PDA

View Full Version : [Survey] The ONE thing Linux needs



rbrugman
December 22nd, 2005, 03:14 PM
I've been meaning to post this for a while. I'm interested in hearing from other people the answer to this question:


In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?


For me, I think Linux needs program installers, so programs can be installed like in Windows.

snowjunkie
December 22nd, 2005, 03:16 PM
I actually think the apt-get method that ubuntu/debian provides is much easier than installing applications in windows.

Havoc
December 22nd, 2005, 03:17 PM
A bigger market share, so companies will release their software/games under Linux.

Also, more software/games, so that Linux can enjoy a bigger market share.

:D :p ;)

darkfame
December 22nd, 2005, 03:17 PM
It does have program installers, loki installer is one example.
But there are too few open source apps using GUI based installers imo.

spier
December 22nd, 2005, 03:18 PM
... many millions users?!:cool:

Rackerz
December 22nd, 2005, 03:19 PM
Yeah, thats what I like about Linux. When you install something its usually from the command line so you can see exactly whats going on. The thing with Linux is that its different from Windows and people don't want it to turn into Windows.

On the other hand they want it to be ready so people can use it as an ordinary desktop, like Windows. For that to be possible they need clickable installers, otherwise people just wont bother with Linux, and if they do not understand the command line.

Personally I think Linux needs more compatiablility with Games then it would get alot further then it is at the moment.

rcerreto
December 22nd, 2005, 03:19 PM
For people which uses PCs to play: games support, which is getting better but still not enough
For people using PCs to work: fonts handling

darkfame
December 22nd, 2005, 03:19 PM
I actually think the apt-get method that ubuntu/debian provides is much easier than installing applications in windows.

I agree, but not all applications are found in the repository.

The Hedgehog
December 22nd, 2005, 03:21 PM
I actually think the apt-get method that ubuntu/debian provides is much easier than installing applications in windows.
I must disagree. The official repo's often have older versions. So if you want the newest versions you'll have to search for alternative repo's or search for a deb package.
And if you want it in a language other than English it's even harder to find.

Pablo_Escobar
December 22nd, 2005, 03:25 PM
To convince people that Linux is not just a geek toy and that all-CLI era in Linux distros is far gone :)

Rinzwind
December 22nd, 2005, 03:25 PM
High profile games that are NOT usable on Windows.

Games attract children. Get children to learn to work with Linux and within 25 years Linux is leader in the OS-market.

darkfame
December 22nd, 2005, 03:25 PM
I must disagree. The official repo's often have older versions. So if you want the newest versions you'll have to search for alternative repo's or search for a deb package.
And if you want it in a language other than English it's even harder to find.

True, what if you want Firefox 1.5 now? 1.0.7 is the latest version in the official repos as 1.5 hasn't been cleared yet.

darkfame
December 22nd, 2005, 03:27 PM
To convince people that Linux is not just a geek toy and that all-CLI era in Linux distros is far gone :)

I don't agree about the CLI part ... you still need the CLI... and the CLI will continue to be the most powerful tool (and that's the way it should be too).
But you shouldn't need to use the CLI as a regular user which only wants to get his job done fast, easy and effective.

akniss
December 22nd, 2005, 03:29 PM
Its a catch 22... we need software to be designed for Linux that people like using on Windows (things like photoshop, games, etc.) but in order for that to happen, we need more users to switch so the big software companies will take notice. But we can only get so many users as long as we don't have the software. And if no software, no users. No users, no software. software... users... software........

Pablo_Escobar
December 22nd, 2005, 03:31 PM
I don't agree about the CLI part ... you still need the CLI... and the CLI will continue to be the most powerful tool (and that's the way it should be too).
But you shouldn't need to use the CLI as a regular user which only wants to get his job done fast, easy and effective.
I didn't say that CLI is not needed, I use if very often and I like to work in the terminal.
Some people I know still think that running a Linux box can be done only by CLI and that there is no DE.
That kind of people need to be shown how many things can be done better in Linux than in Window$.

rjwood
December 22nd, 2005, 03:41 PM
In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?
A growing forum community just like this one. This is nothing like windows and it's 100 times better. This is exactly what needs to keep happening. People like all of you!

rj

az
December 22nd, 2005, 03:46 PM
There is no need to overtake windows. It is not a competition. Both can coexist. The reality is that people will tend to use what is of equivalent value but costs less. So, if free-libre software gets more marketshare and exposure, you will see people using it because there is no reason not to.


What do I think linux needs?

Gnome 10x10.

(Ten percent marketshare by 2010)

deNoobius
December 22nd, 2005, 03:54 PM
Even though I'm not a gamer, I agree with another poster that a killer Linux-only game (like Halo was for xBox) would certainly help. It would have to be a really good game, though, to get Windows and OSX users to install an entire OS to run it!

Where would such a game come from, though? There's no big "Linux corp." to throw their capital behind it like there was for xBox. Linux gamers and coders themselves would have to write it. It would be very interesting to see if the open source community could generate a product like that.

I agree, though, that Linux needn't overtake Windows on the home computer market, but it would be nice if it had ENOUGH share to cause more software producers to make Linux versions.

gnu2tux
December 22nd, 2005, 03:57 PM
It's simple - Linux needs proper drivers for everything. Recently, this has become a lot better, but it's not just up to the oss community - it's up to the manufacturers to get their socks pulled up. Ignoring Linux is no longer a reasonable answer, it's too big these days to ignore.

Once Linux is 100% plug and play with regards to drivers, and hardware interfaces (eg: DirectX/OpenGL) then nobody will ever need anything else!

Package management is not really an issue these days with apt-get or the new autopackage system, and neither is ease of use. The Desktop is as usable as any Windows desktop I have used recently.

Check out my Linux for Newbies site for a fully-rounded review of Linux:

http://www.linuxnewbieguide.org

Cheers!

rjwood
December 22nd, 2005, 04:04 PM
It's simple - Linux needs proper drivers for everything. Recently, this has become a lot better, but it's not just up to the oss community - it's up to the manufacturers to get their socks pulled up. Ignoring Linux is no longer a reasonable answer, it's too big these days to ignore.

Once Linux is 100% plug and play with regards to drivers, and hardware interfaces (eg: DirectX/OpenGL) then nobody will ever need anything else!

Package management is not really an issue these days with apt-get or the new autopackage system, and neither is ease of use. The Desktop is as usable as any Windows desktop I have used recently.

Check out my Linux for Newbies site for a fully-rounded review of Linux:

http://www.linuxnewbieguide.org

Cheers!

Great site.--Keep up the great work. That's what I'm talking about. That and the rest of the community input will make companies watch and listen.
Happy Holiday's!!

rj

tigrez
December 22nd, 2005, 04:55 PM
The first think that linux need is Microsoft Visual Studio. Simply a compiler that can build linux apps writed for windows. So games and apps may easy installed in any linux box with good compatibility.
And the second think: each owner of windows product pay the right price. Windows and office is installed in so much machine why is "free", no cost...

Knomefan
December 22nd, 2005, 05:01 PM
In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?

What do you mean by overtake? (Quality? Quantity? Good press?)?
What erea are you talking about? Desktops (in companies, for gamers, for grandma, for ...?)? Servers? (Mail, Web, directory,...?)? Embedded systems? Supercomputers?

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 05:05 PM
Most open GL games like Doom3 are already installable on GNU/Linux. In fact there is even Linux code on the games Windows install cd and all you have to do is download the linux installer. The problem is that most games are coded in Direct X and Direct 3D. Those two formats are owned by MS and it would be a cold day in hell before they allow it to be supported in Linux. What needs to happen is the GNU/Linux community needs to lobby game makers to code in and support Open GL for all new game titles. Doom 3 and Fear both show that Open GL is a superior technology anyhoo.

The thing that will spur GNU/Linux adoption the fastes is that you can buy it preloaded and configured on computers already from the major manufactuers. Also better hardware support and drivers would go a long way to help.

Gadren
December 22nd, 2005, 05:06 PM
I'd say that Linux needs more ads on TV and such. Just about everyone I've talked to either uses Linux or has no idea what it is. Viral marketing ads like that IBM-Linux commerical a couple years ago (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8333280591924223277&q=linux) could do a lot, since most people have never even heard of an OS besides Windows or Mac.

linbetwin
December 22nd, 2005, 05:25 PM
- Support from hardware manufacturers (drivers)
- Support from software makers (games, graphics and multimedia apps)
- Support from computer vendors (so that computers preinstalled with free Linux distros will not be more expensive than PC's preinstalled with Windows)
- Exposure
- Killer apps

The aim is not to "overtake" Windows, but to become a viable alternative on the desktop (i.e. easy to find and easy to use).

DimaIL
December 22nd, 2005, 05:27 PM
The biggest problem with Linux is that you need to write large commands via Terminal. It's very hard to new people in Linux and annoying :(

Dima

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 05:32 PM
The biggest problem with Linux is that you need to write large commands via Terminal. It's very hard to new people in Linux and annoying :(

Dima

If you want to stay away from the command line altogether, you can always use Suse 10 or Linspire. I use Suse 10 now and I never have to touch the command line. YAST does everything including setting up config files for you. I have not once opened the terminal since installing Suse. I know you meant well but you are just plain wrong, there are plenty of ways to get the same job done without touching the command line.

jc87
December 22nd, 2005, 05:57 PM
Sorry but you are all wrong :smile: , what we need is more wallpapers like this :

1 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-029-1024x768.jpg)

2 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-001-1024x768.jpg)

3 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-000-1024x768.jpg)

We also need to ignore your Nix* heritage , and make gnu/linux even more insecure than windows , average joe will only change to us if we can assure that his machine wil get infected in 10 minutes or less of being connected to the web.

P.S. All this post content was a joke , it should not be taken seriously , really , i´m just kidding , stop saying i´m right.

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 06:15 PM
Sorry but you are all wrong :smile: , what we need is more wallpapers like this :

1 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-029-1024x768.jpg)

2 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-001-1024x768.jpg)

3 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-000-1024x768.jpg)

We also need to ignore your Nix* heritage , and make gnu/linux even more insecure than windows , average joe will only change to us if we can assure that his machine wil get infected in 10 minutes or less of being connected to the web.

P.S. All this post content was a joke , it should not be taken seriously , really , i´m just kidding , stop saying i´m right.

This can't be a joke damnit! You have to be right! I will not stand for this! We need to adopt those wallpapers in Linux by default and then we will rule the world. ;)

Malphas
December 22nd, 2005, 06:25 PM
Its a catch 22... we need software to be designed for Linux that people like using on Windows (things like photoshop, games, etc.) but in order for that to happen, we need more users to switch so the big software companies will take notice. But we can only get so many users as long as we don't have the software. And if no software, no users. No users, no software. software... users... software........

Most open GL games like Doom3 are already installable on GNU/Linux. In fact there is even Linux code on the games Windows install cd and all you have to do is download the linux installer. The problem is that most games are coded in Direct X and Direct 3D. Those two formats are owned by MS and it would be a cold day in hell before they allow it to be supported in Linux. What needs to happen is the GNU/Linux community needs to lobby game makers to code in and support Open GL for all new game titles. Doom 3 and Fear both show that Open GL is a superior technology anyhoo.

The thing that will spur GNU/Linux adoption the fastes is that you can buy it preloaded and configured on computers already from the major manufactuers. Also better hardware support and drivers would go a long way to help.
I second these posts. They cover pretty much everything I was gonna say. I guess one thing I would add would be a bit more standardisation between DEs and distributions to make life easier for developers that do want to write or port software for Linux.

matthinckley
December 22nd, 2005, 07:53 PM
I second these posts. They cover pretty much everything I was gonna say. I guess one thing I would add would be a bit more standardisation between DEs and distributions to make life easier for developers that do want to write or port software for Linux.

I agree however.. isn't this what Canonical is aiming to do? that is enhance and support communications between distributions and the developers of FOSS?

Haegin
December 22nd, 2005, 08:07 PM
Even though I'm not a gamer, I agree with another poster that a killer Linux-only game (like Halo was for xBox) would certainly help. It would have to be a really good game, though, to get Windows and OSX users to install an entire OS to run it!

People brought Xboxes just to play Halo - they don't even need to pay for linux...

Now we just need an uber game - if only I could program better *sigh* oh well, keep on learning...

benplaut
December 22nd, 2005, 08:31 PM
it needs more games, and it needs better hardware support.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 08:34 PM
Less users that want to turn it into windows to attract more win users, i mean, seriously, why are you using Linux in the first place? Because it's almost as good as windows?

Sheinar
December 22nd, 2005, 08:39 PM
Less people complaining that Linux needs more crappy graphical installers.

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 08:52 PM
Less people claiming you have to be a command line enthusiast to use it.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 08:59 PM
Less people claiming you have to be a command line enthusiast to use it.

Less people claiming that Linux does not require CLI knowledge.

More people facing the truth, X for Linux is what win 3.1 was to dos and there is no way around that.

The thruth is that if you can't master the CLI then windows is a much, MUCH better OS for you to use.

xequence
December 22nd, 2005, 09:00 PM
Big computer companies to install it on their sold computers by default.

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 09:07 PM
Less people claiming that Linux does not require CLI knowledge.

More people facing the truth, X for Linux is what win 3.1 was to dos and there is no way around that.

The thruth is that if you can't master the CLI then windows is a much, MUCH better OS for you to use.

I have to dissagree with you on this one. I have been using Suse 10 for over a month now and I have not had to open the terminal or use the command line once. I even enabled other sources and installed DVD playback through YAST. There are Linux distros out there the average user never has to touch the command line at all. It may be your prefference that all Linux users use the command line, but that is not the reality of the situation. I enjoy using Suse and I am able to find anything I want to install on it without having vast CLI knowledge. I agree with you that I do not want a simple point and click installer in Linux, but GUI installers already exist in YAST and synaptic in Ubuntu.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 09:07 PM
Big computer companies to install it on their sold computers by default.

Won't happen in another ten years, while MOST big computer companies already support Linux as their OS of choice inhouse and for server ends they believe that Windows is a better choice as a desktop OS for new computer users.

I disagree but then otoh i would like a new computer user to learn their system.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 09:15 PM
I have to dissagree with you on this one. I have been using Suse 10 for over a month now and I have not had to open the terminal or use the command line once. I even enabled other sources and installed DVD playback through YAST. There are Linux distros out there the average user never has to touch the command line at all. It may be your prefference that all Linux users use the command line, but that is not the reality of the situation. I enjoy using Suse and I am able to find anything I want to install on it without having vast CLI knowledge. I agree with you that I do not want a simple point and click installer in Linux, but GUI installers already exist in YAST and synaptic in Ubuntu.

Eventually you WILL get into a situation where you will be locked out of X, it's not a discussion of IF, it's a discussion of WHEN.

CLI is 10x more efficiant for many things, i come across users that think that it's not possible to do some things in Linux because it's not part of the menu in Gnome (who remove options by default) and i find it sad that none of them would even bother to look into it.

ALL linux users will eventually have to use the CLI, well that or do as any windows user would, wipe and reinstall.

I think it's sad that some users won't use the CLI because it's easier once you get the hang of it and it is WAY faster.

Like the questions regarding how to delete a folder of many folders that you have copied from a CDROM, they are write protected so you can't do it in GUI but open terminal and do a "rm -rf Foo" and they are all gone.

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 09:30 PM
Eventually you WILL get into a situation where you will be locked out of X, it's not a discussion of IF, it's a discussion of WHEN.

CLI is 10x more efficiant for many things, i come across users that think that it's not possible to do some things in Linux because it's not part of the menu in Gnome (who remove options by default) and i find it sad that none of them would even bother to look into it.

ALL linux users will eventually have to use the CLI, well that or do as any windows user would, wipe and reinstall.

I think it's sad that some users won't use the CLI because it's easier once you get the hang of it and it is WAY faster.

Like the questions regarding how to delete a folder of many folders that you have copied from a CDROM, they are write protected so you can't do it in GUI but open terminal and do a "rm -rf Foo" and they are all gone.

I understand there may be situations that might require the command line. I run into those situations sometimes in Windows.(Although very rarely) I was just saying that most average computer users never have to touch the command line in some distros. Also GUI tools are getting better all the time and in the near future some of those task that may require the command line may be possible in a GUI installer/uninstaller. I just don't think we should drive away new Linux users by telling them you have to be CLI savvy to use Linux. Many of these users may decide later that they want to learn command line functions for better flexibility later.

DevilsAdvocate
December 22nd, 2005, 09:34 PM
Sorry but you are all wrong :smile: , what we need is more wallpapers like this :

1 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-029-1024x768.jpg)

2 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-001-1024x768.jpg)

3 (http://wallpapers.neo5k.de/content/images/wallpapers/linuxchicks/linuxchicks-000-1024x768.jpg)

We also need to ignore your Nix* heritage , and make gnu/linux even more insecure than windows , average joe will only change to us if we can assure that his machine wil get infected in 10 minutes or less of being connected to the web.

P.S. All this post content was a joke , it should not be taken seriously , really , i´m just kidding , stop saying i´m right.

My contribution to Linux then:
http://www.maximonline.com/girls_of_maxim/girl_template_magnified.aspx?id=1164&img=/girls/ashley_massaro/ashley-massaro-gm_l1.jpg

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 09:38 PM
I understand there may be situations that might require the command line. I run into those situations sometimes in Windows.(Although very rarely) I was just saying that most average computer users never have to touch the command line in some distros. Also GUI tools are getting better all the time and in the near future some of those task that may require the command line may be possible in a GUI installer/uninstaller. I just don't think we should drive away new Linux users by telling them you have to be CLI savvy to use Linux. Many of these users may decide later that they want to learn command line functions for better flexibility later.

The truth is that the GUI's for Linux are not nearly as good as the windows GUI, you can tell new users that.

My point is that it's NOT windows, that the things that make Linux great are NOT the things that makes windows great.

Learn to appreciate the difference and really get the hang of what MAKES Linux (or any FOSS software for that matter) so great, namely the direct control over the system, something you do not have without learning how your init files works or how everything is configurable down to the last byte but not included in the GUI.

To be entirely honest, people who install the more complex systems are the ones who will use Linux forever, most other people who do everything GUI will eventually become so annoyed with the lack of options that they will return to Windows which does that oh so much better.

prizrak
December 22nd, 2005, 09:50 PM
It needs to have OEM's preinstall it on their machines. That is very much the only thing Linux is inferior to Windows in.

mstlyevil
December 22nd, 2005, 09:52 PM
The truth is that the GUI's for Linux are not nearly as good as the windows GUI, you can tell new users that.

Absolutely nothing to disagree with on that point whatsoever.


My point is that it's NOT windows, that the things that make Linux great are NOT the things that makes windows great.

You are correct on this one too. I make sure to tell people that Linux is not windows and it does not work like windows. I also explain to them the advantages of Linux vs Windows and vice versa.


Learn to appreciate the difference and really get the hang of what MAKES Linux (or any FOSS software for that matter) so great, namely the direct control over the system, something you do not have without learning how your init files works or how everything is configurable down to the last byte but not included in the GUI.

This is exactly my main selling point on why Linux/FOSS is so much better than Windows. Instead of Microsoft or Apple telling me how to configure and run my OS for me, I am free to do it any way I like under Linux. Greater flexibility is the greatest part about Linux and Free BSD.


To be entirely honest, people who install the more complex systems are the ones who will use Linux forever, most other people who do everything GUI will eventually become so annoyed with the lack of options that they will return to Windows which does that oh so much better.

There are a percentage of people who will give up on Linux because it does not have iTunes,Photoshop and the lack of support for many of their games. Others who always done things through a GUI convert just because of the flexibility and security features. Many people like me will dual boot so they can enjoy the best of both worlds. No one has to give up anything whatsoever. They just need to be educated and the best way for that to happen is to convince them to give it a try.

lutosdemayo
December 22nd, 2005, 10:07 PM
Windows User Applications is what it needs. Like if i want photoshop then give me photoshop and please dont tell me to use gimp. If i want dreamweaver then dont tell me me to use nvu or screem or just use the text editor.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 10:16 PM
Windows User Applications is what it needs. Like if i want photoshop then give me photoshop and please dont tell me to use gimp. If i want dreamweaver then dont tell me me to use nvu or screem or just use the text editor.

Who's going to give you photoshop? Not the FOSS community, take your complaints to Adobe, if enough people do, they will.

How about this, if you don't like the FOSS software options, don't use them, don't complain about it either because just because you are not willing to learn doesn't mean that there are not great alternatives out there.

Personally i think GIMP is way better than photoshop ever will be, it will never be photoshop though and it's not supposed to be, for me it'd truly suck if it was.

You want it the windows way, well, hey, no one is preventing you from using photoshop on XP, seriously, if you like that then use that, nobody besides you really care.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 10:22 PM
Absolutely nothing to disagree with on that point whatsoever.



You are correct on this one too. I make sure to tell people that Linux is not windows and it does not work like windows. I also explain to them the advantages of Linux vs Windows and vice versa.



This is exactly my main selling point on why Linux/FOSS is so much better than Windows. Instead of Microsoft or Apple telling me how to configure and run my OS for me, I am free to do it any way I like under Linux. Greater flexibility is the greatest part about Linux and Free BSD.

I won't bother but for your own sake, say *BSD or FreeBSD, NetBSD or OpenBSD in other instances, the users are freaks, trust me, i know. :D




There are a percentage of people who will give up on Linux because it does not have iTunes,Photoshop and the lack of support for many of their games. Others who always done things through a GUI convert just because of the flexibility and security features. Many people like me will dual boot so they can enjoy the best of both worlds. No one has to give up anything whatsoever. They just need to be educated and the best way for that to happen is to convince them to give it a try.

You know, i'd really hate to see Linux change away from what it does best, that's it, whether you or a majority is using Windows doesn't bother me at all, i don't WANT it to be mainstream if that means giving up on what makes it great.

JimmyJazz
December 22nd, 2005, 10:24 PM
I've been meaning to post this for a while. I'm interested in hearing from other people the answer to this question:


In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?


For me, I think Linux needs program installers, so programs can be installed like in Windows.

Linux has installers just like in windows but most people prefer the apt-get method. Its really not going to make any difference how close linux emulates windows, what people really want is applications. Linux needs 3rd party commercial application support, there I said it.

LoclynGrey
December 22nd, 2005, 10:28 PM
"understanding"

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 10:28 PM
Linux has installers just like in windows but most people prefer the apt-get method. Its really not going to make any difference how close linux emulates windows, what people really want is applications. Linux needs 3rd party commercial application support, there I said it.

Yes it does, the FOSS kind, it exists already although not completely.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 10:28 PM
"understanding"

??

DevilsAdvocate
December 22nd, 2005, 10:29 PM
"understanding"

don't forget about...

love

briancurtin
December 22nd, 2005, 10:29 PM
I don't agree about the CLI part ... you still need the CLI... and the CLI will continue to be the most powerful tool (and that's the way it should be too).
But you shouldn't need to use the CLI as a regular user which only wants to get his job done fast, easy and effective.
CLI is faster, easier, and more effective in most cases. take changing permissions for example:


chmod +x myFile
compared to these steps:

1. right click on file
2. click on permissions tab
3. click executable box for whichever needs those permissions
4. click ok

any time you can do something without moving your hands off the keyboard is more efficient, and in the example i used its faster. while it may not be easier at first, doing it a few times will get your speed up and you will thank the CLI.

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 10:36 PM
CLI is faster, easier, and more effective in most cases. take changing permissions for example:


chmod +x myFile
compared to these steps:

1. right click on file
2. click on permissions tab
3. click executable box for whichever needs those permissions
4. click ok

any time you can do something without moving your hands off the keyboard is more efficient, and in the example i used its faster. while it may not be easier at first, doing it a few times will get your speed up and you will thank the CLI.

To easy, try this, copy a bunch of folders with subfolders to your desktop, now try to delete them, you can't, they are all write protected, these are a total of 11252 folders i'm talking about, so you have the choice of entering them one by one and do a ctrl+a and removing the flag, for every folder and then delete them. OR you could just open up a terminal and type chmod -R +w [top folder] and then delete it, or just run rm -rf [top folder]

It is kind of scary that newer users don't know about basics like chmod, chown, chgrp and so on.

briancurtin
December 22nd, 2005, 10:39 PM
Won't happen in another ten years, while MOST big computer companies already support Linux as their OS of choice inhouse and for server ends they believe that Windows is a better choice as a desktop OS for new computer users.
i dont think this is correct. i believe it has more to do with contracts. i have read in a few places that the reason that the big computer companies arent shipping out linux boxes is because of contracts with microsoft. they say that they will only sell windows based PCs and they get big bucks to do so. start shipping linux boxes and microsoft will take their business elsewhere.

profits from the operating system:
how much does dell make on every computer sold with microsoft? a little bit. lets just say $10 (it might be one cent, it might be a million bucks, i just picked $10)
how much would dell make on every computer sold with ubuntu? none. how much would ubuntu make? none.

now when they say "we want to open up and sell SuSE, Fedora Core, Ubuntu, and Debian boxes along with Windows XP and Home," microsoft is going to say "cool, see you later. HP just made a bunch of money on their car insurance, and on our new increased business with them."

the big computer companies are making money off of windows too, and they have contracts to do so.

briancurtin
December 22nd, 2005, 10:44 PM
Windows User Applications is what it needs. Like if i want photoshop then give me photoshop and please dont tell me to use gimp. If i want dreamweaver then dont tell me me to use nvu or screem or just use the text editor.
if you want photoshop, then i wont tell you to use gimp, ill tell you to use windows.

i used photoshop for 4.5 years prior to switching to purely linux. i wish we had photoshop here, but if you want it on linux then talk to Adobe.

LoclynGrey
December 22nd, 2005, 10:44 PM
"understanding"
hehe > in various ways.

- Windows migrators need it
- Linux bashers need it
- Hardware manufactuers need it
- hell, Linux newbies need it

BSDFreak
December 22nd, 2005, 10:48 PM
i dont think this is correct. i believe it has more to do with contracts. i have read in a few places that the reason that the big computer companies arent shipping out linux boxes is because of contracts with microsoft. they say that they will only sell windows based PCs and they get big bucks to do so. start shipping linux boxes and microsoft will take their business elsewhere.

profits from the operating system:
how much does dell make on every computer sold with microsoft? a little bit. lets just say $10 (it might be one cent, it might be a million bucks, i just picked $10)
how much would dell make on every computer sold with ubuntu? none. how much would ubuntu make? none.

now when they say "we want to open up and sell SuSE, Fedora Core, Ubuntu, and Debian boxes along with Windows XP and Home," microsoft is going to say "cool, see you later. HP just made a bunch of money on their car insurance, and on our new increased business with them."

the big computer companies are making money off of windows too, and they have contracts to do so.

And they made these contracts because they believe that windows is a better desktop OS, and for the average windows user, it is.

Wallakoala
December 22nd, 2005, 10:52 PM
I think the problem is that people don't know exactly what linux is. They get the impression that it is hard to use, or some other crazy thought, and they never really give it a chance.

poofyhairguy
December 22nd, 2005, 11:03 PM
In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?


A large computer maker (Dell, Hp, etc.) shipping it on desktop systems while spending millions to advertise it in a way that explains what Linux is and why it is better in many cases.

But since that seems unlikely, I think the real answer is that Linux will "be on the desktop" when the desktop computer as we know it dies and is replaced with appliance-like computer systems that run Linux. Like the Playstation 3.

briancurtin
December 22nd, 2005, 11:04 PM
And they made these contracts because they believe that windows is a better desktop OS, and for the average windows user, it is.
i dont know if they so much as believe that it is a better OS; rather, they believe it will make more money for them.

lets say that Ubuntu makes some change and all of a sudden its the best desktop OS ever in the world, and even MS is shaking in their boots at this change. i dont think dell will care, because what is the benefit to them if they change and start shipping ubuntu boxes? they make no profit from the OS and they lose lots of people who only know windows and are locked into windows. sure, they do gain a bunch of customers looking for the best desktop OS, but i dont think that number is greater than the amount of people locked into windows currently. i think its more of a matter that they are locked into windows, just like the users, more than thinking it is really a better operating system.

poofyhairguy
December 22nd, 2005, 11:05 PM
And they made these contracts because they believe that windows is a better desktop OS, and for the average windows user, it is.

More like:

"They made these contracts because AT THE TIME the Linux Desktop was very primative and Windows was a better desktop OS."

Some of these deals go back to last century.

poofyhairguy
December 22nd, 2005, 11:07 PM
True, what if you want Firefox 1.5 now? 1.0.7 is the latest version in the official repos as 1.5 hasn't been cleared yet.

Autopackage. Or use the installer from the Mozilla website. There is two examples of working universal installers.

Not. A. Problem.

darth_vector
December 22nd, 2005, 11:19 PM
more native games. games are the only reason i still have a windows box at all.

poofyhairguy
December 22nd, 2005, 11:23 PM
More people facing the truth, X for Linux is what win 3.1 was to dos and there is no way around that.

Not at a techincal level no. But I get your point- it blew my mind (in a good way) when I started using Linux and I learned that what I saw was not all the OS was...



The thruth is that if you can't master the CLI then windows is a much, MUCH better OS for you to use.

Maybe if you are a middle of the road user. For low end computer users (aka most of planet) Linux is better because it allows one to check thine email and browse thine web without having to buy/use/run/understand a anti-virus/spyware/malware program at all times.


Eventually you WILL get into a situation where you will be locked out of X, it's not a discussion of IF, it's a discussion of WHEN.

Only if you are doing things like installing X-drivers or you are messing with experimental X stuff (like Dapper). And most users won't.

Biggest mistake a Linux geek could make is to assume that middle of the road Windows users like themselves (or like they once were) are the majority of computer users.

Most computer users think the blue "E" IS the internet and have no idea what an OS IS. Gnome is based on this philosophy.



CLI is 10x more efficiant for many things, i come across users that think that it's not possible to do some things in Linux because it's not part of the menu in Gnome (who remove options by default) and i find it sad that none of them would even bother to look into it.


Why is it sad? If you are not a CLI type person, until someone makes a GUI for a program you CAN'T do it. Since there is not a dictator like MS demanding that every program made has a GUI component like in Windows, many features are CLI only. Part of life, and only middle of the road users want the things that require these CLI tricks.



ALL linux users will eventually have to use the CLI, well that or do as any windows user would, wipe and reinstall.

Or get someone else to do it for them. See....thats what normal people do with computers! Thats why all those local computer shops exist!



Like the questions regarding how to delete a folder of many folders that you have copied from a CDROM, they are write protected so you can't do it in GUI but open terminal and do a "rm -rf Foo" and they are all gone.

Who says? I have a button on my desktop for "gksudo nautilus" - lets me do all that stuff with a GUI!


The truth is that the GUI's for Linux are not nearly as good as the windows GUI, you can tell new users that.

I would say that there are LESS GUIs for Linux, not that the GUIs that exist are worse. Give me a Gnome GUI tool over its Windows equivilent anyday.



To be entirely honest, people who install the more complex systems are the ones who will use Linux forever, most other people who do everything GUI will eventually become so annoyed with the lack of options that they will return to Windows which does that oh so much better.

Maybe. But that why any sane person would admit that Windows is better for the middle of the road user. They have more demands than a low end user, but less patience to deal with the learning curve than a high end user!

BWF89
December 22nd, 2005, 11:51 PM
The 1 thing Linux needs: better hardware support.

When I installed Fedora Core 2 this time last year neither my Canon S520 printer and my Compaq S200 scanner worked.

BSDFreak
December 23rd, 2005, 12:44 AM
More like:

"They made these contracts because AT THE TIME the Linux Desktop was very primative and Windows was a better desktop OS."

Some of these deals go back to last century.

It is my opinion, it's not set in stone and this is a debate, just so we're clear on that.

The windows desktop IS better than any Linux equivalent, the closest you can come in functionality is KDE, the closest you can come in usability is Gnome, the closest you can come to the very idea of Linux is ICEWM.

None of these GUI's do one single thing BETTER than windows does it, they either do it the same way or it's just not possible (Gnome).

I don't mind GUI's per se, my problem is catering to something that Linux will never be as good as instead of aiming for something new, i like ICEWM because of that, i like KDE because it at least tries.

BSDFreak
December 23rd, 2005, 01:03 AM
Not at a techincal level no. But I get your point- it blew my mind (in a good way) when I started using Linux and I learned that what I saw was not all the OS was...

Yes on a technical level. Or would you say that dos isn't test based and win 3.1 wasn't a gui resting upon that, basically using the commands through the interface, or would you say that linux+gui acts differently?




Maybe if you are a middle of the road user. For low end computer users (aka most of planet) Linux is better because it allows one to check thine email and browse thine web without having to buy/use/run/understand a anti-virus/spyware/malware program at all times.


Low end users don't give damn about viruses or spyware, they don't even know what it is and rarely do they cause problems, that is why they can spread, high end users already have a decent firewall, av, three kinds of anti-spyware, middle end just keeps everything up to date. I'd say that anyone running ANY OS without running an active AV daemon is a fool.



Only if you are doing things like installing X-drivers or you are messing with experimental X stuff (like Dapper). And most users won't.

Through more than one decade of experience i make this judgement, one day you WILL be presented with CLI to make your GUI work, the good news is that it's possible to do most of the time in Linux while not so in XP.


Biggest mistake a Linux geek could make is to assume that middle of the road Windows users like themselves (or like they once were) are the majority of computer users.

I wouldn't know, i started with Unix but any user not willing to learn isn't ever going to have a great OS in Linux or anything *nix.


Most computer users think the blue "E" IS the internet and have no idea what an OS IS. Gnome is based on this philosophy.

Great, gnome caters to the exceptionally stupid, i won't use it much.


Why is it sad? If you are not a CLI type person, until someone makes a GUI for a program you CAN'T do it. Since there is not a dictator like MS demanding that every program made has a GUI component like in Windows, many features are CLI only. Part of life, and only middle of the road users want the things that require these CLI tricks.

Because they could just run windows with better results, Gnome will NEVER be as good of a GUI as windows has and fortunatnly, it doesn't attempt it, it caters to people who don't have problems thinking if they are presented with a choice. KDE on the other hand offers menus so overwhelming that it's hard to even get thought them. Windows has the option but presented another way.


Or get someone else to do it for them. See....thats what normal people do with computers! Thats why all those local computer shops exist!

And i find that sad, the new user base are morons?


Who says? I have a button on my desktop for "gksudo nautilus" - lets me do all that stuff with a GUI!

There was some thread about it, anyway, by having that button and doing it that way you are efficiantly bypassing the security offered. Anyway, if a user copy a file to their desktop they are not allowed to remove it if it is copied from a read only folder, now that makes perfect sense to me but to most users, it's enough to go back to windows.


I would say that there are LESS GUIs for Linux, not that the GUIs that exist are worse. Give me a Gnome GUI tool over its Windows equivilent anyday.

And i would say you are wrong but this is all opinon so let's just agree to disagree.




Maybe. But that why any sane person would admit that Windows is better for the middle of the road user. They have more demands than a low end user, but less patience to deal with the learning curve than a high end user!

Because it's there, it works better for them, it's as easy as that.

Now, whether you know it or not i am a full time user of BSD and Linux, i really do care about the development of these FOSS software OS's and i do contribute, but i also realize, just as everyone should, that it is not for everyone.

poofyhairguy
December 23rd, 2005, 01:56 AM
It is my opinion, it's not set in stone and this is a debate, just so we're clear on that.

Oh course.


Yes on a technical level. Or would you say that dos isn't test based and win 3.1 wasn't a gui resting upon that, basically using the commands through the interface, or would you say that linux+gui acts differently?

Its different at a more specific level, but at a general level I get your point.




Low end users don't give damn about viruses or spyware, they don't even know what it is and rarely do they cause problems, that is why they can spread,

The AOL commercials beg to differ.



Great, gnome caters to the exceptionally stupid, i won't use it much.

I would say Gnome caters to the regular user, but that is a matter of perspective.



And i find that sad, the new user base are morons?


No...not morons...just not technocrats. Its a fact- most people who use computers are not geeks. Maybe back in the 386 days...but now? Most know as much about computers as I know about car engines (nothing). Does not make the stupid- I'm sure they are all good at something. Just not computers.

Thats why I think one day the desktops we have today will be replaced by computer appliances- most people get all the disadvantages of computers as they are (viruses and security problems) without any of the advantages (the ultimate flexibility). So I think the latter will be sacrificed for the former.



There was some thread about it, anyway, by having that button and doing it that way you are efficiantly bypassing the security offered. Anyway, if a user copy a file to their desktop they are not allowed to remove it if it is copied from a read only folder, now that makes perfect sense to me but to most users, it's enough to go back to windows.

I have always said that if a user was going to turn back at something as simple as that, then they will leave as soon as they learn that Linux does not run Windows software (aka something that is not Linuxs fault).



And i would say you are wrong but this is all opinon so let's just agree to disagree.

Deal. This a friendly, civil discussion.

BSDFreak
December 23rd, 2005, 02:18 AM
Oh course.

For the longest time (and i have been lurking for a long time before i decided to join in the discussion, hence my current responses to just about every post) i thought your username was poofyhairyguy and i was kinda surprised by you using the fact that you are hairy as a username... :D If i were to use a name referring to my hairstyle it would be BaldBSDFreak. I'm a skinehead see, and Jewish... oh how i hate myself...




Its different at a more specific level, but at a general level I get your point.

Give me the specifics you are referring to, i am claiming that if you look into the specifics of either system they are equal in any way they can be.



The AOL commercials beg to differ.

You are using AOL commercials as your source? Do you want me to answer this or should we just forget that you ever made that comment? ;)



I would say Gnome caters to the regular user, but that is a matter of perspective.

I would say that that depends on the user base you are referring to, new or actual, if new, then yes, Gnome works great because it won't do anything that you didn't expect it to do, older user base, well, hey, we like our options and we don't get paralyzed if we have the option to edit the menu directly. (a function that Gnome people excluded).



No...not morons...just not technocrats. Its a fact- most people who use computers are not geeks. Maybe back in the 386 days...but now? Most know as much about computers as I know about car engines (nothing). Does not make the stupid- I'm sure they are all good at something. Just not computers.

Actually i have used that sentence a LOT as a teacher, that we are all good at something, however, i don't think you have to treat your user base as imbecils either.


Thats why I think one day the desktops we have today will be replaced by computer appliances- most people get all the disadvantages of computers as they are (viruses and security problems) without any of the advantages (the ultimate flexibility). So I think the latter will be sacrificed for the former.

As long as the computer is as wide range as it is today, i beg to differ, your future may happen but i will fight it every step of the way.


I have always said that if a user was going to turn back at something as simple as that, then they will leave as soon as they learn that Linux does not run Windows software (aka something that is not Linuxs fault).

IOW, Linux is not Windows, i agree, it shouldn't cater to that user base and it shouldn't ever strive to become that, that is where we apparently disagree, but hey, that's the way it is and we're cool with that.


Deal. This a friendly, civil discussion.

Best one in a LONG time.

lutosdemayo
December 23rd, 2005, 07:04 AM
Personally i think GIMP is way better than photoshop ever will be, it will never be photoshop though and it's not supposed to be, for me it'd truly suck if it was.

You want it the windows way, well, hey, no one is preventing you from using photoshop on XP, seriously, if you like that then use that, nobody besides you really care.

Who cares? Only me? There is the wine project, does this mean it nullifies all their effort in bringing windows program to linux.

bored2k
December 23rd, 2005, 07:07 AM
Cereal. Yeah, Linux definitely needs some healthy cereal. Us geeks need to eat healthy food.

towsonu2003
December 23rd, 2005, 07:57 AM
drivers drivers drivers drivers drivers ....
ah those manufacturers...
and those expensive nice linux-preinstalled computers! You've gotta be bill gates to buy them...

BSDFreak
December 23rd, 2005, 08:29 AM
Cereal. Yeah, Linux definitely needs some healthy cereal. Us geeks need to eat healthy food.

Cereal is your reference to healthy food? Seriously?

Try beef, chicken, turkey, high protein loads of nutrients, couple that with some fresh fruit and some grains and you have yourself a meal.

I open 3-4 cans of tuna in the morning, pour out the water and eat that, peal an orange and eat that and finish the meal with two large mugs of coffee.

I really like tuna.

tanari
December 23rd, 2005, 09:35 AM
I think the main thing is ability to launch or have linux versions of "big apps" like AutoCAD, Photoshop, 3DMax, etc.

And on second place is certainly games :)

nocturn
December 23rd, 2005, 09:43 AM
A domain/managment system (like ADS), but following open standards

That's the one thing Windows has going for it. You can get part of it by implementing OpenLDAP and Kerberos, but neither are very friendly and not all programs/services support them.

I had to work a lot to get SSO with Kerberos (pam_krb5) and Cyrus Imap, but I'm still missing a file-sharing system (like Samba) that integrates with this. Nfsv4 is promising though, but not there yet.

23meg
December 23rd, 2005, 09:49 AM
Linux, the kernel, needs one thing: more open hardware specs from manufacturers. Nothing else; it's very fine the way it is now.

jeremy
December 23rd, 2005, 05:39 PM
In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?
Nothing at all, Linux has overtaken windows, it's just that there are a lot of people who, unfortunately for them, don't know.

BSDFreak
December 23rd, 2005, 05:45 PM
A domain/managment system (like ADS), but following open standards

That's the one thing Windows has going for it. You can get part of it by implementing OpenLDAP and Kerberos, but neither are very friendly and not all programs/services support them.

I had to work a lot to get SSO with Kerberos (pam_krb5) and Cyrus Imap, but I'm still missing a file-sharing system (like Samba) that integrates with this. Nfsv4 is promising though, but not there yet.

I think you are my direct opposite in this world, i disagee completely with pretty much everything you say, i'd hate to see it implemented that way because admins are too lazy to learn how to implement it using a better security model. (i am sure you know which model i am talking about)

Mr_J_
December 23rd, 2005, 05:55 PM
It's something a person already said.

Kids to learn this OS from childhood.

And you get that if there are computer shops that sell, repair and install stuff for the users. Shops that will tell the users what to buy and what not to buy.

The catch 22 of linux. Not enough people = Nothing much is developed from big companies towards linux.

Haegin
December 23rd, 2005, 07:59 PM
hmmm I can see the catch 22 so as I see it we just have to advertise linux better. Just because the software isn't made by a big company doesn't mean it doesn't rock.

The other problem is the lack of support. I don't find this a problem as we have these amazing forums which combined with the web are pretty much all I need but others will need more and often we cannot convert friends as we don't have the time to support them. To solve this we need a network of linux users accross the globe so people can submit a problem and somebody can help them with it. Much like a forum but with the added bonus of it storing peoples locations so that if somebody has a problem that cannot be solved over the internet then somebody may be able to visit them and help.

Of course - you can't have people who are too young going round to peoples houses and helping etc etc *legal waffle*

This can be linked in with computer stores to get better coverage.

My on-the-spot idea (nt thought through in too much detail - please give responses)

ts.
December 23rd, 2005, 09:14 PM
You are using AOL commercials as your source? Do you want me to answer this or should we just forget that you ever made that comment? ;)

AOL might have a connection to the "low-end users" you talked about earlier.

As for the original thread topic, hardware support is probably the only downside to Linux right now, and that's always improving.

GreyFox503
December 23rd, 2005, 11:38 PM
We need more users, and more mindshare/awareness in general. If we can get more companies, especially hardware companies, to care about linux users, that would help us out a lot. It's difficult to shop for hardware or convince other people to try out linux when the hardware in question won't work with it.

briancurtin
December 23rd, 2005, 11:38 PM
in my opinion there should be no focus at all on games in developing and bringing the OS up to where windows is at popularity wise. none at all. if people want to play games, buy a console.

that obviously is not going to be a popular opinion, at all, but really games dont matter at all. look at who buys most computers: for the most part its people over 25. sure, high school and college students are buying/building computers but then again if i look around my school id say 85% of people had their parents buy them the computer. what parent is buying a computer looking at the ability to run lots of games as a strong point of the OS? id say its a very low percent. it seems like most people just want to play games, and want gaming to be like the big deal of linux. if we start seeing flashing signs saying "linux plays all new games now!" i really dont think it will do a damn thing for getting linux on the desktop to more people. i could be wrong, which is a strong possibility. i could seem like a bitter old man, but im 21.

i understand gaming is important to some, but thats really a side deal and shouldnt be the focus of anything.

whitesox
January 1st, 2006, 10:38 AM
A thought occurs:
even if all of the driver problems, game issues, program platform issues and such dissapear, there still is a problem:

either we change to fit the average user, or the average user changes to fit us.

its that simple
either we change our ways, breaking away from the Nix* tradition, to meet the user with ease of use, or they change to us.
If we change, ubuntu dies. If ubuntu becomes too much like windows, it looses everything that makes it great, other than the oss concept of it. The discussion above shows that the terminal is ages ahead of the GUI, so it appears that it would be a step backwards to have an easy to use GUI, performance and time wise. Besides, the terminal scares the user.

on the other hand, we could just direct the user to ubuntuforums.org, and tell them to search for the answer to all their problems. We could incorperate the terminal better into the GUI, and make it easy to access and use, but even after all that, the user still does not want to learn the commands. To the average user, a computer is just supposed to work. A mouse is all they should ever need, along with the occasional input from the keyboard. Beleve me, my family is my example. Each and every one of them reguards a computer as a tool that should work without any prior knowlage on how to use it. If it can't meet that expectation, they freak out, and call me down to explane to them how to use it (the attachment icon is a different color when using thunderbird instead of outlook express, mom)

this isnt an unsolvable problem though, and I believe it will be solved. Ubuntu has taken great strides to make the terminal easy to use, but not every one is like us at this forum, who are willing to learn something new about computers. We need to cater to those (lazy) people, while also catering to those who are pros at linux. Once a middle ground is found, hell will freeze over (jk)

so to answer the question:
A better search engine for the forums (can google help?)
-and-
Easyer way to use the terminal (what linux noob knows what chmod does?)
we need to have some sort of list that can be easily accessed that has all the essential commands, how to use them, and a way to search them

drfalkor
January 1st, 2006, 10:51 AM
Games
Linux need more native games. Something like - World of warcraft, F.E.A.R, cod, Battlefield 2, Brothers in arms and alot more.

Graphic design (2D)
Something Better than gimp, something like photoshop or looks like photoshop- we're allready there- There is a program called Pixel ( looks like a photoshop clone )

Hardware support
Allready alot of hardware support, but better support for wireless ethernet cards, and for webcams - more to add ?

After this- Linux will replace windows ( I belive ) :p
If you see, Linux is perfect - there is only a need for software/games. So don't come here and say Linux is crap !

Lord Illidan
January 1st, 2006, 11:23 AM
Hmm, in my opinion 4 things.

1. More awareness that it exists, and awareness that it isn't pure CLI.
2. More games. Good games, too, like Warcraft, Starcraft etc, and native ones, not bloomin Cedega.
3. Better hardware support from the manufacturers, especially webcams and soundcards. Also, try making it easier to install video drivers.
4. Speed. If we can speed up KDE, Open Office, Firefox and other large apps even more, than Linux will be invincible...

jeremy
January 1st, 2006, 12:07 PM
There is a program called Pixel...
Shame it is not FOSS!

drfalkor
January 1st, 2006, 12:25 PM
Shame it is not FOSS!

:oops: Photoshop is not FOSS too, but still - pixel is a better choise than running photoshop via wine :p

drfalkor
January 1st, 2006, 12:27 PM
4. Speed. If we can speed up KDE, Open Office, Firefox and other large apps even more, than Linux will be invincible...

Amen ! :)

drfalkor
January 1st, 2006, 12:29 PM
By the way, if you guys wanna try the pixel demo:
http://www.kanzelsberger.com/pixel/?page_id=4

-enjoy :KS

exclipy
January 1st, 2006, 12:41 PM
For all those people saying the GUI is crap and the CLI is 10x better because the CLI can do a recursive permission change and the GUI can't - well that is a perfect example of one of the things Linux needs to become mainstream. Better GUI tools!

If everything - including recursive permission setting, configuring network interfaces gooily without it exiting silently on a badly formed config file (yes, my eth0 wasn't working at first because my eth1 wireless wasn't configured), compiling/installing video drivers from the GUI, etc. Look at all the HOW-TOs which say "open a console, type this, type that." When these evolve to say "click Start, open this, click this, click OK", that's when Linux will be ready.

L Campbell
January 1st, 2006, 01:01 PM
I've been meaning to post this for a while. I'm interested in hearing from other people the answer to this question:


In your opinion, what is the single most important thing Linux needs before it can overtake Windows?


For me, I think Linux needs program installers, so programs can be installed like in Windows.

Well, since you ask, how about a CLEAR and CONCISE 'How-To' for connecting to the 'net with dial-up?

OK, OK, I know that you're going to say that there are several of them out there already but then, surely you must ask yourself, why is this guy writing this?

I'm writing because I am still not online after 2 1/2 months of trying.

My modem works SO well with Mepis (KDE KPPP) that setting up a connection was as easy as falling off a log. Now, despite the various threads that I have started on this subject, all the good people who have offered ecouraging suggestions and several weeks of discourse with the good folks at www.linmodems.org, I have yet to get online with Ubuntu.

The learning experience has been great and I'm absolutely convinced that I'm _almost_ there but................

It seems to me that if I can have so much difficulty, surely there must be others who have had problems too and have had to give up, due to the fact that they have a REAL life.

When I have this issue resolved, I hope to be able to document my success and share it with anyone that it might help.

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE.

awakatanka
January 1st, 2006, 01:41 PM
People brought Xboxes just to play Halo - they don't even need to pay for linux...

Now we just need an uber game - if only I could program better *sigh* oh well, keep on learning...
And what if they can't make there vga our sound our there joystick/gamepad our anything else they have/need for that game to work properly?

1st they need easy install for drivers, else they just go back to windows.

They just want to play and don't want to mess around to get something to work.

Cedega sucks and for the money people spend on it they better can buy a windows cd that will work for the next 5+ years for there games. And have painless working games.

raha
January 1st, 2006, 03:51 PM
This is what I think:

1- Better IDE (Like Borland or Visual Studio) so developers can write their programs quicker and better
2- Good Games
3- Using Cairo (http://www.cairographics.org/introduction) along with Glitz (http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/glitz) so we can have better and nicer GUI.
4- Better Graphical installer (I like the idea of Synaptic Package Manager) but it could be more organised than what it is now.
5- Better hardware support (it already getting better) but I hope big manufacturer start supporing Linux just like Windows.
6- Having a solid and standard Multimedia Player such as better RealPlayer for web or other ones.

Thats it for now.

AllenM
January 1st, 2006, 04:14 PM
High profile games that are NOT usable on Windows.

Games attract children. Get children to learn to work with Linux and within 25 years Linux is leader in the OS-market.

Lets make Linux easier to install and run faster than Window$. Make online videows showing how to do stuff. Write manauls where a teenaage could figure it out. Bring Linux user groups to town; and put linux cds out in retail stores like AOL does.

I would like to see easier to use software.:smile:

eriqk
January 1st, 2006, 06:34 PM
Hardware manufacturers to embrace openness. Unfortunately, not likely-it simply doesn't fit in the business model of most of them.

Next up: Major computer manufacturers pre-installing. While this doesn't require a major climate change in hell, it's still not very likely because of contracts.

So I think the most realistic ONE thing Linux needs is smaller companies -the computer store, in fact- to offer pre-installed Linux. They can build to spec, install and configure. Just like they do with Windows.
This might create a bigger user base which in turn will make point #2 more likely.

Groet, Erik

matchew
January 1st, 2006, 06:50 PM
4 sure.

matchew
January 1st, 2006, 06:57 PM
Hardware manufacturers to embrace openness. Unfortunately, not likely-it simply doesn't fit in the business model of most of them.

Next up: Major computer manufacturers pre-installing. While this doesn't require a major climate change in hell, it's still not very likely because of contracts.

So I think the most realistic ONE thing Linux needs is smaller companies -the computer store, in fact- to offer pre-installed Linux. They can build to spec, install and configure. Just like they do with Windows.
This might create a bigger user base which in turn will make point #2 more likely.

Groet, Erik
When Linux (any blend) makes installation and administration idiotproof everyone will jump on the bandwagon. Right now I'm trying to figure out how my USR5610 hardware modem "installed" on /dev/tty14 and how to get it to tty 0, more or less.