Linux Desktop Readiness Thread [Archive] - Page 29

You bunt to?

April 20th, 2007, 02:40 PM

Have you ever had a Windows install that came with Flash? With Adobe? No? Huh.

In Ubuntu, running Firefox, Flash is not automatically installed, it's an add-on. Neither is Adobe automatically installed, you have to do it yourself with SPM. Not that I'm complaining!

At least in Windows there is Foxit (http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php) a much slimmer and faster package than the bloated Adobe monster.

As for media codes, I can't count how many times I've downloaded an AVI file, and gotten "Error requesting codec" from Windows Media Player. Why do I have to get it, I can play that AVI file fine, what's wrong with this one? Why do I have to install a new codec to have this AVI play sound, but that one alreay does? I'll agree there are more codes by default in Windows, but it's been pointed out why those aren't an option in a deafult Ubuntu install, and they're no more difficult to find and add in Linux than Windows.

Yeah WMP is awful, but everyone knows that http://rulesplayer.lessequal.com/ is a wonderful replacement with all codecs selfcontained. Pity it is not available in Linux.

It seems that the new version of Ubuntu has failed https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg-server/+bug/89853, so not everything is as rosy with Ubuntu as you make out, no to mention the numerous SoundCard problems (check out the Multimedia & Video forum - thread " Still no sound whatsoever").

How often do you open a Command (or Cmd) window in Windows? Most Windows users don't even know what it is. Of course in Linux it is common, in fact it is fundamental. For Ubuntu to become a replacement for Windows, it has to be a lot less like Linux, and a lot more like Windows.

Ubuntu is a start in that direction, bit that's all it is - a start. No ordinary Windows user wants to get involved in the Terminal, graphical or otherwise, and start learning all the options of ls. What a name! Of course you can make an alias for "ls" but if it's that easy why isn't it renamed by something meaningful by default? I realise that it is a very powerful tool to the initiated, but in the coming Windows versus Linux wars, the designers of Ubuntu will have to make this tool, and others, more user friendly -- and preferably with a graphical interface. Just creating an appealing desktop is not enough.

Oh, and one other though. SPM is a great tool but.. I found something of interest and installed it but it was nowhere to be found. I later realised that it was a KDE app and as I was running Gnome as default, that was the reason it didn't show. (Am I correct?) If I am correct, why are KDE apps even listed in SPM when running Gnome? Makes no sense to me, except.. In the bottom righthand corner of the desktop I see that I can switch desktop spaces. Can one be KDE while the other is Gnome?

jvc26

April 20th, 2007, 02:45 PM

For Ubuntu to become a replacement for Windows, it has to be a lot less like Linux, and a lot more like Windows.

I think again I'll make the point I made before - whats to say Ubuntu wants to be a replacement to windows? I dont think it ever wants to be. It wants to be an alternative OS which is good to use for those who want to. Hey if you want a windows clone why dont you go for the best windows clone going - Windows. I wouldnt recommend switching to Ubuntu to anyone who has absolutely no reason or desire to switch. Its only a switch people want to make if either they want to out of inquisitiveness, interest, need for an alternative so much they can accept that ubuntu is not windows, and never will be. I for one would stop using it if it became like a windows clone with all the necessary trappings of viruses, spyware and adware, need to constantly defrag, weak install system and having to pay for my apps (or get them by less than legit methods)

"ls" but if it's that easy why isn't it renamed by something meaningful by default?

ls - short for list? Does what it says on the tin my dear sir - after all typing in ls is one hell of a lot shorter than list every time.

Oh, and one other though. SPM is a great tool but.. I found something of interest and installed it but it was nowhere to be found. I later realised that it was a KDE app and as I was running Gnome as default, that was the reason it didn't show. (Am I correct?) If I am correct, why are KDE apps even listed in SPM when running Gnome? Makes no sense to me, except.. In the bottom righthand corner of the desktop I see that I can switch desktop spaces. Can one be KDE while the other is Gnome?
You can install kde apps, and run them in Gnome, it just means you have to install the kde base libraries which are needed to run them - i used to use k3b for a while as I preferred it to Gnomebaker.

Il

KIAaze

April 20th, 2007, 02:47 PM

Oh, and one other though. SPM is a great tool but.. I found something of interest and installed it but it was nowhere to be found. I later realised that it was a KDE app and as I was running Gnome as default, that was the reason it didn't show. (Am I correct?) If I am correct, why are KDE apps even listed in SPM when running Gnome? Makes no sense to me, except.. In the bottom righthand corner of the desktop I see that I can switch desktop spaces. Can one be KDE while the other is Gnome?

Because KDE applications also work in Gnome. :)
And vice-versa.

I'm happy that I can something like Amarok for example under Gnome and that I can install it from the SPM (Software package manager?).

I don't think it's possible to switch between KDE and Gnome using the desktop switcher... But you can install both and log out/log in to switch.

However the fact that sometimes we have to search for the shortcuts of programs we just installed is indeed a problem.
But as far as I know, it's the fault of the package creators and therefore not directly Ubuntu's fault. (or it's gnome/KDE's fault)

Hint:
A great tool to launch apps is Katapult. ;)
alt+space->type first letters of app name and enter. Et voila!

The command line is also very reliable for launching progs when you can't find the shortcut.

TheTuna

April 20th, 2007, 02:50 PM

Something to think about. One of the reason's we enjoy ubuntu is that it's safe and clean. If you try to push all the window's hand-holding, "I'll install it for you, just click here and it's done" kind-of-stuff, you're going to compromise that whole "safe and clean" thing. In trying to turn even the most non-technical gradma into a computer user, security holes are inevitebly created. There's a trade-off you see... if the OS does everything.

I'll take the learning curve. I'll type commands in the terminal window. I'll run the scripts... because I don't worry about malware anymore...

I don't play my favorite game anymore either. That's the trade off I was willing to accept when I stepped over to Edgy.

I paid for Vista Premium (not ultimate). I enjoyed it. Heck, I told people I loved it, and I did. But I left it. Sure, it's sitting on a hard-drive on the shelf. I might want to play that blasted game again someday.

(btw, I make my living developing software that runs on Windows. I've been an applications developer for well over 10 years. I'm also developing several games that use DirectX 8. I'll be 40 years old next week. I conceed that ubuntu/linux is probably a bit easier for a guy like me to migrate to. But there are growing pains to deal with too. I don't 'want' to go back and learn c++ all over again. But I am. I don't want to give up the simple to use DirectX wrapper I've been using for game development, but I will!)

danbrownlow

April 20th, 2007, 02:53 PM

atlings

April 20th, 2007, 03:08 PM

I'm failing to see how this can be "hard" to use. Is "hard" just =! windows?

Of course this is hard ... Being a complete Linux noob, I've been pulling out my hair trying to install the nvidia drivers for a couple of days. The main problem for someone like me is the complete lack of instructions :s And when I can find instructions, there's always important steps that are missing... I've tried the restricted drivers manager, envy and automatix2 - no luck. Then I thought I'd try the driver on the Nvidia page, since some people say they've had better luck with that one. Oki, installation: Type "sh NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-9755-pkg1.run" to install the driver," is what it says. I type, and get told that I need to shut down the x server first. After some checking, I figure out a way to do that. Then it tells me I need to run at initlevel 3, which involves some more cryptic commands that aren't mentioned anywhere on the nvidia page. And now it tells me that it's missing some libc libraries, whatever that is, and that it can't find the right kernel either. None of these things are mentioned anywhere on the Nvidia page, or in the readme. I'm sure it gets easy after a while, but for a beginner, it can be pretty daunting.

ububaba

April 20th, 2007, 03:16 PM

I had no problems, the forums are very helpful. I mean, every OS has things that could be improved, Ubuntu does obviously could do with some improvemnets, but is a hell of a lot better than windows for example
Surely it is better. At times, the feeling of not getting nowhere with Ubuntu is daunting.

Terl

April 20th, 2007, 03:33 PM

Of course this is hard ... Being a complete Linux noob, I've been pulling out my hair trying to install the nvidia drivers for a couple of days. The main problem for someone like me is the complete lack of instructions :s And when I can find instructions, there's always important steps that are missing... I've tried the restricted drivers manager, envy and automatix2 - no luck. Then I thought I'd try the driver on the Nvidia page, since some people say they've had better luck with that one. Oki, installation: Type "sh NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-9755-pkg1.run" to install the driver," is what it says. I type, and get told that I need to shut down the x server first. After some checking, I figure out a way to do that. Then it tells me I need to run at initlevel 3, which involves some more cryptic commands that aren't mentioned anywhere on the nvidia page. And now it tells me that it's missing some libc libraries, whatever that is, and that it can't find the right kernel either. None of these things are mentioned anywhere on the Nvidia page, or in the readme. I'm sure it gets easy after a while, but for a beginner, it can be pretty daunting.

You need to look in the right places. Always try the documents that go with your distribution first (in this case Ubuntu). Most often the questions are answered there. For example, typing 'nvidia' in the search box on the documents page(Documents Page (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UserDocumentation)) from the main Ubuntu site gets you this as one link: nVidia Driver How-to (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/BinaryDriverHowto/Nvidia?highlight=%28nvidia%29).

Google is another great place to search for help. There is lots of help out there. The Linux Documentation project has many free downloadable books about Linux. There are tutorials everywhere online.

If you are willing to learn and willing to read you will learn much. When you think about it, you probably searched for help about windows before too. The difference is you were more used to windows. If you work at Linux it will become easier everyday. Just set goals like, today I will learn how to write a little script. Or, today I will play a windows game on Linux. Just have fun :KS :)

KIAaze

April 20th, 2007, 03:50 PM

Just set goals like, today I will learn how to write a little script. Or, today I will play a windows game on Linux. Just have fun :KS :)

Not everybody thinks that learning how to write scripts, or how to set up wine is fun... ;)
(I do. :p)

banditv1

April 20th, 2007, 03:57 PM

charliedog

April 20th, 2007, 04:35 PM

Ive got to say that the above post makes a lot of sense to me

DivingWind

April 20th, 2007, 04:50 PM

The only reason why I have windowz on my hard drive is games, thats it! Ubuntu rocks! And it's evolving rapidly.

odin123

April 20th, 2007, 05:00 PM

Hi,

For my part, I say "AMEN" to what Manojvekaria said, and I fully sympathize with him.

I've been trying Linux distros on and off for the last four years, and I have always been puzzled by the same problems Manojvekaria raises.

Every single point of his is legitimate, even though there are, indeed, ways to solve his problems.

But such is not the issue, as Manojvekaria says. We "know" that we can solve the problems, but we don't know yet why we "have" to solve them everytime a new distro or a new release appears.

Let me lay my cards straight: I'm neither a Windows nor a Linux fan. I'm a fan of good, efficient, quick, and clean technology. The side which gives it to me will have me as a customer. If Linux is about "freedom," then allow me the freedom to choose.

Let us face the facts:

1. Linux is moving towards "Linux for the Desktop," there's no doubt about it; almost every distro makes this a selling and, mostly, a winning, point. So, the old argument that Linux is for geeks, and that beginners, if they're not happy about it, can just go fish somewhere else, is being defeated even as we speak.

2. The equally-old and equally-tedious argument that there are "geeks" and "newbies" out there and that newbies need all the help they can get is insulting to many of us. If "geek" means knowing how to tweak your IP tables manually, and "newbie" means that they need a GUI (poor guys!) because they're not smart enough, then the whole purpose of technology is defeated. Technology is about doing complex things the simple way without consuming undue time, something which is originally supposed to give us more time to enjoy life, isn't it? If, everytime I install Linux and run it, I have to spend "days" in order to have my graphic card do what's is supposed to do or to run my network, then, excuse me if I say that there's something wrong somewhere. These two days have been totally lost because I could have done something productive in the meantime. Is finding a way to run my graphic card time used productively? No, because what I have learned in the process is not going to improve my life. The task of having hardware and software run well should not be my concern, but should be the concern of programmers and technicians, right? Tinkering with your system for hours on end is not the mark of a superior intellect but the mark of someone who has nothing else to do or, better, the mark of a technician or a programmer, who do this for a living (many thanks to them for helping us do things the easy way!). Guys, let's not forget that life is short and can be used more fruitfully and more pleasantly than searching for hours and hours how to enable 3D on your desktop!

3. Why is Windows, despite all the rant, so successful? Not because it's "Windows," but because it addresses a basic need of users (all users), which is to quickly set out to do what they want to do, with minimum fuss. Linux, whether we like it or not, is moving not towards Windows, but towards the Windows "way" of operating: plug and play, automation, better help, etc. There's no shame about this, on the contrary, and Linux developers have understood that technology is about making people's life easier, not more difficult.

4. In the world of Windows, the divide between "geeks" and "newbies" is nowhere as sharply-marked as in Linux. To do the most mundane things (office, music, cd-burning, video, network, internet, etc.) all are equal. In Linux, I'm afraid that the hierarchy between geek and newbie is more salient: if you're a newbie, your pc won't run properly, so come to "us" for help (not meant to disparage those who help newbies, on the contrary, we owe them a lot, but what a waste of time on both ends!). As a Windows user, I have never ever in my life needed to ask a question in a forum. Forums have made their appearance in my life after starting with Linux. Fortunately, this is fading, and I am happy to see that within a couple of years most of the problems which are plaguing us (Linux users) will have been finally ironed out, but I am equally sad that this entrenchment behind obscurantism (how else would you call the format of man pages, despite the much-vaunted claim that everything in Linux is "human readable"?) has made the linux community so slow to understand where the real priorities reside.

Written in good faith (I am a Linux user, by the way)

Cheers!

rillip

April 20th, 2007, 05:28 PM

After reading all these posts, I heard several good points from both sides. But I think this simplest thing may have been over looked. I will try to explain what I mean. When a new linux user makes a statement about something being hard, not understanding, or needing help. Most long time linux users respond with an answer that they know works. However most of the time things get lost in the transition. Some times answers either assume too much about the users knowledge, the answer may contain short cuts, or may be to generally stated to be understood. Please understand that I not saying the help is not greatly welcomed. Some times it is just not graspable. There is a huge movement on the net telling every one how great Ubuntu is. This is why the “linux Newbie”like my self has become so abundant. I admit I am not fond of linux documentation, some I understand but most I don't. I personally think, that if the kind hearted people who are trying to help could imagine that they are guiding a child threw learning ride a bike when they give their answer. It would be far more effectively received. I respect the fact that everyones time is of great value to them, so when you kindly donate that time remember the quality of work and knowledge you place into that time is passed on to who ever uses it. Here is an example, if the community creates a help file on lets say installing flash and during that time no step is over looked or skipped. Every little detail or nuance explained with pictures and good clear detailed instructions. Then you will have created a reliable and recyclable answer for the FAQ section. Now I bet some of you are thinking that is a lot of work and you a most certainly right, however it is work that only needs to be done once. The next thing that comes to mind as you have been reading is the thought of, that most of the documentation is already like this. We know this is not the case, or these questions would not revolve threw the forum as often. Also please consider that not every one maybe as adept at learning new skills as you are. Here is an example, lets say you are a C++ master programmer of the gods. Now for some reason you have to be come an auto mechanic. Some of your skills will carry over like reading comprehension, but you will likely need help understanding the difference between solid lifters and hydraulic lifters. Windows and Linux can be as extreme as this for some people.

Ubuntu's only real obstacle in my opinion, is they communication gap between the new and experienced users. The logo for Ubuntu is three people holding hands, perhaps this shows the bridge to this gap. I do hope these simple words make sense.

Thank You to every one who tries to help newbies like me.

I can appreciate what you're saying.

Two seconds of searching, litterally:

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/flash

Linked to from a thread reading "install flash" here on these forums.

It doens't have pictures, but it is very thorough. Chances are if you look, you will find explicit guides for what you're trying to do. Check out the ultimate sound guide sticky in the media forum as a great example.

Odin:

1. I agree that its usefulness as a desktop is a selling point. But that doesn't mean it has to fit everyone. Let me tell you my experience with Macs as an example. I have a degree in CS, I'm a technical manager for the company I work for, that supports > 100k people. I've been using computers since I was eight or so. Suffice to say, I'm fairly savy. I've run DOS, Win 3.11, Win 95, 98, 2000 and XP. I'm using Ubuntu 6.06 right now, and work everyday with Fedora Core 3 and Redhat 7.1 (not as a desktop, naturally). I'm a fairly well versed guy.

I had to use a mac the other day at a library. Would you belive I couldn't figure out how to check my e-mail? I mean, I got Safari open after a little bit of poking at it, got to the webmail interface, read my first message... and then... I couldn't figure out how to go back. No right mouse button to click, no back button in site... I felt stupid. Then I wanted to save something. Well... no right mouse button still... still can't find the stupid menu... Alright, so I give up, I'll just print it. Ctrl +p... no wait, that's not the print screen... aw shucks, what'd I do now? Cancel, cancel.... no... cancel... There, back to the browser, and without even destroying everything.

I am totally serious here, I looked like a retard on this Mac, despite the fact that I'm exteremly computer savy. But Mac is very successful. It's not successful by being more like Windows.

I agree that systems are converging, that's the nature of the business. Linux is more like Windows now than ever before. Windows is more like OSX now than ever before. OSX is built on the spiritual brother to Linux! But that doesn't mean that being like Windows is good.

I had a hell of a time getting my hard drive to install in Windows. It took me ten hours of work. I didn't have a forum to post on - I actually ended up getting my Windows answer here when I couldn't find it! It worked in Linux without issue. You say that the disparity with geeks is that Linux wants you to do manual configrations, this is a waste of your time, etc. Your basic argument is if Linux wants to be really succesfull, it needs to "just work," no configuration, the way Windows does. But I wasted more time in Windows! It took me two days to get my graphics card set up right the first time because it was detecting it twice for some reason and installing two different drivers. I have had TONS of issues with Windows where Ihad to go in, reinstall drivers, figure out what the error code "0x0773549 - unexpected error" meant, etc. WINDOWS DOESN'T JUST WORK/. However, many people never encounter an issue like this, and when they do they write it off, because Windows is the way it is. Have a problem with x? Well, that's Windows for you, reinstall, reboot, try again. And because Windows has paid support, no visible, centralized forum to air issues like these out, and is an atypical experience, it's not the common perception. I think Linux has this perception of needing more configuration, more tinkering, more work, because it's more open about the issues. I think you would find that given 100 instalations, 90 of them work fine. There will be minor annoyances on some that wil cause people to go back to Windows. These same people will complain about an issue in Windows, but they have just learned to live with it. For example, someone you will find it inconvenient that they have to type a password to update. These same people blindly accept they have to restart to update. Which one takes longer??

But it doesn't matter that Linux is really easier and safter here. It matters that it's an inconvenience that they don't accept, as opposed to the one they do. I think if you really look at what you do in Windows to get hardware to work a lot of the time it's the same process, same frustration, different tools. But it's different, so it's bad in Linux, and just the way it is in Windows.

greymongrey

April 20th, 2007, 05:41 PM

For Ubuntu to become a replacement for Windows, it has to be a lot less like Linux, and a lot more like Windows.

I don't want a Windows replacement nor do I want Ubuntu to become one. I want Ubuntu to be all it can be. For those happy in the Windows world, I'm happy for them. I'm happy in the Linux world. To each their own.

hardyn

April 20th, 2007, 05:50 PM

I know they really don't make this user- friendly I just joined and I am thinking of quitting because it is too hard.

what are you having trouble with?

it would be far more constructive if you could post your difficulties in the form of questions, there are many that would be glad to help.

freebird54

April 20th, 2007, 05:52 PM

I think the impression that Windows is somehow easier has been greatly exaggerated, although not intentionally. That perception is nearly always about familiarity - not ease of use. When Windows came out, one of the first and most important 'Applications' was the Solitaire game. This 'conditioned' people to be comfortable using the mouse, and was simple enough to be understood. Most people were introduced to Windows at an early stage, and learned from THAT point how to get things done.

There is nothing easy about ANY OS at the moment. There is nothing natural about click the Start button when you want to shutdown the machine. Thee is nothing inherently simple about finding Device Manager as a Property of 'My Computer'. They are just things that have become familiar. Mac is no better either - and also no harder. A genuine newbie will wonder why they can't throw "My Computer" in the trash. :) (especially when it won't do what they want)

Until computers learn the DWIM command, this situation will continue. Making Linux more like Windows can help those coming from that world - but it will not improve LInux per se. The point is whether the computer will enable you to get something done - is it a good tool? It does not matter whether that is running a large database, or organizing a large pool of mp3's - Creating an essay for school, or writing the next Great Novel. LInux does a great job of that, as do the alternatives. Oh, DWIM? Do What I Mean :)

I understand that it is difficult to switch. I do not accept that the difficulty is in the thing being switched to. (not even when I, reluctantly switched to Windows in the mid 90's - it sure was hard without real multi-tasking, and a lousy command line. And no, I wasn't coming from Linux) If you think about the hundreds of hours than went into learning Windows, you will see this point.

In short - in life I have found (hah - philosophy :) ) that those who look for problems will find them - and those who look for solutions will find those too. Just what I tell my kids on the baseball team - and it works too!

Have a nice day, with whatever system is your choice.

screeeeeemin

April 20th, 2007, 06:02 PM

NicoleM

April 20th, 2007, 06:10 PM

ZIP files are easier for Windows users like me.

I've only been a part time linux user for about a year. I think I fit the Windows demographic pretty well except for being more curious than many. At this point I'm on a mission to promote Ubuntu and Edubuntu as much as possible.

With that in mind, I want to tell you that the single most difficult part of trying linux for the first time (and still) is that, as a download it is only available as an *.iso.
I know that these are well known to many windows users but not to me.

If it were a ZIP file it would be much more easily accessible to windows users that are as out of the loop as me. There are plenty of us!

I image there are many reasons not to do this but if even just one mirror site could offer ZIPs it would be the familiar choice for alot of newcomers.

you can't install an OS from a zip file though...

it comes as an iso because that's a cd image that you then have to burn and run. windows comes as a cd also. you have to have something to boot from in order to install an os...you can't install from within another OS. if you were to find a windows disc online in downloadable form (fro ma torrent site, pirated, whatever) it will be in an ISO format because that's how you clone an optical disc for burning and installing a OS.

this format definitely transcends OS and is based on sheer usability. just because you're not familiar with it doesn't detract from the fact that it's the best (if not only) tool for the job.

if you find ISO files too difficult ubuntu offers FREE discs with FREE shipping through canonical's shipit service. that way you can just receive the cd in the mail and put it into your drive "just like windows" if you want to.

edit: you can even order a few extras from shipit for your friends that also may be unsre of themselves when it comes to ISOs. or you can always check the ubuntu documentation that outlines how to download and burn an ISO to create a working install cd.

just a second edit to add some useful links to some of the things i referenced in my post

how to burn an ISO once you've downloaded it: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/BurningIsoHowto
shipit (order free cds with free shippind): https://shipit.ubuntu.com/

rillip

April 20th, 2007, 06:19 PM

screeeeeemin

April 20th, 2007, 07:08 PM

I don't know why I didn't use Infra Recorder the first time! If it wasn't mentioned on that page before it's a great addition.

Lack of an application to burn iso's was my whole problem. I end ended up using the command line on a Mac ( hdutil ) which work great but took a little Mac learning on my part (which was good too). All is good.

Regarding common practices: I had a feeling there were good reasons for distribution of ISO's, it's just that I'm at (or was) a experience level that had never included downloading boot disks.

I knew how to use zip files though...

If I had downloaded a zip file that included the files and directories that I see on a burned iso, I would unzip to a directory then burn them to a CD. That would be bootable wouldn't it?

I don't need to feel defensive here, right? I'm just sharing my personal roadblock experience. I support Ubuntu fully !

xpod

April 20th, 2007, 07:11 PM

Another nice and easy option.....not to mention free:)
http://www.cdburnerxp.se/help/burniso

rudeboyskunk

April 20th, 2007, 08:21 PM

*grr* i'm trying to delete the post i just made but i can't seem to figure out how.

dtsdude

April 20th, 2007, 10:51 PM

.......to become an everyday system is:

The complete support of:
Adobe Systems (multimedia and graphics)
Autodesk (CAD)
Electronic Arts (games)

These software companies stand for the major part of software, for which in linux there is no real alternative. It is also software that is needed in productivity/entertainment for the majority of users.

No matter how amazing the system is (7.04 imho is better than OSX), without the support of these companies, it will lack critical applications for many users.

Its either necessary to get this support, or make linux capable to run (wine / crossover office) these applications as good as windows, and as easily out of the box. Even though they are made for windows.

Teg_Navanis

April 20th, 2007, 11:09 PM

Bug #1 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1) is a vicious circle. In order to penetrate the market, Linux needs support by the software industry, but in order to get that, it needs a large enough market share to be an attractive platform.

PatrickMay16

April 20th, 2007, 11:26 PM

The process of installing drivers to become much much easier.

Right now, you have to jump backwards through loops of fire to install drivers which aren't included with the default installation, like if you get a USB wifi dongle or something. You need to install the build-essential package, install the kernel headers, get the source for the driver, untar the source code, type a bunch of crap in a terminal, and spend hours looking through google when it fails to compile (which it often does for some reason). Then after you've torn half the hair out of your head and spent hours looking through forum posts and whatever you could find on google, you might get it working.
If linux is to be a desktop OS for all people, then this has to change.

It will also need more applications and improvements to currently available applications. Like applications for music/sound editing, video editing, office and other productivity, etc. A lot of that is filled well, but things like video editing are lacking.

gashcr

April 20th, 2007, 11:45 PM

What linux needs is linux users... I think people is more interested in making linux a windows clone ( cause they want to have everything they have in windows running on linux ), than creating something new. The beauty of linux is that it is built by and for the community. Don´t make the same mistakes that led you to change from MS, we have the chance to make our own stuff, our way, and most important, better!!

Let´s think different! I´ve never though choice was related to having the same product with a different brand... choice is having the chance to chose from different options, each one with its own flavor...

If we help develop better things than those in other platforms, I have no doubt market will grow... that´s the way to go

dtsdude

April 20th, 2007, 11:54 PM

In order to penetrate the market, Linux needs support by the software industry, but in order to get that, it needs a large enough market share to be an attractive platform.

True, apparently Dell is considering linux (probably Ubuntu) as an option for its consumer pc, that is a step in the right direction, if more OEMs follow dell, it might create the market. But the software corporations still need to be more supportive (prime example: Shockwave) in order to make that market share possible.

What linux needs is linux users... I think people is more interested in making linux a windows clone ( cause they want to have everything they have in windows running on linux ), than creating something new. The beauty of linux is that it is built by and for the community. Don´t make the same mistakes that led you to change from MS, we have the chance to make our own stuff, our way, and most important, better!!

Let´s think different! I´ve never though choice was related to having the same product with a different brand... choice is having the chance to chose from different options, each one with its own flavor...

If we help develop better things than those in other platforms, I have no doubt market will grow... that´s the way to go

No, not a clone.....
The UI, the way the system works, the community.......all great, and allready better than the other operating systems.

The problem is that there allready established standards within certain industries, and current alternatives in linux hardly come close to what those companies had 5 years ago or more.

Its easy to say create something new, but even if you manage to make something better, these companies are still king of the hill. The industry supports their prosukts, no alternative even comes close and they are only availiable in windows.

Its not about changing linux into windows, its about getting critical tools (like autocad) working just as well, if not better, in linux as they do in windows. Either with the support of the companies(preferably, they are the industry leaders) or making something far more powerfull and user friendly.

gashcr

April 21st, 2007, 12:04 AM

Perhaps developers don´t realize a lot of people would switch if they give support to linux.

R&CRULE

April 21st, 2007, 12:12 AM

one word. GAMES. and movies. and music. and basically every single possible thing Windows can do but better.

WiseElben

April 21st, 2007, 12:14 AM

Last time I checked, Linux can play games (ok, not all), movies, and music. Windows has viruses, do you want Linux to copy that too?

aysiu

April 21st, 2007, 12:14 AM

Merged, in accordance with the principles outlined in this sticky (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=408514).

dtsdude

April 21st, 2007, 12:26 AM

Last time I checked, Linux can play games (ok, not all), movies, and music. Windows has viruses, do you want Linux to copy that too?

I think he ment the editing of movies and music, well if not than he's just uninformed.

As for games, alot of them do play fine but only in wine or crossover.

From personal experience, alot of gamers dont even know how to uninstall the game, they just delete the shortcut. Nevermind getting them to work with wine. Maybe its just because i had to deal with some ignorant gamers, but maybe not. Native support is a must for them.

cypherzero

April 21st, 2007, 12:28 AM

What Linux really needs is new innovation - not to simply copy what MS has already done (like Mono for .NET).
Look at the Microsoft tools available for games dev out there, virtually every (recent) game has been designed using MS VC++, and Microsoft knows it so of course they make MS products non-compatable with other OS compilers.

Linux just feels so much cleaner than Windows and I would use it so much more if only more commercial products were available for it, open source is good and free, but open and propriety is even better

FoolsGold

April 21st, 2007, 12:29 AM

Gaming is fine in Linux - there are enough games of most genres to keep people happy anyway.

Swab

April 21st, 2007, 12:30 AM

.......to become an everyday system is:

The complete support of:
Adobe Systems (multimedia and graphics)
Autodesk (CAD)
Electronic Arts (games)

I don't get it.. what is wrong with Adobe? Why don't they release their entire product range for Linux. We're as big a market as OSX no? What is holding them back?

FoolsGold

April 21st, 2007, 12:39 AM

Maybe they figure Linux users never buy software, so they have nothing to gain by porting PS to Linux because no-one would buy it.

Heh, alright it's a stereotype and not exactly true, but a lot of people still believe it.

aysiu

April 21st, 2007, 12:39 AM

If you believe you have practically implementable suggestions, make a proposal in the Gutsy Gibbon subforum. Have your say in Gutsy Gibbon! - Instructions within (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=409519) has more details.

If you believe your criticisms that are not practically implementable are original, read this:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CriticismFAQ

... or just read the thread I merged your thread with.

gashcr

April 21st, 2007, 12:40 AM

Probably they think we wouldn´t pay for those products... probably they think we use Oss just because its free ( well, that´s a very good reason in my case, jaja ) but one thing is my OS, other is apps, and definitively I would pay for an app if I really need it, as long as the price is reasonable.

jiminycricket

April 21st, 2007, 12:47 AM

jiminycricket

April 21st, 2007, 12:50 AM

I don't get it.. what is wrong with Adobe? Why don't they release their entire product range for Linux. We're as big a market as OSX no? What is holding them back?

Someone posted a thread on the official Adobe forums with a response from the developers a while back in this thread. I think it had to do with different distributions, ALSA and something else...but really Opera can deal with it very friendly by providing a lot of different packages-- although they could get by with just tar.gz, deb and rpm-- I don't know if it's just an excuse because they don't see money in it (although high end places would definitely use Linux for Photoshop, like they use CinePaint and Blender to cut out the OS licensing)

PatrickMay16

April 21st, 2007, 03:11 AM

I think the driver problem could be solved with a nice GUI way to install source packages, added into Gdebi, and ndisk-gtk as well. But really, it's only wireless and 3d that have these problems in the mainstream, and Nouveau, r300 and the new wireless stack are working to solve that without binary drivers.

The process of installing a driver shouldn't be this difficult, no matter how little times you might have to do it.

julian67

April 21st, 2007, 11:22 AM

If anybody wants an Ubuntu based system but with restricted drivers and codecs already installed and beryl working by default they can install Mepis 6.5. Out of the box it will play WMA, MP3, Musepack, DVD, DivX, Flash etc, sync with ipod, and have 3d acceleration enabled. It's KDE based but very customised and nice and simple to use. It makes an interesting alternative to Feisty and to Vista. It's definitely not suitable for anyone who doesn't want a distro with proprietary code but is maybe the easiest distro for everyone else.

darrenm

April 21st, 2007, 01:38 PM

Someone posted a thread on the official Adobe forums with a response from the developers a while back in this thread. I think it had to do with different distributions, ALSA and something else...but really Opera can deal with it very friendly by providing a lot of different packages-- although they could get by with just tar.gz, deb and rpm-- I don't know if it's just an excuse because they don't see money in it (although high end places would definitely use Linux for Photoshop, like they use CinePaint and Blender to cut out the OS licensing)

I don't believe their excuses for a second. If Microsoft aren't paying Adobe then Adobe should be asking them for money. Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash etc are the only barriers to entry for a lot of web developers, graphic designers etc. who want to use cheap, common, PC based hardware with the Adobe stuff that they currently use on a Mac. I can't believe that the only reasons are the different distros and they think no-one would buy it; All they have to do is make it monolithic. As far as paying for it goes, it would just work the same as it does in the Windows world, all home users pirate the software and all businesses have to pay for it in case FAST come knocking.

salsafyren

April 21st, 2007, 02:18 PM

And because Windows has paid support, no visible, centralized forum to air issues like these out [snip]

Come on, there are lots of forums for Windows. To say otherwise is just silly.

aysiu

April 21st, 2007, 02:38 PM

Ubuntu also has paid support, and Windows has several visible forums.

bookinstall

April 21st, 2007, 04:26 PM

Linux on the Desktop? Are we serious?

This goal requires changes in the way we do things.

The first thing that new Linux OS users must do is find out how to get their aplications installed!

Desktop users want to run their applications, and the OS should not put obstacles in ther way.

Most people think that Linux is for geeks or nerds only!
After losing my Mozilla Composer WYSIWYG editor application, I believe they are right? and how can we change this?

Yes we need to be able to have powerful Console commands for programmers), but terminal must not be required for most desktop users! This would require learning Command line commands.

Things that must be changed:

1. Downloads and Installs
2. Upgrades
3. Missing Applications in the drop down lists of categories.
4. Drivers

1. Downloads and Installs:

After the Linux OS is installed, desktop users begin to add their neccessary applications, not installed with the operating system, from the add remove programs list, or from another list, or from a link to a download site.

After painfully obtaining these applications, and updating them, it is very disturbing when any of them are removed, automatically when they are declared obsolete and will no longer be supported?

Removal of an applications from the supported list, should not mean removal of the application, rather it should be moved to an unsupported list.

Installing applications from the supported packages list, seems to be a good idea, until you lose necessary applications!

Desktop users need to know that their apps are secure, if they upgrade their OS.

There needs to be a way to lock the application to prevent automatic removal.

All Installations must be automatic! From any source, to make Linux a serious contender for desktop use. Yes the Synaptic Packaging Manager is suitable for geeks, but too complicated for most desktop users.

Installs can be initiated by or with the OS, or they may be required to be installed by an application, or by the home website. (For example Comcast.net occasionally forces an install of the newest flash player when using their "Fan" videos. This often fails when using internet explorer broswer, but may work properly with a different browser. We have two Windows computers and now one Linux computer.

Add/Remove Programs

This is a good way to select supported programs, except that the list (hundreds of programs) is far too long! Something must be done to make finding installed programs easier!

Yes there are categories, but we need to have two lists to help us find installed programs:

A currently installed supported programs alphabetical list, and
A currently installed unsupported programs alphabetical list.

Perhaps we should have two categories:
Add/Remove Supported Programs, and
Add/Remove Unsupported Programs?

(Unsupported programs should not be removed automatically?)

Missing Applications in the drop down lists of categories.

When we cannot find a launching link to our program in a drop down list, we should be able to easily correct this for any program on these two lists.

I installed a virus scanner (Aegis in OS 6.10) but never could find a launcher for it. Now that I upgraded to OS 7.04, this app is missing, and I can't find a virus scanner in the new supported list!

I had to search for and install and configure a firewall application (Firestarter) not in the supported list.

Yesterday I installed the upgrade to OS 7.04, which required a 300 mbyte download, which should be easy with my high speed internet, but required 10 hours at 10 kbytes/sec to 30 kbytes/second (because the download servers are slow? or perhaps the OS installer thinks I do not have high speed internet?)

Drivers:

All device drivers must be automatically installed after selecting the device (printer HP 842C) without asking users to navigate to find printer ppd files.

I had never heard of an ppd file, so I had to search for ppd files, so that I could find the folder containing the two HP ppd files. Which one do they want?

I have only had Linux a few days (ubunto 6.10 upgrade to 7.04).
But I really needed the now obsolete Mozilla Composer application for editing hundreds of htm and html files. This application was removed when 7.04 was installed.

So, today I will try to find a way to get it back. Very discouraging!

When I right click the desktop, the only document choice is for a text file. I will have to find a way to add to this right click list, a Composer Html file, and Open office files.

If I ever get all my applications installed, maybe I should never upgrade the OS again?

I really like the simplicity of linux compared to Windows, goodbye registry! I hope that Linux can become the dominant desktop OS.

slimdog360

April 21st, 2007, 04:32 PM

hmm

raja

April 21st, 2007, 04:53 PM

I think most of your perceived problems are only the difficulties of having to adjust to a new way of doing things in a new OS. Give it a couple of months and you will realise that.
1. The main reason why Linux is a more modern OS compared to windows is the ease of installing new applications, in my opinion. You may have some problems when you want something that is not in the repository, but that is pretty rare. However did you get the idea that Synaptic is for geeks? It should be very friendly for someone coming from windows. You can search for applications, see what is installed and what can be installed, and install or remove anything with a couple of clicks. Though personally I would suggest starting to use the terminal once you get over the initial aversion to it. You want to play anagrams? All you do is
apt-cache search anagrams , pick one from the results and
sudo apt-get install anagramarama Come on. How much simpler can it get?
2. When you upgrade your system, it is inevitable that you may lose some apps that do not yet run on this. You have to be prepared for that if you have some unusual apps running.
3. I agree this can be pain. But personally, I never use the dropdown menu to start applications. Use Alt-F2 and type in the first few letters to find and launch any application (or of course, do the same from the terminal). Now when I have to log into windows for something, I find myself cursing that I cant easily launch an application without wading through the menu.
4. The problem with drivers, is still a problem with vendors who want to keep the code proprietary. I think Ubuntu should not compromise on the concept of 'freedom' for this. Things will get better with time.

phen

April 21st, 2007, 05:15 PM

i completely disagree with the thread-starter. since 2 days feisty is running with full desktop effects enabled, every application installed (no config file hacking at all). its great, and even a mac user (flatmate) is impressed. it is easier to install applications with synaptic than it has ever been with windows. driver problem?? go and ask early vista customers :) anyway thats a problem that the linux community is not able to solve alone.

do you look for a tutorial for beginners? start firefox and read the homepage, you will soon find a link to:
https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/desktopguide/C/index.html
if you have never seen windows, installing it is not easy, too. otherwise i would not be asked regularly to help with windows installations.

dont know how to get your editor back, but you have upgraded your OS! Its just normal that there MIGHT be conflicts with old/new applications. regarding firewall and virus: dont install it, you dont need it, thats simplicity, isnt it? is a firewall included in windows these days? maybe yes, thats the annoying thing asking cancel or allow every 10sec?

there is always a lot space for improvements, but you seem to have the 100% contrary view on feisty compared with my view. i think linux is there, finally.

stickman51

April 21st, 2007, 05:44 PM

chakkaradeep

April 21st, 2007, 05:49 PM

Linux on the Desktop? Are we serious?

YES :KS

This goal requires changes in the way we do things.

The first thing that new Linux OS users must do is find out how to get their aplications installed!

Desktop users want to run their applications, and the OS should not put obstacles in ther way.

If you use proper tools, the tool handles it in a smart way. If you are using Synaptic, search for an application, try to install it, Synaptic calculates the dependencies too to install and prompts it too and installs it. As a User, you dont even need to bother about what are the dependencies.

Yes we need to be able to have powerful Console commands for programmers), but terminal must not be required for most desktop users! This would require learning Command line commands.

Terminal, one way is a good thing to debug any application.Its not a must for every User to use Terminal, but there is nothing wrong when a User asks how to use a terminal and we (community) tell them or point to some tutorials :)

1. Downloads and Installs:

I can say the way we Install/Remove an application has really improved a lot. BTW, if you try to uninstall kdelibs and if you say you are being shown with so many other apps to be uninstalled, I would say its the ignorance to know about KDE and I wouldnt blame the Package Management for that !

Add/Remove Programs

This is a good way to select supported programs, except that the list (hundreds of programs) is far too long! Something must be done to make finding installed programs easier!

Yes there are categories, but we need to have two lists to help us find installed programs:

A currently installed supported programs alphabetical list, and
A currently installed unsupported programs alphabetical list.

Perhaps we should have two categories:
Add/Remove Supported Programs, and
Add/Remove Unsupported Programs?

Are you serious that you didnt find any of these in the current Ubuntu Add/Remove Programs ? Strange !

I installed a virus scanner (Aegis in OS 6.10) but never could find a launcher for it. Now that I upgraded to OS 7.04, this app is missing, and I can't find a virus scanner in the new supported list!

I had to search for and install and configure a firewall application (Firestarter) not in the supported list.

Dont compare the Installation mechanisms from Windows where you download anything from the internet and install it and using it. Thats Windows and what you are using is Linux ! Check for the distribution support for your package and then try to install from the distribution repos and if you find any problem , the distribution community is there for to help.Atleast check with the Application website whether they support your linux distribution or not.

Yesterday I installed the upgrade to OS 7.04, which required a 300 mbyte download, which should be easy with my high speed internet, but required 10 hours at 10 kbytes/sec to 30 kbytes/second (because the download servers are slow? or perhaps the OS installer thinks I do not have high speed internet?)

Is this the worry of Linux :mad: ?? This is really bad, go check your ISP. Me too upgraded and my upgrade was complete in 1 1/2 hours providing I had good ISP and high bandwidth.

I really like the simplicity of linux compared to Windows, goodbye registry! I hope that Linux can become the dominant desktop OS.

I can say you are affected and yet to recover from the Windows Syndrome. Dont expect Linux to be same as Windows , its Different and if you have any troubles, we the Community are here to help you. I can say you should come out of your ignorance and try to understand what actually Linux is.

bobplano

April 21st, 2007, 05:50 PM

well most people like you want to get away from windows, that's the biggest reason for switching. if you have a server linux almost always runs smoother and longer than a windows OS. sure you can't run outlook or photoshop on just a linux system, but there is wine and vmware if you really need those. sometimes you don't need to do that. there are alternatives to many windows programs. for instance outlook-> evolution or thunderbird and (not quite so much) photoshop->GIMP. a big hardware problem with linux was wireless but now with fiesty 7.04 out that is becoming less of one. so while your son may say why, i say why not. you get a great deal for an even better price and you gain more experience. believe me, knowing how to use linux can't hurt in getting a job

Jonne

April 21st, 2007, 05:51 PM

I can understand his point about Photoshop and Indesign, but Outlook? What's so good about Outlook that people choose to suffer under it?

forrestcupp

April 21st, 2007, 05:51 PM

All Installations must be automatic! From any source, to make Linux a serious contender for desktop use. Yes the Synaptic Packaging Manager is suitable for geeks, but too complicated for most desktop users.

Do you even know what you are saying? Maybe you mean the apt package manager. Synaptic is about as easy as it gets for installing software. I was a big Windows user and supporter, and Synaptic is easier than installing things on Windows. I've shown Synaptic to Windows users who aren't very tech-savvy and they can't believe how easy it is to install things with Synaptic. Have you tried using the search function to enter keywords and find apps that you want? It's not that hard to find what you're looking for in that big list of software.

ComplexNumber

April 21st, 2007, 05:52 PM

the way i see is that all OS's have some hangups. when in windows and something messes up, one's only options are to either a) call out a technical support person, or b) try and hack into the (closed) code and fix it ourselves. other things are either impossible or just not straightforward to do in windows.
linux makes things a lot more simple and user friendly by giving users the option to use the terminal for those that don't a) want to call out a technical support person, or b) hack into the (closed) code.

if anything, i would say that it is indeed windows that is not yet suitable for the desktop for the average user. i have known people who are running windows, and blissfully unaware that their PC is crawling with infections....yet they are powerless to do anything about it, due to either lack of technical knowledge and/or lack of awareness of the scale of the problem. almost all of them have to get a technically savvy neighbour to help them solve their problems.

noerrorsfound

April 21st, 2007, 05:55 PM

Photoshop can be run under GNU/Linux using a program called Wine.

You might be able to get Outlook running with Wine also, but unless there is a specific feature he needs that is only present in Outlook, then he could try an alternative such as Thunderbird (http://mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/) (made by Mozilla, the creators of the Firefox web browser).

aktiwers

April 21st, 2007, 05:55 PM

I got Photoshop running under Wine :)
But you are right, if these 3 programs keep you on windows, you should probably stay there. Though I would use Thunderbird. But Photoshop and Indesign can be hard to replace with Gimp and inkscape.. or whatever. A dual boot or Windows running in Vmware could be a solution. At least there are some things such as no virus, spyware and so on Linux and other great things that isn't on windows. Its a matter of taste I guess.

Drakkor

April 21st, 2007, 05:56 PM

Haven't tried this myself but :

VorDesigns

April 21st, 2007, 05:56 PM

And I want my games too but, your son misses the point.
-
Can't run Outlook: Consider Thunderbird which runs on Windows and Linux -- hmm, cross compatibility and free..
-
Can't run PhotoShop: Consider Gimp which runs on Windows and Linux -- hmm, cross compatibility and free..
-
Can't run InDesign: Got me there. I'll bet there is some form of alternative. Probably buggy as frell too but out there.
-
Can't run Metrix: Can't run MS VB either but there are a cornicopia of development tools out there.
-
It would be easier and more credible for him to say he isn't willing to expand his horizons and money is no object.
-
Sure, there are tools that many of us have grown used to missing in the Linux world but they will show up.
-
His broad stroke dismissal of Linux as a credible tool makes this whole post feel like a paid gaff.

m.musashi

April 21st, 2007, 05:59 PM

Ho hum. Linux is too hard. It will never be ready for normal people. You need to be an expert to install. Blah, blah, blah.

Here's news. My 10 year old just installed Feisty to dual boot on her (mine but I let her use it) laptop. The only thing I did was manually partition so /home could be a separate partition. Had I just left her to do she could have done the default option but I didn't want that. Now, how hard can it be to install if a 10 year old who is no computer whiz can do it. I didn't help except to show her how to make it boot from the CD and then partitioning.

We can now claim that Ubuntu is so easy to install even a 10 year old can do it.

Oh, if you are having trouble with drives, install feisty. Drivers are now nearly automatic and even easier than in windows. It sees the wireless card for the laptop and installs the driver without me even telling it to and the nvidia driver is a 2 or 3 click install. You don't even have to search the web or insert a CD. Way to go Ubuntu.

Whiners - 0, Ubuntu - 1000...

anjilslaire

April 21st, 2007, 06:00 PM

Or perhaps more to the point, why are you letting your children dictate what software is run in your household?

I'm not a young n00b without children. I have them, am the 2nd oldest in my team, and am an IT professional so I'm not asking this blindly. If you want to switch, do it.

Note: I'm not a zealot; I run strictly MS software at work, but simply prefer a change when I come home, plus I don't need to worry about spyware/virii with my family.

jazzman83

April 21st, 2007, 06:00 PM

I think it all comes down to what you want your computer to mean to you.

You can analogize this to being the same thing as why do people like tinkering with their own cars? You can spend a little more and just buy a new/used one instead of buying various parts and trying to install them yourself. You spend a little more but your time is much better used in the respect of not needing to learn/work on the car which may never end up working properly anyway. This attitude of curiosity leads to things over all scopes of life to be accomplished whereas they might never have been. It is one of man's defining attributes.

I see Linux as a way for people who find their computer experience to be very important to themselves as a means to explore new roads and not say that one company should write rules as to how the planet should use their computers. It is a sense of expression and a personal growing need/want for freedom on what have become essential parts of modern society.

Linux is also an incredibly educational experience and is the main reason I use it. I learn more about the structure and logic and processing of a computer from one general week on Linux than I would from years of general Windows usage. You cannot deny this that the Linux experience on the whole is much more gratifying for those willing to explore the limits and innuendos of their machine.

That said, I agree with you that from a complete usability perspective that Windows is without competitor. Ubuntu is really pushing this envelope more than any other OS besides for Mac in this category but still has a long way to go. For anyone who only needs their computer as a tool to acomplish work and no strings attached Windows is definitely the way to go for the present moment but the whole idea behind Ubuntu and the hundreds of other different OS'es possible is that this doesn't have to be the way forever.

Just my two cents worth but I hope you can see - at least a small bit - my point.

Lucifiel

April 21st, 2007, 06:01 PM

Holy crud... Outlook Express may be very easy for many to use but it's filled with plenty of problems. I last used Outlook in 1998(or was that 1995?) and I've never looked back since.

Nythain

April 21st, 2007, 06:04 PM

it is about the software and hardware one needs... linux isnt for everyone... but it is a great OS for people who like control over their computer... for people who cant afford a multi hundred dollar OS... for people with older machines that newer OS's just dont run good on... for people with the curiosity and learning capacity to make it work for them.

For almost every piece of windows software there's and almost equal if not better piece of software for free available and updated more often on linux... and if not, and the piece of windows software is popular enough, then the community has found or made a way to make that windows software work for them. There are many users who cant go without certain pieces of software like photoshop for whatever reasons, school, work, hobby... and as far as i know, they are getting it to work for them under linux...

Its also about security and stability... Leave an xp (im not sure about vista) machine running for 6 weeks straight without a reboot on a p4 2.0 with under a gig of ram and see how fast and well it performs... accidently click on the wrong website or forget to enable antivirus software on a microsoft machine and see how fast it gets infected with malwar, adware, spyware and good old fashioned viruses... add the fact that your average port scanning script kiddie knows nothing about the few security risks of linux or how to exploit them with regular (and i mean DAILY) updates to correct any problems discovered and you have one hell of a secure box on the internet, wich is pretty important now a days.

So yeah, it may not be for everyone, but i would say its much more than just a "curiosity"... my Kubuntu supports better than my xp ever did, and runs everything i need it to better, faster and cheaper than xp ever did... Ubuntu is just right for me

stuck

April 21st, 2007, 06:05 PM

Ive just (5days) ago installed Ubuntu on my laptop. I'm on my second install because I killed it trying to get my wireless network card to work.

I have a tripple boot system, XP, Vista and Ubuntu.

Ive never had a problem with XP, I love Vista. Admitedly there are a few software compatibility issues, thats why ive still got XP.

I love the simplicicty of MS systems, you point, click and it works.

About half the devices are Unknown in device manager, and although I think i've installed my wireless card I still cant click on firefor and connect to the web.

But despite all the hassle of Ubuntu i'm going to try and stick with it to see if i make any progress with it.

So far my opinion of Ubuntu/linux is its awful, but i hope this opinion changes over the next few weeks.

jojo4u

April 21st, 2007, 06:07 PM

Well, GIMP ist no replacement for Photoshop since it lacks some professional features.
Outlook might be only a concern if you use Exchange.

Nythain

April 21st, 2007, 06:12 PM

linux only seems complicated and impossible because windows has been the mainstream for like ever... give it a few weeks or month... ask questions, pay attention to the answers... once you get the basics down linux is almost simpler than windows.

I personally could NEVER get the hang of registry editing in windows, and now dont have to...

jnoreiko

April 21st, 2007, 06:14 PM

linux only seems complicated and impossible because windows has been the mainstream for like ever...

It depends.
Some things are much simpler on linux.
Some things are not. I've just discovered I can't get the creation date of a file, which seems to be a pretty basic thing to want.

Loki-uk

April 21st, 2007, 06:20 PM

Thunderbird can equal outlook express, but the windows mail in vista edges it and outlook is a whole nother story tb doesn't touch it..... Try Outlook with BCM when tbird can do that i'll switch. :(

peebly

April 21st, 2007, 06:20 PM

photoshop $649 - the gimp $0

Nythain

April 21st, 2007, 06:24 PM

i run konqueror in kubuntu for a file manager/browser, metabar gives me modified date and last accessed date, along with all the other important info... but yeah, not actuall creation date... i never really thought about that

aysiu

April 21st, 2007, 06:29 PM

I've been getting excited about Linux and made the "Live CD" with Ubuntu 6.10. In trying to get my son involved in it, he wrote this and it is hard to disagree with him:

"> But bottom line, I just can't still see why I'd dink around with it. I
> can't run Outlook under it, and can't run photoshop and InDesign and
> Metrix and and and.. So as neat as it may be I just don't see the point.
> It's all about the software one needs to run, and the devices one needs to
> support, and if it can't do either then it is just a curiosity, right?"

Personally, I would LOVE to quit Windows for good; I have Vista HP now and hate it.

My rant is at http://www.sticksite.com/vista/ Why should I dink around with Windows? It doesn't come with any decent software (Notepad, Paint, Wordpad, Internet Explorer), it costs money to upgrade, I have to dig around the internet with Google searches trying to find .exe files. I have to click Next > Next > Next > Finish and reboot about a hundred times to get some basic functionality. And I'm constantly having to prove to Microsoft that my copy of Windows is genuine. Installing Windows for me means waiting an hour for it to install, digging up an activation key, rebooting, installing Service Pack 2, rebooting, installing drivers, rebooting again, installing more drivers, rebooting again, installing regular Windows updates, rebooting again, downloading and installing Notepad++, Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, GIMP, iTunes, and then going through the wizard of each new program and possibly rebooting after some. Then I have to turn off all the damn wizards (doggy searches and paper clip "helpers") and get some sensible defaults. That's not my idea of a good time.

Why dink around with it?

Ubuntu is free. It provides me with functional software out of the box and an easy way to install more packages if I want to. I can install it on as many computers as I want and get free upgrades. I pop in the Ubuntu CD, and it's installed in thirty minutes. All my programs are ready to go, and a simple
sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install mozilla-thunderbird gets me my other much-needed program.

Sounds to me as if it's just a matter of priorities and computing needs. Your son "needs" Outlook and InDesign. Well, I don't. I need no hassles. I need a functional and free operating system.

By the way, since this is treading old territory, I've merged this with the Linux Desktop Readiness thread.
More details about this in the sticky: **** Announcement Please Read First Criticism FAQ ***** (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=408434)

amaroKer

April 21st, 2007, 06:38 PM

Linux is first a learning experience. That is how it was created in the first place. Second, it is an exercise in worldwide social collaboration, and not following the masses of the misinformed and gullible. If he truly believes that the closed, proprietary approach to merely checking email is pinnacle, and sees all alternatives as pointless, there will be no converting him.

Although Linux can be customized and tinkered with indefinitely, the point of open computing is still usability. The ability to run Windows-only programs does not make Windows superior to Linux, but the modular, secure, open, and collaborative nature of Linux does, in my opinion, make Linux superior to Windows no matter what software is available for it.

dr_d12

April 21st, 2007, 07:06 PM

Or perhaps more to the point, why are you letting your children dictate what software is run in your household?

*If* the son has reason to use, already knows how to use, and has a licensed (expensive!) copy of Adobe Creative Suite, he should definitely be running Windows or OSX. You just can't YET replace that software under linux, especially Indesign.

My education copy of CS2 cost me about $350 (the non-education version was about $900). I'm going to run an XP machine for years while I make the most out of that purchase. I'm not about to exchange CS2 for a clunky Photoshop7 under CrossoverOffice.

That said, I think XP will be my last MS product. Vista is out. Explorer, Outlook, Instant messenger, word and powerpoint are out (thank goodness). Cracks and anti-virus software are out.

OpenOffice is in (and is very good), pybliographer replaces Endnote, Gimp and Pixel do most of what I need for imaging (but I am still so much faster/familiar on photoshop). I'm learning to use Scribus as a future replacement for Indesign and it's pretty good, too. Gedit and terminal are in, and I like them all.

About the son not wanting to use linux: you can lead a horse to water...

Dave

keith11

April 24th, 2007, 01:43 AM

I had a message here which was not intended by me to be here. It is in the community cafe now.

slimdog360

April 24th, 2007, 01:46 AM

keith11

April 24th, 2007, 02:07 AM

Today is one of those days when I just need to bring out what I am feeling, which is not good news for Ubuntu. I think Ubuntu or any community version which is free is targeted at people who can't afford windows or are frustrated with the problems in windows and there are many of them. But what's the point when you find out that you just ended up installing yet another OS which is equally frustrating and sometimes even more because at least the hardware work out of the box in windows, but not in linux distros. There's a limit in understanding that hardware vendors don't write drivers for linux. But if I were starting a business and I would want people to use my product, I wouldn;t offer that as a reason to the end users who get frustrated and eventually ditch linux becuase it didn't recognize their hardware. I wouldn't want my clients to go back a few years in terms of their daily needs, rather I would try to offer them the best and the latest.

I truly don't get this. I wonder if linux, any distro of it, will ever be able to compete with windows on the desktop front. Even worse I have a feeling people who are developing it rreally don't get what the end users want. Although I don't know how to write the code for an OS, I do know about programming and I know there are many many components which should all work in sync. But the point is they should work. I don't understand why the problems in linux stay as problems for months, after all why. i don't want to draw a comparison betwen windows and linux or any other OS. I am just talking about linux. Just take the case of Feisty. With a new version you expect things to get better and the things which matter the most MUST get better.

In case of Fesity, one of the very basic of applications, the networkmanager is full of problems. I wonder what kind of an impression you are giving out with inefficient coding in programs like those. From the point of customer relationship building, trust building and marketing, that would be a very negative impression. Sometimes I wish I knew how to program these modules and I didn't have to depend on the developers for months to fix an issue. Not to mention some issues get worse too. This is not a debate against the developers, but if I were one of the developers, why would I put out a code without researching enough and putting down all specs about the hardware it supports. If i were to code, I would make sure it works with all the hardware, almost most of it. If anyone has to say that come on it is free, you can't expect that, I would just say that if that's the psychological approach you will never get a professional grade product and things will always be amateurish. I have been using linux since 2001 and I am one of those who would read a lot to fix a simple issue in linux or otherwise. I know many of us here have spent days and nights configuring things in linux, be it any distro. But until how long will we have to just keep on configuring things? After all it is an OS which should work on its own and I don't think any developer or sponsor expects every user of their product to be an expert in linux. No one can be an expert in all fields.

I wonder if developers even read threads in this forum. I just don't understand it. How can you mess up things which were already working nicely in older versions? I am pursuing two master's degrees simultaneously in elect. engineering and an MBA with a specialization in IS. I know it would be complicated to sort things out, but then please stop pushing this 6 month cycle thing. I don't know who came up with that idea. If you have to compete with giants like MS and MAC, you just don't do such amateurish things. I hope Mark Shuttleworth reads such posts here because he is the one spending money. If you have a 6 month cycle at least don't force people to have the latest older version before upgrading to the newest. What sense does it make? With linux distros, as most of us have experienced, we all spend quite some time configuring hardware and stuff and those configuration are obtained after a lot of reading of forums, posting questions, helping each other etc. And just after 6 months comes a version like Feisty which kills your wireless, for many of us. When you use a OS, you don't expect to give 2 hours each day, as long as you are using that OS, just to sort out problems and keep on configuring things. Free DOES NOT have to mean amateurish. Please remember developers, without having applications that really work, in all conditions with all hardware, these projects will go nowhere.

If I were one of the developers, I wouldn't be able to sleep without fixing the problem once and all, considering I have two master's degrees to pursue. Isn't that something we all do, although we are not the developers, we all give time to fixing problems in our distros by spending so much time and energy after reading forums, articles, how-to's, etc, with an active life going on with jobs and school? So even if you have the problems fixed with your distro of Ubuntu, after 6 months you again have to keep on playing for days and nights to get simple things to work. Does it sound attractive or appealing in any possible way to anyone who is thinking of switching to any linux distro? How come we still keep on having problems in linux which should just stop existing now. Is it that people are being overly tolerant under the pretext of linux being free? And please remember that all the comments here refer to linux trying to capture the desktop market. Looking at the whole scenario, it seems very disappointing. I think I will just think about learning python and other coding languages to fix things for myself and not depend on others for months. But not everyone knows about programming. Is the real target of linux OSes including Ubuntu just to stir the waters a little bit for windows and do nothing more? The way the linux distros are progressing it seems like that.

It might be apparent from my post that I am rather disappointed in linux in certain aspects becuase I want it to do so good. I want to be able to tell my colleagues and friends that linux is THE thing to look forward to and be able to prove to them in all significant technical aspects which would truly make their lives easier, compared to other OSes out there. Good things are happening, but not fast enough. If anyone is thinking of replying to my post by saying I can't expect everything polished from a free OS, then please save your time and don't bother typing your reply. If I have to put something in the market for other users to rely on, I wouldn't say it's free, don't complain about it. Free of not, who said the quality should be compromised? We have to get out of that mentality in order for linux to share a good amount of the desktop market, or otherwise, just drop such projects. You don't play to lose, you play to win. I am typing this post from windows because since so many hours I was just struggling to get online in Feisty, just to check my e-mails. I try not to go back to windows, but well, somethings just push you towards that. I think Ubuntu team should do away with this whole 6 month cycle if they can't provide applications which will always work in the newer version. Otherwise too, whenever you think you need to upgrade to a newer version of the OS what sense does it make to have the latest older OS installed?!!

Imagine that someone has put in great efforts and finally made all the things work in his distro and he doesn't upgrade for let's say 18 months. After 18 months the support for an OS like Fesity will stop so it's like forcing us to upgrade to the version which came out after 12 months and then to upgrade to the one which came out after 18 months or just install the 18 months one from scratch. That would AGAIN begin the whole configuring problems story right from scratch. What justifies the 6 months cycle? I wish Mark Shuttleworth gives out his general contact information or at least reads these forums. Man, you come to linux thinking of efficient code of the OS, better utilization of your hardware capabilities and stuff...all rosy things and then realize that in order to utilize the hardware capabilities to their max, first of all the hardware has to work, which itself is a challenge in linux and has been for quite some time. This wasn't a rant, it was a very objective view with regards to the long term plans linux or ubuntu may be making and the goals they may have set. If this was a corporation, the operations department needs a huge huge boost. I hope the voices of people like us are heard by the developers and the sponsors like Mark Shuttleworth.
Edit/Delete Message

keith11

April 24th, 2007, 02:10 AM

Wow, thats a big paragraph in the middle, and the bottom and the top, but thats a very big paragraph in the middle. No one could read that without going blind, or perhaps their heads exploding.
Besides I dont think this would be the best place to post this.

I posted it as a thread in the Community Cafe. I don't know how it ended up there. Didn't mean it for the eyes which didn't have to read it.:)

Albi

April 24th, 2007, 02:26 AM

I understand your concerns, and they're very valid, but I don't think the six month release cycle is to blame. If anything, I think the increased demand and time constraints are causing the developers to work harder, and Linux is at a stage which it is still rapidly developing. Once it's at a stage where it will be accessible by the non tech-savvy home user and most issues have been sorted out, then the release cycles can become more gradual.

Also, there are LTS versions which address most of your concerns.

I agree that Linux isn't very presentable professionally, but neither is Windows in that sense, it seems Mac OSX does this best, but to be fair so would ubuntu given the perfect circumstances.

Hardware support has always been one of the downfalls for Linux, and the only way this will change is if it gains momentum; you can't expect the community to write perfect drivers for every piece of hardware out there.

There's only two things I I would change; one is to make the testing period for potential releases a bit more. This gives more time to address potential concerns. The second thing, of course, is not to enforce strict deadlines. It does more harm to release an unfinished product than to take an extra week and finish it. I always thought that one of the strong points of linux was that it didn't have to meet deadlines because it doesn't have a lot of pressure to do so, look at Debian for example.

m.musashi

April 24th, 2007, 02:29 AM

zubrug

April 24th, 2007, 02:34 AM

Sorry that you feel that way, I have a five or six year old copy of mandrake you should try, linux has come a long way.
Search of your post's suggest's you need something that is more newbie friendly so I suggest pclinux or even better linspire.
Microsoft has an ouragious monopoly and there os has it's issues. Considering the small market share linux shares it is an incredible os, infact better in so many way's. Mandrake made me feel the same way.
Give linspire a shot, you will be impressed.
Ever tried installing windows on barebones no os system?

Happy_Man

April 24th, 2007, 02:35 AM

You see, the hardware is built for Microsoft, for Windows. It makes it easier for Microsoft's code monkeys but not for the driver makers. In Ubuntu and other distros of Linux, you have to build the software to work with the system. It's really, really, really hard to make sure that every single combination of hardware specs works with your Linux distro, a problem that is avoided in Windows for the above reasons. That can only really change if Linux gains a wide acceptance and use. Linux is at a ridiculously early stage in its development right now, and you have the benefit of seeing the broader scope from a viewpoint of a seasoned vet in five or so years. For now, though, be patient, and use a workaround. Linux has nowhere to go but up!

Adamant1988

April 24th, 2007, 02:47 AM

I read through that post (why I bothered I don't know) and you don't really present any new information/complaints. I do like that you inflated your own importance in the first couple of sentences claiming that your opinion is 'not good news for ubuntu'. Well, fortunately if you don't like Ubuntu no one is forcing you to use it.

Concerning hardware, it's my understanding that Vista is undergoing a taste of Linux hardware support. A lot of devices and peripherals simply don't work with it, go figure. Hardware support issues are strictly related to the availability of drivers. However, Ubuntu (and any distribution that has moral/legal standards) will not ship 'blobs' (proprietary drivers) by default unless it is deemed absolutely necessary to functionality, and even then other distributions STILL might make you do it yourself. Hardware support will continue to be a problem in Linux for as long as the drivers for 'X-device' are closed.

Concerning the 6-month release cycle. I think you must misunderstand the way that the development of GNU/Linux in general works. The development is SO rapid in places that a year is enough time for a distro to become antiquated, in terms of having reasonably up to date software. New features, improvements, bug-fixes, etc., there is a TON of incentive to upgrade to newer applications, which require newer dependencies, which require a more up to date distro (unless you don't have an issue destabilizing the one you're already using). I'm of the opinion that a 6 month release cycle for an up-to-date distribution is right there where it needs to be. Maybe a little slower would allow for more to be done for each release, but it's not necessary.

Also, if you want to get in touch with someone in the project (including Mark Shuttleworth) it's as simple as logging into IRC, or joining the mailing list. There are some developers that use this forum, but it's not the standard and you shouldn't expect much of it. There are forum ambassadors that serve the purpose of delivering info from the forums to the developers, however.

I'm also going to hit you with a nugget of advice, if your install is working... DO NOT UPGRADE. If you are happy with the way things are, why change them? Personally, I run Feisty and it has been a joy to use. In the future I may stick with Ubuntu LTS releases (or another distribution's stable releases) and just virtualize my OS of choice on top of that. Don't go messing with a good thing.

steven8

April 24th, 2007, 02:48 AM

I had an Ensoniq(sp?) sound card, you know, a soundblaster by a different name, that would NOT work in any version of windows from 95 to XP. I tried 95, 95a, 95b, 98, 98se, ME, winNT, and XP pro. Every version claimed to recognize that the drivers I installed should work, but they wouldn't. I downloaded driver packages from every site in the known internet universe, including the creative site, but that card would not produce a sound. I finally took it over and threw it in the trash. It may have been the card, I'd guess, but I went a got a card that did work.

The point? Never ONCE did I consider going to the Microsoft web forum to tell them that their OS's were no good because of it. And Creative sound cards are the industry bloody standard!

Why is that?

jfinkels

April 24th, 2007, 02:48 AM

If your programs aren't working, file a bug report!

If you have an idea which you'd like to see implemented in the next release of Ubuntu, read this for instructions (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=409519).

And last but not least, if you're upset about something, fix it! It's all out there for you: open source programming languages, open source distribution, open source kernel, open source drivers. If you're not happy with the way your computer is working, then fix the problem! But if you don't feel like that...beggars can't be choosers :D.

Linux is a team effort. Do what you can to help, even if it's just a bug report!

robtg

April 24th, 2007, 03:05 AM

I also wonder why a new distro is scheduled every six months. I'd rather have a stable distro that didn't necessarily have the latest everything which was kept up to date with the sort of update mechanism that Ubuntu already has.

It's frustrating to install a distro like Feisty only to find that the installation process wasn't as good as it was for Dapper or Edgy (the screen resolution problem and wireless networking not working).

I worked for a small mainframe software company for a few years, and I learned this: Don't make your customer regret an upgrade. It sounds stupid to complain about free software, but I'd really love for Linux to be successful to give Microsoft some real competition, but right now, it looks like many of these distros are more like science-fair projects.

-Rob

steven8

April 24th, 2007, 03:06 AM

I agree that Linux isn't very presentable professionally

I don't buy that at all.

matthinckley

April 24th, 2007, 03:11 AM

EDIT: Link to post I was replying to. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2520236#post2520236)

OK that was long.. so basically I think what that was about was hardware compatibility and the 6 month release cycle.

Well lets talk about hardware compatibility.. there is the Hardware Compatibility List (http://doc.gwos.org/index.php/HCL) which tells you what hardware is compatible.. I mean you don't buy Mac parts for a PC, or PC parts for a MAC.. why is it everyone expects Linux to work with every piece of hardware in existence? Just bite the bullet and buy supported hardware.. that's what MS wants you to do for Vista.. Mac makes you buy their platform.. this isn't unusual

And for the 6 month release cycle.. the complaint seems to be that you are forced to upgrade after 18 months when it took 6 months to get your configs all set up.. OK so use only LTS releases.. they come with 3 years of support (security patches and such).. I don't know if you will be able to upgrade from LTS to the next LTS (seeing as how we only have one so far) but oh well.. MS upgrades don't work that well either.

Anyways, just my 2 cents.

Matt

EDIT: that was weird.. I was replying when it was it's own thread.. now we're in the Feisty thread.. oh well the powers that be are keeping the thread alive! go for the record!

aysiu

April 24th, 2007, 03:16 AM

matthinckley

April 24th, 2007, 03:18 AM

Deleted because my original reply that I copied here [posts got moved] is now two posts above this one.. LOL

steven8

April 24th, 2007, 03:19 AM

EDIT: that was weird.. I was replying when it was it's own thread.. now we're in the Feisty thread.. oh well the powers that be are keeping the thread alive! go for the record!

Yeah, I love finishing my post to find I'm in a different thread. aiysu is best for that! :)

steven8

April 24th, 2007, 03:19 AM

deja vu.

matthinckley

April 24th, 2007, 03:23 AM

Yeah, I love finishing my post to find I'm in a different thread. aiysu is best for that! :)

LOL yeah.. I just stuck a link in to the post I was replying to.. I don't like to delete my text.. then everyone wonders what I originally wrote.. or someone else already quoted me.. and then I look like a 'tard.. lol.. I usually Just quote whatever I'm replying to but if you look at the post you'll understand why I didn't do that my first time around.

keith11

April 24th, 2007, 05:48 AM

Thanks everyone for being gentle and letting your thoughts out. I really appreciate the non-rudeness in ubuntu forums and anyone who has been in this forum for 6 months knows it. As I expected some people assumed I was trying to make windows look better than ubuntu, which I wasn't and I can't. Just imagine, everyone is busy, has a lot to do in a day, why in the world would you just keep on trying different distros and compare them to windows or any other OS? Doesn't make sense, does it? I have used Linux since Redhat 6.1 or 6 whichever it was and I will admit I haven't been using it continuously. I have used Fedora 10, Mandrake 9.2, Mandriva 2007 (Powerpack) and then ubuntu edgy. This is not to say I have any kind of huge experience, but I at least know how far linux has come. But again, when you have to compete, you don't measure your success relatively or with reference to what you were and what you have become.

I was expecting members with more number of beans to be gentler but on the contrary they said things like I shouldn't use linux or should fix everything myself and compared windows to linux and stuff. The earlier post was long because I didn't want people to think something which I didn't mean to say, but seems I failed in that department. Once again, I don't care how windows or mac are doing, no one needs to copy them or compare them, but when you are competing based on features which will make a desktop more appealing, there are basic things which just should work, like wireless, graphics, multimedia, etc. Again, I am not saying they don't work in ubuntu, I am just citing the most desirable attributes of a desktop OS.

When people say that this or that thing doesn't work in windows, it doesn't imply we are better and why should one measure the success from observing things which didn't work in other OS's. Shouldn't it be like this is what I need for the desktop and that's what I have to work hard on. If that same feature is not working in windows, does it mean that we should feel relaxed? No. Yes, I am a newbie, if that's what someone wants to assume and feels comfortable with, but that doesn't mean I should switch to some other distro. If every newbie started doing that, who will be the target market for ubuntu which is trying so hard to market its product among those windows users and providing even migration tools?

Finally, let me make this clear. Just because I may be a newbie or rather not an expert, doesn't imply I am unaware of the basics. I am staying with windows xp and not going for vista, guess why? Because everything works nice and sweet in xp, so of course I don't to go to vista. Now I guess I answered someone asking me not to upgrade to other versions if I don't feel comfortable with them. People upgrade hoping the things which didn't work for them in the earlier version will work in the next. My post was not meant to make someone angry, but to really let the developers know what people think and what their concerns are.

Let me also address one comment which said I was trying to inflate my importance when I said it was bad news for Ubuntu. If someone had read the whole (of course I know it was some storeys tall) post they would know I was not trying anything silly like that and I don't need to.When I said it was bad news, it just meant "Customer Feedback". And yes, I have filed bugs, tried to learn some coding other than what I know. The only thing I haven't done is to go to IRC channels. Please also don't emphasize that oh it works for me and if it doesn't work for you, you should try even more or stop using this distro. Comments like those serve no purpose logically.

If I am sorry for anything it is for the person who was trying to reply to my post and I edited it out.:))

Brunellus

April 24th, 2007, 03:05 PM

Those of us with higher post counts have seen all the typical whines. At the end of the day, the decision a user faces is either

A) Accept the new OS and adapt to it

or

B) Abandon the new OS and move to one more suitable to his needs.

Most of us have chosen A. Giving advice to new users is complicated, because they haven't made up their minds: they will neither accept the new OS nor abandon it.

In general, I try to be pretty frank with people who are thinking of migrating. Users who are heavily dependent on proprietary software--applications and device drivers, particularly-- are very poor candidates for migration. They arrive complaining and never stop. They should not have moved from a productive environment in the first place.

On the other hand, users with fewer dependencies are easier to migrate.

All of us had similar complaints or "issues" when we first migrated, I think. Babies are born crying, too, but eventually they also learn to speak.

steven8

April 24th, 2007, 03:37 PM

aysiu

April 24th, 2007, 03:56 PM

Those of us with higher post counts have seen all the typical whines. At the end of the day, the decision a user faces is either

A) Accept the new OS and adapt to it

or

B) Abandon the new OS and move to one more suitable to his needs.

Most of us have chosen A. Giving advice to new users is complicated, because they haven't made up their minds: they will neither accept the new OS nor abandon it. There's another part to A), Brunellus... maybe it's C), too:

Find out what the real (not just the perceived) problems are and do what you can to make a practical positive difference in solving them. That includes filing bug reports, donating money, writing documentation, contributing code, helping others. It doesn't really include making long rants you think are original about what you think "needs" to happen.

keith11

April 24th, 2007, 07:27 PM

Ah there we go...:). Babies, ranting and stuff. Well, I am surprised. It's amazing how not meeting people in person can lead others to form opinions and make judgments. The thing is, whoever is posting replies to my posts thinks I am on the opposite side. That's not the case. I am just one of the Ubuntu lovers and I am always on the same side. I am thankful you are at least not being rude, I do appreciate it. But if I were in your position, I would have answered someone with my type of concerns differently even if I had 6000 beans. I am pretty good in my field, you can say around 4000-5000 beans,:), but I don't deal with new colleagues the way I am being dealt with when they express their concerns. I am not going to abandon this OS, if I had to I wouldn't have embarked on this journey in the first place. Please don't view my post as something as a rant or a whine because if you keep on doing that how will you even remotely relate to the concerns which do exist (as one of you admitted you had those issues too when you started out)? I have accepted the OS and I don't know why anyone would get the idea I haven't. Just two days ago, when a colleague was concerned about his PC with windows on being slow, I gave him a list of 8-9 applications which included antiviruses, spyware, malware and adware removers. After I did that I also asked him to consider using linux, especially Ubuntu. I have been trying to convince my roommates too when they come to me with a windows software problem or a hardware one with their laptops. I don't rip apart their laptops like I did mine to fix the problems, but I do try to convince them to switch to linux. Because of all that, it was surprising to learn that one can think I am not adapting to the OS.

The reason I switched to Ubuntu from Madriva Powerpack was the documentation. I have a tendency to think that when the documentation is good and easy to understand the product is well-designed. Other reason for switching was the speed of responses I got when I was thinking about switching from Mandriva to Ubuntu and had some concerns. I completely understand linux is about choice so you may not get all the things already installed, but would it be out of the way to expect at least the applications that do exist and are very critical today, like wireless, graphics, etc. are functional absolutely? I think everyone knows whether they should or shouldn't consider switching to linux from windows or other OS. When I have to work in MS Access or finance and management software, I work in windows and of course I don't expect linux to provide me those because they are not designed for linux and when I have to design a semiconductor chip, I use linux. So no one is expecting linux to provide things which are specific to windows, but linux or windows, wouldn't someone expect basic things like internet, wireless or wired, to work perfectly? At least that is not OS specific, is it? I know coming across people who may be frustrated at some level with this OS or linux in general would automatically lead someone to think the people who are frustrated are newbies and stuff.That's fine with me.

My post was never a confrontation. I could help in filing bug report, which I have done. I haven't helped ever in the documentation, but that's because I don't know that much that I can write a documentation. The place where I work at as a student research assistant and the things I know and based on my work an article is published in the annual research magazine of the university. This is just to say I do my stuff where I really know about things. Similarly, would it be wrong to expect people to do their stuff when they know about their fields? I offer myself to help in any way possible, even if it is just doing some trivial work like typing the documents, converting them in different formats, or even pasting the codes in the programs of the application to fix them, whatever someone can offer a person who doesn't know the languages to code the actual application. I am not saying the above to prove anything here. I am really up for it. It will be great satisfaction helping even in a small way to fix things which so many people rely on and would make their experiences with the OS pleasant.

undertakingyou

April 25th, 2007, 04:12 AM

Interestingly enough I was posed this question at a Fesity install party the Ubuntu-Utah Group threw. Someone heard about it and stopped by. I showed him just basic stuff on my laptop, and he asked if this was going to put linux on the map this year. Strange how people keep asking that question. The fact that anyone has heard of linux has it on the map.
I told him that what will make the real difference for linux is if system manufactures put it on the computers they sell. If that happened the hardware manufactures would make the drivers, the software manufactures would make native ports. Really that is what is holding it back. What "average" user even knows what an OS is let alone how to install one?
That raises the arguement, well windows is so universal that if a user did have to do a reinstall it would be easy. No, ever tried one? I have spent hours and hours hunting down proprietery drivers for dell and gateway systems. Drivers are an issue in windows too. So are firewalls and viruses and everything else. Installing doesn't always work and neither does unistalling. Windows is arguably not ready for the desktop.
So, is linux ready for the desktop, I'd say yes, I'm using it, have set it up for some others. Ubuntu in particular seems straightforward and user friendly. What holds it [linux] back is system manufactures and them being sucked in by M$.

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 11:58 AM

<start rant>

Ubuntu Fiesty Fawn is deeply flawed. In many ways worse than Dapper Drake from almost a year ago.

There are certain things that simply need to work. Things like screen resolution, bit color depth, and refresh rates.

The reality is that such simply do not work properly.

Install XP on a computer and you will have the screen resolution, bit color depth, and refresh rates working properly in no time.

With Ubuntu welcome to hours of working from a command line, editing within a text editor like nano to try and get at least a viewable outcome.

Running Ubuntu on a 19" monitor locked in at 800x600, flickering away at 50Hz are not signs of an operating system that is ready to see the light of day.

If that wasn't bad enough, try typing in a terminal as you are randomly pestered by Ubuntu messages of [bcm43xx: Error: Microcode "bcm43xx.microcode5.fw"] because it doesn't like your wifi card. Nothing like being in the middle of typing in a command and having that error message place itself right in the middle.

I wish Fiesty Fawn worked. I really do. The reality is that it works for some people. It probably works for Mark Shuttleworth, it probably works for Canonical, but it doesn't work on my computer - it is an ordinary, average computer.

XP works. XP works well and that is why I use it. I would prefer to use Ubuntu, at least for everything other than games.

However the sad reality is that Ubuntu is simply not ready. Not ready for the foreseeable future.

When you cannot even get to the desktop without a long list of problems, then something just isn't right and Mark and those that put out this operating system need to take a long hard look at where their priorities lie.

I tested 3 different monitors and only 1 got an acceptable screen resolution and refresh rate.

Nothing has changed since last year. Sure NTFS now loads automatically, but gaining that other things have been lost. At least I could run Dapper Drake.

Vista, ME and Fiesty Fawn have a lot in common.

If only Ubuntu had a lot in common with XP with regards to working properly, I could switch.

I am disappointed. I read so much about Fiesty Fawn and it is Flawed, a Failure, totally F-ed in my view.

This isn't a Vista moment where I ought to change my hardware for an operating system to work. Ubuntu should work. It doesn't.

I am happy for those who have this running.

For the rest of use, we can only wait and hope that Gutsy Gibbon resolves the long list of problems.

</end rant>

mac.ryan

April 25th, 2007, 12:34 PM

Yes, Feisty Fawn has many more troubles than it seemed by the enthusiastic reviews of the testers. Yes, Edgy Eft was way more accurate in managing cards and monitors. Yes, I sympathize with your frustration as I was disillusioned as well by this release.

No, you are not right when you say ubuntu is not ready (or else, you are the only one who got something hundred of thousands of other users have missed). No, I don't think canonical have prioritized poorly the issues (ubuntu is being an incredible success story because it balances well features, stability, marketing, ease of use). No, you can't make a fair comparison between XP and GNU/Linux when it comes to driver issues (i.e. managing video cards), as hardware itself and its drivers are developed by the hardware makers specifically for windows, while in GNU/Linux they are the fruit of ages of reverse engineering or - at best - some kind of mysterious proprietary-closed software, poorly interacting with the rest of the OS.

Anyhow... GNU/Linux is all about choices: if you prefer to use M$ Windows, that is a respectable and understandable choice as well, you shouldn't be so unhappy about it... as you pointed out: it is just a matter of prioritizing well what is important for you.

Cheer up! :)

TimelessRogue

April 25th, 2007, 12:41 PM

Wow! When you titled this one "<start rant>" you weren't kidding, were you!

I've had everything from Dapper on up to including the testing/latest releases of Feisty on four totally different computers ... one is a way older HP n5000 laptop, another is my rather esoteric self-built desktop (AMD, ATI, Creative, Linksys wireless, early Princeton LDC monitor, etc) plus a basic three-year old E-machines desktop with newer Acer LCD monitor and a four year old Dell Pavilion 4400) ... all with out anything more than having problems with the Linksys wireless.

I guess what I'm getting at is that Feisty does work ... with all kinds of configurations ... some simple and basic, some custom and complicated. So rather than rant on about Ubuntu not working and XP/Vista being so much better, etc, etc, etc why not give us some specifics including your method of installation (full install from CD, update/upgrade via update manager or Synaptic, that sort of thing) as well as a detailed list of the problems your are experiencing. I think you will find that there is someone here on the forums with a simple fix for you ...

And if you still decide to return to Microcost ******* ... well good luck with that also ...

eentonig

April 25th, 2007, 12:48 PM

Can you give the specs of your 'ordinary, average computer'? So the devs/community at least have the possibility to see why it doesn't just work.

Did you open a bug ticket for this?

Frankly, you're possibly right. But then, I can have the same kind of problems when installing Windows. The only difference is, Windows will answer me "Yes, but that HW is not on our compatibility list". And Windows has the big advantage that every HW vendor tries to make his hardware compatible for Windows. While under linux, you have to depend on someone being so nice to develop the correct drivers for your hw.

So, it's even more important to check the HW compatibility lists that exist for Ubuntu if you can't stand these issues.

After all, Ubuntu comes free and without ANY garantuees that it will work for you.

Wight_Rhino

April 25th, 2007, 12:58 PM

It's a Great Pity that the OP mentioned, let alone Compared Feisty to XP, because his very valid points will now turn this thread into a Win v Linux "discussion" as everyone assumes defensive positions.

Important questions will not be asked, let alone answered. Amongst the "Debate".

Three years down the road (and 6 releases) why are many getting issues that seemed to have worked in previous releases? Why can't we build on the success instead of bouncing between bugs like a pinball; sound, wireless, usb, and now drive detection.

Is it in our genes to keep "fiddling", rather than take a breather and ensure that everything that worked in the previous release still works? Think about it, if everything that's been "fixed" over the last three years stayed fixed what a distro we would have!

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 01:02 PM

Anyhow... GNU/Linux is all about choices: if you prefer to use M$ Windows, that is a respectable and understandable choice as well

Having a 19" CRT monitor locked in at 800x600 at 50Mhz is not a "choice".

So rather than rant on about Ubuntu not working and XP/Vista being so much better, etc, etc, etc

You need to re-read what I think of Vista as you wouldn't have said that.

Did you open a bug ticket for this?

Yes I have an open ticket and yes I have supplied details and yes I will be assisting with troubleshooting this so that by Gutsy Gibbon it should hopefully be all fixed.

I REALLY wanted to use Fiesty Fawn but it doesn't work on my system. Specifically my monitor - Viewsonic. After many hours over two days, I am just sharing some thoughts.

Ubuntu has to take the good with the bad.

I want Ubuntu to work. I am prepared to do my part, but I won't pretend it is fine when it isn't, that is all.

Thanks for the replies - some worthwhile posts!

Seisen

April 25th, 2007, 01:05 PM

Linux isn't perfect what do you expect. Be glad you didn't use Linux back in the day when you didn't even have GUI's, all you had was a command line. If more companies would write drivers for Linux you wouldn't have the problems you have. What kind of graphics card do you have anyway?

JerseyShoreComputer

April 25th, 2007, 01:08 PM

I think like most people, my biggest complaint is with the wireless. I have an IBM Thinkpad A30, Pentium III-933, and 1gig of RAM. It has the ATI Radeon Mobility M for graphics. With some tinkering and going to the community for help, I managed to use ndiswrapper and get the Linksys wireless to work. Now, the only thing that does not work is connecting to a projector - just cannot seem to get that external VGA out working.

Not compare that to my problems with Windows. I had nothing but problems with the graphics way back when with 95 and 98. For me, Win 200 and XO worked great right out of the box - no complaints. Vista crashed my computer twice on install, and I am still waiting for drivers to use somethings, although it is 100% stable at the moment.

I think like most people here, I would like to use Ubuntu for almost everything and reduce my use of Windows. I can't do that yet, but maybe with Gutsy all the problems will be fixed. It seems like it works for some, and not for others depending on the hardware and how you installed it.

I hope you can all get it working, it is really pretty nice when it works. (Yes, I said it, when it works)

Snoo

April 25th, 2007, 01:11 PM

I hear what you are saying. I've just dual booted Edgy Ubuntu (just upped to Feisty) with XP.

My plan was to get into Ubuntu now and never need to upgrade to Vista. Never really had a problem with XP other than security and it gradually clogging up. Even though I keep it in good shape.

So how has my switch been? Well Rhythm box seems to have problems importing music folders, there's sound problems, DVD's don't seem to play, I can't connect my phone (crashes) and all manner of other niggles (wireless,, Yawn!). Now all these things are fixable if I spend time on each one with the wonderfully helpful people on this forum. And I'm up for spending time doing this for the greater good of myself. I can always use XP easily to carry out the tasks I want. But the thing is, after initialy telling people how great it looked, I feel I couldn't really reccomend it to anybody. There is no way my family are gonna be able to use this. Is my dear old mother really going to sit at the command prompt editing code? Nope. She can barely plug in a USB! I have a Mac also and I was expecting something similar but feeling less like a Fisher Price My First Computer. Now it feels like I have My First Degree in Programming. I certainly feel like I've gone from Edgy to Feisty!

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 01:11 PM

It's a Great Pity that the OP mentioned, let alone Compared Feisty to XP, because his very valid points will now turn this thread into a Win v Linux "discussion" as everyone assumes defensive positions.

I hope no one does. I am all for Ubuntu and against XP. That said, I need Ubuntu to work for me and with Fiesty Fawn it doesn't.

That is the context.

Ubuntu is the future, no question, but with 7.04 I feel really disappointed and am just expressing that.

This is not a Linux - Windows debate.

XP works. It does. However Vista is not the way of the future. That belongs to Linux, and specifically to Ubuntu.

I want Ubuntu to work because I want to use it.

My rant comes after two days, many hours buried in editing xorg.conf and I have had enough.

A proper fix is needed and this is being worked on for Gutsy Gibbon - that is my understanding.

meborc

April 25th, 2007, 01:18 PM

have you tried reconfiguring your X? ... the screen resolution problem is based on the videocard and drivers... have you installed the proper ones? what is your video card mark and model?

go to ctrl+alt+F1, then
sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorgand chose the resolution your computer uses...
then ctrl+alt+F7 to get back to the graphical mode... and then ctrl+alt+backspace to restart your X

kvonb

April 25th, 2007, 01:24 PM

Mate, you have one of the easiest and best supported video cards, I can't understand why you are having so many probs.

I have the exact same card, and a 21" Sony screen, when I boot from the Feisty (or any for that matter) CD, I get 1024x768.

Yeah that's not the best, but it's useable, and suffices until I open a terminal and run:

sudo dpkg-reconfigure -phigh xserver-xorg

Or edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf and add my frequency ranges.

You can search this forum for info on how to do this, it is VERY well documented.

Do you have anything connected to the TV out connector of the video card? When I have my TV connected, whether it's turned on or not, my screen res defaults to 800x600 and will not go any higher. Try unplugging it if that is the case and reboot.

Also, once you have Feisty installed, download and install the Nvidia driver from www.nvidia.com (http://www.nvidia.com), it comes with an excellent utility for setting the resolutions.

Of course you will have to do some research and work to get it installed, but there ya go, I'm sure it won't hurt you too much.

As for XP, there are hundreds of video cards that will boot into 256 colour mode until you manage to find the correct driver and install it.

This is a driver issue, not the fault of Ubuntu who in all fairness have to cover as many different setups as you can imagine. Microsoft have the benefit of the co-operation of the hardware manufacturers, by whatever method they employ to assure this co-operation, legitimate or otherwise!

I'm sure if you donated millions of dollars to the Ubuntu team, or more specifically, the people who give their time freely to do all the hard work for us, then you would be happy with the results.

thomas.hoyland

April 25th, 2007, 01:24 PM

agreed
my laptop worked perfrectly in edgy
no problems at all
however now feisty wont even get to login!
it stalls on the firewire component which cant be turned off, lol

not impressed

i think edgy is the better of the two, just enough cool stuff and light weight

tom

eentonig

April 25th, 2007, 01:27 PM

I can truly understand the agony and frustration people experience when things don't 'just work'. I had my share of sh*t in the past.

But you always have to consider the big differences between Windows and Linux. And not from feature x point of view. But from a HW and operational point of view.

Windows publishes a list of certified HW, they garantuee works with their products. If your hw is not on that list, they'll laugh in your face (actually, they'll politely ask you to contact your hw vendor). And they know that 99,99% of the HW vendors do everything they can to make their product 'just work' for Windows.

Linux (or better, the distributions) publish a list of HW 'reported' to be working for their product. They don't have the budget or ressources to certify a huge amount of different HW. They have to depend on the community to tell them if things work or not. Even worse. They most of the time can't even rely on the design notes/source codes to see why something does or doesn't work. And 99,99% of the hw vendors don't even think about Linux when designing their product. So it's sometimes a little miracle things can be made to function.

There only a few things you can do when you experience such problems.

* complain at your vendor that it doesn't work for linux. (They wont help you, but they'll slowly become aware that there is a market for linux drivers).
* Report the issue to your distro's developpers (Ubuntu made this real easy for you). You wont be garantueed a solution. But at least they know about the issue and maybe try to resolve it. If so, be gratefull.
* Post your problem on the forum as specific as possible. Maybe someone has a solution or workaround.

What NOT to do?
* Complain. it's free, it doesn't come with a garantuee.

How to avoid if you can't risk this happening?
* check the available lists of HW that is known to work. And adapt your shoppinglist to it.

deathbyswiftwind

April 25th, 2007, 01:33 PM

I read a reply by someone saying why cant we take a breather and make sure everything worked from before. Its really not all that easy to do. Imagine the repos have 23000+ programs. Some from the gnome people some from the kde some from private developers some from ati and nvidia some from xorg...etc etc.... Thats a hell of alot of packages to deal with. Sometimes stuff does get messed up.

I am sorry to hear about your problems. But trust me its not only ubuntu. Every linux distros have its strengths and weaknesses. If ubuntu isnt working for you maybe fedora would? I personally have tried over 20 different distros. I was constantly downloading new isos and burning spindles of cdrs away until I found ubuntu. It works for me. Also the forum community is the best around IMPO. I love testing out the alpha stages of every release and giving feedback because it makes me feel I am part of the community. Now you were saying you could use dapper. Maybe you should use dapper until the next LTS edition. Im guessing you want the latest and greatest but with that comes the toll of crashes , failures, and sometimes hours of headaches. But please feel free to browse around the linux world. Im sure there is a distro that would meet your full needs and maybe even exceed them! If I didnt love tinkering so much Id have gentoo and gentoo only but I love to tinker which means I break alot of stuff and if I cant fix it I have to reinstall and that takes way to long. So I love my ubuntu and wont let it go :)

Smaug067

April 25th, 2007, 01:41 PM

I, personally, am sick of all the griping!:mad: Edgy didn't see my extra hard drives:confused: and Feisty won't go to any resolution above 800x600:( People need to realize that Dapper was the distro which proudly bears the LTS label. If you fear upgrading will break your system, then DON"T DO IT!!!!! I will continue to mine these and other forums for answers and learn all that I can. Those who p!$$ and moan about their upgrade woes have my sympathy. I'm off to try to make things better:biggrin:

Tomosaur

April 25th, 2007, 01:56 PM

XP Works, does it? Come and install it on this computer then. An 'average' computer, I don't have any particularly special hardware. Sure, it works in the sense that I can use it, now, but when I first installed it, it was a horrible mess. Sound card wouldn't work, graphics wouldn't work, it crashed something like once an hour (and these were big crashes, not just hangs, they were bluescreens and corrupt files). Only after many hours of tinkering, tweaking, updating etc, was XP anything close to 'usable'. Ubuntu Dapper and Edgy have installed flawlessly and I've had a working system with software and no extra setup needed to get a usable system. Yes, the post-installation Ubuntu can be lacking in a few areas, but it's nowhere NEAR as bad as a bare-bones XP, which is not so much an operating system as a suicide note. I'm quite confident I could just kill myself with a copy of XP in hand, and there'd be absolutely no mystery surrounding my death at all.

Now, on to Feisty - I am having a bit of trouble with it, yes. My wireless card isn't working - it detects my network, but refuses to connect to it properly. It shows as 'connected', and has a singal strength indicator, but no network activity takes place (ie, no internet, basically). My housemate's machine works fine on the same network, so it is definately a Feisty issue. It also has a habit of freezing up after I mess with the network settings - I'm thinking there's something wrong with the driver for my card. In any case, I can fix that soon enough, and I will almost certainly be much happier with Feisty than I am with XP. Initial releases always have problems, the difference between Windows and Ubuntu is that on Ubuntu, they get fixed.

bedfojo

April 25th, 2007, 02:02 PM

I think some of the pain that upgraders are feeling is due to the regressions from Edgy to Feisty.

Wireless in particular (looking at the Networking and Wireless forum) seems to have taken a significant step backwards for many users. Somewhere between the new kernel, ndiswrapper, network-manager and wpa_supplicant something has clearly gone very wrong. I've managed to mostly sort mine (which worked fine in Edgy) by compiling the latest version of ndiswrapper myself and installing wicd rather than network-manager. But this isn't exactly simple for a newbie. Suspend and hibernate are now also broken spectacularly for me when Edgy acually worked better than XP on that front.

As for the LTS releases, the LTS means "Long Term Support". It just means that they will be supported for longer. There is no reason to assume that a LTS release will be better than a non-LTS release. Indeed, isn't the whole point of new releases to make things better? If not, why bother?

Maybe Gutsy should have fewer new features and more bug fixes...?

thegreenman

April 25th, 2007, 02:24 PM

Funny, I'm a complete noob and I've had no such issues.

I just installed Dapper and then upgraded directly to Feisty. ( I didn't know I wasn't supposed to do it that way, but it worked anyway.) I have a supposedly problematic ati radeon 9600 card and I'm running amd x64.

Maybe I'm the exception but everything just worked for me "out of the box", not a single hitch so far. :guitar:
My res is 1024x768 on a 19 in monitor, using generic open source drivers.
It's operating at 70hz. No problem.

The only problems I've had have been getting the browser plugins to work with the x64 firefox, so I followed a howto and started using the 32 bit version of firefox instead. Again, easy to do, no problems.

YMMV, but this install has been:

1) easier and with less hours spent updating compared to XP with sp1 installed
2) faster loading from boot
3) faster shutting down
4) completely trouble free even with the desktop effects.
5) my wireless wg311t worked immediately after upgrading to feisty

I'm very pleased with the install and the noob-friendlyness of the entire operating system.
And needless to say this forum is the best support forum anywhere! I've gotten answers and help to every question I've asked, usually withing a few minutes.

I'm a happy camper.

brian j

April 25th, 2007, 02:33 PM

Win XP Never works 100%, Thats another one of my reasons to get rid of m$.
As for Fiesty Fawn, the only problem I'm having is the sound card on my toshiba A100-583 Multimedia. Apart from that everything works just fine.

thegreenman

April 25th, 2007, 02:47 PM

I have a 19" Viewsonic 90f crt monitor on FF, with ati radeon 9600xt, open source drivers, here are my res and refresh choices:

mac.ryan

April 25th, 2007, 02:50 PM

Having a 19" CRT monitor locked in at 800x600 at 50Mhz is not a "choice".

Well, it is: it just depends what are your priorities. You value more high-definition graphic than - for example - possibility to tweak the kernel, or harden your system for security.

I am not saying it is a BAD choice. (I would also not want to work on such a system... as I said before: I sympathize with your frustration). Yet I don't see the point in whining about ubuntu devs not assigning priorities the way you would like, but the way they see it is important for ubuntu...

There is not such a thing like "customer service" in free software. Eventually there is community support, and people volunteering on the forums need specs and proper description of the problems, rather than rants. :)

My rant comes after two days, many hours buried in editing xorg.conf and I have had enough.

...so you get online and pour your torn into the forums? Sorry... I understand your frustration, but i don't get the logic of your post... you wanted to attract the attention? You did. And now? You will still have to post specs of your hardware and description of your problems if you hope to get support.

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 02:53 PM

I have a 19" Viewsonic 90f crt monitor on FF, with ati radeon 9600xt, open source drivers, here are my res and refresh choices:

Could you please post your xorg.conf?

Thanks.

Loki-uk

April 25th, 2007, 03:01 PM

The only problem I have with 7.04 is the PS2 mouse problem everything else worked perfectly screen res and colour depth worked right out of the box. Using a usb mouse fixed the mouse problem and thats not even a Ubuntu issue its a kernel issue.

And on a completely separate note Vista's pretty solid too (the 32 bit is awesome shame there aren't any drivers for the 64).

I'm running 6.06 under virtual PC, 7.04 on my P3 and Vista and all of them seem are sweet :)

I think that the Ubuntu team need a big up for all the effort they're putting in to the project. Thanks Guys :)

dubrict

April 25th, 2007, 03:08 PM

Parmenion

April 25th, 2007, 03:10 PM

Yeah, Ive been reading through the entirety of the thread and basically what I can say is that while Fiesty doesnt "Just Works", it comes pretty close for most people(including myself). Even though I had a few hitches with my wireless card(Broadcom Dell 1390 MiniCard rev 01), I think it was well worth the slight effort Iwent through to get it working. Now, I have a laptop which runs faster, smoother and lasts longer than on XP. I even get to use all the bells and whistles of Beryl, which XP definitely cannot provide coupled with a more responsive system.

It just matters what we find is important. For myself, I need the box to be able to do my basic functions and then a little more. It would be dandy if it could put a sock into a few doubter's faces at the same time. I dont know how it is for you. Dont forget this isnt some monolithic corporation which every hardware manufacturer wanting to earn a profit off his product has to suck up to. Our strength is the willingness of talented developers to help develop drivers and applications to work with our hardware. So really, you cant expect the same.

I last used Ubuntu when it still was in Warty. In comparision, it has improved by leaps and bounds. I have never used Edgy so I cant really compare. I hope that you get your hardware issues fixed up and I would love to see more bug fixes and usability increases by Gutsy. Come on, we cant kid ourselves that our mothers(an all important benchmark for usability) can use this without calling us for help to configure it. After configuration, it works smooth as silk.

All in all, have a nice day folks.

got_nix

April 25th, 2007, 03:12 PM

@u.b.u.n.t.u.. Trust me.. I'm really sorry to hear bout your problems. in my days of edgy i had trouble.. x never worked perfectly resolution worked but my Virtual terminals didn't work along with some other gripes.. Dapper was the perfect distro.. but edgy in my oppinion has come a far way.. Alot of things no worked out the box.. with little configuration work on my part.. My beryl setup was broken but big deal.. The upgrade process was extremely simple and i had zero problems. other than beryl being broken.. and having to re do my ndiswrapper wifi setup becasue of the new kernel images that got installed i needed ot move the ndiswrapper ko files for the module created for my wireless to the new kernel image location.

I'ld say keep trying but i dont wanna waste your time cuase the truth of it is that it may never work.. and then again you might figure out a way to get it working....

one thing for sure tho you being upset at ubuntu wont fix it though. and based on Shuttleworths' keynote speech the other day re gutsy gibbons I think you can count on gutsy to deliver ease of install. for stuff to work.. (sound like thats what he's pushing the most.. even more than the default composite x environ)

compmodder26

April 25th, 2007, 03:13 PM

Completely discrediting an entire operating system because of something as relatively small as X configuration?
Come on man, for the sake of all morality, don't do that. The world would be a much better place without people with that kind of mindset.
Next thing we know, you'll be discrediting entire groups of people, because of something as relatively small as the color of their skin.

Wow, how did you come up with that reasoning? He thinks that Ubuntu is flawed because it produces an ugly 800x600 resolution on his 19'' monitor and it has so far, been unfixable. So therefore, he is ultimately going down the path of becoming a racist? :confused:

Parmenion

April 25th, 2007, 03:19 PM

Its just a comparision. And a fairly eloquent one to boot. And its a logical comparision if you think about it a bit more.

thegreenman

April 25th, 2007, 03:20 PM

# /etc/X11/xorg.conf (xorg X Window System server configuration file)
#
# This file was generated by dexconf, the Debian X Configuration tool, using
# values from the debconf database.
#
# Edit this file with caution, and see the /etc/X11/xorg.conf manual page.
# (Type "man /etc/X11/xorg.conf" at the shell prompt.)
#
# This file is automatically updated on xserver-xorg package upgrades *only*
# if it has not been modified since the last upgrade of the xserver-xorg
# package.
#
# If you have edited this file but would like it to be automatically updated
# again, run the following command:
# sudo dpkg-reconfigure -phigh xserver-xorg

Section "Files"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/misc"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/cyrillic"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/Type1"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/100dpi"
FontPath "/usr/share/X11/fonts/75dpi"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/misc"
# path to defoma fonts
FontPath "/var/lib/defoma/x-ttcidfont-conf.d/dirs/TrueType"
EndSection

Section "Module"
Load "i2c"
Load "bitmap"
Load "ddc"
Load "dri"
Load "extmod"
Load "freetype"
Load "glx"
Load "int10"
Load "type1"
Load "vbe"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Generic Keyboard"
Driver "kbd"
Option "CoreKeyboard"
Option "XkbRules" "xorg"
Option "XkbModel" "pc105"
Option "XkbLayout" "us"
Option "XkbOptions" "lv3:ralt_switch"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Configured Mouse"
Driver "mouse"
Option "CorePointer"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
Option "Protocol" "ExplorerPS/2"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
Option "Emulate3Buttons" "true"
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Driver "wacom"
Identifier "stylus"
Option "Device" "/dev/wacom" # Change to
# /dev/input/event
# for USB
Option "Type" "stylus"
Option "ForceDevice" "ISDV4" # Tablet PC ONLY
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Driver "wacom"
Identifier "eraser"
Option "Device" "/dev/wacom" # Change to
# /dev/input/event
# for USB
Option "Type" "eraser"
Option "ForceDevice" "ISDV4" # Tablet PC ONLY
EndSection

Section "InputDevice"
Driver "wacom"
Identifier "cursor"
Option "Device" "/dev/wacom" # Change to
# /dev/input/event
# for USB
Option "Type" "cursor"
Option "ForceDevice" "ISDV4" # Tablet PC ONLY
EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "ATI Technologies, Inc. RV350 AR [Radeon 9600 XT]"
Driver "ati"
BusID "PCI:3:0:0"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
Identifier "E90f"
Option "DPMS"
EndSection

Section "Screen"
Identifier "Default Screen"
Device "ATI Technologies, Inc. RV350 AR [Radeon 9600 XT]"
Monitor "E90f"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Depth 1
Modes "1792x1344" "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1280x960" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Depth 4
Modes "1792x1344" "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1280x960" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Depth 8
Modes "1792x1344" "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1280x960" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Depth 15
Modes "1792x1344" "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1280x960" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Depth 16
Modes "1792x1344" "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1280x960" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1792x1344" "1600x1200" "1280x1024" "1280x960" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
EndSubSection
EndSection

Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "Default Layout"
Screen "Default Screen"
InputDevice "Generic Keyboard"
InputDevice "Configured Mouse"
InputDevice "stylus" "SendCoreEvents"
InputDevice "cursor" "SendCoreEvents"
InputDevice "eraser" "SendCoreEvents"
EndSection

Section "DRI"
Mode 0666
EndSection

acadiansteph

April 25th, 2007, 03:22 PM

Well, I am a complete noob when it comes to Linux. Still, I got my bcm4318 wireless to work with ndiswrapper. I got direct rendering with my ATI card. I just followed the wikis. I find it sad when someone rants about a free OS (Ubuntu,) instead of posting the original problem with the details. Granted, the original poster was probably tired after trying to figure out what what wrong after the Feisty upgrade. Ubuntu has great documentation and community support. The Ubuntu DEVS work hard to give a free OS for all to use. My hope for the original poster that he gets his Feisty to work. We are all here to help!

P.S. I upgraded to Feisty yesterday with no problem!

compmodder26

April 25th, 2007, 03:24 PM

Its just a comparision. And a fairly eloquent one to boot. And its a logical comparision if you think about it a bit more.
Reply With Quote

Please explain the logic to me then, because I'm failing to see it. I fail to see how dismissing an operating system because it isn't work for you is akin to dismissing an entire race because of the color of their skin. Okay, yeah I suppose you could loosely say that the color of their skin isn't "working for you", but that would be stretching it extremely far, no?

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 03:26 PM

thegreenman ... Thanks for that!

It seems a straight forward xorg.conf and like mine apart from the GPU and that it is ATI. I have 6600GT Nvidia.

Nothing obvious that I may have overlooked.

I am guessing, but it seems that ATI is saving the day on this one. Your monitor code is what my has been, but yours works. I put that down to ATI doing a better job of it on this occasion.

Thanks again.

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 03:31 PM

Please explain the logic to me then, because I'm failing to see it. I fail to see how dismissing an operating system because it isn't work for you is akin to dismissing an entire race because of the color of their skin. Okay, yeah I suppose you could loosely say that the color of their skin isn't "working for you", but that would be stretching it extremely far, no?

compmodder you are right, they are wrong, end of story :lolflag: , let's move on - please. dubrict made a personal attack and I will leave any future indiscretion on his part to the mods here to sought out.

I am only criticizing Fiesty Fawn here. Not all of Ubuntu nor the future of Ubuntu.

Parmenion

April 25th, 2007, 03:33 PM

Please explain the logic to me then, because I'm failing to see it. I fail to see how dismissing an operating system because it isn't work for you is akin to dismissing an entire race because of the color of their skin. Okay, yeah I suppose you could loosely say that the color of their skin isn't "working for you", but that would be stretching it extremely far, no?

:) Sorry if my other post was a little too curt. Sick and tired of people fighting over such petty matters. Nonetheless, your right! I think the original poster was trying to illustrate that point.

If Computer = Human and Operating System = Skin, I suppose we could pull off that argument eh :P

Sorry if my previous post rubbed the wrong way.

compmodder26

April 25th, 2007, 03:34 PM

compmodder you are right, they are wrong, end of story :lolflag: , let's move on - please. dubrict made a personal attack and I will leave any future indiscretion on his part to the mods here to sought out.

I am only criticizing Fiesty Fawn here. Not all of Ubuntu nor the future of Ubuntu.

I agree, that was getting way off-topic. As for your issue, can you post your xorg.conf?

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 03:37 PM

If Computer = Human and Operating System = Skin, I suppose we could pull off that argument eh :P

If Computer with Fiesty Fawn = working for Human u.b.u.n.t.u, I suppose that would be one more happy person here with Fiesty Fawn.

But alas poor Fiesty Fawn, it wasn't to be.

:-({|=

thegreenman

April 25th, 2007, 03:38 PM

dasunst3r

April 25th, 2007, 03:41 PM

I guess I could fairly say that not all operating systems "just work," even though that is our ultimate goal here. I respect your views, but I would like to take this chance to recognize how far Linux has come by taking you back three years:

You had to mount CDs and USB drives using the command line. Don't forget to set the permissions properly, or else the user may not be able to access it.
Wireless networking: In your dreams. Even wired networking was a bit problematic.
Desktop effects did not exist
Standby did not work
Dependencies were a bigger problem than what they are today.

No operating system "just works," even Windows. Whenever I format my computer, I would be stuck at 1024x768 instead of the glorious 1680x1050. I would have to install drivers galore to get everything working well. In Linux, things are a bit better. I only had to install the graphics drivers and that was the end of it. Therefore, I can say for sure that your mileage will vary. I sympathize with your experiences -- I went through this kind of hell myself, and I would like to encourage you to hang in there, try another distro (openSUSE comes in at a close second for me), or come back in six months. I, like many community members, are here for you and will welcome you back with open arms if you decide to take a hiatus.

P.S. In my three years of running Linux, ATi cards and their drivers truly suck. They are now the equivalent of nVidia's drivers back when they were still at 67xx or somewhere along those lines.

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 03:44 PM

I agree, that was getting way off-topic. As for your issue, can you post your xorg.conf?

It is generic. Similar to what thegreenman posted except to the GPU and it being Nvidia rather than ATI.

I spent hours over two days with various edits.

I got it to work with 1152x864 and 85Hz - locking it in. Then I went to install Nvidia to see Beryl for myself, rebooted and hey presto, back to 800x600 and 50Hz, completely bypassing the xorg.config file.

I will resign myself to XP till at least Gutsy Gibbon and assist the official Ubuntu team (I am in contact with one person) working on resolving this problem. It is known issue.

The mechanism of identification needs to be worked on.

Thanks to almost everyone who posted in reply ;)

compmodder26

April 25th, 2007, 03:47 PM

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 25th, 2007, 03:56 PM

I understand if you are too fed up to deal with it anymore, but in the event you want to give it another go, post back and I would be happy to try to help you through it. In all actuality, you shouldn't be having these troubles. The 6600 series of cards are well supported, and if xorg has the proper refresh rate for your monitor, then things should work (note the emphasis on should) .

Thanks. I lodged a bug report and am in contact with a person from Ubuntu who has been assigned to look into this. It extends beyond what I have reported.

I have offered to assist in testing and so I will be waiting to hear what I should do.

I don't expect a resolution any time soon. However by Gutsy Gibbon, with a bit of luck, a solution will have been implemented.

Cheers.

DJiNN

April 25th, 2007, 04:01 PM

Sorry to hear that you're having so many troubles. Feisty is working well for me after a few teething problems.

Did you get your problem(s) sorted?

DJiNN

edgecoug71

April 25th, 2007, 04:08 PM

I didn't read all of the posts on this topic, so I may not know everything going on.....but yes 7.04 has some issues, but once you find solutions for these problems you will enjoy 7.04 a lot better....I have an HP dv9008t laptop and there are a lot of fixes you have to do to get everything working, but when I was stuck on something that is where I turned to the forums....they are here to help you and the people here will help you.....I now have a laptop that runs 7.04 seamlessly and I have conky and Beryl installed, thanks to everyone on here who helped me, but it is better than windows by far!!!!! Trust me, I work with Windows everyday, especially at my work, where we are Windows dominant, but why rant and rave about known issues with Feisty when you could ask for help and try to get everything working right with the help of other users......

frodon

April 25th, 2007, 04:24 PM

It is generic. Similar to what thegreenman posted except to the GPU and it being Nvidia rather than ATI.

I spent hours over two days with various edits.

I got it to work with 1152x864 and 85Hz - locking it in. Then I went to install Nvidia to see Beryl for myself, rebooted and hey presto, back to 800x600 and 50Hz, completely bypassing the xorg.config file.

I will resign myself to XP till at least Gutsy Gibbon and assist the official Ubuntu team (I am in contact with one person) working on resolving this problem. It is known issue.

The mechanism of identification needs to be worked on.

Thanks to almost everyone who posted in reply ;)It's your choice to give up but this have solution, indeed it is an annoying problem that some may have (most won't) but it has a simple solution.
When i started using ubuntu with hoary 5.04 it was the first problem i got but once solved it's only pleasure till now.

The first thing to do as some may have already told you is to put in your xorg.cong file the refresh rates of your screen then for even stronger description add a modeline corresponding to the exact resolution you want and you should be good to go forever.

Detailed instruction/explanations here :
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=83973

prizrak

April 25th, 2007, 04:24 PM

but linux or windows, wouldn't someone expect basic things like internet, wireless or wired, to work perfectly? At least that is not OS specific, is it?
Hardware requires drivers and drivers are OS specific. If your wireless card isn't supported by the driver or you are using a driver that wasn't designed to work with your kernel it won't work. These are things that can't always be resolved by the distro maintainers.

If you don't want to upgrade don't no one is making you. Get an LTS release, they carry 3 years of support. The current LTS is Dapper next LTS will be in about a year according to Mark maybe 18 month (either Gutsy+1 or +2). You can also go use Debian if you want something that is 100% stable and won't be upgraded anytime soon. They have like 4 years between releases or something. If you want rolling updates there are other distros to try, Gentoo is one of them. I think Arch and Zenwalk are on the same schedule but I'm not sure. In short if it doesn't work well for you don't use it. No reason to make yourself work harder than you have to. I understand you like Ubuntu but there are many distros out there and you may prefer one of them. My friend recently switched from Gentoo to SuSE but obsolutely hated Ubuntu.

I've used Ubuntu since Warty (first ever release) and it has always worked perfectly for me on all my systems. Then Edgy decided to suck horribly on my tablet (still worked fine on my laptop till the mobo died). The desktop was taken offline so I was stuck on Windows until Feisty Herd 2 came out and I decided to give it a whirl. I have been on Feisty since and everything but the special keys worked great. The special keys required no more than an install of a 3rd party driver (in DEB format at that so a simple double click) and configuring them to do work with certain commands. All 100% GUI based.

You talk about not wanting to compare to the competition but at the same time you talk about what is necessary for desktop success. However you mention technical issues, this makes it possible and in fact fair to compare Ubuntu to competition. When we do we find that the competition also suffers from problems and while they may be different they level the playing field. Since the playing field is level when it comes to technical quality we should look at other issues.

Issue #1 - Hardware
Windows and OS X are installed by an OEM, all the drivers are loaded and tested. The hardware configuration is tested and made sure to work reasonably well. Thus the system works seemingly out of the box. This is not because the system is great this is because it was already set up.

Linux needs to be installed in 99% of the cases by the user. The hardware is w/e was lying around at the moment, not all drivers may be shipped with the kernel of your distro so they will require hunting them down. Some hardware may not even have a driver available or the driver is broken (happens in both Windows and OS X world frequently as well). Thus the system seems to not be working out of the box.

Issue #2 - Marketing forces
Windows (and before it DOS) has been on computer for years. Reasons for it are numerous but mostly because it was first designed to run on IBM PC's and sold with them. When the architecture became open it naturally worked on any IBM compatible PC as it was designed for that platform. This made it very cheap for the OEM's to produce PC's as they didn't have to pour money into OS development they only had to provide a system that was compatible with IBM specification. They would also have to write drivers for their hardware or just use the hardware available on the market with such drivers. By the time Windows came out just about every PC in the world ran DOS (remember Torvalds didn't start writing Linux till 91 and it was pretty much useless outside of his computer when he put it up online). This meant that MS already had developed relationships with OEM's and ISV's. Additionally MS made a very brilliant move of providing development tools for programmers at either ludicrously small prices or free. So even though Apple had a GUI interface by then it was more expensive to buy and more expensive to develop for. By the time MS had a GUI there was an army of developers and a huge number of contracts in place. It was the cheaper choice and people went for it. This created vendor lock-in and people became dependent on MS software.

Issue #3 - intuitiveness.
Linux isn't harder to use than either Windows or OS X, however it is very difficult to learn for someone who is used to either environment. Reason for it being is that they look similar and behave in a similar fashion but they are very different. So when you try to do the same thing you would on one platform in another you get frustrated and it seems harder than it has to be. As a case in point, my father upgraded his home desktop to Office 2007 and both me and my mother are completely lost in it because the interface was redesigned. While my mother is pretty computer illiterate I just happen to be an IT professional and have used Windows for about 10 years and Ubuntu for like 3 so obviously learning how to do something is not a big issue. If a changed interface in Word frustrates and confuses me, you can't expect a "regular" user to be comfortable with a whole new OS. Of course when it comes to Office and Windows in general people will just put up with it. They take it as a part of the game that they need to learn how to do it the new way because they see no way out. When it comes to Linux of course people hold it to a higher standard and when something doesn't work just go back to the familiar environment, since there really is nothing forcing them to use it.

Basically all your arguments and "insights" have been rehashed for years and years and apply equally to the big 3. This is why people pretty much tell you to go on your merry way, we are all aware of the problems, the developers are aware of the problems, those problems are being worked on and alot of them aren't even problems with the OS/software itself.

kelvin spratt

April 25th, 2007, 04:28 PM

aysiu

April 25th, 2007, 04:32 PM

Install XP on a computer and you will have the screen resolution, bit color depth, and refresh rates working properly in no time. These rants have been heard many times before, and they don't actually do anything to improve Ubuntu. But if you just want to get it off your chest, that's fine. We have a place for that, and it's here (where I've merged your thread).

For more details, read this sticky (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=408434), which also includes some tips on making positive and practical contributions to Ubuntu.

Brunellus

April 25th, 2007, 04:36 PM

exuse me but fiesty works perfect for most people straight from the box xp does not without 3rd party drivers and if you don't have the drivers you still have to go and find them so cut the crap i've used windows since 3.1
and vista is even worse ubuntu does a good job i'm using an ATI 9550 full 3d from set up nvidia motherboard
3dnow etc all work even the sound card works. With xp i can't use either with windows drivers and xp with sp2
crashes using btorrent by default i'm running 1600x1200 75hz with beryl perfect but then i'm not running a
reliant robin trying to race a porche then complaining am i i'm just grateful that the people at ubuntu have produced a product that is as good as vista if not better for the majority of people and to the unfortunate people
with problems go to Ati Nvidia an complain to them for not supporting there customers if firestone or whoever don't make tyre for you car you don't tell the car maker his car is crap you find another tyre manufacturer
don't you? or do you!
1) I will not tolerate "cut the crap" on any thread I see. Consider this a friendly warning. Further flames will merit an infraction.

2) It is silly to tout the stability of an admittedly unstable component--beryl-- as a test of the stability of the overall OS. When making claims for ease and stability, please try not to oversell beta software. I know *nix nerds tend to crave their desktop chrome, but overselling the chrome tends to create unrealistic expectations.

3) Please try to use sentences and paragraphs. Computers may not have a problem with long streams of serial data, but humans really benefit from the organization.

camz

April 25th, 2007, 04:37 PM

whooo that long huh? i think in a few years. gnu/linux is rapidly approaching the mac user base in numbers, will only be a matter of time.

Mainly because Mac is really terrible :P

prizrak

April 25th, 2007, 04:50 PM

3) Please try to use sentences and paragraphs. Computers may not have a problem with long streams of serial data, but humans really benefit from the organization.
ROFL

Iceni

April 25th, 2007, 04:53 PM

Actually I am very impressed with how ready Linux is for desktop use right now. I will bore you with my own story as an example.

I am what most people will call a power user. No wait. "Geek" is the term, or at least it was the term before my 9-year old neighbour and her grandma started talking via webcam. I've been using ms software since '94, from dos till XP. I am that guy people call when their computer is broken.

About 6 weeks ago, I was bored with Windows, unimpressed by vista and not really feeling the need to upgrade my computer for a glassy interface. I started looking around for linux distros. Picked up Ubuntu, expected a steep learning curve, but was pleasantly surprised. Setting up Ubuntu (Dapper at first) was for me not much harder than setting up a fresh XP install, and with the help of these forums I had everything running to my liking is a day or so. I set my gf's computer up with feisty, kde and a pink look, she had never booted back into windows. Next target: mom! ;)

So, judging by my own experience Linux is about ready for the Desktop of common users.

I do have a few things. The linux community should work on looks. I see so many beautiful themes in the desktop threads, some of those should be bundled. First time you see Ubuntu is a down after seing screenshots of desktops. Customizing is very confusing with gtk, metacity, emerald, icons, kde, etc. And the community needs to stop selling Beryl and other beta software, because it breaks things:)

steven8

April 25th, 2007, 04:53 PM

A proper fix is needed and this is being worked on for Gutsy Gibbon - that is my understanding.

Did you know the fix was being worked on before, or after, your rant? If you knew before, you really didn't need the rant, but I understand the frustration. XP does work, but it does NOT work because It is a better, or more 'ready' OS than Ubuntu. As many have said before me, it works because it has the whole cooperation of the industry. Vista has issues because it is trying to exclude everyone from understanding it, while still expecting them to make their products work with it. For DRM reasons. That's how linux has to work with proprietary vendors. It ain't easy.

m.musashi

April 25th, 2007, 04:56 PM

Running Ubuntu on a 19" monitor locked in at 800x600, flickering away at 50Hz are not signs of an operating system that is ready to see the light of day.

Sorry to hear of your troubles.

I have a 19" LCD and feisty (from beta) defaulted to 1280x1024 at 50mhz. I don't know what the refresh rate "should" be but at 50 I don't seem to have any problems.

In fact, I've installed feisty on my custom desktop (from beta) and on two laptops (from final release) and I have not had a single problem. Wireless, resolution, restricted drivers (way cool) and so on have all worked flawlessly. I guess the devs really like my hardware or something.

BTW, the laptops are both never Dells and my desktop uses a 939 MSI board with an nvidia 7600GS.

matthinckley

April 25th, 2007, 06:07 PM

Well this is just a big collage of Linux isn't ready threads isn't it.

dreadlord_chris

April 25th, 2007, 06:15 PM

for those who may not know, or who have forgotten:
All Operating Systems Suck! (http://www.ehlke.net/os-suck.html)

All operating systems suck. They suck, blow, bite, chomp, chew, spit, dribble, drool, blubber, blabber, and puke. Every last one of 'em sucks in some way or other. They are designed for maximal sysadmin discomfort by festering syphillitic marketroids. Not one does not suck.

Have a nice day ):P

aysiu

April 25th, 2007, 06:16 PM

Well this is just a big collage of Linux isn't ready threads isn't it.
Yes. And if you read them, you'll see that:
1. They all think they're original
2. They're all about the same
3. None of them actually results in the improvement of Ubuntu
4. Very few have practically implementable suggestions

keith11

April 25th, 2007, 08:57 PM

Hardware requires drivers and drivers are OS specific. If your wireless card isn't supported by the driver or you are using a driver that wasn't designed to work with your kernel it won't work. These are things that can't always be resolved by the distro maintainers.

If you don't want to upgrade don't no one is making you. Get an LTS release, they carry 3 years of support. The current LTS is Dapper next LTS will be in about a year according to Mark maybe 18 month (either Gutsy+1 or +2). You can also go use Debian if you want something that is 100% stable and won't be upgraded anytime soon. They have like 4 years between releases or something. If you want rolling updates there are other distros to try, Gentoo is one of them. I think Arch and Zenwalk are on the same schedule but I'm not sure. In short if it doesn't work well for you don't use it. No reason to make yourself work harder than you have to. I understand you like Ubuntu but there are many distros out there and you may prefer one of them. My friend recently switched from Gentoo to SuSE but obsolutely hated Ubuntu.

I've used Ubuntu since Warty (first ever release) and it has always worked perfectly for me on all my systems. Then Edgy decided to suck horribly on my tablet (still worked fine on my laptop till the mobo died). The desktop was taken offline so I was stuck on Windows until Feisty Herd 2 came out and I decided to give it a whirl. I have been on Feisty since and everything but the special keys worked great. The special keys required no more than an install of a 3rd party driver (in DEB format at that so a simple double click) and configuring them to do work with certain commands. All 100% GUI based.

You talk about not wanting to compare to the competition but at the same time you talk about what is necessary for desktop success. However you mention technical issues, this makes it possible and in fact fair to compare Ubuntu to competition. When we do we find that the competition also suffers from problems and while they may be different they level the playing field. Since the playing field is level when it comes to technical quality we should look at other issues.

Issue #1 - Hardware
Windows and OS X are installed by an OEM, all the drivers are loaded and tested. The hardware configuration is tested and made sure to work reasonably well. Thus the system works seemingly out of the box. This is not because the system is great this is because it was already set up.

Linux needs to be installed in 99% of the cases by the user. The hardware is w/e was lying around at the moment, not all drivers may be shipped with the kernel of your distro so they will require hunting them down. Some hardware may not even have a driver available or the driver is broken (happens in both Windows and OS X world frequently as well). Thus the system seems to not be working out of the box.

Issue #2 - Marketing forces
Windows (and before it DOS) has been on computer for years. Reasons for it are numerous but mostly because it was first designed to run on IBM PC's and sold with them. When the architecture became open it naturally worked on any IBM compatible PC as it was designed for that platform. This made it very cheap for the OEM's to produce PC's as they didn't have to pour money into OS development they only had to provide a system that was compatible with IBM specification. They would also have to write drivers for their hardware or just use the hardware available on the market with such drivers. By the time Windows came out just about every PC in the world ran DOS (remember Torvalds didn't start writing Linux till 91 and it was pretty much useless outside of his computer when he put it up online). This meant that MS already had developed relationships with OEM's and ISV's. Additionally MS made a very brilliant move of providing development tools for programmers at either ludicrously small prices or free. So even though Apple had a GUI interface by then it was more expensive to buy and more expensive to develop for. By the time MS had a GUI there was an army of developers and a huge number of contracts in place. It was the cheaper choice and people went for it. This created vendor lock-in and people became dependent on MS software.

Issue #3 - intuitiveness.
Linux isn't harder to use than either Windows or OS X, however it is very difficult to learn for someone who is used to either environment. Reason for it being is that they look similar and behave in a similar fashion but they are very different. So when you try to do the same thing you would on one platform in another you get frustrated and it seems harder than it has to be. As a case in point, my father upgraded his home desktop to Office 2007 and both me and my mother are completely lost in it because the interface was redesigned. While my mother is pretty computer illiterate I just happen to be an IT professional and have used Windows for about 10 years and Ubuntu for like 3 so obviously learning how to do something is not a big issue. If a changed interface in Word frustrates and confuses me, you can't expect a "regular" user to be comfortable with a whole new OS. Of course when it comes to Office and Windows in general people will just put up with it. They take it as a part of the game that they need to learn how to do it the new way because they see no way out. When it comes to Linux of course people hold it to a higher standard and when something doesn't work just go back to the familiar environment, since there really is nothing forcing them to use it.

Basically all your arguments and "insights" have been rehashed for years and years and apply equally to the big 3. This is why people pretty much tell you to go on your merry way, we are all aware of the problems, the developers are aware of the problems, those problems are being worked on and alot of them aren't even problems with the OS/software itself.

Thanks for an informative response rather than a shrugging-it-off one. I like the information you provided about the beginning days of windows and linux. I upgraded because I had issues with Edgy, of course otherwise I wouldn't have upgraded. And I could have installed Dapper Drake but I assumed that just as it would be expected that the issues in Edgy would be fixed in Feisty, the issues in Dapper Drake were fixed in Edgy and certainly anyone would like to use a version with less bugs. Let me ask you this: If I use Dapper, wouldn't I be using older versions of drivers for my hardware? I am fine with that as long as it works nicely. I tried reading about Dapper Drake but I couldn't well figure out what the technicalities are which make it more stable and in what aspects.

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 26th, 2007, 12:33 AM

It's your choice to give up but this have solution, indeed it is an annoying problem that some may have (most won't) but it has a simple solution.

Editing the xorg.conf is NOT a "simple solution". It is NOt a solution at all. It seeks to overcome the inherent problem but fails. A proper solution is needed.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg/+bug/3731

Note:

STATUS = CONFIRMED
IMPORTANCE = CRITICAL

The proper solution, the "simple solution", is for Ubuntu to correctly auto detect screen resolutions, bit color depth and refresh rates.

freebird54

April 26th, 2007, 03:31 AM

julian67

April 26th, 2007, 04:43 AM

That seems a bit much - there is no system that can do that. Certainly not anything released for a desktop level machine. While I agree that editing xorg.conf is not a PRETTY solution, at least it is always 'to hand' - unlike my experiences in XP where the 'settings' tab would not even come up so one could edit them at all. Beyond that though - best that could be hoped for is detection of 'maximum possibility', not the correct (for the user) value.

It's more accurate to say that there is possibly no Debian derived system which can do that. This is something that is accomplished by other distros with different set up tools. When I install openSUSE it does correctly configure screen resolution, physical dimensions, depth and refresh rates and allows test and adjustment as necessary as part of the install/set up. Unfortunately the Debian X Configuration tool seems to completely ignore important parameters like physical size and modes. Realistically the Debian set up tool is just intended to get you started with something useable and the user should then configure X properly. This is fine for Debian's intended users but probably not adequate for Ubuntu's purposes.

btw my Intel 945GM integrated graphics is fine in openSuse, was also fine in Dapper, was OK in Edgy after editing xorg.conf, but in Feisty X is horrible....unstable...crashes, freezes. I'll have to reconfigure it and see if it can be made to work.

freebird54

April 26th, 2007, 04:49 AM

Brunellus

April 26th, 2007, 05:10 AM

SaX is an excellent tool, and probably the single best thing SuSE has going for it. It was also proprietary for a long time. I don't know whether or not there's any move to port it to Debian or any of the Debian daughters.

u.b.u.n.t.u

April 26th, 2007, 05:53 AM

I don't doubt that more might be done than Ubuntu does - but I still say that no OS can do what you requested..

All I request is to use my monitor and GPU as they are meant to be used. To adjust the screen resolution, color depth and refresh rate.

If you say that no OS can do this then I suggest you look beyond Ubuntu and broaden your experience of what other OS can actually do.

This discussion is basically meaningless in the context that this problem is known and will shortly be worked on. Hopefully to be resolved by Gutsy Gibbon in October.

aysiu

April 26th, 2007, 06:20 AM

I've moved the posts about this thread to How best to handle "Linux is not ready for the desktop" threads (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2537389#post2537389)

julian67

April 26th, 2007, 06:59 AM

I don't doubt that more might be done than Ubuntu does - but I still say that no OS can do what you requested. The 'correct' settings for such things as colour depth and resolution cannot be determined by hard or software because the correct setting may change hourly or even more often, depending on the needs/wants of the user. today I want 1600x1200 @ 24 depth, later I may 800x600 @ 16 depth for maximum visibility of something. Thus my position that maximum can be detected, but correct can not.

Yes other OS's can do exactly this.

But firstly most other users only want maximum correct resolution and bit depth and correct screen size and nothing else. This is the obvious goal of the quick installer set up tool and indeed is all that is attempted in Ubuntu with my laptop's widescreen LCD. Only the maximum resolution is configured and there are none of the supported lower resolutions listed/configured. Debian/Ubuntu config tool unfortunately can't really even get this maximum config correct. Initially it appears it has done this but a closer look at xorg.conf shows it only does half the job. Fortunately this approach works more than half the time for more than half the people but it is not so good for many others.

Other distros do offer automated correct configuration for multiple supported resolutions and depths , so it is actually possible. Example: Ubuntu on my laptop only offers me only "1280 x 800" at depths 1,4,8,16,24. openSuse offers me all the resolutions supported by my hardware "1280x800" "1280x768" "1024x768" "1280x600" "1024x600" "800x600" "768x576" "640x480" at depths 8, 15, 16 and 24 and with a correct modeline written for each resolution.

So it is clear that at least one other distro can do exactly as you describe and automatically offer multiple correct configurations for the various resolutions supported by the hardware. I would be rather surprised if Mandriva could not do the same and I would expect Fedora to achieve something similar.

prizrak

April 26th, 2007, 02:22 PM

Thanks for an informative response rather than a shrugging-it-off one. I like the information you provided about the beginning days of windows and linux. I upgraded because I had issues with Edgy, of course otherwise I wouldn't have upgraded. And I could have installed Dapper Drake but I assumed that just as it would be expected that the issues in Edgy would be fixed in Feisty, the issues in Dapper Drake were fixed in Edgy and certainly anyone would like to use a version with less bugs. Let me ask you this: If I use Dapper, wouldn't I be using older versions of drivers for my hardware? I am fine with that as long as it works nicely. I tried reading about Dapper Drake but I couldn't well figure out what the technicalities are which make it more stable and in what aspects.

Yes you would be using older drivers as well as older software. Stability comes from two things (mainly). One is that the software that is older generally has been better tested and more bugs have been fixed. The other thing is that it has a 3 year support cycle, That means that you will keep getting bug fixes and security updates for 3 years and won't have to upgrade to anything. It also means that your software environment doesn't actually change it simply gets fixed. Trade off of course means making due without the newest and prettiest features.

Also there is no shame in distro switching, some hardware configurations seem to work better with other distro's. For instance a friend of mine had issues with Ubuntu but OpenSuSE worked 100% out of the box for him. I don't want you to think that when people tell you to use something else they are being mean sometimes it's the only real solution (sad but true).

prizrak

April 26th, 2007, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by u.b.u.n.t.u View Post
It is generic. Similar to what thegreenman posted except to the GPU and it being Nvidia rather than ATI.

I spent hours over two days with various edits.

I got it to work with 1152x864 and 85Hz - locking it in. Then I went to install Nvidia to see Beryl for myself, rebooted and hey presto, back to 800x600 and 50Hz, completely bypassing the xorg.config file.

I will resign myself to XP till at least Gutsy Gibbon and assist the official Ubuntu team (I am in contact with one person) working on resolving this problem. It is known issue.

The mechanism of identification needs to be worked on.

Thanks to almost everyone who posted in reply
Hate to tell you this but this is an obvious case of user error. If you have the nVidia driver installed and enabled you also have nvidia-settings. That just happens to be an excellent GUI from nVidia themselves that will allow you to probe monitors (and believe me it can get what the max res is) and will allow you to set the resolution you want. It's simple and it's instant. Just because you don't know about something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

wog

April 26th, 2007, 05:30 PM

Under "Desktop Ready" I would add that an application is intuitive, easy to understand how to control and use, and the graphical interface looks sharp and/or pretty.

aysiu

April 26th, 2007, 05:32 PM

Under "Desktop Ready" I would add that an application is intuitive, easy to understand how to control and use, and the graphical interface looks sharp and/or pretty.
I don't know any OS that fits that criteria.

Brunellus

April 26th, 2007, 05:33 PM

Under "Desktop Ready" I would add that an application is intuitive, easy to understand how to control and use, and the graphical interface looks sharp and/or pretty.
none of which applied to MSFT for years--and yet they dominated the desktop.

Desktop readiness means that the application is on the desktop that most people have. That means pre-installation. MSFT played its cards right with IBM/Intel in the early days to achieve this.

julian67

April 26th, 2007, 06:05 PM

It didn't used to just mean pre-installed. There was a real battle between office suites and productivity applications and web browsers.....even different shells. It wasn't at all unusual to be running word perfect and netscape navigator and you might see people running geoworks instead of the MS environment. I think most people know that MS is not in the competition to take second place and they use some dubious methods but it's better not to forget that MS office is the benchmark for office suites and they are not stupid and do get a lot of things right. If MS Office wasn't at minimum equal to or better than other office suites MS wouldn't stay in a monopoly position for long.

an application is intuitive, easy to understand how to control and use, and the graphical interface looks sharp and/or pretty.

Liferea? Totem? Epiphany? SoundJuicer? All those fit the description for me but I realise everyone has a different idea what is sharp/pretty, even functional.

keith11

April 26th, 2007, 08:39 PM

Yes you would be using older drivers as well as older software. Stability comes from two things (mainly). One is that the software that is older generally has been better tested and more bugs have been fixed. The other thing is that it has a 3 year support cycle, That means that you will keep getting bug fixes and security updates for 3 years and won't have to upgrade to anything. It also means that your software environment doesn't actually change it simply gets fixed. Trade off of course means making due without the newest and prettiest features.

Also there is no shame in distro switching, some hardware configurations seem to work better with other distro's. For instance a friend of mine had issues with Ubuntu but OpenSuSE worked 100% out of the box for him. I don't want you to think that when people tell you to use something else they are being mean sometimes it's the only real solution (sad but true).

Yes I understand where you are coming from as far as switching is concerned. The way I look at a distro is how big and responsive community it has, what kind of documentation it has, what latest features they have, how stable the company which owns it is and how hard the developers work to incorporate the features which are very important for the end user. Based on all those I chose Kubuntu over OpenSuse. I have no plans to switch to any other OS except Kubuntu as most of my hardware works and more important I have a better feeling with Kubuntu that whatever problems I have they will be solved soon. Someone here suggested I use Gentoo (Porbably he was making fun of me...:)...), like I could use Gentoo, yeah right.:))

Keith.

Keith.

prizrak

April 26th, 2007, 11:02 PM

ut it's better not to forget that MS office is the benchmark for office suites
If that's the case then OOo should have no problem whatsoever. Office 2007 sux horribly and has removed much of the functionality.

prizrak

April 26th, 2007, 11:05 PM

Yes I understand where you are coming from as far as switching is concerned. The way I look at a distro is how big and responsive community it has, what kind of documentation it has, what latest features they have, how stable the company which owns it is and how hard the developers work to incorporate the features which are very important for the end user. Based on all those I chose Kubuntu over OpenSuse. I have no plans to switch to any other OS except Kubuntu as most of my hardware works and more important I have a better feeling with Kubuntu that whatever problems I have they will be solved soon. Someone here suggested I use Gentoo (Porbably he was making fun of me...:)...), like I could use Gentoo, yeah right.:))

Keith.

Keith.

Gentoo needs lots of babysitting the friend who is using OpenSuSE now switched to it from Gentoo because he didn't have the time to keep it running anymore. I'm sure we'll see you on the forums for a bit if you are sticking with Kubuntu ;)

rsambuca

April 26th, 2007, 11:12 PM

If that's the case then OOo should have no problem whatsoever. Office 2007 sux horribly and has removed much of the functionality.

??? That opinion is by far the minority. Search around for reviews - Office 2007 is decent software although the UI is a little different than people are used to.

prizrak

April 26th, 2007, 11:16 PM

Under "Desktop Ready" I would add that an application is intuitive, easy to understand how to control and use, and the graphical interface looks sharp and/or pretty.
First and foremost define intuitive. If you have used Windows before then right clicking on something to get to a menu is "intuitive" if you are used to OS X then you are used for Apple+Click for the same. If you use Linux you are used to middle click paste, wouldn't work in any other OS. Also I would argue that a default Gnome install is "intuitive" it has icons that seem descriptive to me and you click on them for things to happen. Sure the GIMP may not be all that intuitive but then again neither is Photoshop. So are we talking OS itself or just the software than runs on top of it?

Secondly GUI looking sharp and/or pretty is 100% subjective. Some people love the OS X look I for one can't stand it. This is true for just about anything, my mother loves sedans and no other kind of cars, I like mostly liftback coupe's. This is strictly looks based not performance or anything else. If you want to use looks as a measure of desktop readiness then I would suggest easy themeability/skinability (yeah I made those words up) rather than default good look.

prizrak

April 26th, 2007, 11:22 PM

??? That opinion is by far the minority. Search around for reviews - Office 2007 is decent software although the UI is a little different than people are used to.

I used both 2003 (extensively) and 2007 (not as extensively since it's recent) and 2007 is actually missing some functionality that has been around since 97. As an example, there is no more insert picture from scanner you have to use a different program (included in Office Ultimate not sure about others) to scan the file and edit it before putting it into the document. As a result what used to take me about 5 minutes took a half hour.

The thing is not necessarily that Office 2007 sux by itself but that it's not as good as the previous version. Add on top of that a new interface (it's not a little different, it's quite a bit different) and OOo becomes on about the same level for like 70% of people out there.

rsambuca

April 26th, 2007, 11:28 PM

The thing is not necessarily that Office 2007 sux by itself but that it's not as good as the previous version. Add on top of that a new interface (it's not a little different, it's quite a bit different) and OOo becomes on about the same level for like 70% of people out there.

OK, I can accept that. It is a little different from your previous statement that "2007 sux horribly"!! Just keepin' it real, dawg.

Frak

April 26th, 2007, 11:29 PM

I used both 2003 (extensively) and 2007 (not as extensively since it's recent) and 2007 is actually missing some functionality that has been around since 97. As an example, there is no more insert picture from scanner you have to use a different program (included in Office Ultimate not sure about others) to scan the file and edit it before putting it into the document. As a result what used to take me about 5 minutes took a half hour.

The thing is not necessarily that Office 2007 sux by itself but that it's not as good as the previous version. Add on top of that a new interface (it's not a little different, it's quite a bit different) and OOo becomes on about the same level for like 70% of people out there.
That is where intuitiveness and usability argues against functionality and features.
I LOVE Office '07, and find it more enjoyable to use than OO.o because of its ease of use, and everything it put in human readable form, in menu's that make sense. Nothing is put where a person that would use logic that is not known by you or I, but where the general population could easily be more productive.
My two cents.

prizrak

April 27th, 2007, 02:44 PM

That is where intuitiveness and usability argues against functionality and features.
I LOVE Office '07, and find it more enjoyable to use than OO.o because of its ease of use, and everything it put in human readable form, in menu's that make sense. Nothing is put where a person that would use logic that is not known by you or I, but where the general population could easily be more productive.
My two cents.

I find it completely illogical. That random button that hides most of the menu makes very little sense. Oversized menu buttons take up way too much screen.

Aside from all of that, MS's main weapon is familiarity. Look at the complaints on the forum there is a huge number that basically boils down to "this is not what I'm used to in Windows". When they redesign the GUI to the point where someone who's worked with their product for years needs to relearn again what's going on they loose that edge. I actually seen comments from people on Vista that it's too different from XP and that they have to learn how to use the computer again. This basically supports that the whole "intuitive interface" is nothing more than a myth. To a fresh person it makes no difference in terms of "intuitiveness" whether it's Aqua, KDE, Gnome, XFCE, Aero, Aero Glass, or Explorer that runs the interface. However I have seen people who are used to Windows get confused on the Mac (and that's supposed to be the most intuitive interface). Hell when I started using Win95 I couldn't figure out where Norton Commander was and why I can't just type my commands anymore. All that clicking wasn't "intuitive" it seemed unnecessary.

bro

April 27th, 2007, 11:44 PM

After Feisty's install and Windows reinstall at the same time I come rethink the issue. Maybe there are no Desktop-ready OS's today.
Feisty's live cd didn't startup due to Ati X1400. Edgy did it. I won't rant on how stupid this is. Appart from these kind of childish bugs that should obviously not appear in an professional OS Ubuntu is ready.

Windows on the other side... I have an official XP cd but can't install from that because it doesn't have sata drivers and I don't have a floppy-disk. Asking for a floppy disk with the drivers for a sata disk is an insult. No professional OS should insult it 's users. Not being able to startup and install at least the minimum without additional help is again 'a childish bug that should not appear...'

Ubuntu doesn't come with all drivers and codecs as they could or should or as we all dream about. Yes I use Automatix.

Windows does worse by far. My graphic drivers are not installed after I use the recovery cd that came with my laptop (has sata drivers though). Neither installed is my network card or wireless card. Mind you, this is the official windows recovery / install cd. My XP doesn't play a long list of file types. The help file 'helps' me to the site of a certain Redmond based company where I can buy the codecs. Even though I live in country where I can legally download and install them for free from another place. A OS that makes you pay can be professional, an OS that makes you pay for something that's obviously free....

I'm surprised how little many people who work with computers daily know about them. And how it becomes harder every day to comprehend for me that they just don't know, don't care and will never know.. For these people any computer with big icons on the desktop that spell 'Internet' 'Email' 'Office' is 'ready'. They accept whatever anomaly appears as something 'that computers do'. My girlfriend switched to ubuntu without any pain whatsoever. And still she is a smart person who cares a little. I'm sure my mother and most of my collegeas would do the same. They would frown slightly at the different look, find the firefox icon, notice that office looks 'more or less' the same (they only used bold, italic, an occasional table and page preview as features beyond a text-editor anyway).. and continue to work with it.

The less it bothers them with questions the better they consider it. By far Ubuntu has less pop-up questions then windows. Ubuntu is therefore more desktop ready.

gee long post.

freesky2

April 28th, 2007, 09:51 PM

Gmbrdilos

April 28th, 2007, 09:52 PM

relax man, if you have a question ask it instead of releasing anger.

teet

April 28th, 2007, 09:55 PM

It's probably for the best.

You could always set up a dual boot machine with vista and linux. You could use vista as your prime time OS and linux could be your "toy". That's what I was doing until one day I realized that I had everything working in linux and actually liked it better. Go figure.

Be sure to give linux a try in the future (or try a different distro now!). Things in the linux world can change a lot in a couple years time. Remember, ubuntu has only been around since October 2004...not even 3 years!

-teet

locke.dragon

April 28th, 2007, 09:56 PM

i agree with Gmbrdilos. chill dude. problems? ask. solution? tell. simple! :D

K.Mandla

April 28th, 2007, 10:03 PM

Ubuntu isn't for everyone. Vista isn't for everyone. Use what you like, and what works for you. Cheers, be happy and drive safely. :D

Now everybody hold on tight while I wrap this thread up into that gigantic ball of bad vibes we call the Linux Desktop Readiness Thread. ... Ready, steady ... GO!

DezSP

April 28th, 2007, 10:03 PM

I'm sure we're all sad to hear that you've been having such problems. Unfortunately, wi-fi was never Linux's strong point, and for all their advances, many cards still do not function natively. As for your sound device problem, it's probably not so insurmountable, but without any Internet and thus no Google to aid you, I can see it becoming a frustration.

If you're still willing to try Ubuntu, I'm sure we can help you get your hardware up and running. If not, I hope you'll think to try a Linux disto again someday, and I wish you luck for when that happens.

xpod

April 28th, 2007, 10:23 PM

I don't like Ubuntu! It's NOT easy to work with, very SUPER HARD infact. I can't get my belkin wireless card to install, nor can I get my on-board sound to install.

What good is this OS "Ubuntu" if you can't go online to the internet OR get sound? I tried for many hours and hours and hours. I gave up. I will stay with VISTA!

At least I can go to the internet with NO problem and listen to music.

I know exactly how you feel....

When i first sat down at a computer last year it took me about 2 weeks to realise i needed something called a driver to get the sound going, then probably another week of banging my head on the wall before i found out that your motherboards own site is where you should really go as apose to Driver Guide for such things:???:

Of course that was a WIndows computer but a new OS is a new OS eh?
Discovering Ubuntu some months later wasn`t any better mind you as i still knew jack but by asking loads of dumb "seeming" questions instead of having dumb "seeming" rants these good folks had me up and running in no time.

Frak

April 28th, 2007, 11:04 PM

Tomosaur

April 28th, 2007, 11:57 PM

deanlinkous

April 29th, 2007, 12:37 AM

I don't like Ubuntu! It's NOT easy to work with, very SUPER HARD infact.
WOW another person born with a innate ability to use windows yet somehow missed the linux-education infusion in-utero. What kind of clones are we building? Oh yea, the 'works with windows' kind. :D

I can't get my belkin wireless card to install, nor can I get my on-board sound to install.
Well the card installs if you stick it in the side. Getting it to work is another matter. Your on-board sound IS on-board so it is installed already. Once again getting it to work is something else. Do you buy a car and then complain it doesnt fit in your garage - do some research. Sheesh.

What good is this OS "Ubuntu" if you can't go online to the internet OR get sound?
I can.

At least I can go to the internet with NO problem and listen to music.
I am surprised you manage that actually...

Awww, I am just joking. Group hug......

starscalling

April 29th, 2007, 11:33 AM

all i gotta say is beryl >>>>>>>>>> aero
[and there are aero themes for beryl/emerald/compiz i believe]
if you can run vista decently you really really deserve every bell and whistle in beryl for SURE
whish i could... buddy just installed on 4cpu intel - everything is BLAZING fast hehe

yaknow with the dvd iso one would hope every mode of installation ever would be on it... including alternate and text and server and every other mode... and every darn hardware driver too :>
as for the rest of it... im not sold on feisty but edgy is rather nice.. :)

i would say [since its my first 2cents in this thread] that linux is more desktop ready than apple... only really lacks applications you pay for that do industry specific things - like photoshop for linux for realz

it would be nice if all windows apps worked in wine perfectly.. but meh nothings perfect ^^

prizrak

April 30th, 2007, 02:10 PM

Pfft, Belkin don't work on Windows right either (not for me in any case).

Daveski

May 2nd, 2007, 12:42 AM

Dell seem to think it is ready for the desktop:

http://www.ubuntu.com/news/dell-to-offer-ubuntu

julian67

May 2nd, 2007, 12:52 AM

That's great! I thought that Dell would be more likely to offer openSuse or Fedora. This is a huge endorsement from Dell and really good news for everyone who uses GNU/Linux distros. It's exactly the step needed to push hardware and manufacturers towards offering real support for their products. If they want to sell 100s of thousands of units to Dell they'll have to get real about Linux :)

It should give Ubuntu a massive boost, reassure a lot of people who are not sure about using something other than Windows and annoy the hell out of mr Ballmer and his pet lawyers.

Frak

May 2nd, 2007, 01:57 AM

I remember getting an email about this. It said that they were (with this) marketing towards a programming crowd, but as we all know, since all the hardware should work out of the box, it will be available for everyone to learn how to use it, and its simplicity, with no hardware difficulties.

darrenm

May 2nd, 2007, 07:55 PM

I really don't want to be smug on this one but I've been saying for ages on this thread and others that Dell can't offer anything but Ubuntu and I now feel kind of vindicated. ;)

prizrak

May 2nd, 2007, 08:21 PM

I really don't want to be smug on this one but I've been saying for ages on this thread and others that Dell can't offer anything but Ubuntu and I now feel kind of vindicated. ;)
LOL Sure they can but they don't want to ;)

deanlinkous

May 2nd, 2007, 09:45 PM

I really don't want to be smug on this one but I've been saying for ages on this thread and others that Dell can't offer anything but Ubuntu and I now feel kind of vindicated. ;)
and when dell sells about a coupl hundred systems to some geeks and that is about it....what then? :D

Nonno Bassotto

May 2nd, 2007, 10:22 PM

Did anyone read the whole thread?

aysiu

May 2nd, 2007, 10:26 PM

Did anyone read the whole thread?
Yes. I'm probably one of a handful of people who have read all 7000+ posts.

prizrak

May 2nd, 2007, 10:28 PM

Yes. I'm probably one of a handful of people who have read all 7000+ posts.

Same here :) Then again I read all the original ones before they were consolidated and then it wasn't too difficult to keep up.

rsambuca

May 2nd, 2007, 10:46 PM

I really don't want to be smug on this one but I've been saying for ages on this thread and others that Dell can't offer anything but Ubuntu and I now feel kind of vindicated. ;)

What do you mean by "can't"...

Oh wait, I think we did do this before.:lolflag:

m.musashi

May 3rd, 2007, 03:12 AM

Did anyone read the whole thread?

Started around post 1875 (my first response) but I have to admit that I skimmed some of the long-winded ones. :)

darrenm

May 3rd, 2007, 06:21 PM

and when dell sells about a coupl hundred systems to some geeks and that is about it....what then? :D

Not gonna happen. I guarantee it. There are enough Microsoft haters out there with enough money to spare to just buy machines to make the figures look good. As soon as Dell start selling Ubuntu machines in the UK, I'm going to buy one and it seems to be echoed in a lot of places.

What do you mean by "can't"...

Oh wait, I think we did do this before.:lolflag:

i don't think any other distro would be able to cut it. It needs to be as user friendly as possible and still toe the line legally. Ubuntu has about the best balance of those things.

deanlinkous

May 3rd, 2007, 09:26 PM

Not gonna happen. I guarantee it. There are enough Microsoft haters out there with enough money to spare to just buy machines to make the figures look good. As soon as Dell start selling Ubuntu machines in the UK, I'm going to buy one and it seems to be echoed in a lot of places.

i don't think any other distro would be able to cut it. It needs to be as user friendly as possible and still toe the line legally. Ubuntu has about the best balance of those things.
Why does hating microsoft==ubuntu dell?
Yea, actually I figure it will be a few thousand to ubuntu geeks and a few thousand to linux geeks and hopefully that will be enough for dell to consider it a reasonable niche and keep offering it.

Thinking that anyone wanting a new computer is going to choose ubuntu without ever hearing about it is silly IMO.

Do those same people have money to buy one year after year.....

Ask your granny if she is going to buy a ubuntu system? Make sure she is sitting down first. :D

Brunellus

May 3rd, 2007, 09:41 PM

Why does hating microsoft==ubuntu dell?
Yea, actually I figure it will be a few thousand to ubuntu geeks and a few thousand to linux geeks and hopefully that will be enough for dell to consider it a reasonable niche and keep offering it.

Thinking that anyone wanting a new computer is going to choose ubuntu without ever hearing about it is silly IMO.

Do those same people have money to buy one year after year.....

Ask your granny if she is going to buy a ubuntu system? Make sure she is sitting down first. :D
my granny doesn't know what a computer is or what it does.

adza

May 3rd, 2007, 11:42 PM

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2124099,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532

has anyone read this post? i was gonna flame this guy out... then thought i won't waste my time.. haha

aysiu

May 4th, 2007, 03:00 AM

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2124099,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532

has anyone read this post? i was gonna flame this guy out... then thought i won't waste my time.. haha
I can't take a review of Ubuntu seriously that says this:
# Firefox does not have Flash installed by default. This strikes me as odd since so much multimedia content uses Flash. Shouldn't it be installed by default? Why should the users have to install it themselves?
# My Nvidia drivers were not installed by default. Initially my desktop resolution was only 1024 x 768. I was able to download the drivers easy from the Add/Remove tool but, given that my video card has been around for ages, Ubuntu should be able to install the drivers automatically for me. The exclusion of proprietary software by default in Ubuntu should be no mystery to a reviewer who's spent that much time documenting the installation and use of Ubuntu. Part of the "Ubuntu promise" right on the front of the Ubuntu webpage is
Ubuntu CDs contain only free software applications; we encourage you to use free and open source software, improve it and pass it on. Not to mention the fact that Windows doesn't come with Flash or Nvidia drivers either...

deanlinkous

May 4th, 2007, 03:42 AM

Ubuntu CDs contain only free software applications; we encourage you to use free and open source software, improve it and pass it on.
Well the ubuntu CDs contain more than JUST free software apps - so ONLY is not the correct word.....

Hex_Mandos

May 4th, 2007, 04:10 AM

Well the ubuntu CDs contain more than JUST free software apps - so ONLY is not the correct word.....

Really? Are there any proprietary applications in a default Ubuntu install? I'm sure the proprietary bits are just drivers and firmware.

trackerbishop198x

May 8th, 2007, 10:47 PM

1. Live CD install has some minor bugs -
a) when youre doing a manual partition, the dropdown menu to select / or /home, etc doesnt work and you have to enter these in manually

b) if you want to edit partition sizes, if you want to change say 60005mb partition size to 50005, you cannot simply delete the 6 and change it to a 5, you must backspace over the entire 5 digits and re-enter the whole thing.

2. Beryl advertised/shown off, along with wobble effects, but it doesnt work with ATI X1xxx video cards unless you go through 500 steps. My ubuntu is actually broken now, I installed the ATI driver that came with it and turned on wobble effects and now i get a black screen when i boot after the splash ubuntu screen, and i only know a few terminal commands so i dont know how to fix this via recovery.

3. Installing flash player for youtube is a pain, cant be installed directly if you have an amd64 for some weird reason (why would linux punish amd 64bit users?) and i had to follow an install from the forum.

4. now that my ubuntu is broken, id have to reinstall and do my flash player installation aaaallll over again and then if something else breaks it down the line, i have to redo everything again!!!!

so you see, windows is superior to linux because, in the 10 years since i used redhat 7 (where i had to build my own kernel for internet and sound), nothing has really changed. people focused more on making a pretty 3d cube instead of adding mass functionality to the system. In 10 years, windows has at least made their installation process and their plug-n-play/driver support process so much easier and streamlined that the learning curve isn't high at all. Whereas linux is still punishing certain people for having unsupported hardware. If I want beryl cube i have to do xgl + something + something else i forget and its far more cpu intensive than other people get to have with different video cards.

so here is my question, why is it in 2007, people are bugging dell to use ubuntu and people go on youtube telling people to switch, when ubuntu isnt as stable, user friendly, and everything is constantly in beta mode? everyone brags how stable linux is, but mine broke after a few hours and there isnt a clear way to fix it without redoing everything. the last time windows had that problem was like windows 3.1

again im not trying to troll or be a jerk but im pointing out obvious things that no one wants to address. also, where is the ubuntu help guide included in the install. is everyone sentenced to sift through forums to find their solution or would it be so hard for someone to compile all the solutions into a fact and include it as a help file?

thanks.

aoanla

May 8th, 2007, 11:01 PM

1. I admit, I've not installed Windows for a while, but I don't remember there being any detailed options in the XP installer re: partitioning? Surely the nearest equivalent is using the guided install... which is basically idiot proof?

2. Yes, but this is a problem with ATI not writing drivers which support their own hardware, not with Linux. Unless you want to pick on Windows Vista for not working well with nVidia cards, I don't see how this is a relevant complaint against Linux. (It might have been when XP was what Microsoft was pushing, of course.) Feel free to complain about ATI, though, since it's their fault. There's little Linux developers can do if a hardware manufacturer refuses to work with them.
(That said, it is claimed that the ATI driver situation will improve once the R600 cards come out... don't hold your breath, though.)

3. IIRC, Flash doesn't work (at all?) well on 64-bit Windows either (certainly not on Windows XP 64-bit!), so again, this seems like an odd complaint versus Windows. Once again, this is a problem with Macromedia who make Flash, not with Linux per se. (I assume you'd not complain about Windows not having a functional version of some linux-targeted software?) Indeed, 64-bit Linux has a fair bit more driver support than Vista has, apparently (and certainly more than XP 64bit)!

4. Not a complaint about Linux, a complaint about how you'll have to reinstall things. This tends to also be an issue with broken Windows installs, at least with XP.

trackerbishop198x

May 8th, 2007, 11:09 PM

well i do see your points but one thing windows has now is that everything in xp is streamlined. installing partitions on feisty and installation was EASY and a joke, so they have that down pretty good ill give them that. also improved plug n play stuff. but before this can really takeover people shouldnt have to be building their own kernels or going through rigorous terminal installations. i dont mind doing a few lines in terminal here and there but the average joe doesnt want to deal with that. sure its good stuff to know and learn but most of us dont really have the time or the patience. it just seems like building a 3d beryl effect/wobble effect is jumping the gun a little, as its going to make everyone linux slaphappy and think linux has come full circle finally when in reality it still has major support/driver/stability issues.

i am now getting the blackscreen of death because i use ati, and sure it may be ati's fault but all i know is that my ati card works in windows and it doesnt in linux, and im not getting any blue screens in xp. so what is a guy to do ya know?

aoanla

May 8th, 2007, 11:29 PM

Not buy ATI cards? It sounds flippant, but unless manufacturers realise that non-Windows platforms matter, nothing will change on that front, barring buy outs from other companies. (AMD is generally quite pro-Linux, and the ATI drivers have improved since AMD bought them...)

I'm not sure when you had to build your own kernel? I'm using an ATI card here, and didn't have to do anything so drastic (indeed, everything but the ATI card worked out of the box for me in Feisty, even wifi). I also think that adding Desktop Effects was perhaps a little too early - mainly due to the lack of good driver support from ATI - but then, they work pretty much perfectly with nVidia cards without any need for terminals or anything.

Remember, to get "Desktop Effects" in Windows, you'd have to be using Vista - which doesn't support this kind of thing with anywhere near the range of hardware that Feisty will do it with, even taking into account issues with the x1000 series cards. And, again, Vista has its own fair share of driver support and stability issues compared to XP.
Ignoring Desktop Effects, Feisty should be almost as stable as XP with ATI cards, and just as stable with nVidia or Intel graphics.

I know it's irritating that support is lacking in some areas. Really, as a fellow ATI card owner, it irritates the hell out of me. (Similarly, support for linux in games, or the lack of it, annoys me.) Neither of these problems is something the people at Canonical can affect, however, so we just need to get onto ATI (and other non-compliant manufacturers) about it instead.

jiminycricket

May 8th, 2007, 11:38 PM

Been a quiet thread recently.

eweek (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2126936,00.asp?kc=EWLINEMNL050807EOAD) had a nice review of Feisty, called "The State of Ubuntu is Strong". Some advice too, although I wonder about the wisdom of relying on MS tools that they can break at anytime in a Windows Update, and blame Ubuntu for. THe author seemed quite knowledgeable of Feisty specs like BulletproofX; that's a nice side-effect of and open development platforms: journalists can feel involved and spread publicity, of all people.

With companies and individuals everywhere failing to find the wow in Windows Vista, Apple's OS X riding iPod sales and snarky commercials to steady growth, and long-time Microsoft partner Dell announcing plans to market a Linux desktop to the mainstream, it seems certain that the days of Microsoft's desktop monopoly are numbered.

..
We think that Ubuntu's migration tool would be more useful if it were separable from the installation routine, and if we could run it directly on Windows machines. What's more, it might be worthwhile for the Ubuntu team to investigate whether it could co-opt Microsoft's own settings migration tool to ferry user data onto new Ubuntu installations.

Microsoft can't be happy. Dell just gave a lot of press to Ubuntu and yet you can't even find Ubuntu anywhere on dell.com. That marketing strategy doesn't seem to be working as well MS would have hoped. I wonder if Dell really did pull the wool over MS's eyes by going with Canonical on the desktop? Probably not, but the SuSE announcement seems to have fizzled.

Does anyone think if there'll ever be an MSNBC Ubuntu review?

Coucouf

May 8th, 2007, 11:47 PM

The point I would gladly give to your post is that windows definitely has superior harware support !
But that'll change in time. :)

The reason why people are buzzing around linux you ask ?
For me it was that GNU/Linux is free !!! Free as in freedom, not as in free beer ((c) GNU philosophy ;)).
I just decided to get out of the M$ DRM reach.

I would hardly say the switch was easy, but now :
- I'm free. Yes, my "Windows, get out of my hard drive" invocation worked ! :D
- I won't have to buy any single M$ license from now on
- I know a lot more about how my system works

I'm just sad your experience with Ubuntu was bad, but would you post your problems here, people would be happy to answer !
I don't remember having ever had support from M$ for specific problems ("call your device manufacturer", "call your ISP", "call your mother"... OK maybe not that last one :)).

You complain about the developers only being able to add the desktop cube effects in 10 years but... reading your post sounds like that was one of the main reasons you installed Ubuntu !
Remember that desktop effects are EXPERIMENTAL in feisty in case you missed the warning !

Lastly, recovering a GNU/Linux installation is often "as easy" as reinstalling/reconfiguring the packages you messed with. I already did that once after messing up with some funky libdevmapper package for fake raid support or whatever... and since then my system works perfectly again !
I've tried the restoration on quite a few broken Windows systems in my looong Windows user life and it happened to end with a reinstallation each time. (Well to be honest I must mention that fixing the MBR to restore the boot worked when I tried.)

Daveski

May 9th, 2007, 12:11 AM

Been a quiet thread recently.

Probably with Dell's announcement it is fairly obvious that Linux IS ready for the Desktop.

Microsoft can't be happy. Dell just gave a lot of press to Ubuntu and yet you can't even find Ubuntu anywhere on dell.com. That marketing strategy doesn't seem to be working as well

They are making some noises:
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs

allwin

May 9th, 2007, 02:58 AM

I have yet to see any Linux distro so far which properly detects my wide screen monitor resolution from the get go.

I have yet to see one which activates my BCM wifi card on my cheapo Dell laptop from the get go. Yes, I can get it to work after a while but the whole point is to be able to roam around in an airport and not geek out at the command line for a half hour getting it to light up.

I have yet to see a SIMPLE video editor which can take in stuff from MPEG4 cameras (cheapos that record to SD cards) and allow you to slice and dice for YouTube purposes.

I'd like my cheapo WEBCAM to work (goes hand in hand with the video editor not being there).

And I'd like to SEE text on my LCD monitor that's as readable as ClearText, especially tiny fonts.

This is where they should be spending their development efforts, not on the next greatest Text Editor or libfoobar interface which nobody adopts or understands.

And I'm not trolling here, either. It's getting really close if you can come up with just 5 annoyances. Unfortunately, it's tough to take a working notebook with another operating system, whose tiny text is nice and readable, and for which the hardware works, and slap on something else that isn't quite there yet.

Wonder to myself what I'd do if I didn't always have another operating system for backup when Feisty (or something I did to it) goes south.

trackerbishop198x

May 9th, 2007, 03:28 AM

Remember, to get "Desktop Effects" in Windows, you'd have to be using Vista - which doesn't support this kind of thing with anywhere near the range of hardware that Feisty will do it with, even taking into account issues with the x1000 series cards. And, again, Vista has its own fair share of driver support and stability issues compared to XP.
Ignoring Desktop Effects, Feisty should be almost as stable as XP with ATI cards, and just as stable with nVidia or Intel graphics.
.

actually with windows blinds, vista transformation pack, object dock, and google toolbar, ive turned my XP into something far superior to Vista. i still want to use ubuntu tho:)

trackerbishop198x

May 9th, 2007, 03:33 AM

well the reason i post my complaints here is that i dont have someone in particular (ie microsoft) i can email and say: fix this, focus on this, do this, etc... but no one wants people to complain about ubuntu on the forum, yet there is no other forum for ubuntu complaints and there isnt a "Gripes & Grievances" section for people to vent and complain to eachother with? i just got really excited about ubuntu because i thought linux had come full circle and it would blow away windows but it turns out its only feasible as a 2nd boot option/side toy and im going to be stuck with win XP for another 10 years.

i also dont like getting ban threats. no one has to read my posts, im not violating tos, and im not using profanity (anymore:))

tgalati4

May 9th, 2007, 03:38 AM

Ubuntu installs are quite impressive considering you don't have to pull out 7 floppies to load various drivers.

For the hardware that requires extra tweaking, others have done it and explained it well in these forums. For all the complaints about setup, once it's running, there's little else to go wrong. The extra effort needed to get everything working properly is worth it. But you have to experience it yourself before you understand.

aysiu

May 9th, 2007, 03:40 AM

why ubuntu/linux fails in 2007 whereas windows wins (not a troll msg) Looks like a troll to me. No one told you to use the 64-bit version if you wanted Flash. No one told you ATI was a good brand to go with for Beryl. And most people don't have those problems with (or requirements of) the live CD.

This is a classic case of "I had very specific expectations Ubuntu didn't meet, so I'm going to generalize and assume Ubuntu meets no one's expectations." We see it all the time on the forums. You're not violating any rules, but I don't see the point of this thread other than to stir people up.

I've merged your thread with this one. Read this sticky for more details:
***** Announcement Please Read First Criticism FAQ ***** (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=408434)

prizrak

May 9th, 2007, 04:42 AM

trackerbishop, allwin:
If you look at each other's complaints you will realize that the problem are in install and hardware detection. The very problems Dell's Ubuntu offering is trying to rectify. If you were to get a Dell with Ubuntu preinstalled, do you think that it would have an ATI card in it? Do you think that the resolution wouldn't be properly set up? Do you think your wi-fi will not be operational? If you do think that then Dell must be full of complete and utter morons. If you got a Dell system with a barebones Windows install (no drivers, codecs, anything beyond what Windows has) do you really think it wouldn't require tweaking? Do you think Dell could possibly [widely] sell a DIY laptop/desktop? I seriously doubt it.

I see alot of complaints about fonts, to date I have not seen Windows do noticeably better with fonts than Ubuntu. And I have 20/20 vision so it's not like I can't really tell the difference. I'm sure that if it's really a problem then Dell and Canonical/Gnome/KDE/X.org will work together to come up with a better way of font smoothing, with compositing it should yield some very good result.

P.S. Compiz is beta software, it is included but not enabled for a good reason. It pops up with a warning about it for crying out loud. You can screw up your Windows install with Windows Blinds or Litestep(trust me I done that many times) as well but you don't complain to MS about it.

m.musashi

May 9th, 2007, 05:43 AM

P.S. Compiz is beta software, it is included but not enabled for a good reason. It pops up with a warning about it for crying out loud. You can screw up your Windows install with Windows Blinds or Litestep(trust me I done that many times) as well but you don't complain to MS about it.

Well, that's because you can't complain to MS. If you have a problem, they will charge you before they let you explain it - even if it's a bug in their software (of course they might refund your money if they admit it's a bug).

prizrak

May 9th, 2007, 02:28 PM

Well, that's because you can't complain to MS. If you have a problem, they will charge you before they let you explain it - even if it's a bug in their software (of course they might refund your money if they admit it's a bug).

They got forums that you can complain on.

dan171717

May 9th, 2007, 06:39 PM

imo it means that a new peice of software that was in devolpment is now stable

udha

May 10th, 2007, 10:05 AM

3. Installing flash player for youtube is a pain, cant be installed directly if you have an amd64 for some weird reason (why would linux punish amd 64bit users?) and i had to follow an install from the forum.

You have alot of valid reasons that I won't get into, but step 3 is flat out FUD. Yes, you can't run the adobe/macromedia on a native 64 bit GNU/Linux environment, that is because you can't run the adobe/macromedia flash player on ANY 64 bit environment, not for Mac, not for Windows, not for anything. Now that I have educated some people on that, now realise that you can, thanks to Linux, get the closed-proprietary flash plugin to work using a wrapper, and still keep your OS, apps, and browser all running happily in 64 bit land.

Sorry, but the (why would linux punish amd 64bit users?) just pushed me over the edge, since it's because flash isn't open source that it's a problem to begin with.

rai4shu2

May 10th, 2007, 10:12 AM

Just thought I'd stir the pot with this nugget:

"The most interesting new applications today aren't traditional desktop apps at all," Stevens said. "They really are online services."

http://www.theregister.com/2007/05/09/redhat_desktop_service/

Enverex

May 10th, 2007, 12:10 PM

Now that I have educated some people on that, now realise that you can, thanks to Linux, get the closed-proprietary flash plugin to work using a wrapper, and still keep your OS, apps, and browser all running happily in 64 bit land.

This isn't necessarily too. Using nspluginwrapper on Gentoo was easy enough but it just wont work for me when I try and use it in Feisty. When you try and register the plugin it just keeps asking for more and more misssing .so files and after 20 minutes of manually symlinking the .6 or .2 files to the .so or whatever, you eventually run into libraries that you don't have installed and aren't in apt either meaning you can't use it.

macogw

May 10th, 2007, 12:13 PM

udha

May 10th, 2007, 01:37 PM

This isn't necessarily too. Using nspluginwrapper on Gentoo was easy enough but it just wont work for me when I try and use it in Feisty. When you try and register the plugin it just keeps asking for more and more misssing .so files and after 20 minutes of manually symlinking the .6 or .2 files to the .so or whatever, you eventually run into libraries that you don't have installed and aren't in apt either meaning you can't use it.
I'm sorry to hear that, I'm using it right now in fiesty, the only problem with it is sometimes clicks stop registering until I right-click in the flash app and then left click works again, hasn't bothered me though since I only wanted flashplayer 9 for youtube playback. And yes, I'm using the nsplugginwrapper you are talking about, but no, it wasn't a straight-forward install, I figured it out somehow but I'm sorry to say the specifics escape me now.

prizrak

May 10th, 2007, 02:02 PM

Just thought I'd stir the pot with this nugget:

http://www.theregister.com/2007/05/09/redhat_desktop_service/

Very true actually.

This isn't necessarily too. Using nspluginwrapper on Gentoo was easy enough but it just wont work for me when I try and use it in Feisty. When you try and register the plugin it just keeps asking for more and more misssing .so files and after 20 minutes of manually symlinking the .6 or .2 files to the .so or whatever, you eventually run into libraries that you don't have installed and aren't in apt either meaning you can't use it.

Last I heard the open source SWF player worked with YouTube. Chances are it will work just fine in 64bit since it would be a simple recompile.

Also the point is that you can't say that Ubuntu/Linux is punishing x86-64 (it's not called AMD64) users because flash doesn't work. It's more like Adobe is punishing all the x86-64 users by not providing 64bit enabled software. Actually Paul Thurrote himself said that Vista 64 is not ready for anything, only a few drivers exist for it and very limited amount of software. In fact in his Vista review he advised that people go for the normal 32bit edition. In that respect Linux is actually quite a bit better since all the FOSS stuff can be recompiled by the distro maintainers to make it 64bit.

aysiu

May 11th, 2007, 03:24 AM

If you're trying to keep track of this whole Linux desktop readiness discussion, don't forget to include in your reading list this thread I've closed:
Blogger slams Ubuntu vs. Windows (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=436526)

The discussion in that thread should pick up again here.

blackspyder

May 11th, 2007, 04:07 AM

One of the main things Ubuntu (actually Linux in general) has an issue with is Drivers. The problem is that the hardware manufacturers have to be involved in this issue.

aysiu

May 11th, 2007, 04:15 AM

One of the main things Ubuntu (actually Linux in general) has an issue with is Drivers. The problem is that the hardware manufacturers have to be involved in this issue.
We might be moving in that direction...

AMD mulls opening Linux graphics driver source (http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12440):
Red Hat developer Christopher Blizzard has written a rather interesting update on his blog about AMD's Linux graphics driver support plans. According to Blizzard, AMD executive VP and Chief Sales and Marketing Officer Henri Richard attended the Red Hat Summit and "committed to fixing the ATI problems with open source." Blizzard paraphrases Richard's statements as, "most people are worried about what they will lose...[intellectual property], etc...we're worried about what we can win."

If this is indeed true, it would be a definite change of direction for AMD. In October last year, shortly before the AMD-ATI merger was finalized, we emailed ATI's Software and Video Marketing Manager Terry Makedon about this very subject. He told us, "Proprietary, patented optimizations are part of the value we provide to our customers and we have no plans to release these drivers to open source. In addition, multimedia elements such as content protection must not, by their very nature, be allowed to go open source." Makedon then added that, as of mid-October 2006, nothing had changed as a result of the AMD deal. Or maybe not?

prizrak

May 11th, 2007, 04:20 AM

We might be moving in that direction...

AMD mulls opening Linux graphics driver source (http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12440): Or maybe not?

I hope that if AMD goes this way nVidia will follow. Their drivers are one of the best available, especially the control utility (man I wish normal X came with something like that) and maybe the black window problem and suspend will get taken care off.
*wishes really really hard*

m.musashi

May 11th, 2007, 04:27 AM

The licenses in almost all software has a line saying no warranty as is blahblahblah so you can't complain in general

Which is odd because if I buy just about anything else and it breaks I can return it or exchange it (within the warranty period). To say that software is exempt is basically admitting it's less than perfect and we know it so if you use it it's your funeral - oh, and if you try and use it without paying you are a criminal. This seems backwards to me. At least with FOSS I know I can submit a bug or fix it myself (if I know how).

stuoolong

May 11th, 2007, 10:44 AM

Well I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been said before. :lolflag:

I have very recently upgraded to Feisty from Breezy, by installing over the top. I have to say it's very very user friendly and most definitely it is "Desktop ready". The internet works, the office software works, the media players work. Just like that. I plug in my camera and it asks where I want to store the pics. I click on a music file and it knows which is the best program to open it with.
Also the installation process itself was easier, and more user friendly, than it was for Breezy.

I'm one of those people who doesn't mind a little bit of tinkering with settings etc to make things work better, but basically I really struggle when things don't work out of the box, as was the case when I first got Breezy.

454redhawk

May 11th, 2007, 11:56 AM

The discussion has gone way off the original blog post, so please continue your discussion in the biggest thread the planet has even witnessed

How nice of you to DUMP yet another thread into a SEVEN HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN PAGE conversation with SEVEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN replies.

Way to go genius. While you are at it why not change the thread title again.

Pocadotty

May 11th, 2007, 12:24 PM

I find that once Ubuntu is properly configured it is a dream operating system that is very usable.

I find Ubuntu MORE intuitive then windows XP, and it certainly is a great deal more powerful. The only reason why so many people find windows easy is they haven't been exposed to much else. Ubuntu is easy to pick up on and consistently works the way you want it to. Compared with XP which works the way nobody wants it to.

I am converting some new-to-linux friends to Ubuntu and I will set up their system with things like multimedia format support, Thunderbird, Byrel (depending on their system), and give them a tutorial of how to add install apps while adding some things they might want, as well as show them how to get support from the community.

Maybe it would be useful to have some Video tutorials on how to use Ubuntu so newbies don't find themselves completely lost. Those videos (which have to be able to play with standard packages) could be linked from a getting started document or the first thing they see when they start firefox.

argie

May 11th, 2007, 01:01 PM

How nice of you to DUMP yet another thread into a SEVEN HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN PAGE conversation with SEVEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN replies.

Way to go genius. While you are at it why not change the thread title again.

You might be interested as to how that works.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=396172

CJ56

May 11th, 2007, 05:18 PM

Apologies if this has already been done to death, but as a recent proselyte I just wondered - Who will be using Ubuntu in five years' time? I only ask, because, as a long-term M$ victim, I at last switched to Ubuntu earlier this year & now wonder if anyone actually knows where the project is heading?

I should point out that I use my PC every day to earn a living (I'm a writer) but in an absolutely plain-vanilla, bog-standard way: word processing, internet, emails, a bit of music, the odd DVD plus the family photo album. I have an unfortunate tendency to build my own machines but make almost no demands on whatever OS I install. In fact, the less I have to do with software of any kind, the happier I am. I've installed and re-installed Win Xp and it's always worked straight out of the box - and I'd probably be using Vista right now except for the fact that I finally lost patience with M$'s cynical exploitation of their business monopoly (why is it that you can buy PCs from any number of manufacturers, but an OS from, effectively, one?), plus the fact that Vista is overpriced, comes in a multitude of confusing and unhelpful formats and doesn't work terribly well.

So. Having just built myself a nice new SFF box with AMD64 dual brains, I'm now using Ubuntu 6.10 64-bit with a touch of Beryl and it's excellent. OpenSuse 10.2 was okay the first time I tried it, mysteriously hopeless the second. Mandriva broke almost immediately. Knoppix was simply bonkers. Ubuntu was, for this lightweight user, miles ahead. It worked well on the live disc (an absolute must in marketing terms), it installed straightforwardly once past the partitioning stage, I could get all the extras I needed, it looks like a proper grown-up Operating System and it runs smoothly (yes, tempting fate, I know).

But where does it go to next? There is still no way I could recommend even as friendly a distro as Ubuntu to a nervous agnostic. Straight off the bat, the disc partitioning in Ubuntu is pathetic (OpenSuse is a beast in comparison) and Ubuntu 7.04, which has a number of good ideas, is (as far as I can tell) prone to instability and has a problem with USB ports, both of which faults are inexcusable in this day and age. Adding applications, codecs and so on is much easier on Ubuntu than on other distros, but is still a mess; I've been reduced to Automatix more than once and I absolutely loathe writing command lines into a terminal. In fact, there were times when I only put up with it all out of sheer rage at M$. Now, when Michael Dell pre-installs Ubuntu on his PCs, much of this will be taken care of, so far as the end user is concerned. But when Grandma the silver surfer, three weeks after laptop purchase, comes face to face with her first download containing two pages of close-typed instructions, or her first tarball, what then? She can ask her battle-worn son how to manage it, or phone Dell, but this is taking us back to the horror that was Win95 and before. We simply should not have to do this kind of stuff in 2007. If Ubuntu is going to make real inroads, it must be absolutely no harder to use than WinXp, with the same press-the-button GUI procedures; and it must be absolutely dependable in such boring matters as USB mounting (it works in 6.10 - what happened in the interim?), printer recognition, stability and what have you. The comfort zone and the ease of use, are, from the marketing point of view, everything - much more, I would guess, than gee-whizz novelty features. Even cost wouldn't be an issue, if the product was sound: I'd pay £85, same as OSX, for a really rock-solid, well-specced Ubuntu DVD that I could install (and re-install, when I decided to change things) on my Frankenstein PC. And if that forced M$ into producing something similar and sensible and at a similarly sensible price, and with the same licensing agreements, I'd look at it: I'm not that much of an idealist.

But this - if it were ever likely to happen - would take big money, for R&D and for marketing. No-one in the Linux business has this kind of cash, yet. Presumably, Mark Shuttleworth is positioning himself as a younger, hipper Bill Gates, to lead the consolidation which will have to happen in the Linux desktop world if this is to become a reality. There is a chaos of competing rival distros, out there. We really only need two very large ones, tops. I understand that this is an offence to the core GNU/Linux ideology, but if Ubuntu/Linux is going to make it into the mainstream, make converts and hang onto the people who are just starting to switch now, it has got to get richer, bigger, more market-minded, more blindingly obvious, more like M$, in fact. A $10 million Canonical institute plus loads of free software developers - some good, some terrible - won't be enough. And the product has to be completely thought through from a dimwit consumer angle first. What are the chances? Or is it incontrovertibly in the nature of Linux-for-the-desktop that it will only ever be a hobbyist's passion, and that today's sexy, headline-making Ubuntu will, sooner or later, fizzle out and die?