PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Thought Provoking Article



ankitmalik
January 13th, 2005, 07:58 AM
Hi

This is an interesting thought provoking article which talks about Installers and also mentions Ubuntu.

It takes a dig @ linux installers.

IMHO Ubuntu shud do something about it and get better.

http://members.cox.net/kadymae/installhell.html



P.S. Some *good words* are sprinkled here and there. Ignore them !

wallijonn
January 13th, 2005, 08:41 AM
from provided link:

I never even got it on line (I was on dialup at the time and my phone cord woudn't stretch).
:D

The NVU problem must be a PPC thing.

nocturn
January 13th, 2005, 09:24 AM
I read through the article. And basicly, it is off base.

Some of the things the author wants are things I've seen many times before, like the windows-like layout of the filesystem. Sure /urs/bin is intimidating if you ls through it. But you don't do that reglarly. You use a package manager for this kind of thing.

He touts the simplicity of Windows on this, but c:\windows\system is a hell, and there is no package manager to help. In addition, it is nearly impossible to remove a program.

The author also expresses his hate for the CLI, which is a shame, because it is often easier to send someone a full command he can copy/paste then describe 10 menu-items he needs to go through. I have even walked my mother (started using a computer after her 60th birthday).

Yet such people feel perfectly OK to navigate to some obscure windows registry setting and chane a HEX value...

He is right about one thing, in Gnome it is not really straight-forward to add apps to the menu, that's the only one I'll give him.

Sure, there is room for improvement to Linux and Ubuntu. But making it like windows or MacOS X is not the way.

ankitmalik
January 13th, 2005, 09:45 AM
I read through the article. And basicly, it is off base.

Some of the things the author wants are things I've seen many times before, like the windows-like layout of the filesystem. Sure /urs/bin is intimidating if you ls through it. But you don't do that reglarly. You use a package manager for this kind of thing.

He touts the simplicity of Windows on this, but c:\windows\system is a hell, and there is no package manager to help. In addition, it is nearly impossible to remove a program.

The author also expresses his hate for the CLI, which is a shame, because it is often easier to send someone a full command he can copy/paste then describe 10 menu-items he needs to go through. I have even walked my mother (started using a computer after her 60th birthday).

Yet such people feel perfectly OK to navigate to some obscure windows registry setting and chane a HEX value...

He is right about one thing, in Gnome it is not really straight-forward to add apps to the menu, that's the only one I'll give him.

Sure, there is room for improvement to Linux and Ubuntu. But making it like windows or MacOS X is not the way.
Let us not compare it to Win! Let us compare it to granny! :D or maybe OS X

ralph_ubuntu
January 13th, 2005, 10:08 AM
Great article.
So this guy tries to install a x86 binary on ppc and it doesn't work. Impressive. (Btw., there's also a ppc binary for realplayer)

I have to agree with him about one point though, it really should be easier to install software that is not provided by the distribution. However he fails to mention how easy it is to install, upgrade and manage software that is provided by the distribution. Linux and especiall Debian clearly outshines any other system I've used so far in this regard. And that includes OSX.

nocturn
January 13th, 2005, 10:35 AM
Great article.
So this guy tries to install a x86 binary on ppc and it doesn't work. Impressive. (Btw., there's also a ppc binary for realplayer)

I have to agree with him about one point though, it really should be easier to install software that is not provided by the distribution. However he fails to mention how easy it is to install, upgrade and manage software that is provided by the distribution. Linux and especiall Debian clearly outshines any other system I've used so far in this regard. And that includes OSX.

I agree. He is blaming the OS for failing to make this easier, when it is the packager of the package (Opera in this case) that is responisble for most of it.

I have had to install OpenSSH on Windows XP (at work), this is a real pain, but I'm not calling MS responisble in this case.

ankitmalik
January 13th, 2005, 10:43 AM
I agree. He is blaming the OS for failing to make this easier, when it is the packager of the package (Opera in this case) that is responisble for most of it.

I have had to install OpenSSH on Windows XP (at work), this is a real pain, but I'm not calling MS responisble in this case.
Again!

I find a problem with Linux thinkers!

It is time we stopped resting just on our laurels! Let us go further!

This article clearly shows we are lagging somewhere!

ralph_ubuntu
January 13th, 2005, 11:00 AM
Again!

I find a problem with Linux thinkers!

It is time we stopped resting just on our laurels! Let us go further!

This article clearly shows we are lagging somewhere!

Nah, I don't think this is fair. As I already said, I agree that there need to be better ways to install software that is not part of the distribution. And there are other people that agree too, just look at:
http://autopackage.org/

However, as nocturn already said, a lot of the problems this guy has are the packagers fault, not linux. For example it isn't exactly a linux problem that real doesn't have a big warning sign on it's download page that you are about to download a x86 version of realplayer but that there is a ppc version available.

ankitmalik
January 13th, 2005, 11:11 AM
Nah, I don't think this is fair. As I already said, I agree that there need to be better ways to install software that is not part of the distribution. And there are other people that agree too, just look at:
http://autopackage.org/

However, as nocturn already said, a lot of the problems this guy has are the packagers fault, not linux. For example it isn't exactly a linux problem that real doesn't have a big warning sign on it's download page that you are about to download a x86 version of realplayer but that there is a ppc version available.
how about this

'Why should ppl need to know that they are running ppc or x86 or abc or xyz!"

the system should itself redirect to the page.

I think something like Click and Run of Linspire is the answer!

nocturn
January 13th, 2005, 11:27 AM
how about this

'Why should ppl need to know that they are running ppc or x86 or abc or xyz!"

the system should itself redirect to the page.

I think something like Click and Run of Linspire is the answer!

The *webpage* should direct you to the proper download. There is no way the OS/Desktop can crontrol this as there is no standard way for webpages to advertise target platform. This is common for all systems that run on multiple hardware platforms (Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, ...)

Again, the situation is no better for MS. A user needs to select his version of Windows, if he fails to do that... (or try installing an OS X app on Mac classic).

I helped someone recover his win95 system from installing a game that required 98!
The recovery succeeded only partially (this would have been simple if it included a package manager like most Linux distros).

Click and run has it's advantages, but is not a perfect solutions (it is similar to Ubuntu repos, what do you do when a piece of software is not in click-and-run?).

Linux should move ahead, I fully agree, but what I'd like to see is detached clustered filesystems (like coda), integrated support for single-sign on (kerberos), ...

sassur
January 13th, 2005, 12:26 PM
I like this


Does anybody reading this think that the typical grandma/grandpa could get this far without making a phone call to the geek grandkid for help?

My answer to this
"Does anybody reading this think that the typical grandma/grandpa would try to download Opera on their own and install it?"

ankitmalik
January 13th, 2005, 12:35 PM
I like this



My answer to this
"Does anybody reading this think that the typical grandma/grandpa would try to download Opera on their own and install it?"
Let us think it as a challenge!

Let us make Ubuntu Linux so easier so that even a Grandpa/ Grandma would think of installing Opera.

I have an idea if a developer can take it up!

Make a control centre sort of thing for the Ubuntu Starter Guide!

That should be a GUI and should have wizards to easily install stuff like

a) Java
b) Flash
c) Mplayer
d) Opera

Of course this particular S/w will have to be installed first by an apt-get or download.

Adding modules coud be done automagically by an apt-get update thru synaptic!

What say?

I wud love to do this but as of now Python is still a snake for me and C is the third letter of the alpahabet!

wallijonn
January 13th, 2005, 06:07 PM
I find a problem with Linux thinkers!

It is time we stopped resting just on our laurels! Let us go further!

This article clearly shows we are lagging somewhere!

Just look at Mozilla and OpenOffice and Java. They have their own installers, and just like Windows you double click setup.exe (in the case of OpenOffice) to install the package. It's just too bad that it mucks up the system (Java) when it does so. Linux is laid out the way it is because of security, security which you seemingly want to over ride, whether it is BSD or Linux. There's a reason why users shouldn't muck around with system binaries (/bin and /sbin) and are relegated to user binaries (/usr/bin and /usr/sbin). They are kept separate for a reason - to insure system stability.

With Windows and Macs you have to code according to their dictates. Windows used to de-ride Macs for having such a tight hold of their programming standards then saw the inevitable advantages of it and implimented the same system. What you are advocating is the same type of standards. How then is one to security harden a kernel?, or code a kernel driver? You're advocating creating a standard API, much like DirectX which has its hands in so such of the kernel. OpenGL is superior to DirectX, no? But you seemingly advocate OpenGL not be used for CAD/CAM and instead have CAD/CAM use DirectX. That is not about to happen anytime soon. At its core, the kernel, Linux is different than Windows.

As it is, there is a war being waged between those that want Linux dumbed down and stripped of all its power and those who seek to keep Linux powerful and at the CLI level. If you look at the evolution of FireFox you'll see that some functionality has been stripped from the later versions; the same may happen with Linux, overall.

Make Linux a Windows clone? Why bother? Just use Windows and be done with it. Just don't be surprised if superior products like WordPerfect die in the shadow of MSOffice. If you're into video or photo editing, get a Mac and use Photoshop and it's other great applications.

All that the article shows is that the person is used to working in a MSWindows mentality. He is advocating turning Linux into Windows. Why bother with Linux at all? If he can't find a program that does what he wants, then he can't have it in the Windows world. If however he wants to program it himself he has to use something else, like Linux and its Open Source Libraries. If he wants to use MSWindows then he can't complain that he will need faster and faster cpus and more and more RAM with each new Windows OS release. Are you ready for Longhorn? You'll need a 4G cpu and at least 2 Gig of RAM. Guess what your outdated computer will probably be running 5 years from now? That's right, Linux. Or are you still using Winows 95?

You can pay $200 for a WXP license or $0 for Linux. You can pay $400 for MSOffice or $0 for OpenOffice. You can pay $500 for Photoshop or $0 for The GIMP. And if it hadn't been for Netscape chances are you would have to pay for an internet Browser.

I don't want my Grandma using Linux. She can't even use Windows XP Professional. I have to give her WXP Home. And when she gets infected with viruses I have to fix it for her.

As someone here has said, "If you VCR clock is always flashing then Linux is not for you".

Have you ever tried to install a W95 program on NT4.0? Or install a WXP program in W95? How about slipping that PC game into a MAC?

If Linux went to a "double click setup.exe to install" we would be inundated with people who complain that double clicking it didn't install it. So what if that setup.exe only installs into Windows? "But its supposed to work..." Right, and my Sony PS2 is supposed to play that XBox disc - they're the same size... :rolleyes: Gee, I wonder why my CD player can't play that DVD...

ankitmalik
January 14th, 2005, 10:11 AM
Just look at Mozilla and OpenOffice and Java. They have their own installers, and just like Windows you double click setup.exe (in the case of OpenOffice) to install the package. It's just too bad that it mucks up the system (Java) when it does so. Linux is laid out the way it is because of security, security which you seemingly want to over ride, whether it is BSD or Linux. There's a reason why users shouldn't muck around with system binaries (/bin and /sbin) and are relegated to user binaries (/usr/bin and /usr/sbin). They are kept separate for a reason - to insure system stability.

With Windows and Macs you have to code according to their dictates. Windows used to de-ride Macs for having such a tight hold of their programming standards then saw the inevitable advantages of it and implimented the same system. What you are advocating is the same type of standards. How then is one to security harden a kernel?, or code a kernel driver? You're advocating creating a standard API, much like DirectX which has its hands in so such of the kernel. OpenGL is superior to DirectX, no? But you seemingly advocate OpenGL not be used for CAD/CAM and instead have CAD/CAM use DirectX. That is not about to happen anytime soon. At its core, the kernel, Linux is different than Windows.

As it is, there is a war being waged between those that want Linux dumbed down and stripped of all its power and those who seek to keep Linux powerful and at the CLI level. If you look at the evolution of FireFox you'll see that some functionality has been stripped from the later versions; the same may happen with Linux, overall.

Make Linux a Windows clone? Why bother? Just use Windows and be done with it. Just don't be surprised if superior products like WordPerfect die in the shadow of MSOffice. If you're into video or photo editing, get a Mac and use Photoshop and it's other great applications.

All that the article shows is that the person is used to working in a MSWindows mentality. He is advocating turning Linux into Windows. Why bother with Linux at all? If he can't find a program that does what he wants, then he can't have it in the Windows world. If however he wants to program it himself he has to use something else, like Linux and its Open Source Libraries. If he wants to use MSWindows then he can't complain that he will need faster and faster cpus and more and more RAM with each new Windows OS release. Are you ready for Longhorn? You'll need a 4G cpu and at least 2 Gig of RAM. Guess what your outdated computer will probably be running 5 years from now? That's right, Linux. Or are you still using Winows 95?

You can pay $200 for a WXP license or $0 for Linux. You can pay $400 for MSOffice or $0 for OpenOffice. You can pay $500 for Photoshop or $0 for The GIMP. And if it hadn't been for Netscape chances are you would have to pay for an internet Browser.

I don't want my Grandma using Linux. She can't even use Windows XP Professional. I have to give her WXP Home. And when she gets infected with viruses I have to fix it for her.

As someone here has said, "If you VCR clock is always flashing then Linux is not for you".

Have you ever tried to install a W95 program on NT4.0? Or install a WXP program in W95? How about slipping that PC game into a MAC?

If Linux went to a "double click setup.exe to install" we would be inundated with people who complain that double clicking it didn't install it. So what if that setup.exe only installs into Windows? "But its supposed to work..." Right, and my Sony PS2 is supposed to play that XBox disc - they're the same size... :rolleyes: Gee, I wonder why my CD player can't play that DVD...
Am I trying to say Linux doesnt work well and that I dont want to use it???

No I am just giving suggestions to make Linux easier to use! After all, everyone has a right to use computers sans viruses!

"Linux is laid out the way it is because of security, security which you seemingly want to over ride"

Am I ? I just want it to go simpler man!

"users shouldn't muck around with system binaries (/bin and /sbin) and are relegated to user binaries (/usr/bin and /usr/sbin). They are kept separate for a reason - to insure system stability."

no average joe wants to look into those dirs definitely, so why do they?? because they cant find it in the menu!!!!!!!!

"Make Linux a Windows clone? Why bother? Just use Windows and be done with it"

No! It should be better than Windoze! It is already better in terms of security! but it is not good as far as ease of use is concerned.

From what you have written it seems like USERS have to make a choice between ease and use and security!

"You're advocating creating a standard API, much like DirectX which has its hands in so such of the kernel. OpenGL is superior to DirectX, no? But you seemingly advocate OpenGL not be used for CAD/CAM and instead have CAD/CAM use DirectX."

Am I advocating these? I dont even know what they stand for :D !

!! :D


"I don't want my Grandma using Linux. She can't even use Windows XP Professional. I have to give her WXP Home." But why shudnt she be allowed to work in a securer environ ???

nocturn
January 14th, 2005, 10:36 AM
Let us think it as a challenge!

Let us make Ubuntu Linux so easier so that even a Grandpa/ Grandma would think of installing Opera.

I have an idea if a developer can take it up!

Make a control centre sort of thing for the Ubuntu Starter Guide!

That should be a GUI and should have wizards to easily install stuff like

a) Java
b) Flash
c) Mplayer
d) Opera

Of course this particular S/w will have to be installed first by an apt-get or download.

Adding modules coud be done automagically by an apt-get update thru synaptic!

What say?

I wud love to do this but as of now Python is still a snake for me and C is the third letter of the alpahabet!

Linux is not just a technical product, is has a morality behind it. That morality is Free Software.

Opera is commercial software, as such the company behind it is responsible to produce installers for your OS (for Windows they even shell out money for installshield).
If they make their package correctly, the program will appear in the menu (on windows they have to do this too, programs don't appear there magically).
There are even packages that correctly set up menus for both Gnome *and* KDE, so it is not that difficult to do.

As people supporting the Free Software idea, the creators of Free distribution choose Free Software over proprietary alternatives (FireFox over Opera).

ankitmalik
January 14th, 2005, 10:51 AM
Linux is not just a technical product, is has a morality behind it. That morality is Free Software.

Opera is commercial software, as such the company behind it is responsible to produce installers for your OS (for Windows they even shell out money for installshield).
If they make their package correctly, the program will appear in the menu (on windows they have to do this too, programs don't appear there magically).
There are even packages that correctly set up menus for both Gnome *and* KDE, so it is not that difficult to do.

As people supporting the Free Software idea, the creators of Free distribution choose Free Software over proprietary alternatives (FireFox over Opera).
Oops! I made a mistake!

I didnt intend to put Opera in that list! because WE HAVE FIREFOX!!!

But you still got to agree than Lin Installers are tough than Win Installers for apps outside of the Synaptic world

Eg. Here is how an Avg Joe went about installing OOo Preview Release and uninstalling!

Win

a) Download and double click file!
b) Next Next Next :D
c) Check out the Start Menu, New Programs installed !
d) Go to Add/Remove Programs, and uninstall

Lin

a) Download and double click
b) Ark opens up, Q. What is Ark? A. I tell her it ia like Winzip, you need to extract the contents ou. Fortunately she knows what Winzip is like :D
c) Clicks at the folder!
d) Scrolls down furiously thru a pool of files to locate something called setup
e) clicks @ setup, Next Next Next.
f) Checks out the menus: the stuff is not there :(
g) Uninstalling: goes to synaptic and tries to uninstall OOo but it is not there in the list asks Q.: But you told me Ankit that Synaptic stands for adding and removing apps!

h) I do the rest of the job for her adding icons thru kmenuedit!

nocturn
January 14th, 2005, 11:24 AM
I don't want my Grandma using Linux. She can't even use Windows XP Professional. I have to give her WXP Home. And when she gets infected with viruses I have to fix it for her.


I agree with a lot of what you said, but I believe that Linux is a better alternative for people who are not knowledgeable in computers provided that Linux is installed for them.

I thought my mother to use a computer (never touched one before) when she passed 60, she uses Linux and loves it.

Linux has the advantage over Windows because it does not crash, she cannot mess up the system and no virii.

Distros like ubuntu are ready for such users as long as they do not have to install themselves, but they are not capable of doing that with windows anyway.

nocturn
January 14th, 2005, 11:32 AM
But you still got to agree than Lin Installers are tough than Win Installers for apps outside of the Synaptic world


Yes and no. ;-)

If an organisation packages their product for Debian, but it is not in a repo.
The steps are:
1) locate product
2) download
3) run either dpkg -i <package> or use a frontend.
The package can put the app in all required menus.

Any other product will install in exactly the same way, so the knowledge you gained installing the first one will help you any other time.

On windows, there is no consistent way of doing this (although installshield is often used). Some times you click setup, sometimes install. Sometimes the installer looks one way, sometimes another (this matters to non-technical users)
Most of the time, the installer is interactive (installshield), but it can be a .bat file or even a perl script or just a plain zip file. Not all installers create menu entries, it is optional as with the debian packages.
There is no consistency whatsoever.

So instead of messing with the nice package system we have we should push everyone to actually use it and leverage its full power (by not only installing the app but also put it in the menus).