Windows Newb ready to make the switch voicing some concerns/suggestions

[michaeljb2005]

I'm a big techie(yet current windows user but past linux OS user) who is on the edge of jumping into programming and open source software(OS) given it's development and stability side. This is my first post and I just thought I might put it out there given my intention to switch to ubuntu in the next month or so.

I know all the idealists state that linux is not windows, linux was never meant to be mainstream, so on and so on. But the fact of the matter is whether linux was made so that people could customize the operating system or not there are people out there who don't want to see the development side of software and operating systems. People who want software to just work. I'm not saying all software on windows just works but the fact of the matter is it gives end users less hassle(and with that less choice). Power users are the ones that benefit from advanced features right away and techies (like me) don't mind having to fix problems via the command line (I don't really know any command line commands I just copy paste from my browser lol).

From the way I see it ubuntu wants to be a free OS that doesn't necessarily cater to the masses but is new-user friendly. I say it is in many respects. But the bugs that it, and other linux distributions bring forth can tend to be more obvious in the beginning. This is turn makes people have to start fixing problems as soon as they get their distribution and no average end user wants that feeling when they first get their computer/OS. It ruins the feeling of newness and robs them of the feeling of an upgrade because they're fixing problems right from the start (upgrades are supposed to be better right?). Once people start having to delve into scary, system maintenance tasks, such as editing xorg.conf (I've broken many a systems in the past doing this and so I gave up) and have the potential to break the system it becomes a worrying situation and people don't want to have to worry about a system task of that complexity.

I do agree that part of the problem is a lack of education due to microsoft's monopoly but even I tend to have a feeling of being bogged down with more system responsibility than I care for and I like that kind of stuff! I like customization, but once it's customized I want it to stay that way and work. Which leads me to a love-hate relationship when it comes to software installation/upgrades.

What really truly draws me to linux (especially ubuntu) is its debian style of software management through synaptic. I like the idea of always having the newest/most fixed version of software. But for some reason this also seems to be stability's downfall in that all of a sudden the new version seems to have new problems(bugs). These bugs seem to intefere with the customization scheme that you set up and then all of a sudden you have to recustomize and do more system work. Upgrades should be seamless and shouldn't be available for software (through normal repositories) if they're going to break something. I know we can't catch everything but that seems to be a problem more often than I can remember in windows. Even though I say that I do realize that I probably upgrade my software less in windows that I would in linux and so the probability of problems is higher in linux. So maybe software needs better testing and a longer release period than they currently give it?

When it comes right down to it the software management component, the lack of malware/viruses, the user management scheme, the open source software (firefox, openoffice, evolution/thunderbird, gaim), and to a smaller degree, the belief that software can be better when developed by many people in a community is what draws me to linux.

In conclusion (and I may be castrated for this), if linux could maintain the ease of use of such things like installing video cards, like windows or OS X does, using more guis (which I know, to some degree this community believes in), and had more software availability, without the hassle of having to fix things that break from the get go, the transition to linux would be the easiest decision anyone ever made.

P.S. It's not that I think linux is too hard to use with or without the gui's but the fact of the matter is people who aren't techies find it to be more than they care to (re)learn given busy schedules. You guys do a great job lending command lines to fix problems and if everyone were as good at using existing resources as they should be learning wouldn't be a problem. So thanks and I hope my transition is a good one.

[kingmonkey]

Good luck.

[aysiu]

I'm not sure if you're just rambling out loud. It doesn't sound as if you have much of an agenda.

I will say these things, though:

1. Linux is not stagnant. It never has been. It never will be. Distros improve usually by leaps and bounds, and most of the major ones have new releases twice a year.

Developers don't just kick back, relax, and twiddle their thumbs, and new versions tend to have more GUI frontends for tasks not fewer. Just look at Warty, which was still in use in March 2005, and Dapper, which will be in use one week from now.

That's a year and a little bit.

Between Warty and Dapper, you now have a point-and-click installer, point-and-click partitioning during installation, a live and installer CD combined into one, a graphical boot-splash, a double-click .deb installation, a simpler version of Synaptic called Add Applications that any idiot can use, and a much better-looking Human theme.

Development is moving forward. You don't need to worry about it.

2. How can you make it move forward even faster? Well, this post of yours may be a good brainstorm (thinking out loud, as it were), but it doesn't make a tangible difference in terms of improving Ubuntu (sorry).

These steps do make a tangible difference, though:

1. Donating money
2. Contributing code
3. Filing bug reports
4. Writing documentation
5. Helping new users

Do one of the five or all five or any combination of the five and Ubuntu will continue to improve. And, honestly, even if you did nothing, Ubuntu would continue to improve.

[WhimpyPeon]

I have to disagree a little with your post here. If you just ran ubuntu "out of the box" without a lot of customization it would work almost flawlessly. Especially when you consider the average user who wants to surf, e-mail and type letters. As you customize things you break the ability to do a smooth upgrade to newer versions of whatever you have changed. Lots of times your customizations will carry without problems as well.

In windows many things will break "out of the box". Have you ever upgraded a video card and it borked other programs that worked before? This has happened to me before and I had to reinstall windows more times than I would like to admit. That is probably my biggest complaint with windows... how a change in one program or piece of hardware will impact other programs and hardware.

Consider the new Microsoft Office exploit. Last I heard Microsoft was recommending you run office applications in safe mode to prevent the exploit. Now I am no dummy and I know how to turn off Word as the default editor for Outlook (which is the default behavior). There are lots of people that do not know how to do it and many of them will probably be impacted. I also find it frustrating to say the least when I have to patch Office and I need to pull out the original installation disk to verify that my copy is not pirated. This isn't a huge problem at my home computer because the disk is in my desk. At work, however, it takes away my ability to do it remotely. Not to mention that many of the (upper management usually) users have their install disks but forgot where they put them.

I work with both Linux and Windows servers. I can tell you with absolute certainty that the Linux ones take less time to administer, they do things that can't be done with the Windows ones, and the Internet/Google has been my only source of tech support for them. I recall a while back where I upgraded the backup software on a Windows server. I spent about ten hours fixing the mess that was caused and about eight hours of that was on the phone with tech support from a reputable company. The reason... an undocumented problem that the backup server had to be a PDC for the domain.

The average computer user was raised on Windows. They understand the paradigm (I hate that word) of using Windows. Linux is differnet and people have to learn the different paradigm. I would really like to see what happened if you took people who had never used a computer and gave them an installed copy of each, and then looked to see which had more problems and which would be easier to learn. I would also like to see what the user's ability was like five years down the road.

But that's just my opinion.;)

[aysiu]

I have to disagree a little with your post here. If you just ran ubuntu "out of the box" without a lot of customization it would work almost flawlessly. Well, part of the problem is that most users never really use Ubuntu "out of the box." They install it from scratch on a Windows box.

Windows is "out of the box" because it comes pre-installed.

If you buy a System76 (http://www.system76.com) and then complain, your complaints might actually be legitimate.

Or, better yet, install a copy of Windows XP on a System76 and then install a copy of Ubuntu on a Dell--that's really the only fair comparison.

[michaeljb2005]

I am rambling. I didn't post this to make ubuntu better, although I did state that maybe some of what I said were suggestions. I don't think it will improve anything but I thought it might give another point of view from an end-user perspective (not that you guys need another one). A lot of the people that post in here are developers, and may be a little biased towards linux. I just wanted to be outside looking in and from an objective point of view (I think). Although my post wasn't exactly totally educated and arguments could be made against it, regardless, this is the impression I get.

[aysiu]

A lot of the people that post in here are developers, and may be a little biased towards linux. I think it makes more sense to say a lot of people that post here use Linux and are biased toward Linux. I don't know how many people here are developers. Certainly very few (if any) Ubuntu developers frequent the forums...

In any case, what does bias have to do with anything?

By the way, I hope you mean bias in the bolded sense, not the rest of the definition:
3 a : BENT, TENDENCY b : an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment

[kingmonkey]

I think edgy will be more biased to developers.

Dapper is biased to customers.

[michaeljb2005]

I will admit that windows does have it's problems no doubt, and more than linux in many cases. I don't advocate that windows is perfect, nor do I necessarily prefer it given that I am switching. It definitely requires a lot of time if something goes wrong, however, my impression is that sometimes you have to go through steps in linux, in order to get normal things working that work out of the box in windows, that could more easily break the operating system than any steps you might take in windows. As far as your driver thing I never had that kind of problem but just like in linux every problem seems to be on an individual basis in windows as well. But since windows does have a better hardware compatibility factor (not necessarily without drivers provided by the hardware manufacturer) it's less likely for that to happen in windows.

[michaeljb2005]

I think it makes more sense to say a lot of people that post here use Linux and are biased toward Linux. I don't know how many people here are developers. Certainly very few (if any) Ubuntu developers frequent the forums...

Thanks for clarifying. That does seem to make sense.

By the way, I hope you mean bias in the bolded sense, not the rest of the definition:

Yes, I did mean it in the bolded sense.

[michaeljb2005]

I think edgy will be more biased to developers.

Dapper is biased to customers.

I'm actually kind of hoping not so much since I would like to see XGL/Compiz just work without many problems (gaming, theming, etc etc). I realize that this can/probably will be done with dapper eventually but I would like to keep upgrading software since as I do believe software is not usually upgraded but bug fixed in normal software updates? And software upgraded more often in distro updates? Maybe not?

[WhimpyPeon]

Well, part of the problem is that most users never really use Ubuntu "out of the box." They install it from scratch on a Windows box.

Windows is "out of the box" because it comes pre-installed.

If you buy a System76 (http://www.system76.com) and then complain, your complaints might actually be legitimate.

Or, better yet, install a copy of Windows XP on a System76 and then install a copy of Ubuntu on a Dell--that's really the only fair comparison.
My point was that the default Ubuntu will work just fine. I have a good Internet connection and I can download the iso quicker than a trip to the computer store to buy a copy of Windows. There are a good many people who only use their computer to surf the net, read their e-mail, type their letters and look at their pictures.

I standard Ubutnu install will do all this without any tweaks or changes. Sure, you may have to set up your network, but if you have some kind of DHCP that is simple.

To me, "out of the box" doesn't mean to take the media out of the box, or whether it is pre-installed, but to use the default installation. Sorry if I was wrong in the meaning.

[aysiu]

My point was that the default Ubuntu will work just fine. I have a good Internet connection and I can download the iso quicker than a trip to the computer store to buy a copy of Windows. There are a good many people who only use their computer to surf the net, read their e-mail, type their letters and look at their pictures.

I standard Ubutnu install will do all this without any tweaks or changes. Sure, you may have to set up your network, but if you have some kind of DHCP that is simple.

To me, "out of the box" doesn't mean to take the media out of the box, or whether it is pre-installed, but to use the default installation. Sorry if I was wrong in the meaning. Yeah, we're talking about two different things. I totally agree with you.

[michaeljb2005]

My point was that the default Ubuntu will work just fine. I have a good Internet connection and I can download the iso quicker than a trip to the computer store to buy a copy of Windows. There are a good many people who only use their computer to surf the net, read their e-mail, type their letters and look at their pictures.

I standard Ubutnu install will do all this without any tweaks or changes. Sure, you may have to set up your network, but if you have some kind of DHCP that is simple.

To me, "out of the box" doesn't mean to take the media out of the box, or whether it is pre-installed, but to use the default installation. Sorry if I was wrong in the meaning.

Well I will give Ubuntu major props in that it makes it easy to get software and codecs (almost out of the box) that with windows you have to browse for. It just may require adding repositories, but once they're there, you never have to look again :).

I agree in that many people just use it for the basic essentials that do come out of box, however, eventually people wander, and if they've never wandered before it seems like it would be easy to break stuff in linux.

[aysiu]

Well I will give Ubuntu major props in that it makes it easy to get software and codecs (almost out of the box) that with windows you have to browse for. It just may require adding repositories, but once they're there, you never have to look again :). Wow! If you give Ubuntu major props for that, what do you give Mepis, Blag, and PCLinuxOS--Linux distros that include most of those proprietary codecs in their default installations?

[michaeljb2005]

Wow! If you give Ubuntu major props for that, what do you give Mepis, Blag, and PCLinuxOS--Linux distros that include most of those proprietary codecs in their default installations?

Maybe I should try those. But I don't think so. Ubuntu has advanced to the point where it has a larger support base, good forums, and other tools that make it easy to do things for people who don't know command line. It provides a wealth of applications in it's universe, multiverse repositories and plus it ships free CD's :).

[aysiu]

Maybe I should try those. But I don't think so. Ubuntu has advanced to the point where it has a larger support base, good forums, and other tools that make it easy to do things for people who don't know command line. It provides a wealth of applications in it's universe, multiverse repositories and plus it ships free CD's :). I'll agree with you about the support base--that's the main reason I switched, but all the distros I mentioned are free downloads (no, they won't ship to you), and Mepis' next release will be based on Ubuntu, so it'll probably use Ubuntu repositories.

[michaeljb2005]

I'll agree with you about the support base--that's the main reason I switched, but all the distros I mentioned are free downloads (no, they won't ship to you), and Mepis' next release will be based on Ubuntu, so it'll probably use Ubuntu repositories.

Now if only XGL worked flawlessly. I'm going to install soon and I'm going to try XGL with Quinn's repository of CVS and see if it works for me!

[Mustard]

Now if only XGL worked flawlessly. I'm going to install soon and I'm going to try XGL with Quinn's repository of CVS and see if it works for me!
Heh..the irresistable draw of XGL. :)

If you are getting into that type of customisation then its seems inevitable that something is going to break sooner or later. :D

Have you contemplated using a separate install of Ubuntu for fiddling around with these types of projects, rather than using your working installation as a test bed?

[michaeljb2005]

Heh..the irresistable draw of XGL. :)

If you are getting into that type of customisation then its seems inevitable that something is going to break sooner or later. :D

Have you contemplated using a separate install of Ubuntu for fiddling around with these types of projects, rather than using your working installation as a test bed?

Actually at this point in time i'm using vmware to test ubuntu without xgl (for obvious reasons). But you're right, if I can find a way to do it without touching my main partition then that would be nice. But I haven't installed yet anyway, and that's one of the things I might try first. So if I break it I can just reinstall and won't lose much.