Linux consumer-readiness discussion (splintered from Mac OS X discussion)

[handy]

Linux kernel based distributions will never team up & make one great distribution. The core of OSS development will always be that people can take & use & change the code to do what they want, providing they make their code freely available so others can build on it.

The last thing I want is one Linux distro' that 51% think is great!

[HokeyFry]

I think that if there was one distro created that was popular with the masses, I think it would lead to Linux becoming well supported in the future. I know that a great deal of the support coming to Linux would be proprietary and closed source, but to someone like me, as long as it works, I don't care. And to people who do care, it's all good because open source will never die. There will always be a choice on Linux as to what hardware and software you can use, so everybody can be happy.

UT2k4, the Quake's, Firefox, VLC is awesome & I dig NeroLinux.

I wouldn't say nothing cool ever gets officially ported over to Linux (distributions).

I meant in general not a lot of proprietary software gets officially ported to Linux. And weren't VLC and Firefox made for Linux originally, then ported to Windows?

[handy]

I think that if there was one distro created that was popular with the masses, I think it would lead to Linux becoming well supported in the future. I know that a great deal of the support coming to Linux would be proprietary and closed source, but to someone like me, as long as it works, I don't care. And to people who do care, it's all good because open source will never die. There will always be a choice on Linux as to what hardware and software you can use, so everybody can be happy.

Personally, I really don't care if the Linux kernel based distributions don't develop any further as I am perfectly satisfied by them as it is.

As far as one distro' becoming incredibly popular & causing hardware manufacturers to take notice; that is & will continue to be Ubuntu, as best I can foretell.


I meant in general not a lot of proprietary software gets officially ported to Linux. And weren't VLC and Firefox made for Linux originally, then ported to Windows?

From memory at least the early Quakes may have started on Linux also?

As I said, it really doesn't matter to me.

[linux5uper]

If we put 'politics' aside, I see mac as the only viable alternative to windows for the masses today, and the standard towards which linux should aim.

[handy]

If we put 'politics' aside, I see mac as the only viable alternative to windows for the masses today, and the standard towards which linux should aim.

Why does Linux need to change its aim?

What is wrong with the way it is going now?

We have so many different flavors, it is wonderful, like going to the multi-flavored ice cream shop.

If one doesn't suit your palate (hardware) try another, get a favorite for a while, then choose another later, all for free.

We are so fortunate that GNU & Torvalds exist, our world would be very different without them. Canonical has put the funds/energy in to making Linux more attractive/easier for those willing to put in the effort to learn a new OS, the number of Ubuntu forum users is growing, which says something.

[linux5uper]

Why does Linux need to change its aim?

What is wrong with the way it is going now?

We have so many different flavors, it is wonderful, like going to the multi-flavored ice cream shop.

If one doesn't suit your palate (hardware) try another, get a favorite for a while, then choose another later, all for free.


Why does it need to change you say? Because very few people like it at the moment! And due to very few people liking it, the people who do like it can't enjoy it to its full potential.

It's currently a home-brew style OS, more like a primordial collection of tools that mostly work together for some tasks, than a complete and usable OS.

OSX has way more support in terms of professional applications than linux, and that's why I think the linux world can learn from them. How has Apple achieved this? Go to apple.com and look at the introduction to leopard video. When Ubuntu will have a similar style video with instructions on how to do things easily through GUIs, one-click installs, backup your system in a predetermined and secure way, etc., without EVER touching the terminal, then we can talk about it as a serious competitor to the other two.

On the other hand, the things you've pointed out are indeed wonderful. Linux got many things right, which is why I personally love it and use it for most of my needs.

[handy]

Why does it need to change you say? Because very few people like it at the moment!

Enough like it for it to be as fantastically good as it is.


And due to very few people liking it, the people who do like it can't enjoy it to its full potential.

So you say?


It's currently a home-brew style OS, more like a primordial collection of tools that mostly work together for some tasks, than a complete and usable OS.

Works for me.


OSX has way more support in terms of professional applications than linux, and that's why I think the linux world can learn from them.


That is what you think, you obviously don't understand what support is.


How has Apple achieved this? Go to apple.com and look at the introduction to leopard video. When Ubuntu will have a similar style video with instructions on how to do things easily through GUIs, one-click installs, backup your system in a predetermined and secure way, etc., without EVER touching the terminal, then we can talk about it as a serious competitor to the other two.


Sorry, you are right, I hadn't understood that you were talking about who has the best GUI.


On the other hand, the things you've pointed out are indeed wonderful. Linux got many things right, which is why I personally love it and use it for most of my needs.

Good.

Use whatever OS does it for you.

I do.

[linux5uper]

"It's currently a home-brew style OS, more like a primordial collection of tools that mostly work together for some tasks, than a complete and usable OS."

Works for me.

See, you're able to say that because your needs do not extend into using, for example, professional audio hardware & software. For people who do, linux is currently just a toy. The other two OS's are able to handle that. And the list goes on.

I don't know why you need to get so defensive about it, it's just fact.

[NoSmokingBandit]

The problem/advantage with linux distros is that everyone works independently. Its great because everyone can have what they want, but its a bad thing because most computer users want something simple and strait-forward. Big software devs dont want to port to linux because it has almost no market share and nobody wants to help increase its market share because there are no apps from big developers.
OSX is a prime example of a polished *nix distro (disregarding the hardware tie-in) and every *nix distro should aim to be just as polished and uniform. But for linux distros this wont happen because everyone has a different idea of what a perfect setup would be so each release ends up being a big comprimise of most people's ideals.
OSX has to follow only Job's wishes so everything turns out sleek and consistent. Theres no problem with linux distros aiming for that high level of quality.
just my view.

[linux5uper]

Exactly! But the thing is, out of the thousands of distros, only 1 needs to make it and it will instantly become the first choice of most users. Sort of like Ubuntu, although it's not quite there yet.

This is why I think that linux doesn't need 1 thousand more developers, it only needs 1 guy with a vision that will sell to the hardware manufacturers and the general public.

[handy]

"It's currently a home-brew style OS, more like a primordial collection of tools that mostly work together for some tasks, than a complete and usable OS."

Works for me.

See, you're able to say that because your needs do not extend into using, for example, professional audio hardware & software. For people who do, linux is currently just a toy. The other two OS's are able to handle that. And the list goes on.

I don't know why you need to get so defensive about it, it's just fact.

Sorry, we do obviously have a communication problem; this current sentence may be misinterpreted as defensive.

As previously stated I do not in any way shape or form agree with you. Though I will always fight for your right to disagree.

Just because you can't meet your sound/video needs with software based on OS's that use the Linux or BSD kernels, you have no right to impose your disability on all other Linux/BSD kernel users.

I think that you may need to do more research.

[aysiu]

What percentage of computer users really need professional audio hardware and software?

[linux5uper]

Sorry, we do obviously have a communication problem; this current sentence may be misinterpreted as defensive.

As previously stated I do not in any way shape or form agree with you. Though I will always fight for your right to disagree.

Just because you can't meet your sound/video needs with software based on OS's that use the Linux or BSD kernels, you have no right to impose your disability on all other Linux/BSD kernel users.

I think that you may need to do more research.

This is really amusing :) I think it's clear I'm not imposing anything on anybody.

I'm simply pointing out the fact that despite the great advancements of linux os's in the last few years, there is room for improvement in some areas that will appeal to many, many people.

Let me ask you a question - are you opposed to progress in general, or only when linux is concerned?

[linux5uper]

What percentage of computer users really need professional audio hardware and software?

That was just one example. There are so many basic things missing that I think it's futile to make a list here.

[aysiu]

Really? I can't think of anything basic that's missing.

The basics, as a matter of fact, are the selling point for Linux on the desktop/laptop: Email Web browser Photo organization Word processor Music player/iPod manager It's only when you start getting into niche markets (PC gaming, professional audio or graphics, accounting software) that Linux runs into problems for consumers.

[linux5uper]

Really? I can't think of anything basic that's missing.

The basics, as a matter of fact, are the selling point for Linux on the desktop/laptop: Email Web browser Photo organization Word processor Music player/iPod manager It's only when you start getting into niche markets (PC gaming, professional audio or graphics, accounting software) that Linux runs into problems for consumers.

First of all, basic usability. Tell me, off the top of your head, how to change the default pdf application that opens from within any other application, system wide? Right click, other..NO! You have to edit the config file for gnome defaults, after searching the whole bloody internet for instructions.

Once we have all these wrinkles straightened out, it will be much more enjoyable for everybody. I'm not attacking anybody and anything, I'm just pointing out some things that need polishing.

edit: off the top of my head, there is no system restore/backup utility that matches the features and performance of time machine. now wouldn't that be sweet?

[aysiu]

First of all, basic usability. Tell me, off the top of your head, how to change the default pdf application that opens from within any other application, system wide? Right click, other..NO! You have to edit the config file for gnome defaults, after searching the whole bloody internet for instructions. Right-click > Properties > Open with... YES!

[linux5uper]

Right-click > Properties > Open with... YES!

That's very kind of you!

It's the first thing I did without any instructions, but guess what - when you open a pdf from an email attachment from gmail in firefox, it still opens it with whatever was set before. And so on with all other apps. So the change that you make is not 'global', but rather applies to clicking within nautilus and maybe a few other places.

read up...

http://linuxowns.wordpress.com/2008/05/31/changing-default-applications/

[aysiu]

What other apps are opening PDFs?

Firefox always does its own thing anyway. In Windows, I can set Firefox to open a different PDF reader than Explorer opens. Firefox is not a Windows application, and it isn't a Gnome one either.

If you want that kind of integrated experience, you should stick with only Gnome apps or only KDE apps.

Frankly, I've never heard anyone but a power user wanting to change the default PDF reader. Most people don't even know what a PDF reader is.

[aysiu]

What other apps are opening PDFs?

Firefox always does its own thing anyway. In Windows, I can set Firefox to open a different PDF reader than Explorer opens. Firefox is not a Windows application, and it isn't a Gnome one either.

If you want that kind of integrated experience, you should stick with only Gnome apps or only KDE apps.

Frankly, I've never heard anyone but a power user wanting to change the default PDF reader. Most people don't even know what a PDF reader is.

I still haven't seen any evidence that Linux can't do "the basics."

[linux5uper]

Well, case in point, I wanted to open pdf's with acroread. Evince produces horrible looking text. I also want to set different multimedia files to open with specific browsers, because for example the default video player plays videos like a slideshow (I read somewhere it had to do with Pulse Audio integration). Therefore I want to play them with VLC.

Do you want to know what else is on my to-do list for today? To search this forum for the reason why I can't listen to youtube and rhythmbox at the same time (no sound in one or the other app). I was perfectly able to do this in Gutsy and every OS I've used since windows 95!

I'm young and a student, and honestly, to a very big extent, I enjoy doing these things and looking under the hood for how things work. But I don't think this should be the only way of doing things. In a few years when I'll have a job and a family, I'll just buy a mac because it has it all - the *nix under the hood, and the smoothness of experience, the 'just works'. And that's why I'm saying, linux CAN achieve this, and should aim for it.

[aysiu]

This isn't the fault of Linux. This is a combination of Ubuntu 8.04, your hardware, and the newest release of Gnome.

As you've already stated, in previously releases, things were working just fine. In older versions, you could change the default video player to VLC easily, and you could play more than one sound at the same time.

The Ubuntu devs got a little experimental with PulseAudio, and the Gnome devs decided to make things "simpler" yet again by taking out even more functionality. I love Gnome, but it really does make some dumb "improvements" sometimes.

I also am not convinced that these are "the basics." You're talking about changing PDF readers and video players. Most users do not do this. Most users stick with defaults. I can't tell you how many Windows users I've seen with the rolling hills and blue sky wallpaper. Seriously.

[NoSmokingBandit]

The problem with an OS supporting only the basic functions (which i agree linux distros do quite well) is that if someone wants to try out something more advanced like audio recording they are either stuck with the basics like Audacity or they have to find a whole new OS.
I put linux on a computer i gave to my church because its only ever going to run Audacity and Kaffeine. Thats a perfect use for linux, but here at home i might want to throw together a video or song which would require something more than the basics. Linux needs to stop being a 'basic' OS and start getting itself to the level of Windows and OSX. this, as i've said, will be difficult do to the cirlce of "no pro software = no pro users = no need for pro software..."

[aysiu]

Well, most of the professional functions that Mac OS X and Windows do aren't really done by the OS. Some professional applications are developed by Apple and Microsoft, but many of those applications are third-party applications.

The key is to get as many satisfied-with-basic-functions folks on Linux, and if the user base increases enough, Linux will gradually be an attractive enough platform for third-party professional software companies to port more of their products to.

In other words, get a lot of email-web-word processor-photos-music Linux users, and you'll eventually get Final Cut Pro, Microsoft Office, QuickBooks, Adobe CS3, etc. as well.

[karellen]

The problem with an OS supporting only the basic functions (which i agree linux distros do quite well) is that if someone wants to try out something more advanced like audio recording they are either stuck with the basics like Audacity or they have to find a whole new OS.
I put linux on a computer i gave to my church because its only ever going to run Audacity and Kaffeine. Thats a perfect use for linux, but here at home i might want to throw together a video or song which would require something more than the basics. Linux needs to stop being a 'basic' OS and start getting itself to the level of Windows and OSX. this, as i've said, will be difficult do to the cirlce of "no pro software = no pro users = no need for pro software..."

you talk as if it's Linux's fault as a whole because software makers don't release a Linux version of their products

[linux5uper]

Well whose fault is it? Everything needs to be earned. You think the Apple folks sat there with their 'basic' desktop and thought 'it's not our fault if nobody makes software for us'? No, Steve Jobs went out and sold it to other company's execs, aggressively.

And to be able to do that, you need to at least have a system that is stable from release to release, and that is workable without having to dig into the very guts of the operating system. With the amount of fragmentation and stubbornness among linux developers, this ain't happening any time soon.

Plus, we don't have our own Steve Jobs yet. Mr. Shuttleworth is a wonderful gentleman for all he does, but he can't mesmerize a crowd or strangle other company CEOs with his sheer will, until they say YES! :)

[aysiu]

Well, Mac OS X even lacks a lot of support (to my Macbook Pro-owning wife's dismay).

Netflix's Watch Now isn't available for Mac OS X. Google's new Chrome browser isn't yet available for Mac OS X. The real estate agents' mecca mlxchange.com doesn't work in any browser that supports Mac OS X. My church uses a worship organization-projection tool that is Windows-only software. As far as I know, AutoCAD is not available for Mac. My in-laws had a Lexmark printer that couldn't work with Mac OS X. Many popular PC games are not ported to Mac... or ported only long after the Windows version has been available.

Mac does get a lot more support than Linux, but it still suffers from a small marketshare.

[handy]

This is really amusing :) I think it's clear I'm not imposing anything on anybody.

Good, I'm glad that you are mellowing.


I'm simply pointing out the fact that despite the great advancements of linux os's in the last few years, there is room for improvement in some areas that will appeal to many, many people.

As aysiu said, how many?

Many, many is a very loose definition statistically speaking. Impossible to argue for or against, in reality.


Let me ask you a question - are you opposed to progress in general, or only when linux is concerned?

:lolflag:

The last thing I'm opposed to is real progress.

Real progress is another definition that lives in the same basket as the many, many.

Now we are trying to relate personal definitions that live in the subjective realm, which unless you are a poet, they are all but impossible to translate in a meaningful fashion one to another.

[handy]

Well whose fault is it? Everything needs to be earned. You think the Apple folks sat there with their 'basic' desktop and thought 'it's not our fault if nobody makes software for us'? No, Steve Jobs went out and sold it to other company's execs, aggressively.

What you stated above, can not happen for all of the Linux distributions due to what I consider to be the wonderful diversity inherent in same.

It is only possible for Linux distributions to achieve what you are talking about individually.


And to be able to do that, you need to at least have a system that is stable from release to release, and that is workable without having to dig into the very guts of the operating system. With the amount of fragmentation and stubbornness among linux developers, this ain't happening any time soon.

It all comes down to how well an individual's particular set of hardware is supported by the drivers incorporated in the particular distribution of Linux that they are using.

Beyond that, we are NOT talking about OS BASICS, which I will define as the ability to use an office suite; many natives are available including OpenOffice or MS Office if you choose to use Wine or a derivative; browse the web, you can take your pick of browsers; play your music, again you can take your pick from a multitude of applications; watch videos, take your pick from the range; burn data on DVD/CD, take your pick...

Is there a basic function missing here?


Plus, we don't have our own Steve Jobs yet. Mr. Shuttleworth is a wonderful gentleman for all he does, but he can't mesmerize a crowd or strangle other company CEOs with his sheer will, until they say YES! :)

I think that Mark Shuttleworth is doing an incredible job when it comes to the promotion of the Linux kernel based distributions.

Ubuntu came from nowhere & spends most of its time leading the popularity count by far (according to distrowatch anyway).

Also, Ubuntu's development often assists other Linux distributions due to the nature of the license which is what it is all about as far as I am concerned anyway:

Helping each other towards satisfaction, as opposed to competing against each other for personal profit.

Rarely do those two paradigms ever meet.