PDA

View Full Version : Linux Desktop Readiness Thread



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

zekopeko
January 26th, 2007, 01:17 PM
four: MS introduced PowerShell on Vista. The point and click adventure got command line interface. yeah!

CLI rocks! it's fast && easy.

RudolfMDLT
January 26th, 2007, 01:42 PM
Why in the 21st century are we using command lines at all? I realise for uber-geeks (respectfully) this may be fine, but if Linux is interested in a serious attempt at hitting MS where it hurts ie: on the desktop of average users the community has failed, and may lose the greatest chance of gaining 'market share' and becoming a mainstream OS.


Hi there,

The Command Line is a tool - a very effective one. I too feel that a better GUI would be great but I do feel that your remarks about the command line are not justified.

If you continue fighting the command line you'll never really learn how to use linux/Ubuntu with much authority and effectiveness.

I am a Geek, but a pretty lazy one at that and mist all the shiny knobs, bells and whistles of windows at first. But after about 2 or 3 months I really started using the command line and found it a really useful tool.

I'm not going to call you an stupid, but your statement in my opinion is stupid and not well researched. Even as a windows administrator I used Dos BATCH files and even in windows the command line is much faster than the icons.

Just an example. When working on a clients machine its much quicker to launch MS Word by clicking [start], [run], 'winword' [enter] than searching through the start menu for the bluddy shortcut.

By clicking [start], [run], 'cmd' [enter] and typing in 'ipconfig' is much faster than checking all the networking settings by mouse.



Honestly, fiddle with it and get to know it and in time you'll learn that all new tools require time and not ignorance to become useful.

Anyway, Cheers!

Rudolf

HereInOz
January 26th, 2007, 01:42 PM
I understand your comments, but would like to point out a couple of things.

To set up a Samba share on a Ubuntu machine can all be done with the GUI, apart from one thing, which is to set up the Samba user and password - one line in the Terminal. That one had me stuffed until I found out about it.

Also, you will find that many serious administrators of Windows systems will still use the command line as appropriate to do the things they need to do, so even in the offerings from Redmond the CLI is still used by many serious operators.

ice60
January 26th, 2007, 02:00 PM
is life 2 short 4 linux?
asking that in a linux forum is probably not a good idea as most people will be using linux, so there you have your answer. maybe ask in a windows forum.

...but if Linux is interested in a serious attempt at hitting MS where it hurts ie: on the desktop of average users the community has failed...
i'm not sure the point of linux is hitting MS anywhere, i think it's about freedom. but, as there are so many devs maybe some of them will be trying to hit MS, i don't really know :confused:

as has been said the CLI is useful in windows too, i use linux because it's better than windows, but maybe it's not for you. computer skills are all learned, maybe you have spent so much time with windows you'll always have problems with linux because you have trouble re-learning :confused:

Gargamella
January 26th, 2007, 02:18 PM
I think that the open source project is a long and winding road to go and maybe you can say that, but we've come a long way...why not go ahead?

this is my thinking

;D

forrestcupp
January 26th, 2007, 02:43 PM
The OP has a good point, though. What's wrong with Linux getting to the point to where the average end-user can have a smooth and easy Linux experience? I think it is heading more and more in that direction. I remember trying Linux around 1997 and giving up. Look how far things have come since then in making things easier for the average user. So that is the direction things should go, so that the average user can do all of the things an average user would want to do in a GUI. But never get rid of the command line for the people who want to do things more complex than an average user wants to do.

Maybe when we give support, we should keep in mind that some of these people are just average users, and we can show them how to do some of the command things by using GUI techniques.

xpod
January 26th, 2007, 02:50 PM
if Linux is interested in a serious attempt at hitting MS where it hurts ie: on the desktop of average users the community has failed, and may lose the greatest chance of gaining 'market share' and becoming a mainstream OS.

I`m pretty stupid when it comes to a lot of this stuff but dosent the term "market-share" apply to stuff we actually have to pay for??
The trick is not to be bothered about how many others use it but to enjoy using it yourself as thats what really counts.

Iv`e only used computers for a relatively short time but i`ve certainly learned a good bit more about the things since coming here to Ubuntu.
Saying that though, iv`e actually learned so much more about Windows itself since i came here and that can only be a good thing:D

Lifes never too short to learn something new although i do wish there was more hours in the day sometimes....it`s just soooo hard to put down once you get into it:D

Good luck regardless

jethro10
January 26th, 2007, 04:02 PM
I would say no to your question, reasons: I'm 60 yrs young, spent most of life in construction[25yrs]. Had a stroke 5 yrs ago, no more construction. Took up putering, learned to build my own. For 5 yrs beat the hell out of 95,98,98se, 6 mos ago started with linux, currently have 14 distros installed. Was it easy, simply & succiently, no & hell no, frustrating, yes & at times intensely. Did I give up, nope, ya gota keep on truckin to get thru life, quit learnin or tryin to & your as good as dead, think outside of the box sometimes :)

Well, Im not 60.... in my 40's
Not had a stroke....good luck to you mate.

But man I totally agree with everything else you said.

If I don't try things, I feel I might as well not be here. Whats the point of life to just exist?

Good luck
J

TheWizzard
January 26th, 2007, 04:05 PM
this is one of the most frustrating experiences I have ever had with an OS.

and this is your first post on the ubuntu forum :confused:
why are you posting this? just whining?

it's a waste your experience was not a nice one. but i think it's you to blame.
if you used the forums, you'd had everething up and running in no time. without touching the command line.

if you like to complain and blame the world: buy yourself a mac.

so long

phossal
January 26th, 2007, 04:38 PM
Whats the point of life to just exist?

Kind of. :D

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 05:20 PM
I support fixing bug #1 and have since about 1985. This was the year I realized Microsoft was doing illegal things in the conduct of their business. The last version of an MS operating system I have used is MS DOS 2.11. Nuff said on this issue.

Here is my point: To fix bug #1 people like me have to have a os that we can spread around. While I've only been using Ubuntu for less than a year I'm a fairly advanced computer user who gets to help friends and family with their computer issues. So far I've only loaded Ubuntu on one machine for one friend. I'm not sure if Ubuntu will stay on his system in the long term.

Here is the problem: While I may be of a mindset to spread Ubuntu, I can't do so if it is going to cost me large amounts of time to support those installations or if it is going to hurt my reputation. Unfortunately Ubuntu is not yet to the point where it can be installed and forgotten. It requires a LOT of very technical administration and this administration has to be done in ways Windows user are not familiar with.

The fix: So what will it take before I can start spreading Ubuntu? Improvements must be made in these areas:

- Include FLASH in the distro.

- Include JAVA in the distro.

- Include WinModem drivers in the distro.

- Include NVIDIA/ATI video drivers in the distro and get video support upgraded to the point that it "Just Works(tm)".

- Include Real Player in the distro (and get it up to speed).

- Give me a gui utility that is easy to use that shows what drivers are loaded and allows me to install/uninstall drivers. It should also show me what hardware is in the system. Right now telephone tech support is very hard to do.

Those siz items would solve 90% of the problems from my perspective and would allow me to spread the os like wildfire. I understand that some folks are against including non-oss. My own perspective is that Bug #1 is far more important that holding to that ideal. Think of it as Embrace, Extend and Exterminate.

Cheers

pveith
January 26th, 2007, 05:35 PM
Hm, i don't agree with you on allmost all mentioned points (Flash, Java, Real Player and NVidia / ATI). I don't think it is too hard to install these, as Flash, Real Player and Java are very easy to install after you have opened all repros allready available in "sources.list". It can even be done using the gui tools (aka software-sources) and then just a simple synaptic install. This is -IMHO- much easier as in Windows and the update-manager keeps these things even up-to-date. Someone who can not cope with this should get "local" support by another ubunteer (aka. ubuntu-user).
On NVidia / ATI it could be easier, but again this just for 3d-Support (the preinstalled driver are quite good). And even then a simple install of the restricted modules and execution of the respective settings-tool or the "dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg". This is a not too easy task, but none the less it should be manageable.

On the winmodem part i simply agree even though i don't think this is a major issue with bug #1.

rbmorse
January 26th, 2007, 05:37 PM
Isn't this what Linspire/Freespire is all about?

sloggerkhan
January 26th, 2007, 05:45 PM
I've done Ubuntu installs for people and once it's installed I almost never have them come to me for tech support. I don't see why Ubuntu needs real player, no-one uses it and I've never come across a need for it.

Flash and java are in the repositories. All you have to do is click a little checkmark. Video is vary close to "just works" and probably will be much better in the future.

I have no idea what you mean by "driers." I think most of them are part of the kernel.

There are at least 4 system profiler type apps in the add-remove menu alone.

So you have heard of synaptic? From what I can tell, if you check 3 boxes and hit OK, most of your "problems" would go away....

paparucino
January 26th, 2007, 05:48 PM
The fix: So what will it take before I can start spreading Ubuntu? Improvements must be made in these areas:

- Include FLASH in the distro.

- Include JAVA in the distro.

- Include WinModem drivers in the distro.

- Include NVIDIA/ATI video drivers in the distro and get video support upgraded to the point that it "Just Works(tm)".

- Include Real Player in the distro (and get it up to speed).

- Give me a gui utility that is easy to use that shows what drivers are loaded and allows me to install/uninstall drivers. It should also show me what hardware is in the system. Right now telephone tech support is very hard to do.

Are you sure you don't need Windows?:D

cezdeville
January 26th, 2007, 05:53 PM
i've read only the first, original post and have to say that life is definitely too short to read threads like this.

you have all answers here:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=307823&postcount=1

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 05:57 PM
Hm, i don't agree with you on allmost all mentioned points (Flash, Java, Real Player and NVidia / ATI). I don't think it is too hard to install these, as Flash, Real Player and Java are very easy to install after you have opened all repros allready available in "sources.list". It can even be done using the gui tools (aka software-sources) and then just a simple synaptic install. This is -IMHO- much easier as in Windows and the update-manager keeps these things even up-to-date. Someone who can not cope with this should get "local" support by another ubunteer (aka. ubuntu-user).

On the winmodem part i simply agree even though i don't think this is a major issue with bug #1.

pveith, I respect your opinion but my post is based on actually experience. The installation I did on a friend's system (I mentioned it above) was done about 6 months ago. He is an average Windows user... browser, email and the kids type some reports on the computer. He can't do some things he wants to do due to the lack of FLASH and JAVA. After six months he still can't successfully install FLASH or JAVA. I've emailed him steps to take but he has messed it up every time. He is ready to format and buy a copy of Windows.

I simply do not have the time to make free trips to do onsite tech support for those who I can talk into trying a new os. The os HAS to require less follow on support or I can't help spread it.

Cheers

MetalMusicAddict
January 26th, 2007, 05:59 PM
The things in your 1st post cannot happen by default because of license/patent issues.

Best thing for you is to make a custom disk and give it out yourself.

dushkal
January 26th, 2007, 06:01 PM
I can partly agree to this. One option is that after installation of the Ubuntu system, an option can be shown that "Your default system is installed and ready to use, do you want to install following components?" and then the list as Automatix shows....

I think the projects like Automatix or easyubuntu is what makes Ubuntu great. You HAVE a choice...:)

Greetings from Germany

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 06:04 PM
I've done Ubuntu installs for people and once it's installed I almost never have them come to me for tech support. I don't see why Ubuntu needs real player, no-one uses it and I've never come across a need for it.

Flash and java are in the repositories. All you have to do is click a little checkmark. Video is vary close to "just works" and probably will be much better in the future.

I have no idea what you mean by "driers." I think most of them are part of the kernel.

There are at least 4 system profiler type apps in the add-remove menu alone.

So you have heard of synaptic? From what I can tell, if you check 3 boxes and hit OK, most of your "problems" would go away....

You missed the point of my message. I have used computers since 1977 using many different operating systems. I've coded for many systems. I'm able to support my own Ubuntu installs. The point was that Ubuntu is not yet something I can spread to average pc users because it will cost me to much time to support. Based on my experience I also stated what it would take to make it so that I could spread Ubuntu.

Cheers

pveith
January 26th, 2007, 06:06 PM
Please note that this only a suggestion to keep him an ubunteer.

He is networked then? Why not use VNC-Remote Desktop for support? Or even SSH? This might remove the need to travel on-site. This is something Linux excells at...

I have installed about 20+ Ubuntu-desktops and got them all supported somehow. Eventhough sometimes i had to rely on some friends in time of need to get them to do on-site support.

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 06:08 PM
The things in your 1st post cannot happen by default because of license/patent issues.

Best thing for you is to make a custom disk and give it out yourself.

Please explain how this is so.

(Hint: I have an advanced degree and I understand business law so don't bother explaining the law)

sloggerkhan
January 26th, 2007, 06:11 PM
I kinda agree that some things without graphical front ends could use them, new users are always attached to them.

They generally prefer to do something like system>synaptic>search>click>install
to something like
sudo aptitude install (insert program here)

I always like to make sure users know that they can use synaptic because I think some see everyone on the forums telling them to apt-get stuff and they don't realize they could do it with a gui (which makes them feel much more comfortable).

As far as Samba goes, not sure what you want to do, but mounting windows shares has worked for me out of the box.

and I think making it easy to follow the GUI tendancy, even if it's less efficient, is a nice thing to do for people who just want to use a computer rather than know it inside out.

dushkal
January 26th, 2007, 06:12 PM
Please explain how this is so.

(Hint: I have an advanced degree and I understand business law so don't bother explaining the law)
How about a Add-On CD with a clear licensing warning? Similar application CDs are distributed with HP-UX or Solaris...

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 06:16 PM
Are you sure you don't need Windows?:D

Are you saying that you don't support fixing Ubuntu bug #1?

Cheers

sloggerkhan
January 26th, 2007, 06:17 PM
pveith, I respect your opinion but my post is based on actually experience. The installation I did on a friend's system (I mentioned it above) was done about 6 months ago. He is an average Windows user... browser, email and the kids type some reports on the computer. He can't do some things he wants to do due to the lack of FLASH and JAVA. After six months he still can't successfully install FLASH or JAVA. I've emailed him steps to take but he has messed it up every time. He is ready to format and buy a copy of Windows.

I simply do not have the time to make free trips to do onsite tech support for those who I can talk into trying a new os. The os HAS to require less follow on support or I can't help spread it.

Cheers

Why on earth would you leave them out of the install if you and he both knew he'd need them?

This is more your fault than his. Next time do a complete setup before you ditch.

And I am also shocked that your friend can't go to "add/remove" and put little check boxes next to java and flash.

paparucino
January 26th, 2007, 06:27 PM
Are you saying that you don't support fixing Ubuntu bug #1?

I think so.



I simply do not have the time to make free trips to do onsite tech support for those who I can talk into trying a new os.


I haven't time too, but I know that my friends aren't fishes, they phone me and I help them via phone. My "guru" made the same with me.
Then I agree with sloggerkhan which says:



And I am also shocked that your friend can't go to "add/remove" and put little check boxes next to java and flash.

zubrug
January 26th, 2007, 06:27 PM
I do agree with your points, all were issues I battled with when I first started using linux (mandrake 8.1)
Have you posted this in the absolute beginners forum as I am sure a lot of new user's would agree with you. It would be easy for myself to to say not so as I am now more knowledgable in regards to the command line, but, this was achieved through many hours of forum research and borking my own system.
Truth be said, it was Linspire that really got me hooked as it showed me how great linux could be, my love affair soon faided as the challenge of trying other more up to-date distro's became sort of addictive. (but it was a lesson in frustration)

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 06:34 PM
Please note that this only a suggestion to keep him an ubunteer.

He is networked then? Why not use VNC-Remote Desktop for support? Or even SSH? This might remove the need to travel on-site. This is something Linux excells at...

I appreciate the suggestion. I have considered this. Maybe I will do this if and when Ubuntu gets the point that only small amounts of ongoing support are required. I'm a fairly busy person.

Cheers

forrestcupp
January 26th, 2007, 06:42 PM
and this is your first post on the ubuntu forum :confused:
why are you posting this? just whining?

it's a waste your experience was not a nice one. but i think it's you to blame.
if you used the forums, you'd had everething up and running in no time. without touching the command line.

if you like to complain and blame the world: buy yourself a mac.

so long

Did you even read the original post? The OP said that he followed several different howto guides that were posted, and none of them worked for him. It's not like he didn't even try.

Again, I say there is nothing wrong with working toward making things easier for the "average user." I believe things are headed that direction.

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 06:43 PM
Why on earth would you leave them out of the install if you and he both knew he'd need them?

Sloggerkhan, did I say anywhere that I knew he'd need them? In fact I did not know he needed "them."

I do NOT earn my living as a computer tech support rep. Supporting and spreading Ubuntu falls into the HOBBY category. I'm able to do it if it can be done with limited commitment on my behalf. My original post was simply to point out and discuss what it would take for me to be able to spread Unbuntu. Nothing more, nothing less.

sloggerkhan
January 26th, 2007, 06:49 PM
I'm sorry, but how do you expect someone to use the internet these days without flash and java?

My point is that he wouldn't require tech support if the intitial install had been reasonable.

And is he using 6.06? Because I still don't see how clicking 2 boxes in the add/remove menu could go wrong.

TheWizzard
January 26th, 2007, 06:51 PM
Again, I say there is nothing wrong with working toward making things easier for the "average user." I believe things are headed that direction.

this was the OP's first post, so apparently he never asked for any help.
i mean, getting samba to work is just point 'n click. you must follow pretty obscure howto's to make it fail.
he did try indeed, but not with an open mind.


Again, I say there is nothing wrong with working toward making things easier for the "average user." I believe things are headed that direction.

ubuntu is NOT for people who want nothing but a free sort of windows. read:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=63315

aysiu
January 26th, 2007, 06:55 PM
I've merged this with the Linux Desktop Readiness thread.

By the way, if all we needed were some codecs to fix bug #1, Linux Mint, PCLinuxOS, Blag, and Mepis would have already fixed it.

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 06:58 PM
My point is that he wouldn't require tech support if the intitial install had been reasonable.



I can agree with this statement. Where we seem to disagree is whether it is me or Ubuntu that should provide this "reasonable" initial installation.

My position is: Not my job. I have the time to help spread the os but I don't have time to make it what it should be in the first place.

Thank you for helping clarify things.

Cheers

Brunellus
January 26th, 2007, 07:00 PM
Are you saying that you don't support fixing Ubuntu bug #1?

Cheers
Not necessarily the same thing.

It is simply not feasible, in some cases, to ditch Windows entirely. Such is the nature of dependency. In a large organization, the usual path aroudn this is to identify what users need what applications that are completely unavailable in the preferred OS, give those users what they need and then--this is very important--segregate those users and those tasks from the rest of the organization.

The segregation reinforces the privileged nature of your preferred OS and signals your intention to move towards a more uniform environment whenever possible.

Unfortunately, this model seems to be at work more in organizations which privilege Windows (segregating non-Windows users to specific tasks/privileges), but it could just as easily or effectively work in other organizations whose privileged OS is different (OSX, Solaris, Ubuntu)

MetalMusicAddict
January 26th, 2007, 07:06 PM
Where we seem to disagree is whether it is me or Ubuntu that should provide this "reasonable" initial installation.

Ubuntu cannot provide what you want because the things you want installed by default have licenses that prohibit Ubuntu from including them or infringe upon patents in some countries.

Building a custom disk and giving it out yourself still helps you spread the work.

Sunflower1970
January 26th, 2007, 07:11 PM
I'm pretty new (maybe a month at it now...?), and yes, there have been a few frustrations here and there (56K modem, TV tuner card, setting up printer/scanner...but I did it), but on the whole, Ubuntu has been quite easy and painless (I at least had a working computer after the install).

Up until recently, I was afraid of Linux because of the command line. But, once I began to dive in and start to use it, I find it's not that bad at all. For the most part, the commands are simple to understand, once one knows where they come from, and the why behind them they're easier to use (some I understand right away, some I still have no idea on). I don't mind learning and making mistakes. I don't mind it that it takes me a while to set things up the way I like them. Because I know in the future I'll be able to do it faster, and easier, and things will make even more sense when I do do them. I know more about the workings of my computer too, which I like.

As pointed out many times on this forum, Linux isn't for everyone--I don't even know if it's right for me...it'll take some time before I really figure that out....We all have to find the best OS for us, and for some it's a Mac, or MS, or Linux, or whatever else is out there.

FernandoMilton
January 26th, 2007, 07:11 PM
because it will cost me to much time to support

That's the exact reason for what I quit supporting Windows on my friends and family boxes, and try to move as many people as I can to Ubuntu. Every single month I used to get a call from someone who "got a virus", or complaining that the computer started to slow down, or took ages to boot. Changing them to Ubuntu, setting up the system accordingly in the first place, and giving myself access to the machine via ssh practically solved all my problems when it concerns to remote assistance.

Furthermore, Ubuntu shouldn't (and won't, as far as I understand) start to include packages that could give them legal troubles, or obligate them to pay royalties, because of the ShipIt initiative. I don't have the quote here, but I read something like "we cannot include stuff that would potentially make us to pay royalties on each CD, because we either would have to pay it from our pockets or to pass the cost to the end user, and that is not going to happen". Someone feel free to find the appropriated quote :)

TheWizzard
January 26th, 2007, 07:23 PM
I don't even know if it's right for me...

you made it so far. not afraid for the cli. you'll make it :guitar:

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 07:38 PM
Ubuntu cannot provide what you want because the things you want installed by default have licenses that prohibit Ubuntu from including them or infringe upon patents in some countries.


It is common practice in the computer industry to make no-fee agreements to distribute.

Has Mr. Shuttleworth met with the powers that be at nVidia? They are giving the driver they produced for free. A simple agreement between Mr. Shuttleworth and nVidia management is all that is required.

All items I listed in the original post are distributed for no fee on multiple platforms. Mr. Shuttleworth can, if he chooses to do so, attempt to negociate a no-fee distribution license in regard to these apps and drivers. If any of these suppliers refuse to make a reasonable agreement with him then I'll be the first to move as far as I can get from the hardware or format that is supported by that driver or app.

Ubuntu is not ready for the desktop of the average user. I know some effort is being put forward in regards to some of the issues I brought up here but it isn't clear to me what effort is being put forth and to what extent. I hope that the effort is there.

Sometimes there is need for compromise on the road to a goal.

Brunellus
January 26th, 2007, 07:42 PM
It is common practice in the computer industry to make no-fee agreements to distribute.

Has Mr. Shuttleworth met with the powers that be at nVidia? They are giving the driver they produced for free. A simple agreement between Mr. Shuttleworth and nVidia management is all that is required.

All items I listed in the original post are distributed for no fee on multiple platforms. Mr. Shuttleworth can, if he chooses to do so, attempt to negociate a no-fee distribution license in regard to these apps and drivers. If any of these suppliers refuse to make a reasonable agreement with him then I'll be the first to move as far as I can get from the hardware or format that is supported by that driver or app.

Ubuntu is not ready for the desktop of the average user. I know some effort is being put forward in regards to some of the issues I brought up here but it isn't clear to me what effort is being put forth and to what extent. I hope that the effort is there.

Sometimes there is need for compromise on the road to a goal.
Simply because money doesn't change hands does not make something free. Canonical and Ubuntu probably don't want to be tied up with the legal complications of redistributing proprietary software.

Ubuntu has been a Free Software distribution. If you don't like it, there are other distributions--Xandros and Linspire immediately come to mind--that will accomodate your wishes.

aysiu
January 26th, 2007, 07:50 PM
I thought Ubuntu is going to include Nvidia drivers by default in Feisty?

MetalMusicAddict
January 26th, 2007, 07:50 PM
It is common practice in the computer industry to make no-fee agreements to distribute.

Has Mr. Shuttleworth met with the powers that be at nVidia? They are giving the driver they produced for free. A simple agreement between Mr. Shuttleworth and nVidia management is all that is required.

All items I listed in the original post are distributed for no fee on multiple platforms. Mr. Shuttleworth can, if he chooses to do so, attempt to negociate a no-fee distribution license in regard to these apps and drivers. If any of these suppliers refuse to make a reasonable agreement with him then I'll be the first to move as far as I can get from the hardware or format that is supported by that driver or app.

Ubuntu is not ready for the desktop of the average user. I know some effort is being put forward in regards to some of the issues I brought up here but it isn't clear to me what effort is being put forth and to what extent. I hope that the effort is there.

Sometimes there is need for compromise on the road to a goal.

Lots of things are free to download or to redistributed but are still incompatible with GNU/Linux license-wise no matter what the agreement Mr. S might achieve.

With respect to nVidia drivers. Their code is not GPL. Open. They actually cant because nVidia has licensed code for things. The cannot open code they dont own themselves.

This is how alot of things are. Free as in beer but not freedom.

For-pay linux distros can include some of these things because they have paid a license.

Brunellus
January 26th, 2007, 07:52 PM
I thought Ubuntu is going to include Nvidia drivers by default in Feisty?
It is; seems to have been a rather controversial decision.

MetalMusicAddict
January 26th, 2007, 07:52 PM
I thought Ubuntu is going to include Nvidia drivers by default in Feisty?

As I understand it will be a user-option by default. The "user" will choose to install the drivers. They wont just be there.

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 07:54 PM
Simply because money doesn't change hands does not make something free.

Certainly. This is the root of my problem in regards to spreading Ubuntu. It will cost me too much time.


Canonical and Ubuntu probably don't want to be tied up with the legal complications of redistributing proprietary software.

My bet is that Mr. Shuttleworth is not supporting this project only for philanthropic reasons. There will be a need to be bothered with those legal and redistributing issues sooner or later. It depends on the burn rate.


Ubuntu has been a Free Software distribution. If you don't like it, there are other distributions--Xandros and Linspire immediately come to mind--that will accomodate your wishes.

You don't need to show me the door. I know where it is.

Brunellus
January 26th, 2007, 07:58 PM
Certainly. This is the root of my problem in regards to spreading Ubuntu. It will cost me too much time.



My bet is that Mr. Shuttleworth is not supporting this project only for philanthropic reasons. There will be a need to be bothered with those legal and redistributing issues sooner or later. It depends on the burn rate.



You don't need to show me the door. I know where it is.
My patience is thin; I wish you'd decide whether you're in the door or out of it.

Let's go over this:

1) You are dissatisfied with Ubuntu as it's shipped.

2) We have pointed out that other distros might be shipped in states that might suit your needs better.

3) Having received this information, you continue to insist that Ubuntu is not ready for your needs.

Do what you need to do. If you want change, vote with your feet and your pocketbook.

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 08:09 PM
With respect to nVidia drivers. Their code is not GPL. Open. They actually cant because nVidia has licensed code for things. The cannot open code they dont own themselves.

This is how alot of things are. Free as in beer but not freedom.

I try not to use the words "can't" and "won't" among others when discussing topics such as this. The reason is that things can change. One way to make them change is to engage. Given the right situation that code that nVidia has sublicensed can be released as open source.

For this to be a possibility there has to be a need for it to happen. Increasing the amount of users makes the right situation more likely. For the userbase to increase dramtically some changes need to happen-as outlined in my OP

boredandblogging.com
January 26th, 2007, 08:11 PM
Like folks have mentioned, some things are just done better with CLIs.

Seems like life usually comes back full circle. Early on, Microsoft bashed the CLI. One of their big selling points was that sysadmins wouldn't have to use the command line, they could just click-click and everything would work.

Years later, a lot of those sysadmin guys are figuring out that it would significantly easier to do things wouldn't have to sift through a lot of screens and menus. Why not just type in a line of command to do what I want?

This is from the Microsoft Powershell webpage:
"Microsoft Windows PowerShell command line shell and scripting language helps IT Professionals achieve greater productivity. Using a new admin-focused scripting language, more than 130 standard command line tools, and consistent syntax and utilities, Windows PowerShell allows IT Professionals to more easily control system administration and accelerate automation."
Umm...isn't that what the Unix guys have been saying for like 40 years now?

Talon2
January 26th, 2007, 08:16 PM
My patience is thin

Your problem, not mine.


3) Having received this information, you continue to insist that Ubuntu is not ready for your needs.

I didn't ask for the information *you* provided. I posted my opinion based on my experience. This information can be used in anyway whoever reads it wishes. I'll even make it gpl if you want.

Please save your info for somebody that asks for it.

To the others in this thread: I enjoyed the conversation. Have a good day.

kvonb
January 26th, 2007, 08:18 PM
Who cares? Go away!

bobbybobington
January 27th, 2007, 04:08 AM
CLI will always have it's place but lets face it, people need to get things done. An OS is basically a tool to get things done. Some people need a good CLI to accomplish their goals. But most people need GUI to get stuff done. Why did apple and ms rush to GUI? Because it was a better tool for people's tasks. I don't see why we need to be all defensive when someone points out that the tools they need to accomplish a task is not at an acceptable level. Honestly what would we loose from improving GUI? Nothing. It's that plain and simple. Linux is text based, and it will always be text based. But some people absolutely need GUI. Its unfair to bash GUI just because people need different tools to get stuff done, it s as pointless as KDE vs. Gnome flamewars. Given he's obviously frustrated, and taking it out on the current state of things. But instead of "just use windows if you don't want to use CLI" rhetoric, we need to improve GUI. We just can't grow complacent with the current state of things. Does it even make sense to have one awesome tool, and have the other rusting away hidden in some corner. Ubuntu is all about making Linux easy for human beings, that means awesome and usable GUI and CLI.

end rant O:)

boredandblogging.com
January 27th, 2007, 05:12 AM
Why did apple and ms rush to GUI? Because it was a better tool for people's tasks. I don't see why we need to be all defensive when someone points out that the tools they need to accomplish a task is not at an acceptable level.

The problem is that for years Microsoft said that we should all get away from the CLI, that everything could be done with the GUI. In their early years, that was a huge selling point.

Now, years later, a big chunk of those who were sold on the kool-aid that the GUI will solve everything, realize that the GUI does not solve everything..hence Monad and Powershell.

Similarly, we always see Windows users complain about the CLI, like nothing should ever require it. The funny thing is that Microsoft is the one who is bringing it back. Just a bit ironic.

I don't think anyone is saying that GUIs shouldn't be improved. But complaining about usage of CLIs is plain odd.

riven0
January 27th, 2007, 08:07 AM
The point is, there is only so much the GUI can do. And let's face it, the CLI will always be faster. If your just a regular user, then your never going to need the CLI, (take my family, for example), but if you really want to learn Linux, you're going to need the command line.

And, seriously, it doesn't take that long. It took me about a month or two to get comfortable with the basics of the terminal and I think most will say the same. But if your looking for a free Windows, why don't you try ReactOS? That will suit you better.

Somenoob
January 27th, 2007, 09:13 AM
well command-line/consoles/terminals are powerfull that's why and you don't have to use it. There are easy-to-use GUIs, and it's higly probable that soon there will be complete GUI control for those who want.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 11:14 AM
Linux Newbie,

Since you went out of your comfort zone by using an OS which is new to you, you must be driven one way or another to learn more about it.

I posted the thread "Newbie Support" (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=346697) believing that the lack of access to and abundance of excellent documentations is making it hard for the Linux Newbie.

Now, I want to hear more from the Newbies like me.

What makes it hard for you to use Linux?

The things I can think of now are because you want a better documentation, you want to do it the easy way (as easy as how you use Windows), you are not that interested with Linux but you are obliged to because you don't want to spend so much for an OS?

I am pretty sure that the reasons that I have mentioned above are not complete.

Now, what could the reason be?

AlexC_
January 27th, 2007, 11:42 AM
Now, what could the reason be?

That you've only been using it for such a short time. Like said in the other thread, there is more documentation for Linux apps than any other.

Have a browse around the Wiki (http://wiki.ubuntu.com/), that is packed full of information that helps people who are knew to Linux/Ubuntu.

The official desktop guide, Working with your desktop (https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/desktopguide/C/index.html) also teaches you everything you need to know, and how to install software and use Ubuntu.

The fact that you are knew to Linux is what makes it hard. Did you find Windows hard to use when you first used it? Most probably yes. Linux is not Windows things are going to be different, it _will_ take time to get use to. You can not expect to jump straight in and know everything about it.

I fail to see why you think there is so little documentation out there, in fact it's quite the opposite!

gidra
January 27th, 2007, 12:05 PM
I've been using linux on and off for about a year now. So problem one i think is to choose a distro, and besides reading reviews it comes with some trial and error. Only last month i decided to give up windows and use linux only. Chose ubuntu and started to install things and play around with htem. I think it is very hard at the beginning to switch from a simple to such a complex (yet efficient of course) system like this. But when there's a will there's a way, everything is possible. So the only great disadvantage i see about linux is that you need time, a lot of it. Yet, now that I managed to break the ice, I perfectly believe that it is time good invested. So all linux newbies make heart and don't quit cause only time will tell that linux is the OS of your life

MrHorus
January 27th, 2007, 12:07 PM
1) People want their hand held 100% of the way and aren't willing to do a bit of work themselves - this is evident from the amount of questions that are asked that can be solved with a Google or a quick glance at a guide/FAQ.

2) Linux is not Windows. Let me say that again: Linux is not Windows. Things are different, the phisilophy is different, you need to open your mind to a slightly different mentality and way of doing things and if you can do that you will be fine but if you come expecting a $0 version of Windows then you are sorely mistaken.

heldal
January 27th, 2007, 12:08 PM
That you've only been using it for such a short time. Like said in the other thread, there is more documentation for Linux apps than any other.

[snip]

I fail to see why you think there is so little documentation out there, in fact it's quite the opposite!

Documentation has improved a lot in the last few years, but lots of it is not translated. CS students and professionals may be comfortable with English, but that doesn't apply to the average desktop user. Most translations are limited to basic UI objects like menus, buttons and tool-tips. For most languages items on the help-menu will produce english-language documentation.

To compensate the lack of translated documentation I've found that the key to linux-adoption is to establish user-groups where people can discuss their issues in their own language.

KuriKai
January 27th, 2007, 12:14 PM
wersdaluv: I am sure if you had used linux all your life and then moved to the windows way of things you would find windows very hard.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 12:55 PM
You have good points. I have a new idea. I think it's because of the lack of development of the GUI. I have been using Windows all my life but when I tried Mac OS, I was not culture shocked this much.

I think that's not a very big problem because I believe that Linux is developing so fast.

Also, I think, I really have to spend more time using the OS. So as other newbies.

Maybe, what we need is a good Linux Literacy where we could be taught to be more open minded to the laws of a very different OS.

xpod
January 27th, 2007, 01:50 PM
I suppose i`m lucky in that regard as i only had a few months worth of Windows clouding my judgment before coming here and not the year & years some of you guys mabey had:D

I probably asked more dumb seeming questions than most when i landed here but only because practically every aspect of computers was still very new to me and even the most general of terms was still beyond my comprehension at that time.

All i seemed to learn during my few months with Windows was stuff to get it working and keep it working but with this i`m finally getting to actually USE a pc.

If thats a "hard time" then i cant wait till it gets easy:D

AlexC_
January 27th, 2007, 02:04 PM
You have good points. I have a new idea. I think it's because of the lack of development of the GUI.

I have a new idea to, I think it's because your so new to Linux and need something to blame for not being able to use it properly.

When I was new to Linux, I also blamed the GUI. I thought it was horrible and completely stupid, what was my problem? I thought and wanted it to be Windows. I now think the opposite, I find the Windows GUI very bloated and hard to work with but Gnome and KDE are much easier and faster to work with.


Also, I think, I really have to spend more time using the OS. So as other newbies.
Exactly! Now were getting somewhere :D

Linux is NOT Windows, things will be different. You've been using nothing else but Windows for the majority of your life, correct? That means you are use to the Windows way of things, to use Linux you will need to open your mind and let new ideas and ways in. If you keep thinking the Windows way then well, good luck.

NanoXbuG
January 27th, 2007, 02:23 PM
Quite honestly, a lot of the documentation can be convoluted to the new user. I myself had a breakthrough recently (thank you automatix2 development team) but prior to that the documentation I had come by was poorly assembled and made crippling assumptions that the reader would be able to understand where the shortcuts lie.
The evident elitism that exists in the linux world is a major turn off for the new user. Though many are friendly, curtious and helpful, many will meet the new user with sarcasm, hostillity and arrogance. Is this really the framework a community is built on?

Seeing more instructions for the apt-get feature would be nice. Often they are ridden with typeos and useless terms, they fail to mention critical commands and they fail to mention where the downloaded files need to be in order to install them with terminal.

As a newb myself, I wish you all the best of luck and remember to post and assist anyone in any way that you can. Newb, novice, know-it-alls alike. The more contribution, the better it will get.

AlexC_
January 27th, 2007, 02:25 PM
Quite honestly, a lot of the documentation can be convoluted to the new user. I myself had a breakthrough recently (thank you automatix2 development team) but prior to that the documentation I had come by was poorly assembled and made crippling assumptions that the reader would be able to understand where the shortcuts lie.
The evident elitism that exists in the linux world is a major turn off for the new user. Though many are friendly, curtious and helpful, many will meet the new user with sarcasm, hostillity and arrogance. Is this really the framework a community is built on?

Seeing more instructions for the apt-get feature would be nice. Often they are ridden with typeos and useless terms, they fail to mention critical commands and they fail to mention where the downloaded files need to be in order to install them with terminal.

As a newb myself, I wish you all the best of luck and remember to post and assist anyone in any way that you can. Newb, novice, know-it-alls alike. The more contribution, the better it will get.

Want to know more about a command? then type "man command" in terminal, to get a big detailed documentation on it. So for more info on apt-get type "man apt-get"

I think the title of this thread should be changed to "Why can't someone hold my hand?" - You are _new_ to Linux, keyword being _new_. If you are _new_ to something then you will not understand it fully from the begging. Once you use it for a while then you will understand it better.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 02:36 PM
Quite honestly, a lot of the documentation can be convoluted to the new user. I myself had a breakthrough recently (thank you automatix2 development team) but prior to that the documentation I had come by was poorly assembled and made crippling assumptions that the reader would be able to understand where the shortcuts lie.
The evident elitism that exists in the linux world is a major turn off for the new user. Though many are friendly, curtious and helpful, many will meet the new user with sarcasm, hostillity and arrogance. Is this really the framework a community is built on?

Seeing more instructions for the apt-get feature would be nice. Often they are ridden with typeos and useless terms, they fail to mention critical commands and they fail to mention where the downloaded files need to be in order to install them with terminal.

As a newb myself, I wish you all the best of luck and remember to post and assist anyone in any way that you can. Newb, novice, know-it-alls alike. The more contribution, the better it will get.

You know what... I also feel the presence of elitism. You had a good point there.

une
January 27th, 2007, 02:39 PM
I believe many problems are rooted in the fact that many computer experts struggle to explain how to do something to newbies. Explanations given are full of assumptions about knowledge of terminology and procedures and critical steps in procedures are omitted as it is assumed the newbie will know to do the obvious stuff. This is common throughout the computer world. I am half way through a graduate certificate in computer science and I can't remember how many times I have had to work out how to do something or understand a concept by using trial and error as the answers to my questions by experts are often hard to decipher. When I finally work it out I always find myself saying "Why didn't they just say this or that, that expert turned a molehill into mountain." I think experts think it wrong to say "Press this button, then type this, then press that button", they would rather explain using terminology. However using computers is just a series of keystrokes, you press the keys and see the results. Do it enough times and you work out what is happening. Doesn't sound as elegant, but it gets people results, and that is what counts. Don't get me wrong, we need the experts. Their responses combined with trial and error are the usual path to success and the input of the expert is critical. However some experts can communicate to newbies better than others.
I have found elitism fairly rare and have received much valuable help via Linux forums. However when you do encounter it, the arrogance of some computer experts can put that of pro football players, politicians, movie stars, rock stars and pro surfers to shame.

koenn
January 27th, 2007, 02:42 PM
The evident elitism that exists in the linux world is a major turn off for the new user. Though many are friendly, curtious and helpful, many will meet the new user with sarcasm, hostillity and arrogance. Is this really the framework a community is built on?
For many years, linux/opensource communities were build on common interest and mutual respect between technical and intellectual equals : fellow programmers. So, no, elitism, arrogance and sarcasm are not the framework those communities were build on.

Malta paul
January 27th, 2007, 02:45 PM
Yes I agree with AlexC, Linux is NOT windows and never will be (I hope) and it takes a little while to get used to.
I think Linux in general was a bit slow to use the GUI system. Knoppix KDE was my first try.
But GUI has now taken off -even spinning cubes and wobbles. So now with greatly improved documentation, links like 'psychocats.net' and a friendly helpful community things are looking good. The more one learns and experiments with Linux the more one find the power that is under the surface.

slimdog360
January 27th, 2007, 02:47 PM
Now, what could the reason be? People dont like new things, thy are also seems to think that anything they dont already know about must not be worth knowing about.

edit: anyone who thinks that Linux users are elitist should talk to BSD users, they seem to think that they are Gods of some sort.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 02:49 PM
I believe many problems are rooted in the fact that many computer experts struggle to explain how to do something to newbies. Explanations given are full of assumptions about knowledge of terminology and procedures and critical steps in procedures are omitted as it is assumed the newbie will know to do the obvious stuff. This is common throughout the computer world. I am half way through a graduate certificate in computer science and I can't remember how many times I have had to work out how to do something or understand a concept by using trial and error as the answers to my questions by experts are often hard to decipher. When I finally work it out I always find myself saying "Why didn't they just say this or that, that expert turned a molehill into mountain." I think experts think it wrong to say "Press this button, then type this, then press that button", they would rather explain using terminology. However using computers is just a series of keystrokes, you press the keys and see the results. Do it enough times and you work out what is happening. Doesn't sound as elegant, but it gets people results, and that is what counts. Don't get me wrong, we need the experts. Their responses combined with trial and error are the usual path to success and the input of the expert is critical. However some experts can communicate to newbies better than others.
I have found elitism fairly rare and have received much valuable help via Linux forums. However when you do encounter it, the arrogance of some computer experts can put that of pro football players, politicians, movie stars, rock stars and pro surfers to shame.

That is what I call "Newbie Empathy." That's what we need.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 02:51 PM
People dont like new things, thy are also seems to think that anything they dont already know about must not be worth knowing about.

I am a renegade, skeptic, and all. I like new things. That's the reason why I'm here.

I believe, what you said is true for some. Not all.

syxbit
January 27th, 2007, 02:53 PM
I got Vista business through MSDNAA a few days ago.
I installed it, and put on Office 2007.
I must say, I wish it was available for Linux.
It's FAR better than OpenOffice...

I've never considered OOo 2 to be as capable as Office2003 .
I actually dislike OOo (the load times are ridiculous)
I use Abiword personally.

I just wish as linux users we didn't have to make as many sacrifices as we do!

the Gimp is nowhere near as good as Photoshop.
OOo is not as good as office 2003, let alone office 2007
there is no Adobe Acrobat
There are others too!

This isn't a linux bash (I spend 98% of my time in Edgy) but I wish big companies would release their software on linux (like Adobe).

(I've tried wine and crossoveroffice, but haven't been that impressed with performance, and limited compatability)

It annoys me how some linux fanboys act as though Gimp were better, and OOo were better.
They must be kidding themselves, right?

Lets be honest.
Linux is better than windows in MANY ways, but we shouldn't kid ourselves and say it's better in EVERY WAY.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 02:53 PM
It is not true that all Linux users are Elitists but I believe that many of them are.

Mimsy
January 27th, 2007, 02:54 PM
Want to know more about a command? then type "man command" in terminal, to get a big detailed documentation on it. So for more info on apt-get type "man apt-get"

The problem with that solution is it assumes that reading the manual will solve the problem... the documentation on commands suffers from some of the same flaws that were mentioned earlier. It makes incorrect assumptions about my level of prior knowledge, about my understanding of commands, abbreviations, and short-cuts, and it does not answer the question I have at the time, which usually is "why isn't this working?"

While there is a ton of documentation out there, and yes, it probably is helpful once in a while, a lot of it needs to be rewritten. I once spent five hours trying to follow a HowTo that never once mentioned that I needed to be logged in as root for the instructions to work... I was apparently supposed to know that anyway. I discovered that on accident, after futile search after search on Google, for related articles, documents, guides, anything that would help me achieve my goal. I didn't find anything, and I have since given up.

Yes, I'm asking for someone to hold my hand while I try to learn how to walk on my own here. Falling down every two steps gets annoying and frustrating, and is discouraging, so a helpful hand to hold on to would be nice. Chalk it up to immature whining from a Windows-user who wants everything to be like the first OS she ever tried if you want me to. That's fine, if that's how you want to approach this. But some help sifting through the documentation out there and taking out all the bad non-working guides would be nice.

I have met far more elitist and arrogant Linux-users than friendly ones. Since I started reading these forums, that's been completely reversed, so whenever I think I smell elitism here, I get very aggressive about it. Koenn, while I agree with you in principle, I think some of the problems mentioned in this thread are due to the fact that now the sphere where the fellow programmers were all equals and friends is being invaded by dumb newbs who most of the time have next to no idea what they're doing, and who are trying to learn but not always being successful. This is a source of irritation for the ones who thought they had finally found a place where they can just kick back and relax, away from the idiots, and this irritation is what prompted the arrogant and elitist behavior. Just a theory. ;)

/Mimsy

slimdog360
January 27th, 2007, 02:55 PM
I am a renegade, skeptic, and all. I like new things. That's the reason why I'm here.

I believe, what you said is true for some. Not all.

Thats because the like of you or me are better then normal people. So it counts for all of 'those' sorts of people.

How is that for elitist:wink:

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 02:57 PM
I got Vista business through MSDNAA a few days ago.
I installed it, and put on Office 2007.
I must say, I wish it was available for Linux.
It's FAR better than OpenOffice...

I've never considered OOo 2 to be as capable as Office2003 .
I actually dislike OOo (the load times are ridiculous)
I use Abiword personally.

I just wish as linux users we didn't have to make as many sacrifices as we do!

the Gimp is nowhere near as good as Photoshop.
OOo is not as good as office 2003, let alone office 2007
there is no Adobe Acrobat
There are others too!

This isn't a linux bash (I spend 98% of my time in Edgy) but I wish big companies would release their software on linux (like Adobe).

(I've tried wine and crossoveroffice, but haven't been that impressed with performance, and limited compatability)

It annoys me how some linux fanboys act as though Gimp were better, and OOo were better.
They must be kidding themselves, right?

Lets be honest.
Linux is better than windows in MANY ways, but we shouldn't kid ourselves and say it's better in EVERY WAY.

I agree with that.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 02:59 PM
For the solution, maybe, what we have to do is to cooperate with the whole community and do our best in developing what we have.

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 03:01 PM
Thats because the like of you or me are better then normal people. So it counts for all of 'those' sorts of people.

How is that for elitist:wink:

Good :)

ushaba
January 27th, 2007, 03:01 PM
the possibility that linux is actually harder to use doesn't seem to come up very often, but it's actually worth considering. you have to remember that several factors are in place with microsoft vendor lock-in. the entire culture thinks that windows itself is the computer. but on the other hand, you always have a cousin or a brother or a geeky friend around who can help you with basic computer problems even if you can't.
however, several main things:

1) if you ever read documentation on windows, for instance buying a book on windows xp, you find that most of the functions that are explained are as some have said, a series of mouse clicks and repetitive motions. there's not a whole lot in there about the registry. you need a special book for that, which most people will never even know exists, because they've never had to use a registry. i think you see an interesting phenomenon with linux documentation. most of us don't really need a book on starting gnome baker or open office, and most of us are unwilling to read a book on bash, the ldp (the average age of articles on there seems to be about 5 years old...and most users are basically taught to disregard anything that seems too old to be relevant), and whatever else "just in case," but inevitably, under linux, something will go wrong, and at that time, the frustrated user will have to look into commands they don't entirely understand... and probably botch things even worse. one thing that linux users are often forgetting is that there is not a lot of documentation to get from the step where you are just using kde/gnome and various applications to the point where you are understanding bash commands. sure, it happens eventually, but it's not exactly a smooth process. i'm saying this from the perspective of someone who didn't exactly have a whole lot of experience at all with windows before switching. i basically would use a computer to type papers at the library in high school, and got my first computer in college. i switched to linux in my senior year. but with linux, you have a sort of 100 level class, using kde/gnome, amarok, etc. such as is the case with the ubuntu book, or a great part of it. then you have the 400 level classes, on the system hierarchy and bash and whatever else, but it feels like a jarring transition between the initial steps and getting deeper into it. you'll notice i'm using linux, so i'm not saying that there's a problem with the terminal, but i think there needs to be more effective task-oriented documentation, perhaps with color, and with pictures (and i'll probably get to worko n this myself sooner or later). people want like "intro to the filesystem" and "intro to common commands" before they get a huge book full of difficult things. i can say that certain sites such as these exist, but the ldp, for instance, is very difficult on the eyes.
2) the gui is still important. you've got to remember that microsoft spent millions of dollars in the early nineties researching where users expect the shadows on icons to be and built the look and feel of windows 95 around that. the fact that there are inconsistent interfaces among various programs, as well as the fact that i can never remember which one is networking and which one is network tools in gnome (for example) show that some better input could be given. for my part, i've completely given up on gnome and kde and moved to fluxbox because i configure everything by hand...even if it takes longer. programmers are not typical idiot end users, and what they think is good for the user may not be what the user thinks is good for the user.
3) Google. With all the commands to read the ($@#ing manual, and to search google, and whatnot, you'd think someone would be complaining about how dangerous fixing things on your own is. the broader your search gets, the more likely it is to include gentoo or bsd or something, and you end up destroying your xserver in a series of incompetent gestures based on mixing and matching advice from different sites. fixing things on your own is dangerous, and i love the fact that ubuntu allows users to ask stupid questions again and again. i try not to do it as much as possible, but google is pretty scary. also, neither reading man pages, nor reading the man page for man pages, nor copying and pasting into a terminal helps a user understand what is going on.

i should point out that the thing i love most about linux is that using it has taught me about computers. it has taught me about software, about hardware, about operating systems, about programming languages, and whatever else. however, i didn't know any of these things at the start when i was still using windows, and was a royal pain for my best friend in college as i was learning to transition to linux. learning all of those things took a lot of time. it's like being thrown into a foreign country and not speaking the language, and having to figure it out overnight. it's a slow process, but i'm more or less comfortable now.
i don't think windows is so much a system that encourages people to do things a windows way as much as it is a system that encourages people to not have to learn anything. mac is too. the fact that you have to learn something about your computer to do just about anything... well, that's foreign to almost everyone. actually, at this point, if i could find good documentation on the windows filesystem hierarchy, using the registry, etc, i'd be really excited, but whenever you search for anything about windows, you get ads for products to remove your porn searches and whatever else. they need twdp.org!!

slimdog360
January 27th, 2007, 03:02 PM
Whats wrong with gimp and OOo? I like them. Oh and perhaps you should use OOo again, the load times for me are the same as MS office both without anything being preloaded before hand. You (and others) may also want to look at the openoffice quick starter, search synaptic for 'OpenOffice.org QuickStarter'.

Tomosaur
January 27th, 2007, 03:03 PM
I personally really like OpenOffice. I find it much cleaner and more satisfying to use than the Microsoft Office suite. I haven't tried the latest outing of MS Office though, so I can't compare the two. I doubt I will ever have the oppurtunity though - I have grown sick of MS, and don't really feel like giving them my money.

That being said - I can understand your concerns. It's not really a compromise in my experience. I don't like MS Office, and the GIMP is perfectly suited to my needs. Yes, I do like Photoshop, but I don't feel like the GIMP is a compromise. It does what I need it to do. Yes, it could be a bit more user-friendly, but such is life.

ushaba
January 27th, 2007, 03:04 PM
aiya! in the time i was typing this, people beat me to it on some points... yes, things are improving.

Solver
January 27th, 2007, 03:04 PM
I think that office suites are quite possibly the weakest part of the entire open-source software community. Game support notwithstanding, I find that I like all opensource applications at least as much as their proprietary counterparts - with the exception of office suites. (I find the GIMP good enough, thoug I only do very basic image manipulation so am really in no position to judge)

Linux has programs like AbiWord or Gnucash. These are very good applications for simplistic functions. I like AbiWord - it has a decent .DOC import filter, it's fast and it works well. Of course, it has a limited functionality set, so it's no longer useful once you need something more sophisticated. Same goes for Gnucash. OpenOffice is, as far as I know, the only (popular) free office suite that has MS Office compatibility and a set of features that can compare to MS Office. Still, I never felt it's quite as good for numerous reasons. Tried MS Office 2007 recently, and I think it's a good step forward from the previous versions - unfortunately, leaving OOo further behind.

Well, I'm still happy because I rarely need non-basic office functionality, mostly do other things, but I'd still love to see a better free office suite someday...

wersdaluv
January 27th, 2007, 03:10 PM
The problem with that solution is it assumes that reading the manual will solve the problem... the documentation on commands suffers from some of the same flaws that were mentioned earlier. It makes incorrect assumptions about my level of prior knowledge, about my understanding of commands, abbreviations, and short-cuts, and it does not answer the question I have at the time, which usually is "why isn't this working?"

While there is a ton of documentation out there, and yes, it probably is helpful once in a while, a lot of it needs to be rewritten. I once spent five hours trying to follow a HowTo that never once mentioned that I needed to be logged in as root for the instructions to work... I was apparently supposed to know that anyway. I discovered that on accident, after futile search after search on Google, for related articles, documents, guides, anything that would help me achieve my goal. I didn't find anything, and I have since given up.

Yes, I'm asking for someone to hold my hand while I try to learn how to walk on my own here. Falling down every two steps gets annoying and frustrating, and is discouraging, so a helpful hand to hold on to would be nice. Chalk it up to immature whining from a Windows-user who wants everything to be like the first OS she ever tried if you want me to. That's fine, if that's how you want to approach this. But some help sifting through the documentation out there and taking out all the bad non-working guides would be nice.

I have met far more elitist and arrogant Linux-users than friendly ones. Since I started reading these forums, that's been completely reversed, so whenever I think I smell elitism here, I get very aggressive about it. Koenn, while I agree with you in principle, I think some of the problems mentioned in this thread are due to the fact that now the sphere where the fellow programmers were all equals and friends is being invaded by dumb newbs who most of the time have next to no idea what they're doing, and who are trying to learn but not always being successful. This is a source of irritation for the ones who thought they had finally found a place where they can just kick back and relax, away from the idiots, and this irritation is what prompted the arrogant and elitist behavior. Just a theory. ;)

/Mimsy

Good theory. That's one of the reasons why I kept on requesting for documentations meant for the innocent Newbs.

It's hard to empathize with a very different person.

I first experienced it when someone told me to install a software using synaptic. I was so confused with that "synaptic" because I was assuming that people were more newb-friendly since it was in the absolute beginner talk forums, but I came to realize that people can't guess how much I knew about Linux.

tkjacobsen
January 27th, 2007, 03:12 PM
I think time will do the job. Linux is gaining momentum and the large software companies (Adobe) need to make their software run on linux some day. They have to. We'll just have to wait. For now we can just be happy that linux is such a good operating system and keep using windows when we need to.

Chop
January 27th, 2007, 03:16 PM
Alot of people have a hard time wrapping thier minds around the concepts fundamental to Linux. "Terminal" will strike the fear in many hearts. I remember growing up playing games on the Commodore 64 and in my high skool years messed with DOS, bAsic, Blindoz 3.14, and the old BBS message boards. But I fell out of the loop. So i get back to it these days and the concept of the Terminal is familiar, but not easy. At least not at first (and not yet). Free software, free information, free access, free exchange. Before I started getting into Linux, I picked up an MP3 player that was a UMS for a reason. Alot of people I know would prefer to enjoy the freedom that Linux and certain software and hardware offer, for free, but they just don't know how to yet. And as always, the best things in life are free, and if there is a price, a cost to it's worth. It will be payed with effort. Cheers! And the best! I'd rather see the corpus of human intellect accessable to all, FOR FREE.

xhaan
January 27th, 2007, 03:24 PM
1) People want their hand held 100% of the way and aren't willing to do a bit of work themselves - this is evident from the amount of questions that are asked that can be solved with a Google or a quick glance at a guide/FAQ.

2) Linux is not Windows. Let me say that again: Linux is not Windows. Things are different, the phisilophy is different, you need to open your mind to a slightly different mentality and way of doing things and if you can do that you will be fine but if you come expecting a $0 version of Windows then you are sorely mistaken.

I tend to agree. I've never really had a problem using any computer, from Apple IIc to Windows, C64, BSD, Linux, Mac, BeOS... I've never considered any of them to be hard, I just figure out what to do.
I've had to ask questions a few times but other than that I just looked to the manual if I needed help or just experimented.

I do think that Linux in general used to have a bad habit of assuming everyone who uses it is already experienced with it... this can still be seen in some documentation but I think that situation is starting to improve.

Kateikyoushi
January 27th, 2007, 03:42 PM
Why do people have a hard time starting anything new ?

Computers are quite complicated compared to your average electronics devices, as in your case you already have some experience with other OS which makes it even worse if you try to use linux like the other one works.
You try to replace windos with a quite different OS then you have to adjust yourself to it because windows replacement isn't the main purpose of linux.

I do not think the documentation is bad you just need to be able to locate them (Ie use the internet), most linux guides are more user friendly than what you find on MS support pages, not mentioning the support of linux users is much better than what you can expect from your daily MS support mail.

saulgoode
January 27th, 2007, 03:43 PM
I first experienced it when someone told me to install a software using synaptic. I was so confused with that "synaptic" because I was assuming that people were more newb-friendly since it was in the absolute beginner talk forums, but I came to realize that people can't guess how much I knew about Linux.

I think the general assumption, even for the beginner talk forums, is that the asker is aware of search engines such as Google, Yahoo, and Ask.com. There is nothing "unfriendly" about expecting the asker to research terms with which he may be unfamiliar. In fact, it is most often the case that the responder has verified that the information is available yet does not provide it directly -- in hopes that the asker learns more than just an answer to a single question.

syxbit
January 27th, 2007, 03:46 PM
wow.
you guys are more open minded than I thought.
I agree with most of your comments (although I can't believe for a second that OOo boots as quickly as Office.)

One thing I love about Ubuntu is it's 6 month release cycle.
You get a new kernel, gnome + other stuff.
I also love the way the repo's work.
I don't need to worry about update programs, they all update themselves! (of course our firefox updates lag by a few days because of dependencies, but that's a differen story)

I think one of the main differences is that Windows will happily copy others (which we criticize it for), and yet many linux programs would never copy any windows feature (the possible gnome control panel could be an exception, but it's not final yet)

Why do you all think Ubuntu is good?
partly cause it copied Debian, and built upon it.

We shouldn't care where the code/idea came from.
All I care about is having a superior product. Who cares if it's a copy of someone else's idea

Lord Illidan
January 27th, 2007, 03:48 PM
Quite honestly, a lot of the documentation can be convoluted to the new user. I myself had a breakthrough recently (thank you automatix2 development team) but prior to that the documentation I had come by was poorly assembled and made crippling assumptions that the reader would be able to understand where the shortcuts lie.
The evident elitism that exists in the linux world is a major turn off for the new user. Though many are friendly, curtious and helpful, many will meet the new user with sarcasm, hostillity and arrogance. Is this really the framework a community is built on?


I am not a new user to Linux yet I know what you mean. My breakthrough came when my uncle taught me how to use vi and that ./ in front of a command would run it!!

If you see a forum user being elitist, ignore him. Even the greatest programmer can he humble. We were all newbies once, and some people forget this.

PurplePenguin
January 27th, 2007, 04:08 PM
Why do you all think Ubuntu is good?
partly cause it copied Debian, and built upon it.

We shouldn't care where the code/idea came from.
All I care about is having a superior product. Who cares if it's a copy of someone else's idea

This kind of "copying" isn't a bad thing. It is exactly this sharing of source code and constant evolution that drives the success of open source / free software.

It's a completely different mindset than we are used to. We are taught that if somebody creates something like a computer program, it is his and his alone. Free software instead sees it as something that is given back to the community for other people to improve. There's no shame in that. :)

max.diems
January 27th, 2007, 04:15 PM
there is no Adobe Acrobat

Actually, there is. I think you'll find it in Multiverse.

syxbit
January 27th, 2007, 04:18 PM
I'm not talking about Adobe Reader, but Adobe Acrobat (the one that costs, and lets you edit PDF's)

PurplePenguin:
I agree, that's what I was saying.
I was trying to point out that Linux shouldn't be afraid to copy a few windows/mac ideas every now and then. They do have SOME good ideas :)
I was pointing out that windows copies a lot of ideas from OSX, and it shouldn't be frowned upon.
what matters is that you have a good final product.

I was condoning ubuntu's copying of debian :)
why recode the same thing????

Tomosaur
January 27th, 2007, 04:23 PM
You're getting into the realm of intellectual property there though. Adobe could see a project if it coped Acrobat, for example. There are lots of issues limiting the growth of open-source software - almost all to do with legal barriers.

PurplePenguin
January 27th, 2007, 04:38 PM
I'm not talking about Adobe Reader, but Adobe Acrobat (the one that costs, and lets you edit PDF's)

You can save as PDF with Open Office. Not quite the same, but hey, it's something. :D



PurplePenguin:
I agree, that's what I was saying.
I was trying to point out that Linux shouldn't be afraid to copy a few windows/mac ideas every now and then. They do have SOME good ideas :)
I was pointing out that windows copies a lot of ideas from OSX, and it shouldn't be frowned upon.
what matters is that you have a good final product.

I was condoning ubuntu's copying of debian :)
why recode the same thing????

Ah, I gotcha. :) So it seems as we agree pretty much on everything... I just read your post wrong! :)

Yes, I think it's fine to take the best ideas, even if they come from MS or Mac. I've even got my desktop set up as an OSX clone... I just think it looks cool. That's what I love about linux... whenever my mood changes, I can fool around and change stuff. I'm not forced into somebody else's decision about what's best. :)

About recoding the same thing, I agree completely. Why reinvent the wheel? That's why, in my opinion, linux and free software has gone so far so quickly since the first time I tried it (Caldera OpenLinux was the first serious attempt I made at linux, back in the day). I had made other attempts before, but could never get through the installation. :D

koenn
January 27th, 2007, 04:40 PM
The problem with that solution is it assumes that reading the manual will solve the problem... the documentation (...) makes incorrect assumptions about my level of prior knowledge, about my understanding of commands, abbreviations, and short-cuts, and it does not answer the question I have at the time, which usually is "why isn't this working?"

(...) I once spent five hours trying to follow a HowTo that never once mentioned that I needed to be logged in as root for the instructions to work... I was apparently supposed to know that anyway.
The problem with all documentation is that it has to assume prior knowledge. I bought a laundry machine and the instructions talk about temperature and rinsing cycles, assuming i know what that is and why they are relevant to doing laundry. It talks about wool and syntetics as if i know what my cloths are made of. I used to have white T-shirts and red T-shirts. TI have only pink T-shirts now, and the machine has flooded the house because there's some sort of exhaust pipe where water runs out after the washing is done. That laundry machine is really difficult, and the documentation sucks.

An other way of looking at it : It probably is possible to write 'better' and 'newbie-friendly' documentation. But given the limited time people have, would you rather have them re-write documentation, or develop new software or fix bugs in existing software ? What's more important, a manual about "to shut down the system, click on the shutdown icon (screenshot)" , or drivers for new wireless network cards ?

yes, there's a certain amount of sarcasm in those comments. On the bright side : one way or another, you will acquire some of that assumed prior knowledge, and if in the mean time you've also learned to use google and find man pages (because people told you to, arrogant elitists that they are), you're well on your way to figure out how to work yourself out of some of the problems you may encouter when using Linux. And you'll get a better understanding of computers and networking in general, so you'll get yourself in far less trouble. Nice bonus, if you ask me.


(...)I think some of the problems mentioned in this thread are due to the fact that now the sphere where the fellow programmers were all equals and friends is being invaded by dumb newbs who most of the time have next to no idea what they're doing, (...)

Nice theory - probably right too.

[QUOTE=Mimsy;2070145](...) and who are trying to learn but not always being successful.

OK - some of them. Others obviously just demand that someone fixes their problem - without any effort from their side. That those are met with elitism, sarcasm and what not, I don't really care about. Let them use Windows and call Microsoft if something doesn't work.


(...) This is a source of irritation for the ones who thought they had finally found a place where they can just kick back and relax, away from the idiots, and this irritation is what prompted the arrogant and elitist behavior.

Not completely correct - re. the first paragraphs in this post. It's not about kick back and relax, it's about exchanging information that is of interest to them, or solving interesting problems - problems they can learn something from themselves while searching for a sollution. From that perspective, "newbie" questions are a waste of time.

EmilyRose
January 27th, 2007, 04:57 PM
In a word: Installation. Don't get me wrong, the ease of installation has improved leaps and bounds since I started tinkering with linux, god, 5, 6, 7 years ago. But its still a bit on the rough side. What is a partition?? Most people have no clue. Ask them what a HD is and they'll look at you blankly - they have no clue. So when you start asking them about partitions, they think "man, why am i bothering?" and go back to windows.

Second of all (for me at least), once the installation was complete and my computer was (hopefully) booting up properly getting my modem to work. Now this is probably less of an issue than it was in the past as soo many people are now on networks (are they easier or harder to setup than a dialup modem? I have no clue, having never, ever had the joy of even trying...).

Thirdly is (in the past at least), getting sound to work. I'm still amazed that Ubuntu detected and correctly figured out my sound and I didn't have to fiddle with it - hell even my surround sound speakers are working, which is incredible (they didn't really ever seem to work right in windows...).

Once you have it up and running, getting all the neccasary codecs downloaded so that you can play mp3's, cd's, dvd's etc is a bit confusing as well - though to be fair I suppose you have to download/install those things in windows too, though most folks' computer come pre-setup by the factory, so....

But, once its set up properly linux isn't any harder, IMO. My husband is succesfully using Ubuntu with me now - and he's about as computer-illiterate of a 24 year old as you can find these days!! I'm planning on switching my dad over from ME to Ubuntu sometime here soon (tisnt like I have anything better to do than fiddle with computers atm...), and if I can get him working right... maybe grandpa will be next!!

syxbit
January 27th, 2007, 05:50 PM
while this "not reinventing the wheel" thing has made linux improve substancially, the idea that anyone can change the code doesn't halp as much as it should sometimes.

in the case of Ubuntu, they're tried to give back to debian, but most other RPM distro's don't give back.

imagine if the developers of KDE and gnome were sharing.
imagine if compiz and beryl hadn't split

I know sometimes you need to fork, as you have completely different ideas, but oft times we get lots of half-finished products instead of 1 or 2 great ones.

in the case of Rhythmbox. Lots of people have taken code
I don't like Rhythmbox much (use listen) but if the listen guy had just improved on Rythmbox instead of making a new product (same goes for most others like banshee, exaile etc..)

same for cd burning.
gnomebaker is junk (IMO, as it just burns coasters) Brasero is good, and there are some others too, but do we really need 12 different burning apps, and 20 media playing apps?

I know 1 app wouldn't fit the bill for everyone, but if there were 3-4 ??

Or, how about a firefox approach.
1 app fits the bill for everyone. They have a base, and add extensions.
wouldn't that work for other apps too?

I just feel that sometimes linux dev's are working against eachother sometimes...

Polygon
January 27th, 2007, 06:04 PM
but on the contrary, if programs have competition, then they work harder to make their software better, faster, have more features, appeal to more users. Which is a win win situation. A common example of this is intel and amd processors. intel basically had a stranglehold on the market, and then amd came on the scene and started producing processors that rivaled intel's, and now both companies are trying to outdo each other with price, performance, all that jazz.

and it all comes down to that linux does not have enough marketshare. If we had more, more companies and people would start contributing to programs like gimp and openoffice so they wouldent have to pay for programs like Word and Photoshop

and i must disagree that gnomebaker is junk, as i have a stack of 10 linux cd's next to me that have been successfully been burned by gnomebaker.

and if you look at the avaiable programs for windows, you also find that there are a ton of programs for burning cd's, ton of programs for image editing, ton of media playing programs.... having a bunch of different programs that do the same thing is not new

PurplePenguin
January 27th, 2007, 06:35 PM
and i must disagree that gnomebaker is junk, as i have a stack of 10 linux cd's next to me that have been successfully been burned by gnomebaker.

Not to steer the conversation in a different direction, but I have to agree... I've read quite a few bad things about gnomebaker lately. I should mention that I've only been using it (and gnome) for half a year or so, so I have no experience with older versions of the program... but I burn around four or five discs every day with gnomebaker and have had absolutely no coasters this whole time. I do burn at slow speeds (4X for CD, 2X for DVD) because Azureus is running 24/7 in the background and tends to hit the hard drive quite a lot (and I'm usually surfing the net and using an archive manager at the same time). I was a hardcore k3b fan before making the switch to Ubuntu.

Well, that's it for this rant... I've got to come to the defense of my favourite burning program! :)

syxbit
January 27th, 2007, 06:42 PM
Polygon: you say that there are lots of similar apps in windows.
you're right, but these are comercial companies.
in the world of OSS, there isn't as much of a need for it, as they can help out whoever they want and contribute code.
they're not making money, so they have no reason to start their own project.

i've heard lots of good vs bad storied of gnomebaker.
it might work well for you, but the fact that it doesn't for others means something is up

PurplePenguin
January 27th, 2007, 06:55 PM
i've heard lots of good vs bad storied of gnomebaker.
it might work well for you, but the fact that it doesn't for others means something is up

Isn't it just a graphical frontend for cdrecord? How much difference could there be aside from cosmetic? (not trying to be sarcastic or anything... I'm genuinely interested in knowing!) :)

EdThaSlayer
January 27th, 2007, 07:07 PM
The main difference that could explain why one is better than the other is that one costs hundreds of dollars while the other one is for free. If you compare the amount of $ spend to the productivity that you get from using that certain software I bet you that the opensource programs will win.

cunawarit
January 27th, 2007, 07:15 PM
I'm an OpenOffice and GIMP user, I also use Microsoft Office 2003 at work.

I rate OpenOffice very highly, specially Writer, other than the collaborative options I don't think it lacks much. Calc isn't brilliant, but it is more than good enough for personal use.

OpenOffice isn't quite as sophisticated as Microsoft Office yet, but for personal use and certain corporate settings it is a perfectly good product. Sadly as I mentioned before the lack of collaborative options does rule it out for many corporate users.

As for GIMP, well I am a fan of it. I am biased though, because I never learned how to use Photoshop.

What I miss most in Linux is the lack of support for interfacing with some consumer products, for instance: my Nokia phone and my TI calculator. I am at the point where I'd be happy to use Linux most of the time at home for things like Web browsing, but I would also have a machine with a better supported OS (either Windows or OSX) for other things.

meng
January 27th, 2007, 07:19 PM
Yes, it would be nice if there were more choices for applications, however I would still prefer to use open-source apps rather than closed-source ones. Or at least applications that save documents in open formats rather than closed ones.

boredandblogging.com
January 27th, 2007, 08:06 PM
I think Excel is an issue for Open Office. There are a lot of people who have customized worksheets in Excel with VB and macros, moving to Calc would require a lot of training.

Also, Linux really needs a good replacement for something like Quicken or MS Money. Gnucash is ok, but it needs the ability to download transactions and pay bills. This isn't a criticism, I'm sure Gnucash or another product will get there eventually.

smoker
January 27th, 2007, 08:25 PM
everything in life is a compromise, there will probably never be an operating system and a list of applications that will appeal to everyone all the time. but each case has it's plus and minus points, linux is more secure, but some of the applications aren't as developed, windows is a breeding ground for all sorts of spyware and nasties like drm and wga, though some windows applications are more polished. you just have to pick the compromise that suits you best, or use both, whatever..,

Insomniac20k
January 27th, 2007, 09:28 PM
Perhaps thread starter should take his linux discs back to the store and get his money back :rolleyes:

Back when I used M$Office (it's been a while) it took forever to load up. On my laptop, which is few years old now, Open Office boots in a couple seconds. If you can't handle that, then perhaps joining the mindless masses and running windows is a good idea. Of course, to keep things running smoothly you'll have to reload every couple months.

As far as features go, I am a college student and I do some menu writing for work and I've never needed to do something that Open Office couldn't do. What the hell are you doing with it that it's failing you?

Yes we have to make a few sacrifices. Office Software is a big strongpoint. I can't tell you how many people who have told me they were going to buy MSOffice, and are now more than satisfied with Open Office.

Stop biching. If you're that upset about doing without a few lame proprietary programs, then use Windows or learn to program and make your own.

Crashmaxx
January 27th, 2007, 09:59 PM
I've always thought Open Office was almost identical to MS Office, you can fix the load time without pre-launching, and otherwise it seems the same to me. But I'm not a heavy office user, so I don't even know what the advanced features are, much less how to use them. If they would just fix the default settings so it would load faster, it would be perfectly fine for the average user.

Now gimp on the other hand is great.Yeah its not as good as Photoshop, but I trust I can do 90% of the stuff Photoshop does and its free software. I am glad to not have to use a pirated copy of Photoshop anymore. And since most users of Photoshop DON'T pay for it, I think the comparison is unfair.

So I don't feel like I'm compromising anything. But I agree more effort should be put in doing things like making gimpshop comparable to Photoshop and giving Open Office the extra features it needs and making sure it is properly usable on all systems.

syxbit
January 27th, 2007, 10:25 PM
Stop biching. If you're that upset about doing without a few lame proprietary programs, then use Windows or learn to program and make your own.

that statement was immature.

Insomniac20k
January 27th, 2007, 10:55 PM
that statement was immature.

Perhaps. But seriously.

Mateo
January 27th, 2007, 11:08 PM
I wish people who would say OOo isn't as good as Office would give some reasons!

and you can run MS Office if you get Crossover office.

And as someone said, Acrobat is on linux. I don't know why you would want it, though, it's slower than Evince.

Mateo
January 27th, 2007, 11:10 PM
but as to the general theme, yeah you are sacrificing some stuff. but you're also sacrificing stuff if you use windows too. There are always sacrifices. You can't ever get the best of all worlds. That's called life.

Mateo
January 27th, 2007, 11:12 PM
I think Excel is an issue for Open Office. There are a lot of people who have customized worksheets in Excel with VB and macros, moving to Calc would require a lot of training.

Also, Linux really needs a good replacement for something like Quicken or MS Money. Gnucash is ok, but it needs the ability to download transactions and pay bills. This isn't a criticism, I'm sure Gnucash or another product will get there eventually.

i guess i'm going to have to try gnucash. I've been using Grisbi but everyone keeps talking about gnucash! I love grisbi except for the budget system, it confuses me.

Artemis3
January 27th, 2007, 11:49 PM
Seems someone likes an OS but not the available applications. We can do nothing to make the companies port their product to other OSes, but we can help improve free software proyects so they reach all OSes.

Perhaps if you started helping free software, you could eventually make it do exactly what you want. If you can't code, you can always contribute or hire people to fix things.

Consider the 400$ you were supposed to give Microsoft if you used their product, why not donate this to OpenOffice.org? How about GNOME Office, KOffice, or even Siag Office? And the 100$ for Windows? How about the cost for Acrobat? Photoshop. etc?

Consider the same if you are an organization with 100 machines, but there is this little feature you need in Openoffice to do the switch. Do the math, might 40000$ be enough incentive for the community to fix this? I think you could even make it with less...

When you don't use free software you are doing a great sacrifice. Suddendly you can't offer any amount of money to anyone anymore to fix you things (unless you somehow can buy the entire corporation owning the software you use). Sun did the math when they bought Stardivision and released OpenOffice.org. The alternative was paying thousands of licences to a rival corporation...

slimdog360
January 28th, 2007, 12:21 AM
I agree with most of your comments (although I can't believe for a second that OOo boots as quickly as Office.)

I just timed it then, a little over 4 seconds, ~4.13 seconds, from the time I clicked it to the time I was able to use it. Thats from a fresh start to without the preloader too. This is just on my particular setup, Im not saying its that fast for everyone or that MS Office is that fast or slow for anyone either. When I disable the MS Office preloader I get it loading in about the same amount of time. I don't have Windows installed at the moment so I cant time it but I remember timing it once before and that was pretty much the result, ~4.something from memory.

Of course the startup time was not your primary concern but I just though I'd let you know how fast it is for me.

Edit: I should mention that this is on edgy, I remember on breezy, dapper and windows that openoffice took much longer to start. Also I just tried openoffice with the built in quickstarter after a restart and it took a about second off it, but after the first startup it loads immediately (< 1 second).

wersdaluv
January 28th, 2007, 12:27 AM
I'm planning on switching my dad over from ME to Ubuntu sometime here soon (tisnt like I have anything better to do than fiddle with computers atm...), and if I can get him working right... maybe grandpa will be next!!

That's what I am also dreaming of, but I don't think a man as busy as my dad would spend some time studying about a new OS even if Windows works for him, although not perfectly, but it works.

I hate to say this but I think, so far, Ubuntu is not for everybody. Despite of that, I am still optimistic that, one day, Ubuntu will be for all those "human beings" who use a computer (except those who work for rival OSs of course).

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 12:42 AM
I've merged this with the Linux Desktop Readiness thread.

I happen to agree that Linux "fanboys" tend to oversell the greatness of OpenOffice and GIMP, but I'd qualify that by saying Linux critics tend to underappreciate that same greatness for both applications.

OpenOffice does not do everything MS Office does, and I'm not just talking about compatibility issues. Simple things like proper grammar checking, case changing beyond upper and lower, creating pivot charts from pivot tables... OpenOffice does not match up to MS Office in terms of one-to-one functionality (though, the export-to-PDF option in OpenOffice is nice!). At the same time, who cares? A lot of home users don't need those special features I just mentioned. A lot of them don't care about macros or other complex functions. All they want to do is type up a letter and print it out, or make a quick bullet-point list of things to do. Bottom line: there are a lot of people who currently use MS Office and would be perfectly satisfied with OOo functionality... if they only knew OOo existed.

Same with GIMP. It may not be as functional or as "friendly" as Photoshop for professionals. But for home users who just want to play around with some family photos, a free program with the capabilities GIMP has is amazing.

Frak
January 28th, 2007, 01:24 AM
Hey, here's an idea, want a basic M$ Word, try Abi Word, the basic of basic, and take it from me, it works almost exactly like M$ Word, and its something I can contribute to, making it every day more ready for the desktop...

RAV TUX
January 28th, 2007, 01:47 AM
Linux Newbie,

Since you went out of your comfort zone by using an OS which is new to you, you must be driven one way or another to learn more about it.

I posted the thread "Newbie Support" (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=346697) believing that the lack of access to and abundance of excellent documentations is making it hard for the Linux Newbie.

Now, I want to hear more from the Newbies like me.

What makes it hard for you to use Linux?

The things I can think of now are because you want a better documentation, you want to do it the easy way (as easy as how you use Windows), you are not that interested with Linux but you are obliged to because you don't want to spend so much for an OS?

I am pretty sure that the reasons that I have mentioned above are not complete.

Now, what could the reason be?...I was new to linux once, and still learn new things daily...and I find it easier-then-windows to understand....I honestly never understood windows....still don't...also Mac OS X I feel is like Linux on training wheels....(an OS for the challenged)

syxbit
January 28th, 2007, 05:54 AM
I wish people who would say OOo isn't as good as Office would give some reasons!

and you can run MS Office if you get Crossover office.

And as someone said, Acrobat is on linux. I don't know why you would want it, though, it's slower than Evince.

Acrobat is NOT on linux. The free Adobe reader is.
They're completely different programs
You can't edit PDF's right now in linux!

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 05:58 AM
Acrobat is NOT on linux. The free Adobe reader is.
They're completely different programs
You can't edit PDF's right now in linux!
I can understand the confusion.

After all, Adobe Reader used to be called Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Now the Acrobat family has more functionality than just reading. There is, for example, Adobe Acrobat Professional.

Frak
January 28th, 2007, 07:00 AM
You can't edit PDF's right now in linux!

On contraire, programs such as Xfig and flpsed can add new text and graphics on top of the file, not actually editing the PDF file, but it gets the job done, and done effectively.

ushaba
January 28th, 2007, 09:26 AM
i don't think installation is that big a deal. my friend and i successfully installed several versions of linux, including slackware, in the early days of experimenting. i think the main thing with linux is that you need two computers, one working and one being worked on. it's pretty hard to fix problems with google if you can't get online, for instance. in the beginning i maintained a dual boot just for that one reason...

maxamillion
January 28th, 2007, 09:41 AM
newbies seem to have trouble using google, searching wikis and forums, or reading man pages ... that is their biggest problem

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 09:45 AM
I've retitled the thread.

The term newbie is not necessarily insulting, but in this context I think new user is less likely to bring charges of elitism (even though the OP identifies as a "newbie"). It is also not a given that new users have a hard time using Linux, so I popped in the word sometimes.

By the way, you don't need to know what a partition is in order to install Ubuntu. You need to know partitions only if you're going to install a dual-boot--same goes for Windows. If you want Ubuntu to be your only OS, you can just choose the "erase entire disk" option during installation and never know or have to deal with the term partition.

Ubuntu isn't any harder to install than Windows. The only thing that makes a Windows installation any easier is the fact that almost all hardware manufacturers (for economic viability) create and distribute Windows drivers for their products. Windows doesn't recognize your modem? Don't worry. The modem manufacturer included a Windows driver. Windows didn't recognize your scanner? Don't worry. The scanner manufacturer included a Windows driver.

... oh, and the fact that most people never install Windows. Dell (or HP or Sony or Gateway) does it for them.

ushaba
January 28th, 2007, 09:53 AM
i still think it's unfair to assume that new users are not trying. many of them spend DAYS looking at google and man pages before ever asking a question. if you're saying that people don't know HOW to use google and whatever else, that is fair. but it's not that they're NOT using google and the forums and the wikis and the man pages. i admit there is the occasional user who asks "what is wine? can it play world of warcraft" and that can seem like the sort of thing that a quick search would fix though... but generally, some people overestimate the extent to which people are lazy.

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 10:06 AM
I disagree with the whole "Google it" philosophy.

In theory it sounds good, but in practice...

1. The asking of questions and the giving of answers serve to foster community and to build knowledge. I gained a lot of my understanding of Ubuntu not only from doing Google searches but also from answering the same "dumb" questions over and over again. The best way to learn is to teach, and a great way for slightly-older-than-brand-new new users to get a grasp on things is to help brand new users with simple concepts.

Also, what exactly are you Googling for? If people don't ask questions, there's nothing for Google to index. Should there be only one thread on the entire internet about Wine and World of Warcraft?

Keep in mind, too, on the community building side of things, that even though a lot of "the same old questions" seem similar, many times there are unique twists to a new user's situation. New users who are lost in a different world need some assurance that they're not alone. It goes beyond just having their problems "solved."

2. Google searches do not always yield the best answers. Someone looking for how to install software may do a Google search and come up with trying to rpm a .deb file or compile from source when Synaptic Package Manager is readily available. I've seen (and experienced myself when I first started using Linux) new users finding terrible dual boot guides that involve you using Windows' boot loader, doing a dd to some linux.bin file and editing the boot.ini file in Windows to get a dual boot working instead of just going with the default install Grub to the MBR and let Grub automatically add Windows to the boot menu.

In other words, new users may find results, but they have no way of assessing whether a tutorial is a good tutorial or the best one out there. By asking questions, she gets a chance for the community to offer several suggestions and to validate or amend one another's comments.

3. Sometimes Googling is only effective if you know what to search for.

If people don't want to answer new users' questions, they shouldn't answer new users' questions. They can spend their time doing something else. Rebuffs of the "Google it" or "RTFM" nature serve no purpose but to turn off new users and give the speaker a false sense of superiority.

slimdog360
January 28th, 2007, 10:14 AM
because there is no PTP support for their camera and as suchh it is impossible (or very very hard) to get their photos off of their cameras.

koenn
January 28th, 2007, 10:56 AM
I disagree with the whole "Google it" philosophy.
... and "Google it" is an unacceptable answer according to the forum policy, but still I think sometimes it's an appropriate answer. Some questions, when typed in a google search in stead of in a forum, will lead straight to a wikipedia page or a tutorial on the subject. Added bonus : people realise there's more than one way to get information.

Also, I've seen new users ask questions along the lines of "I'm completely new to Linux, I've just concluded my first install of ubuntu 2 hours ago, and now I want to set up a network at home, run my own public web server, and set up a game server and let my friends connect to it over the internet. I'm new, so please provide step by step instructions and don't bother me with commands - strictly GUI please. "
Answering that without any references to a manual, a tutorial or any other external source of information, including Google, is possible, but I'm not convinced it's the best way to do it.

Teach them how to fish, and all that.

wersdaluv
January 28th, 2007, 12:18 PM
Teach them how to fish, and all that.

BINGO!

Fingerz91
January 28th, 2007, 04:25 PM
Yup. The command lijne is a great tool. And being a new user and having numerous problems with samba, I determined that the CL, not the GUI was the best way to go....works wonders for me!

Just Google "Ubuntu Commands" or "Samba Commands" and you'll get a nice list.

I've been a user for about 7 months, and if you're not willing to learn, Linux will not reveal all of its potential to you.

Bloodfen Razormaw
January 28th, 2007, 04:51 PM
I followed literally tens of guides on getting SAMBA to work (none of which did), all of them different and no doubt from well meaning users (your willingness to help was appreciated) please please please Linux users/developers just go to a GUI for newbies and you may just find more and more people switching.
KDE has had a GUI for Samba for ages.

RCC2k7
January 28th, 2007, 05:26 PM
I agree with the OP but I want to give some of my perspective.

First: Yes, life IS too short for Linux, but Linux is not too short for life. Today's Linux distros are light years ahead of what was available ten or twelve years ago. Give it a few more years and you might actually get surprised.

Second: Command lines in the 21st Century.
A command line by itself can be a very powerful tool, and Linux's command line is top of the line in that. It's priceless for automation, and a true helper when things go wrong. However, there is a difference between using a command line because you WANT to, and having to use a command line because you have no other choice. Being required to use a command line these days is archaic, period. There is a reason why MS-DOS is now dead, why Apple dumped their command prompt-based OS's from the Apple II series in favor of the Macintosh UI, and there is a reason why OS/2 is no more. Requiring the user to rely in a command prompt is just inefficient. Windows Vista includes PowerShell, and it is available for download for Windows XP, but you don't have to use it unless you really want to. I have yet to see a Linux distro that can claim the same flexibility, although some distros have shown some progress in this front.

Third: There is a reason Windows is king of the desktop, and it isn't Microsoft's marketing. It's called Productivity. It's an OS where people can focus on getting their tasks done, and not in how much it takes to get those tasks done. Granted, some of MS attempts at this have backfired on them (*cough* Office 2007 *cough*) but still the amount of stuff that just works in Windows while you have to sweat blood to get the same stuff to work with Linux is still overwhelming.

Here's a simple sentence that summarizes the traditional philosophy behind Linux .

I like to understand what I do.
I have tried many Linux distros and the common denominator is this: The user is required to spend much more time trying to understanding what he/she is doing (success or not) than actually doing it! And sometimes, it takes a ridiculously large amount of effort to get a simple task accomplished.

Linux's future and success will be in combining choices to accommodate both types of users: those who want to understand and control every aspect of a task, and those who just want to get the darn task done.

DoctorMO
January 28th, 2007, 05:44 PM
Third: There is a reason Windows is king of the desktop, and it isn't Microsoft's marketing. It's called Productivity. It's an OS where people can focus on getting their tasks done, and not in how much it takes to get those tasks done. Granted, some of MS attempts at this have backfired on them (*cough* Office 2007 *cough*) but still the amount of stuff that just works in Windows while you have to sweat blood to get the same stuff to work with Linux is still overwhelming.

Er no, Windows is king because of underhanded and illegal business practices by Microsoft and anything they do is tainted regardless of the technical quality with a stink of immorality.

The windows PowerShell is a nice tool, uses object definitions to pass between programs; unlike bash which uses line delimited data; but I could use a whole bunch of other CLIs in Linux, there's a really nice tool which processes english language as commands suitable for voice recognition which will be nice in a few years (forget the name for the moment)

The OP is moaning about being frustrated because he doesn't know what he's doing. this doesn't mean that ubuntu doesn't have a way to go or that this user knows how to fix those problems; prevention of the frustration should be a first priority for any programmer wishing to accommodate new users in what ever they way they use their computer. sometimes you may wish to just tell them how to do it better and sometimes you may want to build a tool for them to use.

Kobalt
January 28th, 2007, 05:56 PM
Yes, life IS too short for Linux, but Linux is not too short for life.
Possibly the dumbest thing I've read since a long time...

but still the amount of stuff that just works in Windows while you have to sweat blood to get the same stuff to work with Linux is still overwhelming.
Reading this I have the feeling that you don't really have an experience with both windows and linux...

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 07:01 PM
Well, as I said before, Googling may yield a tutorial right away, but it may not be a good tutorial or the best one out there, and the new user has no way of assessing the quality of the results.

It's also very easy, now that you know what you're doing, to say "teach them how to fish," but when you're a new user and your internet connection isn't working, your screen resolution is way off, and you have no idea what you're doing... you're extremely frustrated, and all you want to do is just get it working for now. A little understanding goes a long way here.

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 07:29 PM
My question is: is life too short for threads like these that don't end up doing anything productive to make Linux easier to use or more widely adopted?

I've merged this with the desktop readiness thread.

RCC2k7
January 28th, 2007, 07:30 PM
Possibly the dumbest thing I've read since a long time...

Reading this I have the feeling that you don't really have an experience with both windows and linux...

(Windows)
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98 and 98SE
Windows ME
Windows 2000 Professional and Server
Windows XP Home and Professional
Windows Vista Ultimate (beta 2 and RC1)

(Linux)
Mandrake 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 and 8.0.
Corel Linux (before it was dumped by Corel and acquired by Xandros)
Redmond Linux (then renamed Lycoris, and then acquired by Mandriva (formerly Mandrakesoft and Conectiva)
SeSE 9.0 and 9.1
Mandriva Discovery 2006
Ubuntu 6.10

I'm not a fanboy. I tried various OS's and will still keep on trying them. I'm just telling it like it is. Windows gets the job done, while Linux will require you to waste too much time figuring out how the OS works before you can get the job done. The only ones who could've crushed Windows to pieces would've been Apple if they had not kept their hardware and software models that closed.

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 07:42 PM
I'm not a fanboy. I tried various OS's and will still keep on trying them. I'm just telling it like it is. Windows gets the job done, while Linux will require you to waste too much time figuring out how the OS works before you can get the job done. I have a similar background to yours--used almost all versions of Windows and tried out a bunch of Linux distros, but I came to a different conclusion. After all, we've been using Windows since 3.1. We know how it works. We've spent decades getting used to how it works, so obviously we don't have to "waste too much time figuring out how the OS works." It took me that long (decades) to feel any sort of mastery or comfort with Windows. I got comfortable with Linux within two months.

And of course you don't have to waste time figuring out the OS in Windows--it comes preinstalled. Before four years ago, I'd never installed Windows from scratch... ever. It had always come on every PC I'd bought. Dell would just take care of everything for me. On the other hand, most Linux users do have to install and configure Linux themselves, and they do not necessarily do research on hardware first to see if it'll be compatible. They just use what they have, cross their fingers, and hope Linux will work with every conceivable piece of hardware available, even though the hardware manufacturers do not all create Linux drivers or release driver code.
The only ones who could've crushed Windows to pieces would've been Apple if they had not kept their hardware and software models that closed. This makes no sense. Part of Apple's appeal to its users is its closed hardware/software model. That's how their computers work as well as they do--they have full control over compatibility.

riven0
January 28th, 2007, 08:09 PM
You know, I'm a huge newbie, but I found Ubuntu easier to install and setup than XP. Considering that I've re-installed XP close to 20-30 times, I think I'm pretty good at comparing them. :D

Of course, it helped that I knew what the CLI/terminal was before installing Ubuntu, but over all, I think it was easy because I came at it with an open mind. I wasn't expecting things to work anything like Windows. Also, I appreciated the ease of use, (no driver installation, synaptic, the ability to customize as much as I want, etc), and immediately realized how many strong points Linux has. The Ubuntu search forum also helped me with any problem I ran into... including the first time I seriously broke the xserver. :p

I think if all new users came to Linux with an open and learning attitude, people wouldn't have so many problems. Not meaning to insult anyone, especially you wersdaluv, :D but I think too many people come in with the wrong expectations.

koenn
January 28th, 2007, 08:12 PM
When I used to be a newbie, my only criterium for assessing the quality of a tutorial was : if I at least understand some of what it says, i'ts already good enough. The majority of what google returned would simply not make any sense to me.
I do understand that for a new user, to be going the tar, configure, make route to install software because the howto says so, is not really desirable. On the other hand, there's plenty of ubunti-specific documentations, both on this site and at http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Main_Page , plus just about every question has been answered already (yeah yeah, i exagerate) so letting new users know that there are other ways of finding info seems justified to me. Finding information trough a search alse requires some skills, but if they never try, they'll never learn.
Situations / questions / users suchs as those described by 23meg at http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=2069967&postcount=32 really turn me of (and I usually refrain from answering them and shouldn't let it bother me, but still ...)

RCC2k7
January 28th, 2007, 08:36 PM
And of course you don't have to waste time figuring out the OS in Windows--it comes preinstalled. Before four years ago, I'd never installed Windows from scratch... ever. It had always come on every PC I'd bought. Dell would just take care of everything for me. Then that's different in your case. I have installed and configured from scratch each and every version of Windows I've used. Even on new OEM machines, vendors put too much junk in their installations that I've always gotten better performance from reformatting and reinstalling from scratch.

Ironically, most Linux distros I've tried have been relatively easy to install - Ubuntu has been truly my most painful Linux install yet. It's what comes after the installation what's Linux Achilles heel. It's when you need to use your computer for something and find out that a program or driver is missing or not configured. That's Linux problem. Ironically Ubuntu has been the least painful to configure so far, but still no walk at the park. I still feel I'm spending more time hacking my computer than actually using it. If or when someone combines the extensive customization and control capabilities of Linux with usability (thinigs work at an essential level but still allow control and customization to extend and customize the system's capabilities, that'll be a killer Linux distro and will make easier to talk people into using it. So far that hasn't happened, although there has definitely been some progress.


This makes no sense. Part of Apple's appeal to its users is its closed hardware/software model. That's how their computers work as well as they do--they have full control over compatibility.
But it has also meant less market share for Apple. You don't have to buy a PC from Dell, HP, IBM or some other fancy vendor. You can buy pieces and make build your own. And when small bisuness build computers in this manner, what do they preinstall on their systems? Definitely not MacOS because to use MacOS, you have to buy Apple's Mac computers. The number of manufacturers that can build a Mac cant's even compare to the number of manufacturers that can build a PC.

aysiu
January 28th, 2007, 08:44 PM
Maybe something's wrong with your hardware.

Ubuntu was a walk in the park for me. All I had to do was put two lines into my /etc/X11/xorg.conf to get the proper screen resolution for my monitor, and everything else worked without any configuring.

Mimsy
January 28th, 2007, 09:21 PM
Personally, I've always been a bit turned off by the documentation that talks about how easy something is, or how well it works...

As an example, I'm right now trying to make my laptop wireless, by trying to install network-manager-gnome, and enable WPA so I can connect to the wireless router. I can't even begin to count the number of tutorials that tell me network-manager-gnome can configure and run WPA very easily out of the box, with next to no hassle whatsoever. My installed version must be the wrong one then, since it doesn't even have WPA as an option, but I have yet to find information on how to change that. I keep trying, of course, since the whole point of having a laptop kind of goes away if I have to keep it stationary, tethered to the wireless router with an ethernet cable, but it still annoys me that most of what I can find insists on telling me how easy and hassle-free this process is... :roll:

/Mimsy

Curggles
January 28th, 2007, 10:11 PM
I have tried linux a few times over the last couple years. I just recently got fed up with windows though and sat down and seriously gave Linux specifically Ubuntu a chance. I am running 6.10 Edgy at the moment and it runs very well. I have some issues with my graphics card but that's about it.
I would have to say until recently it was hard to find a distro that was relatively easy to setup. Ubuntu has done a great job with user friendly install and even some support which is unreal for a free os. The main problem I see with Newbies like myself and linux is compatibility. software and hardware alike. if more of the major hardware and software companies took linux seriously and developed drivers and software that worked for linux I think linux would catch on very fast. Just right now you try and setup a peice of hardware and the drivers work for some people and others have to do more intense setup and yet others have no luck what so ever.
All in all I am very impressed with ubuntu and am now will be continuing on with running ubuntu way better than xp. Way more efficient. Worth the time you spend tweaking it to get it setup.
Just wanted to say to all those experienced linux users thanks for your posts on how to setup hardware and software. You are the ones that keep linux growing by helping us migrating newbies. Thanks all!!!

Mateo
January 28th, 2007, 10:21 PM
it requires a lot of user feedback.

Sepp1
January 28th, 2007, 10:27 PM
I have used DOS, Win3.1, win95-98 and XP (pardon my swearing) and switched to Ubuntu 6 months ago, and I KNEW, that "Linux is not windows", and "Everything is going to be a lot different in the beginning" (Actual quotes). However everything - except wifi configuring - has actually been a lot easier, than I feared, and a lot easier, than it was in windows.

You asked however: "Why do new users sometimes have a hard time using Linux?"

The anwer for me is WIFI configuring - thats a hard time indeed, but that was also difficult in windows.

Sepp

IYY
January 28th, 2007, 11:03 PM
I started using Linux a few years ago, but I still remember that after a few months of using Linux, I've learned it better than Windows, despite having used Windows for around 15 years.

dvarsam
January 28th, 2007, 11:31 PM
Quite honestly, a lot of the documentation can be convoluted to the new user...

It is because documentation & manuals for specific programs do NOT include some user case Examples...
Even thought that is very easy to do...
They tend NOT to provide these...
So, in the end, the user is trying to solve a "riddle" to make things work...

Thanks.

seijuro
January 28th, 2007, 11:48 PM
I've done about two dozen different machine installs now with ubuntu and the only problem I have ran into was one was too old to run the liveCD (enter altCD). Aside from that the only other real tweaking I had to do was install the nvidia drivers.

wersdaluv
January 29th, 2007, 12:24 AM
Well, as I said before, Googling may yield a tutorial right away, but it may not be a good tutorial or the best one out there, and the new user has no way of assessing the quality of the results.

It's also very easy, now that you know what you're doing, to say "teach them how to fish," but when you're a new user and your internet connection isn't working, your screen resolution is way off, and you have no idea what you're doing... you're extremely frustrated, and all you want to do is just get it working for now. A little understanding goes a long way here.

Let's put it this way, as you have said, a user has specific problems which is the reason why the user has the right to post a thread even if a similar thread exists. That is good because I wouldn't have solved many of my problems if I was not to post a thread made especially for my problems.

The "teach them how to fish" is a different story. It is meant for the new users who want to learn about the Linux basics. It's because a Windows migrant isn't used to using the forums and browsing manuals. That principle is useful in a different sense.

I think, for a new Linux user to learn, the first step is to fish. The second is to ask for help when he is having a hard time.

Daveski
January 29th, 2007, 12:55 AM
Second: Command lines in the 21st Century.
A command line by itself can be a very powerful tool, and Linux's command line is top of the line in that. It's priceless for automation, and a true helper when things go wrong. However, there is a difference between using a command line because you WANT to, and having to use a command line because you have no other choice. Being required to use a command line these days is archaic, period. There is a reason why MS-DOS is now dead, why Apple dumped their command prompt-based OS's from the Apple II series in favor of the Macintosh UI, and there is a reason why OS/2 is no more. Requiring the user to rely in a command prompt is just inefficient.

On the whole I agree here, although I am a major fan of the command line, both in Windows and in Linux. I know you have not specifically said that Windows does not rely on the command line, but if you have ever run Windows servers, or done major support on Windows machines, you will know that many, many of the higher functions, trouble-shooting and problem resolutions DO require the command line in Windows.

A GUI is a great way to interface with a computer, but nothing yet has come even close to the sheer power and flexibility of a good command line interpreter.

rmartz
January 29th, 2007, 04:54 AM
The "teach them how to fish" is a different story. It is meant for the new users who want to learn about the Linux basics. It's because a Windows migrant isn't used to using the forums and browsing manuals. That principle is useful in a different sense.

I think, for a new Linux user to learn, the first step is to fish. The second is to ask for help when he is having a hard time.

As a "Newbie" to Ubuntu and a long time computer user, I might share a little of my perspective.

First, I think there are basically two (and maybe more) types of computer users. One, who loves to be on one and looks for things that keep them there. Second, those who use it to get what they need done and want to then go fishing.

I tend to be the first, but have taught some Senior citizen computer classes to many of the second. The second don't want to fish, they want to surf and email a few people. They don't want, nor are capable of, spending hours setting up a wireless network, or scanner.

Most people who are into computers will love Ubuntu and will forgive, and even sometimes enjoy the problems of setup and installation. Most times will feel victorious for being able to get the thing working. I myself have a patented "I got Ubuntu working" dance.

I also know that there are many who I have taught to do some basic things in Windows that would be totally lost with the dual toolbars in Ubuntu. I set up a system for a little historical society locally and knew I had to reconfigure the desktop to be as "Windows" looking as possible. Many people have a very slow learning curve.

The challenge is that Linux is just starting to come out of the "techie" world and trying to enter the mainstream. Mainstream world is filled with a majority of people who can not or care not to learn all the details. They don't want to fish linux files, they want to surf a little then go do some real fishing. Creating something for mainstream the trys to make them become techies will not work. I played with Ubuntu 5.1 and shelved it. I could see where it was heading, but could see it was not there yet. Ubuntu 6.1 is much closer and I could see it as something I could get to a non technical person and be able to hep them get what they wanted with little struggle.

I can't wait until Ubuntu 7. It may be able to completely go mainstream.

Okay, I have rambled enough. Just sharing a few thoughts.

Peace.

aysiu
January 29th, 2007, 04:59 AM
rmartz, while a lot of what you say is true, I'm not sure it's relevant to this discussion.

The second type of computer user you mention is not going to install and configure her own operating system, and then sign up for web forums asking for help.

RCC2k7
January 29th, 2007, 05:31 AM
On the whole I agree here, although I am a major fan of the command line, both in Windows and in Linux. I know you have not specifically said that Windows does not rely on the command line, but if you have ever run Windows servers, or done major support on Windows machines, you will know that many, many of the higher functions, trouble-shooting and problem resolutions DO require the command line in Windows.
You are correct about the server side but since this thread was about Linux's readiness for the desktop, I was referring to usage of the systems for the desktop. ;)

aysiu
January 29th, 2007, 05:39 AM
While I agree that one should never have to use the terminal (it should be a choice, not a requirement), people also tend to exaggerate just how often you do have to use the terminal.

Through this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=311953&highlight=dependent+terminal), I was able to find only a handful of situations in which terminal use was necessary (no GUI way available) and some of them are obscure or rare circumstances.

The vast majority of common tasks can be done through the GUI. It'll be a great day when Ubuntu makes all common tasks able to be done through the GUI, of course, without sacrificing the power of the terminal.

RCC2k7
January 29th, 2007, 05:43 AM
Maybe something's wrong with your hardware.

Ubuntu was a walk in the park for me. All I had to do was put two lines into my /etc/X11/xorg.conf to get the proper screen resolution for my monitor, and everything else worked without any configuring.
Umm, lets see: First Ubuntu refused to start up even in safe graphics mode - video card is ATI Radeon X600, not too old, not too new and not too rare. When I finally jumped through all the hoops to get start up in VESA mode, then it came partition hell. Ubuntu suggested that I repartitioned the entire hard drive, with complete disregard for my Windows and data partitions. When I told the installer not to do so and to automatically use the 40 GB of unpartitioned space I had previously allocated for it, it decided not to mount my NTFS partitions, so I decided to reinstall Ubuntu and manually partition the unallocated space. Only then Ubuntu decided to mount my NTFS drives. Far from being a walk at the park.

aysiu
January 29th, 2007, 05:44 AM
Right, and there are plenty of Windows installation horror stories as well.

You make it sound as if only your experience has any validity.

A sample size of one is not a study. Sorry. There are smooth Ubuntu installations and smooth Windows installations. There are nightmare Ubuntu installation and nightmare Windows installations.

John E
January 29th, 2007, 06:33 AM
What is clear from this thread is that there are two basic schools of thought about the term "desktop ready" - namely:-


School of thought #1
Desktop ready = Simple enough to be configured and used by an average user.

School of thought #2
Desktop ready = Simple enough to be used by an average user, as long as somebody else configures it.

Frankly, I'm surprised that these two views exist. On the ideal PC, I'd probably expect to spend 98.5% of my time using my apps productively (and/or playing games, if I'm that way inclined). 0.5% of my time installing those apps or games. 0.5% of my time installing and configuring my hardware devices - and 0.5% of my time installing or upgrading the OS itself. In other words, I'd expect to spend less than 2% of my time on installation & configuration - so why is this even being factored into the equation? Well, let me offer a personal insight....

It's now some 10 weeks or so since I first installed Linux. I don't use it every day but I've probably averaged about 2.5 days per week running Linux and the rest of my time running Windows. It has to be said that Windows comes pretty close to the above ideal - in other words, I do spend around 98.5% of my time using it productively. How does this compare with Linux?

Well I'm sorry to say (and I promise you that this is no exaggeration) in all my time using Linux I've carried out no productive work with it whatsoever. Pretty much all of my time so far has been spent purely and simply trying to make it work. A few days ago, frustrated after 10 weeks of pain with Dapper, I "upgraded" to Edgy, only to find myself right back at square one with many of my key hardware devices no longer working properly.

Armed with some prior experience I'm hoping that it won't take another 10 weeks before I get everything back again - but I'm prepared to bet that I'll still be working mostly on configuration for the next 2 or 3 weeks.

Viewed in those terms it's easy to see why so many people want "configuration" to be taken out of the equation. Whatever your slant on Windows, the latest versions are childs play when it comes to installing & configuring hardware. By contrast, Linux is roughly where Windows was, back in the early days of NT. In fact, from my personal experience, I'd say that NT is quite a good comparison for Linux.... NT is another OS where I spent most of my time on configuration and very little time doing anything productive with it.

Given sufficient time & patience, I've no doubt that Linux can be a productive OS once you finally surmount all the configuration hurdles. But nothing is ever gained by people burying their heads in the sand. Configuration is still a MASSIVE problem area with Linux. In particular, the absence of a unified strategy for driver installation is a HUGE letdown. Great progress has been made for installing apps - but installing drivers under Linux is an absolute nightmare. Linux needs an equivalent to Synaptic - but for driver installations. Only then will it be even close to calling itself "desktop ready".

mdsmedia
January 29th, 2007, 06:52 AM
You know, I'm a huge newbie, but I found Ubuntu easier to install and setup than XP. Considering that I've re-installed XP close to 20-30 times, I think I'm pretty good at comparing them. :D

Of course, it helped that I knew what the CLI/terminal was before installing Ubuntu, but over all, I think it was easy because I came at it with an open mind. I wasn't expecting things to work anything like Windows. Also, I appreciated the ease of use, (no driver installation, synaptic, the ability to customize as much as I want, etc), and immediately realized how many strong points Linux has. The Ubuntu search forum also helped me with any problem I ran into... including the first time I seriously broke the xserver. :p

I think if all new users came to Linux with an open and learning attitude, people wouldn't have so many problems. Not meaning to insult anyone, especially you wersdaluv, :D but I think too many people come in with the wrong expectations.As a new(ish) user and still a newbie, I agree with this wholeheartedly.

I tried RedHat 5,6,7 years ago and had a bit of fun with frozen bubble, and got my ppp dialup connection happening, and it was all fun, but I couldn't do much more with it. Next Windows installation killed my Linux partition and that was that, until about 4 years ago, I tried again, and got a similar result with RedHat. I was, however, still interested in Linux and maintained a casual interest.

October, 2005 I was reading the mailing list of my local Linux User Group and they often talked about Ubuntu, although mentions of Slackware etc. and terms I had no idea about abounded, but for some reason Ubuntu kept coming up as a great distro. of Linux, and I asked about it on the mailing list. I got one reply, that I should give it a try...that I wouldn't be disappointed.

I tried the LiveCD on a magazine DVD and liked what I saw. For some reason I knew that I had to be open minded about a different OS. That it was different to Windows. So I came in with an open mind. I think that's the best way to learn to use Linux. Treat it as a new experience and don't expect to come from Windows and be able to do things you probably couldn't even do in Windows straight away.

I learn new things in Linux all the time. I find programs that will do things that I could never find for Windows. A good PIM replacement for Outlook (actually there are several), Tomboy note taker (I couldn't ever find something so simple in Windows), my point being that I came in with an open mind. I can't do everything that I may have been able to do in Windows without even realising it, but I'm learning new things all the time, and gradually learning to do things that I want to do. The more I learn, the less dependant I am on Windows, and as far as I'm concerned that can only be a good thing.

Dealing with the "you must have Windows Media Player" or "open in Excel" or "just open it in Word" or "you must use IE" types of statement build a defiance in me and whenever I find a workaround so I "don't have to use Windows Media Player" and so on I feel a sense of triumph over the establishment. Just ASSUMING I use Windows annoys me and if I can do it without Windows I will. If I can't I'll find out if I can. If I still can't I'll seek an alternative. I can't find an alternative I'll think about whether I HAVE to do it at all. If I have to do it....I'll boot into Windows... update my anti-virus.... and get back to Linux as quickly as possible, because while I'm in Windows there are lots of things I can't do!!

kuja
January 29th, 2007, 07:00 AM
If you used hardware that played nice with linux, that headache wouldn't exist. I personally spent no time at all with driver headaches, because the hardware I use really, really, just works. Hardware manufacturers generally don't support Linux. Linux however, for some odd reason, seems to support a lot of them anyway, if you haven't noticed. Most of your headaches seem to be a complete and total lack of VENDOR SUPPORT John E.

John E
January 29th, 2007, 08:07 AM
If you used hardware that played nice with linux, that headache wouldn't exist.
If only.... lack of vendor support, whilst undeniable, has been a relatively small part of the problem. For example, although I had problems configuring my graphic display, a lot of the problems were caused by inadequate or (even worse) cryptic, unhelpful feedback messages - or (worst of all) drivers telling me they'd installed correctly when they hadn't. There were also problems caused by Ubuntu's login screen being at an indeterminate refresh rate. Since most of today's flat panel displays are incapable of anything higher than 60Hz, why does the login screen default to 75Hz? You can fix it of course - but this involves having to find a high res monitor, reducing the refresh rate to 60Hz and then plugging up the flat panel. Since all monitors are capable of 60Hz, the sensible thing would have been a default of 60Hz, which people could increase later if their hardware allows it - not the other way around.

It's true that vendors are unwilling to support Linux to the same extent as Windows. I'm not going to argue with that. But the main thing crippling Linux is sloppy programming. Whether it's from vendors or from the developer community, field testing and other quality procedures are often poor.

FyreBrand
January 29th, 2007, 09:13 AM
What is clear from this thread is that there are two basic schools of thought about the term "desktop ready" - namely:-


School of thought #1
Desktop ready = Simple enough to be configured and used by an average user.

School of thought #2
Desktop ready = Simple enough to be used by an average user, as long as somebody else configures it.

Frankly, I'm surprised that these two views exist. On the ideal PC, I'd probably expect to spend 98.5% of my time using my apps productively (and/or playing games, if I'm that way inclined). 0.5% of my time installing those apps or games. 0.5% of my time installing and configuring my hardware devices - and 0.5% of my time installing or upgrading the OS itself. In other words, I'd expect to spend less than 2% of my time on installation & configuration - so why is this even being factored into the equation? Well, let me offer a personal insight....

It's now some 10 weeks or so since I first installed Linux. I don't use it every day but I've probably averaged about 2.5 days per week running Linux and the rest of my time running Windows. It has to be said that Windows comes pretty close to the above ideal - in other words, I do spend around 98.5% of my time using it productively. How does this compare with Linux?

Well I'm sorry to say (and I promise you that this is no exaggeration) in all my time using Linux I've carried out no productive work with it whatsoever. Pretty much all of my time so far has been spent purely and simply trying to make it work. A few days ago, frustrated after 10 weeks of pain with Dapper, I "upgraded" to Edgy, only to find myself right back at square one with many of my key hardware devices no longer working properly.

Armed with some prior experience I'm hoping that it won't take another 10 weeks before I get everything back again - but I'm prepared to bet that I'll still be working mostly on configuration for the next 2 or 3 weeks.

Viewed in those terms it's easy to see why so many people want "configuration" to be taken out of the equation. Whatever your slant on Windows, the latest versions are childs play when it comes to installing & configuring hardware. By contrast, Linux is roughly where Windows was, back in the early days of NT. In fact, from my personal experience, I'd say that NT is quite a good comparison for Linux.... NT is another OS where I spent most of my time on configuration and very little time doing anything productive with it.

Given sufficient time & patience, I've no doubt that Linux can be a productive OS once you finally surmount all the configuration hurdles. But nothing is ever gained by people burying their heads in the sand. Configuration is still a MASSIVE problem area with Linux. In particular, the absence of a unified strategy for driver installation is a HUGE letdown. Great progress has been made for installing apps - but installing drivers under Linux is an absolute nightmare. Linux needs an equivalent to Synaptic - but for driver installations. Only then will it be even close to calling itself "desktop ready".Interesting. I have nearly the exact opposite experience. In my home system Windows will recognize neither my modem nor my Broadcom gigabit ethernet card. If I don't have third party drivers available prior to the install then I won't be able to go online to get them. I don't have this problem in Ubuntu because it recognizes and configures my ethernet card and allows it to talk to my router. I wouldn't conisder the Windows option "childs play" at all even though the system is OEM'd on WinXP. Interesting isn't it?

Windows recognizes my video card, an Nvidia 6800XT, as does Ubuntu. The Windows native driver has nor real support for the card other than standard resolutions. In order to get good driver support I must go to Nvidia's website find the driver, download it, and install it. Then I must configure it, which is simple. In Ubuntu I must enable the repository, tell it to download and install (apt-get install nvidia-glx) and then configure it. Not really different there is it?

I could go on with installing and configuring firewalls, and anti-virus. The truth is anecdotal experience doesn't mean much. Linux isn't Windows and there is always a learning curve associated with a new operating system and software. If you use a Mac then you must learn the Mac way. If you have been using MS Windows for a long time then you're already familiar with it. Just because you have to learn how to do something differently or realize that you don't know how to do something doesn't make it bad or "not ready" to use.

You have to ask yourself do I like how this works and am I willing to learn some new ways of doing things? After using Microsoft OS's for 20 years I found I love how Linux does things. Everything from file structure to OS functionality. I like learning the Linux way. If you do too then use it, if not then maybe stick with something more comfy.

xhaan
January 29th, 2007, 09:17 AM
[...] Just ASSUMING I use Windows annoys me and if I can do it without Windows I will. [...]

My sentiments exactly.
There should be a law against OS discrimination. I mean, there would be outrage if there were gas (petrol) stations that only served a certain make of cars... why should computers be different?

John E
January 29th, 2007, 09:48 AM
In Ubuntu I must enable the repository, tell it to download and install (apt-get install nvidia-glx) and then configure it. Not really different there is it?
Not in that one particular case that you've chosen as your example.... but you've chose the simplest example - and if all driver installation were that simple, I wouldn't be complaining.

The point I'm making is that double-clicking on a setup file has become the defacto standard for Windows installation. apt-get install etc is one of at least eight different methods for driver installation under Linux - and they're only the methods that I happen to know about. There might be a lot more, for all I know. If Linux ever gets to the stage where apt-get install becomes a defacto standard, then it'll be getting close to the ease of configuration of Windows. However, it's quite a long way from being there yet.

argie
January 29th, 2007, 10:13 AM
AFAIK, the Linux standard for drivers is having them in the kernel. For applications, Ubuntu uses .deb packages, and nearly every developer releases these.

kuja
January 29th, 2007, 10:19 AM
Not in that one particular case that you've chosen as your example.... but you've chose the simplest example - and if all driver installation were that simple, I wouldn't be complaining.

The point I'm making is that double-clicking on a setup file has become the defacto standard for Windows installation. apt-get install etc is one of at least eight different methods for driver installation under Linux - and they're only the methods that I happen to know about. There might be a lot more, for all I know. If Linux ever gets to the stage where apt-get install becomes a defacto standard, then it'll be getting close to the ease of configuration of Windows. However, it's quite a long way from being there yet.

Which driver are you thinking of that can't be apt-get installed. I'm sure you have something in mind.

3rdalbum
January 29th, 2007, 10:38 AM
I myself have a patented "I got Ubuntu working" dance.

After software patents are outlawed, Richard Stallman is probably going to start a campaign to abolish choreography patents, so look out! :-P

John E
January 29th, 2007, 10:55 AM
Well one obvious example is a broadband driver - but okay, I accept that's being unfair...!

The driver I had most trouble with was my graphics driver (my card is a Matrox Millennium G400 dual-head). I happen to have a twin monitor setup so I do use the dual head option. I'll cut a long story short here.... almost all the instructions you'll find on Linux forums for setting up dual-head output with a Matrox card are wrong. This could well be due to the poor vendor support that you mentioned earlier but whatever the reason, trust me, virtually everything you read about Matrox/dual-head setup is wrong. I eventually found an unoffical Matrox users site here (http://matrox.tuxx-home.at/):- where someone kindly talked me through it. If you can get that to work via apt-get install, you're a better man than I am...!

darrenm
January 29th, 2007, 11:12 AM
If Linux ever gets to the stage where apt-get install becomes a defacto standard, then it'll be getting close to the ease of configuration of Windows. However, it's quite a long way from being there yet.

Well I only use Ubuntu so I only use apt-get (well, Synaptic actually) to install applications and drivers so its the de-facto standard for me.

Chop
January 29th, 2007, 01:55 PM
Computers are highly complex and sometimes very difficult. For many people. The most technically adept and the most technically inept have all thrown their shirts out the door because of computers. Everyone gets a crash or a freeze or a problem they simply cannot solve at the moment. But we hope to keep trying. Windoz and Linux, or whatever you run in yer box, make binary and make computers easier for us. If you can grease Terminal, or spin XP, great. But, when it comes to it, the machines beneath our keyboard (and mice'z) are for all. If your good, great. If you new, keep trying. And forget anyone who says you can't. What's going on now is for EVERYONE. n00b to hack, the best is yours to learn, share, and take. Just don't be afraid to give back.
Cause that's what it's all about, right? For free? Cheers!!!

EmilyRose
January 29th, 2007, 03:36 PM
The second type of computer user you mention is not going to install and configure her own operating system, and then sign up for web forums asking for help.

No they are not. They are going to have there son/daughter/friend/mother/father come and install the system, and expect it to work. IF it doesn't work 100% correctly, they yell at them and tell them to just put it back the way it was. THey will not go onto a web forum, asking for help - they don't have that much patience. I know this because I help my family (father, grandfather/grandmather, uncle, husband) with their computer problems ALL the time - if it doesn't work, immediatly, they're pissed.

wersdaluv
January 29th, 2007, 03:52 PM
No they are not. They are going to have there son/daughter/friend/mother/father come and install the system, and expect it to work. IF it doesn't work 100% correctly, they yell at them and tell them to just put it back the way it was. THey will not go onto a web forum, asking for help - they don't have that much patience. I know this because I help my family (father, grandfather/grandmather, uncle, husband) with their computer problems ALL the time - if it doesn't work, immediatly, they're pissed.

Will the day come when we can convert people to Linux without having them complain? I have been dreaming of that. What do you think? Maybe, after 5 years?

doobit
January 29th, 2007, 03:55 PM
Will the day come when we can convert people to Linux without having them complain? I have been dreaming of that. What do you think? Maybe, after 5 years?

I don't know anybody who doesn't complain about whatever OS they are using at one point or other.

wersdaluv
January 29th, 2007, 04:10 PM
I don't know anybody who doesn't complain about whatever OS they are using at one point or other.

Yeah.

FyreBrand
January 29th, 2007, 08:49 PM
Not in that one particular case that you've chosen as your example.... but you've chose the simplest example - and if all driver installation were that simple, I wouldn't be complaining.

The point I'm making is that double-clicking on a setup file has become the defacto standard for Windows installation. apt-get install etc is one of at least eight different methods for driver installation under Linux - and they're only the methods that I happen to know about. There might be a lot more, for all I know. If Linux ever gets to the stage where apt-get install becomes a defacto standard, then it'll be getting close to the ease of configuration of Windows. However, it's quite a long way from being there yet.That isn't the simplest example it's a very common and typical example. In fact dual head or two card dual monitor is not the common configuration. So you've chosen a difficult example. The ATI and Nvidia drivers do actually work, and the Intel integrated graphics driver especially so.

I build Windows images at work. My boss uses two monitors with two cards: 1 nvidia and ati. Configuring those in Windows is no trivial task. It would be silly of me to say that installing a dual monitor system is nearly impossible on Windows based on that particular example.

I think aysiu pointed out that any given OS installation (Windows, Linux, or otherwise) will go smoothly or not so smoothly on any given day.

I just installed Kubuntu on an Intel board with a sata drive. It wasn't easy or trivial because the bios settings for boot order must be "just so" or grub won't be installed correctly. There is an example of a not so smooth Linux install, at least at the start. Now that I know what I need to I can make sure the rest of the systems are configured that way before I lay an image back down to them. The rest of the install went rather well and I had none of the many headaches I encounter with an XP install. My point is that installing and configuring an OS to work how you need it to is work no matter the platform.

I have a million install goes well/badly stories on both platforms. It's really something of a fallacy to say that because something is difficult or requires some particular fix it isn't ready for use.

John E
January 29th, 2007, 11:29 PM
I have a million install goes well/badly stories on both platforms. It's really something of a fallacy to say that because something is difficult or requires some particular fix it isn't ready for use.
I agree with that 100%. Actually, I didn't volunteer that example (nor any specific example, as it happens). I described that experience as an example, only because I was asked to.

It's a simple fact that for any bad experience which someone has with Linux, someone else can quote a similarly bad experience with Windows or any other OS. Quoting examples isn't a constructive way of deciding whether or not any of those OS's are "desktop ready". My criticism of Linux is that it has failed to achieve a unified strategy for installing and configuring hardware drivers. There are too may variations and far too many imponderables. It is this, more than anything else, that makes Linux offputting for the average user.

Interestingly, this is one area where Windows has gradually become more like Mac. In the early days of Windows, the main thing that people liked about it was its flexibility. Microsoft's philosophy was very different from that of Apple, whose rigidity (particularly its lack of widespread hardware support) were seen as weaknesses and were ultimately responsible for its relegation to the "niche market". Microsoft was initially praised for allowing different users to find different ways of doing the same thing.

But Microsoft had the good sense to realise that people only really want flexibility in their day-to-day usage. For those once-in-a-blue-moon tasks, people mostly want to learn one way of doing them and they want to use that same method every time. I think that this is a lesson which Linux hasn't quite learned.

Brunellus
January 29th, 2007, 11:36 PM
But Microsoft had the good sense to realise that people only really want flexibility in their day-to-day usage. For those once-in-a-blue-moon tasks, people mostly want to learn one way of doing them and they want to use that same method every time. I think that this is a lesson which Linux still hasn't learned.

Strictly speaking, "once in a blue moon" moments, like, say, rebuilding your filesystem when it's been corrupted, have only one solution. That that solution requires a command line might be what you're driving at.

I remain convinced that 99% of the cries for "flexibility" from non-Windows users really mean "implement Windows all over again for me." Those of us who have migrated a few times in our lives are flexible enough by default, because we have less rigid expectations of what an OS should be.

Windows users--especially those who began learning to use computers after 1995--have never known any other computing reality, and tend to be more inflexible in their demands.

FyreBrand
January 29th, 2007, 11:51 PM
I agree with that 100%. Actually, I didn't volunteer that example (nor any specific example, as it happens). I described that experience as an example, only because I was asked to.

It's a simple fact that for any bad experience which someone has with Linux, someone else can quote a similarly bad experience with Windows or any other OS. Quoting examples isn't a constructive way of deciding whether or not any of those OS's are "desktop ready". My criticism of Linux is that it has failed to achieve a unified strategy for installing and configuring hardware drivers and it is this, more than anything else, that makes it unsuitable for the average user.I don't really see how Linux has failed to achieve a "unified strategy" in driver support. Hardware support is in the kernel. How much more unified must it be? So how do see it as not being "unified". There is always hardware that isn't supported, but that is hardly not unified. If you don't like the current kernel driver you can install a binary driver or a hardware compatibility layer like ndis wrapper. I just don't see how having a problem configuring hardware supports your claim. You need credible proof.


Interestingly, this is one area where Windows has gradually become more like Mac. In the early days of Windows, the main thing that people liked about it was its flexibility. Microsoft's philosophy was very different from that of Apple, whose rigidity (particularly its lack of widespread hardware support) were seen as weaknesses and were ultimately responsible for its relegation to the "niche market". Microsoft was initially praised for allowing different users to find different ways of doing the same thing.I am also not seeing any similarity between Windows and Mac other than they are preinstalled at purchase. Mac OSX is a BSD-UNIX system written for specific hardware while Windows leverages market share to require manufacturers to support their OS. So how is Windows becoming like Mac OSX?


But Microsoft had the good sense to realise that people only really want flexibility in their day-to-day usage. For those once-in-a-blue-moon tasks, people mostly want to learn one way of doing them and they want to use that same method every time. I think that this is a lesson which Linux still hasn't learned.This really has nothing to do with anything at all. Most people do that with everything and they do it on Windows, Linux and everything else they use. You again make claims that you don't support with valid proof. I perform my tasks in Linux in a routine manner just like I do when I perform tasks in Windows. So what are you really trying to get at?

mvarga
January 30th, 2007, 12:51 AM
I think there are two main categories of problems which an average user faces: solvable and unsolvable. The problems in the first category are getting easier and easier to solve, many good applications are on the way or have already arrived, from OpenOffice through Network-Manager to different configuration utilities.

But there are a lot of us who could and would use Linux on desktop and on laptop, if there would be hibernation support on laptops and problem-free 3D (on ATI and nVidia). If there are no solutions for those problems, we are unable to use Linux - I am _forced_ to use Windows, because using a laptop without reliable hibernation support is really pointless (I've got an IBM, and the suspend is still problematic..).

BLTicklemonster
January 30th, 2007, 12:55 AM
Make the freaking network easy enough, and that would be a start. I've been using ubuntu for almost a year total, and danged if I have gotten a reliable network ever.

squrl
January 30th, 2007, 02:12 AM
I don't care if you like it or not. This is my impression of Ubuntu and everything connected to it. If you don't like my opinion then don't read it...

Ever wonder why less than 6% of computers use Linux.

It takes longer for updates to load than it does for the system to be installed from a CD. There is a CD version and a DVD version. There are at least 12 different ISO versions of Ubuntu drifting around. What are the differences. In most cases most people don't know. Don't ask though or you will be flamed for being a malcontent.

Some of the so called updates are buggier than a mongrel dog. Be wary of the updates or they will have you reinstalling from scratch. There are a whole flock of guides to this and that and everything else. Just don't try to use them. Most are out of date and won't work anymore. Be careful here also because the guys that wrote a lot of them are so full of themselves they refuse to accept the fact their baby is no longer worth the time to read it but they won't remove or update it. Let the poor idiot using it find out the hard way.

More than a few of the replies to problems are responded to by people who are damn lucky they can boot their own machine and are offering help to someone else who is as blind as they are. A Mod sees this and just goes on to the next poor bastard never offering a correction and the poor schmuck with the problem gets the bad solution to his problem getting him in even deeper. Don't offend the prick that posted an ignorant solution though. Then there is the guy who is really between a rock and a hard place. He tries to help his girl friend and gets in over his head. Nobody responds to his problem so he is screwed.

Ubuntu aint ready for prime time folks. Msoft still has you by the whatevers. I do feel sorry for the Mods. Most really try and they do a good job but can't be everywhere at once.

Now that I have scorched my *** on this board for the next 20 years try this on for size and if you don't like kiss me baby.

kerry_s
January 30th, 2007, 02:24 AM
oolo

23meg
January 30th, 2007, 02:52 AM
people who are damn lucky they can boot their own machineI'm feeling very lucky here, anyone else?

IYY
January 30th, 2007, 02:55 AM
I suspect I'll have to just keep coming back every year or so until things have progressed to the point where everyone's grandmother can use linux

The year when grandma could use Linux was around 2005. The year when grandma can install or configure Linux is never coming, sorry to disappoint you. However, I am yet to see a grandma who can install or configure Windows or even Mac OS.

Sorry to hear that you are having trouble with your hardware; I know how frustrating it is when a network card doesn't work (Ubuntu recognized mine out of the box, but some other distributions don't). These kinds of problems (hardware problems) will become less and less common as Linux gains wider adoption.

I'd suggest to post a separate thread for each one of your problems in the Beginner's Talk or general support forums. Chances are that someone will offer a simple solution. I think that you may have to use ndiswrapper for your network card, and change the keyboard mapping.

boredandblogging.com
January 30th, 2007, 03:09 AM
Microsoft does have the advantage of talking to a lot of vendors and getting them to make sure their hardware works with Windows. There is no such authority with Linux. Sure users can complain to companies like ATI anv Nvidia, but it takes time and effort.

There is nothing wrong with using Windows if it does everything you want it to do.

aysiu
January 30th, 2007, 03:17 AM
What you're basically saying is that learning something new takes time, and it's much easier to work with something you're familiar with.

That's a given.

It's the same reason I gave someone else in another thread for my using Firefox instead of Opera. Yes, Opera has a lot of the same features to match the best Firefox extensions, but I just don't have the inclination to bother to learn how to redo everything in Opera that I already know how to do in Firefox.

So you just have to weigh out cost and benefit. Is the benefit of using Linux as a desktop worth the time (and cost, depending on what hardware you have) to get comfortable with it?

Crashmaxx
January 30th, 2007, 03:41 AM
Are you dual booting now? If not, that is the best thing I recommend to help you out. Its very easy and when something is bothering you with linux you can just go back to xp for a time. But you have to want to tinker with it every once and a while or you will give up.

Anyway, I got into linux by being a little bored and curious. I dual booted ubuntu breezy and had to reinstall it quite a few times trying to do "interesting" things, even though it worked fine out of the box. Then when xp finally took a dump on me, I went to using ubuntu all the time and haven't regretted it a bit.

Once you get past the hump of not having whatever "work", or not having whatever you "need" that you have in windows, its all down hill. A fresh install of linux is a cake walk compared to xp, and you have such a nice system in comparison.

squrl
January 30th, 2007, 03:48 AM
23meg

You know as well as I do what that referred to. You are displaying the exact attitude that isn't needed. You sound like a tv news reporter. Take it out of context and make the news instead of reporting it.

aysiu
January 30th, 2007, 03:56 AM
I've merged a couple of threads in here, as they seem to be about Linux "desktop readiness" or "prime time."

aysiu
January 30th, 2007, 03:58 AM
I don't care if you like it or not. This is my impression of Ubuntu and everything connected to it. If you don't like my opinion then don't read it... How exactly would one decide whether she likes your opinion or not before reading it?

aysiu
January 30th, 2007, 04:03 AM
Well, I'm never bored, and usually 'curious' about countries, books, science, history, people: never computers. That's almost the point I'm making, really: I use computers entirely functionally, and I'm looking forward to the time when Linux is suitable for people like me.

On dual booting: no -- I didn't want to bother shrinking my NTFS partition to make space. I just imaged my XP installation, deleted the partition and installed Ubuntu into there. I might dual-boot for a while, perhaps. I never actually reboot XP on my laptop, always just hibernating it (unless updates require a reboot). But I guess I can just hibernate and then switch on again to boot into linux.
I think your best bet is to wait until the next time you need a computer. When that time comes, buy one with Ubuntu preloaded on it. Then you don't have to futz around to get hibernate or wireless working.

Rab22
January 30th, 2007, 04:17 AM
It takes longer for updates to load than it does for the system to be installed from a CD. There is a CD version and a DVD version. There are at least 12 different ISO versions of Ubuntu drifting around. What are the differences. In most cases most people don't know. Don't ask though or you will be flamed for being a malcontent.


Maybe a faster computer, wider bandwidth, and more intelligence could solve your problems there.



Some of the so called updates are buggier than a mongrel dog. Be wary of the updates or they will have you reinstalling from scratch. There are a whole flock of guides to this and that and everything else. Just don't try to use them. Most are out of date and won't work anymore. Be careful here also because the guys that wrote a lot of them are so full of themselves they refuse to accept the fact their baby is no longer worth the time to read it but they won't remove or update it. Let the poor idiot using it find out the hard way.


I know plenty of Linux users, and they don't suffer form these problems. Don't install software outside of the regulated repositories and you'll be fine.



More than a few of the replies to problems are responded to by people who are damn lucky they can boot their own machine and are offering help to someone else who is as blind as they are. A Mod sees this and just goes on to the next poor bastard never offering a correction and the poor schmuck with the problem gets the bad solution to his problem getting him in even deeper. Don't offend the prick that posted an ignorant solution though. Then there is the guy who is really between a rock and a hard place. He tries to help his girl friend and gets in over his head. Nobody responds to his problem so he is screwed.


Amazing that those people who, 'are lucky they can boot their computer', have little to no problems with Ubuntu like you speak of. Yet, after you insinuate that they suffer from a lack of intelligence you divulge that you lacked the necessary knowledge to run Linux.



Ubuntu aint ready for prime time folks. Msoft still has you by the whatevers. I do feel sorry for the Mods. Most really try and they do a good job but can't be everywhere at once.

Now that I have scorched my *** on this board for the next 20 years try this on for size and if you don't like kiss me baby.
[/QUOTE]

Your solution? Just stop?

I have a better one...why don't we express constructive criticisms and progress Linux into 'mainstream'.

That is of course, if you can break away from the leash Microsoft holds you with.

</rebuttal>

Soarer
January 30th, 2007, 08:45 AM
A lot of this thread surprises me. I am certainly no Ubuntu expert, but I almost NEVER have to do anything to my system - it just works. True, I don't run wireless or 3D graphics, but I don't need to.

XP, which I have to use for work, mostly just works. I often have to reboot it though, something I never have to do for Ubuntu. Maybe that's because it's on a Dell laptop, rather than the Compaq desktop on which I run Ubuntu. Having said that, I had a lot of trouble initially with the built-in bluetooth, and some with the built-in wireless, on the Dell.

And, despite working with Windows for many years, I have NO IDEA how to create and then restore a fresh image in Windows, as one poster does. Presumably, they had to figure out how to do that at some point. But figuring out things in Ubuntu is too hard?

John E
January 30th, 2007, 09:35 AM
Crispinb - I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Linux is an OS for people with lots of time on their hands. Once it's configured properly, it's no less useable than any other OS but the time needed to configure it properly can be hugely offputting. Of course there'll be instant successes, like Soarer's; cases where the standard drivers built into the kernel just work. My laptop is one such example. It can tun Ubuntu straight off the live CD and everything works. It can even see my Windows network and it successfully accesses my network shares.

But here's the problem.... (and FyreBrand, please read what Im writing not what you think Im writing) when those drivers don't work (as indeed they don't on my desktop PC) there is no unified strategy for updating them. Some drivers can be installed using apt-get install. A few can be updated by Synaptic. Some are in self-extracting zips or tarballs. Others require you to extract a tarball and then run some kind of setup utility. Others use a scripting approach. Some (indeed most) require a command shell. Some drivers require make. Some require you to manually edit certain config files. Others attend to any editing automatically The list of different approaches is endless.

I'm not expert enough about Linux to know whether the statements about drivers being built into the kernel are true or not. Im sure that this was never true of Unix and to be honest, it seems like a very risky strategy to me. But no matter. Even if its true, the chances of any kernel-based driver being able to cover all eventualities are nil. And this makes it paramount that the process of replacing them should be as uncomplicated as possible. Surely I cant be the only person who understands that???

23meg
January 30th, 2007, 12:28 PM
You know as well as I do what that referred to. You are displaying the exact attitude that isn't needed. You sound like a tv news reporter. Take it out of context and make the news instead of reporting it.Sorry but your whole post is old news for us, we've seen a lot of it and there's nothing to be reported there; I was just trying to be light hearted since you don't leave much to be discussed and I thought all you'd get would be flames and goodbyes.

And I wonder, what is the attitude that's needed when responding to a post like yours?

TheWizzard
January 30th, 2007, 06:17 PM
Umm, lets see: First Ubuntu refused to start up even in safe graphics mode - video card is ATI Radeon X600, not too old, not too new and not too rare. When I finally jumped through all the hoops to get start up in VESA mode, then it came partition hell. Ubuntu suggested that I repartitioned the entire hard drive, with complete disregard for my Windows and data partitions. When I told the installer not to do so and to automatically use the 40 GB of unpartitioned space I had previously allocated for it, it decided not to mount my NTFS partitions, so I decided to reinstall Ubuntu and manually partition the unallocated space. Only then Ubuntu decided to mount my NTFS drives. Far from being a walk at the park.

and you are using edgy, not dapper LTS

TheWizzard
January 30th, 2007, 06:32 PM
It's now some 10 weeks or so since I first installed Linux. I don't use it every day but I've probably averaged about 2.5 days per week running Linux and the rest of my time running Windows. It has to be said that Windows comes pretty close to the above ideal - in other words, I do spend around 98.5% of my time using it productively. How does this compare with Linux?

Well I'm sorry to say (and I promise you that this is no exaggeration) in all my time using Linux I've carried out no productive work with it whatsoever. Pretty much all of my time so far has been spent purely and simply trying to make it work. A few days ago, frustrated after 10 weeks of pain with Dapper, I "upgraded" to Edgy, only to find myself right back at square one with many of my key hardware devices no longer working properly.


i'm very sorry to hear you're having so much trouble installing ubuntu. it must be very bad luck with your hardware, or maybe you have to get used to the linux way of how things work.
on my laptop it took about 2 hours to install every piece of software i need and configure cron to automatically perform administration tasks. wifi worked out of the box and i never had to perform any administration tasks since.

every time i boot into windows, programs start asking me to update or, if i want to buy the newest version of the software. lots more distraction.

FLPCGuy
January 30th, 2007, 08:12 PM
... when those drivers don't work (as indeed they don't on my desktop PC) there is no unified strategy for updating them. Some drivers can be installed using apt-get install. A few can be updated by Synaptic. Some are in self-extracting zips or tarballs. Others require you to extract a tarball and then run some kind of setup utility. Others use a scripting approach. Some (indeed most) require a command shell. Some drivers require make. Some require you to manually edit certain config files. Others attend to any editing automatically The list of different approaches is endless.

I'm not expert enough about Linux to know whether the statements about drivers being built into the kernel are true or not. I’m sure that this was never true of Unix and to be honest, it seems like a very risky strategy to me. But no matter. Even if it’s true, the chances of any kernel-based driver being able to cover all eventualities are nil. And this makes it paramount that the process of replacing them should be as uncomplicated as possible. Surely I can’t be the only person who understands that???

I agree, trying to include all common drivers in the kernel will quickly lead to a bloated and slow OS [we already have one of those included with each PC].

It makes more sense to either streamline and standardize the custom kernel build process during hw detection and installation or at least have a standard driver interface for each major component types (with only mini-drivers needed to handle specific hw features). Linux won't be truly ready for the [average user] desktop until the driver issue is resolved for wireless, video, analog modem, and printers.

Brunellus
January 30th, 2007, 08:17 PM
I agree, trying to include all common drivers in the kernel will quickly lead to a bloated and slow OS [we already have one of those included with each PC].

It makes more sense to either streamline and standardize the custom kernel build process during hw detection and installation or at least have a standard driver interface for each major component types (with only mini-drivers needed to handle specific hw features). Linux won't be truly ready for the [average user] desktop until the driver issue is resolved for wireless, video, analog modem, and printers.
you want GNU/HURD, whose microkernel is theoretically better. But if you're obsessing about Linux's lack of readiness. the HURD isn't even at 1.0 yet....

Ptero-4
January 31st, 2007, 01:14 AM
Third: There is a reason Windows is king of the desktop, and it isn't Microsoft's marketing. It's called Productivity. It's an OS where people can focus on getting their tasks done, and not in how much it takes to get those tasks done. Granted, some of MS attempts at this have backfired on them (*cough* Office 2007 *cough*) but still the amount of stuff that just works in Windows while you have to sweat blood to get the same stuff to work with Linux is still overwhelming.

You`re wrong, The reason Windoze is king on the desktop is because it is so crappy that it burns PC`s fast, which is something good for PC manufacturers because it means that you buy new PC more frequently and always the most expensive PC. It`s also good for the hardware makers because it makes the hardware obsolete fast making you buy more of it more frequently, is good for the utility apps makers because to keep it running you need their expensive apps and finally is good for M$ because they profit from it. So as you see Windoze is included in all OEM PC`s not because its good for the customer but because it raises their profit (if they put linux on it they would lose sales, they wouldnt be able to stick their high-end PC`s on home users, they would lose the money coming from the hardware makers and they would lose the money that they make by including all that junk in their PC`s like the demos of norton and AOL).

toasted
January 31st, 2007, 01:38 AM
Face it... regardless of the reason, Windows is ahead. There are things that I do in Windows that cannot be done in Linux no matter how much time I spend trying to do it. Period. Some things simply cannot be done. The inverse is just not true.

Most likely its because Windows has a huge bankroll to help it along... well thats ok with me, keep it up and keep making my life better. I will still be using XP for a long time to come.

I can't believe how narrow minded some of you die hard Linux users are...... and why is this thread still going?

kuja
January 31st, 2007, 02:15 AM
I agree, trying to include all common drivers in the kernel will quickly lead to a bloated and slow OS [we already have one of those included with each PC].

It makes more sense to either streamline and standardize the custom kernel build process during hw detection and installation or at least have a standard driver interface for each major component types (with only mini-drivers needed to handle specific hw features). Linux won't be truly ready for the [average user] desktop until the driver issue is resolved for wireless, video, analog modem, and printers.

Not quite, there are _A LOT_ of drivers included with the kernel already, the reason it isn't super-slow/bloated is that most of these are built as modules, and that these modules aren't loaded unless they need to be.

wersdaluv
January 31st, 2007, 02:20 AM
Linux has always been for the tech savvy but I also heard that Ubuntu is aiming for having the majority of the market share for FOSS. My bases for the former is the Linux culture and Ubuntu's Bug #1 for the latter.

I have noticed that Linux is designed for the geeks while Windows and Mac is better with taking care of the less computer literate.

I'm confused with this target market issue. What do you think is it for Ubuntu?

Stemp
January 31st, 2007, 02:23 AM
I have noticed that Linux is designed for the geeks

I will tell my daughter and my mother they are geeks.

Jellicletrb
January 31st, 2007, 02:28 AM
Uh....ME! I got my first Ubuntu CD at a most decidedly un-geeky stage of my existence. I'm a 46 year old factory worker that lives 14 miles from the nearest city that does everything online that was becoming very afraid of windows. I still remember sitting in front of a working XP desktop with the Ubuntu CD thinking..."what if it don't work...what if I blow everything up?...."

I had to use automatix just to get myself off the ground. But, I'm figuring things out, searching the forums....and I'm a lot more comfortable with my security level now. I believe that a lot more people would try it, if they just knew about it. I just happened to spot ubuntu in a news article some months ago and decided to do a search on it.

Choad
January 31st, 2007, 02:31 AM
linux is designed to be a tiny, fast, modular os to obfuscate the hardware from the software

linux is just the kernel

ubuntu is designed for the average jo

wersdaluv
January 31st, 2007, 02:35 AM
I will tell my daughter and my mother they are geeks.

They are lucky to have you do the tech savvy job for them

m.musashi
January 31st, 2007, 02:36 AM
and why is this thread still going?

Because people keep coming into the Linux room and telling all the Linux users (i.e. those that are USING Linux) that their choice of os sucks and isn't usable. You see, the thing about Linux is that it is welcoming to all and you have the choice to use it or not. What is frustrating for those of us who choose to use Linux is all the people who come here of their own accord and then proceed to tell us we made the wrong the choice. Live and let live. If you don't like it, fine. You have the choice to do as you please - and so do I and all the others who like Linux despite (or perhaps because of) its faults.

IYY
January 31st, 2007, 02:42 AM
The installation and configuration of Ubuntu is designed for the fairly computer-literate user... Basically a geek.

The use of Ubuntu is for everyone.

Really, isn't this the same with every OS?

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 03:04 AM
I have noticed that Linux is designed for the geeks Linux--when you're speaking about it as a general term describing OSes that use the Linux kernel--is not any one thing. Some Linux distributions are designed for "geeks." Others are designed for everyday users. Some have very specific target audiences (those with older hardware, those without a CD drive, those who want to install a server, those who want eye candy, etc.).

The problem is that Ubuntu is not preinstalled on major hardware manufacturers' laptops and desktops. So you have to be at least somewhat of a "geek" in order to use Ubuntu... or at least know a geek who can install and configure Ubuntu for you.


why is this thread still going? Because people keep posting to it. By posting to it, you're keeping the thread going.

John E
January 31st, 2007, 09:14 AM
The reason Windoze is king on the desktop is because it is so crappy that it burns PC`s fast, which is something good for PC manufacturers because it means that you buy new PC more frequently
I thought I'd heard them all.... but that explanation should win a prize...! :confused:

m.musashi
January 31st, 2007, 05:00 PM
I thought I'd heard them all.... but that explanation should win a prize...! :confused:

There may be a bit of hyperbole in that statement but it's not far from the truth. My mother has a 2 year old HP and she was complaining because it was running so slow. She said it must be time to get a new computer and did I have any suggestions (she didn't want another HP because it "didn't last"). I told her it was probably just in need of a re-install. I went and did a clean install of windows and now it's running like it did they day she bought it.

Now, don't you think there could be others out there who figure that if a computer is running slower than normal they need to buy a new computer rather than fix windows? How many average users would actually know that a reinstall is a fix and also know how to do it? With so many people owning PCs now, the majority of sales are going to be replacements. This is a lucrative myth for hardware makers and microsoft as new computer means new copy of windows.

We have hundreds of windows computers at work and each year they re-image the drives because they have gotten so gummed up and slow. Fortunately, our IT staff now how to fix this and don't just buy new computers each year. However, it is a well established fact that well used windows computers need to be re-imaged. I guess the question is do well used Linux computers need to be re-imaged (re-installed) as well? I don't have enough experience with Linux to answer that but we do have a Linux thin-client lab at work now. It's only 6 months old but we'll see if it needs a re-image. I know it's running smoothly right now and many of our windows computers are starting to bog down after only 6 months. Now, does windows bog down like this by design (insert conspiracy theory here) or because it is just poorly coded? If I have some evidence that Linux also suffers this as well as OSX, then I'd be willing to admit it is probably indicative of computers in general rather than a flaw in windows. I'll let you know in 6 month.

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 05:18 PM
Now, don't you think there could be others out there who figure that if a computer is running slower than normal they need to buy a new computer rather than fix windows? How many average users would actually know that a reinstall is a fix and also know how to do it? With so many people owning PCs now, the majority of sales are going to be replacements. This is a lucrative myth for hardware makers and microsoft as new computer means new copy of windows. In fact, there was a story in The New York Times about it a year and a half ago: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/technology/17spy.html?ex=1279252800&en=5b2b6783f66a7422&ei=5090)

Brunellus
January 31st, 2007, 05:20 PM
In fact, there was a story in The New York Times about it a year and a half ago: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/technology/17spy.html?ex=1279252800&en=5b2b6783f66a7422&ei=5090)
man. that means my ghettolappy is totally useless. Pentium III 500, 320mb RAM (yeah, pimped-out!)....but it runs reasonably well with a cut-down Ubuntu install.

kuja
January 31st, 2007, 05:40 PM
There may be a bit of hyperbole in that statement but it's not far from the truth. My mother has a 2 year old HP and she was complaining because it was running so slow. She said it must be time to get a new computer and did I have any suggestions (she didn't want another HP because it "didn't last"). I told her it was probably just in need of a re-install. I went and did a clean install of windows and now it's running like it did they day she bought it.

Now, don't you think there could be others out there who figure that if a computer is running slower than normal they need to buy a new computer rather than fix windows? How many average users would actually know that a reinstall is a fix and also know how to do it? With so many people owning PCs now, the majority of sales are going to be replacements. This is a lucrative myth for hardware makers and microsoft as new computer means new copy of windows.

We have hundreds of windows computers at work and each year they re-image the drives because they have gotten so gummed up and slow. Fortunately, our IT staff now how to fix this and don't just buy new computers each year. However, it is a well established fact that well used windows computers need to be re-imaged. I guess the question is do well used Linux computers need to be re-imaged (re-installed) as well? I don't have enough experience with Linux to answer that but we do have a Linux thin-client lab at work now. It's only 6 months old but we'll see if it needs a re-image. I know it's running smoothly right now and many of our windows computers are starting to bog down after only 6 months. Now, does windows bog down like this by design (insert conspiracy theory here) or because it is just poorly coded? If I have some evidence that Linux also suffers this as well as OSX, then I'd be willing to admit it is probably indicative of computers in general rather than a flaw in windows. I'll let you know in 6 month.

I'd say the three main causes of Windows slowdown are registry bloat, filesystem fragmentation, and malware.

a) Linux doesn't use a registry
b) Linux systems aren't nearly as prone to fragmentation
c) I think you know c already.

m.musashi
January 31st, 2007, 07:27 PM
In fact, there was a story in The New York Times about it a year and a half ago: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/technology/17spy.html?ex=1279252800&en=5b2b6783f66a7422&ei=5090)

Well, there you have it. There are others out there who simply think the solution to a computer problem is to buy a new one.


"I may have no choice but to buy a new one," he said, noting that he hopes that by starting over, he can get a computer that will be more impervious to infection. - from aysiu's linked article

If the OS is so poor that users end up believing their computer needs replacing (when the hardware itself is probably fine and it's the OS that needs replacing) then I'd say that OS is "not ready for the desktop."


I'd say the three main causes of Windows slowdown are registry bloat, filesystem fragmentation, and malware.

a) Linux doesn't use a registry
b) Linux systems aren't nearly as prone to fragmentation
c) I think you know c already.

Agreed.

RCC2k7
January 31st, 2007, 08:56 PM
Here we go again. I don't want anybody to take it personally, and don't think that I'm just here to troll. I'm testing Ubuntu and have had some success with it, beyond what I've had with other distros, but the subject of this thread is one that can really make me ramble on and on... Let's see if I can make it concise.

Why do newcomers have such a hard time using Linux? Well, because Linux was designed by an elite of geeks - not said in a disrespectful way. It just happen that Linux is created by people who know what they are doing, for people who know what they are doing. In the past eight or so years, some effort has been put into making Linux friendlier for new users, but most of it has been pure eye candy and less substance. There is a lot of documentation and today, most linux programmers and expert users expect newbies to read the manuals or come to forums like this one. No effort is really put into the OS to encourage new users to find things on their own. As good as online documentation and Wiki pages could be, they'll never cover enough so users need to search in various sources. Some of you might think this is OK, but it really makes Linux inefficient for new users.

Here's one real world example. Task: Erasing a CD-RW.

Steps in Windows XP: Put the disc into the disc burner. Right-click the disc burner icon in My Computer and select Erase this CD-RW. An alternate choice is to launch the CD recording program and look for an erase disc option there.
Steps for Ubuntu Linux: I have no idea!

How did I find how to do it? For Windows I found it on my own, by skimming through the menu bars and right-click trial and error. I didn't have to read a single manual or help file, much less go searching online for an answer. I have yet to find out how to erase a CD-RW in Linux as like I said, the OS is not design so I can find things on my own, and the programmers don't feel there's much need to change that, because there's a lot of documentation out there... I'm sorry but when you have to spend hours reading through various help sites before you can find how to erase a darn CD-RW disk, we have problems!

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 09:02 PM
No effort is really put into the OS to encourage new users to find things on their own. Really? No effort? I'd beg to differ:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/feisty



Here's one real world example. Task: Erasing a CD-RW.

Steps in Windows XP: Put the disc into the disc burner. Right-click the disc burner icon in My Computer and select Erase this CD-RW. An alternate choice is to launch the CD recording program and look for an erase disc option there.
Steps for Ubuntu Linux: I have no idea!

How did I find how to do it? It's actually quite apparent in K3B:
http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/11501.html

By the way, I've merged this with the Linux Desktop Readiness thread, since that's pretty much what this thread has turned into.

RCC2k7
January 31st, 2007, 09:14 PM
Really? No effort? I'd beg to differ:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/feisty

Feisty is not yet released, although I'm glad to see that somebody's giving some thoughts to these issues. :cool:


It's actually quite apparent in K3B:
http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/11501.html
K3B is not installed by default, unless maybe if you use Kubuntu. A new user with Ubuntu Edgy just gets Serpentine and the default data disc writer from Gnome, none of these make the task of erasing CD-RW intiutive for a new user to figure it out on his/her own.

Brunellus
January 31st, 2007, 09:26 PM
Feisty is not yet released, although I'm glad to see that somebody's giving some thoughts to these issues. :cool:


K3B is not installed by default, unless maybe if you use Kubuntu. A new user with Ubuntu Edgy just gets Serpentine and the default data disc writer from Gnome, none of these make the task of erasing CD-RW intiutive for a new user to figure it out on his/her own.
file your bug and feature requests with the GNOME devs. We don't develop 'em. We just use 'em.

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 09:37 PM
Feisty is not yet released, although I'm glad to see that somebody's giving some thoughts to these issues. :cool: Really, the developers of Ubuntu are always thinking of ways to make Ubuntu easier for new users, and they're working hard to get a better release every six months. It's not as if they were twiddling their thumbs until Feisty.

The point of Warty was to just get a release out ("warts and all") to see if a six-month release cycle was feasible. Hoary put a little more polish and stability on Warty. Breezy added a few more pretty graphics ( a graphical boot splash, for example). Dapper added a graphical point-and-click installer and a few other graphical frontends for things. Edgy did the same.

Feisty seems to be a huge step forward, though, if it does everything the devs want it to--easy codec installation (instead of just "uh, you can't play that," you'll get an easy way to install playback support), "bulletproof-x" so you'll never end up at the command-line unless you want to, and network browsing (network-manager's been around for a while, actually, but not installed by default).

Keep in mind, though, that a lot of what Ubuntu has been working to "improve" at this point has just been playing catch-up to other leading "user-friendly" distros like SuSE, Linspire, Mepis, Xandros, and PCLinuxOS. If "bulletproof-x" is really bulletproof, Ubuntu will start being a true innovator.

For new users straight from Windows, I've always recommended Linspire, Mepis, or PCLinuxOS and never Ubuntu, though. Ubuntu isn't a total "geek" OS (like Gentoo or Slackware), but it's not Windows-power-user friendly yet either. Maybe with easy codec installation... it will become so.


K3B is not installed by default, unless maybe if you use Kubuntu. A new user with Ubuntu Edgy just gets Serpentine and the default data disc writer from Gnome, none of these make the task of erasing CD-RW intiutive for a new user to figure it out on his/her own. You bring up a good point--KDE has more point-and-click configuration options, but that's what KDE is all about. I'm making broad generalizations, of course, but KDE sacrifices simplicity for ease (re: point-and-click ease) of configuration. Gnome sacrifices ease of configuration for simplicity.

RCC2k7
January 31st, 2007, 09:45 PM
Feisty seems to be a huge step forward, though, if it does everything the devs want it to--easy codec installation (instead of just "uh, you can't play that," you'll get an easy way to install playback support), "bulletproof-x" so you'll never end up at the command-line unless you want to, and network browsing (network-manager's been around for a while, actually, but not installed by default).
OK, you are getting me excited about Feisty. :D

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 09:53 PM
OK, you are getting me excited about Feisty. :D
Well, Feisty sounds exciting. We'll see in April whether or not it lives up to the hype. My guess is that it'll take a little while to stabilize. Maybe Feisty+1 will actually be what people hope Feisty will be. Who knows?

darrenm
January 31st, 2007, 10:03 PM
The thing with Feisty and Edgy to an extent is it makes me as an old Linux type person feel a little uneasy. I want Linux to be embraced by the World and Ubuntu seems like the only possible way things are going to change in Windows-world but back in the old days everything was daemon-config. You wanted to configure something and you change the config file and reload the daemon. You knew everything that was going on and nothing really broke the mold.

Now with more and more exotic hardware like laptops with CPU stepping support, Wi-Fi and all the funky newer stuff that Linux distros such as Ubuntu have had to embrace it starts getting a bit scary and a bit more difficult to do stuff and to keep up. I know how to configure all the mainstream old stuff but some of the new stuff goes past me and I have to really start reading up.

I think this is what will cause some problems for Linux distros in the near future. As Ubuntu with Feisty goes very ex-windows-user friendly all the old-skool Linux gurus will start resenting the new crowd and resenting the distros that bring the new crowds in with their knowledge of the new stuff that they have to learn at the time. No-one will need to know how to configure printers.conf when the GUI does it all fine or /etc/fstab when Gnome-VFS does it fine. Thats what makes me slightly uneasy, all these new GUI ways of doing things are great but I worry slightly that if something doesn't work I don't know everything underneath that works it all.

I'm rambling a bit here, just a bit of social commentary. Linux distros and mainly Ubuntu is right in between 2 major user groups at the moment, thats why its starting to get incredibly popular.

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 10:10 PM
I think this is what will cause some problems for Linux distros in the near future. As Ubuntu with Feisty goes very ex-windows-user friendly all the old-skool Linux gurus will start resenting the new crowd and resenting the distros that bring the new crowds in with their knowledge of the new stuff that they have to learn at the time. No-one will need to know how to configure printers.conf when the GUI does it all fine or /etc/fstab when Gnome-VFS does it fine. Thats what makes me slightly uneasy, all these new GUI ways of doing things are great but I worry slightly that if something doesn't work I don't know everything underneath that works it all. Well, the beauty of Linux distros is their retention of configuration files and the command-line, no matter how sophisticated the GUI gets. You can use the KDM Theme Manager to configure the login screen, or you can still edit the /etc/kde3/kdm/kdmrc file manually.

I don't think it's going where you're afraid it's going.



I'm rambling a bit here, just a bit of social commentary. Linux distros and mainly Ubuntu is right in between 2 major user groups at the moment, thats why its starting to get incredibly popular. I agree. Most distros are either too focused on new users or too focused on old users. Ubuntu strikes a nice middle ground.

koenn
January 31st, 2007, 10:12 PM
The installation and configuration of Ubuntu is designed for the fairly computer-literate user... Basically a geek.

The first time ever I installed Ubuntu was on a Dell Inspiron 81something laptop. It went as olows :
boot from live CD (Dapper)
click "install" icon
answer 6 easy questions (where do you live / click on a city; ... that sort of thing)
Finisished.

I added a printer later. Click on "add new printer", same as in Windows. No sweat.
Repeated the install couple a days later on a no-brand PC without any knowledge of the hardware inside. Same thing : boot, click install, click OK 6 times, Done.

Is that's today's definition of "computer-literate, basically a geek" ? Wow !

Okay, now I've seen the desperate help requests, especially regarding wireless networking etc, I 'd have to admit there could be some complications here and there -still, I assumed that these were exceptions and that the majority would install Ubuntu just as easy as I did.

prizrak
January 31st, 2007, 10:14 PM
The thing with Feisty and Edgy to an extent is it makes me as an old Linux type person feel a little uneasy. I want Linux to be embraced by the World and Ubuntu seems like the only possible way things are going to change in Windows-world but back in the old days everything was daemon-config. You wanted to configure something and you change the config file and reload the daemon. You knew everything that was going on and nothing really broke the mold.

Now with more and more exotic hardware like laptops with CPU stepping support, Wi-Fi and all the funky newer stuff that Linux distros such as Ubuntu have had to embrace it starts getting a bit scary and a bit more difficult to do stuff and to keep up. I know how to configure all the mainstream old stuff but some of the new stuff goes past me and I have to really start reading up.

I think this is what will cause some problems for Linux distros in the near future. As Ubuntu with Feisty goes very ex-windows-user friendly all the old-skool Linux gurus will start resenting the new crowd and resenting the distros that bring the new crowds in with their knowledge of the new stuff that they have to learn at the time. No-one will need to know how to configure printers.conf when the GUI does it all fine or /etc/fstab when Gnome-VFS does it fine. Thats what makes me slightly uneasy, all these new GUI ways of doing things are great but I worry slightly that if something doesn't work I don't know everything underneath that works it all.

I'm rambling a bit here, just a bit of social commentary. Linux distros and mainly Ubuntu is right in between 2 major user groups at the moment, thats why its starting to get incredibly popular.

I always thought that one credit to Ubuntu was the despite having GUI tools for config the underlying config files were still very readable and accessible. As opposed to SuSE for example that is great on GUI configs (much more GUI than Ubuntu is) but writes config files that are extremely difficult to figure out and are very cluttered (perhaps that's the reason behind it being so slow).

Having said that, it would seem that both Windows and Linux are moving to XML config files that behave like database schema rather than having to parse a regular text file. This should be able to speed things up when dealing with large config files while still keeping them readable.

BTW all the CPU stepping and ACPI stuff is nothing but scripts not that hard to figure them out. Don't worry I doubt Linux would ever get to the point where under-the-hood stuff will be too obscure to access.

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 10:18 PM
Is that's today's definition of "computer-literate, basically a geek" ? Wow ! Unfortunately, that is.

Most Windows users I know (and this isn't a slam against Windows--it's just most people I know who aren't computer literate also happen to be Windows users) would have no idea how to launch Internet Explorer if the icon for it were gone. They wouldn't be able to reconnect to the internet if you disable the LAN connection with a right-click. They wouldn't be able to add a new printer or install a driver or even know they need to install a driver. They don't bother to "safely remove" a USB drive before disconnecting it from the machine.

Yes, if you install an operating system--no matter how simple the installation is--you are a computer-literate "geek."

FLPCGuy
January 31st, 2007, 10:35 PM
The thing with Feisty and Edgy to an extent is it makes me as an old Linux type person feel a little uneasy. I want Linux to be embraced by the World and Ubuntu seems like the only possible way things are going to change in Windows-world but back in the old days everything was daemon-config. You wanted to configure something and you change the config file and reload the daemon. You knew everything that was going on and nothing really broke the mold.

Now with more and more exotic hardware like laptops with CPU stepping support, Wi-Fi and all the funky newer stuff that Linux distros such as Ubuntu have had to embrace it starts getting a bit scary and a bit more difficult to do stuff and to keep up. I know how to configure all the mainstream old stuff but some of the new stuff goes past me and I have to really start reading up.

I think this is what will cause some problems for Linux distros in the near future. As Ubuntu with Feisty goes very ex-windows-user friendly all the old-skool Linux gurus will start resenting the new crowd and resenting the distros that bring the new crowds in with their knowledge of the new stuff that they have to learn at the time. No-one will need to know how to configure printers.conf when the GUI does it all fine or /etc/fstab when Gnome-VFS does it fine. Thats what makes me slightly uneasy, all these new GUI ways of doing things are great but I worry slightly that if something doesn't work I don't know everything underneath that works it all.

I'm rambling a bit here, just a bit of social commentary. Linux distros and mainly Ubuntu is right in between 2 major user groups at the moment, thats why its starting to get incredibly popular.
I felt exactly the same when Windows went to a registry from 3.1's five simple text files for configuration. By the time 2000 came out, I was comfortable with 9x. It's still easier to restore a 98 registry with SCANREG than with XP. My comfort level is still somewhere back around 2000 which I knew inside out as a server admin & MCSE. But I'm starting to appreciate some of the crap M$ has added with XP since then. I don't know that I'll ever move to Vista but I'm sure most people will embrace it, DRM, digitally certified hardware and all.

Sometimes I wish I'd never sold my '75 Levi's Gremlin with it's simple carburetor & ignition, no catalytic converter, and lots of room to work under the hood. There's so much going on under my new car's hood (Variable Valve Timing, electronic ignition & fuel injection) I'm not sure even the Toyota mechanics really know what's happening.

Relative simplicity is one of the things I enjoy about Ubuntu and the terminal at home after spending the day working with Tiered Group Policies and Domain Controller Active Directory Replication.

Enjoy the simplicity of today's Linux before it gets even more complicated.

Brunellus
January 31st, 2007, 10:39 PM
I felt exactly the same when Windows went to a registry from 3.1's five simple text files for configuration. By the time 2000 came out, I was comfortable with 9x. It's still easier to restore a 98 registry with SCANREG than with XP. My comfort level is still somewhere back around 2000 which I knew inside out as a server admin & MCSE. But I'm starting to appreciate some of the crap M$ has added with XP since then. I don't know that I'll ever move to Vista but I'm sure most people will embrace it, DRM, digitally certified hardware and all.

Sometimes I wish I'd never sold my '75 Levi's Gremlin with it's simple carburetor & ignition, no catalytic converter, and lots of room to work under the hood. There's so much going on under my new car's hood (Variable Valve Timing, electronic ignition & fuel injection) I'm not sure even the Toyota mechanics really know what's happening.

Relative simplicity is one of the things I enjoy about Ubuntu and the terminal at home after spending the day working with Tiered Group Policies and Domain Controller Active Directory Replication.

Enjoy the simplicity of today's Linux before it gets even more complicated.
the gremlin was also remarkably inefficient and polluting. I dont' think there's much comparison.

koenn
January 31st, 2007, 11:08 PM
the gremlin was also remarkably inefficient and polluting. I dont' think there's much comparison.
All analogies / metaphores will suffer from that kind of discrepancies.
I can relate to the gist of what Brunellus says. I followed a similar track, and every time you think you're more or less on top of it, there'd be a next, new& improved, and always more complex version.

A happened to be looking into gnome config a while back, and (also re prizrak a bit earlier) found that the straightforward text files I expected were not there - i found heaps of xml, and apparently there was also some sort of hierarchy in them so that one file would complement or overrule an other, and so on.
With plain text files, it's quite comforting to know that "in the end, if all else failse, I can still get myself out of trouble by editing a text file". I did not get that feeling from the gnome config files.

Then again, Windows Registry was a labyrinth at first as well. Still is, in many ways, but after a while I kinda got used to it and happily import registry keys or add or modify them by hand.

aysiu
January 31st, 2007, 11:14 PM
Well, the beauty of Linux (and open source in general) is that you're not under the thumb of one company.

If Ubuntu starts trying to hide plain text config files, you can bet there'll be a fork that preserves easy-to-figure-out text files.

Even right now if you don't dig all the Gnome XML, you can forego that in favor of IceWM. It's all about choice--and Ubuntu and Gnome are just one combination out of many.

koenn
January 31st, 2007, 11:43 PM
--and Ubuntu and Gnome are just one combination out of many.
but it happens to be a combination I've come to appreciate.

I guess xml is quite an adequate an appropriate choice for configuration of something as complex as a desktop, if you want applications to easily integrate in to it (as gnome seems to be trying), and keep it highly customizable.
(and we're right on topic again : I do think that "Linux" - or at least a comnination along the lines of Ubuntu and Gnome, is "ready for the desktop". Maybe not every desktop , but still.)

And if I ever end up really needing to, I'll probably have another go and figure out what i need to know to get a handle on it Gnome's XML - same as i did with Windows Registry but without the MS's "touch the registry and you're on your own' disclaimer.

Brunellus
January 31st, 2007, 11:49 PM
Well, the beauty of Linux (and open source in general) is that you're not under the thumb of one company.

If Ubuntu starts trying to hide plain text config files, you can bet there'll be a fork that preserves easy-to-figure-out text files.

Even right now if you don't dig all the Gnome XML, you can forego that in favor of IceWM. It's all about choice--and Ubuntu and Gnome are just one combination out of many.
. . . or, indeed, fluxbox, whose config files have a refreshingly straightforward syntax.

darrenm
February 1st, 2007, 11:23 AM
I'm not sure even the Toyota mechanics really know what's happening.

They don't. They just have some very good tools, manuals, and diagnostic software provided by the very clever guys at HQ. Kind of like the current situation with Linux.

Brunellus
February 1st, 2007, 03:20 PM
They don't. They just have some very good tools, manuals, and diagnostic software provided by the very clever guys at HQ. Kind of like the current situation with Linux.
difference with Linux is that most of us also have the tools (if not the skills) to forge new parts.

FLPCGuy
February 2nd, 2007, 12:21 AM
the gremlin was also remarkably inefficient and polluting. I dont' think there's much comparison.
You don't know what you are talking about. The Gremlin may have been ugly in it's default puke butterscotch and plaid colors and configuration but the optional American Motors in-line 6 was so efficient it was the ONLY power train sold in the USA in 1975 that met tough new EPA emission standards WITHOUT using a catalytic converter.

Also, with it's optional electric controlled overdrive added to the manual 3-speed my Gremlin could cruise Interstate 5 at the mandatory 55 MPH (strictly enforced) limit doing barely 1,600 RPM's. It got about 30 MPG...not bad for a vertical box nose with factory optional 7" wide reverse rims and wide oval tires (great for stability and handling--and still didn't need power steering). The Levi's Jeans interior package was authentic and included matching deep metallic blue paint and a large gold hockey stripe. I added a chrome air foil and huge chrome Gremlin gas cap to break up the chopped-off looking rear hatchback [but very handy].

This tricked out model cost only $3,700 brand new and I got the first factory rebate ($400) after ordering the car because they had one already built and sitting in the factory overflow lot. My Gremlin was not ugly, underpowered, poor handling or poorly appointed as most that came off the assembly line were (giving it terrible press). I sold it in one day in late 1976 for book price before going overseas (3 year military tour) and had four different parties begging me for it. Otherwise, I would still have it and be able to fix it myself.

I would compare that great, simple, solid, well built unpopular car to Ubuntu Linux. Most people turned their noses up at it, but they didn't know what they were talking about. If you know what you are doing, you don't have to spend a lot, follow the crowd, or settle for mediocrity.

FLPCGuy
February 2nd, 2007, 12:29 AM
They don't. They just have some very good tools, manuals, and diagnostic software provided by the very clever guys at HQ. Kind of like the current situation with Linux.
Agreed. It really bugs me that I have to find someone with a $1,500 electronic box to reset the date-based "change oil" warning after I've done my own oil change. My BMW had a similar set of color warning lights that only the dealer could reset. I prefer doing basic maintenance under the hood myself.

I can usually fix Windows, but I almost enjoy getting under the hood in Linux. Maybe that makes Ubuntu more like a Triumph or MGB.

boredandblogging.com
February 2nd, 2007, 04:25 AM
There is a slashdot post about some guy who tried to make his StarOffice files work with MS Office and vice versa and how the files got too big. And he complains about how Evolution doesn't work with Exchange.

Thought some of you would find it funny.

slashdot post (http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/02/01/1536251.shtml)
direct liink (http://www.networkperformancedaily.com/2007/01/ten_years_of_pushing_for_linux.html)

rai4shu2
February 2nd, 2007, 05:01 AM
Lame, even by flame bait standards.

aysiu
February 2nd, 2007, 06:06 AM
Oh, Linux isn't ready for the corporate desktop? We have a place for such discussion. Merged.

John E
February 2nd, 2007, 10:16 AM
Any gambling men among you Linux fans...? It's now 6 days since I upgraded to Edgy but I still haven't managed to get my broadband modem to work. On and off, I've probably spent 10-12 hours on this, so far. I've followed 4 different sets of instructions (none of which worked). One set of instructions was 6 pages long (yes, 6 whole pages of A4 paper!!)

Next thing on my list is my sound card.... I had to buy a nice new sound card after having to give up on my old one (no Linux drivers available). I've bought myself an RME Hammerfall 9652 which was recommended to me as being particularly easy to install under Linux. I don't yet know what the installation procedure is - but once I get my broadband working, I assume I'll just use apt-get install to install the drivers.

Here's my prediction.... The Windows drivers will take no longer than 40 seconds to install (plus possibly, a reboot).

I'm prepared to take bets on how long it will take me to install the Linux drivers. My guess is that it will be measured in days. Any takers? :)

steven8
February 2nd, 2007, 10:24 AM
I have a Soundblaster PCI 128 and didn't have to do anything. In either dapper or edgy. it just worked.

darrenm
February 2nd, 2007, 10:58 AM
Any gambling men among you Linux fans...? It's now 6 days since I upgraded to Edgy but I still haven't managed to get my broadband modem to work. On and off, I've probably spent 10-12 hours on this, so far. I've followed 4 different sets of instructions (none of which worked). One set of instructions was 6 pages long (yes, 6 whole pages of A4 paper!!)

Next thing on my list is my sound card.... I had to buy a nice new sound card after having to give up on my old one (no Linux drivers available). I've bought myself an RME Hammerfall 9652 which was recommended to me as being particularly easy to install under Linux. I don't yet know what the installation procedure is - but once I get my broadband working, I assume I'll just use apt-get install to install the drivers.

Here's my prediction.... The Windows drivers will take no longer than 40 seconds to install (plus possibly, a reboot).

I'm prepared to take bets on how long it will take me to install the Linux drivers. My guess is that it will be measured in days. Any takers? :)

I'll take 10/1 that it will take 0 seconds to install the Linux drivers.