View Poll Results: What does "ready for the desktop" mean to you?

Voters
4604. You may not vote on this poll
  • Any person can install it on any computer without any problems

    1,609 34.95%
  • Anyone can use it once it's already been installed and configured

    2,414 52.43%
  • Every commercial application works on it

    453 9.84%
  • Nothing--it's a nonsensical term

    704 15.29%
  • It automatically detects most hardware without the need to hunt down drivers

    2,236 48.57%
  • It comes preinstalled on computers so novice users don't have to install it

    889 19.31%
  • It's suitable to the needs of most beginner users but not necessarily to most intermediate ones

    568 12.34%
  • Windows and nothing else... not even Mac OS X

    46 1.00%
  • Works on my desktop

    1,199 26.04%
  • Other (please explain)

    166 3.61%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 852 of 952 FirstFirst ... 352752802842850851852853854862902 ... LastLast
Results 8,511 to 8,520 of 9520

Thread: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

  1. #8511
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    0

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by aysiu View Post
    No, you tell me this: if you have no experience with computers, what would make more sense to do--launch a blue e icon, search in a search engine for the word firefox, find the download now link and double-click some file on your desktop and click Next in a wizard... or click on [I]Applications[/I > ]Add/Remove > Internet and then check the box next to Firefox?

    I don't see what
    Code:
    sudo apt-get install firefox
    has to do with it.
    omg i used firefox just as an example, what about any other application that is not in the Add/Remove online database?

  2. #8512
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    0

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by aysiu View Post
    I've gone ahead and done the same.
    I couldnt care less if i get ignore by people that think that a rough linux is ready for home pc usage, and that do not care about userfriendly.
    I'll keep posting for people that does care!

  3. #8513
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    perdita
    Beans
    1,622
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by XogGyux View Post
    Why each time i say something about linux installation system people only talks about .deb? why no one talks about how easy is to compile a program that you downloaded the source code? or how easy is to install a tar.gz?
    Because it is NOT easy to compile a program from source.
    It can be easy in 70-80% of the cases maybe. But if you encounter errors and are a newbie, you're lost without external help.
    Errors in configure are not too hard to solve, but when you start getting errors during the make phase, it gets harder without programming knowledge...

    And everyone talks about .deb because it's the standard way (except for synaptic, but that's also using .deb in some way) of installing programs in Ubuntu and we are on an Ubuntu forum.

    There are also other package management systems out there like autopackage, rpm, etc.
    You mentioned that some .debs don't install shortcuts. That is true. But once again, it depends how the package was made.
    Contrary to Windows installers that allow you to choose where to install the program and if you want to add shortcuts or not, .debs install the program the way the packager wanted it too (usually they try to follow the standards).

    There are two reasons why you mostly find source packages (.tar.gz/.tar.bz2) instead of binary packages (.deb&co):

    1)Installation from source works on all UNIX based systems and even on Windows. So it's the best way to distribute a program for several platforms.
    Binary packages like .deb for example on the other hand only work on certain distros. (altough tools like alien can help here)

    Some package management systems like autopackage are actively being developed to solve this problem and create a package system usable on all GNU/Linux distros.

    2)Creating packages needs to be learned and is not straightforward.
    I managed to create some by creating a control file and using dpkg-deb, but apparently this isn't the correct way and I should have used dh_make.
    Anyway, it's something that needs to be learned and I haven't been able to find a GUI to do it yet, which would be very nice.

  4. #8514
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Acworth, GA, USA
    Beans
    20
    Distro
    Ubuntu 7.04 Feisty Fawn

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    What I have been seeing in this “readiness” string is a bit of confusion. If we want to talk about "new installs" then I suggest we need to look at the new Dell's that come with Ubuntu pre-loaded. I have not purchased one – but I submit this is the only valid comparion against new Windows PCs.

    Almost no Windows “user” installs Windows and all the associated applications and drivers. I think the next “killer app” to get Linux in general and Ubuntu specifically “ready” for the desktop is to get HP to start selling Ubuntu as an offering. If someone could walk into Wal-Mart and buy a Ubuntu box – then it would be “desktop ready”.

    Since we have no control over that – how about a few more surveys about various apps that could improve the “out of the box” Ubuntu experience?

  5. #8515
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    0

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by KIAaze View Post
    Because it is NOT easy to compile a program from source.
    It can be easy in 70-80% of the cases maybe. But if you encounter errors and are a newbie, you're lost without external help.
    Errors in configure are not too hard to solve, but when you start getting errors during the make phase, it gets harder without programming knowledge...

    And everyone talks about .deb because it's the standard way (except for synaptic, but that's also using .deb in some way) of installing programs in Ubuntu and we are on an Ubuntu forum.

    There are also other package management systems out there like autopackage, rpm, etc.
    You mentioned that some .debs don't install shortcuts. That is true. But once again, it depends how the package was made.
    Contrary to Windows installers that allow you to choose where to install the program and if you want to add shortcuts or not, .debs install the program the way the packager wanted it too (usually they try to follow the standards).

    There are two reasons why you mostly find source packages (.tar.gz/.tar.bz2) instead of binary packages (.deb&co):

    1)Installation from source works on all UNIX based systems and even on Windows. So it's the best way to distribute a program for several platforms.
    Binary packages like .deb for example on the other hand only work on certain distros. (altough tools like alien can help here)

    Some package management systems like autopackage are actively being developed to solve this problem and create a package system usable on all GNU/Linux distros.

    2)Creating packages needs to be learned and is not straightforward.
    I managed to create some by creating a control file and using dpkg-deb, but apparently this isn't the correct way and I should have used dh_make.
    Anyway, it's something that needs to be learned and I haven't been able to find a GUI to do it yet, which would be very nice.
    thats my point, althou deb packages are fairly common there still exist several other that are still in use, moreover deb package wont give you any feedback (unless something terrible happens, but if everything is cool it wont say where the application went etc) and it wont ask you where you want it installed either.

  6. #8516
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    0

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    do you really think that for a home user the actual mess in "/" directory is better than something like this?


    Image :

    compare to the actual:
    http://learnlinux.tsf.org.za/courses.../diagram04.png


    about the applications installation i got the following idea:
    you download the application, (which is actually ready to run) and you copy it to where you want it (or download directly to its final destination), now if you dont want to have duplicate libraries, after you have the application in the directory you want, you right click it and the menu will show you an option "register shared files/libraries" this will cut the "shared libraries" from the application and paste it into /system/shared libraries and files and add a couple of lines to an existent text file which will be the log or record of shared files, if when you selected register shared libraries, the library already exist, the system will keep the most recent (information obtained from metadata), ok now the installation process is really straight foward just copy and paste (easier than .exe in windows or .deb in linux), is more flexible (you can install wherever you want, even cd, dvd, memory drives, etc) and if you dont want duplicate libraries for any reason (maybe you dont have enough space, or you just want to keep your system extremely clean, you only have to register them and it will delete the libraries from the application, and copy them to the system shared libraries.

    one important thing, since the installation is only copy and paste, when you right clic the application you should have an option to add it to the system menu, the panel quicklaunch, and desktop

    for unistallation, if you did not register the application, you only have to delete the application, if you did register it, when you delete it, the system will alert you that the application has library a, library b, and file c shared, and library b and file c are needed for application d, and gives you the option to delete all, keep all, or delete only the non-in-use library (a) once you selected the option you wanted, it will delete the application, and then update the register text file.
    Last edited by XogGyux; August 21st, 2007 at 03:45 AM.

  7. #8517
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    perdita
    Beans
    1,622
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Coming soon: XogGyuxLinux ^^

    I don't think those changes will be implemented anytime soon in Ubuntu. But nothing prevents you from creating a new distro.

    After all, that's how it works: Some people don't find any distro that works exactly as they want, so they create a new distro.

    As suggested previously, have a look at GoboLinux and ArchLinux for example.
    (altough ArchLinux didn't seem very user-friendly from its description...)

    And by the way, I think it's better to put all user folders in the same folder /home. Make it easier to backup and is less messy if there are a lot of users.

    The "system" folders could be simplified indeed. But on the other hand, as said previously, it's not what a normal user should be concerned about. And it's not a change in this filesystem that will make the OS more user-friendly.

    User-friendliness comes from good software, good hardware support and good stability IMO.

  8. #8518
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    0

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by KIAaze View Post
    Coming soon: XogGyuxLinux ^^

    I don't think those changes will be implemented anytime soon in Ubuntu. But nothing prevents you from creating a new distro.

    After all, that's how it works: Some people don't find any distro that works exactly as they want, so they create a new distro.

    As suggested previously, have a look at GoboLinux and ArchLinux for example.
    (altough ArchLinux didn't seem very user-friendly from its description...)

    And by the way, I think it's better to put all user folders in the same folder /home. Make it easier to backup and is less messy if there are a lot of users.

    The "system" folders could be simplified indeed. But on the other hand, as said previously, it's not what a normal user should be concerned about. And it's not a change in this filesystem that will make the OS more user-friendly.

    User-friendliness comes from good software, good hardware support and good stability IMO.
    Create a new distro needs time + probabbly some programming skills, i dont got either of those, the immense amount of different distros in my opinion in my opinion only makes it all worse( check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._distributions so you can see how many there are, all that makes it a lot harder to "resolve" problems since all are different), it is like pulling the rope in 100 different directions.
    What i have been trying to point out are linux features (that are not bad) but that are not very user firendly and could be improved (my suggestion are user-friendly based and im not talking about bugs a overall improvements as the example aysiu showed me the links)
    Last edited by XogGyux; August 21st, 2007 at 04:08 AM.

  9. #8519
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    0

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by AcworthJack View Post
    What I have been seeing in this “readiness” string is a bit of confusion. If we want to talk about "new installs" then I suggest we need to look at the new Dell's that come with Ubuntu pre-loaded. I have not purchased one – but I submit this is the only valid comparion against new Windows PCs.

    Almost no Windows “user” installs Windows and all the associated applications and drivers. I think the next “killer app” to get Linux in general and Ubuntu specifically “ready” for the desktop is to get HP to start selling Ubuntu as an offering. If someone could walk into Wal-Mart and buy a Ubuntu box – then it would be “desktop ready”.

    Since we have no control over that – how about a few more surveys about various apps that could improve the “out of the box” Ubuntu experience?
    I wouldnt count on dell's to promote linux thruout home users, in fact until now i havent seen any dell computer featuring ubuntu in any store, i have only seen to buy them from the web (at the same price that windows computer, which for me seems really stupid, since linux is free and the basic version of windows is 100+ usd), in my opinion Dell is only distributing linux to fill up a gap in the market, and i dont think dell linux pc will do much to increase linux popularity!

  10. #8520
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Acworth, GA, USA
    Beans
    20
    Distro
    Ubuntu 7.04 Feisty Fawn

    Re: Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by XogGyux View Post
    I wouldnt count on dell's to promote linux thruout home users, in fact until now i havent seen any dell computer featuring ubuntu in any store, i have only seen to buy them from the web (at the same price that windows computer, which for me seems really stupid, since linux is free and the basic version of windows is 100+ usd), in my opinion Dell is only distributing linux to fill up a gap in the market, and i dont think dell linux pc will do much to increase linux popularity!
    I agree - Dell is not pushing Linux - just making some systems available. Maybe we should go the other way and push HW parts companies to include Linux drivers with their products. This would make it easier to install Linux.

Page 852 of 952 FirstFirst ... 352752802842850851852853854862902 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •