Blogger slams Ubuntu vs. Windows

[Cheese Sandwich]

http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/05/06/ubuntu-is-not-ready-for-most-even-from-dell/



Ubuntu is not ready for most, even from Dell

Posted on May 6th, 2007 by Jonathan Schlaffer

Ubuntu is not ready for most, even from Dell Dell has seen fit to equip some of its laptop and desktop offerings with one of the most popular versions (also called distros) of Linux being Ubuntu. I have said many times before one of the biggest challenges for Linux is to make things easy to install and configure. I know plenty of people that think doing so is hard in Windows and for them it would be impossible in Linux.

Andrew Kantor of USA Today says that “Linux isn’t just for geeks” but I beg to differ for one reason. Near the end of his post he talks about something that is completely alien to a Windows user, repositories and dependencies.

“Judging by a comment in an article written earlier this year about Cinelerra: “…installation is simple: I add the correct Cinelerra repository for my CPU, along with the Debian Multimedia repository, to my /etc/apt/sources.list file, then update and install Cinelerra.”

Yeah, okay… what? I don’t even care to understand what that means… why can’t I just install an executable or msi file and be done with it. Linux doesn’t work that way which is why it will never be ready for Joe Schmo user, not that Windows is easy for some people either but come on… I want double click installation files where I can click “Next, Next, Okay, Finish.”

Heaven help you if you want to install something that isn’t in the repository list which will require installation of a dependency and sometimes the dependency requires a dependency, isn’t that lovely? No, no its not.

Not to mention all the programs you have to choose from for playing video/audio files to text editing, it’s almost too much.

I have no doubt Dell will at least configure the installation of Ubuntu somewhat but it comes with a bunch of programs for doing one thing and many others can be downloaded.

Let’s try the Windows way. Say you want to install Limewire or Frostwire and have no idea what Java is or don’t know that Java is required for the program, during the installation, Frostwire/Limewire will pause installing, download Java, install it and configure it for use without you having to do a single solitary thing except click “OK” and “Next.” Linux needs to learn to do things that way or it will never be ready for… 90% of the population.

Not to mention how every single program on OSX or Windows has a far more polished feel to it and perhaps more usability as well, I don’t want to have to go through two different programs to do ONE thing.

Linux lacks polish, its programs lack polish, it’s free but as always is not worth it in my opinion. In my world there are only three operating systems, Windows XP, Vista and Mac OSX and it will always be that way.

There’s a program called EasyUbuntu that will install and configure some things for you but look at the command you need to run after downloading it, wget -q http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/medibuntu-key.gpg -O- | sudo apt-key add – oh yeah, that’s real intuitive. I wouldn’t even bother with it because of THAT, it’s insane. I guess it’s still easier than doing all of this separately but still… if you know that command by heart, something is really very wrong with you.

Linux needs to abandon command lines most importantly and make something like .exe files or .msi files and do away with repositories, dependencies, the whole system and start over.

[aysiu]

Yawn. What's new?

[Tux Aubrey]

Summary of article for those who can't be bothered to read more:


In my world there are only three operating systems, Windows XP, Vista and Mac OSX and it will always be that way.

Says it all really.

[pirothezero]

Yawn. What's new?
Ya lol.

Seems like it comes down to do you want to stick with the same old or try new things and not judge them before you try them. I feel sad for people like that. ](*,)

Its like even try to mention to him the good that repos do, like give you 21k worth of applications and dependencies and he'll burn you at the stake because windows can do that too!

[testube_babies]

I'm scared of learning new systems, too. That's why my computer is in a building four blocks away and I have to haul boxes of punchcards back and forth from it.

[Kevin]

We'll never get through to close-minded people like this until the market forces them to be open minded. Ubuntu isn't ready because it doesn't install programs like windows does? Yeah right. And Windows never caught on because it installed programs differently than DOS.

So Frostwire wants an install program for Ubuntu? They've got a deb package, make it depend on sun-java5-bin and its set. Download, double-click, enter password, and you've got frostwire.

Add a line to sources.list? That's one way to do it. Or you could go to system/administration/software sources, fairly obvious, and add the url. Or of course they could just provide packages instead of a a repo.

There's one way I could think of improving this, and that is the ability to have packages that contain multiple packages within them, and install all of them. If some binary application not in the repos needs multiple packages, then they could supply one file with the multiple packages inside it, and it would install all of them.

Either way though, this is in no way a blocking issue for adoption. People want Firefox, Frostwire, Skype, etc. All of these have simple .deb packages ready to be double-clicked and installed. Ubuntu is not perfect, but it will never be to everyone. Ubuntu is not windows, its different, and rightly so. Get used to it.

[meman63]

Yeah,right.Next we'll be running Ad-Aware,SpybotS&D,maybe even a McAfee for good measure!

Oh,don't forget using .EXE files that automatically run in an admin(root) context.That is EXACTLY what I DON'T want??!!Never mind that you really can't change permissions on files(folders).

I don't want to click-and-run.I want to know what is going to be installed!Not ...."Never mind what I install behind the scenes to watch your online,or offline for that matter,behavior and habits.".


Give me dependency hell anytime(Please,NO!)before I rely on someone else's .msi file.

My two cents worth,
Regards,
Red

[tgalati4]

It's a good thing that Bug #1 only applies to 2 out of 3 of those operating systems.

Knowing what a repository is--it's where the oil goes in your car. Now you can rely on your Engine Light, but it won't put oil in the car for you.

[mijj]

I think he (the orinial quote) makes a valid point ... a little to vehemently .. but it's still valid.

Development is being done by technical people - and somewhere in there there's some thought about how to make the product accessible to a user.

but let's face it .. technical people are **** at ergonomics - they know too much about what's going on in there.

... and the nature of linux flavours being what they are, development will always be driven by technical people.

[ZeroXR]

Talk about really being stuck in the whole "Gimme the GUI!" bit. Sounds like he just doesn't understand the concept that it's more an introduction to the public, not a direct attack to the every-man PC user. I mean, maybe the Terminal is "intimidating" but it is not as dramatic as the writer makes it.

No offense, but he didn't use MS-DOS/Windows 95... Then he probably takes the laziness of the GUI for granted.

[Sweet Spot]

Holy cow is that person a frakin moron ! He actually almost makes a point TO use Ubuntu, and absolutely makes the normal Windows user look extremely bad.
Yeah, okay… what? I don’t even care to understand what that means… why can’t I just install an executable or msi file and be done with it

This guy HAS to be kidding, right ? I'd seriously like to get this guy on some meds right away. He doesn't seem to be thinking clearly. Um, news for you blogger clown... the reason why you can't just RUN an .exe is because of something called "LINUX isn't Windows" you dolt. And the statement saying that he doesn't even care to understand what it all means, pretty , much sums up the entire blog without even needing to read further, actually.

It honestly hurts my intellect (as well as my heart) to read much more past that (again), as this person clearly has very little grasp on things outside of his 13 year old playroom/bedroom. I'd absolutely refuse to believe that this blog was written by anyone even old enough to have a learners permit (to drive). His ignorance goes beyond my ability to understand how such a person is able to be a useful, functioning member of society.

I hope he reads this, so that he may know that even a person such as myself whom was using nothing but Windows for the past 20 years, can MUCH MORE than easily get the hang of a distro such as Ubuntu, and even feel the need to learn more about Linux (including the command line which when used properly is a much faster and efficient way to operate from time to time), and not feel helpless just because a little bit of reading is in order when doing something like say... LEARNING SOMETHING NEW !

God you're an idiot. I think that even Windows is too good for you to use. Perhaps you should give the Etch a' Sketch a try ?

[FuturePilot]

Ok first, dependencies alien to Windows? I beg to differ. Ever hear of DLL Hell? Hence the name DLL, Dynamic Link Library, which means it's a dependency of something.

Second, the thing about pausing and downloading the necessary extras during installation. If you try to install a deb with Gdebi that has unmet dependencies it will automatically download them and install them before continuing.

Oh yeah, one more thing. The thing about adding the gpg keys. At least you know that it's a trusted repo unlike some websites that people randomly download unknown .exe's on.

Ok, the more I read this the more steamed I get. Abandon the command line!? What!? And what's wrong with knowing commands by heart?

Linux not worth it!? I think Linux was one of the most worthwhile things I've ever done.

I think whoever wrote this needs to actually use Ubuntu before criticizing it.

[meman63]

I think he (the orinial quote) makes a valid point ... a little to vehemently .. but it's still valid.

Development is being done by technical people - and somewhere in there there's some thought about how to make the product accessible to a user.

but let's face it .. technical people are **** at ergonomics - they know too much about what's going on in there.

... and the nature of linux flavours being what they are, development will always be driven by technical people.

I agree that Archlinux(,or others along those lines) may be a little difficult for your average home user.Ubuntu?Give me a break!This is,by far,the easiest Debian- based distro out there for me.

Not disputing the fact that you have to be willing to go through a learning curve,when first starting any *nix.



Therein lies the problem:Do you want,need,desire or just crave learning enough,to try something different.

Regards,
Red

[B. Gates]

Damn! Almost forgot.

/hands blogger bag of money

My monopoly is once again secure!

[Praill]

Ya I really cant agree with him either.
First of all ubuntu comes with LOADS more useful software than windows. If the linux movement takes off proprietary distros like linspire will win over the newbie. They are able to include out-of-the-box mp3, mpeg, etc, etc support while still using all the beautiful open-source tools that would cost you thousands of dollars in windows (gimp, open office, k3b, etc).

For the software that doesnt come pre-installed? Well ma and pa who check cnn.com and email their son in college dont apply, but for anyone else: isnt clicking a synaptic icon, searching, and choosing install from a TRUSTED source easier than endless googling to malicious pages infecting you with random spyware and then eventually finding an executable from god knows where that does go knows what? I think so.

If he wants to attack linux he has alot better opportunities that he completely missed.

[Sef]

GNU/Linux is about choice, so he has the choice to run Windows instead. I don't agree with his choice, but that is his decision.

[jiminycricket]

He could have just downloaded the .deb file from the Cinelerra repository.

Double click, woopty doo..

[Mateo]

He's right though. Dependacy hell is hell. People like to pretend like all software is in the repositories but that is blatant lie. MANY programs are not in the repos. This is canonical's fault because they are zealots who won't put new software into the repositories except twice a year. This is why they are out-of-touch, they think a minor unimportant bug is more important than software. PEOPLE WANT SOFTWARE. With linux if you have to start compiling from source more than likely you're going to run into some dependency issues from time to time. This is not easy and there is no excuse for this not being priority #1 to fix. This means making DEB files easily accessible, and if canonical are too fundamentalist to put software in repos they need to make unofficials debs available on the internet.

[deadguy87]

I bet this guy has never used ubuntu or anyother good linux distro. I fiddled with linux years ago, but I didn't have an internet connection. I just really started again and I haven't found anything to hard to learn yet. But he does have a point there are a few users who would want some things that Ubuntu doesn't have out of the box, but aren't computer savvy enough to install the medibuntu repository. I think that most dell purchasers would be able to learn how to do what they need to do in Ubuntu.

[mijj]

I dont really think the "if the user is having difficulties with Ubuntu then the user is stupid" approach will do much to further the cause.

The ergonomics of Ubuntu is the big problem if you want to get people involved en mass. ... sure .. if you're an enthusiast it's riduculous to think of improving the user centered interface when all you need to do is read around and study a few manuals and throw out a few command lines. ... but ... we dont all want to be covered in Ubuntu oil and surrounded by Ubuntu cogs.

[meman63]

They will and I bet these forums really start sending smoke signals to all who are looking.

Whether they see the "whole picture" depends on their perspective.

When these boxes start being bought by 'former' Windows users,this place is going to jump in popularity beyond all that you can imagine!

I can see many more people being hired here,just for monitoring these posts!

I must say," Kudos to the Ubuntu crew!".Keeping all civilized is not easy!

Regards,(I get lazier and lazier about indenting.)
Red

[23meg]

MANY programs are not in the repos. This is canonical's fault

https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-universe-contributors
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU#head-ec7a97d5af67e96747b4f36993232ff434f4486c

Packaging for Universe is done by the MOTU and MOTU hopefuls, very few of whom are employed by Canonical; anyone can become a MOTU. Anyone who can build good packages can also submit packages for inclusion in Universe through the sponsorship of MOTUs without having to be one.

So, guess whose fault it is.


because they are zealots who won't put new software into the repositories except twice a year.

Freezing the repositories is part of the time based release model (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TimeBasedReleases) that Canonical has chosen, the word "zealot" has nothing to do with this, and freezing the repositories has nothing to do with some packages not being in them.

If you want newer versions within less than six months and can't compile, use backports, Prevu, third party repos, getdeb.org, or get/pay someone to build them and stick them in a repo, or use another distro.


PEOPLE WANT SOFTWARE. With linux if you have to start compiling from source more than likely you're going to run into some dependency issues from time to time. This is not easy and there is no excuse for this not being priority #1 to fix. This means making DEB files easily accessible, and if canonical are too fundamentalist to put software in repos they need to make unofficials debs available on the internet.

Please rub your magic lamp and summon 100 new developers who will package and maintain the new software you want that's missing from Universe. Or just stop commenting on issues you don't understand.

[Somenoob]

I guess it's too sophisticated for him, writing a few commands that is...


Not to mention all the programs you have to choose from for playing video/audio files to text editing, it’s almost too much.

What? is he not aware of the millions of video and audio players and text editors that are available for Windows?

Just one of those who expects everything to be easy enough that no learning will be needed. I'm getting tired of complaints from those with windows user habits.

[tbroderick]

the reason why you can't just RUN an .exe is because of something called "LINUX isn't Windows" you dolt.

Maybe Ubuntu should look into using something similar to PBIs.

[jiminycricket]

He's right though. Dependacy hell is hell. People like to pretend like all software is in the repositories but that is blatant lie. MANY programs are not in the repos. This is canonical's fault because they are zealots who won't put new software into the repositories except twice a year. This is why they are out-of-touch, they think a minor unimportant bug is more important than software. PEOPLE WANT SOFTWARE. With linux if you have to start compiling from source more than likely you're going to run into some dependency issues from time to time. This is not easy and there is no excuse for this not being priority #1 to fix. This means making DEB files easily accessible, and if canonical are too fundamentalist to put software in repos they need to make unofficials debs available on the internet.

It's really Cinelerra's fault for perhaps making not more accessible, but the repository idea is still OK. Also, gDebi resolves dependancies, so does sudo apt-get -f install. He also didn't have to edit /etc/apt/sources.list-- Synaptic->Settings->Edit Repositories, anyone?

What's so much hard than that Windows, with: Next, next, don't read onerous licensing eula that mentions a program is installing spyware, next, next, etc.

It's just different than Windows. And there are advantages to a repository system.

I think it's an artifical barrier and no reason to diss Ubuntu for.

[SeanWuzHere]

Wow, if this guy thinks Ubuntu Linux is bad, he should try learning something like Solaris 9 using CDE. He'll have a whole new appreciation for how far Linux operating environments have come. :D

[brooklyn88]

This poster is right about some of the things that he says. But all the problems that he states can easily be fixed by introducing linux to a mass audience that will easily be able to and willing to get how to use it without problems : kids and the less fortunate. Since most schools (in the US anyways) have computers that already restrict access to what you can do to only word processing and limited web surfing. If someone convinced school districts to save money by converting their old pcs to ubuntu or edubuntu rather than buying new pcs to run latest windows or new macs.
Then market old pcs with linux on them to those who can't afford a mac or new pc with latest windows they would learn to use it and there would be the new linux users. With more people demanding that linux gets easier I'm sure it would. The only thing keeping this from happening are a lack of marketing to those in charge of schools and tech people who work in those school districts and only have windows training who probably wouldn't like their jobs getting harder.

[jiminycricket]

IMO, it already is easy, though. He's complaining about editing sources.list, yet he doesn't seem to mention that you can do it through a built-in GUI, that has advantages such automatic updates to the latest secure version for all apps, and no spyware if the repo is trusted, a key hash for each package, etc.

This is a very specific nit pick about one process that Ubuntu uses to install software, not a showstopper. He didn't mention that you could download debs directly and install them with a GUI, for example.

(don't take this as me advocating adding repositories willy-nilly, though)

[bluenova]

I want double click installation files where I can click “Next, Next, Okay, Finish.”

The day I see that in Linux is the day I switch to BSD.

[jiminycricket]

He's right though. Dependacy hell is hell. People like to pretend like all software is in the repositories but that is blatant lie. MANY programs are not in the repos. This is canonical's fault because they are zealots who won't put new software into the repositories except twice a year. This is why they are out-of-touch, they think a minor unimportant bug is more important than software. PEOPLE WANT SOFTWARE. With linux if you have to start compiling from source more than likely you're going to run into some dependency issues from time to time. This is not easy and there is no excuse for this not being priority #1 to fix. This means making DEB files easily accessible, and if canonical are too fundamentalist to put software in repos they need to make unofficials debs available on the internet.

If you have time, why not build a redistributable debian package for your pet software? Video on how to build Debian packages (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=436432) Then you can submit it to to Ubuntu/Debian, or host it at http://getdeb.net

[karellen]

I'm scared of learning new systems, too. That's why my computer is in a building four blocks away and I have to haul boxes of punchcards back and forth from it.

:lolflag: that was tough ;)

[graabein]

Repositories and dependencies are real scary high-tech stuff. No normal human being can ever understand that. Let's just give up!

:confused: :guitar:

[crimesaucer]

“Judging by a comment in an article written earlier this year about Cinelerra: “…installation is simple: I add the correct Cinelerra repository for my CPU, along with the Debian Multimedia repository, to my /etc/apt/sources.list file, then update and install Cinelerra.”

So the copy, paste, and save buttons don't work on your computer?


Yeah, okay… what? I don’t even care to understand what that means… why can’t I just install an executable or msi file and be done with it. Linux doesn’t work that way which is why it will never be ready for Joe Schmo user, not that Windows is easy for some people either but come on… I want double click installation files where I can click “Next, Next, Okay, Finish.”

...once again, copy and paste, press enter, press "Y". enjoy new program.


There’s a program called EasyUbuntu that will install and configure some things for you but look at the command you need to run after downloading it, wget -q http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/medibuntu-key.gpg -O- | sudo apt-key add – oh yeah, that’s real intuitive. I wouldn’t even bother with it because of THAT, it’s insane. I guess it’s still easier than doing all of this separately but still… if you know that command by heart, something is really very wrong with you.

...and again, copy and paste, press enter, press enter or Y when needed.

(EDIT- to explain my point further)
Installing form the wiki page is easy. Instructions are written for anyone, even beginners, to understand. Anything that needs to be entered into the terminal is written in the code boxes. All you have to do is follow the steps in order which usually are simple copy and paste directions of:

1.) coping and pasting some new lines of code into your /etc/apt/sources.list, and then pressing save.
2.) Updating with sudo apt-get update which is even written in the code box for an easy copy and paste.
3.) installing with sudo apt-get install or aptitude install, and again, it's written in the code boxes to be copy/pasted.

Now, compiling programs may seem difficult to a beginner like me, but once I actually decide to do it, and follow the directions of the program/page that I'm installing from, most of that is just coping and pasting the correct commands in the order of the installation page too. What's so difficult about reading a few sentences, and then using copy/paste/enter?

This writer acts like he had to come up with these command codes himself, like they weren't written there in easy-to-install copy and paste directions. He acts like he had to type it all in by hand, letter by letter. He makes the simplest act of installing from the wiki page with the Terminal, seem like hard work that only some tech genius could do.

I remember my very first day, feeling nervous and scared to do anything, I wanted my java and flash and didn't know what to do. So somebody recommended that I try to install Automatix2. I was on xubuntu for my very first install, and it was a little more difficult then ubuntu because most people give tips and answers for ubuntu. Well, I went to the Automatix2 page, and read the directions for xubuntu. Then, I followed them and easily added the repository and the proper key. And then installed Automatix2.

It was that easy. It took 5 minutes from not knowing anything about Linux. In fact, it was so easy, that I didn't even run Automatix2, and I went to the next section about Java and Flash, and did it myself without Automatix. Then I went through the whole wiki adding media players and dvd burners, codecs, fonts and new programs and games, even wine. It was all so easy. Then I un-installed Automatix2 since I never needed it.

[steven8]

Repositories and dependencies are real scary high-tech stuff. No normal human being can ever understand that. Let's just give up!

:confused: :guitar:

The closest I can come is Suppositories and Depends. :( I'm gonna reinstall Windows. . .

[zugu]

The day I see that in Linux is the day I switch to BSD.

You might be interested in PC-BSD where, guess what, software is installed the way you dislike so much: Next, Yes, Finish.

[heimo]

Typical proprietary software install on Windows:
Search for software using Google
Register to download full or evaluation version
Read and Accept License(s), often several pages of legal text
Evaluate / make sure your system is compatible
Pay and download install file
Run installation
Accept License, limiting pretty much all responsibilities of vendor, including any incompatibilities and loss of data
Yes, I want to install this software
Choose which parts of program you want to install, Next
Re-register your company/personal information to attach it to the software you are installing and sending it to some database AND/OR
Enter long registration number for evaluation / full copy of the software
Reboot
Run software
In case of problems, call technical support during first 30 days
After 30 days, pay for additional support
Get a call or email from software reseller, selling you more stuff or upgrades
Pay your VISA/Mastercard bill
Let the program handle its updates using vendor specific program which will contact some server on the internet, download some binary files and install on your system, or download upgrades from software vendors site and apply them manually
After one year, renew your support contract to keep the software up to date and patched against bugs and security problems
After three years, pay for major upgrade version or new full version
Never change your software vendor as your old files are in proprietary format which is not supported by other software and there's no migration path
Obey EULAVersus

Typical free software install on GNU/Linux system
Use your package manager to search and choose program you need
Let the package manager download and install all software that is needed, from your distributions mirrors you trust
Use the software
Get excellent support directly from other users and software developers
Be free
run the program for any purpose
study and modify the program
copy the program so you can help your neighbor
improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits

[steven8]

Typical proprietary software install on Windows:
Search for software using Google
Register to download full or evaluation version
Read and Accept License(s), often several pages of legal text
Evaluate / make sure your system is compatible
Pay and download install file
Run installation
Accept License, limiting pretty much all responsibilities of vendor, including any incompatibilities and loss of data
Yes, I want to install this software
Choose which parts of program you want to install, Next
Re-register your company/personal information to attach it to the software you are installing and sending it to some database AND/OR
Enter long registration number for evaluation / full copy of the software
Reboot
Run software
In case of problems, call technical support during first 30 days
After 30 days, pay for additional support
Get a call or email from software reseller, selling you more stuff or upgrades
Pay your VISA/Mastercard bill
Let the program handle its updates using vendor specific program which will contact some server on the internet, download some binary files and install on your system, or download upgrades from software vendors site and apply them manually
After one year, renew your support contract to keep the software up to date and patched against bugs and security problems
After three years, pay for major upgrade version or new full version
Never change your software vendor as your old files are in proprietary format which is not supported by other software and there's no migration path
Obey EULAVersus

Typical free software install on GNU/Linux system
Use your package manager to search and choose program you need
Let the package manager download and install all software that is needed, from your distributions mirrors you trust
Use the software
Get excellent support directly from other users and software developers
Be free
run the program for any purpose
study and modify the program
copy the program so you can help your neighbor
improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits

The Bazaar VS The Cathedral. I prefer the Bazaar. :popcorn:

[rai4shu2]

It seems to me that blorge.com is a mindless Windows-spam operation. No point in feeding those trolls.

[diskotek]

Yeah, okay… what? I don’t even care to understand what that means… why can’t I just install an executable or msi file and be done with it. Linux doesn’t work that way which is why it will never be ready for Joe Schmo user, not that Windows is easy for some people either but come on… I want double click installation files where I can click “Next, Next, Okay, Finish.

i hate these kind of comparison . of course if everybody get used to linux, it would be hard for them to use windows. so these kind of people wanted to see linux, similar to windows. come on, linux is something different, also mac os x is something very different. so should we say "windows is very different it have to be like windows..."???

[jmore9]

I have been dual booting for years and of all the linux distros to to use I have found Ubuntu/Kubuntu to be the easiest to install and use. I just recently tried to install SUSE 10.2 and spent 3 HOURS screwing around with it. (maybe Novells connections with M$ the reason it differs from previous releases ?) But when a person who has never used linus is put in front of ubuntu/kubuntu it only takes a few minutes to figure out most of the major apps and how to use them. Adding and installing software is very easy in 7.04 and compared to XP a nicer experience. All in all 7.04 does a very good job at being user friendly. And the reference that the piece at the beginning that windows software is totally easy to install is not always true. Just my thoughts

[regomodo]

Has he even tried Ubuntu?

Add/Remove anyone?

[v8YKxgHe]

His entire blog just shows his lack of understanding of Ubuntu/Linux. For example this:


wget -q http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/medibuntu-key.gpg -O- | sudo apt-key add – oh yeah, that’s real intuitive.

You do not have to do, all you could do is download the gpg key, then go to System->Admin->Software Sources->Authentication and then add the Key. Also he moans about having to edit /etc/apt/sources.list ... well, guess what you don't need to, just go to System->Admin->Software Sources again and add it in, done =).

I wish people who try to say Ubuntu is crap and not ready, would understand it before opening there mouth and complaining.

[Gaunty]

"Linux needs to abandon command lines most importantly"

This always is an issue for new users, fix it and it will solve most of the problem, it shouldn't even be too hard either, there are GUIs for most things.

[Mateo]

If you have time, why not build a redistributable debian package for your pet software? Video on how to build Debian packages (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=436432) Then you can submit it to to Ubuntu/Debian, or host it at http://getdeb.net

Common users can't do that, it's not an option. Unless Ubuntu does this, then the criticism remains valid.

[starcraft.man]

Meh, seems like these attacks on Ubuntu are everywhere. Nothing new in that post, just another uniformed and uninterested user. Windows has its own complexities to be mastered if you want real control, and some of them are very obscure. Not to mention the fact that I think this writer forgets Windows is becoming Linux, with its new UAC, the revamp of the power shell, patenting of sudo and the fact that the next microsoft OS is highly rumoured (through patents) to be a modular system like linux with DRM >.>

[devnet]

The day I see that in Linux is the day I switch to BSD.

You better switch to BSD...you can double click debs and rpms already and use kpackage. Which BSD derivative you going to?

[devnet]

I dont really think the "if the user is having difficulties with Ubuntu then the user is stupid" approach will do much to further the cause.

The ergonomics of Ubuntu is the big problem if you want to get people involved en mass. ... sure .. if you're an enthusiast it's riduculous to think of improving the user centered interface when all you need to do is read around and study a few manuals and throw out a few command lines. ... but ... we dont all want to be covered in Ubuntu oil and surrounded by Ubuntu cogs.

Agreed.

And it shows alot that users in this forum are quickly labelling this guy a Linux heretic...a zealot...a MS fanbio...a retard...ignorant. They don't know anything about his background other than what he wrote in the article...they don't know where he worked, what projects he worked on, etc. They just assume.

It's very sad to see this in any forum/community.

Instead of trashing this guy's comments...try and track down WHAT MADE HIM MAKE these comments. And being an idiot doesn't fly in this case. You have to approach this in this vein...

"how can we make this user change his/her mind about Linux"

Not

"This guy is an a-hole moron who doesn't know his butt from a hole in the ground. He's an idiot and is so ignorant that even his shoes are racist"

At the very least, this guy hasn't had enough exposure to Ubuntu...and in that case, he's naive not ignorant. For naive people, you don't bash the crap out of them and tell them how dumb they are...can you imagine doing that to a 9 year old kid who doesn't understand? "Daddy, what are stars made of?" "Shutup you little ignorant boy! You know nothing!" Doesn't sound so hot when put into perspective right? Yet here we are...bashing away at this guy, showing everyone how zealous we are for Linux. The thing is, that's not what we should be conveying to everyone...we should be showing them how professional and understanding we can be.

OH well...bash on Community...bash on.

[aysiu]

can you imagine doing that to a 9 year old kid who doesn't understand? "Daddy, what are stars made of?" "Shutup you little ignorant boy! You know nothing!" Doesn't sound so hot when put into perspective right? It's more like a 9-year-old kid reading Michel Foucault, not understanding it, and then writing a review of it on her blog about how it sucks and is bad writing because she doesn't get it.

[laxmanb]

I agree with the installation part...

[prince_alfie]

It's more like a 9-year-old kid reading Michel Foucault, not understanding it, and then writing a review of it on her blog about how it sucks and is bad writing because she doesn't get it.

Wow, I really like Michel Foucault. Man, into Roland Barthes too?

I haven't heard his name check in a long time. Word! :popcorn:

[picpak]

He makes a good point:


wget -q http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/medibuntu-key.gpg -O- | sudo apt-key add –

Wh....wha? I know what it means...but imagine explaining it to a newbie. "In order to authenticate the Medibuntu APT repository, you need to install their GPG key. Never mind all the gibberish that comes up...just do it."

Another person here makes a point that it can be done through the GUI, but it's really not that obvious. I didn't even know about Software Sources until a couple months ago.

But the one thing I don't get is why Easy Ubuntu can't do this when it first runs...Automatix does, why not Easy Ubuntu?

[FurryNemesis]

Dissected as deserved. This guy doesn't quote most of his sources, has obviously not sufficiently engaged in his subject matter and doesn't want to learn. Some of his later posts contain facts that are just plain wrong. His point could have been made so much better.

[jiminycricket]

He makes a good point:

Quote:
wget -q http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/medibuntu-key.gpg -O- | sudo apt-key add –
Wh....wha? I know what it means...but imagine explaining it to a newbie. "In order to authenticate the Medibuntu APT repository, you need to install their GPG key. Never mind all the gibberish that comes up...just do it."

Another person here makes a point that it can be done through the GUI, but it's really not that obvious. I didn't even know about Software Sources until a couple months ago.

But the one thing I don't get is why Easy Ubuntu can't do this when it first runs...Automatix does, why not Easy Ubuntu?You can still install something without the key, it's just untrusted and you're prompted. Maybe it can be more user-friendly but...how easy do you REALLY want it to be for people to add random (http://www.pthree.org/2006/11/23/untrusted-repositories/)repositories that can install anything on your system?

[EdThaSlayer]

That blogger is pretty stupid. He probably has never seen the easy to use Add/Remove in the Application menu.

[Sweet Spot]

He makes a good point:



Wh....wha? I know what it means...but imagine explaining it to a newbie. "In order to authenticate the Medibuntu APT repository, you need to install their GPG key. Never mind all the gibberish that comes up...just do it."

Another person here makes a point that it can be done through the GUI, but it's really not that obvious. I didn't even know about Software Sources until a couple months ago.

But the one thing I don't get is why Easy Ubuntu can't do this when it first runs...Automatix does, why not Easy Ubuntu?

No... Actually, he doesn't .

Look, I'm all for defending someone whom has genuinely done their research, tried to learn something new in order to give it an fair evaluation grade and so on, but in THIS case, it absolutely seems like this person is just rambling on about things which he has no firsthand knowledge of, and is just getting his information from other people whom might have actually run into problems, but were also incapable of either expressing what they were, or didn't really try to solve anything or get help.

I do not think that this guy/girl deserves being defended in any way, and he/she has absolutely NO valid points whatsoever, since the basis of this entire argument lays in the fact that you can not compare Windows and Linux in the manner which the examples are given. Especially since he/she is so closed minded, and won't make ANY effort to try and understand why things are the way they are, rather than just bashing them because it's what he's not used to ? ! Seriously, please....


Agreed.

And it shows alot that users in this forum are quickly labelling this guy a Linux heretic...a zealot...a MS fanbio...a retard...ignorant. They don't know anything about his background other than what he wrote in the article...they don't know where he worked, what projects he worked on, etc. They just assume.

It's very sad to see this in any forum/community.

Instead of trashing this guy's comments...try and track down WHAT MADE HIM MAKE these comments. And being an idiot doesn't fly in this case. You have to approach this in this vein...

"how can we make this user change his/her mind about Linux"Are you kidding me ? How many people do you think have time to both psychoanalyze someone's habits, and then attempt to 'correct' their way of thinking ? This also implies that we'd have to be arrogant enough to believe that we should be some sort of saviors for people like this.... If he's a grown up, let him/her act like one and not have to be held by the hand as if in an amusement park. The moment that he/she decided to go on a tirade about something which no research was done for, was the moment that the "cause" fell out of the communities hands.

People such as this will always exist, it's human nature. It's not OUR job to act as understanding (passive) parents who coddle the bad child in order to make some sort of change. And if you don't know what made him/her make such comments, then you haven't been around the 'game' long enough to know not to care anymore.

Good luck in your quest though. God Speed gentle warrior !!:KS

[devnet]

It's more like a 9-year-old kid reading Michel Foucault, not understanding it, and then writing a review of it on her blog about how it sucks and is bad writing because she doesn't get it.

But it doesn't matter in this instance...you won't fault a 9 year old for not understanding...why would you fault a person with a 9 yr olds grasp of Ubuntu?

That's my point. This guy doesn't get it. Let's not flame him...let's help him get it.

Put pride in distro aside...put disdain aside...help people come to a better understanding of Linux. If it's something that can be fixed, we need to address it via bug submission or discussion with developers.

[raffytaffy]

maybe hes a linux user with a sick sense of humor. i have come across those folks lol:lolflag:

[devnet]

Look, I'm all for defending someone whom has genuinely done their research


I'm not talking about defending them...I'm talking about not bashing them and getting to the root of what he is posted.

For example, in the blog post he stated something along the lines of why can't I double click it like an exe? That's a valid question for a new Linux user coming over to Ubuntu...and as evident in many posts in this thread, even Linux users didn't know that double click debs or rpms could be done. So, in this instance, we'd fix the documentation and make it more prevalent on installing software with double click. That may solve issues that many people like this have.

But instead here, we're bashing any critique...even if untactful...that this guy gave. I'm all for posting rebuttals...but doing so in a professional manner is much better than slamming.


Are you kidding me ? How many people do you think have time to both psychoanalyze someone's habits, and then attempt to 'correct' their way of thinking ? This also implies that we'd have to be arrogant enough to believe that we should be some sort of saviors for people like this

Actually, it's about having human decency. Treating others as if they were sitting right here in front of you instead of hiding behind the facade of the internet. The internet is anonymous and therein lies it's downfall...people are crass and attack at the drop of a hat. Read this article from a different perspective...that's all I'm asking. Don't read it from the perspective of "he's attacking my favorite distro" and instead read it from "this is a Windows User and he has many complaints about my favorite distro"


It's not OUR job to act as understanding (passive) parents who coddle the bad child in order to make some sort of change.

It may not be YOUR job or any of our jobs...but some people in Open Source and Linux make it a point to try to help people along in this manner and in doing so, make some of the strongest and soundest advocates of Linux and Open Source.

[Mateo]

Good post, devnet. Some people are just zealots and see it as a obligation to bash anyone who makes a criticism of their preferred operating system. It is known as "fanboyism", where technology is like religion.

[Sweet Spot]

But it doesn't matter in this instance...you won't fault a 9 year old for not understanding...why would you fault a person with a 9 yr olds grasp of Ubuntu?

That's my point. This guy doesn't get it. Let's not flame him...let's help him get it.

Put pride in distro aside...put disdain aside...help people come to a better understanding of Linux. If it's something that can be fixed, we need to address it via bug submission or discussion with developers.

Yer' a bit on the green side I see. I don't particularly LIKE being pessimistic, but over time have grown accustomed to it because of having been left little other choice. But hey, I'd love for you to prove that decency and patience with those whom show absolutely no reception to those characteristics in a person or group of people, is effective. Tell you what... You start (guinea pig of course) and I'll be right along side you in your mission, should this person seem to genuinely take an interest in your musings.

Just remember though, this is a person whom already has shown that he has no regard or respect for openness or truth. His only apparent goal is to bash something which he clearly doesn't even WANT to understand. I'm not just saying that because he even openly said it himself, but because every word he typed had a ring of disdain for everything with which he was not familiar. I say let him be. He, and his brethren will always be around no matter how hard you try and instill some sense of moral piety amongst them.

Yin/Yang. Black/White Good/Bad. Can't have one without the other. Somethings just NEED to exist. Remember that. If the whole world existed without there being any bad, we'd have no appreciation for the good. And while I can appreciate your agenda at its core, I think that it's a bit futile to try and change someone whom clearly doesn't want to change. It's like cigarette smoking. People only truly quit when they want to. Bah, enough of me, I think you get what I'm trying to say.

[salsafyren]

He's right though. Dependacy hell is hell. People like to pretend like all software is in the repositories but that is blatant lie. MANY programs are not in the repos. This is canonical's fault because they are zealots who won't put new software into the repositories except twice a year. This is why they are out-of-touch, they think a minor unimportant bug is more important than software. PEOPLE WANT SOFTWARE. With linux if you have to start compiling from source more than likely you're going to run into some dependency issues from time to time. This is not easy and there is no excuse for this not being priority #1 to fix. This means making DEB files easily accessible, and if canonical are too fundamentalist to put software in repos they need to make unofficials debs available on the internet.

Have you checked out http://www.getdeb.net/? They make unofficial packages which works quite nice.

The backports repository is not a good idea, IMHO. A website like getdeb is much nicer.

[Mateo]

getdeb is a good idea but it only accounts for a very small percentage of the software not available in the repositories. it is the responsibility of Ubuntu, IMO, to make these software easily available in an easily installable format like DEB. So they should be making the packages and sending them to getdeb if that's the way they want to do it.

[Sweet Spot]

Good post, devnet. Some people are just zealots and see it as a obligation to bash anyone who makes a criticism of their preferred operating system. It is known as "fanboyism", where technology is like religion.

Did you even read the blog ? Your assessment of this is way off base. No one here is exhibiting any form of zealotry, because this is not really about defending Ubuntu or Linux, since the blogger clearly doesn't even have a simple grasp on what using said OS is like and is basically talking out of his ***. As I said before, it would be a totally different story if the writer of the blog gave Linux or Ubuntu a fair shot, and THEN criticized it for the things it fell short on, rather than comparing things with pretty much no foundation.

When you buy something that you have no knowledge of, do you just call it crap before understanding why it won't do what you want it to ? Do you ever RTFM, or do you just attempt to figure out how it works and what it does based on something which might be similar to it, that you've used in the past ? Is that fair ? Do you realize how many links there are in relation to learning every aspect of how Ubuntu works ? In just this forum alone, there are probably hundreds of signatures which link to technical help or wikis with information and MORE links to guides and scripts and manuals for said information.

If this person did ONE freeking iota of reading, or cared just a LITTLE bit about genuinely learning, his blog wouldn't exist. Therefore, I can only come to the logical conclusion that it does exist, simply to spread FUD (in a most ineffective and immature way) and lambaste something because he and his crew have a personal agenda. You sensitive PC types really do miss the mark on these things, a lot.

[Mateo]

Did you even read the blog ? Your assessment of this is way off base. No one here is exhibiting any form of zealotry, because this is not really about defending Ubuntu or Linux, since the blogger clearly doesn't even have a simple grasp on what using said OS is like and is basically talking out of his ***. As I said before, it would be a totally different story if the writer of the blog gave Linux or Ubuntu a fair shot, and THEN criticized it for the things it fell short on, rather than comparing things with pretty much no foundation.

Go read my post on page 3, then read a few replies to it. I use Ubuntu (using it right now), do I count as someone who has "given Ubuntu a try" or am I an "idiot" like this blogger too. Look at the response to my criticism. That is fanboyism personified.

[salsafyren]

getdeb is a good idea but it only accounts for a very small percentage of the software not available in the repositories. it is the responsibility of Ubuntu, IMO, to make these software easily available in an easily installable format like DEB. So they should be making the packages and sending them to getdeb if that's the way they want to do it.

Nope, that's not the solution.

The developers of the software should make distro-neutral packages otherwise you are just wasting efforts.

If Linux developers cannot solve the problems of distro-neutral packages, I won't count on having Linux on the desktop on more than 5% on desktops. Sure it is hard problem, but come on, linux developers solved more problems than that.

Distro-neutral packages is something that Ubuntu should prioritize VERY high but they won't (read the gutsy forums).

[salsafyren]

Nope, that's not the solution.

The developers of the software should make distro-neutral packages otherwise you are just wasting efforts.

If Linux developers cannot solve the problems of distro-neutral packages, I won't count on having Linux on the desktop on more than 5% on desktops. Sure it is hard problem, but come on, linux developers solved more problems than that.

Distro-neutral packages is something that Ubuntu should prioritize VERY high but they won't (read the gutsy forums).

Quoting myself: I understand why Ubuntu "just" packages debs. Not enough resources.

[devnet]

Yer' a bit on the green side I see. I don't particularly LIKE being pessimistic, but over time have grown accustomed to it because of having been left little other choice. But hey, I'd love for you to prove that decency and patience with those whom show absolutely no reception to those characteristics in a person or group of people, is effective. Tell you what... You start (guinea pig of course) and I'll be right along side you in your mission, should this person seem to genuinely take an interest in your musings.

Just remember though, this is a person whom already has shown that he has no regard or respect for openness or truth. His only apparent goal is to bash something which he clearly doesn't even WANT to understand. I'm not just saying that because he even openly said it himself, but because every word he typed had a ring of disdain for everything with which he was not familiar. I say let him be. He, and his brethren will always be around no matter how hard you try and instill some sense of moral piety amongst them.

Yin/Yang. Black/White Good/Bad. Can't have one without the other. Somethings just NEED to exist. Remember that. If the whole world existed without there being any bad, we'd have no appreciation for the good. And while I can appreciate your agenda at its core, I think that it's a bit futile to try and change someone whom clearly doesn't want to change. It's like cigarette smoking. People only truly quit when they want to. Bah, enough of me, I think you get what I'm trying to say.

Green? Maybe to the Ubuntu Forums :)

I've been using Linux since the 1.2 branch of the kernel :) I learned *nix on a Solaris 2.0 box in the early 1990's and have been dabbling in web design since 1993. :D

I stay positive because that's what Linux needs me to do. I put the needs of Linux ahead of myself because that's what it needs me to do. I drop my disdain at the door and try to understand why people say and do the things that they do. I also remember the something that ESR said..."Rule 1 of writing software for nontechnical users is this: if they have to read documentation to use it you designed it wrong." I think this is true...and if so, I know we (as in Linux and you and I) can always improve.

Improving starts with an "I" :) and it's all about the perceptions held and displayed.

I do understand what you're trying to say...I think we understand each other. The thing I'd like you to take with you is this...good/bad, yin/yang, to smoke/not to smoke...choices. I've seen people who don't want to change figure it out...and it's absolutely amazing to see it happen. Once you've seen it one time...you try and duplicate it as often as you can. I've seen 65 year old grandmothers (retired as an MSOffice Certified professional) have the light go on and now she's hacking along with gimp and no viruses. It's those people and those that are like them...close minded, standoffish, etc. Those people make the best allies. That's why it's about choice....just like you and I have a choice to use or not to use free and open source software like Linux...I think we need to look at the choice we have to help people understand or write them off and give up on them.

I also understand that not everyone has the patience to do this...it's like school instructors...not every single one of them is good for every single individual. But if you get that special combination of teacher and student that works for the student...that student will remember what that teacher taught them for life and practice it...use it...live it.

Are you or I that teacher for someone? Could be...or it may be that we're not suited for that role. Whatever the case, we should support that role...because Linux as a whole benefits from it.

[MOS95B]

I actually use a lot of this guys arguments, albeit hopefully a lot more tactfully and intelligent sounding, when hardcore Linux fans tell everyone that has a Windows error "You must switch to Linux!!"

Linux is not for everyone. Heck, it may not even be for me, but I'm having fun with it right now.

But, to bash something as hard as he did just because "I don't understand it, and I don't want to" or using the rhetorical argument "Because MS sucks" just doesn't exactly make one sound like someone I want to take any sort of advice from.

Just my noobish 2 cents...

[scotty32]

In my world there are only three operating systems, Windows XP, Vista and Mac OSX and it will always be that way.

so, there wont be anything after vista?:lolflag:

[jrusso2]

Well when you have Mark Shuttleworth himself saying Linux is not ready for the desktop on the eve of its launch on Dell PC's then what do you expect others to think?

[Bou]

I actually use a lot of this guys arguments, albeit hopefully a lot more tactfully and intelligent sounding, when hardcore Linux fans tell everyone that has a Windows error "You must switch to Linux!!"

Yup. Guy has a point indeed, even if he's an ***. Some new kind of distro-neutral package should be created, that includes A) the program itself and B) its dependencies, and installs only the ones that are not installed yet and can't be found in the repos.

Probably not too practical, but useful as a last resort.

[Orkin]

As far as I can see both OS's have their benefits.

Ubuntu for me takes minutes to set up, I install it, answer all the questions just like windows, then restart and boot into the proper OS. This is really were the two start to differ, Ubuntu's software update package is brilliant, even if there is two hundred odd updates required I can just start the program and let them download to their hearts desire, in Doze this is not the case, I have to install millions of software updates (I resent the whole WPA as well) this involves constant restarting, probing and at times half an hour long installation and by the end of it I'm still not secure, no firewall, no decent web browser, nothing.

I dont see how they can complain about the lack of .exe file types in Ubuntu, we have .Deb's what can I say, you press install and most of the time it just works.

Ubuntu is also much faster on my machine than XP or 2k, it was even faster when only one of my two processors was active back when I was using dapper, hell even some of the games in Cedega work faster.

The real clinching point however (that the blogger dude has missed out on), is games support and professional software, no matter what people say Audacity and Gimp dont quite make up for the loss of Sonar and Photoshop, but they are free. Games are a mixed bunch, whilst you can install Cedega with the money you saved from not buying windows it doesnt quite work all the time, I've had very mixed results, games that it "supports" not working and others that it doesnt working great.

In terms of eyecandy, XGL/Beryl blows away even Vista, my machine "cant run" the fabled new Microsoft offering but it runs Beryl so smoothly its unbelievable - despite at times it being a tad unstable.

All that being said however, I've never had any problems with loss of sound in windows unlike Ubuntu, I've not been plagued by GRUB buggering up (numerous occassions) and the whole experience took me about a month too get used to (and I'm a bit of a nerd).

Anyway, thats my two cents.

[Sweet Spot]

Go read my post on page 3, then read a few replies to it. I use Ubuntu (using it right now), do I count as someone who has "given Ubuntu a try" or am I an "idiot" like this blogger too. Look at the response to my criticism. That is fanboyism personified.


I know that YOU use Ubuntu, and I know what your stance is on this whole thing. You're reading me wrong however, and you've also not read what I said carefully enough. If you have issues w anything in particular concerning Ubunbtu, I can at least take advice from you personally BECAUSE of the fact that you HAVE given Ubuntu a fair shot. When I started using Ubuntu, it was people such as yourself to whom I looked to for unbiased and balanced opinions.

No, you're not an idiot, and I honestly don't like stooping to the level of having to call anyone that, even someone who may be one.... But this person is simply acting like one, and I can only call em' like I see em'. This is NOT fanboyism sir. I actually still dual boot w/XP pro, and can't find fault with it for what I do with it. In fact, I'm typing this using my wife's laptop which I TRIED installing Ubuntu on (didn't work), and then had to install XP Pro on instead. It gives me ZERO problems, because I know how to use it.

So do I have reason to bash XP ? Nope. But do I have reason to encourage the use of Linux in the face of what's going on today in terms of DRM, privacy, security and being able to have healthy choices rather than being dictated to by big corporations ? You bet. And Ubuntu IMO is a fine model with which to start on. So should someone like this come along and throw in empty words which may even sway people who don't know any better, it gets me all worked up until I realize that this is just the way of things, and as much as I'd like to personally join a crusade to change it, I just don't have the time or energy. Besides, this person is likely very young, and will change his tune as he gets older (hopefully), unless he gets hired by MS of course !:)

[strabes]

The only reason this guy thinks that linux is hard is because it's different from windows. If he grew up on linux he'd think the same thing about windows. Sounds like a pretty typical digg user criticism to me.

[Iceni]

Why hate repos? The whole idea of having one update system for all my software is just great.

[jiminycricket]

As far as I can see both OS's have their benefits.

Ubuntu for me takes minutes to set up, I install it, answer all the questions just like windows, then restart and boot into the proper OS. This is really were the two start to differ, Ubuntu's software update package is brilliant, even if there is two hundred odd updates required I can just start the program and let them download to their hearts desire, in Doze this is not the case, I have to install millions of software updates (I resent the whole WPA as well) this involves constant restarting, probing and at times half an hour long installation and by the end of it I'm still not secure, no firewall, no decent web browser, nothing.

I dont see how they can complain about the lack of .exe file types in Ubuntu, we have .Deb's what can I say, you press install and most of the time it just works.

Ubuntu is also much faster on my machine than XP or 2k, it was even faster when only one of my two processors was active back when I was using dapper, hell even some of the games in Cedega work faster.

The real clinching point however (that the blogger dude has missed out on), is games support and professional software, no matter what people say Audacity and Gimp dont quite make up for the loss of Sonar and Photoshop, but they are free. Games are a mixed bunch, whilst you can install Cedega with the money you saved from not buying windows it doesnt quite work all the time, I've had very mixed results, games that it "supports" not working and others that it doesnt working great.



What about Ubuntu studio and things like Ardour 2? That's gotten rave reviews I think. Jokosher and Traverso look great too fo ralpha apps. I'm sure there will never be an exact Photoshop clone but maybe one day Adobe will port it; after all, MS is already moving in on their territory (Flash=Silverlight). In the meantime, there's Pixel and Krita and GIMP is working on GEGL for CMYK management.

BTW since you're running XGL and not AIGLX, I guess you're using ATI's crashy fglrx..not the best driver but it's some people's only choice for 3d, I know.

[mainalisuyog]

In terms of eyecandy, XGL/Beryl blows away even Vista, my machine "cant run" the fabled new Microsoft offering but it runs Beryl so smoothly its unbelievable - despite at times it being a tad unstable.

It does? I could never get beryl running smoothly on my system. Well actually, beryl runs, but then watching videos on fullscreen is impossible. And i used a friend's vista pc with similar configurations as mine, and the videos run very well on fullscreen too. Almost all multimedia programs in linux seem half baked (except amarok) and i honestly find vista much prettier and polished.

But hey, I love linux, and wouldn't use anything else! Hope things get better in future with wider adoption of linux desktop.

[jiminycricket]

^ the reason why videos don't work is because XGL is some kind of layer between two x servers. It's a hack from 2006 or 2005.

AIGLX is what is supposed to be used, but ATI is holding it back. fglrx doesn't support it.

[Foxmike]

Common users can't do that, it's not an option. Unless Ubuntu does this, then the criticism remains valid.

Untrue again, common users can at least compile softwares without too much braint-out. Common users can cook and follow recipies, the same applies to softwares compilation. And even if somebody don't want to compile, I guess a 6 month release cycle is still bether than a 5 years release cycle...

[Concorde]

I have been using Ubuntu for going on almost two months now. I actually prefer Ubuntu (or any Linux Distro) over Windows anytime. I can get my tasks done quicker and more efficiently then I could using Windows. I can leave my PC running for days and still come back and continue where I left off at with no problems. I just keep to the repositories and I am good to go. I do download zip files for the Pygame tutorials I am learning on my free time, but other than that, I just stick to the repositories.

To be honest, I have to chuckle inside when my co-workers come up to me and ask me to fix their computers because they have viruses or other malicious software infecting their systems I always try to tell them about the great benefits of Ubuntu and Linux, but let's just say that my point is usually mute about 99.9% of the time..

'sigh" some people are so closed-minded

Just my 2 1/2 cents,
Concorde

[Mateo]

Untrue again, common users can at least compile softwares without too much braint-out. Common users can cook and follow recipies, the same applies to softwares compilation. And even if somebody don't want to compile, I guess a 6 month release cycle is still bether than a 5 years release cycle...

compiling absolutely is too difficult for the common user. I think you're overestimating how computer knowledgeable the average user is. Let me give you an example, you might remember that before 7 or 8 years ago everything you downloaded came in a zip (or some other compression format). Self-extracting archives were rare. So a person had to extract the archive, then run the installer, or even copy the files to the final destination themselves. This was seen as too difficult for common users so they invented the self-extracting setup files that windows users know today.

Now compare that to compiling. There are several reasons why it's way too difficult:

1) A person has to know that they have to compile. You're a common user. You download a program you want to install. It comes in a tar.gz file. You look at it and say "WTF is this?" MAYBE you are smart enough to double click it, and file-roller opens and shows you te contents of the file. Maybe you are smart enough to look for something called "setup" or "install", and again this is not something common users can do because they couldn't even do it in windows.

2) Assuming you find out that you have to compile it, you don't know how.

3) If you manage to find out the ./configure , make, sudo make install (way beyond anything a common user could find out), if there happens to be any dependency errors, you don't know how to fix them. Dependency problems are extremely common when compiling. To deny this is lying.

4) To go with the above, a common user wouldn't know that they had dependency errors even if they had them.

5) If the user did find out that they had dependency errors (which they common user would not), they would not know how to get the dependencies.

6) The program might be written in python or some other format that doesn't install with ./compile, make, sudo make install. These install with different commands. The common user doesn't know how to install these (I don't even know how to install these, but I can usually figure it out eventually).

6) Even if it got installed correctly, and this is way beyond the ability of the common user who can't even extract zip files and move them to a permanent directory, they wouldn't know how to launch the program. Compiling doesn't make launchers in the application menu.

[Foxmike]

Before to continue, I think that you will have to define to me what is a common user, because I think you and I don't have same the same definition.

I also think you are over estimating the complexity of software compilation.

1) To compile a software, you have to find it. Where you find it? If you find it in synaptic, then you don't have to compile. Otherwise, anybody that has not any Linux knowledge will make a search over google, and chances are that user will end up a HOW-TO, explaining step by step the way to go.

2) I think that the first reflex of any computer user when you download something, (anything) is to double-click on the icon. Then, Magic, Fileroller pops up with the content of the file. Don't need to be genious!

3) If you look to the file list, you will find with UPPERCASE, README and INSTALL. Self explanatory.

As you would do with anything entering in the "Technology" category (computers, electronics, TVs), you will have little reading to do. Unless you are unpacking Open Office, the reading will be very little.

This is not sorcery. This is the common usage of a computer. Of course, you do this in the only case you want a specific package to do a specific job, but in that case I assume that you have a mimimum of knowledge and ability with computers.

Regards,

-FM

[aysiu]

I've never had to compile software from source, and I don't think I've ever done it successfully, even when I tried it for "fun."

Luckily, the repositories software more than meets my needs.

[rai4shu2]

I compile software from source all the time, but then again I also compiled software from source in Windows.

[bluenova]

You better switch to BSD...you can double click debs and rpms already and use kpackage. Which BSD derivative you going to?

Double clicking a deb is great! Having to click Next 9 times, which was the point I was making is not great.

[Mateo]

Before to continue, I think that you will have to define to me what is a common user, because I think you and I don't have same the same definition.

I also think you are over estimating the complexity of software compilation.

1) To compile a software, you have to find it. Where you find it? If you find it in synaptic, then you don't have to compile. Otherwise, anybody that has not any Linux knowledge will make a search over google, and chances are that user will end up a HOW-TO, explaining step by step the way to go.

2) I think that the first reflex of any computer user when you download something, (anything) is to double-click on the icon. Then, Magic, Fileroller pops up with the content of the file. Don't need to be genious!

3) If you look to the file list, you will find with UPPERCASE, README and INSTALL. Self explanatory.

As you would do with anything entering in the "Technology" category (computers, electronics, TVs), you will have little reading to do. Unless you are unpacking Open Office, the reading will be very little.

This is not sorcery. This is the common usage of a computer. Of course, you do this in the only case you want a specific package to do a specific job, but in that case I assume that you have a mimimum of knowledge and ability with computers.

Regards,


A person will find software usually using a search engine. So you google "instant message client linux" and you find one called "Joe's IM". You go to Joe's IM page and it looks like a fun program. You want it. Maybe you've used Ubuntu long enough that you've used synaptic before. So you open synaptic and type in Joe's IM. It's not there. So you go back to Joe's IM page and you find the download. It's source. You do like you say, you downloaded the file and double click it and fileroller opens. Maybe you're smart enough to read the INSTALL file.

But then you've lost the common user. INSTALL files are not simplistic, they are often lengthy and have a lot of different options that a person can compile with. Common user doesn't realize that he can just ./compile, make, sudo make install. Even if he eventually comes across it in the file, he doesn't know what these words mean. He doesn't know that he has to type them into the terminal. Install files don't say "type this in the terminal".

And again, this is completing ignoring dependency problems which are extremely common. Or if it's a python program you might have to do "python whatever.py install", which again, the common user doesn't know he has to do.

And again, this is ignoring that source code doesn't put a launcher in your Applications panel. The common user doesn't know how to launch a file except for this way.

[Mateo]

Double clicking a deb is great! Having to click Next 9 times, which was the point I was making is not great.

Let's see, you double click the deb (1), you click the install button (2), you type your password (5 to 10 keystrokes on average), you click ok (3), it installs and then you click the close button in the progress bar (4), then you click to close the deb install utility (5). So 5 clicks and between 5-10 keystrokes.

My guess would be this is the same for a typical windows install program. Off the top of my head there is the initial screen where you have to press next (1), then a screen where you have to agree to some type of agreement (2) and press next (3), then it says where it's going to install and you press next (4), it then installs and tells you its down and you must press finish (5).

[juxtaposed]

which will require installation of a dependency and sometimes the dependency requires a dependency, isn’t that lovely? No, no its not.

Linux handles dependencies much better then windows.

"You need directx to play this game"
Try to install directx...
"You need windows installer to install directx"
Try to install windows installer...
"You need to do windows genuine advantage, and you need internet explorer for that"
Blah.

On linux...

Double click a .deb, click install.


Not to mention all the programs you have to choose from for playing video/audio files to text editing, it’s almost too much.

Gasp, a choice! It's much better to let a corporation choose what software we use.


ot to mention how every single program on OSX or Windows has a far more polished feel to it and perhaps more usability as well,

Ha. Most windows programs are like cheap shareware oddly looking unpolished...


wouldn’t even bother with it because of THAT, it’s insane.

Yes, copy and paste, insane!


and make something like .exe files or .msi files and do away with repositories, dependencies, the whole system and start over.

Sure, instead of downloading from an extremely fast repository, you can download from some 10KBps shareware site. Yay.

The ubuntu package system is one of the best things about it, it just works.

[crimesaucer]

I'm a beginner, or at least have only used Linux since last October/November.

Back in December I easily compiled Conky 1.4.5 when Conky 1.4.2 was all that was offered in the repositories.

As long as there is a guide, or a "HOWTO", compiling is no problem. And even asking questions on the forum or using the forum search, or Google search will get you directions.

Most programs have a wiki page and install pages that have accurate directions of how to install their program for any distro, and usually they list every package that is needed to compile and install. And usually it is written in the simplest manor for beginners like myself.

EDIT- Mateo has a good point about not everything being easy, and some directions being a little confusing, but, if you jump on the forum and ask a question about compiling that certain program, usually someone will respond with the correct answer and you learn a little bit more about Linux.

[tbroderick]

Linux handles dependencies much better then windows.

Not really. Most .exe include all the needed dependencies. Same goes for PC-BSD's pbi.



Double click a .deb, click install.

As long as all the dependencies match up. Otherwise you might have to force install it. And sometime packagers miss dependencies or not all of the optional dependencies are installed. Or the binary is compiled without a certain switch on, so you have to download the source and compile yourself.


Gasp, a choice! It's much better to let a corporation choose what software we use.

Ubuntu makes some choices for you too, but at least it's easier to remove those choices then in Windows. I can see how new users might be overwhelmed.



Ha. Most windows programs are like cheap shareware oddly looking unpolished...

Only the cheap shareware programs.


Yes, copy and paste, insane!

Some people like to know what they are doing before they blindly copy and paste commands.


Sure, instead of downloading from an extremely fast repository, you can download from some 10KBps shareware site. Yay.

Why would you download from a shareware site? Why couldn't the same mirrors just mirror a web page where one could download software like the PC-BSD site.


The ubuntu package system is one of the best things about it, it just works.

It works great if you stick to the official repos, but I think something like PC-BSD's package system might be worth taking a look at.

[Mateo]

I'm a beginner, or at least have only used Linux since last October/November.

Back in December I easily compiled Conky 1.4.5 when Conky 1.4.2 was all that was offered in the repositories.

As long as there is a guide, or a "HOWTO", compiling is no problem. And even asking questions on the forum or using the forum search, or Google search will get get you directions.

Most programs have a wiki page and install pages that have accurate directions of how to install their program for any distro, and usually they list every package that is needed to compile and install. And usually it is written in the simplest manor for beginners like myself.

You're not the common user. In order to compile something you have to, at minimum, know the CD and LS (or DIR) commands before you can even read how-to instructions. The common user knows 0 commands and has no desire to learn any (they don't know what a command is, in fact). And as I already explained, a common user doesn't know what a "how-to" is. They have never heard of a how-to. So they don't know to even look for a how-to.

Compiling is simply not a viable option for the install-problem. Thinking it is is nothing short of delusion. Being delusional might make you feel better, but it doesn't help make the OS more accessible. Ubuntu, if they care about adding new users, should be hiring people just to make deb packages all day long.

[Foxmike]

You're not the common user. In order to compile something you have to, at minimum, know the CD and LS (or DIR) commands before you can even read how-to instructions. The common user knows 0 commands and has no desire to learn any (they don't know what a command is, in fact). And as I already explained, a common user doesn't know what a "how-to" is. They have never heard of a how-to. So they don't know to even look for a how-to.

Compiling is simply not a viable option for the install-problem. Thinking it is is nothing short of delusion. Being delusional might make you feel better, but it doesn't help make the OS more accessible. Ubuntu, if they care about adding new users, should be hiring people just to make deb packages all day long.

Again, what is the common user?

Untrue concernint LS and CD commands if you copy/paste commands into terminal.

The desire to learn /not to learn is different from user to user, we cannot assume what user want to learn /want not to learn.

Common user know read. How To is self explanatory.

True on the fact that compiling is not the best solution to provide to new users. But again, when I discovered Ubuntu Linux for the first time, the first thing that catched my attention was that "Add/Remove" menu at the bottom of the main menu. Installing a software was self explanatory. I became more aware of the different softwares options under Linux by reading and searching and trying things, and that reading/searching/trying learned me what I needed to compile softwares I discovered that way. I do not consider myself as genius, and when I first needed k9copy, I compiled it using a howto I found for the first time by google and it worked well. I am just saying that for somebody to come to compile a software, that person generally already has a good idea of what he/she will be needing. If not, that person will probably know where he/she will have best chances to get the needed information.

Again, what is a common user. A 5 years old child, my grandma, you, me? Am I a common user? How can you judge? Explain please.

Regards,

-FM

[DoctorMO]

Compiling is simply not a viable option for the install-problem. Thinking it is is nothing short of delusion. Being delusional might make you feel better, but it doesn't help make the OS more accessible. Ubuntu, if they care about adding new users, should be hiring people just to make deb packages all day long.

You know I don't think I care about adding new users if they're going to be that stupid. thankfully most people aren't and can learn to do what they want and make adult choices. stop whining because you have a gripe.

[juxtaposed]

Most .exe include all the needed dependencies.

I don't know about most .exe files or anything, but I know i've had more problems with dependencies in windows then linux.

Sometimes I would have to find obscure .dll or .ocx files.


As long as all the dependencies match up. Otherwise you might have to force install it. And sometime packagers miss dependencies or not all of the optional dependencies are installed. Or the binary is compiled without a certain switch on, so you have to download the source and compile yourself.

That's just never happened to me that I can remember. Maybe i'm lucky.

The only problem I have installing programs in linux is vmware. I've never been able to get it to install.


Only the cheap shareware programs.

One thing I found in windows was every little utility seemed to be just that, a cheap shareware program (cheap in quality, not in price, they normally were like 40$).

I find linux programs look much more polished. I don't know the technical stuff about it, but they just seem to look good.


Some people like to know what they are doing before they blindly copy and paste commands.

Well, in linux you can atleast find out what commands do. In windows you install something and you don't know what it is doing (linux package installers can show the terminal)


It works great if you stick to the official repos, but I think something like PC-BSD's package system might be worth taking a look at.

I don't know much about PC-BSD (except I was going to try it once, but didn't get around to it).

All I know is that i've tried how windows does it, and how ubuntu does it. I much prefer the way ubuntu does it.

[ticopelp]

Not to sound horribly elitist, but a user who comes to a new operating system with an attitude of "I refuse to learn anything whatsover, but demand a seamless user experience all the same" is probably best off sticking with the operating system of their choice. And, especially if learning a CD or LS command is too much for them, Linux might not be a good choice.

[Mateo]

You know I don't think I care about adding new users if they're going to be that stupid. thankfully most people aren't and can learn to do what they want and make adult choices. stop whining because you have a gripe.

There you go folks. Some people are so stubborn that they'd rather not have ubuntu become more popular than to admit that compiling from source is difficult for common users. This type of thinking comes from fanboyism; Ubuntu isn't just something they use, it's like religion. Like religion, you can't admit fault of any kind.

[saulgoode]

You're not the common user. In order to compile something you have to, at minimum, know the CD and LS (or DIR) commands before you can even read how-to instructions.

CLICK HERE to learn how to read a HOW-TO without using 'cd' or 'ls' (http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-Building-HOWTO.html). If your "common user" is capable of clicking on that link then your assertion is incorrect.


The common user knows 0 commands and has no desire to learn any (they don't know what a command is, in fact).

Does your supposed "common user" possess the skills required to Google the term "define:command"? For surely there is effectively no difference between typing words into a Google search box and typing a command in a terminal.


Compiling is simply not a viable option for the install-problem. Thinking it is is nothing short of delusion. Being delusional might make you feel better, but it doesn't help make the OS more accessible.

Does the technical delineation of what constitutes "compiling" provide any confrontation to a "common user"? When a user clicks on a button (or pastes a command into a terminal) to install a DEB package, does it matter whether the software is installed by extracting a "binary" file then performing some bookkeeping OR extracting a file, translating it from some "source" format to some "binary" format, and then performing some bookkeeping? Other than time-of-execution, the user perceives no difference between the two operations and your concern that he might actually be engaging in the activity of "compiling" is unfounded (a less refined person than myself might term it "delusional" :) ).

[jiminycricket]

Adam had an interesting article on this Windows/Mac expectation of the desktop:

Should your desktop be trivial? Part 1 (http://opinunix.blogspot.com/2007/04/should-your-os-be-trivial-part-1_24.html) | Part 2 (http://opinunix.blogspot.com/2007/04/should-your-os-be-trivial-part-2.html)

[Mateo]

Does the technical delineation of what constitutes "compiling" provide any confrontation to a "common user"? When a user clicks on a button (or pastes a command into a terminal) to install a DEB package, does it matter whether the software is installed by extracting a "binary" file then performing some bookkeeping OR extracting a file, translating it from some "source" format to some "binary" format, and then performing some bookkeeping? Other than time-of-execution, the user perceives no difference between the two operations and your concern that he might actually be engaging in the activity of "compiling" is unfounded (a less refined person than myself might term it "delusional" :) ).

A user doesn't need to use the terminal or type any commands whatsoever to install a deb.

[marym]

For the software that doesnt come pre-installed? Well ma and pa who check cnn.com and email their son in college dont apply, but for anyone else: isnt clicking a synaptic icon, searching, and choosing install from a TRUSTED source easier than endless googling to malicious pages infecting you with random spyware and then eventually finding an executable from god knows where that does go knows what? I think so.
.

On behalf of all mothers and fathers that use the Internet to check the BBC and email their sons, I take exception. I am trying to become proficient in the use of Ubuntu and have found the following - with varying degrees of success - to be complementary to my learning and useful:

a) abovementioned son, when he is not revising
b) google
c) these Ubuntu fora

Have any of you tried to solve a problem using the MS Windows troubleshooter!. Yes, you can click a toggle button, press next, go through a series of screens, then to be told it cannot help you anyway. At least with Ubuntu and the community there is a chance you can solve a problem!

Rant over

[tbroderick]

CLICK HERE to learn how to read a HOW-TO without using 'cd' or 'ls' (http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-Building-HOWTO.html). If your "common user" is capable of clicking on that link then your assertion is incorrect.

That is not a very good guide on compiling programs for Ubuntu. I don't think a 'common user' would find that very helpful.

[saulgoode]

That is not a very good guide on compiling programs for Ubuntu. I don't think a 'common user' would find that very helpful.

The point I wished to present was that a HOW-TO could be read without knowing shell commands; the actual content of the HOW-TO was inconsequential.

[Foxmike]

There you go folks. Some people are so stubborn that they'd rather not have ubuntu become more popular than to admit that compiling from source is difficult for common users. This type of thinking comes from fanboyism; Ubuntu isn't just something they use, it's like religion. Like religion, you can't admit fault of any kind.

Untrue. Ubuntu is an OS, not a religion. Maybe some people make it a religion, just as some people make Star Trek a religion, but I feel good to watch Star Trek just as a TV show as I feel good to use my computer with Ubuntu installed on it as a computer with Ubuntu installed on it.

Linux is about choices, and you have choice to use it or not, as you have choice to use it the way you want, to learn wat you want with it. I can easily imagine anybody knowing nothing about linux at all, in front of an Ubuntu install, using it without entering any command line at all and still be able to burn CD, chat on IM, fetch e-mails, listen music or videos, browse internet and doing any other task a "common user" (again, what is a common user???) would want to do with a computer.

The fact here is if someone migrates from Windows to Mac OSX (example here), that person might think that OSX is not easy to use just because it does not works like Windows. Same for somebody migrating from Windows to Linux.

When you try anything new, you have to learn a minimum of how it works. Just think about your VCR and imagine this is the first time in your life you have that kind of machine on front of you... now, are you a VCR specialist because you are able to program it to record that specific program? No, you are a "common user" that learned how your VCR is working and managed to make it worked. You have to agree that VCR menus are far from user-friendliness. Are people so genious because they have been able to learn it? No, they just did what a "common user" is doing in front of something new: learning how it works.

Regards,

-FM

[tbroderick]

The point I wished to present was that a HOW-TO could be read without knowing shell commands; the actual content of the HOW-TO was inconsequential.

Yeah, most people who use computers can read. I'd be more interested in knowing what your search terms were and how you picked that particular how-to over others. The problems a 'common user' faces, is not reading a how-to, but searching with the right terms and filtering out only what is helpful.

[aysiu]

If I had to compile programs from source, I wouldn't use Ubuntu.

But the repositories satisfy my computing needs.

[gashcr]

Amen

[tbroderick]

When you try anything new, you have to learn a minimum of how it works. Just think about your VCR and imagine this is the first time in your life you have that kind of machine on front of you... now, are you a VCR specialist because you are able to program it to record that specific program?

A VCR generally comes with one manual making it easier to learn how to use it and there are a limited amount of things to learn, whereas Ubuntu doesn't come with one manual, there are many parts and many manuals with many things to learn.

[crimesaucer]

You're not the common user. In order to compile something you have to, at minimum, know the CD and LS (or DIR) commands before you can even read how-to instructions. The common user knows 0 commands and has no desire to learn any (they don't know what a command is, in fact). And as I already explained, a common user doesn't know what a "how-to" is. They have never heard of a how-to. So they don't know to even look for a how-to.

Compiling is simply not a viable option for the install-problem. Thinking it is is nothing short of delusion. Being delusional might make you feel better, but it doesn't help make the OS more accessible. Ubuntu, if they care about adding new users, should be hiring people just to make deb packages all day long.

Why am I not the common user?

Do you want to know the sad truth...I never even owned a computer before October 21, 2005, and never had access to my own internet connection before Oct. 24,2005.

Before that, my computer experience was limited to public libraries and internet cafe, and I only knew how to use a yahoo email account because a Librarian showed me how and opened an account for me. I had maybe surfed the web using IE on a friend or roommate's computer, but before that I had stayed away from computers because I was busy with other things, like trying to become a professional snowboarder and surfer (1991-1999), and at night, my employment was as a chef, so I never needed a computer other then using someone else's to mess around on, or search craigslist for restaurant jobs.

So as soon as I finally got a laptop and an internet connection in late Oct of 2005, I spent a few months on my Windows Xp using IE and Outlook. In fact, I didn't even know how to configure my Outlook, or what a pop3 or smtp was? I had no idea what a .exe was or .jpg or what anything was that the "common user" would know.

I had wanted to learn html because friends and roommates of mine were web designers in San Francisco. So I actually took one of those Video Professor courses on html and learned a few things. Then I discovered a few more sites on html and css and the W3c tutorials, and began making my own html practice web pages using tables.

So, soon I found Firefox and Thunderbird, and shortly after I kept reading things about Linux. Durring that time I also got better at html/xhtml and began using css and saw how Firefox was better to write xhtml/css for then IE6.

I also kept seeing the penguin avatar and wondered what Linux was all about, and if it was anything like the way Firefox was compared to IE, then I knew I would want to switch.

So one day I StumbleUponed the ubuntu forums and home page. I read through it and liked what I saw. I even ordered the Breezy 5.10 live install CD and joined the forums. I liked the idea of learning how to know the inner-workings of my system like the way I had learned to write xhtml/css.

Well, at that point, I had advanced a lot in Windows Xp and had learned about sites like FileHippo and Softpedia....I had the best freeware and betas, and had tried some nice Vista shells called WindowsX, and also the Inspirato:Brico Pack. I had been using GIMP and I liked that program, so why wouldn't I like it's native OS? It's file system was also really easy to use with it's path bar.

I even burnt an ISO version of xubuntu edgy 6.0.6 beta, and installed it that early spring of 2006. Well, the early beta 1 was buggy and unstable, and I un-installed it and was told that I should try ubuntu anyway because it's easier for beginners.

Then my 5.10 live CD's showed up in the mail. I tried the live CD and I immediately hated it. My mouse was strange, my scroll functions didn't work, I was confused about installing programs.

I knew that if I had put time into it, I would learn, but I have to admit that I was turned off of ubuntu because of the 5.10 live CD. Plus, I had finally gotten to the point of knowing what I was doing in Windows, even cleaning out the registry and maintaining it to run smooth an fast.

But I also knew that 6.0.6 was out in a few days, and 6.10 was already being talked about, so, I figured I'd try that in a while, and maybe even some of the other Linux distros.

Well, after surfing that summer in California, I got back to the east coast and was bored, so I decided to give ubuntu another try. I downloaded, burnt, and installed a dual boot of the xubuntu 6.10 beta, and I played around with it for a week, and I actually gave it a chance.

And in that week, (which might be more time then most want to spend to get to know a new OS), I actually tried (and learned) to install all of the programs that I needed to use in xubuntu, for the same things that I used Xp for, and everything turned out to be really easy.

Even for a total beginner on xubuntu.

In fact, once someone linked me to the ubuntu 6.10 wiki page, everything became SUPER EASY.

If I had a question, I asked it and it was answered.

Now, I'm still a beginner, but after I learned a few things, I definitively preferred xubuntu. I've had my problems too, mostly from being a beginner and trying advanced things without much experience, like for example, when I first tried to install Beryl XGL when I should of used Berly AiGLX, and also, the Beryl install page had not included the install directions for XFCE4.4. But there were still pages on the ubuntu forum to help with that, and a few weeks later, Beryl had a beautiful page written for XFCE, GNOME, and KDE that made installing with XFCE only take 5 minutes. They were the simplest directions possible, with startup scripts and everything. Most all of them copy and paste.

And for my last point, I see it like this:

To want to use Linux, to have chosen a Linux distro like ubuntu, you probably wanted to learn about your computer as much as you wanted to just use it for the regular things like the web, email, media, torrents, lack of viruses, and free software. So why even argue the point of learning.

I learn something new everyday on xubuntu/ubuntu. I learned three things just from this thread alone. I had looked at the code for the installation of the Automatix2, and since it looked different then most codes that you add to your /etc/apt/sources.list.... I looked it up and learned a few things.

I found out that the echo command was for standard output, and that a pipe connects multiple commands together, and that the command tee was for accepting output from another command and sending it both to standard output and to files, and the -a option was for appending to files and not overwriting them.

So as a beginner, I would guess it's an easy way to use the terminal for adding the repository to my sources.list, with out having to open up my sources.list graphically using sudo mousepad, and then manually doing it myself with copy/paste/save. I haven't tried this yet, but I guess that it also shows the display in terminal.

I learned that using pipes ( | ), the standard output of one command is fed into the standard input of another. That the standard output directs its contents to the display, and a standard input by default gets its contents from the keyboard, but like standard output, it can be redirected with this <, just like standard output can be redirected with > or >> to append the redirected info. And then if you use | ,then you can connect commands together. I also learned I can use it in Google search instead of OR.

I am what I would consider an average computer user. No college, and only a little bit of computer class back in Elementary school in 1983 (20 goto 10 stuff), and a few English classes in Jr. High and High school that used computers. That's it.

....oh yeah, I hadn't mentioned that I was delusional. Whatever dude.



EDIT- Seriously, after thinking some more, what is a Common user? Someone that buys a computer for their first time, uses the installed OS and web browser, then learns of open source like Firefox and uses that instead, because they work better? And what would be the "Common user's" next progression?

An open source OS. Or would that be considered delusional?

[tbroderick]

If I had to compile programs from source, I wouldn't use Ubuntu.

But the repositories satisfy my computing needs.

Good to know.

[Foxmike]

If I had to compile programs from source, I wouldn't use Ubuntu.

Why not? Just curious.

Regards,

-FM

[aysiu]

Why not? Just curious.

Regards,

-FM As I said earlier, I've never had to compile a program before (i.e., for a program I actually use), but I did try it a couple of times just out of curiosity, and I've never been able to do it. I think I tried it for GIMPshop and LSongs. It involved a lot of dependency-hunting, since the dependencies were not in the repositories. And I don't think I ever successfully "made," in order to do the "sudo make install."

It was just annoying.

I had never been a big fan of setup.exe files in Windows, even when I was a Windows user, even when I was a Windows advocate (yes, I used to be). The minute I saw Synaptic Package Manager, I fell in love and haven't looked back. The discovery of extra repositories was just a bonus.

[bren21]

I agree that the 'common' Windows user would not be able to function correctly on Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution. I use the word 'common' to represent those who know very little about computers, and go crying for help when any error occurs. All they basically know how to do is double-click on an exe and have a program install by itself. There are a lot of people like this; in fact, go here (http://www.geeksquad.com/pricing/default.aspx#section3) and check out what the Geek Squad charges for some of the most basic things. I mean paying $30 to have a piece of software installed is just plain pathetic. But there are a LOT of people who can't do even the most trivial things on Windows. My sister, for example, does not even know how to connect to wireless internet on her laptop (in Windows). The network isn't even encrypted, all you have to do click connect!

Could most of the Windows users read tutorials and figure out how to install things on Ubuntu? Probably. But it is more time consuming and presents more issues than they want to figure out. The fact is, most people are just lazy (in America at least, I've never been anywhere else). Why would they want to switch to an operating system that takes more time and doesn't really have any advantages or benefits (in their eyes)?

[aysiu]

I agree that the 'common' Windows user would not be able to function correctly on Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution. I use the word 'common' to represent those who know very little about computers, and go crying for help when any error occurs.
But there are a LOT of people who can't do even the most trivial things on Windows. These two observations really go together. Yes, "the common Windows user" can't function on Ubuntu, but also can't function on Windows either. I see computer "illiterates" on Windows and Mac all the time. They'd be just as "illiterate" (i.e., apathetic about learning) when it comes to desktop Linux.

Just the other day, someone I knew wanted me to "fix" his computer because he couldn't log onto his bank's website. I thought the worst--it's a virus... some kind of weird spyware... maybe he's gone to some phishing site instead of his real bank...

Well, I sit in front of his Windows computer armed with my Knoppix CD and USB key, in case things are really bad. I see the error message (something about the security certificate not being valid), highlight it, copy it, paste it into a Google search... the second result gives me the answer. I'm done in less than two minutes.

He's shocked. "How did you fix it?" I answer that I just changed the clock on his computer from 2002 to 2007. Could he have highlighted the error and searched for it himself? Probably. Did he bother? Definitely not. This is how a lot of users are. Anything goes wrong and they feel helpless. The few times I've tried to teach such users to empower themselves and learn to troubleshoot (i.e., just do Google searches), I've been met with a lot of resistance. There's a group of users out there who almost pride themselves on thinking of computers as mystical magical objects instead of human-controlled machines. When they do this, though, they end up helpless victims of, as bren21 points out, Geek Squad or other computer maintenance scams.

[Iceni]

Wow, I could have been a millionaire if I charged those prices for me helping people:)

[orb9220]

Yep as aysui and bren21 pointed out I make my living off of lazy people.


I just saved my document where did it go?

"And how long have you been using Office and windowsXP?"


Uhhh about 6 years.

Also I use to get requests from many friends and family to help with the most basic things that they should already know!

So I have implemented the "Force them to Learn or Pay!" project..

1st 3 requests are free but you must repeat after me!
"I will spend 15-30 mins a day learning something new in windowsXP"
And I make them do it and warn them they are using up their freebies.

The 4th request will cost you $5
The 5th " " $8
After that it is $10/hr for friends and relatives and $20 for everyone else.

Now relatives and friends may also trade services and goods like running errands or picking up items for me.

It might sound a bit harsh or extreme but I am trying to:

1) Instill into the individual that Computer Expertise is a skill and should be appreciated. I don't know how many times that people I know would go out and buy a $100-200 piece of hardware and expect me to install for free.

2) It is in their financial best interest to learn about their system.
3) That being lazy is gonna cost you one way or another.

[Foxmike]

Well, I think that if the definition of a "common user" is someone that uses Windows day to day, for day-to-day business, then they shouldn't have any problems with Ubuntu Linux has it is.

I just can't figure out why somebody that manages:
- Antivirus
- Antispyware
- Firewall
- Defrag (if they ever do...)
- Security/software upgrade (again, if they ever do - try installing SP2 over XP....)

wouldn't be able to use an Ubuntu Linux workstation. As a said in a previous post, for 99% (if not 100%) of "common user common task" (ie web browsing, mail fetch, etc), there is absolutely no need for the command line. But the command line is there to ease troubleshoot a problem over forums and/or e-mail...

Of course, if you want to try out new software versions and you are no willing to wait less than 6 months, or if you want to go out of the "common user common tasks" then, would you still be considered "common user"?

Best regards,

- FM

[FuturePilot]

Well, I sit in front of his Windows computer armed with my Knoppix CD and USB key, in case things are really bad.
Ahh, two great tools. I've found myself in a similar situation and wish I would have brought that Knoppix CD with me. I think I'm going to start carrying it wherever I go now:lolflag:

[SBFC]

Dude, why did you post that link? I just spent the last half hour posting a very constructive comment. ;)

Seriously though, that was pathetic (the blog entry I mean).

It's one of those standard reviews, you know, "I'm going to review another OS with an extremely biased viewpoint!"

[tbroderick]

It's one of those standard reviews, you know, "I'm going to review another OS with an extremely biased viewpoint!"

It's not a review, it is an opinion piece.

[SBFC]

My apologies.

"I'm going to give my opinion on another OS with an extremely biased viewpoint!"

[steven8]

My apologies.

"I'm going to give my opinion on another OS with an extremely biased viewpoint!"

I thought it was a review/opinion piece. :lolflag:

[dspari1]

I'm guessing this guy doesn't know that a .deb file pretty much does the same thing as an .msi OR that dependencies are automaticlly* downloaded and installed instead of having to go on google to hunt down a specific dll file. He doesn't know that automatix is available in a .deb format and will install all the codecs needed without even having to type any commands at all.

Each new release of Wine, CrossOver, and Cedega keeps on making it easier to never go back to Windows. I do have some complaints(specifically installing midi synth) that needs to be addressed for the normal user, but so far I have been having a good time.

[xyz]

...even the cat yawns...

[zgornel]

What's the point of this discussion ? There is no point of taking into consideration these opinions.

[stimpack]

I would probably slag off linux if it could generate this many ad clicks. Leave the guy to big shiney easy to press buttons like this;

http://www.retrogames.co.uk/stock/assets/images/HH_-_Speak___Spell.jpg

And let it drop, no more ad clicks!.

[dpmccoy]

Gosh, I guess I should stop using Ubuntu and go back to my old Color Computer 3; at least I don't have to worry about resolving dependencies on that computer! :roll:

[DNSBubba]

His one actual valid point is in the title of the piece. "Ubuntu is not ready for most, even from Dell."

His comparisons of Linux to Windows aside (It's a foolish one to make, even if it is common), your average computer user isn't ready for Linux of any variety.

Think of all your die-hard Windows friends, family and co-workers. Would you trust them to do an install of Ubuntu, unassisted? I wouldn't. Heck, I wouldn't let them even TRY to configure their system to boot from the CD/DVD drive, much less do the install.

As for usability, he somewhat has a point. I mean, if people could handle their own installs and had the sort of in-depth knowledge of their system that Linux requires, then things like Geek Squad wouldn't be in business.

The biggest issue I have with articles like this is the apparent assumption that those who develop Linux and Linux programs, as well as those who use it, want every single person on the planet to switch to Linux right now, as if it's some sort of technological jihad.

Personally, I don't. I have an innate sense of pride in having been able to get Linux up and running on my system, and configuring it the way that I want it to be. I like the fact that you need a certain level of expertise to install and use Linux.

Heck, I'm a 20 year computer veteran, have a degree in computer science and I'm MCSE certified. I still have been coming on these forums almost everyday since I installed looking for advice and help.

I like being part of a community wherein almost every member has as much (and very many have more) computer knowledge than I do. It's like going to an exclusive tech school, and not paying a dime for it.

So, let those who want and have to use Windows do so. Let them deal with the issue's we never have to even see, and we'll (all of us, together) deal with the issue's they can't even begin to understand, much less fix.

To me, Linux is an OS for those of us who not only know better, but for those who know more.

[aysiu]

His one actual valid point is in the title of the piece. "Ubuntu is not ready for most, even from Dell."

Think of all your die-hard Windows friends, family and co-workers. Would you trust them to do an install of Ubuntu, unassisted? I wouldn't. Heck, I wouldn't let them even TRY to configure their system to boot from the CD/DVD drive, much less do the install. Uh, but it if it's from Dell, you don't need to install it. That's the whole point. I wouldn't trust my friends, family, and co-workers to install Windows either.


As for usability, he somewhat has a point. I mean, if people could handle their own installs and had the sort of in-depth knowledge of their system that Linux requires, then things like Geek Squad wouldn't be in business. The Geek Squad is in business mainly for Windows, so that actually says more about Windows' usability... or people's (lack of) investment in learning how to manage their own computers, regardless of operating system.

[DNSBubba]

Uh, but it if it's from Dell, you don't need to install it. That's the whole point. I wouldn't trust my friends, family, and co-workers to install Windows either.

The Geek Squad is in business mainly for Windows, so that actually says more about Windows' usability... or people's (lack of) investment in learning how to manage their own computers, regardless of operating system.

What I was referring to is the relative ease of installing Windows, and the users who do so, as oppsed to Linux. I was speaking more to their frame of mind than anything else. Sorry if that wasn't as clear as it could be.

As for Geek Squad, I'm very aware of what their for, having been a Lead Technician for them in the past. However, again I was speaking to the mindset of those that use that sort of service, which you touched on.

If your unwilling to even upgrade your own memory, or video card, then chances are Linux is going to be quite beyond you.

[aysiu]

But I guess what I'm challenging is the idea that "Linux is beyond" somehow implies "you shouldn't use it."

For a lot of these users (Geek Squad customers, for example), anything computer-related is "beyond" them, even Windows. Yet, they still use Windows.

Not understanding something doesn't preclude using it.

[DNSBubba]

But I guess what I'm challenging is the idea that "Linux is beyond" somehow implies "you shouldn't use it."

For a lot of these users (Geek Squad customers, for example), anything computer-related is "beyond" them, even Windows. Yet, they still use Windows.

Not understanding something doesn't preclude using it.

I absolutely agree. However, most of the sort of person we're talking about don't see themselves as computer user's so much as program user's.

I would like more people to become as knowledgeable about computers as most of the people on here, but it's not going to happen.

Computers have passed into the main stream as a personal appliance, not that different from a television, and changing that mindset is going to be all but impossible for many.

[aysiu]

You're absolutely right, but if they can use all the same (or similar) programs in Ubuntu, then I'd switch them to Ubuntu just for security purposes. Argue that it's a smaller market share or whatever the reasons are--at the moment, and probably for the next five years at least, Ubuntu users will have less malware to worry about than WIndows users.

[DNSBubba]

You're absolutely right, but if they can use all the same (or similar) programs in Ubuntu, then I'd switch them to Ubuntu just for security purposes. Argue that it's a smaller market share or whatever the reasons are--at the moment, and probably for the next five years at least, Ubuntu users will have less malware to worry about than WIndows users.


I think one of the best ways to convert someone, which you kind of touched on, is to convert those who have already had major issues with Windows. The person who just lost a ton of data to a virus is a prime candidate for trying Linux.

The problem, as it is with many things, is education. It's easy to set someone up on Ubuntu, and show them how to use the package manager to get new software, but the first time they can't figure out how to change their icon's font color, and they realize they'll have to spend some time at the terminal, they're going to have an issue with being on Linux.

The author's assertion that Windows is easier is true on many levels. However that ease of use has led to the very lack of a true desire for many to find out as much about their system as, say, those of us here.

The average person just doesn't see their computer as something to fiddle with, or something to experiment on. To date, Linux has had just that reputation.

In my opinion, and Microsoft can take my Cert's if they like, Linux is a better OS on most levels. But, it does need work on ease of usability and consistency across applications.

Ubuntu appears to be a huge step in that direction, but I still would not be comfortable setting some of my friends up on it, and most of my family.:p

[aysiu]

The first step in any conversion is exposure. I would definitely start them off by getting them used to using open source programs in Windows first (Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, GIMP, Audacity, Frostwire). Once they got used to those, they'd be a lot more open to switching to Ubuntu because they'd be using the same applications.

The main problems (the main reasons I can't "convert" anyone I know to Ubuntu) are fear of the unknown and the lack of desire to learn anything new. It's not that Ubuntu is harder than Windows but that it is different from Windows. Package management is actually a more beginner-friendly model of software installation than setup.exe files from random places on the internet (forcing beginners to search on the internet for software, find out what is free, what is not free, what's a free trial, what might have spyware or not, what the license agreement really means), but if people are used to setup.exe files, they'll find it hard to get used to a new paradigm.

[dan171717]

what a load of bulshit imean he talks about repositories being alein it is just a word for a server where you can dowload stuff and using synaptip is better than a .exe installer anyway

[DNSBubba]

The first step in any conversion is exposure. I would definitely start them off by getting them used to using open source programs in Windows first (Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, GIMP, Audacity, Frostwire). Once they got used to those, they'd be a lot more open to switching to Ubuntu because they'd be using the same applications.

The main problems (the main reasons I can't "convert" anyone I know to Ubuntu) are fear of the unknown and the lack of desire to learn anything new. It's not that Ubuntu is harder than Windows but that it is different from Windows. Package management is actually a more beginner-friendly model of software installation than setup.exe files from random places on the internet (forcing beginners to search on the internet for software, find out what is free, what is not free, what's a free trial, what might have spyware or not, what the license agreement really means), but if people are used to setup.exe files, they'll find it hard to get used to a new paradigm.

I agree that your method of conversion would work, for someone who was open to it. But, trying to convert someone who isn't having any problems with Windows is problematic at best, as you alluded to in your 2nd paragraph.

I also think package management is a great alternative, and I think most full-time Windows user's would agree if they tried it. But, then again, we're back to exposing someone to something new, which we both seem to agree can be like pulling your own teeth.

Personally, I think that 60 to 70 percent of current Windows user's would benefit from switching to Linux, and to Ubuntu specifically.

I also think, and you seem to agree, that most won't do it unless they have to. The ones that would do it just because, well, they're probably already here.:)

[Knowles]

He's just another tech noobie being 'controversial'

[Hendrik-Jan]

1. st im a LINUX noob (2days old) and proud of it.. installed ubantu and got internet and beryl going.

how many windows noobs are proud ????

2. Ive been downing pirated soft for years..yeah i cant afford it--- feels like its free after a while....
made me feel kinda ugly so the feeling of fresh great software for free was inspiring.

--- main point ---

Ubuntu frees me of that ugliness of pirating and i prefer to ---- work less at learning a couple of
lines of code --- than working more to pay a program that will grow old in 6 months.

----------------------

3. Learning a bit of LINUX and Ubuntu and knowing how to set it up and get the internet giong
is a MAJOR PLUS for anybodies CV people will be impressed...

Whens the last time anybody was impressed at knowing how to insatall windows... eheheh

4. Feels like my good old C-64 amiga days all over again... i actually feel like im discovering a gold mine
and not being spoonfed iron bulk.

5. Give it time... there will be a day when it will be click and go....so whast thats good.
you know it will happen its called progress... but along the way well find out how to do it safely
and cleanly ....while big money will be bogging the ol microsoft machines down with spycrap.

Either way you look at it... Linux Ubuntu has a possitive aura to it. use the force ! shuold be a linux motto.

im so excited about all this... its soooo coool.. hehe !!

Hendrik-Jan Rio de Janeiro Brazil

[DNSBubba]

It's funny that we're talking about this, as I just recieved my copy of Maximum PC today, and right on the cover was "Get started with Linux The Easy Way!"

A quick perusal of the article in question, and sure enough it's all about installing and configuring Ubuntu FF.

Worth a look if you want to pick the mag up.

[crimesaucer]

1. st im a LINUX noob (2days old) and proud of it..
Hendrik-Jan Rio de Janeiro Brazil

After seven months on xubuntu, I still consider my self a total beginner. I Learn new things everyday, and that makes me feel proud.

Every thing that I've done with my xubuntu install has left me with feelings of accomplishment.

Correctly installing Beryl, compiling Conky 1.4.5, writing your own .conkyrc, modifying your own gtkrc theme, making your own matching Emerald themes, this is just the beginning...you'll keep getting that proud feeling every time you put the effort into your ubuntu install.

At least that's how it is for me. Not to mention that my xubuntu just feels better, and faster then my Windows Xp ever has.

[DoctorMO]

After seven months on xubuntu, I still consider my self a total beginner. I Learn new things everyday, and that makes me feel proud.

After I've worked out this __str__ bug in python classes I'll feel proud too, I don't think it ever goes away even after years and years.

[argie]

I'd take this blogger seriously if he knew what he was talking about. On my Dapper box a .deb works like a .msi except better and faster. Double click, grant admin privileges, and done. That "Linux needs to move from the command line" bull I've had enough of.

Sometimes I wonder if there's a machine out there that takes old blog posts about Linux, extracts random sentences, sticks them together and makes a new blog post out of that.

[23meg]

Sometimes I wonder if there's a machine out there that takes old blog posts about Linux, extracts random sentences, sticks them together and makes a new blog post out of that.

I've been thinking about making a text generator that spits out random "Linux desktop readiness" posts, similar to the Postmodern Essay Generator (http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo). Maybe it's been done already.

But then there's the scary possibility that people like this blogger will actually use it to create more FUD, and the even scarier possibility that others will swallow the bait and get worked up over it.

[MOS95B]

I'd take this blogger seriously if he knew what he was talking about. On my Dapper box a .deb works like a .msi except better and faster. Double click, grant admin privileges, and done. That "Linux needs to move from the command line" bull I've had enough of.
Granted, I'm pretty new to this whole *nix thing, but I've installed, and uninstalled, several programs on my new Ubuntu machine. I think I've had to use command line a grand total of once. Everything else has been exactly as you stated, pretty much just point and click. So, yeah, that argument just doesn't hold water with me either.....

[pirothezero]

Just curious before Apple's Intel switch was the was standard file install or what is it still on max os x? Do .exes work on a mac?

Seems like they had the same way to install software, and if they didn't holy **** my admiration grows from 1 percent to 3-4 percent because thats not an easy thing to do to push on to people.

[Old Pink]

Linux needs to abandon command lines most importantly and make something like .exe files or .msi files and do away with repositories, dependencies, the whole system and start over.

What the hell?! Using the Add/Remove software to browse the respositories is one way of staying away from the command line! Hypocrite. And he hasn't even tried a .deb file? :(

Basically "Linux wants to stop being good and be Windows" Just use Windows, and shut the **** up. :mad:

[mrgnash]

His blog post, is far too verbose. Let me distill the essential message:


I'm an idiot, 90% of "the population" are idiots. Linux is bad because it makes our brains hurt. Therefore, idiots will not buy Linux, so it will never be successful.

[mijj]

Not to sound horribly elitist, but a user who comes to a new operating system with an attitude of "I refuse to learn anything whatsover, but demand a seamless user experience all the same" is probably best off sticking with the operating system of their choice. And, especially if learning a CD or LS command is too much for them, Linux might not be a good choice.

translation: if anyone has expectations of working with Ubuntu without too much effort they may as well not bother with Ubuntu.

I think that could be inscribed on Ubuntu's gravestone.

(the orginal expression was an exagguration to make the user-in-difficulty seem to have irrational expectations).

There's lots of this attitude in this thread.

The "defence" of Ubuntu seems to be touching on hysteria. This kind of "defence" actually undermines what Ubuntu is trying to achieve.

Personally ... i think there's a fear from the Linux-fluent about making it seamless for teh novice. Losing the need to hack around with config files and command lines and avoiding the need for esoteric knowledge of linux structures to get things working will mean that their level of guruness will no longer be appreciated by the novice.

[aysiu]

translation: if anyone has expectations of working with Ubuntu without too much effort they may as well not bother with Ubuntu. Or buy Ubuntu preinstalled.

[rai4shu2]

This whole thread is one big troll. Trolls make a living from spewing lies. Simple as that. This blogger is a troll. By all means, lets just keep talking about these lies and not getting anywhere because all it does it stir up more irritation from people who know better and offers other trolls the opportunity to label us as fearful or insensitive.

A troll is a troll. Let's not keep shutting our eyes to this fact.

[ticopelp]

translation: if anyone has expectations of working with Ubuntu without too much effort they may as well not bother with Ubuntu.

I think that could be inscribed on Ubuntu's gravestone.

(the orginal expression was an exagguration to make the user-in-difficulty seem to have irrational expectations).

There's lots of this attitude in this thread.

The "defence" of Ubuntu seems to be touching on hysteria. This kind of "defence" actually undermines what Ubuntu is trying to achieve.

Personally ... i think there's a fear from the Linux-fluent about making it seamless for teh novice. Losing the need to hack around with config files and command lines and avoiding the need for esoteric knowledge of linux structures to get things working will mean that their level of guruness will no longer be appreciated by the novice.

Well, I think it depends on your definition of "too much effort." I think a certain amount of effort in learning a new operating system is inevitable; if a user is going to demand a user experience completely identical to the one they've had before, it seems to me that switching operating systems might just be unnecessary.

Don't misunderstand me; I'm all for making the Ubuntu experience as seamless, pleasant, and low-effort as possible for new users, but there has to be a certain amount of cooperation from the user. No amount of (and I hope you will forgive my use of this term) "idiot-proofing" is going to completely spare the user from having to relearn certain habits and do a few things differently. If a user is so invested in their experience being exactly like their previous operating system (whatever it happens to be), then they should probably stick with it and just try to be as productive as possible with that OS instead.

I'm not a big believer in single-OS theory. I don't believe any one OS is superior to another. In my house, I have an Ubuntu box, an XP machine, two Powerbooks, and a Vista laptop. All of them serve their purposes. Computers are tools, and people should use tools in the way that suits them best.

I have no guruness to protect. I just think people should be willing to learn, instead of demanding other people make it so they don't have to learn. I don't think that's so unreasonable, and I don't think it makes me a zealot.

[mijj]

I think there may be a problem in Ubuntu chasing Windows in an effort to win over windows users.

If the look and feel is too similar to windows, then the casual "let's give it a try" Ubuntu tester will expect it to work like windows, and anything that is different will seem like a fault (even if it's actually a good tool - like the synaptic package manager - it will be interesting to see how this evolves). Followed, of course, by invitations to go away if they dont like it from the Ubuntu fanatics.

Ubuntu needs a paradigm that fits with the way the user will need to work with it - the current de facto paradigm seems to be: "we're as good as Windows". This means that when Ubuntu works ok you're in the happy familiar visual medium of windows and menus and selectable options. But when you need to get into the machine ... it's a completely different world and it's a culture shock. There needs to be a paradigm shift which reflects the reality of having to deal with the machine. The Ubuntu system should have as part of its ethos a notion of graceful descent into the machine. ... anyhoo ... What I mean is ... erm, for example ... say ... I mean view the pc as layered machine rather than a desktop with documents.

... does that make sense?

[DNSBubba]

I think there may be a problem in Ubuntu chasing Windows in an effort to win over windows users.

If the look and feel is too similar to windows, then the casual "let's give it a try" Ubuntu tester will expect it to work like windows, and anything that is different will seem like a fault (even if it's actually a good tool - like the synaptic package manager - it will be interesting to see how this evolves). Followed, of course, by invitations to go away if they dont like it from the Ubuntu fanatics.

Ubuntu needs a paradigm that fits with the way the user will need to work with it - the current de facto paradigm seems to be: "we're as good as Windows". This means that when Ubuntu works ok you're in the happy familiar visual medium of windows and menus and selectable options. But when you need to get into the machine ... it's a completely different world and it's a culture shock. There needs to be a paradigm shift which reflects the reality of having to deal with the machine. The Ubuntu system should have as part of its ethos a notion of graceful descent into the machine. ... anyhoo ... What I mean is ... erm, for example ... say ... I mean view the pc as layered machine rather than a desktop with documents.

... does that make sense?

I couldn't agree more. Instead of perusing the "just as good as Windows" track, it should be more akin to the Windows/Mac difference's. We should be using the positive aspects of Linux, and Ubuntu specifically, to encourage other to make the change, if we in fact want others to make that change.

[mijj]

Instead of perusing the "just as good as Windows" track, it should be more akin to the Windows/Mac difference's. We should be using the positive aspects of Linux, and Ubuntu specifically, to encourage other to make the change, if we in fact want others to make that change.

Actually .. now you mention it ... i think a Windows/Mac v. Ubuntu = Xbox/Playstation v. Wii might be an analogy worth considering for Ubuntu.

I.e. the wii success was based on not chasing down the same path as those with vast resources. The circumstances of Wii development forced a change of tack that led to an evolution of the games machine. Maybe facing the circumstances of Ubuntu (and linux) could force a change of path that would be equally successful.

note: re games machine evolution: xbox and sony tout having more dots on the screen and the processor working faster as evolution ... that's just more of the same .. not evolution at all. Adding an extra dimension to interaction is evolution.

[ticopelp]

If the look and feel is too similar to windows, then the casual "let's give it a try" Ubuntu tester will expect it to work like windows, and anything that is different will seem like a fault (even if it's actually a good tool - like the synaptic package manager - it will be interesting to see how this evolves).

I agree totally. Very insightful.

I think a lot of the defensiveness on these forums comes as a natural (if unfortunate) reaction to complaints... the community here, as far as I can tell, exists to try to help and support people who are getting into Ubuntu, not justify its existence to people who clearly aren't interested in trying to make it work. I think it sets up a regrettable cycle of frustration and resentment.

[DNSBubba]

Agreed.

[Loki-uk]

I've been in IT a long time and tech support for a few years and Linux isn't ready for the average user. I use Vista/Ubuntu and they both have their advantages but I have to say Vista has more and is easier for the average user. But I will try to do my little bit to move Ubuntu towards that goal where it's as easy as windows but right now thats a long way off......

Don't get drawn into that argument and don't be blinkered about which OS is (for now anyway) better supported and easier to use. If someone winds you up with and article that you don't like use that passion to improve Ubuntu.

Loki

[UI-Freak]

So someone doesn't like Ubuntu and linux... so what....

[yanovitchsky]

i found an interesting article on this website http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
You should read it. it says linux is not windows.

this is the end of the article which i found really interesting


"Linux is not interested in market share. Linux does not have customers. Linux does not have shareholders, or a responsibility to the bottom line. Linux was not created to make money. Linux does not have the goal of being the most popular and widespread OS on the planet.

All the Linux community wants is to create a really good, fully-featured, free operating system. If that results in Linux becoming a hugely popular OS, then that's great. If that results in Linux having the most intuitive, user-friendly interface ever created, then that's great. If that results in Linux becoming the basis of a multi-billion dollar industry, then that's great.

It's great, but it's not the point. The point is to make Linux the best OS that the community is capable of making. Not for other people: For itself. The oh-so-common threats of "Linux will never take over the desktop unless it does such-and-such" are simply irrelevant: The Linux community isn't trying to take over the desktop. They really don't care if it gets good enough to make it onto your desktop, so long as it stays good enough to remain on theirs. The highly-vocal MS-haters, pro-Linux zealots, and money-making FOSS purveyors might be loud, but they're still minorities.

That's what the Linux community wants: an OS that can be installed by whoever really wants it. So if you're considering switching to Linux, first ask yourself what you really want.

If you want an OS that doesn't chauffeur you around, but hands you the keys, puts you in the driver's seat, and expects you to know what to do: Get Linux. You'll have to devote some time to learning how to use it, but once you've done so, you'll have an OS that you can make sit up and dance.

If you really just want Windows without the malware and security issues: Read up on good security practices; install a good firewall, malware-detector, and anti-virus; replace IE with a more secure browser; and keep yourself up-to-date with security updates. There are people out there (myself included) who've used Windows since 3.1 days right through to XP without ever being infected with a virus or malware: you can do it too. Don't get Linux: It will fail miserably at being what you want it to be.

If you really want the security and performance of a Unix-based OS but with a customer-focussed attitude and an world-renowned interface: Buy an Apple Mac. OS X is great. But don't get Linux: It will not do what you want it to do.

It's not just about "Why should I want Linux?". It's also about "Why should Linux want me?""

[jfrancis]

I am still very new to Ubuntu, having recently cut the cord to windows (and it feels real good!).

To me, it is perfectly clear that Windows is Windows and Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Not Ubuntu is Windows or vice versa. Where people get the belief that one is in existence purely to replace the other, I have no idea. Yes, they're both OS's but they're not clones of one another, they're just (for convenience) compatible in common areas (like same hardware and support of same file types).

Comparison can and will be made regardless. Its all good I guess... have an opinion just don't be an *** :)

[454redhawk]

http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/05/06/ubuntu-is-not-ready-for-most-even-from-dell/


The guy hit the nail on the head with that article.


But hey. Linux works for me anyway.

[mijj]

Windows is sewing up the market for the unintellingent and ignorant (as a technical term, not an insult) pc use.

Ubuntu shouldnt try to compete with that.

However, at teh moment Linux flavours are primarily for the intelligent and knowledgable (i.e. tech savvy) pc users.

Ubuntu might do best if it was aimed at the intelligent but ignorant pc user. i.e. provide the usual windows type interface, but dont leave teh user in the lurch when the slick interface doesnt supply the goods. There needs to be UI support for dealing with tech stuff built into Ubuntu when the simple menu selection procedure fails - but before the user descends into the pit of trawling the internet for obscure guides on weird command line instructions.

plus ...

.. the big thing about Linux flavours is supposed to be the community.

So how come this isnt built into the interface? ... e.g. some kind of structure to the ubuntu forum which can be reflected in help menus. ... just a thought.

[maxxum]

Well, not for the reasons he suggests, but I agree with him that Linux is not ready for the common mass. It is and probably will remain the OS for enthusiasts. I have doubts that Dell will see much success with its Ubuntu venture.
I mean, expecting to get a free OS and have it work flawlessly is probably too much to ask. But linux, even the supposedly easiest one, Ubuntu is wayy to hard to even get running, if one is not lucky. I used 6.06 for a while (after getting it to work on my dell with the ATI card and using the workaround for fglrx). I wanted to upgrade to 6.10 but my fglrx workaround does not work, so no luck. Then when 7.04 came out, I upgraded only to see to my horror the now infamous "tty error: job control turned off" which has not been resolved convincingly for all users. I tried workarounds that worked for others but they did not work on my simple dell computer. Hey, it is free but only in terms of money, not in terms of the time you invest to get it to just run, and the troubles. As mush as I want to get away from it, guess I'll have to go with windows, for at least it boots.
Another downside of a free OS is that no one is obligated to help you find a solution, people will be 'nice enough' to offer what they know but if it doesn't work, you're pretty much on your own.
Linux won't be for the common people, or even for some like me who want to learn but get frustrated after several tries and perhaps will give up soon.

[Extreme Coder]

@maxxum:
Lots of people have mixed experiences with Linux. The only problem with your experience so far, is with the fglrx drivers. And Ubuntu or any distro developers are not to be blamed for that, only the ATI developers.
" I mean, expecting to get a free OS and have it work flawlessly is probably too much to ask."
No, it's not too much to ask for. If it didn't work (or almost) flawlessly, many other people, including me, wouldn't have been here. Not only cheapskates use Linux you know :=/
Having Linux pre-installed on PCs already would make the configuration point moot.

Extreme Coder

[Sweet Spot]

I had an idea. A scenario actually....

Let's say that nobody on the planet used either Linux OR Windows OS's. Also, let's drop Apple stuff, and pretend that we've all been using some OS which totally differs in terms of looks, and functionality all together. Now, we've been using this OS for a good 20 years and all of a sudden, we hear on the news that there are two new OS's available.

People run, scream and party like it's 1999..... And after all the commotion dies down, people visit the respective OS's websites, and are told that they're allowed a trial version, good for one year of the OS.

Also, I figure a year because let's now assert that each OS has plenty of documentation on it, which needs to be read. Now....

As far as installations go, let's not even think about dual booting just yet. Let's just have our users install one OS per machine. Also, let's allow unlimited licenses across a network. This way, I don't have to get into the "giving away free PC's with both OS's installed" scenario, that one seems too costly for me, even in a fantasy ! :)


We're allowed to download both Vista and Ubuntu in their true, current states, and the documentation which we have to learn from is, well, everything that is actually available on any website which exists today, as well as the read-me files on both OS's.

A year has passed. What is the conclusion that you have come to ? Try and be as unbiased as possible, please.

Doug

[maxxum]

Doug,
If I liked Vista, I wouldn't be here. LOL.
I mean, its nice looking and all but its boring and annoying. In a scenario like you mention, if a Vista dvd was available and a Ubuntu CD along with it and I popped each of them in my Dell, I would use the one that worked!

I even tried to go back to my old Dapper. It won't work (even with the fglrx patch) anymore, probably because I upgraded my LCD from 20in to a 24in one (both DELL LCDs).

There is a fix for fglrx for edgy as well. But the problem is, it can only be applied when you get a command prompt, which edgy does not give me after it fails to start the x-server(though dapper does).

No, my problems are not only due to fglrx. I tried Fiesty and it won't even boot due to the tty error so common in that distro. So there it is, a free OS for ya! like i said, if it works for your hardware you are lucky and will enjoy it a lot, but if it doesn't, then you keep trying workarounds and workarounds and end up investing days worth of your time. And then post on the ubuntu forums using Vista! Its all good man, linux is good, for whom it works.
I'm not ready to give up yet, I'm getting Fedora now. Will see.:)

[aysiu]

The discussion has gone way off the original blog post, so please continue your discussion in the Linux Desktop Readiness thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2632507#post2632507). Thanks.