, 01:30 AM
That's true, but it's also possible that without MS, Apple would have made a better product. Of course, it's all speculation.

ice60
April 17th, 2006, 01:52 AM
i think most self-made millionaires understand it's far better, and more likely, someone will have for free something which would otherwise cost, so Linux can't be that good - something must be wrong with it.

they won't believe Linux is as good as it is without using it and being able to compare it to Windows, and understand Open Source

@sagarp tell him CAD programs started on *nix systems and that's a fact, so there :evil:

taurus
April 17th, 2006, 01:54 AM
Hey, I happen to like my toy so keep your hands off my toy!!! :twisted:

K.Mandla
April 17th, 2006, 03:23 AM
Any chance your millionaire friend owns stock in Microsoft? It would explain his explosive reaction. Just a thought.

htinn
April 17th, 2006, 03:34 AM
don't get me wrong, i respect microsoft and bill gates for what he's done. surely without him, much of the world would not be how it is. he can be compared to edison maybe, someone with vision and the ability to market his work.

I have no respect for Micro$oft. Their motto may as well be Anything For Money. They lie, cheat, and rob people of their hard work. Try researching them some time.

Oh, by the way, Bill Gates was a sucky programmer who got ahead by being wealthy and stabbing people in the back. Try respecting people who DESERVE it for a change.

NeghVar
April 17th, 2006, 04:06 AM
Oh, by the way, Bill Gates was a sucky programmer who got ahead by being wealthy and stabbing people in the back. Try respecting people who DESERVE it for a change.

OK, I dont much care for Billy boy there, but I have to point out that;

1) Him and Allen did write the software that ran the Altair, if you can call blinking lights running. He was smart enough to license the copies instead of selling outright.

2) When he went to IBM after Apple started he offered them a product, then legally purchased the product after he offered it for $50,000 from the Seatle Computer Company. He did not develop DOS, SCC didn't either, DOS was a rip of a program which had been around much longer. Once again he has the brains to license the software instead of selling outright.

3) Once Packard Bell, I think it was them I can't really remember, reverse engineered the IBM BIOS and started making PC clones he was smart enough to go and get his foot in the door there.

4) Eventually Apple 'buys' Xerox's GUI with a heaping pile of Aplle stock Billy boy was able to get a contract with Apple to work with them. Apple foolishly gave MS everything it had and they used it.

5) Mac sues MS for ripping off their GUI, after much debate the case is eventually dismissed based on the interpretaion of the judge that you can not copyright a general environment, however several small things like the trash were upheld and MS changed to the recycling bin.

Now then like I said, I don't like MS or Bill, but they did not start out by stealing, they started by buying low and selling high. It wasn't until later that they really began their anti-competition.

Oh and BTW in case you try and bring up the fact that they forced vendors who sold DOS to pay a fee for every computer sold regardless of its OS, yes I know about that, but thats not stealing, although it is anti-competitive. In a business sense it was a good move, in a legal and moral sense it was deplorable.

rfruth
April 17th, 2006, 04:24 AM
good stuff NeghVar ! (Compaq not PB 1st reversed engineered IBM BIOS) oddly enough the first MS OS was Zenix (a flavor of Unix) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#1975.E2.80.931981:_The_founding_of_Micro soft

NeghVar
April 17th, 2006, 04:39 AM
good stuff NeghVar ! (Compaq not PB 1st reversed engineered IBM BIOS) oddly enough the first MS OS was Zenix (a flavor of Unix) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#1975.E2.80.931981:_The_founding_of_Micro soft

Ahh ok, I wasn't sure what company did it, I was writing from memory. And ya I had forgotten about Zenix, I didn't even know it existed until about a month ago.

I don't fdind Linux to be a toy, it is very much a working machine here. most people that believe that are misinformed and are using information several years old, but of course they can't become informed because billy boy keeps spouting misinformation about alternatives. I would personally love to see someone sue MS for false advertising when it claims its products work, I think that would be a rather interesting case.

The computer industry has never been a cut and dry place, there have always been shades of gray and what is often percieved as being the truth is generally false. MS has made very few innovations of their own, and what they have made have since been beaten by others that move products along.

Take for example MS Word, ever since I started using computers with Windows 95 I always wondered why the heck I couldn't select text, hit caps lock or something easy and have it go all caps. When Open Office included this idea it was the final straw for Office. It may seem like a little thing but it is little changes like that that make this easier to use with out adding half a million dialougues presenting me with the possible consequeces that this action would have on the amount of free press in the rusian federation.

At first I liked the XP interface, it was much nicer than the 9x style. Then after I switched to Gnome with Linux I realised how much I like it, its simple, has everything I need where I need it and how I want it. To me XP is more of a toy, I personaly like to play a game with all of my friends called; Who can crash their system the fastest by running solitaire and IE at the same time, or the ever popular how many seconds after installing and connecting to the internet to update my antivirus does it take for me to get a virus (note: results only count if you get the virus before the virus update).

So as you can see, Windows is a toy, a play thing for people who don't know any better. Windows users are like Kindergardeners when trying to understand the concept of supply and demand. They have no idea what your talking about, dont really think it will ever have an effect on their life and dismis the idea as foolishness. Of course once that person grows up they realise they were completely wrong.

rfruth
April 17th, 2006, 05:11 AM
once again NeghVar has hit the nail on the head, XP is a toy and like SUV's or lines at the grocery store people gravitate to it / them cause to do otherwise would involve thought process ...

briancurtin
April 17th, 2006, 06:27 AM
apparently, this engineer loves windows. i pointed out that the network tech is probably right, windows is known for it's frequent failures. "linux is much better," i told him. that made him upset.
i stopped reading your post after you said this. when people use windows in environments like the person you supposedly talked to, they use them for a reason. when your stuff works on windows, im sorry to say that they will continue using windows in most cases, especially with what you say this guy did. i love linux like the next person, but you mean nothing to him and saying "linux is much better" means nothing. hell, if i was that guy, id be pissed that you said that to me as well.


"linux is a kid's toy, a science project!! there are no apps for linux. sure it's stable, but name one CAD program! name ONE accounting program! see! it's just a toy for college students to play with." that got me pretty mad (since i am a college student who happens to play with linux)
ok so i didnt really stop after that last quote, but i did after this one. i love how people get mad over people not wanting to use or hear about linux.

weasel fierce
April 17th, 2006, 06:35 AM
Most of the internets servers are apparently run on just toys :)

Wide
April 17th, 2006, 06:42 AM
"linux is a kid's toy, a science project!! there are no apps for linux. sure it's stable, but name one CAD program!.


He's not to far off

I use CAD/CAM programs for a living all in windows and they run absolutly perfect. At close to $65.000 for a seat of Catia it better run good

I have been using nix as my home system for many many years of which I call a hobby along with 5 servers.

Everything in the shop is windows.

Toy? no, it's a tool for me as is windows

No games or mp3's for me all business here ;)

aysiu
April 17th, 2006, 06:43 AM
Forgive my ignorance, but what's CAD?

rfruth
April 17th, 2006, 06:52 AM
CAD/CAM = computer aided design - computer aided manufacturing all of which *nix does just fine ;)

aysiu
April 17th, 2006, 06:56 AM
Thanks for the quick response.

Knowing what that is now, this whole thing seems kind of silly. After all, a lot of people do serious work on computers that has nothing to do with CAD. I work at an institution of higher ed, and almost none of the staff use any CAD programs, but they all work pretty hard.

aysiu
April 17th, 2006, 08:59 PM
I'm just tired of it.

Seriously.

Am I the only one?

Sure, there are certain tasks that are easier to accomplish in Windows, but just to make a flatout statement that it's "easier" (usually without any sort of substantiating examples) than Linux just gets under my skin.

Venting over. Back to normal support and chatting.

briancurtin
April 17th, 2006, 09:02 PM
ive had people tell me that windows is easier because you can just drag and drop folders in explorer to copy them, instead of "whatever way linux does that"

Piggah
April 17th, 2006, 09:05 PM
ive had people tell me that windows is easier because you can just drag and drop folders in explorer to copy them, instead of "whatever way linux does that"

I guess those people just love to have umpteen windows explorer windows open dragging files everywhere.

Me, I prefer a command that takes all of 4 seconds to enter to move my files. :P


I don't see how Windows is "easier", it's just.. simpler maybe. Windows just does the thinking for you, and for some people that's good. =\

xXx 0wn3d xXx
April 17th, 2006, 09:07 PM
I'm just tired of it.

Seriously.

Am I the only one?

Sure, there are certain tasks that are easier to accomplish in Windows, but just to make a flatout statement that it's "easier" (usually without any sort of substantiating examples) than Linux just gets under my skin.

Venting over. Back to normal support and chatting.
No, you are not the only one I'm tired of it too. I am also tired of people saying, "I hate Linux, why can't it be like windows ? I was not thinking and I erased Linux by accident. I WANT WINDOWS BACK !!!"

aysiu
April 17th, 2006, 09:08 PM
I don't see how Windows is "easier", it's just.. simpler maybe. Really? I kind of think of it as almost too complicated. Gnome I think of as simple... or, better yet, IceWM.
Windows just does the thinking for you, and for some people that's good. =\ Even the lightbulb in OpenOffice I find less annoying than Clippy the clipboard animated thing in Microsoft Office. I don't like the "do you want to reboot now?" dialogues that keep popping up after every Windows Update (when I've already clicked "reboot later").

I almost wish it did do the thinking for me instead of asking me so many questions over and over again. "You look like you're typing a letter? Do you want help with that?" Argh!

DigitalDuality
April 17th, 2006, 09:14 PM
In some regards linux is much more difficult. After getting to know the OS and how it works.. not so much by any means. Especially to the non-tech savy end user. They don't have to worry about codecs, drivers, etc..

That being said. Most of the whining comes from converts. It's like learning a new language and there's just so much that's different. You take older users and simple things like different icons and program names throw them for a loop. Hell even just run of the mill non-technical people. They've learned to define things as Word, Excel, Explorer, not word processor, spreadsheet, web browser.

I can't tell you the number of people i talk to and they don't even understand you can use a different browser.

No off the shelf software? Synaptic? Why doesn't my DVD play when i put it in? These are things people simply don't care WHY, they just want it to work. Economics about drivers and codecs don't even matter to them.. hell.. if they even know what it is.

Now the one thing i am sick of, is most of us prefer linux.. otherwise we wouldn't be using it. So why must we talk about windows all the f'n' time.
The linux community i think would win alot more hearts and minds if we were more pro-linux rather than defining ourselves against something else (this isn't towards anyone in this thread in particular). But more to the person who can't type Microsoft without a $.

Seriously, doing that makes you the geek equivalent of a PETA protestor outside of a KFC. Cut it out.


Back on topic though, you don't hear the same complaints about ease of use with OS X that you do with windows? Why? Well you have the issues i already mentioned, but they use the same model so to speak of obtaining and installing software as windows, but made it easier. Download, extract, drag the icon to the app folder. To uninstall, drag it to the trash. Most people have no idea that icon they're dragging is actually a folder of files much like your standard linux app (to some degree).

They don't have a different model from the end user perspective, the just simplified the current model.

where as linux itself is a whole different ballgame when it comes to installing software. Most people simply do not care enough to re-learn. It's a big enough pain in the rear for them to learn windows stuff. Much less anything else. And as great as linux is GUI-wise. Lots of great experimental eye candy and such.. but you can't function and do everything you need to do with a GUI in a timely manner. It's just much quicker to use the command line at times. That scares people.

ollesbrorsa
April 17th, 2006, 09:16 PM
Amen!

The really annoying thing is that more often than not it's my gf that does the linux slamming.

At work they use some kind of webmail application that has calendars and such integrated and the damn thing just will not work without IE. Trying to explain that it's not linux/firefox/epiphany-what-have-you's fault is getting old...

Back to lurking mode...

/ollesbrorsa

GreyFox503
April 17th, 2006, 09:19 PM
Unfortunately almost everyone's experience here is skewing their judgement. I bet the vast majority of us learned to use Windows before any type of Unix / Linux.

The only way to know would be to clone myself, and see how long it takes my clone to learn how to use Ubuntu. :)

Because, of course Windows is going to seem easier when you have to switch to something else... anything else, it doesn't matter what.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You could try to compare them just based on observations and not experiences. One could argue that Ubuntu is "easier" because it comes preinstalled with much more software and drivers than Windows does. If you have compatible hardware and do normal, basic computing tasks (using email, surfing the net, typing documents, spreadsheets, playing solitaire, etc.), Ubuntu is almost surely easier, because setup time is just however long it takes to install (20 minutes on a modern computer).

Windows may seem easier if

a) You buy it pre-installed, which for 99% of Windows users, this is the case. This cancels out Ubuntu's advantage. Even if Ubuntu does 100% hardware detection, it will only then be matching the compatibility of a pre-installed Windows box.

b) your hardware is not linux friendly ( a significant percentage of the time).

c) you're terrified of typing at a prompt, and are not willing to even consider learning anything (heaven forbid you learn anything!)

d) all your friends/co-workers uses Windows. This is BIG. Have a windows problem? Ask your roommate/big brother/grandson/guy in the next cubicle. Have a Unix / Linux problem? Unless you're very lucky, it will involve lots of Googling and posting on forums (http://ubuntuforums.org)... and waiting hours or days for someone to respond, not talking with a person.

In fact, everything I learned about FOSS, I have learned solely by reading over the internet, with no face-to-face human interaction at all! No one who doesn't already love computers is going to do that. People need real humans to help them!


Is Windows easier? The world may never know...

egon spengler
April 17th, 2006, 09:21 PM
I guess those people just love to have umpteen windows explorer windows open dragging files everywhere.

Me, I prefer a command that takes all of 4 seconds to enter to move my files. :P

I kind of assumed that Brian's observation was more wryly noting that you CAN just drag files to copy them in Linux

GarethMB
April 17th, 2006, 09:24 PM
I voted for the 4th Option. I'm just tired of seeing umpteen comparisions between the operating systems.

They are different that's all...get over it.

localzuk
April 17th, 2006, 09:24 PM
Seriously, doing that makes you the geek equivalent of a PETA protestor outside of a KFC. Cut it out.

What? Why did you bring PETA up? What is it with people and disliking PETA? I am more sick of people slagging off PETA than I am of people saying Windows is better. But that may be due to me being a supporter of PETA...

rfruth
April 17th, 2006, 09:27 PM
Windows isn't easier when you take into account the time spent dodging all the malware, I liken Windows to a helicopter, ya spend as much time on the ground doing maintenance as you do in the air ...

prizrak
April 17th, 2006, 09:27 PM
Back on topic though, you don't hear the same complaints about ease of use with OS X that you do with windows? Why? Well you have the issues i already mentioned, but they use the same model so to speak of obtaining and installing software as windows, but made it easier. Download, extract, drag the icon to the app folder. To uninstall, drag it to the trash. Most people have no idea that icon they're dragging is actually a folder of files much like your standard linux app (to some degree).
I dunno I still have no clue how to EXIT an app in OS X, as the closing the last window of the app doesn't actually exit it O.o
The thing that annoys me the most is that people cone to Linux forums to bitch at how ****** Linux is. It is quite obvious we think that the OS is just fine.

Zodiac
April 17th, 2006, 09:27 PM
Oh Sweet!!! Yet another inane thread about Linux vs. Windows!!!

I bet we are really going to cover some new ground here!!

P.S. - I am you all can detect the sarcasm dripping from this post, and if you can, you can also probably tell which choice I voted for... if you couldn't tell, you should hit yourself in the head with a tack hammer because you are a retard.

helpme
April 17th, 2006, 09:31 PM
Oh Sweet!!! Yet another inane thread about Linux vs. Windows!!!

Yes, great, isn't it?
I think I've never experience a Linux forum that was to obsessed with Windows as ubuntuforums.org.
Simply amazing.

GreyFox503
April 17th, 2006, 09:41 PM
I think I've never experience a Linux forum that was to obsessed with Windows as ubuntuforums.org.
Well, it must be because Ubuntu works so well, that we have no problems and are so bored that we have nothing else to talk about. :) A testament to the power of FOSS.

russellc
April 17th, 2006, 09:43 PM
i agree with GreyFox503

DigitalDuality
April 17th, 2006, 09:55 PM
What? Why did you bring PETA up? What is it with people and disliking PETA? I am more sick of people slagging off PETA than I am of people saying Windows is better. But that may be due to me being a supporter of PETA...
Their cause is noble, their method of getting it across is obnoxious and everytime you think they hit a new low.. the step lower.

And the fact they dictate to people and try to shock people, rather than making sound arguements and provoking true debate. There's plenty of animals rights organizations out there that stand for the same as PETA does without being like whiney teen punk rockers who'd poop in your face in the hopes that it'll "show you the light".

angkor
April 17th, 2006, 10:06 PM
I've chosen three options:


Not if they give appropriate examples.

Some things are easier in windows, some things are easier in ubuntu.


Yes, it bugs the heck out of me.

I bugs me (not the heck out of me, it's only a minor annoyance) because I don't like the attitude of people complaining about ubuntu when comparing it to windows when something doesn't work as they expected or as they were used to in windows.

Some people don't seem to realize you need to spend time with an os to learn how it works. It took me about a year of using linux exclusively.


I'm tired of people just talking about Windows--good or bad.

I have no interest in reading about windows (or microsoft for that matter) on a forum dedicated to ubuntu, except for newsworthy posts in the cafe.

nalmeth
April 17th, 2006, 10:07 PM
I have always believed that the default layouts of most distro's make linux seems more complicated than it is.
I'm really trying to do some reading into making my own liveCD's, and maybe some day my own install CD, because with the right desktop setup, there's no way at all you could call it "difficult" to use. Unless of course your hardware isn't supported. This is where a lot of people are saying linux isn't easy or ready.
I believe you wrote a piece about this type of experience asyiu?
BTW I voted:
I'm tired of hearing about windows
and
It depends which distro

Piggah
April 17th, 2006, 10:09 PM
Really? I kind of think of it as almost too complicated. Gnome I think of as simple... or, better yet, IceWM.

True, true.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's simple for the average user.

Joe Somebody here is going to consider never having to think about what he's doing as simple, where as we would think of simple, as it truely is.

Bad choice of wording on my part. ^_^

aysiu
April 17th, 2006, 10:13 PM
True, true.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's simple for the average user.

Joe Somebody here is going to consider never having to think about what he's doing as simple, where as we would think of simple, as it truely is.

Bad choice of wording on my part. ^_^ I get what you're saying.

By the way, I started this thread out of frustration because in several threads in the past two days members have posted (unsolicited) remarks like "Windows is easier than Linux." I don't believe this forum is any more "obsessed" with Windows than other Linux forums (and I frequent Linux Questions). The word windows appears 163,000 times in Linux Questions (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Alinuxquestions.org+windows&btnG=Google+Search) and only 116,000 times in the Ubuntu Forums (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Aubuntuforums.org+windows&btnG=Google+Search). The Linux Questions forum is older, but the Ubuntu Forums are far livelier (get more posts in the Ubuntu Cafe per hour than the Linux Questions General forum gets).

Linux users tend to be preoccupied with Windows for the following two reasons:

1. It's a point of reference for many of us. I grew up using DOS, 3.1, 95, 98, ME, 2000, and XP. I can bet you I'm not alone. Many Ubuntu users (or users of other Linux distros) have spent a lot of time on Windows--that's our native OS, so to make comparisons between Ubuntu and Windows is only natural.

2. Some people are drawn to Linux because they feel it's somehow anti-establishment, and they view Windows as the establishment. If I saw PETA protesters outside of KFC, I think they'd have every good reason to be there.

Get over it. If you're so high and mighty, don't post in this thread. Just ignore all the Windows/ Linux threads. Seriously.

Stormy Eyes
April 17th, 2006, 11:00 PM
I'm just tired of it.

Seriously.

Am I the only one?

No. In fact, the minute somebody says "Windows is easier than Linux," I write them off as a waste of ammo. I let such people live only because they're not worth the effort necessary to beat a murder rap.

fuscia
April 17th, 2006, 11:06 PM
windows is easier than linux, just like shitting your pants is easier than going to the bathroom.

Piggah
April 17th, 2006, 11:09 PM
windows is easier than linux, just like shitting your pants is easier than going to the bathroom.


Haha, that's great. xD! I just spit coke all over my desk though. :(

That's the perfect way to describe it though.

poofyhairguy
April 17th, 2006, 11:18 PM
I'm tired of people just talking about Windows--good or bad.

Great option!

aysiu
April 17th, 2006, 11:23 PM
Great option! I'm kind of surprised that the middle four options all got a pretty even distribution.

GarethMB
April 17th, 2006, 11:28 PM
windows is easier than linux, just like shitting your pants is easier than going to the bathroom.
Thats going to be sigged. Its perfect :D

trivialpackets
April 17th, 2006, 11:44 PM
Don't get mad. It's not hype it's true. It is much easier to install a virus'/spyware/etc into Windows. Don't hate, it's just that simple.

kwyjibo
April 18th, 2006, 04:00 AM
I thought I'd have my 2 cents worth as i've just moved over to linux, kind of had to due to my job, I'm 5 days in and haven't booted back in to windows once, but that doesn't mean I haven't wanted to. I've had a nightmare configuring Ubuntu to do what I want it to do, but have persisted and am on one huge learning curve.

Personally I think Windows is much easier to use than linux, but that is because I have been using Windows since 3.1 and it's what I'm used to, the change over to linux was more annoying because things didn't do what i was used to, the more i use it the easier it gets. I'm starting to like the terminal, the structure, the 'freedom' but am also still not too sure on some things, the difficulty I had setting up my printer, my display drivers and all that.

Anyway, I think if you were to take a person who has never used a pc before, sit him down, tell him to install the OS, install a couple of packages, add a printer and some other basic stuff... i think most if not all would come back and tell you Windows was easier!

Qrk
April 18th, 2006, 04:46 AM
I am also tired of it although I do enjoy looking at the Vista threads. Vista is interesting to say the least. But most of the times its a frustrated new Linux user that will eventually learn enough to become a functioning member of the community. Notice how most the threads are started by new users (there is nothing wrong with being new!) who have just spent several hours or days in Absolute Beginner Talk trying desperately to comprehend the hundreds of commands we throw at them.

RAV TUX
April 18th, 2006, 04:49 AM
I have never understood windows...the most confusing screwy OS on earth.
](*,)

jeremy
April 18th, 2006, 07:09 AM
What is windows?

GarethMB
April 18th, 2006, 10:52 AM
I thought I'd have my 2 cents worth as i've just moved over to linux, kind of had to due to my job, I'm 5 days in and haven't booted back in to windows once, but that doesn't mean I haven't wanted to. I've had a nightmare configuring Ubuntu to do what I want it to do, but have persisted and am on one huge learning curve.

Personally I think Windows is much easier to use than linux, but that is because I have been using Windows since 3.1 and it's what I'm used to, the change over to linux was more annoying because things didn't do what i was used to, the more i use it the easier it gets. I'm starting to like the terminal, the structure, the 'freedom' but am also still not too sure on some things, the difficulty I had setting up my printer, my display drivers and all that.

Anyway, I think if you were to take a person who has never used a pc before, sit him down, tell him to install the OS, install a couple of packages, add a printer and some other basic stuff... i think most if not all would come back and tell you Windows was easier!

There is some truth in what you say. Windows is more immeadiately usable. But you forget that you bug windows pre-configured for the specific machine.
The manufacturer provides all the drivers for each component. If you hosed your machine and had to install windows from scratch i bet you'd think differently. Thats one of the things i love about linux, if i hose my machine. I can be back up and running in 2 hours tops. Aside from needing to compile non repo packages.

If you are using linux at work, with a few more weeks you'll feel a lot more comfortable. Maybe you'll even realise that it is as easy as windows but easier in different ways.

localzuk
April 18th, 2006, 11:49 AM
The problem with that is (yes and I know I'm going off topic, but I think you are out of line) that most of the things they fight for, people aren't willing to listen. I'll give an example - in the UK a scientist, Jerry Vlasack attempted to talk to various companies about ethical issues only to be told to go away. These same companies use the 'they don't want to discuss things' argument constantly - claiming that all protesters are irrational terrorists.

Now, more locally, there are constant small demonstrations where anti-vivisection protesters are present. These few people are the target of people calling the nutters if they attempt to tell people about things so have no other choice but to use the 'shocking' approach.

To claim that PETA are wrong is niave. I don't think any protest movement would, or could, be won.

Also, PETA is very successful - they keep their name in the media. In the UK PETA doesn't really do much. Our best organisations are probably Viva and Animal Aid - and they are both barely heard of because they don't do the stunts.

I bet if people were to do stunts like PETA does in support of Ubuntu, our publicity would go through the roof. (Hmm... thats an idea, maybe I could think of some sort of publicity stunt for ubuntu in the UK).

seshomaru samma
April 18th, 2006, 02:10 PM
I don't think any OS is objectively easier, they are just different
I enjoy using Windows XP , Ubuntu and Knoppix , they are all great, each one with its specialities, advantages and drawbacks.
Sorry , I'm a hippy

Zodiac
April 18th, 2006, 03:15 PM
A hippy from Shanghai? Man... it really is a global village.

unbuntu
April 18th, 2006, 03:35 PM
A hippy from Shanghai? Man... it really is a global village.
Yeah, believe it or not...:D :rolleyes:


I don't think any OS is objectively easier, they are just different
I enjoy using Windows XP , Ubuntu and Knoppix , they are all great, each one with its specialities, advantages and drawbacks.
Sorry , I'm a hippy
Well, a lot of people feel that way (including me), but I don't feel that makes me a hippie.

handy
April 20th, 2006, 04:24 AM
Whether it was Bill, or would have been Steve, someone would have created the closed source environment that most computer users are locked into today.

It was obviously inevitable.

Having spent 11 years sorting out hardware, software & mostly windoze OS problems for my customers, I have to say that the evolution of Linux, in the form of Ubuntu, is perfectly timely for me.

I have been able to almost simultaneously close down my support business & dump windoze for Ubuntu!!:KS

This suits me perfectly because I don't like windoze, nor do I need it for anything but the incredibly rare support job for family & close friends.

I will not convert them to Ubuntu, because I don't want to support them through the learning of a new OS. As wonderful as these forums are, I will still be the bunny who gets the machine dumped on them, or the constant phone calls @ any time of the day.

I am unconcerned with people using windoze's, apple OS's, BeOS, any *nix, amiga, whatever. I actually think it is great. Freedom of choice still exists, do with it what you will! Use it as a toy, or to make squillions, it's still up to you...

xenmax
April 20th, 2006, 07:46 AM
"linux is a kid's toy, a science project!! there are no apps for linux. sure it's stable, but name one CAD program! name ONE accounting program! see! it's just a toy for college students to play with." that got me pretty mad (since i am a college student who happens to play with linux), but of course, i didnt say anything. i only thought of what to say much later, as is so often the case.
I guess all these businesses are making money on a kid's toy!
http://cgw.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Archives&Subsection=Display&ARTICLE_ID=118664

nocturn
April 20th, 2006, 07:50 AM
OK, I dont much care for Billy boy there, but I have to point out that;


BG is a very good business man, but that business sense does not make him good at technology.

If you think about it like this, most of what MS does makes perfect sense, though it may be hurting technological progress, general computer stability or competition, it makes money.

He would make a very good used-car-salesman too ;-)

nocturn
April 20th, 2006, 07:54 AM
Forgive my ignorance, but what's CAD?

Computer Aided Design. They mean things like AutoCAD to design buidling infrastructure, cars etc.

Both this and the GIS (Geographical Information Systems) are areas where Linux is lacking sorely, mainly because there are little alternatives to the commercial programs available.

Yet I would still recommend fitting your general IT infrastructure with Linux and keep several windows boxes to run thes specialized programs. Like this is often done the other way arround.

nocturn
April 20th, 2006, 07:57 AM
Thanks for the quick response.

Knowing what that is now, this whole thing seems kind of silly. After all, a lot of people do serious work on computers that has nothing to do with CAD. I work at an institution of higher ed, and almost none of the staff use any CAD programs, but they all work pretty hard.

Indeed. It's a highly specialized market and you cannot judge an entire OS on this one area.

My institute is using Windows per default, yet there's a HP Unix machine in my office, running a complex software suite to calculate the effects of nuclear contamination. The suite does not run on Windows so we need the HP machine.

Likewise, a design firm could still use Linux mostly, but have dedicated boxes to do CAD.

da5id
April 22nd, 2006, 10:16 PM
I bought my last PC from monarchcomputers.com. Look at their Resellerratings.com numbers. (When I bought this PC it was above 9 -- growing pains?) Look at the OS's they offer. They support their systems. I will buy my next PC from them with Vista and Ubuntu installed by them. I fall into 1 dealbreaker app category -- speech recognition -- so, MS. I believe I can use Ubuntu for most everything else ... after 6 months of more set-up.;)

catlett
April 23rd, 2006, 01:03 AM
Sorry I didn't read the thread past page 3. I hope I'm not cutting in at the wrong place.
Linux is a great victory so far and is getting better.
We are talking about a student (Linus) who was unhappy with an OS he was using and decided to take matters into his own hands.
He didn't go to a venture capitalist like Jobs. He didin't suck up and do whatever the biggest company in the world wanted just so he could get cash into his company like Gates. And he didn't sell his ideas and work to Big Blue like a ***** like Wang. He published his work under GPL and posted everything on the net.
Everything about Linux came from this meager beginning and it grew to what it is today. Linux is not like Microsoft, Apple and Wang. It wasn't a big commercial software company that lost market share to Windows. It is a grassroots open source endeavor. And the mere fact that you are proposing that it can compete and overcome a product that has x billions of dollars and x% market share is amazing.
Windows should be dominating. Microsoft was funded by IBM when IBM was god. They have drawn on the top universities for years. They have almost limitless resources. They have implemented and maintained strategies to indoctrinate people to there product.
They don't give computers to libraries and schools because they have a social conscience. They want people's first contact with computers to be a Windows one.
This works exponentially because people only want something they are comfortable with. Therefore hardware manufacturers ship Windows with their computers so the vast majority of people will be comfortable and familiar with the way their hardware works.
This is a the big obstacle. The indoctrination of people to window's products.
.
So stop acting like Windows is doing something great by being in more computers. Linux is 15 years old, Microsoft is 30 years old. Linux is open source and free, Microsoft had 12 billion+ in annual net income and has $40 billion cash on hand. It is no great feat to be a more user friendly interface with that much experience and money.

P.S. I wish someone would point out that Linux based servers have a 70% share in the server market and Windows only holds a 20% share.

richbarna
April 23rd, 2006, 11:33 AM
i installed ubuntu for my mother. i removed everything from the desktop except 4 buttons: firefox, thunderbird, word, shutdown. i renamed them "surf the internet", "email", "writing letters", "turn off". she is so happy now. she never understood why she had to press "start" to actually STOP the computer
I have done this aswell when I installed Kubuntu for friends and family, they LOVE it, whatsmore they tell everyone that they use Linux in a kind of ( oh windows...erm ..yeah, oh... left that behind, Linux, technically superior-possibly a closet hacker ) type tone. They are always trying to get computers into the conversation just to mention that they use linux.
It IS amazing how many people still think that linux is all command line DOS style black and white windows.
When they see the desktop and all the software, they really are surprised at how easy it is.
I love newbies !!! (well I'm one too) but newbies that have just converted.

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 08:46 PM
EDIT 26/4/06 NOTE: This thread has moved along since the initial post. I've learned a lot and I've made a few valid observations. If you're looking for a flame war, you won't find it here. If you are interested in the direction and Philosophy of Linux- read on. For the sake of editorial integrity, the initial post stays.


I've been trying to configure Ubuntu for the past four days with no luck. I've had to totally reinstall it twice now and I think it's time to give up. I didnt start this thread just to vent my frustration (although it's tempting!) ](*,) but rather because the worst 'customer' is the one that sees a problem and just walks.

In my daily life I'm a GUI designer, but I started life as an Industrial Designer. So I know a thing or two about usability and what people expect from products. IMHO- here's what's killing Ubunbtu...

1) It's just not stable. When I try to configure a wireless card- it crashes. When I try to turn ACPI off, it dies and cannot be recovered. Last time it just died for no reason- I had not changed anything, and bam.

2) Two fundamental pieces of hardware have caused difficulty. First, the screen was just plain wrong (had to change the default colour depth-not so easy for a NooB) Then no matter what I do, the wireless card refuses to work.

What do I suggest? Concentrate on getting two things right before trying to create other features.

1) Get it working out of the box on all basic hardware. (Monitor workaround is just not acceptable)
2) For the love of god, if the hardware isnt working, at least make the drivers easier to install.

Yes, I realise it's free. Yes I realise people are doing this in their spare time. But these two things would create a truly usable, universal OS.

When it was running it was impressive- fast on an ancient machine, easy to use GUI. Just get the fundamentals right before you concentrate on the bells and whistles. There's a lot of man years being expended on this project. Just use them wisely.

Yours faithfully,

A human being.

aysiu
April 24th, 2006, 08:51 PM
1) Get it working out of the box on all basic hardware. (Monitor workaround is just not acceptable) This is quite a tall order. Do you want to ask Canonical to solve world hunger, too? There's a lot of "basic hardware" out there.

It's a pretty amazing feat that Ubuntu is able to work on as many hardware components as it does.

That said, your experience, while not unique, is also not typical. A lot of us just popped Ubuntu in and had almost everything working. I would suggest, if you ever give Ubuntu another go, to check out this page first: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupport, use a live CD first, and/or just buy a Ubuntu-preloaded computer (http://www.system76.com).

Most Windows users don't install Windows. Installing an operating system is an arduous task--or can be if things don't go well.

swpalmer
April 24th, 2006, 08:56 PM
Here here!

I've been having a hell of a time getting things working/installed as well.

Here's a hint: If the end user needs to open a command prompt/shell at any point - then you have failed.

It took two tries to install proper Java. Ubuntu comes with some Gnu crap in it's place. The first set of instructions I found failed completely. (Possibly because unlike every other unix distro, Ubuntu did not install the C/C++ compilers)

Ubuntu doesn't detect that the system is multi-processor system and installs the wrong kernel. So I find some instruction to install the right one. Guess what? The SMP kernel crashes on boot.

UI performance is slow, dragging windows leaves trails all over the screen... running on nVidia hardware so it should be well supported.

](*,)

TrojanSkin
April 24th, 2006, 08:57 PM
I have to agree with parts of this. The wireless is rubbish. But the rest of Breezy is great. Except when a program crashes and you can't get rid of the window. I've installed it on my laptop and one of my desktops with no issues whatsoever (except the wireless of course). Oh and I still can't work out how to manually install programs (Cube).

linuxmad
April 24th, 2006, 08:57 PM
LOL:) :) LOL:) :) :) LOL:) .. I am sorry, but you seem to be one of those human beings like I know. You prefer to reinstall windows every 2 months than to learn to use something new... Good luck:mrgreen: Mr. gates will tank you.. or are you using a pirated windows version?? .. be careful with your updates](*,)

MetalMusicAddict
April 24th, 2006, 08:58 PM
People who write that "things suck" suck. :rolleyes:

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:01 PM
This is quite a tall order. Do you want to ask Canonical to solve world hunger, too? There's a lot of "basic hardware" out there.

It's a pretty amazing feat that Ubuntu is able to work on as many hardware components as it does.

That said, your experience, while not unique, is also not typical. A lot of us just popped Ubuntu in and had almost everything working. I would suggest, if you ever give Ubuntu another go, to check out this page first: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupport, use a live CD first, and/or just buy a Ubuntu-preloaded computer (http://www.system76.com).

Most Windows users don't install Windows. Installing an operating system is an arduous task--or can be if things don't go well.
aysiu, it is a tall order, but rather than concentrate efforts on bells and whistles, it sure is a worthwhile goal. And if the hardware is not supported make it easier to install.
If there is any sort of driver available, it should be a simple install. I mean fair enough if it's a beta driver or something, but if it's not it should just slot right in.
The sheer scale of wifi installation problem posts should be an indicator that the current situation is not working.

D

TrojanSkin
April 24th, 2006, 09:01 PM
Why worry about updates? If you've got Firefox, just use Windiz Update instead.

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:04 PM
LOL:) :) LOL:) :) :) LOL:) .. I am sorry, but you seem to be one of those human beings like I know. You prefer to reinstall windows every 2 months than to learn to use something new... Good luck:mrgreen: Mr. gates will tank you.. or are you using a pirated windows version?? .. be careful with your updates](*,)

You seem to think it is reasonable for people to learn an entire code base just to use an OS. Crazy. Learning curves for an OS should not involve delving into source code. With this approach, it will always be for coders. Only admins, experts or developers should have to delve this far.

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:06 PM
People who write that "things suck" suck. :rolleyes:

Excuse the crude title, but it does get the attention :)

aysiu
April 24th, 2006, 09:07 PM
Here's a hint: If the end user needs to open a command prompt/shell at any point - then you have failed. Well, two things about this:

1. Most of the time when people give you a command to type in the terminal it's not because you need to type that command but because it's easier for the person to give you that command than to describe all the buttons you have to click. The command also leaves room for less error, and it will usually provide more feedback if something's not working.

2. Ubuntu is an intermediate distro, I'd say. For people totally tied to point-and-click, Ubuntu is not the distro for you (didn't you read the Sticky thread in this forum?). I would recommend Mepis, Linspire, or PCLinuxOS.


aysiu, it is a tall order, but rather than concentrate efforts on bells and whistles, it sure is a worthwhile goal. It's not really an either/or thing. The developers work hard on hardware support and bells and whistles. If you want them to work harder, perhaps you might want to consider donating some money to Canonical.
And if the hardware is not supported make it easier to install. In Dapper Drake, there's a new installer called Espresso that's all point-and-click and a lot "friendlier" to new users straight from Windows than Breezy's text-based "graphical" installer.
If there is any sort of driver available, it should be a simple install. I mean fair enough if it's a beta driver or something, but if it's not it should just slot right in. Do you really believe all hardware manufacturers provide Linux drivers for their hardware or open up the code so that Linux developers can create Linux drivers for the hardware? I can assure you that's not the case.

aysiu
April 24th, 2006, 09:08 PM
Excuse the crude title, but it does get the attention :) So does screaming "Fire! Fire!" in a movie theater or "I have a bomb" on an airplane. Sometimes, though, attention isn't all that matters.
You seem to think it is reasonable for people to learn an entire code base just to use an OS. Crazy. Learning curves for an OS should not involve delving into source code. With this approach, it will always be for coders. Only admins, experts or developers should have to delve this far. When did Linuxmad say that? I don't see what you're referring to.

I can assure you that I've never learned "an entire code base" or even looked at the Ubuntu code. I've been using Ubuntu since May 24, 2005, and Mepis before that for a month, and I've never had to look at source code to get my computer working. Exaggeration and attention-getting subject titles don't lend you credibility.

I also don't really see what the point of your post is. Developers don't read these forums, and they're not sitting on their asses either. They work damn hard.

mzilhao
April 24th, 2006, 09:08 PM
well, ubuntu was the only linux distro that i tried that recognise my wireless card.
before ubuntu i tried mandriva, suse and fedora.
with ubuntu i got my wireless working out-of-the box. didn't have to configure anything at all. and while i'm at it, my wireless actually works *much* better under ubuntu than it did under windows...

linuxmad
April 24th, 2006, 09:14 PM
You seem to think it is reasonable for people to learn an entire code base just to use an OS. Crazy. Learning curves for an OS should not involve delving into source code. With this approach, it will always be for coders. Only admins, experts or developers should have to delve this far.
Not at all. I met linux back when red hat was delivering 7.2 version. A lot of things changed to get here. A lot of people left their sons, friends, wives, etc, to make OS's like ubuntu, Suse, Mandranke, Fedora, Debian, etc,,.. etc.. I guess that if you are trying Linux it is because something touched you. If don't like ubuntu , why don't you try Suse Fedora. At least here you can choose, and if you come to need help, there are lots of forums like this one. Yes.. there are people that help, without you paying for their time. Microsoft even bills you if you submit a bug, don't believe me .. TRY:cool: .. You will be fascinated with their way.
DON'T GIVE UP ON FREEDOM...:p

zerhacke
April 24th, 2006, 09:15 PM
Except when a program crashes and you can't get rid of the window
Open terminal, type in xkill, hit enter, and click the offending window.

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:16 PM
Aysiu,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I can see where you are coming from regarding the terminal, but the reality of the situation is that many of the commands on the forums can be out of date or not resemble the users personal setup. For a non-coder it is very hard to understand what so many of the commands actually do, so its just a matter of typing what someone has written rather than actaully learning what it does, which ultimately helps people to get around. Sure they can learn, but it's a very steep learning curve. This is the downfall of the terminal system, it's not english.

Installer sounds like good news. I find the more complex installs are OK for beta stuff, but silly for drivers that have been around for a while.

mzilhao- good for you.

zerhacke
April 24th, 2006, 09:21 PM
This is the downfall of the terminal system, it's not english.
Iedereen spreekt nu het Engels?

aysiu
April 24th, 2006, 09:22 PM
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I can see where you are coming from regarding the terminal, but the reality of the situation is that many of the commands on the forums can be out of date or not resemble the users personal setup. For a non-coder it is very hard to understand what so many of the commands actually do, so its just a matter of typing what someone has written rather than actaully learning what it does, which ultimately helps people to get around. Sure they can learn, but it's a very steep learning curve. This is the downfall of the terminal system, it's not english. I've generally found that when things aren't working, what's most important to people is to get it working again... now! Sometimes, afterwards, they'll ask, "So what did that command do?" or even beforehand, "What am I typing? What does sudo mean?" and if they ask that, I'll explain. But most of the time, people actually don't care how things work--they just want things to work.

As I said before, there is a point-and-click way to solve most problems, but it takes a long time to describe those, and there's more room for miscommunication.

If you're really committed to the anti-command-line way of giving instructions, write up some documentation, help out some new users. We're all just fellow users here, and no one on these forums gets paid for her time. Look at what a user here came up with recently (instead of just complaining): http://monkeyblog.org/ubuntu/installing.html

Action counts here, not words. If you want to give screenshots and make everything point-and-click friendly, do it. Complaining will get you nowhere, and it doesn't really help new users, frankly.

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:23 PM
An expression my friend...
:rolleyes:

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:30 PM
Aysiu,

What annoyed me about the Ubuntu philosophy was it's claim that it's 'for humans'. Humans like to point and click, it's why OS's are a success in general. Yes it may be quick, but in many cases it's just confusing and not a good way to remember how and why you did it in the first place. Terminal is not intuitive, and thats the main prob. Why have a steep learning curve if you can prevent it?

The point of this thread was to tell the folks at Ubuntu why someone chooses not to use it. It's feedback. I felt it's better to leave a reason than nothing at all.

If they were dedicated to making it human and a little less code oriented, I would certainly consider contributing. The new installation package seems like a step in the right direction.

D

gingermark
April 24th, 2006, 09:31 PM
I would echo aysiu's sentiments and encourage dpower to get involved in the community.

From my personal experience, any problems I've had with (K)ubuntu are dwarfed by the headaches I had from Windows. Sure, there's a learning curve (although I'm not sure how "steep" it is). I came from Windows just over a year ago, and haven't looked back.

My advice would be to dual-boot, and keep coming back. Sooner or later, I'm sure you'll end up staying.

dpower
April 24th, 2006, 09:34 PM
Thanks Ginger- see previous post on help issue.

aysiu
April 24th, 2006, 09:41 PM
What annoyed me about the Ubuntu philosophy was it's claim that it's 'for humans'. Please read this thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=70603)
Humans like to point and click, it's why OS's are a success in general. Yes it may be quick, but in many cases it's just confusing and not a good way to remember how and why you did it in the first place. Terminal is not intuitive, and thats the main prob. Why have a steep learning curve if you can prevent it? The only way to prevent it is to sell people computers with Ubuntu preloaded (and I've linked to those computers in a previous post). People who install operating systems are not ordinary "human beings." And there's only so easy you can make it. If you can point out something that the developers are doing wrong and how to fix it, point it out to them (not us).



The point of this thread was to tell the folks at Ubuntu why someone chooses not to use it. It's feedback. I felt it's better to leave a reason than nothing at all. You're in the wrong place, then. Ubuntu developers do not read these forums (especially threads entitled "Ubuntu sucks"). They're too busy ensuring that Ubuntu improves to read your criticisms (which actually aren't helpful at all--"make more drivers." Yes, easier said than done). If you really want to make suggestions to the developers, file a bug report:

https://launchpad.net/malone

Frankly, even if developers did read your thread, I don't see what that would do. I used to be an English teacher, and my students appreciated specific feedback about what exactly they did wrong and how they could improve their writing. They would no go for "Your paper sucks. You just need to make it easier to read for English teachers. Thanks."

prizrak
April 24th, 2006, 11:35 PM
1) Drivers:
First of all, have you ever developed a driver or anything to control hardware? Do you think that companies that spend millions of dollars on R&D to come up with that killer peiece of hardware will just open up all the specs for you to look at? Do you think that most manufacturers give a damn enough about a system that only runs on about 5% of desktops to spend money and man hours developing and testing drivers for it? Hardware that tends to run on servers is very well supported by Linux where it enjoys a significant portion of the market share. Consumer hardware is mostly run by Windows == few Linux drivers. Most of the drivers we have are from reverse engineering if you think that's easy I suggest trying it.
Installation of drivers is difficult because there is no one Linux. SuSE, Linspire, Xandros, RHEL, Fedora are all essentially separate OS's running a SIMILAR kernel (there are even differences in kernel versions between them). So yes some drivers are easily installed, some are PITA. nVidia driver is a breeze simply because it's a binary that essentially compiles it for your machine for you, not everyone has nVidia's money to do that so most just provide something you can compile yourself.

4) Development cycle.
Ubuntu gets a new version every 6 months, if there is something missing in the current version it might be there in 6 months. Compare that to everyone's "favorite" OS from Redmond, how old is XP now? 5 years? 6? When is Vista comming out btw? Did you know that Vista has been delayed 4 years now, and that it will be missing a bunch of features including an all new File System and integrated search. Dapper release is promising to be extremely usable and stable, in fact it's so good already that Mark is letting the next release be the bleeding edge and aimed at those who want to play with things. Here is a kicker Dapper is comming out 6 weeks behind schedule, which puts it developement time at 7.5 months and will include ALL the promised features.

2) Terminal
You are so wrong on this you can't even imagine. GUI instructions are the ones that are difficult to follow/give. I am willing to bet that my desktop looks nothing like yours, up until few days ago it didn't even have a "taskbar" (gnome panel). Terminal on the other hand is extremely easy and consistant, you HAVE apt-get and aptittude with every Ubuntu install. When giving you directions I know what you have installed and what commands will work. Not to mention that if you get errors they are verbose and tell me all that is needed to further the help. Also tell me what's easier: menu>system>synaptic, click search, type in "epiphany", pick "epiphany-browser" then click apply. vs menu>accessories>terminal and then copy-paste "sudo apt-get install epiphany-browser". You don't even have to type anything, and on a default system for the first case you have a diff entry, on mine there is just one menu that contains everything else (and I JUST remembered that). One default I think that should be implemented is a shortcut to the terminal so that people can access it readily.

3) Complaining on a forum.
Been pointed out already, devs don't read it. Your feedback is helping no one, we know that not all hardware is supported, if you want to help create a bug report with the hardware names/models that is giving you issues the devs will know what's up and what EXACTLY is broken and maybe incorporate your driver into the distro next time. Last but not least, Ubuntu doesn't work for you? Don't use it! There are over 300 Linux distributions take your pick, try it, see if it works for you. Alot come with live CD's that you can try. All have hardware compatibility lists that you can check out.

aysiu
April 24th, 2006, 11:43 PM
What's better than whining on the forums? ... making a difference (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=78741)

swpalmer
April 24th, 2006, 11:58 PM
Yes,Windows and the like may suck... but the install goes much smoother and installing any program you like is much simpler.. you don't have to wait for Microsoft to put it on an approved list or some such crap. You go to the website, download the installer, double click and you are done. And it doesn't matter which Windows OS you are using XP, 2k, Server 2003... the same installer just works. You don't have to find the special installer for your distribution.

Windows sucks in many ways.. But it is quite a bit ahead of Linux in others. Linux developers need to realize this. Instead they try to clone the Windows (Mac) UI with Gnome but forget that a UI is more than pretty pictures.. the usability and out-of-the-box experience still has a long way to go.

When I installed Breezy, Java didn't work (a broken GNU pile of crud was in it's place). It should have.
When I installed Breezy it installed a single-processor kernel. I have a multi-processor machine.
When I installed and booted with a SMP kernel it crashed. It shouldn't have.
When I updated Breezy to Dapper it broke my XServer. It shouldn't have.
When I installed the latest Dapper updates it broke my mouse. It shouldn't have.

If this is the typical experience for someone trying Linux - and trust me IT IS, then something is wrong.
Those of you that say it isn't typical are the few for which the Linux install actually did the right thing, or you don't need or use the bits of your install that are broken. I've installed Linux enough times now with various distributions on various hardware to know that Linux has a long way to go before it can be used by non-nerds. The types of people that are attracted to Linux just happen to be the techie folks (I'm one) that aren't bothered by having to manually tweak things to get them to work. They don't seem to realize that just a single manual tweak is enough to stop any "normal" user cold.

The thing that has to change is the idea that those how-tos for doing simple things like installing Sun's Java... a simple download and double click on Windows... are ridiculous. I need to download the Linux build from Sun, go to a shell and run various scripts as root, so I finally end up with a package that can be installed... then I install it.. and pray that the symlinks and/or path is updated so that I can actually use it.. if not.. then it is time to dig up another set of instructions to set the current Java.. the instructions aren't hard to follow, at least not for me... but they aren't the sort of things that in the year 2006 no person should have to do. We have computers for tedious things like that.

swpalmer
April 25th, 2006, 12:28 AM
1) Drivers:
First of all, have you ever developed a driver or anything to control hardware?
Yes.


Do you think that companies that spend millions of dollars on R&D to come up with that killer peiece of hardware will just open up all the specs for you to look at? Do you think that most manufacturers give a damn enough about a system that only runs on about 5% of desktops to spend money and man hours developing and testing drivers for it?

I'm an end-user. That's not my problem.


Installation of drivers is difficult because there is no one Linux. SuSE, Linspire, Xandros, RHEL, Fedora are all essentially separate OS's running a SIMILAR kernel (there are even differences in kernel versions between them).

Again, not my problem. The Linux community did that to themselves. A lot of good all that "freedom" got them eh?


4) Development cycle.
Ubuntu gets a new version every 6 months, if there is something missing in the current version it might be there in 6 months. Compare that to everyone's "favorite" OS from Redmond, how old is XP now? 5 years? 6? When is Vista comming out btw? Did you know that Vista has been delayed 4 years now, and that it will be missing a bunch of features including an all new File System and integrated search.

And yet that five year old OS is still more stable and installs much easier, and works much better, etc. So who cares that it is five years old?
(Yes it still sucks in various ways... but at least even with all it's warts it offers a much cleaner simpler user experience.)

I personally prefer Mac OS X. It's not five years old, it has the fancy integrated search, and it is BSD unix under the hood... I can even use a terminal should I want to... But it has a much smoother install process, and much better user experience. On a Mac software installation is a matter of dragging an icon from install media to your hard disk. The Linux community doesn't seem to have clued in on how vastly superior such a simple system is.


Dapper release is promising to be extremely usable and stable, in fact it's so good already that Mark is letting the next release be the bleeding edge and aimed at those who want to play with things. Here is a kicker Dapper is comming out 6 weeks behind schedule, which puts it developement time at 7.5 months and will include ALL the promised features.

Ok. Let's hope that they get the mouse fixed in the next update... and the SMP kernel...


2) Terminal
You are so wrong on this you can't even imagine. GUI instructions are the ones that are difficult to follow/give.

BS. The terminal scares the heck out of casual computer users. Double clicking an icon is a much simpler thing for them.

Don't confuse the fact that describing a GUI procedure without illustrations is tedious with the fact that the over process is much much more intuitive for non-techies.


I am willing to bet that my desktop looks nothing like yours, up until few days ago it didn't even have a "taskbar" (gnome panel). Terminal on the other hand is extremely easy and consistant, you HAVE apt-get and aptittude with every Ubuntu install.

apt-get does a fine job... after you have guess what package you need... a process that is not simple for non-techies.

aptitude is dog vomit. One of the worst UIs I've seen in a while... the help screen does work to salvage some usability out of it.. but gimme a break... if that is the Linux standard for UI then someone needs to get kicked out of the 1970's.


When giving you directions I know what you have installed and what commands will work.

Hardly. I've followed the instructions for doing simple things like installing Sun Java. The result: nothing they failed half way through. Why? Beats me. I ended up installing a lot of stuff manually with apt-get so I could compile Subversion and then I found more instructions to install Java and they worked.. I think some of the other stuff I did to get Subversion compiled "fixed" the instructions.. but I'm not sure if I didn't just find different instructions the second time.


Not to mention that if you get errors they are verbose and tell me all that is needed to further the help.

They might tell you something, if you are lucky... but they don't tell most users anything that they can use.


Also tell me what's easier: menu>system>synaptic, click search, type in "epiphany", pick "epiphany-browser" then click apply. vs menu>accessories>terminal and then copy-paste "sudo apt-get install epiphany-browser".

While Synaptic is also a lame UI.. it is clearly the winner here. Because there actually IS a UI. In the GUI case the user will do that once, and be much better off because now they know about searching and looking through the list to find something they need - with descriptions.



One default I think that should be implemented is a shortcut to the terminal so that people can access it readily.

The user should never even know that the terminal exists unless they are a developer.


3) Complaining on a forum.
Been pointed out already, devs don't read it. Your feedback is helping no one

That much seems clear. The Linux community still doesn't 'get' it. The "devs" are lost in their own little world... they are happy with the status quo... maybe it makes them feel smart to be able to do things that the other users can't figure out.


, we know that not all hardware is supported, if you want to help create a bug report with the hardware names/models that is giving you issues the devs will know what's up and what EXACTLY is broken and maybe incorporate your driver into the distro next time. Last but not least, Ubuntu doesn't work for you? Don't use it! There are over 300 Linux distributions take your pick, try it, see if it works for you.

Been there done that... they ALL don't work. Though different things are broken in each case the fundamental issue is that the user experience is still designed for tech-heads. I don't want to have to solve all these problems to just get my OS working. Sure it's fun to solve problems some times, but sometime I just need to get on with life and hacking Linux just so I have an OS that works isn't what I had in mind.

gingermark
April 25th, 2006, 12:35 AM
OMG. You are such a troll, but I can't help myself.

Package management is an unfortuate result of the choice that Linux offers (ie the number of distros). But it has it's advantages too. And with a regular release cycle, the wait isn't too bad.


When I installed Breezy, Java didn't work (a broken GNU pile of crud was in it's place). It should have.
Jave is a proprietary. If you don't want "GNU crud" why are you using an open-source OS??? If you can't take the time to set up proprietary stuff, then go back to a proprietary OS. One day I will learn how to spell proprietary,

When I installed Breezy it installed a single-processor kernel. I have a multi-processor machine. Congratualtions. Not everyone does. And one CD has it's space limitations.

When I installed and booted with a SMP kernel it crashed. It shouldn't have. Ok, I can't speak for that. I'm not blessed with SMP

When I updated Breezy to Dapper it broke my XServer. It shouldn't have. When I installed the latest Dapper updates it broke my mouse. It shouldn't have.

DAPPER IS BETA SOFTWARE. If you need a stable system, use Breezy until Dapper is properly released.

Ok, give it to me.

EDIT: And I can't be arsed to read that other post......

aysiu
April 25th, 2006, 12:35 AM
swpalmer, all your arguments don't mean anything because your supposed end user who doesn't want to know what terminal is is not going to install an operating system. She will buy a computer with an operating system already installed on it.

If those people who are deathly afraid of copying and pasting a few commands want to use Linux, they should go to Koobox or System76 and buy one that's already installed.

Otherwise, just deal with it. Windows installations are no walk in the park, either.

Stormy Eyes
April 25th, 2006, 01:31 AM
I'm an end-user. That's not my problem.

It became your problem when you chose to install Linux. Linus Torvalds doesn't have a legion of ninja penguins that come to Windows users in the dead of night and offer them a choice between Linux and death on a ninja penguin's sword. You chose to install Linux; the fact that there isn't a driver for your particular piece of gear is your problem. Either bitch at the manufacturer, or get the kernel source, install the compiler, and start hacking. Those are your choices.

dpower
April 25th, 2006, 01:49 AM
Otherwise, just deal with it. Windows installations are no walk in the park, either.

A windows installation is a walk in the park by comparison. Just reinstalled 2000- no prob, no command line. As for 'just deal with it', this is the problem. Why should an end user have to put up with something because a bunch of techies say so? They won't. They'll walk.

Now I think most people are aware that Windows and Linux have their advantages, but rather than defend a poor position just because the competition is doing it, why not accept that this works and get on with it?

I am aware of the time and effort put into this project. Like I said before, parts of it impressed me greatly. But as a new user it's just too much. When I was in college we used macs, unlike most people I had to make the switch to PC, and I have to say, the learning curve was easy enough.

It's not just the OS- the help system is a little flawed. The amount of documentation I have had to read just to install a network card is crazy, and most of it assumes I have knowledge of related areas and am fairly familiar with Linux, the terminal, ndiswrapper, ra0, rt2500, networking theory, sudo, nautilus and a host of other technologies and jargon. That's a community issue and is dealt with easily enough by asking people to document steps correctly. There is also an awful lot of duplication on the forums. I'll even sign up to help out here.

Burying your head in the sand and pretending these aren't issues will alienate people who wish to switch to an alternative OS. I voiced my criticism not only from pure frustration but also a genuine passion for usability.

As for the troll comments- Take it from any restaurant owner, the worst kind of customer is the customer who smiles, nods says the meal was lovely and never comes back without ever giving the restaurant the chance to know what went wrong.

gingermark
April 25th, 2006, 02:10 AM
My troll comment was directed at swpalmer, because I feel anyone who complains that GNU/Linux comes with GNU crud, and that Beta software doesn't work properly, has to be trolling. It goes against common sense.

As far as the restaurant analogy, if I found a bug in my soup I'd file a report :)

Regarding hardware issues if a manufacturer won't support Linux then often there will be a lengthy process to get stuff working. As someone else said, many Linux drivers are written by people unassociated with the manufacturers. You can't expect them to sort out every piece of hardware.

For your criticism of the documentation, yes there is some repetition and redundancy. But as far as step-by-step instructions go, I think the documentation is pretty good. It normally consists of the commands that you can copy and paste in order to get something working. And believe me, you pick stuff up as you go along.

I'm sorry you felt overwhelmed using an OS you'd never used before for the first time. Nobody is suggesting that Ubuntu is perfect, but I do think most of your criticism is misinformed and misdirected.

If you do fancy giving Linux another go in the future you might want to consider purchasing Linspire - that distro goes out of it's way to seem familiar to Windows users.

Best regards,
gingermark.