Linux Desktop Readiness Thread [Archive]

ubuntu_demon

December 3rd, 2004, 01:50 PM

My opinion :

yes hoary will be ready but requires installation,configuration and intro by nerd

I will install mplayer,xmss,firestarter and thunderbird for them. And do a daily :

apt-get update
apt-get upgrade -t hoary-security -y
apt-get upgrade --trivial-only
apt-get auto-clean

I will give a short introduction and explain how to install software.

I would like to create an custom-hoary-cd when it reaches stable for this purpose.

what features ubuntu misses (if any). :

-warty misses firefox 1.0, thunderbird 1.0 (I hope it will make it into hoary)
-warty misses some "polish" like X.org with neat theme
-warty misses nice graphical configuration tools and wizards (like boot configuration tool)

-hoary most likely will miss : beagle, dashboard, a killer-app

-ubuntu misses real MS office compatibilty (microsofts fault)

the feasibility of converting the average-desktop-users to ubuntu (when I've created my custom hoary-cd):

-if people come to me with computer( read windows) problems I will recommend ubunt
-I will recommend ubuntu to my friends

Let's try to convert them before longhorn :mrgreen:

ubuntu_demon

December 3rd, 2004, 02:52 PM

Maybe Ubuntu should look for features that mac OS X offers and Ubuntu does not and focus some time to tightly integrate them into ubuntu.

I don't use OS X so I don't know if there are much of such features. Please post them.

ubuntu_demon

December 3rd, 2004, 05:18 PM

At least on of the following features should be in ubuntu repo in the future :

audio converstation+webcam support for gaim
audio converstation+webcam support for amsn
gnome meeting support for msn

Come on IM developers your software would rock even more if it would have these features.

BWF89

December 3rd, 2004, 05:56 PM

Other: Until Linux gets to the point where when you buy a printer (or other piece of hardware) and along with having Win and Mac drivers it will also have a Linux driver no version of Linux will be ready completely ready for an end-user. I predict this will start happening when I think Linux will start hitting the mainstream in 8-10 years...

jdodson

December 3rd, 2004, 06:07 PM

zenwhen

December 3rd, 2004, 06:46 PM

ubuntu_demon

December 3rd, 2004, 07:22 PM

"yes warty will be ready but requires installation,configuration and intro by nerd"

If it is configured for them, I think the average person can maintain and use an Ubuntu system. This assumes you teach them how to and the value of using synaptic to update their system.

agreed. But I think a lot of average-desktop-users want nice graphical configuration tools and wizards among other things. Also we need a killer-app. Maybe beagle and dashboard in hoary ?

If they go out and buy printer, they should learn to look in printer configuration to make sure they have drivers for it. Manufacturers aren't going to magically suddenly start providing cups drivers on their install CD's any time soon.

This does not mean Linux, or specifically Ubuntu isn't ready for the desktop. It means the lowest common denominator who is unable to check hardware compatibility might have problems. Even then there is paid support for this OS.

There should be stickers with "linux certified : compatible with kernel 2.x and linux distribution y" on hardware boxes. Maybe a linux certified website where everyone can easily see if the hardware he wants to buy is compatible with kernel 2.x and linux distribution y. Or something like this.

This generation of computer users is a bit smarter than their parents. I have faith that the security issues with Windows XP, and the ones that will be created with the new features in Longhorn will cause quite a few users to come our way.

The ones that adapt will stay. If they cannot they will rot in Windows world. I cannot stress enough though, that gaining Windows users is not worth becoming Windows like to the point that users who like a real Linux desktop will look to other desktop environments and distros.

The average Windows using, webshots using, download.com free Christmas wallpaper/screensaver user isn't even going to file bug reports. While we want them to use the OS, catering to them to the point where Linux users are pushed to more configurable/powerful distros and desktop environments would be folly.

agreed. Just take the best features from the popular operating systems that are around.

I don't think Longhorn is going to be more insecure than windows XP but I do think users will have less privacy and have to trust a big commercial corporation that has a monopoly position.

TravisNewman

December 3rd, 2004, 07:35 PM

about the linux certified hardware website:
http://hardware.linuxfaqs.de/

There are many more like this site.

BWF89

December 3rd, 2004, 09:23 PM

about the linux certified hardware website:
http://hardware.linuxfaqs.de/

There are many more like this site.
THANKS A BUNCH! This will really save alot of headaches when I get my new computer :mrgreen: ...

poofyhairguy

December 3rd, 2004, 10:58 PM

-hoary most likely will miss : beagle, dashboard, a killer-app

I'm trying not to be noob, but neither wikipedia or google told me what beagle or dashboard is. Care to explain? (please)

ralph_ubuntu

December 3rd, 2004, 11:13 PM

I'm trying not to be noob, but neither wikipedia or google told me what beagle or dashboard is. Care to explain? (please)
http://www.beaglewiki.org/index.php/Beagle
http://www.beaglewiki.org/index.php/What%20is%20Dashboard

poofyhairguy

December 3rd, 2004, 11:25 PM

http://www.beaglewiki.org/index.php/Beagle
http://www.beaglewiki.org/index.php/What%20is%20Dashboard

Thx.

Wow, that looks cool! If Ubuntu is going to throw all its weight behind Gnome, it needs this kind of stuff.

Lovechild

December 3rd, 2004, 11:56 PM

Warty hardly is ready, I think Hoary will be a good indicator of how much work is ahead of us.

The main problem is still that we can't legally ship a lot of functionality that end users expect, like the ability to play DVDs, mp3s, wma/wmvs and so on. That problem sadly has no easy solution.

Another thing is translations, they are far from perfect in Warty, hopefully Ubuntu will work hard to reach out to the translation teams to get their own stuff translated properly, and please reconsider the idea of only shipping 10-15 languages, I would feel violated as a translator if I worked my ass off and I didn't get my work shipped by Ubuntu, looking at how the translation efforts are doing right now:

2 languages at 95% or better (Danish being one of them thank you very much, MWH has worked his butt off getting us there)
11 at 85% or better
25 at 80% or better

And this is for the development branch of GNOME (2.10), this early in the game that's impressive, since the string freeze isn't even in place yet. I'm willing to bet that we can get 25 at 90% or better with proper support (for the GNOME 2.8 branch that's now 33 languages). So it's a matter of someone (Ubuntu maybe) sponsoring the right interstructure for translators, and you will see impressive results.

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 01:04 AM

about the linux certified hardware website:
http://hardware.linuxfaqs.de/

There are many more like this site.

cool
I didn't know such a thing existed. But it would be more handy if there was just 1 or 2 sites that have a comprehensive overview. It sucks if you have to browse a lot of sites and still have to use google. But it's better than nothing :)

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 01:11 AM

Lovechild

December 4th, 2004, 01:17 AM

I would be really grateful if Ubuntu would throw some cash and labor at GNOME storage and SystemServices - but that's probably not happening any time soon.

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 01:25 AM

I would be really grateful if Ubuntu would throw some cash and labor at GNOME storage and SystemServices - but that's probably not happening any time soon.
can you be a bit more specific ?

BWF89

December 4th, 2004, 01:48 AM

The main problem is still that we can't legally ship a lot of functionality that end users expect, like the ability to play DVDs, mp3s, wma/wmvs and so on. That problem sadly has no easy solution.
Theres no law that says you can't have a DVD player. No one owns the right to DVD movies and
Cool CD Linux (http://emergencycd2.sourceforge.net/) allready has a fullyworking one...

TravisNewman

December 4th, 2004, 03:49 AM

Here's what I think users will want, and have been thinking so for a while.

A package management system revamp. Preferably, you could download a .deb or whatever, double click on it, and a graphical install manager would come up that would connect to the apt databases to download the dependencies available there, and then, this is the tricky part, when creating these packages, the developer or packager should always have the URLs to debs of dependencies that AREN'T provided through apt. Dependencies are still very much an issue for software not in the apt repositories, and the lack of a graphical installer for standalone .deb files not downloaded through apt will be a slight thorn in the side. One of the strengths (and at the same time, one of the crippling weaknesses) Windows has is that it almost always comes with all the dll files it needs, which leads to a lot of bloat and unnecessary duplicates. But to the user, everything just works.

I don't know how much effort this would take beyond the obvious muck of getting maintainers to update their packages to provide the new information, and I also don't know how far away from Debian this would make Ubuntu, but I've been wanting something like that in a distro for a long time.

mark

December 4th, 2004, 04:56 AM

I voted "Other". I think a lot of people could run with Warty right now, providing the installation & some tweaking were done by a nerd/geek/guru (pick 1). Teaching them to update their system with Synaptic should take maybe 5-10 minutes.

Re: printer drivers - I worked for a major printer manufacturer for 15 years and with "just" DOS, Windows and Mac we were losing the driver wars every day. An OS tweak (that really shouldn't affect printing) or a new version of a "favorite" app that handled printing just a little differently and we were back to the drawing board. Writing a good printer driver is science, art and a lot of black magic & luck and anybody that can do that has a lot of respect from me.

That's a fairly long-winded way of saying that I don't think we're going to see Linux drivers on a CD out of the new printer box any time soon. The Linux software environment is just too fluid, too subject to rapid change and revision. I mean, these guys would like a shot at not having their code go obsolete by the time the CDs are burned. And newer peripherals (digital cameras, multifunction output devices, etc.)? Please - I get a twitchy stomach just thinking about 'em.

Also, until some kind of resolution is reached regarding multimedia - video, audio, DVD playback, etc. - Ubuntu (and Linux in general) is going to continue to be a tough sell. My sister-in-law is a nice lady, intelligent, not afraid of computers or trying something different - but she wants to be able to watch her movies, see the streaming video from her favorite web sites - and doesn't want to hear about legal issues or Microsoft lock-out. In my experience, that's a pretty common attitude.

Finally, we have to remember that most "ordinary" people don't want to spend hours tinkering to get something to work. Not everybody has the required mindset (or the luxury of the time) to go to the lengths that even a casual Linux user (like me) pursue to get it "just right". They want stuff to work, and work now - and if you don't offer them that, they'll move on to something else that says it does.

Daniel G. Taylor

December 4th, 2004, 05:41 AM

I'd say Hoary has a good chance of being ready for normal use. Warty is cool, but there are a few things already in Hoary that make it so much nicer from a normal user's viewpoint.

That said, I thought I'd make a comment about the printer issue. Want to make sure you can buy a printer that you plug in and just works for Ubuntu? Buy an HP printer. HP has free software drivers (http://hpinkjet.sourceforge.net/) for all of their printers, and I can tell you from personal experience that they work great. Show other companies that we will financially support companies that release their drivers as free software.

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 11:54 AM

I will install mplayer,xmss,firestarter and thunderbird for them. And do a daily :

apt-get update
apt-get upgrade -t hoary-security -y
apt-get upgrade --trivial-only
apt-get auto-clean

I will give a short introduction and explain how to install software.

I would like to create an custom-hoary-cd when it reaches stable for this purpose.

see :

easy GUI based custom ubuntu cd creation tool
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=5981

and

building ubuntu-based distro?
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2669

HungSquirrel

December 4th, 2004, 12:25 PM

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 01:08 PM

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 01:11 PM

see :

easy GUI based custom ubuntu cd creation tool
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=5981

Maybe this would make installation/configuration by a nerd for someone else a bit faster.

TravisNewman

December 4th, 2004, 03:47 PM

Technically if you can make a custom cd, you could probably add anaconda to it, though I don't know why you'd want to. Too many anaconda crashes for this geek to be satisfied with it. But yes, depending on how custom the custom cd creation tool is, yeah definitely.

However, I'd kinda like to see any work on the installer being passed on to the Ubuntu dev team so that they can include it. They've said in the past that they're going to make a graphical installer eventually, whether it be in hoary or grumpy.

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 05:47 PM

I do not want to work on the installer. That's too big of a project for me. Besides I like the current installer (except from the partioning part).

I am just proposing an easy GUI based custom ubuntu cd creation tool. If we could together agree to nice proposal for it someone might implement it. Maybe I will do it myself (my first linux application :-D)

The custom ubuntu cd creation tool I propose is focused to be easy for nerds. Not to be something everyone could do.

But maybe we could use it to make an Ubuntu environment that's more equiped for average-desktop-users.

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 06:15 PM

I made the following proposal in

Click And Run in Ubuntu???
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=28718&posted=1#post28718

An ubuntu website that reviews software something like this :

http://cws.internet.com/

So users could go to this website and learn about software, read reviews, watch screenshots and download the software.

We need :

deb://softwarepackagename

A user clicks on a deb:// link. Gets a dialog : "do you want to install softwarepackagename ?"

If the user clicks "yes" :

apt-get update -q
apt-get install softwarepackagename -q

ubuntu_demon

December 4th, 2004, 07:03 PM

I would like to know why people chose the option grumpy or grumpy + nerd. Just curious.

BWF89

December 4th, 2004, 11:45 PM

Something to think about: I know very few non-geek Windows users who I would trust to do a Windows install unsupervised. Most Windows users get Windows installed by their computer manufacturer. At this point I think the Ubuntu install really isn't much more difficult than a Windows XP install.
Aren't you exaggerating? I was installing windows when I was 9. Installing Windows is just a process of "click next to continue". I also have a hard time believeing that most users have never installed Windows. Most peoples computers crash don't they? Especially if your a Windows user :)...

poofyhairguy

December 5th, 2004, 12:18 AM

kahping

December 5th, 2004, 03:25 AM

I would like to know why people chose the option grumpy or grumpy + nerd. Just curious.

Ubuntu is still new. as such, it's bound to have issues that would turn off the average user from switching over from windows.

drivers would be, and would still be IMHO, the main stumbling block to many users switching over to using linux. if all the hardware manufacturers would just allow open sourcing their drivers, THEN u'd see a sudden huge "growth" in Linux.

it's gonna take a while. warty is already way better than expected for a first version and i'm sure hoary is also gonna be a hit. but i think it's gonna take a bit more than that to convince many more people to switch over. :mrgreen:

i'll be placing my bets on grumpy :P

kahping

HungSquirrel

December 5th, 2004, 03:31 AM

Daniel G. Taylor

December 5th, 2004, 06:37 PM

Aren't you exaggerating? I was installing windows when I was 9. Installing Windows is just a process of "click next to continue". I also have a hard time believeing that most users have never installed Windows. Most peoples computers crash don't they? Especially if your a Windows user :)...
Try this:

Install Ubuntu or Fedora on a new computer, without any operating system (Send Windows to /dev/null for all I care). Now install windows, but make sure to keep Ubuntu or Fedora around. Oh, and make sure you can boot into Ubuntu/Fedora (Have fun doing this!).

Now, install Windows on an empty drive. Then install Ubuntu or Fedora, and make sure to keep Windows around, and that you can still boot it.

Was it easier to install Windows or GNU/Linux on an empty drive? Was it easier to install Windows or GNU/Linux on a drive already containing an operating system (without wiping out the other operating system)?

Am I making a point? I don't know. Try it out, see what happens.

ubuntu_demon

December 5th, 2004, 06:54 PM

nstall Ubuntu or Fedora on a new computer, without any operating system (Send Windows to /dev/null for all I care). Now install windows, but make sure to keep Ubuntu or Fedora around. Oh, and make sure you can boot into Ubuntu/Fedora (Have fun doing this!).

Now, install Windows on an empty drive. Then install Ubuntu or Fedora, and make sure to keep Windows around, and that you can still boot it.

I don't think you are making a point. Windows wants to be first on the harddisk otherwise it doesn't work. It's not the fault of the OS that was already installed but just crappy MS ****.

ubuntu_demon

December 5th, 2004, 06:54 PM

This is a nice text about average-desktop-users (noobs)

Regarding High Level Computing
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=9021

Daniel G. Taylor

December 5th, 2004, 07:11 PM

Well, the main point I was trying to make is that it is no harder to install Ubuntu on a blank drive than it is to install Windows. Most people install Windows on a blank drive, which is easy because you don't have to worry about partitioning, and then install a GNU/Linux variant beside it (or at least try to), which is much more difficult and involves a few extra steps. If the situation is reversed, it's easy to say that Windows is much more difficult to install. It all depends on the angle you are viewing the situation from.

ubuntu_demon

December 5th, 2004, 07:14 PM

TravisNewman

December 5th, 2004, 08:45 PM

true

But most people upgrade to linux after having used windows instead of the other way around. So it isn't very relevant that it is hard to do.

However, Windows (for me at least) screwed up far more often than linux, so I had to reinstall Windows and then fix everything that the Windows install messed up.

But really, I think that which OS is better at picking up the other OS is irrelevant in deciding whether Ubuntu is ready for end-users.

ubuntu_demon

December 5th, 2004, 09:58 PM

But really, I think that which OS is better at picking up the other OS is irrelevant in deciding whether Ubuntu is ready for end-users.

yeah you're right

Zundfolge

December 11th, 2004, 12:34 AM

I voted :yes warty will be ready but requires installation,configuration and intro by nerd

but this goes for Linux in general.

The ONLY *nix OS that is "Average desktop user" ready is Mac OS X.

If an "ADU" gets lucky and whatever linux distro they choose happens to install right and they have no use for games or professional graphics software then I think most "ADUs" would have no problem with Warty ... however as soon as something breaks, or they want to use javascript in Firefox, or they want to watch a .wmv movie then they need the help of a nerd.

I'm one of those users who in windows is a serious "power user" for Mac OS X I'm better then the "ADU" but not quite a "nerd" or "power user" ... I found warty (which is only my second experience with Liinux ... and the only one I've completely switched to) to be about as easy as it could be ... that said I have a little nerd in me and can figure out how to use the terminal and such.

Linux in general needs to move toward Mac OS X if they want to capture the "ADU" market.

ubuntu_demon

December 11th, 2004, 01:17 AM

....that said I have a little nerd in me and can figure out how to use the terminal and such

ROFL :D

Sorin Paliga

December 11th, 2004, 07:57 PM

In order to become user-friendly, forthcoming Ubuntu edition needs (in the order of install-config, not of importance):
1. Graphical install. Text mode is very Debian-like, but many potential users may be afraid of it, even if Windows install is similar.
2. Manual settings for hardware-periphereals. On 2 computers, mouse port was not correctly detected, and resolution was aside the good values (fortunately, usable; many Linux distros cannot be used because monitor either displays nothing or dispalys flickering lines) This should be done in the final phase of install, including testing (Suse and MDK style). This is much better than letting users guess what they should do, and do not expect them to read hundreds of Unix/Linux documentation in order to find out how to. Also, even if printer (incidentally hp dj 970 cxi) was listed there, upon attempting to print, did not work. It worked after some manual settings. Summing up: manual settings and possibility to test settings before launching X.
3. A more convenient set of keyboard layouts. In my mind, SuSE 9.x keyboard layout set is best of all Linux distros; and most coherent (note that there is new set for Romanian, finally updated by Misu Moldovan). I would are suggest, if ever possible, a kind of parser/import filter for plainly importing the existing keylayouts in MAC OS X 10.3.x. With few exceptions (e.g. Romanian, which is NOT the standard), all the others are well done, and much above the existing Linux set. Incidentally, perhaps a simpler way to install additional keyboard layouts. For sure, it will not be as simple as in MAC OS X, at least not immediately, but something simpler should be there.
4. A more coherent basic set of apps and utils, which do not require many megs and with simple and clear settings, for: (1) network (file transfer, printer sharing, work in mixed Linux-MAC OS X - Windows networks, which are more and more frequent); (2) periphereal identification and settings (cable modems, scanners...), the existing features, even if basically OK, are incomplete or not quite clear to use. I think that samba, apple talk, printer sharing... should be installed by default, or - if not so - a step-by-step tutorial should instruct the user what is the best choice for him/her.
5. A simpler way to install new apps via web. The existing feature works OK, but there is some room for improvement. BTW, is Scribus installable in Ubuntu? given the circumstance it is the only app of this type in Linux, perhaps it should be installed by default, it is only some megs (below 10, I think).

Is there anything I forgot? I shall revert some time later.
Otherwise, Ubuntu warty works fine, and is quite fast on an older computer on which MDK 9.x-10.x and SuSE are breathing hard; only Vector is faster, but this is another story.

saBrEwolf

December 11th, 2004, 08:24 PM

I think hoary will be ready for average desktop end users if a waih type tool is included with it and an option placed in the GNOME menu to start it so that flash, java etc. are installed.

Perhaps the use of GNOME Office instead of OpenOffice.org would bring it to an almost complete form. O yes and Scribus. (Except for like hardware support and languages).

I'm hoping there will be a graphical install and boot to keep average users from being scared away.

BWF89

December 11th, 2004, 08:57 PM

The only thing I don't like about Ubuntu (and by Ubuntu I mean every Linux distro) is that it can't automatically detect what printer and scanner you are useing and do an automatic net search and download the nessessary drivers. If Linux did that it would draw in alot more users. Afterall why would the average end-user care if it's open or closed source. All they want is for it to work. And as much as I'm afraid to say it "Windows just-works"...

poofyhairguy

December 11th, 2004, 11:21 PM

The only thing I don't like about Ubuntu (and by Ubuntu I mean every Linux distro) is that it can't automatically detect what printer and scanner you are useing and do an automatic net search and download the nessessary drivers. ..

For me installing a printer was just as hard in Ubuntu as in XP. Also in Fedora the printer is automatically reconginized, so this is possible.

salsafyren

December 12th, 2004, 01:28 AM

Here's what I think users will want, and have been thinking so for a while.

A package management system revamp.

See http://www.autopackage.org/

It does what you want.

ChrisP

December 12th, 2004, 02:47 AM

I voted that it was ready for end users, with nerd/geek/whatever help to setup, but since I've only used the ubuntu live cd so far perhaps i have no right to comment, so take this for what its worth..

Just got home after reformatting a friends computer. She had a windows 98 installation(pentium 3 ,450mhz, 128 ram, 8 gig hd) that was chocked full of viruses, adware etc, and slowed to a near halt through that and the "protection" programs, like nortan, mailwasher, etc etc. The original call for help was because she'd just got broadband and she could'nt get it to work with win 98.I tried, and failed, to get the bb to work, was a bit concerned about how slow the thing was, and ran some check stuff like adaware and avast. Got it sorted with a reformat and installlation of win 2k, several hours downloading patches; all looking good then, feeling chuffed with meself, i took the box back to her house, hooked it all up and ..... omg it don't recognise her monitor, just runs it in some ultra crap safe mode :), so i head for google, looking for new drivers and nothing obvious shows itself. :( No obvious way to manually set the monitors settings either.

Im sure I'll get it fixed tommorrow when im more awake but for now someone please hand me a windows shaped rugby balll, and i reckon I can kick it to New Zealand.

My suse 9.1 dual boot installation was a piece of p*ss compared with this nonsense. I'd imagine ubuntu won't be any different .

Night all

Chris

poofyhairguy

December 12th, 2004, 04:52 AM

See http://www.autopackage.org/

It does what you want.

Thats looks nice.

ubuntu_demon

December 12th, 2004, 10:22 PM

.
5. A simpler way to install new apps via web. The existing feature works OK, but there is some room for improvement..

This is discussed here :

Click And Run in Ubuntu???
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=7107

We are thinking about creating an firefox extension that acts as an apt-get front-end.

Sniffer

December 20th, 2004, 03:51 PM

No, we need to wait longer.

with my personal experience (3 years with linux) i have to be honest, and say no Linux is not ready...even for pros linux is not ready.

Why?

Let's see for instance my example:

I have been problems with USB connections with ubuntu and fedora.....i have lost a LOT of time with some workarounds just to see if my system wont freeze another time...and another time....i have actually make a thread of it...because i really want to have a Linux Server....but no Luck so far.....

In fedora when manually installing drives for nvidia...init3 don't work properly...stuck in anacron...and udev has indeed bugs....

Samba and windows aren't the best friends...and even here i have problems with configuration......no it isn't only me....many members even following tuts over tuts...have big headaches just to put this working.....

and i can keep going and increase the reply..... lets just say Multimedia for instance...

Why i'm with Linux?

Because i really like to learn more, solve problems.....but in the END WE ALL LIKE SOMETHING THAT SIMPLE WORKS....THAT'S WHAT ANY COMPANY WANT......
And Gnu Linux is far from that objective still....like one fellow once said it's REALLY SIMPLE TO CLICK ON ONE .EXE FILE TWICE I SEE IT ROLLING.

MaZiNgA

December 20th, 2004, 05:02 PM

ubuntu_demon

December 20th, 2004, 05:23 PM

I TOTALLY agree with Sniffer. What really saddens me, is that some linux users DON'T WANT to see this fact. In greek there's a word for this: it's "Ethelotiflo"="to willingly pretend you don't see something"

I think you're right at the moment. But I think hoary will be ready for most average-desktop-users when installation and configuration is done by a geek (to be sure everything works). This is why :

maintaining windows :
spending time and effort or you will have problems like virusses,spyware and crashes
doing windowsupdate,updating a lot of your software manually,checking for virusses and spyware
*can cost a lot of time if you're unlucky or did stupid things

maintaining ubuntu :
adding a cronjob that does a daily security update (configuration/installation)
or doing security updates yourself
reading of security mailing list (optional)
*not much time involved

windows installation and configuration :
most hardware is supported out-of-the-box and otherwise hardware manufacturers wil have drivers (unless you're unlucky and they aren't support windows XP because you hardware was pre-XP)
configuration :
you have at least to install virusscanner,firewall and a browser

ubuntu installation and configuration :
easy if all hardware is supported out-of-the-box and no software outside the distro's repositories are needed
otherwise hard for average-desktop-users (but most average-desktop-users don't install windows on their pc's themselves also)

using ubuntu is only difficult when hardware isn't working out of the box. Or when software is needed from outside the main repositories.

I think hoary will solve some hardware issues and add some more userfriendlyness. I think hoary will be at least comparable to windows XP in usability by the average-desktop-user.

wulf

December 20th, 2004, 06:00 PM

Is Windows really that suitable for an 'average' user? For example, after a hard-drive crash on our main computer back in January, my wife and I ended up getting two new machines - a laptop for me and a desktop machine for her (so that I wouldn't be tempted to play with her settings and she could be sure of the desktop looking the same every time she logged on).

Last month I finally got round to getting the scanner (an oldish Mustek USB model) installed on her machine and the process was far from simple. I had to dig around the Mustek site, download W2K drivers and a utility to update them to WinXP compliance and it probably took an hour or so of fiddling around to get it all working.

That wasn't what I'd describe as an easy task. Or how about a WinXP desktop that hasn't had any security updates? Or one of the many machines that apparently had "issues" with SP2 a couple of months ago? I know that as soon as my parents get broadband, my youngest brother and I are probably going to encourage them to "upgrade" to Linux from the Win98 install they've got on there at present :D

Wulf

shimon

December 21st, 2004, 04:46 PM

like one fellow once said it's REALLY SIMPLE TO CLICK ON ONE .EXE FILE TWICE I SEE IT ROLLING.

](*,) yes this is why python and langs alike are getting more pop. and no longer are slow becuase cpus now are so fast...

my vision is that binaries will become a thing of the past and people will ship apps in source that a thing of today... anyone a few things will come in the old binary and that is the kernel, old apps, and the source code reader.

ktjensen

February 5th, 2005, 06:37 AM

Well I have been running WINXP and WIN98 for months with full functionality. So I thought I would give LINUX-UBUNTU a try.

UBUNTU install cd will not boot with my multi-os mbr loader. found a floppy disk loader that will load the CD. CD boots and UBUNTU installs. Alright!! It works fine.

Decided to install over my existing win98, but found that LINUX hates fat32. okay format to ext3 (after guessing this is the right thing to do). actually got the install thing right (no manual reading).

But now no driver for my wifi card. Got the card to be recognized, but no connection to the network. no idea yet what to do.

***********

ubuntu is not ready for enduser simplicity. winxp does much better at this. so does win98. still ubuntu is pretty close.

Jspired

February 5th, 2005, 07:34 AM

Despite your experience, Linux does work for many.

What are the details of your wifi card. Odds are, someone can lead you to the appropriate driver.

Adrenal

February 5th, 2005, 08:22 AM

/me is reminded of Sisya...

Buffalo Soldier

February 5th, 2005, 08:37 AM

/me is reminded of Sisya...
For all we know he/she could be Sisya. Just with a different nickname.

ubuntu UsER

February 5th, 2005, 12:54 PM

Decided to install over my existing win98, but found that LINUX hates fat32 Or, maybe Windows hates Linux? :P
But now no driver for my wifi card. Got the card to be recognized, but no connection to the network. no idea yet what to do. Does your wifi card work without drivers in Windows? I doubt it.
ubuntu is not ready for enduser simplicity. winxp does much better at this. so does win98. still ubuntu is pretty close. I can't agree with you. Your card doesn't work and you say that OS is bad. I don't want to start another "trolling discussion", becuase there are so many on this forum ;) Try to say something more about your wifi, and maybe we all could help you, but please don't start another battle saying that Ubuntu is bad OS. :)

ktjensen

February 6th, 2005, 03:29 AM

I am using a netgear wg511 card. I dumped UBUNTU and tried MEPIS. MEPIS works much better, the first time (with the LIVE CD). The audio and video files work. My netgear card connects, and I have internet. Everything seems to function well.

Now I just need to get a boot loader to work. GRUB (MEPIS standard version) does not recognize my winxp, and my other bootloader does not startup MEPIS. I will get this all workjing soon.

Just a suggestion for the UBUNTU live CD. Make sure it can work with the majority of the WIFI cards. I guess it works well with the EITHERNET cards, but that is not what I have.

Everyone has there different favorite. I am sure that UBUNTU has its fans, and its best hardware.

Jad

February 6th, 2005, 08:10 AM

Oooh what a sad story.
Never had problem with Ubuntu, all of my trouble-shooting was, How to do X & Y, because I'm new to debian based distro's

Yesterday, I found this post it was nice and a plus to ubuntu
http://telltec.ch/index.php?p=8

Ubuntu has been have been until now, friendly with all hardware I have (I got 2 box's at home) more than enough, I think they should stop making it auto detect everything, at least to keep some fun in the OS while trying to figure out How to do it.
I was using Novell Linux Desktop 9.2 and my scanner Epson perfection 610 and I was not able to get it working on NLD

While i just had to plug the scanner USB cable and the power plugin into electricity cable.
reboot :-)
it was working
and thats fun!

In simple
Long Live Ubuntu

nocturn

February 7th, 2005, 09:23 AM

Where is this myth coming from that *any* OS today is ready for Joe Sixpack?

The truth is this, Win98 is a very old and *unsupported* system, if you plug it to the Internet, you are begging to get hacked.

WinXP is easie to install then Linux yes, but a default install will have your running with admin privileges (root). The ease of use for Windows is that it targets the lowest common denominator. Yeah, a monkey can run an IIS based webserver by clicking 'next' and 'OK', but he will have installed with *defaults*, even for passwords.

BTW, Linux can use FAT32, but it is not recommended to install on. Can your WindowsXP read ext3 and reiser? Can you install on this.

Installing a Linux workstation or server with a moderate to good level of security is actually *much* easier then doing the same on windows.

Please do not spread FUD.

friez

February 8th, 2005, 12:00 AM

nocturn

February 8th, 2005, 08:56 AM

umm if you get the right softwre windows can read both ext2/3 (Explore2fs http://uranus.it.swin.edu.au/~jn/linux/explore2fs.htm (http://) ) and reiserfs(RFSTOOL http://p-nand-q.com/download/rfstool.html (http://) ) ...fud [-X

I never said there were no third party tools that could (as there is Hummingbird NFS to make Windows use NFS shares).
But these are analog to the mtools in Linux, not the kernel level support for both Fat32 and NTFS.

A 'vanilla' Windows install cannot read your ext2/3 partitions, and as I said, it is not possible to *install* windows on such a partition (which is what the original poster was trying to do with Linux on Fat32).

mips

March 21st, 2005, 07:42 PM

Running Hoary AMD64.

Linux does not seem to be the ideal multi-media platform in my book. You have to battle your a$$ off to get anything to play, if its not a codec issue the applications crash, sound & video are out of synch.

My references above are towards amaroK, kaffeine, xmms, mplayer. Something as simple as playing a .mp3 seems to be a major problem.

If Linux/Ubuntu ever wants to be considered a mainstream desktop OS and be taken seriously by people & business then it has to shape up. I know it has improved a lot but it is not ready for the desktop in my opinion, not for average joe out there anyway.

Dont get me wrong, Ubuntu really looks good & feels good to use but it is very hard to get things to work. Most people just want to use a computer to get their work done, it is a tool. Not everybody aspires to be a Linux hacker in order to use the computer as a tool, they want something that 'just works'.

Delving into xorg, fstab etc. config files is NOT for the average computer user out there. DONT tell me but this is the way it is and people must start using the cli to get things going. With an attitude like that you will alienate the masses out there that you are trying to attract to Linux. A lot more has to be done to make this OS more user friendly and by user friendly I mean the installation/configuration part. The actual user interface/desktop(gnome) is pretty nifty and much better ******* imho., i actually love it, down to the earthy colours i at first hated :)

Am I throwing in the towel ? Hell no! I will persevere and try my best to get the better of all these problems. I'm just thinking about average joe out there...and my gripe is more with the apps than the os.

Can anybody recommend a very good Linux/Debian paper based book (I cannot read books from a monitor). I want to learn how this whole OS works, nuts & bolts. Is the Linux cook book 2nd Ed any good, it was available as a download but I no longer see it on the net ???

What are the chances of asking the Ubuntu developers to develop a universal media player ?? I would be happy with one rock solid one than 5 that dont work that well.

cheers
mips

DJ_Max

March 21st, 2005, 08:30 PM

Posts like yours have been seen thousands of times. But it won't change the fact that most media codecs you are probably referring to (WMV, MPEG, etc..) Are cloesd source. Same with most video card drivers(ATI, nVidia), which is very important.

There is actually a reputable company producing open source video cards & drivers.

mike998

March 21st, 2005, 08:39 PM

I second DJ Max's sentiments as far as the multimedia stuff is concerned.

As bad as it sounds, I am getting frustrated with people who complain about multimedia in linux and don't realise the underlying issues related to licensing.

I commend you, however, for persevering. You are probably in much the same position as I was a little while back. I can really reccomend the O'Reilly books (I believe my first was linux in a nutshell or something like that). I understand your difficulty with electronic books, but for much of the materials that you will study, it's best to actually be working on a system while you read so that you can try things out. (Trust me, I'm a technical instructor!)

mips

March 22nd, 2005, 06:41 PM

As bad as it sounds, I am getting frustrated with people who complain about multimedia in linux and don't realise the underlying issues related to licensing.

It is also frustrating for users. I understand the licensing restraints, they suck. Thats why I'm a big supporter of open standards. file & media formats should not be locked by a vendor as they prevent inter ooperability.

Thanks for the book suggestion. I'm actually thinking of starting a poll on recommended books.

There is actually a reputable company producing open source video cards & drivers.

Is there a list of these companies ? If not we need webpage somewhere recognising these companies & support them. I'm currently in the market for a small laser printer and from the looks of www.linuxprinting.org it looks like I should support Epson.

dewey

March 22nd, 2005, 10:58 PM

Try running Hoary 386-k7, it simplifies alot of the 64bit issues, especially media. I have an AMD64 3000+ and recently downgraded to the k7 kernel, which is 32-bit. I have no visible slowdown, and it's made issues much simpler for me. I was never fond of running things under a 32bit chroot. While I do not believe that avoidance is a solution, I'll switch back to a 64bit distro once everything "just works".

Trust me, try out 386-k7 and follow the multimedia instructions on www.ubuntuguide.org

I have no problems with movies or music now, even mp3s!

Dolgan

March 23rd, 2005, 06:26 PM

I thought I'd share my WiFi card experience, just in case it might help someone. I have a DLink card and router that can use up to 152 bit wep encryption. My existing WEP key was a 152 bit key; Ubuntu did not like this. When changed to a 128 bit key it worked great!

This is the first linux distro I've been able to replace my Winblows desktop with and I couldn't be happier with it!

Buffalo Soldier

March 23rd, 2005, 06:34 PM

reading this thread is like taking a time machine and step back to the past... hhmm... my early days with ubuntu... and this forum :) anyone else remembers sisya?

mips

March 23rd, 2005, 06:49 PM

dewey,

That idea has crossed my mind a few times as I ran 32bit on my old machine and everything was 100%. I upgraded to 64bit and would like to use the hardware I have as it is really a kickass system.

I will consider it but will struggle on for now...maybe when I get really desperate, totem seems ok 4 now.

thanks
mips

Paperweight

March 29th, 2005, 01:56 AM

After using DSL for a while, and having almost no functionality, I tried Ubuntu.
Here's my gripes, I've spent hours looking for help on all of them. I have tried multiple apps from Synaptic, too. I've become familiar with linux basics like the unix filesystem and root etc. I was hoping to be able to do some advanced stuff in the future

But how will I, when for the life of me I can't get Ubuntu linux to do BASIC STUFF:

-- Digital camera canon powershot a85 wouldn't work when connected via USB.
-- Memory cards from camera wouldn't work.
-- Wacom tablet wouldn't work.
-- Can't burn CDs, ISOs.
-- Can't network with windows 2000.
-- and couldn't get an ftp server to list files. (So I couldn't transfer my iso off.)
-- rdesktop won't work, even when configured perfectly
-- Had to reinstall because "Users and Groups" screwed up something.

So basically, although I'm very experienced with computers, beyond anyone else that I know, everything that I've tried to do on Ubuntu linux has resulted in hours of wasted time and complete failure. I can't even transfer my work off of this computer to my old one. :cry:
Linux is not ready for the desktop. It sucks but it's true. I would not install this on a regular user's machine untill some later date when stuff actually works!
Bye bye.

Brunellus

March 29th, 2005, 02:07 AM

SD cards are known not to work with the present kernel, so that's a fix that needs attention, yeah. Libgphoto (which handles importing images from digicams in GNOME) is WAY behind whatever digiKam uses on KDE--by a long shot!.

So yeah, that much needs fixing.

But networking with windows 2000 should be trivial with samba (look in the wiki). and I find the no-cd burning at all incredible. Burning music CDs in gnome is not as fun as doing it in k3b in KDE, but no cd-burning at all? wow.

kassetra

March 29th, 2005, 02:10 AM

BASIC STUFF:

-- Digital camera canon powershot a85 wouldn't work when connected via USB.
-- Memory cards from camera wouldn't work.
-- Wacom tablet wouldn't work.
-- Can't burn CDs, ISOs.
-- Can't network with windows 2000.
-- and couldn't get an ftp server to list files. (So I couldn't transfer my iso off.)
-- rdesktop won't work, even when configured perfectly
-- Had to reinstall because "Users and Groups" screwed up something.

Linux is not ready for the desktop. It sucks but it's true. I would not install this on a regular user's machine untill some later date when stuff actually works!
Bye bye.

1. Most of that stuff is not basic. It's easy to think that those are basic things when Microsoft makes sure camera manufacturers et al have to make their products compatible with Microsoft products.

2. Did you ask anyone on the forums?

3. I have a wacom tablet and I know how to make it work with my mouse as well. I could burn cds and dvds with Ubuntu on the first try (right click on an ISO, left click on "Burn to CD"). Also, there are a number of other users that have had some issues with cd burning and they have asked questions here, so did you search the forums?

4. Did you search google for information on your camera and linux? Most cameras work just fine in Linux but some have some other issues that prevents Linux from seeing them. This isn't Linux' fault; the manufacturers do not want to share with Linux and get on Microsoft's *bad list.*

5. Myself and many other people here have been able to set up networking with Microsoft Windows 2k, XP, etc. It's not the easiest thing in the world to do sometimes, but it can be done, and it can be done rather quickly. Same with rdesktop.

6. About Users and Groups - I have no idea what you did or what was not working properly - but most of the time, Linux doesn't need to be reinstalled in order to fix something - Only Microsoft Windows and other products follow that approach.

7. As for Linux not being ready for the desktop; you're right. Linux is not ready to be a drop-in replacement for the desktop one you are already using - nor will any other system. If I took away your current computer and gave you a Mac or any other system, it would also have the same "problems."

If you want to make your Linux system work the way you expect and it doesn't at first, ask for help. Posting a thread like this does nothing to help you get your issues resolved; it is simply lashing out because you couldn't do what you wanted to do right away.

mike998

March 29th, 2005, 02:14 AM

First things first, did you ask here?
Ubuntu is renowned for the community support. I personally have found it to be fantastic. Even if you don't ask, there are postings about the wacom tablet, I am fairly sure of that. (No, *I* didn't search myself.)

You are also a little vauge about what you have stated as problems. For example "Had to reinstall because "Users and Groups" screwed up something.", "Can't network with windows 2000." do not give much information.

Linux may not be ready for the mainstream (I do agree with you on that point), but Ubuntu is extremely close. My non technical wife is adamant about not reinstalling windows as she is so happy with Ubuntu.

--edit--
Bah... Kassetra beat me too it and so better put, too!

garyng

March 29th, 2005, 02:26 AM

linux is not ready for average desktop and may never be, if you use Windows/Mac as a benchmark. Today's linux is way ahead of say 95/98 but way behind XP/Mac in terms of end user experience(assuming no one do the hand holding), especially hardware wise.

If setup properly, linux can do 99.5% of what XP/Mac can do(including all the things you have mentioned) but effort is needed which is what you pay for in XP/Mac when you want someone to do the work for you.

MetalMusicAddict

March 29th, 2005, 02:42 AM

I am like you paperweight in that I have alot of experience with windows PCs. I tried MANY Linux distros before Ubuntu. Because of these fourms and the "Unofficial" guide for 4.1 Ive learned TONS about linux and am gettin the hang of it. Some of the things your tryin to do can be found in the fourms. This board and distro are great. Dont give up. Youll get the answers. ;)

Are you usin Hoary or Warty? If your usin Hoary remember its not quite finished.

zenwhen

March 29th, 2005, 02:44 AM

If you had put just a bit more effort into fixing your issues, you might have had better luck. You didn't name one thing you did to fix your issues. The Wacom tablet and the digicam are the only two things I wouldn't have been able and willing to help you with if you had just made a thread asking for help instead trolling for it.

Does everything that works in Windows work in Linux? No. This is the fault of the hardware vendors, not Linux devs. Perhaps you should spend your money were support for open source software exists.

Nowadays, most of the time any problem can be solved with a bit of effort. Most people are unwilling to expend any amount of effort. Linux may not be ready for them yet. Windows isn't ready for most of them.

Look at the money people are making selling anti virus software and anti spyware software. :)

This thread accomplishes little more than smearing your **** on the wall to get your mommy to pay attention to you.

Paperweight

March 29th, 2005, 03:11 AM

gw90se

March 29th, 2005, 03:21 AM

Linux isn't ready for my desktop because I often have work to do in a small time frame. I would love to learn new workarounds and stuff, but I just don't have the time to waste my life on that right now, when I could be making money.

I can appreciate the time factor. I played with Linux for a couple of years, on & off, because of the time factor. Then I decided to make the time to learn and not just fix my Windows problems.

However, why not set up a dual boot system and have Ubuntu available when you do have the time to spare? Plus, you could keep everything working on Windows until you figured it out in Linux.

kassetra

March 29th, 2005, 03:23 AM

I appreciate the relatively polite responses, you guys. I'm sorry to have posted something like this but I just needed to vent some frustration.

I read somewhere that my digicam was supported. Most Canon cameras are, and it complies to the interface standard (you can't blame this on the manufacturer anymore), so I assumed that I might solve it after about 4 hours of solid research, but I didn't.

About the Wacom tablet...I got lost trying to figure out how to recompile a kernel, and ran into other problems, and decided that it wan't worth it.

I did ask in the forums about the Users And Groups problem, but I got like 6 views and no replies so I assumed that there was not supportive people here. At least I got more views than the people who posted the identical problem (with less info) a while ago, who also got no replies.

It wasn't an SD card it was compact flash, and I was using Warty.

I DID search, extensively, for info on all of these problems.

About networking... Nautilus wouldn't log on to the windows computer. I researched and downloaded xffs, which would log on, but then wouldn't copy stuff over. At this point I tried setting up an ftp server, which I have knowledge of, and I could log on remotely, but it would not show anything in the root location.

It just seems like everything I try to do in Linux becomes a struggle. Linux isn't ready for my desktop because I often have work to do in a small time frame. I would love to learn new workarounds and stuff, but I just don't have the time to waste my life on that right now, when I could be making money.
Don't take it personally.

1. Even when a camera "conforms to standards" - they still do not release information as to how the interface actually works, so yes we can still "blame the manufacturers..." ... and if you read that your camera was supported, most likely that site *also* had information on how to make it work under Linux. Maybe you should find that site again.

2. The wacom tablet does NOT require recompiling a kernel - maybe years ago, but not now. I edited a single text file and I had a wacom tablet working.

3. How long did you wait for a response? We are a very supportive community, but if you catch us on a weekend, the people that can help you may not be around. Also, if you had been searching through the forums, you would see that we are a very supportive community as a whole.

4. Do you have a compact flash reader attached to your computer? Because if you couldn't get your camera to work - then how do you expect to get the flash card to work without a reader?

5. Networking requires proper authorization and *permissions* ... if you do not have it set up correctly on *both* sides, you cannot edit files. I use Nautilus to connect to remote servers just fine, but I can only go where I have permission to go. The root location of other locations will most likely *not* allow you to just browse around.

6. Again, Linux is not ready for you to just DROP IN to your current lifestyle and habits and EXPECT to work JUST LIKE WHAT YOU ALREADY HAVE SET UP. It is perfectly ready to do most, if not all, of the things you just described, but not if you don't take any time to do it. It doesn't require workarounds and hacking and general monkeying around with anything to make it work properly... that's FUD from the late 90's.

Your EXACT problem is how you described, just not exactly how you put it. You don't have the "time" ... or more realistically, you don't want to take the time required to actually do the things you want to do in Linux. So no, Linux is not ready for your desktop, but only because you will not take the time to think about what you're doing before jumping head first.

We can help you change your desktop over to Linux, but not if you're not willing to make the time to listen to what we say.

Buffalo Soldier

March 29th, 2005, 03:24 AM

Edit: I might have been able to burn music cds, but I couldn't burn isos with nautilus. I tried reinstalling nautilus but it couldn't find the warty cd (which I tried in both drives). I downloaded another burning software, (I forget what it's called) and it wouln't burn the iso because it needed to run as root. I tried it as root and it needed to be run in the "cdrecord" group. I tried to make the group but it froze. That's when I began to try networking instead.
Have you tried:
Insert blank CD into your CDRW.
Open up Nautilus and browse to where you've downloaded the ISO file.
Right click on the ISO file.
Click "Write to Disc..."

From Help needed in burning ISO image (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=105744) thread

adbak

March 29th, 2005, 03:25 AM

Your first post reminded me of this Bash.org nugget.

http://bash.org/?152037

primeirocrime

March 29th, 2005, 03:40 AM

(...)

But how will I, when for the life of me I can't get Ubuntu linux to do BASIC STUFF:

-- Digital camera canon powershot a85 wouldn't work when connected via USB.
-- Memory cards from camera wouldn't work.
-- Wacom tablet wouldn't work.
-- Can't burn CDs, ISOs.
-- Can't network with windows 2000.
-- and couldn't get an ftp server to list files. (So I couldn't transfer my iso off.)
-- rdesktop won't work, even when configured perfectly
-- Had to reinstall because "Users and Groups" screwed up something.

So basically, although I'm very experienced with computers, beyond anyone else that I know, everything that I've tried to do on Ubuntu linux has resulted in hours of wasted time and complete failure. I can't even transfer my work off of this computer to my old one. :cry:
Linux is not ready for the desktop. It sucks but it's true. I would not install this on a regular user's machine untill some later date when stuff actually works!
Bye bye.

Do not give up!

I was in the same spot as you 2 years ago, I still have some quirks about this but I would rather have my head choped than returning to Satan's hive.
Things I found about hardware and software issues thru the gnu/linux community saved me in the sense that I realized a sense of comunity that I don't find in everyday life [maybe it will spread to the meatware] I think also that migrating to gnu/linux made me more creative [I can't do it like this...maybe if try this..yeah..hm no...that didn't work but that did..] and also the time that I "wasted" searching for stuff was time that I didn't lose with my machine crashing all the time with WinXP or 95/98. Work getting lost, sad and childish poems, doodlings and music getting corrupted by viruses and an overall sense of beeing controled by the will of something that doesn't even breathe in the first place.
ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh and defrag! defrag sounds like 1915 in no mans land... [-X

Not to lose faith. I droped them because I was irritated one day and tried to uninstall IE. It didn't work. So to hell with them. My digital camera didn't work either untill I found that If shifted the Usb connection to P2P [I know this must be only in Sony cybershots but it was like that... one day I turned the dial to another setting and things worked. But things work because there is above all things of chance and accident, a HUGE base of guys that write this things on other computers, in the night time, in their jobs or in their "leisure" time, people that read what other people just wrote and test and play with what is given and that is how this is done.
Ubuntu reflects that spirit.

But I don not agree of gnu/linux OSs not beeing ready for desktop. I'm a desktoper! ok, a user. But the computer is one of my most important tools, along with my eyes, ears and mind. I'm not a hacker or a programmer or whatever code wizard. I'm a, I guess, a concerned citizen and a satisfied customer. And before I was just another software slave.

we, the end-users, the people that now days depend and want to use this machines, must also face the fact that learning how to drive is also hard at first [at least with european cars :)] and driving isn't just turning right and left and speeding way like a madman. One just has to breath slowly and think about the root. [no pun intended]

And do not feel that Ubuntu/anyotherdistrohere is behind XP. I think XP is an insult to senses in terms of user XPirience. I also had much more trouble with hardware in XP than in Linux, why the hell if I stick a usb scanner in a different port will good old windows ask me if I want to install it? I know I am a bit primitive with this things, but MacOsX never did that or Ubuntu neither did any of my previous distros. Right. SANE can fry my patience at times, but it always lives up to it's purpose. As does Ubuntu. Always.

Paperweight

March 29th, 2005, 03:40 AM

MetalMusicAddict

March 29th, 2005, 03:43 AM

2. The wacom tablet does NOT require recompiling a kernel - maybe years ago, but not now. I edited a single text file and I had a wacom tablet working.
Kassetra, do you remember that file? I have a pad also. Does it just mimic the mouse or did you get pressure also?

However, why not set up a dual boot system and have Ubuntu available when you do have the time to spare? Plus, you could keep everything working on Windows until you figured it out in Linux.
Exactly. ;) I still use XP for media creation.

kassetra

March 29th, 2005, 03:45 AM

Kassetra, do you remember that file? I have a pad also. Does it just mimic the mouse or did you get pressure also?

It's by default pressure sensitive - BUT! Getting it to be pressure sensitive in a graphics app is a whole different issue.

The file I edited was XF86Config-4. :)

Let me see if I can rustle up my config file...

kassetra

March 29th, 2005, 03:47 AM

Exactly. ;) I still use XP for media creation.

I use vmware so that I don't have to dual-boot. I have some proprietary graphics apps that I use in vmware, and then I can also do my other work in my main linux environment. :)

Easy as cake.

Paperweight

March 29th, 2005, 03:47 AM

I won't go back to windows, and I don't put my computer on par with my eyes, ears, or mind.....I think I'll buy a mac.

Ubuntu runs on PPC, right? :mrgreen:

kassetra

March 29th, 2005, 03:49 AM

I won't go back to windows, and I don't put my computer on par with my eyes, ears, or mind.....I think I'll buy a mac.

Ubuntu runs on PPC, right? :mrgreen:

Yep. Which is why we have the special PPC area in the forums.

Macs will cause you just as much grief at first that the Linux install you just tried - just in some different ways and / or areas. Converting from one style of OS to another takes time. Period. No end dance around that.

mike998

March 29th, 2005, 04:15 AM

I'm sorry guys- someday I will find time. And I wasn't trying to find help here, I was just venting :P :)
kassetra, it looks like you were honestly trying to help me, but what you said seems like common sense. And I'm not just being lazy-- I just found all this to be too much for me. I really do want to spend more time on this, but I can't.
Maybe this summer. :)
Thanks.

Paperweight,
Given what you have said it seems to me that you just don't have enough time to put into to get Ubuntu up and running. Sometimes, despite the encouragement you will see here (told you so!) it's best to cut your losses and come back later. Not trying to discourage you, but if you keep at it and don't have enough time to spend you will become frustrated (as you have done) and discouraged (which I hate to see).
Think carefully, I'm sure if you decide that windows is for you right now, you can go that route. We will all still be here (hope I am not out of line here!) when you return to help.
My fingers are crossed for you.
Best wishes,
Mike998

TravisNewman

March 29th, 2005, 05:38 AM

Everyone has covered anything I could say, except this:

WINDOWS is not ready for the desktop.
Rampant security flaws, necessity to reboot frequently, viruses and spyware (and no good way to stop it)-- it's NOT ready.

You have to realize that its a totally different way of thinking, and as has been said before, NOTHING is ready for YOUR desktop when you're comparing it to something else.
As far as things that break, system instability, and general annoyances, Linux is much more ready for the desktop than Windows-- my 2 cents.

TjaBBe

March 29th, 2005, 09:58 AM

Each system has it's disadvantages on the desktop. Linux is a bit harder to learn and to get running. But when you are a bit more convenient with it you get a Linux install running in no time, actually saving time.

Wich also counts for all the reinstalls and frustration you get from Windows suddenly going instable, not able to perform tasks wich it did before, and getting slower second by second after your fresh install.

Linux solves all this, saving me, at least, a lot of frustrations and irritations. And I haven't even talked about the fact of it being free.

arrizaba

March 29th, 2005, 05:49 PM

About the Wacom tablet, it works with Hoary, see the link

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/WacomTabletIssue

which basically is:

Install an 2.6.10 image from hoary (with pinning), which should require no hotplug/blacklist editing, nor doing anything special. you just need to add the correct device to your XF86Config-4, which you can do by either using udev to create a device with a good name, or using wacdump on all files matching /dev/input/event* to see which is the tablet.

It might be true that Linux is still complicated to get used to comparing to Windows, for instance. But, once you take your time to understand it a bit, then it bothers you far much less than Windows. So, take your pick: You either struggle in the beginning (linux), or struggle for eternity (Windows).
That was my experience and believe me, I am much more comfortable with (Ubuntu) linux now :mrgreen:

Paperweight

March 29th, 2005, 10:32 PM

Install an 2.6.10 image from hoary (with pinning), which should require no hotplug/blacklist editing, nor doing anything special. you just need to add the correct device to your XF86Config-4, which you can do by either using udev to create a device with a good name, or using wacdump on all files matching /dev/input/event* to see which is the tablet.

If I needed someone to help me in a forum for stuff like this, exactly what forum would I use? Or should I use IRC?
edit--never mind

jkeck55

March 29th, 2005, 11:43 PM

I understand the frustration. I have been working on getting Ubuntu up and running on my old PC for a couple of weeks. Not full time just a few hours here and there. It can be a bit annoying when things that you think should work out of the box don't. I've had difficulties from the very beginning even getting the install to go through. Turns out it was corrupted memory. I thought Gnome was too slow, tried xfce. To do this I uninstalled Gnome and all Gnome apps. That was a very bad plan. Killed the ability to run X windows. Apt-get install Gnome2 and all was right with the world. I had to reinstall a couple of utilities but the benefit was I trimmed down the overhead and gnome runs better now. I couldn't get my internal zip-drive to work. This was important because I backed up vital files to that before blowing out windows. (yes I completely converted to Ubuntu on this PC) I few forum searches, a little bit of time, and a couple of mistakes (there is an important difference between hdb and hdf) and it works. The community has been helpful. Next I am going to tackle Samba(kids computer still on XP), then it's on to my digital camera. It has been a good learning experience and I am glad I have taken the time to do this. I just wish I could find a No OS computer that competes with Dell on price. Even though when I buy a new computer I won't be using windows I hate to give MS money for something I have no intention of ussing. Sorry for the long winded post but I just wanted to say everyone that has trouble doesn't give up.

arctic

March 30th, 2005, 12:00 AM

It wasn't an SD card it was compact flash, and I was using Warty.
both, sd and compact flash cards do work in warty and hoary. i am using them almost every day. the easiest way is to create a direct usb-connection from your camera to your computer and import the images with gthumb. you can alternatively use card-readers but before you do so, perform a web-search on card reader products that work with linux. ;)

Paperweight

March 30th, 2005, 12:01 AM

I just wish I could find a No OS computer that competes with Dell on price. Even though when I buy a new computer I won't be using windows I hate to give MS money for something I have no intention of ussing. Sorry for the long winded post but I just wanted to say everyone that has trouble doesn't give up.

You can build your own computer, with parts that you know work with OSS. It's not that hard, it's cheap to do, and you can put as much quality into it as you want. Check out sites like www.tigerdirect.com etc.

Edit: If you're Canadian, like me, I recommend NCIX.com. newegg.com doesn't cater to Canadians.

zenwhen

March 30th, 2005, 01:29 AM

You can build your own computer, with parts that you know work with OSS. It's not that hard, it's cheap to do, and you can put as much quality into it as you want. Check out sites like www.tigerdirect.com etc.

Generally I use http://newegg.com for all computer related purchases and do a bit of googling to make sure a few people have gotten everything working with a 2.6 kernel.

aburda

April 10th, 2005, 08:23 PM

Hello,

About a month ago I moved over to using linux instead of xp. I used to use the SLS distro back in '93 but hadn't touched linux in about 12 years and was getting sick of xp virus problems, etc. My first re-attempt at linux was on Mandrake to which I was extremely disappointed. I was expecting the system to have moved away from the necessity of having to use the command line and be really user friendly. It wasn't, neither for that matter has ubuntu but by the time I got to ubuntu I was kind of enjoying messing around with they system and apt-get solved many of the rpm problems I had.

So getting to the point, I still don't think ubuntu is user friendly enough for my girlfriend or mom to setup on their computers. Anybody have an opinion on this matter (whether in or not in agreement with me). Either way I'm on ubuntu to stay but within the theme of providing a great system for all mankind I think usability is an area to continue working on.

With that said though, ubuntu rocks!

Aaron

kassetra

April 10th, 2005, 09:04 PM

So getting to the point, I still don't think ubuntu is user friendly enough for my girlfriend or mom to setup on their computers. Anybody have an opinion on this matter (whether in or not in agreement with me). Either way I'm on ubuntu to stay but within the theme of providing a great system for all mankind I think usability is an area to continue working on.

Well, I set up Ubuntu just fine, and I'm a girl. (i.e. Gender has nothing to do with who can or cannot use Linux)
And my mom would use it if I just installed it for her and showed her where her browser/email/etc was...

Most of the people I know could use Ubuntu just fine with some "HERE IS YOUR INTERNET" type of things... and some hand holding while they got used to it.

It's no longer a matter of user friendliness anymore, Ubuntu is friendlier than windows will ever be now - it's a matter of choosing to switch and then accepting that it doesn't work exactly the same. There is momentum behind windows... that is all now.

Once I tell my mom that, she's cool... and she adapts.

April 10th, 2005, 09:19 PM

Do you mean that it is complicated to drop down to the command line to fix something, or that everything is just difficult because of the way it is organized?

orion_114

April 10th, 2005, 09:29 PM

My mom cant even use windows XP so there is no hope for some ! (Sorry Mom :blush: )
I think anyone can use Ubuntu as kassetra said. All you gotta do is set it up for them and say click here for your mail etc.
It can however become a bit of a mission when you want to upgrade your graphics card etc. Then you need to invest a bit of time and you should be able to do just about anything !

dskirk

April 10th, 2005, 10:28 PM

Well, i'm a linux novice and find ubuntu easy to use. however, I do think more people might move more easily to Ubuntu if the offering of internet applications were more compatible with Windows. Specifically, I cannot find a usenet client in the Internet applications section. Since Firefox is available in Windows, using it was easy here. But i was expecting to also find Thunderbird for both email and usenet. The Evolution email does not seem to support usenet, so that seems a gap. I'm sure the developers are aware of this, but if there is a solution for usenet on the live CD, I can't find it. otherwise, I like the ease of use and the portability of the live CD.
david

dskirk

April 10th, 2005, 11:00 PM

Uh-oh.... it happened again. Once I post somewhere that I don't know how to do something, I then look "one more time" and discover the solution. Sure enough, Evolution supports usenet, but I had not discovered that in several weeks of occasional use. My earlier comment still holds, however. Getting people to switch to Ubuntu will be easier if they see client applications with which they're already familiar...
david

poofyhairguy

April 11th, 2005, 12:17 AM

So getting to the point, I still don't think ubuntu is user friendly enough for my girlfriend or mom to setup on their computers. Anybody have an opinion on this matter (whether in or not in agreement with me).

I think about this a lot. I'm glad Ubuntu doesn't aim at the lowest common denominator. There are two classes of people when it comes to computers- ones that think that they are fun, and those that just want them as tools.

You (and most Ubuntuers) enjoy working with computers. -

I was kind of enjoying messing around with they system

I'm like that too. Every person that actually follows this forum (instead of just using it for support) is like that. Its fun to be a little nerdy. Ubuntu is a great system for that. Its flexible and it doesn't get in the way of your learning curve. Before Ubuntu, command line= Dos floppies to me but now it means POWER!!!!

I've seen a distro that tries to be for the other kind of computer user- Xandros. By default it works well, and my mom could probably install it (honestly she could intall Ubuntu but she couldn't get it to be fully capable, thats what I mean). But it SUCKS for me. Its gets in my way, it won't let me fiddle with things. It assumes I'm an idiot. I hate it. If Ubuntu was like Xandros I'd would install Gentoo and run away. But its not and we love it for that.

Its not suprising Ubuntu is the way it is. Think about it- the founder is simply a millionare that likes to play with computers. If I had a few million I would make my own Distro as well for the fun of it (well, maybe not, Ubuntu is better than I could do). Mark likes playing with computers, and he has made the best OS every for people that like to do that. LETS KEEP UBUNTU LIKE THAT. Let the commercial distros (Madrake, Xandros, SuSe) aim for that person that only wants to use the computer as a tool. Let them make the buggy, crappy GUI config apps that those users demand. Let them lock down their distros, lets keep Ubuntu free.

Thats no to say that the other type of people can't enjoy Ubuntu. I will always maintain that an Ubuntu box that a competent nerd sets up will run better than a similar XP box. My own experiance proves that. But that means doing the install, getting all of the codecs that aren't free but people demand, getting P2P apps or CD burning apps or whatever. Basically following the Ubuntu Guide and a few Howtos here. For one type of computer user that is fun, for another type it is a pain in the ass. Every single poster that has come here just to bitch about Ubuntu not having things on the default (mp3 support or whatever) is one of those people that only wants the computer to be a tool. To them I say, either suck it up or enjoy your Xandros....

I mean, even XP (actually, especially XP) is more like Ubuntu than Xandros. Installing it isn't easy, and after the install you have to do a lot of things to get everything to work well (install codecs, install antivirus, install dvd software, install antispyware software, etc.) The reason that XP works for so many people is because they pay a big nerd company (such as Dell, HP, Emachines, etc.) to set everything up for them. They pay the Dells of the world to do what I do for friends when I install Ubuntu for them-turn XP into a tool. Yet this approach fails- just look at all the zombie XP machines out there. Almost every person I know that has a computer has spyware on it when I check, and lots of the time they don't know what that is. Companies like AOL prey on these computer users (by implying things like "viruses are the reasons for all your problems" even though malware is worse nowadays) and we benefit from them buying that Dell only to let it rot because our hardware costs are cheaper. I remember the time before the other types of computer users bought computer and only nerds did. In 1989 my dad's new 386 costs $5000. For that today I can buy two top of the line PCs.

Ubuntu shouldn't cater to these people, except maybe when planning out security protocols. Now, if some business people want to step in an act like Dell and sell set up Ubuntu PCs, more power to him/her. But don't ruin Ubuntu for those that like to tinker.

A jack of all trades is excellent at nothing...

Raven-sb

April 11th, 2005, 12:28 AM

I
Ubuntu shouldn't cater to these people, except maybe when planning out security protocols. Now, if some business people want to step in an act like Dell and sell set up Ubuntu PCs, more power to him/her. But don't ruin Ubuntu for those that like to tinker.

A jack of all trades is excellent at nothing...

I have to say that I agree with poofyhairguy here, but then again I like to tinker. One of the advantages of linux is that it gives the user the oppotunity to get their hands dirty by tinkering with the system. I feel that this would be a terrible oppounity to waste.

Brunellus

April 11th, 2005, 12:37 AM

Every single poster that has come here just to bitch about Ubuntu not having things on the default (mp3 support or whatever) is one of those people that only wants the computer to be a tool. To them I say, either suck it up or enjoy your Xandros....

...

Ubuntu shouldn't cater to these people, except maybe when planning out security protocols. Now, if some business people want to step in an act like Dell and sell set up Ubuntu PCs, more power to him/her. But don't ruin Ubuntu for those that like to tinker.

Ahh, and nerd-supremacy rears its ugly head yet again. Looks like I'll be looking for another distro, soon.

Seriously. I have come to like ubuntu more than other distributions because of the conspicuous LACK of this sort of newbie-hating. "Humanity to others," wasn't it? Oh, unless those 'others' don't happen to enjoy tinkering with their machine too much.

ubuntu-geek

April 11th, 2005, 12:53 AM

I think any, Operating System can be made to better suit a user, but what user would that be? Lets face it there are not just two, three or even four types of computer user. Everyone has their own opinion as to what is BETTER and what SHOULD be done.

I so wish this thread would have prompted a hey thats a good idea lets create some sort of "Welcome to Ubuntu linux" program that is ran when first logging into the system..

Thread locked.. I see no purpose in a 10 page bash fest of whats better and worse, whats better for me and not you type of thread..

primeirocrime

May 22nd, 2005, 02:42 PM

I think ubuntu is ready for end-users:

Got a live cd inside this winXP spyweared machine, boot up, and got my friend to use everything in his computer. Detected everything. All the apps were there for her to use. The only thing she complained about was GAIM not beeing as cute as MSN and/or trillian. She missed the wiggles and that electroshocking in the screen...other than that, this girl that doesn't even know how to use system restore in winXP, was quite happy with the hoary live cd experience.

there are still issues to be solved in the gnu/linux usage, but i feel them to be more of landmine cleaning than a problem with the distro's. I explain:

since microsoft has the monopoly, most hardware produced is geared to windows, and not only the scanners and printers and tablets, for instance I would like to have siemens mobile phone manager in my ubuntu, but no, they only have it for windows, and they also, somehow got a sync to Outlook in the middle, so they at siemens assume that everyone uses microsoft windows? This has to be reversed, somehow. And it's this kind of small things that prevents more users migrating to free OS's, that and eyecandy and fluffy effects on messenger software. Because the rest, in what really matters performance, office, stability, security it is more than ready. I mean, I am an end-user with only one skill: I can read an HowTo, and that is useful in both microsoft and free OSs.

I still have a xp in another partition, but everytime I change a usb cable for sake of my personal confort, the blasted thing detects new hardware, wich I find really annoying. Or the system, freezes everytime i try to shutdown, restart. And virus. And constant crashing. And the infernal updates. Not beeing able to unistall IE.
Same computer. Clean installs. A very diferent outcome. But heck, maybe I'm to stupid to install windows from scratch.

pdk001

May 22nd, 2005, 03:17 PM

i voted for yes hoary will be ready for average-desktop-users

weekend warrior

May 22nd, 2005, 03:41 PM

No,

Many people are not going to expect or want to use CLI for anything, simple as that. They will want/need point & click and only point & click. That's just the way it is now.

In that sense OS X is ready, ubuntu is not.

EDIT: Remember this is going by definitions in the first post.

I define an average-desktop-user as :

users who have never worked with a computer
users who have only worked with windows XP
users who just want it to work

brickbat

May 22nd, 2005, 04:05 PM

I think the great majority of the software is acceptable for end-users. There are some glaring exceptions (try backing up a dvd video natively!) The big problem is still hardware drivers. Device manufacturers are still not thinking "Hey - we will lose market share if we don't issue linux drivers." Even those that "support" linux do it as an afterthought and like they are doing us a favour. I think we are not direct and vocal enough about our dissatisfaction. All the distribution vendors need to make a representative body that provides a single reference point for hardware manufacturers that encourages them to support linux and also makes it easy for them by not requiring them to make 50 different builds.

Once all the hardware drivers are written by the hardware manufacturers, then Linux will be ready.

ciao
bb

Sam

May 22nd, 2005, 04:10 PM

In my opinion, Ubuntu works great out-of-the-box, but if the end-user wants some specific features (like a graphic driver or a higher resolution), he/she must be guided by someone else.

Sleeper Service

May 25th, 2005, 10:29 AM

One of the problems with Win and Mac (IMHO) is the way they kind of hide what's really happening underneath their polished surfaces. This is partly consumer-led (people just want it to be easy), but it also conveniently (for the OS company) encourages people to depend on that particular operating system for their conceptual model of their computer.

And an even bigger problem is that Joe User isn't just happy with this system - he feels threatened if one tries to suggest that he might get more from his machine if he didn't rely on someone else to tell him how it works.

How many people would go to buy a car and allow the salesman to tell them which car they want?

I answered "Other" in the poll. I think that Ubuntu is perfectly good for the "end-user". Heck, our gran uses it!

But how many people buy a Windows PC that isn't pre-installed? Installing any operating system is beyond many users, without some training or guidance. But I think that anyone who can install and trouble-shoot another operating system should be fairly comfortable with Ubuntu.

By the way, my personal spin is that I work for an arts/IT organisation that works only with Linux and open-source, and I often talk Linux-newcomers through installing Linux on older machines. I've not met anyone that can't cope with Mand(rake/riva) or Ubuntu.

Based on my experiences, I think the best thing the open-source community can do is encourage more people to learn more about the architecture of their machines, and open their eyes to the choice and freedom available with Linux/O-S. Distros like Ubuntu are not just good because they give people what they're used to for free. They're good because they give people the enthusiasm and the confidence to do MORE with the technology.

MechR

May 25th, 2005, 07:57 PM

I've still had a few issues with wireless internet (most of which I've been able to work out by reading and asking around):

Managing multiple 'net connections isn't quite there yet (if you're connected to ethernet and wireless at the same time, neither works right until you turn one off).

If you aren't connected to the 'net on startup, the boot sits there for a good minute or so looking for the nonexistent connection.

Only WEP out of the box for wireless security :neutral:

Other than that, I realize there's not much that can be done for out-of-the-box multimedia. Simply grabbing the GStreamer ffmpeg plugin seems to fix that, though.

As far as playing embedded web media... how's Totem doing on their browser plugin? :razz:

NoTiG

May 25th, 2005, 09:08 PM

MechR

May 25th, 2005, 10:06 PM

You can fix the stall at the boot for network devices (if the cable is unplugged) by
sudo gedit /etc/dhcp3/dhclient.conf

and change timout from 60 to 1 or 5 seconds. no real reason to have anything but 1.Neat, thanks! :)

OTOH, my sound and wireless networking (which I had gotten working previously) seem to have stopped working since my last boot. *thinks* Maybe it was that kernel update a few days ago? I'm gonna try re-fixing them...

Edit: Got them working again :)

cinematography

May 25th, 2005, 10:15 PM

I voted 'need to wait a little longer'. Ubuntu is a great OS but I don't think it has enough automation for the average user. For example, I don't think most average users would have the patience to research and learn how to install the things they need to get mp3, mpg, and other things to work properly.

davidmigl

May 25th, 2005, 11:47 PM

Yup same here: 'need to wait a little longer.' Ubuntu is a great distro, but it simly refuses to work out of the box. Want a higher screen resolution? Sorry, you can't just adjust a slider, you'll have to go in and edit a file through a terminal with root privileges. Want to play mp3 and wma files? You'll have to go days searching the internet and posting on the forums to find the script that sucessfully installs the package that just wouldn't work. Want to boot into Windows? Sorry, Grub didn't quite get that right, and now you'll have to change boot priority to select OS's. Have a wireless network card or ATI video card? You can't depend on those working. Want to.... well, you get my point.

Now don't get me wrong, I love Ubuntu. I have the technical know-how to pick around all these problems. I'm not leaving Ubuntu anytime soon: these problems are too little to cause me to change. But what about the average user? What about the person who has never used a computer before? How is he supposed to know what to do when trouble strikes?

cinematography

May 26th, 2005, 12:09 AM

Want to play mp3 and wma files? You'll have to go days searching the internet and posting on the forums to find the script that sucessfully installs the package that just wouldn't work.
This I can relate with this VERY well. However...

Want a higher screen resolution? Sorry, you can't just adjust a slider, you'll have to go in and edit a file through a terminal with root privileges. -- Want to boot into Windows? Sorry, Grub didn't quite get that right, and now you'll have to change boot priority to select OS's.
I didn't have any problem with this.

aysiu

May 26th, 2005, 12:19 AM

This I can relate with this VERY well. However...

I didn't have any problem with this.
I did. That was a big barrier in me even trying Ubuntu. Mepis had my monitor settings right away.

MechR

May 26th, 2005, 12:24 AM

This I can relate with this VERY well.Installing just the ffmpeg GStreamer plugin (probably from multi/universe) seems to have worked for me. That was something I tried on my own, though... most instructions seem to be along the lines of "add the marillat repositories to your apt sources and get w32codecs," which for me has never gone smoothly :? Totem-xine also used to work, but last I checked, no longer does.

I didn't have any problem with this.I actually did; my laptop's widescreen resolution wasn't being picked up (neither by Mepis nor Ubuntu), and I had to read around to get the answer.

weekend warrior

May 26th, 2005, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by aysiu
I did. That was a big barrier in me even trying Ubuntu. Mepis had my monitor settings right away.
And for me it was exactly the opposite, Mepis giving me the "you have passed an undefined video mode" error that I wasn't able to solve, which was the end of Mepis for me. Just goes to show the extremely wide variety of hardware out there and the difficulty Linux has coping.

Also shows that this poll could be labeled is Linux ready, not just ubuntu.

Apple may have the last laugh, sticking to their own hardware that will work for anyone using OS X. Here's a recent article where both Debian and ubuntu lost out to OS X. read about it >>> (http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;1302841680;fp;16;fpid;0)

Saving grace for Linux is price, but it needs to move fast to improve the user experience.

potomacus

June 1st, 2005, 09:32 PM

I've just tried the live cd on my notebook (toshiba m45) and once again I find that linux is still a long way from becoming a usable os. The cd worked fine and I was able to run the os, but I wasn't able to configure my modem properly and my wireless connection, and software as simple as Totem didn't work.

The modem (Intel AC'97 rev04) is not autodetected and the wireless connection (Intel 2200bg) isn't even available in the networking tool reachable from the system menu.

Totem says that some "resource is busy or not available" and that's it.

The obscure Device Manager lists both devices but there's nothing to be done with it. No help, no clues, nothing.

Compare that to what happens when I run Windows XP and it's clear that it's not a viable alternative.

Nowadays 99% of the users just want to boot and be online, etc without spending hours in forums, trying to understand arcane command line tools,
or having to recompile the kernel (!). That is just the Middle Age of computing...

I know it's free and I recognize it's great, but it can't be advertised as a Windows alternative because it's not. I've been trying to switch to Linux for 5 years (last time I tried RH9) and I guess I'll have to wait a few more years.

5amYan

June 1st, 2005, 09:36 PM

trash

June 1st, 2005, 09:41 PM

potomacus

June 1st, 2005, 09:52 PM

I do know how to install windows, linux, whatever, but I just don't want to spend hours trying to configure things which should just work. That's just what I'm talking about: linux is still for those who have plenty of spare time or nothing better to do than to dismiss those who have a life... Not yet a viable alternative for 99% of the users, sorry.

leviathon

June 1st, 2005, 10:24 PM

Don't feed the troll...

angrykeyboarder

June 15th, 2005, 11:28 PM

but most windows users buy their systems with windows installed, if you did the same thing with a configured linux system i bet your experience would would be similar and linux systems can be bought and have support... I do know MS windows users who can't even re-install windows so your comparison is kinda flawed.

I think his comparison is right on the money, actually

A few months back I reformatted my hard drive and re-installed WinXP Pro. The whole process took about 30 minutes.

Depending on the distro, installing Linux takes about 45-90 (granted you do get more software with a Linux distro than with Windows).

However.....

I've yet to have nothing not work like it's supposed to after installing WinXP or 2000.

My experience with Linux varies by distrobution. I've found that commercial distros (i.e. RedHat, Mandriva (formally Mandrake), SuSE and so forth) are usually ready "out of the box" as Windows is (at least when it comes to Multimedia).

Why? Becuase they include "out of the box" multimedia capabilities. Non-commercial distros such as Debian, Fedora and Ubuntu do not (since they don't include non-free software).

Then there is the issue of peripherial support which varies widely.

I bought a digital Camera last year and when I first started looking into what I wanted, I first checked for Linux compatibility. I found many brands/models had poor or no compatibility. Those same brands/models would work out of the box with Windows.

Even commercial Linux distros have this (and other similar) problem(s) out of the box. It's a matter of sheer luck if you just happen to have the right hardware combination. It does tend to be less of a problem with a distro like SuSE vs Debian.

This is rarely an issue with Windows XP/2000. Eveything usually just "Works".

Don't get me wrong, I prefer Linux to Windows, but I'm willing to tinker to get things working. The average computer user isn't.

desdinova

June 15th, 2005, 11:34 PM

Strange - I've been linux only since 2000 and I don't see any of these issues.... However unfortunately there are a lot of people who have a misconception that Linux is a magic bullet to fix all their ills.

I worked as a sysadmin/tech support from 1991 to 2003 and most of my grief was Windows and Windows based.

When he said "pre-installed" he meant buying the Linux box with everything ready set up and working, as Windows boxes are now. Find a supplier of Linux boxes who does that and the user would never see any hardware issues- most of which relate to cutting edge hardware.

desdinova

June 15th, 2005, 11:37 PM

And btw comments like"nothing better to do than to dismiss those who have a life" are just going to come across as trolling - genuine criticisms do not need to be accompanied by insults

Leif

June 16th, 2005, 01:46 AM

Sorry things didn't work for you, but your "linux users have no life" attitude aside, I agree that hardware detection is a deal breaker for most people, and understandably so. On my computers everything is configured perfectly without any input from me. Check back in another 2-3 years and maybe your laptop will be supported.

Btw, I'm just going to assume that before taking the time to post a complaint on this forum, you actually went ahead and searched for your problem, because chances are that you could have found a solution in the same amount of time.

fastluck

June 16th, 2005, 02:14 AM

In my experience, Ubuntu is more ready for prime-time than any other distro I've tried. And I've tried as many as anyone else, and I bet more than most.

However, it's true that it requires more effort than installing Windows, it's true that Windows just works, and it's true that linux usually doesn't work 100% without some manual intervention. No amount of rhetoric is going to change that.

That's on the desktop. On the server, it's easier to get things to work, and stay working, than it is using Windows. And I'm a Windows person who's tasked with administering 4 or 5 linux boxes as part of my job. The person I inherited the job made the dubious decision to install a different distro on each box, which makes my life hell sometimes. But the Windows servers I administer don't even have SSH servers because they'd have to be purchased--for $1,000 a box.

This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine: There are probably a lot of altruistic developers out there, but most of the really good stuff receives funding from companies hoping to make money off linux. But it seems nobody wants to make money off the desktop, so it suffers. But if Ubuntu, and Debian Sarge and KDE and Gnome and GIMP and all the other software packages I want to add to that list are any indication, the linux desktop is going to reach a point where it works everywhere.

Like people keep saying, vote with your wallet. But tell the companies you're voting against, why you cast your vote. Send emails to marketing people and CEOs explaining what on their machine didn't work, and tell them it's because they didn't publish a public API for their hardware.

This is a hot button for me. Do hardware vendors make money off their crappy device driver software? Do they sell it? No--they sell hardware. They're not in the business of making software, and more often than not, the drivers they write show that off. Especially, but not exclusively vertical hardware vendors (they just happen to be the worst). Is there any reason in the world for them to protect source code that knows how to talk to their hardware? I can only think of one. I haven't seen any proof, but barring evidence to the contrary, it is this: By not releasing public specs and/or actual driver source code to the public, they're making more money than they would releasing said specs and source code. How would a hardware manufacturer make money not releasing information that would motivate linux users to buy their hardware? I used to read anti-Microsoft sentiment and say "these guys are paranoid." But I can't think of anything else that makes any sense. So I have come to the conclusion that 1) Microsoft is paying these people not to release this information; or 2) Microsoft has some form of marketing punishment in the wings for companies that do.

...and that's my 2 1/2 cents on this topic.

Fastluck

TeeJay

June 16th, 2005, 02:18 AM

Sounds like a short between the keyboard and the seat.

It's called a "Carbon Based Error"

ssck

June 16th, 2005, 02:46 AM

i will have to agree that ubuntu is not ready for the end user.you definitely need some tinkering here and there to get it to work .... issues like wireless, battery indicator, etc.but other than that, i am pretty happy with it.

right now, i am not able to print to my office's minolta printer (which is also a copier machine).the reason is because i have yet to find a driver for linux .... so what do i do ?

i copy my file to a windows xp machine, use terminal server to access the windows xp machine and print the file.it's a long process but what choice do i have ?

don't get me wrong ... i like ubuntu ... in fact it is the first linux distro on a laptop that i have been using since may .... and it is pretty good ... i like it.i suppose more support is needed from hardware manufacturers to write drivers for linux ... unless we can come up with software like the ndiswrapper to convert windows drivers for use (something which i had to do for my wireless card).

desdinova

June 16th, 2005, 02:47 AM

ssck

June 16th, 2005, 10:28 AM

Tried nosing round www.linuxprinting.org for a printer driver for that machine?

thanks for the website.checked it out .... unfortunately, the printer is not listed.appreciate your help.

fastluck

June 16th, 2005, 01:16 PM

Which minolta?

alastair lewis

June 27th, 2005, 09:34 PM

I would like to pick up on a few points.

1) I don't have a lot of free time, but I have been able to find time to make a fairly comfortable switch to Linux.
2) Ubuntu was the first distro I tried (had a warty CD that came with Linux Format magazine) and I have no intention of changing, the help available within these fora is excellent.
3) I have had a little trouble getting stuff working but I have got there in each case. As a result, I now know a lot more about how my computer works and this can hardly be a bad thing.
4) At the end of the day Windows is crap. My 5 year-old P3 laptop flys with Linux, and runs like rubbish with Windows. It bloats up over time and the vunerability to online malware is a huge problem. (I'm getting fed up sorting out my Dads windows box everytime it breaks down). Hoary offers an excellent functional safe alternative, and it's free.
5) I echo the point that Windows is not intuitative and all singing/dancing. The point is simply that you are used to it. You had to climb a similar learning curve and do the same sort of tweaking a few years ago. You just forgot what it was like.
6) The fun is now back in computing. I am about to self-build a desktop, I have planned the hardware in advance so it will run 'out of the box'. I reckon I will be able to install, get WiFi surfing and printing off the ground, and an mp3 ripped in the same time it takes you to to take the step back that a WinXP reinstall marks. (or even a fraction if i use partimage).

Why don't you stop complaining and ask for help where it is needed. That is where this forum comes into it's own.

That's my 2 pence worth.

alastair lewis

June 27th, 2005, 09:42 PM

right now, i am not able to print to my office's minolta printer (which is also a copier machine).the reason is because i have yet to find a driver for linux .... so what do i do ?

Buy a Hewlet Packard. Their linux support is excellent. Just watch out for the libjpeg64-dev dependancy which was omitted from the installation HOWTO.

nocturn

June 28th, 2005, 08:20 AM

Nowadays 99% of the users just want to boot and be online, etc without spending hours in forums, trying to understand arcane command line tools,
or having to recompile the kernel (!). That is just the Middle Age of computing...

I know it's free and I recognize it's great, but it can't be advertised as a Windows alternative because it's not. I've been trying to switch to Linux for 5 years (last time I tried RH9) and I guess I'll have to wait a few more years.

I'm sorry it did not work for you, but keep in mind that it is very difficult to support all this harware for which the manufacturers offer no specifications (laptops are specifically difficult in this respect)

Ubuntu installed in <30 minutes on the 4 machines I put it on, no tinkering required.
It takes about 5 minutes of maintenance a week.

My WinXP desktop at work which was pre-installed requires ~30 minutes of maintenance a week, including defragmentation (NTFS was supposed to be clear of this), excluding crashes and reboots.

I don't know why you would have to recompile your kernel, but I haven't needed to do that for years now.

manicka

June 28th, 2005, 08:38 AM

However, it's true that it requires more effort than installing Windows, it's true that Windows just works, and it's true that linux usually doesn't work 100% without some manual intervention. No amount of rhetoric is going to change that.

I'd have to disagree with this one. I certainly don't see that it's true that windows just works. Every windows instal I've ever done I spend just as many hours tweaking it to my liking, as a I do with a linux box.

It may be true that hardware support is better in windows but that isn't necessarily a linux problem. It's the problem of manufacturers not supporting their costomers properly. I think if Linux had access to the same code and support as windows developers do then hthis would be a different story.

I think that if we could look at two machines that had equal hardware support under Linux and Windows and were setup by the manufacturer beforehand, then there would be many more people hopping on the Linux bandwagon.

I think it's a testimont to the OS that so many people are prepared to get in and make it work. I don't think windows would ever reach that level of commitment.

amohanty

June 29th, 2005, 06:38 AM

Sorry I felt I had to respond to this one... Over the past few days I have been setting up a new workstation I setup. The configuration desired was :
Win XP Pro SP2 and a linux distro. I have had quite a bit of experience with RedHat so I definitely wanted to try out FC4.

First off the bat, if you ever compare WinXP Pro setup with either Suse, FC4 & Ubuntu (the three that I tried out), you will find that the XP setup kind of sucks, takes a **** load longer (PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE remember that windows does not install an office suite, print server, 6 different music players, high end image editing software, etc, this doesnt even include web, dns, mail, database .... servers!!!, you have to install them AFTER Win) than a base install of either of the three. I have to say that LInux installers have gotten a whole lot better in the last three years. Although Ubuntu still has a text installer its not so bad (only 42 key presses :)).

I installed Suse, and FC4 both of which have graphical installers and pretty much work out of the box. The problems I saw:
Suse: printer is a paint to setup, could not get scanner working with psc1315.
default industrial theme looks like crap (dunno who does their font sel)
ftp installs a drag, if you dont catch a good mirror.
otherwise its pretty slick.
FC4: problems with my Audigy2 ZS.
printer problems persisted.
Ubuntu: Boy oh boy. I like the look, the no root xdm login, and everything worked out of the box.

The way I see it the problem with people 'having a life' is that IMO they expect everything to be like starbucks, walk in plunck your three fifty and walk out, without realizing that their laptop is probably the most complex piece of machinery they will come across in their entire lifetime. And the above exp illustrates whats great about FOSS: dont like it, jump ship.. nobodys going to call you a rat, just another yuppie..

AZ

eliquid

July 3rd, 2005, 02:17 AM

hmmm.... this is a interesting thread going on.

I want to comment, but before I do remember these things about me:

being a windows users since 3.1.. currently my work computer, laptop, and home computer are all XP right now.
I work as a PHP programmer and use MySQL, so my Linux experince is more than average as the server I work on is Fedora based. However I dont have any advanced Linux experince. I guess you can say I know enough to just write some PHP and ftp it to the server and work with Mysql.

I have been looking into Linux for the past few years, just to gain experince. Ive tested everything from Slackware, Mandrake, Debian, Fedora, to all kinds of Live Cd's too.

One thing I notice was it was a wide gap between Linux and Windows. I wanted a OS that could install on any system without fuss... that being OLD computers, laptops, and servers. What I found was alot of Linux systems would not install on my old P54 system except Mandrake 10.1 and Fedora.. nothing would but these systems

So I thought I found one until I tried my laptop.. for some reason, only Live CD's seem to work... and alot of them didnt. The only ones that would were SLAX, UNBUNTU, and MEMPIS. Along with PUPPY and DSL. Mandrake wouldnt and neither would fedora

Even on my laptop, I noticed alot of LIVE OS's didnt pick up my USB mouse, didnt pick up my modem (winmodem, caused me to go buy a external modem to just work) and a few would freeze up while running.

I narrowed my choice to SLAX, UNBUNTU, and DSL. Out of all the Linux systems I have installed, tested, and played with... these 3 worked everytime I tried them in any system. Oddly all are Live CD based and can be install to the HD. I didnt want to try to make a OS work with the laptop.. I just wanted to at least boot. I could have played with Mandrake or Fedora to get it to work.. but that would impair my testing to find one that suited me.

I had to do alot of work though to get just one OS to work, where as with windows it always worked on all 3 machines. I got XP to even work on that P54 and it still picked up the usb and modem. I didnt have to "research" windows, it just worked.

Im not supporting windows, but I see where people will say Linux has a long way to go for average users. I like UBUNTU ( might be going to KUBUNTU ) becuase it loaded fast, had some basic office apps, and seemed well support and worked on everything I tested all the time. SLAX also did this as well as DSL.

Knoopix and many others either failed at boot or had so many problems afterward.

I think I am settling on KUBUNTU becuase I like KDS better and its based on Debian compared to SLAX based on slackware and DSL on Knoppix. I like the fact that Debian has such a huge apt get repo and I can get alot of software on my system. I want to use KUBUTU to install LAMP and stuff like WINE for windows apps I still may use.

Even though I will start using Linux more, UBUNTU helped me finally make the switch after years of "looking" at Linux.

But for a noob, I would still recommend Windows.. I still have to buy a external modem.... did all the research to find the one OS that would work anywhere, and fool with the system to learn it better. Its not a windows replacement yet (linux) but UBUNTU brings it so much closer.

To me a OS should work on anything ( which UBUNTU did ) and be easy to use, have a huge repo for adding software, be supported well, and have cross over apps available. UBUNTU does this with a very few other Linux OS's in my experince and I am glad I finally found it.

papangul

July 4th, 2005, 03:53 AM

The fact is that linux based desktops need some adaptations for making them more (desktop) user freindly and this is high time something is done in this respect. This article here (http://akaimbatman.blogspot.com/2005/06/linux-desktop-distribution-of-future_15.html) shows the way.

aysiu

July 4th, 2005, 04:03 AM

"The article" says:
The first point is a complex issue, but mostly stems from the Linux use of package mangers. Package management is one of those concepts that seems great on the outset, but fails in practice. The issue is that each package has a complex chain of dependencies unique to itself. In order to be certain that a package is compatible with all installations, all combinations of installed packages must be tested! As it is unlikely that anyone would go through so much trouble, the incompatibilities between packages accumulate, and before long the packaging system is rejecting new installs. And that's assuming that a graphical installer exists!

If a graphical installer does not exist, then life becomes even more difficult for the end user. Instead of launching a GUI and selecting the applications he wants, the user must open a terminal and begin typing cryptic commands for which he has no training for.

Many proponents of packaging systems downplay these issues by stating that packaging errors don't exist on system XYZ (despite proof to the contrary), and that if the user is running Linux he should be "smart enough" to know how to use the command line. Such statements are just silly. Users want the computer to make their lives easier. Any barrier thrown in their way will only drive them to a different platform. Unfortunately, package managers still drive most Linux desktop distributions. Has this person used Synaptic Package Manager and apt-get? Package management is one of Debian-based Linuxes strengths. Sure, there are obstacles to Linux desktop adoption for home users, but this isn't it.

papangul

July 4th, 2005, 04:18 AM

Has this person used Synaptic Package Manager and apt-get? Package management is one of Debian-based Linuxes strengths. Sure, there are obstacles to Linux desktop adoption for home users, but this isn't it.
You have to understand the article is about linux desktops in general and not related to any particular distro like Ubuntu or Gentoo.

aysiu

July 4th, 2005, 07:44 AM

You have to understand the article is about linux desktops in general and not related to any particular distro like Ubuntu or Gentoo. Yes, but it doesn't make exceptions in its generalities. It doesn't say, "Certainly some distributions make packaging easier, but most don't" or "A few distributions have wonderful packaging systems, but there's no way for novices to know which distributions do." It makes no mention at all that there are any exceptions. It sounds as if the author believes this is a problem pervasive throughout all of Linux.

tread

July 4th, 2005, 07:55 AM

Besides, the solution to that is: every application installs its own libraries. This is what happens to most Windows applications, and is the reason for bloated installs.

The only point I liked was:

OS X Finder actually hides them.
but, I think kde already has something like that. Still, a really good app finder would make it easier for people.

benplaut

July 4th, 2005, 08:33 AM

Besides, the solution to that is: every application installs its own libraries. This is what happens to most Windows applications, and is the reason for bloated installs.

The only point I liked was:

but, I think kde already has something like that. Still, a really good app finder would make it easier for people.

XFCE has a very nice appfinder ;-)

jsimmons

July 4th, 2005, 01:11 PM

I think the article is pretty close to the truth. Linux's biggest weakness is the variety of package managers. Add to that the occasional need to use the commandline to get stuff installed, or even the need to compile something, and you're beyond the typical Windoows user's level of experience.

MANY Windows users have never seen a DOS prompt - my dad (73 years old), his wife (50 years old), or my daughter (21 years old).

What Linux needs is a well thought-out, well-designed, and well-implemented package manager that has an equal amount of functionality at the command line as it does in a GUI. It needs to be able to resolve dependencies, start a compile when necessary, and be more forth-coming about where stuff is put on the system. It also needs to be used by ALL distributions. Without these features, package management will continue to be a fragmented partially implemented mess.

Synaptic is nice and all, but the lag time for new versions of apps to be added appears to be a bit long. Granted, this will always be a problem because (and you should have seen this coming) there are so many package formats to support and so many package managers to support them.

papangul

July 4th, 2005, 01:54 PM

What Linux needs is a well thought-out, well-designed, and well-implemented package manager that has an equal amount of functionality at the command line as it does in a GUI. It needs to be able to resolve dependencies, start a compile when necessary, and be more forth-coming about where stuff is put on the system. It also needs to be used by ALL distributions. Without these features, package management will continue to be a fragmented partially implemented mess.

Have you tried porthole, the GUI frontend for portage of gentoo? I installed both precompiled binary and compiled-from-source versions of firefox through it. Give Gentoo and Porthole a try.
My concern is the linux filesystem, which may be appropriate for sys-admins but not for ordinary users.

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 02:20 PM

jsimmons

July 4th, 2005, 04:09 PM

Did it ever occur to people like batsy that being a hughe success on the desktop in this kind of cirumstances might take some time, no matter what the directory structure of Linux might be?

Ummmm, it seems to me that with an existing OS as an example, Linux distros would have gotten it right by now...

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 04:29 PM

Ummmm, it seems to me that with an existing OS as an example, Linux distros would have gotten it right by now...

I'm seriously having trouble understanding what you are trying to say here?
Are you trying to tell us that Linux should be Windows clone?
Are you trying to tell us that if Linux was a Windows clone, Linux wouldn't have to stand up against a monopoly anymore?

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 04:32 PM

What Linux needs is a well thought-out, well-designed, and well-implemented package manager that has an equal amount of functionality at the command line as it does in a GUI. It needs to be able to resolve dependencies, start a compile when necessary, and be more forth-coming about where stuff is put on the system. It also needs to be used by ALL distributions. Without these features, package management will continue to be a fragmented partially implemented mess.

If that is what you want out of Linux then you might be disappointed for years to come. The best we might see in the near fuure is an easy to use synaptic.

The fragmentation in the Distro community will not be healed. Look at how many distros refused to accept the LSB standards.

I'm sorry but this is the truth. OSX and Windows will continue to be the best option for those that fear choice (of package managers in this case).

Stormy Eyes

July 4th, 2005, 04:40 PM

The fact is that linux based desktops need some adaptations for making them more (desktop) user freindly...

Prove it. Making claims without providing facts to back them isn't going to impress anybody.

and this is high time something is done in this respect.

Then start coding. Talk is cheap.

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 04:54 PM

Prove it. Making claims without providing facts to back them isn't going to impress anybody.

Then start coding. Talk is cheap.

I am a programmer myself and the proof that is need is to take a look at even your forums on this site and namely at the following ones...
- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=45480
- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=46078
- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=45315

All of these are just from one forum, the amd64 one...

I myself a linux user for about 4 years, is starting to have my doubts. I constantly said that linux will get better and before long a lot of people will be using it. Its for years since I started telling my self that and as my friends would say, "...She's arrogant to think that that will ever happen..." and yes, I did think that linux would be the most popular and widely used OS, but it isn't. The way current events look, its on a downward fall from its little grace that it did have. I like linux, but I am starting to find it harder to convince myself that using linux is all that worth it.

Kvark

July 4th, 2005, 04:55 PM

*read the whole article*

That article is not relevant to ubuntu in any way. For some distros it may be an improvement to listen to those ideas. But ubuntu is already more user friendly then a distro based on the ideas in that article would be.

The way to go for ubuntu is to...

1. Fix the glitches, such as that programs don't appear in the menu after installation.

2. Hunt down the things that can only be done in a command terminal or .conf file and add gui alternatives to those. For example in natilus, a password prompt for sudoing (of course with a warning above the prompt stating that you could break something if you don't know what you are doing) instead of the "you do not have the rights to do that"-message.

Optimal Aurora

July 4th, 2005, 04:59 PM

Eventually, ubuntu will come that most linux distros have, looking to the super cheap and legacy systems department and trying to get to the server department for businesses and large corporations. So yes I agree with the article and with Venus that linux has alot to prove to be used on my desktop again...

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 05:01 PM

No, not that article again...
As I wrote elsewhere:

A /. troll writing a stupid article about what linux needs to do to succeed on the desktop. Just what we've been waiting for.

And you don't even have to read far to know that it's not worth reading the whole thing

"Installing Applications is complicated"
No, it isn't. It's different than what people are accustomed to, but it sure isn't complicated.

Actually, I don't think the author was trolling, and I don't think he was wrong. You have to understand he is talking about what Linux would need to be adopted by Joe Sixpack. Applications are still difficult to install - not for you and not for me but for the average windows user? Forget about it...

RPM based systems have dependancy problems, and so do Debian based systems. Not as much and not as often, but problems do arise on a regular basis. Search these forums and see how many posts talk about error messages like: "<some program> depends on <someother thing> and is not going to be installed." Yes the user probably messed up his sources list or something, but the system is NOT bullet proof. Want another example? Search the forums for people having problems with sound, or with Firefox plugins. If you took away those questions, and the questions from newbies having trouble understanding sudo, the traffic in here would be reduced by 25%!

In my opinion, Apple got it right when it comes to installing software. Apple proves that a unix based system can be easy to use and bullet proof. I think there is a tendency amoung hardcore Linux users to beleive that Linux is superior to Windows because it is harder to use, and therefore more "techy" or "geeky". Making Linux easier to use for the masses does NOT mean it has to become a WIndows clone. Linux is superior to Windows because it is a)more powerful, b) more stable, c) more secure. Mac OS X makes software VERY easy to install without sacrificing points A, B, or C, and Mac OS X is certainly not a Windows clone.

Having said all that, I still prefer Linux to Mac OS X. Why? Because things work so well on the Mac, it has become boring to me. I like to tinker and fiddle under the hood, and I like to troubleshoot and solve problems - I don't think the average computer user does.

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 05:05 PM

I am a programmer myself and the proof that is need is to take a look at even your forums on this site and namely at the following ones...
- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=45480
- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=46078
- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=45315

All of these are just from one forum, the amd64 one...

Well...thats not fair. The 64 bit version of Ubuntu is very new and lacks many packages. In time this will be fixed.

I myself a linux user for about 4 years, is starting to have my doubts. I constantly said that linux will get better and before long a lot of people will be using it. Its for years since I started telling my self that and as my friends would say, "...She's arrogant to think that that will ever happen..." and yes, I did think that linux would be the most popular and widely used OS, but it isn't. The way current events look, its on a downward fall from its little grace that it did have. I like linux, but I am starting to find it harder to convince myself that using linux is all that worth it.

The reason its not more popular is because MS has really tough agreements that force the big computer makers to NOT ship with Linux preinstalled. No big maker wants to make MS mad (seeing as how most people will still want the MS product)...so no Linux on the desktop (except us nerds of course).

I don't get it....4 years? What has MS released in that time to make Linux seem so beaten? XP is about that old....

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 05:12 PM

Having said all that, I still prefer Linux to Mac OS X. Why? Because things work so well on the Mac, it has become boring to me. I like to tinker and fiddle under the hood, and I like to troubleshoot and solve problems - I don't think the average computer user does.

I quit XP for the same reason. Maybe that should tell me someting about Linux....NAH....

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 05:15 PM

I don't get it....4 years? What has MS released in that time to make Linux seem so beaten? XP is about that old....
Well it is multiple things like the software patents, trying to develop a 3D desktop, the fact that linux still seems to have crappy graphics, the features of Mac OS-X tiger and the fact that since windows SP2, my systems hasn't had a virus or anything affect it and is more compatible with my hardware than linux had ever been. (one example of the hardware support is that my new (well 5 or 6 months old) Microsoft Wireless Comfort Keyboard and Wireless Optical mouse have features that linux doesn't support. On especially is the vertical and horizontal scrolls on the mouse wheel...)

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 05:16 PM

Having said all that, I still prefer Linux to Mac OS X. Why? Because things work so well on the Mac, it has become boring to me. I like to tinker and fiddle under the hood, and I like to troubleshoot and solve problems - I don't think the average computer user does.
I still rather use Mac OS-X and Windows versus Linux in any form, on any platform, and with any package management...

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 05:21 PM

I still rather use Mac OS-X and Windows versus Linux in any form, on any platform, and with any package management...

Well then you should use Mac OS X (not Windows) if you feel that way. Linux is all about freedom, and all about choice - including the freedom to use something else if you'd rather.

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 05:32 PM

Well then you should use Mac OS X (not Windows) if you feel that way. Linux is all about freedom, and all about choice - including the freedom to use something else if you'd rather.
I know that, but what I am trying to make a point that linux desktop isn't really ready for the desktop environment. Just like the Nubuntu thread made me think, I agree with that person but its not a new distro that would be needed but a distro that is only used for developer workstations and servers and for clustering. I feel that ubuntu isn't even good as a server, maybe for me as a developer, but clustering, heck no... I like ubuntu, but it has to improve over this.

And I perfer Windows for surfing the net, and media playing and playing games and my Mac for using graphic editing and some scientific programs.

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 05:49 PM

I know that, but what I am trying to make a point that linux desktop isn't really ready for the desktop environment. Just like the Nubuntu thread made me think, I agree with that person but its not a new distro that would be needed but a distro that is only used for developer workstations and servers and for clustering. I feel that ubuntu isn't even good as a server, maybe for me as a developer, but clustering, heck no... I like ubuntu, but it has to improve over this.

And I perfer Windows for surfing the net, and media playing and playing games and my Mac for using graphic editing and some scientific programs.

Right. I think Linux is ready for the Desktop for those willing to put in a little effort, but I don't think it's "ready for Grandma." I've used Linux on the desktop for more than 5 years and I love it. I have a friend - very bright guy (he's a Phd) who uses Mac OS X for everything. I don't think he would survive using Linux on the desktop. I'm sure he wouldn't.

I'll give you another example. I do IT support for an office of 75-80 Engineers. These guys use a Linux compute farm for ALL their work. (Currently 68 dual cpu servers running RHEL). Probably a third of them have Linux desktop machines in their cubes as well. (And Windows XP notebooks). These people are for the most part very UNIX/Linux savvy, having come up through University using UNIX/Linux as well. I have worked with these guys for 5 years, and know them pretty well. My guess is that maybe half of them could survive with Linux on the desktop instead of WIndows. Give them a computer, some CD's to install Linux, and take away their Windows machines? Most of them could not and would not stand for it. Sad but true.

papangul

July 4th, 2005, 05:50 PM

Prove it. Making claims without providing facts to back them isn't going to impress anybody.
I thought this was so apparent it won't require a proof. In any case I'm a human being and not a lawyer. :-P
Anyone can play with winbloz for three days and he will be familiar with the whole system, no docs will be required. I have actually read the docs for the *nix filesystem structure but always tend to forget the details, again and again; and I generally fumble around most of the time. In contrast I'm sure I will never forget the windows scheme even though I am not going to use windows again in my life.
Sometimes I used to clean the program files directory manually and get rid of directories which didn't(for some reason or other) had an entry in the start menu or the uninstaller menu. Compared to that, under linux, I have most of the time no idea where the files are installed.

Then start coding. Talk is cheap.
If it was a matter of coding I would have started off by now.
The issue mostly is about deciding on new ways of organising the system. My concern is that once linux desktops become more commonplace, it will be that much difficult to change anything.
As for me it's just fine, well almost ;-). I'm afraid for many people out there it isn't.

desdinova

July 4th, 2005, 06:06 PM

papangul

July 4th, 2005, 06:27 PM

And yet again people go off about how Windows is better, better for this better for that. Well if you feel that way, use it. I don't - and I don't want to see Linux become a poor third rate Windows clone to accomodate those who fail to see our strengths lie in the differences we have from that model, and that making Linux a third rate Windows clone in order to chase some mythical "magic desktop" is sheer lunacy.

I've seen Linux develop since 1996/7, went Linux only in 2004. I haven't missed Windows AT ALL. In fact, I don't even own a Windows installed machine or set of cd's for it.

And scientific programs - XMaxima , gnuplot and Octave rule for me. I use Intel Fortran 95 as well, free for non-commercial use. I have no need, or want, to install Windows when I can get apps for free that I feel are better (for me).

People can survive without it, you know.

Package Management - what is wrong with apt-get/synaptic? I made a conscious decision not to compile my own software with this install, and so far I've kept it. Synaptic is brilliant - it actually shows you what is available - imagine firing up Windows add/remove programs and seeing a list of software there ready to install?

Rant off
I also use linux exclusively and am enjoying every moment of it, but reading your and some other posts I am considering going back to "it". Is it a crime of sorts to ask for a better directory structure? Is it totally impossible to make some adaptations for the desktop( without making it a clone of windows)? As I have said the structure is most appropriate for sys-admins and servers(and personally I don't have many problems with it).

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 06:33 PM

Actually, I don't think the author was trolling, and I don't think he was wrong. You have to understand he is talking about what Linux would need to be adopted by Joe Sixpack. Applications are still difficult to install - not for you and not for me but for the average windows user? Forget about it...

I disagree.
Let's take a look at installing a program on Ubuntu and installing a program on Windows, shall we?
Ubuntu:
Start one program (Note, it's always the same program, with the same interface, working in the same way).
Now search for the program you want to install, select the program and press install. That's it.

Windows:
No program, no central repository, no nothing.
Hit google, tucows or your local dealer and try to find what you are looking for.
Then navigate the site of the program you want to download to find where you can actually download the program.
Then download it.
If it comes with an installer, start the installer and see what it has in store for you. (Note, we are not talking about one installer, but a whole lot of them, that all work differently from oneanother, that all have different interfaces. Some may simply install the program, others will clutter every conceivable part of your desktop with shortcuts to your newly installed program, while others may simply be a program whose sole purpose it is to connect to a repository and download the software from there).
But wait, it's not an installer, it's an archieve.
Click on the archieve, hm, doesn't work, say you need to install some program to be able to get it to work.
Strange, last time it worked, but then again, it was a selfextracting zip-archive, this one isn't.
So, return to the beginning and hunt for the program.
If you got it unziped, fire up explorer, change to the directory where the archieve has been unziped to and look for something that might be called setup.exe, or install.exe, or something like this.

RPM based systems have dependancy problems, and so do Debian based systems.

If you use them the way they are supposed to be used, no, they don't. If you insist on doing it the windows way, yes, things will not work.

In my opinion, Apple got it right when it comes to installing software. Apple proves that a unix based system can be easy to use and bullet proof.

No, installing software might be a bit more elegant than installing software on windows, but that's about it.
Just because you don't have to double click on an installer, but instead have to drag the program yourself to the application directory doesn't really make it better.
And don't forget that there are still plenty of programs that require installer, some of them luckily not even providing uninstallers.
Further, this method of software installation is of course terribly ineffecient as you end up with the same libraries installed by and for every program (which wouldn't even make less sense in an open source OS, btw.), which in turn leads to security problems, as you might end up with several versions of one library that has a security vulnerabilty and on top of that, there is no way in hell to keep your whole system updated simply by running the update manager.

I think there is a tendency amoung hardcore Linux users to beleive that Linux is superior to Windows because it is harder to use, and therefore more "techy" or "geeky". Making Linux easier to use for the masses does NOT mean it has to become a WIndows clone. Linux is superior to Windows because it is a)more powerful, b) more stable, c) more secure. Mac OS X makes software VERY easy to install without sacrificing points A, B, or C, and Mac OS X is certainly not a Windows clone.

I think there's a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks by some people and making Linux a OSX clone wouldn't really be better than making it a Windows clone. Making it easier and more usable, I'm with you, making it a clone of something else, that has it's own issues, to put it mildly, nope.

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 06:37 PM

I also use linux exclusively and am enjoying every moment of it, but reading your and some other posts I am considering going back to "it". Is it a crime of sorts to ask for a better directory structure? Is it totally impossible to make some adaptations for the desktop( without making it a clone of windows)? As I have said the structure is most appropriate for sys-admins and servers(and personally I don't have many problems with it).

As I'm suspecting that my posts might be among those "other posts" I'll answer.
No, it's not a crime to ask for a better directory structure. Take a look at gobolinux if you are interested in this, for example, intersting project.

But it also isn't a crime to disagree with you about the directory structure being bad, or pointing out that the directory strutcure is totally irrelevant, as normal users never get exposed to it and never should. Feel free to disagree with me, but please, leave me the right to disagree with you.

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 06:40 PM

papangul

July 4th, 2005, 06:55 PM

As I'm suspecting that my posts might be among those "other posts" I'll answer.

No, it was not yours since you tried to give some reasons. Some people won't even try to understand what is being said , just arrogantly dismiss any issues not to their liking.

aysiu

July 4th, 2005, 06:56 PM

If that is what you want out of Linux then you might be disappointed for years to come. The best we might see in the near fuure is an easy to use synaptic. How is Synaptic not easy to use? Reload. Search. Click to install. Apply. That seems simple enough.

In Windows, it's go to the internet, search for something. Find it. Download it. Double-click the .exe. Hope it's not a virus or spyware. Click "next," "next," "next," "finish." Reboot. Or the same thing but with a CD-ROM.

Can you mention a few specifics about what you're finding so difficult about Synaptic?

Search these forums and see how many posts talk about error messages like: "<some program> depends on <someother thing> and is not going to be installed." Actually--and I'm not playing devil's advocate here--I don't see that very often. I see plenty of threads about screen resolution problems and sound card issues and whatnot. Can you link to a few of these posts you're talking about? And are you going to argue that this never happens in Windows (http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=lang_en&safe=off&q=site%3Amicrosoft.com+missing+dll&btnG=Search)?

I think Linux is ready for the Desktop for those willing to put in a little effort, but I don't think it's "ready for Grandma." We have to be careful in making a distinction here. Isn't most of the effort for Linux getting it set up and installed? Linux is certainly ready for Grandma if Granddaughter or Grandson sets it up for Grandma (as nice Dell, Apple, and HP do for Windows and Mac). Once it's set up, it's all point and click. Does Grandma ever really install an OS? Not often.

I really don't see what the point of these articles is, honestly. Are they trying to scare new users away from trying Linux? If people want to try Linux, why stop them? Rather than saying "it's not ready for home desktop use," how about saying, "It works well once you get it set up, but no company is going to set it up for you. You have to do it yourself"? I mean, clearly this isn't targeted toward Linux users, because it's not like Linux users are saying, "Oh, it's ready. Great. Now we don't have to do any work any more." People in the Linux community are constantly working to make Linux more accessible--either through new GUI tools, easier installers, new programs, or better documentation.

Once again, what is the point of the article? Who is the target audience and what is the article hoping to convince them to do? I don't see how it's appropriate for anyone.

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 07:05 PM

If you use them the way they are supposed to be used, no, they don't. If you insist on doing it the windows way, yes, things will not work.

'sudo apt-get install <whatever>' then something breaks due to a dependancy problem. If you say this never happens, you haven't been reading the forums. Was that an attempt to install software "the windows way?"

No, installing software might be a bit more elegant than installing software on windows, but that's about it.
Just because you don't have to double click on an installer, but instead have to drag the program yourself to the application directory doesn't really make it better.

Right. It has nothing to do with clicking or dragging or whatever. It has to do with fully, 100% solving dependancy problems by packaging everything the program needs. Disk space is cheap. As to security problems - does Apple have a lot of security problems? Don't think so.

I think there's a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks by some people and making Linux a OSX clone wouldn't really be better than making it a Windows clone. Making it easier and more usable, I'm with you, making it a clone of something else, that has it's own issues, to put it mildly, nope.

Never attacked you once. Wouldn't think of it. I you think I did, then I'm sorry for not being clear.

In the end I still say Linux ain't ready for Grandma. Bottom line however is I don't really care all that much. Linux is ready for ME, and that's enough. I've been using Linux for so long now I'll never switch to anything else. My Mac Mini gets only occasional use. My first Linux distro was Slackware 2.0 which I guess must have been around 1995. I dropped Windows completely around 1999-2000.

Peace dude. It's OK to disagree about things. We're on the same side.

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 07:11 PM

As I'm suspecting that my posts might be among those "other posts" I'll answer.
No, it's not a crime to ask for a better directory structure. Take a look at gobolinux if you are interested in this, for example, intersting project.

But it also isn't a crime to disagree with you about the directory structure being bad, or pointing out that the directory strutcure is totally irrelevant, as normal users never get exposed to it and never should. Feel free to disagree with me, but please, leave me the right to disagree with you.

Knome_fan: I'm happy to say I 100% agree with you about this!!! Directory structure is largely irrelevant to users. :-)

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 07:14 PM

And yet again people go off about how Windows is better, better for this better for that. Well if you feel that way, use it. I don't - and I don't want to see Linux become a poor third rate Windows clone to accomodate those who fail to see our strengths lie in the differences we have from that model, and that making Linux a third rate Windows clone in order to chase some mythical "magic desktop" is sheer lunacy.

...

People can survive without it, you know.

Package Management - what is wrong with apt-get/synaptic? I made a conscious decision not to compile my own software with this install, and so far I've kept it. Synaptic is brilliant - it actually shows you what is available - imagine firing up Windows add/remove programs and seeing a list of software there ready to install?

Rant off
apt-get/synapic is crappy when you don't have in any repo something you used in another distro.

And if Linux ever hopes to see the desktop of any number of people that would be classified as average computer users that don't understand programming enough to even use it, then they need to make it run and work with everything just like windows. Personally, I can see that happening in Linux every single day. So in the future if linux is still around it will run just like windows and just like windows people will be hacking and mal-ing (malware) it all day long just like windows.

Some people are so vocal about linux is better than windows that people that are looking to use linux be it from the mac side or windows or solaris side look at the forums first... And what do they see people like you being really vocal and all about linux. Personally, I like linux, but I try to show the world on both sides of the fence. Just as some of my fellow developers said, "... we would rather make programs for windows and mac versus linux because it is more friendly to its users... however, we have to make the program work just as easily..." Granted that is usually hard to do, but it is nice to work with it...

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 07:16 PM

ryanoliver

July 4th, 2005, 07:19 PM

I may be very new to the entire Linux scene but I'm willing to test out my views in the open source waters. I've been using M$ since I could read and type using DOS. Through my few years of experience in using M$ I have run across a lot of red tape. I can't change the lay out of my GUI, I can't fix a huge bug that occurs when I install two programs together even when they're both made by M$. M$ tries very hard to put out a product that the masses want to use, it's supply and demand, if linux was the greatest OS ever it wouldn't matter if no one wanted it. I would like to give M$ some credit for creating an OS that the masses use, something that several companies have tried to do but have failed because of a monopoly.

As for Linux being difficult to use, what fun is it when everything is done for you? I don't want to sit around at work because someone else did it for me, I want to do something too. Having the freedom to alter a program the way that open source allows people to do is a great thing in my eyes. Has anyone ever heard of a great thing happening that was easy to do? If it was easy it wouldn't be that great of an accomplishment. If i remember correctly, DOS wasn't that big on GUIs when I used it, but look at what it has become since then because of the money involved in it. I don't want to pay 300 for a new OS when I can download an ISO for nothing and get a lot more software too than with M$'s OSes.

"Variety is the spice of life." The original OS form M$ came around what, '85ish? Between Mac and M$ there is a total of maybe 20 different versions you can chose form that are very 'user friendly'. Where as Linux hasn't been around for that long and there are how many distros now? Around 2 or 3 hundred now? "That's a spicy meatball."

"Idle minds are the devil's playground." Everyone here, every geek, nerd, hacker and hobbyist are here because they wanted to try something different, new or even challenging. Are there any 17 year old kids from MN here creating viruses? No! If that kid was a Linux user he would have had some respect for his fellow users and created a great program to share with everyone. Hackers (the malicous kind, there is a difference) just creat a big business for companies like SARC and McAfee because M$ hasn't changed since its first release. Same cookie-cutter program, just a new feature here and there and a new eye candy. I haven't heard of many viruses being released for Linux and I think it has something to do with mutual respect between people in the community. I'm not about to hack anyone because I don't want to get hacked either. A little respect can go a long ways sometimes.

"When a child is born, they can learn any vowel sound of any language. But when they reach the age of two they start to only recognize the vowels of thier language." That means that anyone can learn anything, it just depends on what you're use to and what you're willing to do. If people view Linux as too difficult to use, then go back to Mac or M$. Don't be afraid to try for something that isn't spoon fed to you.

I've read on countless Linux forums "what distro?" come form n00bs mouths. I disagree with the article's statement that new people don't know what distro to use. I think that everyone that has used Linux has read about the different distros before ever trying one. We don't need high priced tech support because we have community support, where the real techs live. I can't believe that people try one form of linux and turn away forever. If you tried a new food that you didn't like when you were born, would you have never eaten again? No, someone was there to help you try all kinds of different foods to see what you like and don't like. If you don't like one spice, then try another. If you like cooking, then mix a few together. That's the same as the distros, If you're a programmer, hacker, hobbyist, whatever, then mix a few 'spices' together. Ubuntu is debian based right? That means that some people came together and mixed a new spice and I for one like it and would like to learn a little more about it. Maybe later on I'll mix it with something else too.

If some of you disagree with me, that's great. If we all thought alike, then why would we need any kind of choice in consumer products? Instead of people tyring to flame me for anything I've said, try talking to me. I'm open minded and enjoy a good convo when I can, you might even change my opinion on something I've said here. Flaming to me is just sad, who are you to flame anyone? If a new person asks a question don't ridicule them because at one point in time you didn't know the answer either. You had to learn it just like you had to learn to turn the computer one, or type on a keyboard, so let's not flame anyone.

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 07:30 PM

I don't consider myself a hacker or a nerd or a geek or an average or power user. I however can say from experience that linux is easily modified from the out side especially linuxes like ubuntu that don't have selinux. However, I am a security admin, so I would say that all in all linux is stable and reliable and safe from most viruses, but it is as open as a the sky is on a clear day. So I disagree with you ryan... However, I do admit the beauty is that you get some kind of variety between distros. But still linux is never going to be on every ones desktop until it is more received in the OEM and Software Manufacturer department. Until then it is just you enthusiast and developers (like me) and admins using something to keep their skills up. Out of all the servers and companies that use them in my area, most of the business say they would use windows both on the server and on the desktop whether they could use linux or unix they could care less. Only the enthusiast and those that want home servers use linux...

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 07:35 PM

How is Synaptic not easy to use? Reload. Search. Click to install. Apply. That seems simple enough.

Hey...I love synaptic. I think is great. But its lacking for Window's users.

A perfect synaptic would:

1. Have an icon for each program (Icons would make up for the problem that open source programs are named such weird things. People might not remember "I need Gimp" but they might remember "I need the program with the fox icon."

2. EVERY program that is installed in synaptic gets a menu addition...window's style.

3. There is no three.

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 07:38 PM

'sudo apt-get install <whatever>' then something breaks due to a dependancy problem. If you say this never happens, you haven't been reading the forums. Was that an attempt to install software "the windows way?"

Well, if you read the forums, virtually all of these problems occur because people start to install random debs they downloaded from somewhere, or added repositories for other distributions.

Right. It has nothing to do with clicking or dragging or whatever. It has to do with fully, 100% solving dependancy problems by packaging everything the program needs. Disk space is cheap. As to security problems - does Apple have a lot of security problems? Don't think so.

Oh, it has a lot to do with clicking and dragging. Explaining my father that to install a program he has to fire up the finder, navigate to the applications directory and then drag the program there would be a nightmare, belive me.
And packaging everything a program needs is not a solution to the dependency problem, but a dirty workaround. And it does lead to security problems. Recently there was a problem with a graphics library on windows that is used by a lot of programs.

Now if you have a package manager like Ubuntu does, all you have to do is update the one instance of the library and all the programs are fixed. You don't have the possibility to do anything remotely like this on Windows or OSX.

On top of it you seem to forget that Linux is an open OS, so programs make a lot of use of shared libraries, because they can and because this is one of the great advantages of an open system. Packaging all the dependencies into one package wouldn't really be practical on such a platform.

Never attacked you once. Wouldn't think of it. I you think I did, then I'm sorry for not being clear.

I'm sorry, I probably overreacted, but if people start to talk about how terrible and snobish Linux users are instead of debating the issues, I tend to overreact, as I have seen this line of argument to often already. And after all you did so in an answer to something I wrote, so I felt you meant me.

In the end I still say Linux ain't ready for Grandma. Bottom line however is I don't really care all that much. Linux is ready for ME, and that's enough. I've been using Linux for so long now I'll never switch to anything else. My Mac Mini gets only occasional use. My first Linux distro was Slackware 2.0 which I guess must have been around 1995. I dropped Windows completely around 1999-2000.

Peace dude. It's OK to disagree about things. We're on the same side.
I wouldn't even disagree about Linux not being ready for Grandma, but I'm convinced Windows and OSX aren't ready either. :wink:

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 07:44 PM

Right. I think Linux is ready for the Desktop for those willing to put in a little effort, but I don't think it's "ready for Grandma."

Untrue. As I have said before, Linux is great for two kinds of users:

1. The absolute clueless that think that computers are magic boxes. (what many call "grandma") As long as you set it up...it will run without you having to come in and clean viruses/malware every few months. Some people say "but my grandma/ma/whatever wants to try out programs that their friends email them about." In my experiance EVERY program that anyone but myself told my mom to install on her windows machine has some sort of spyware. Every freaking one. I might put her on Linux just so she can't install the crap her computer clueless friends tell her to install.

2. Super nerds that love the idea of the power of Unix at home. Basically 90% of us.

Those in the middle (I think I speak to you Venus). AKA a "windows power user" will never like Linux. It has a higher learning curve and it won't work with all the properitary software and hardware a Windows power user has. Personally...I will pay extra just to buy a part that works with Linux because I know IT WILL WORK!!! but I know most people don't feel that way. I my buy an HP laptop soon just because HP is supporting Ubuntu. Each to his/her own.

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 07:45 PM

Well, if you read the forums, virtually all of these problems occur because people start to install random debs they downloaded from somewhere, or added repositories for other distributions.

No that is not exactly the case. For me when you install particly any from the universe or multiverse repos for ubuntu then you have problems, but the instance you download the totem-xine and go and find dvd libs and install them you get at least dvd functionality.

I don't agree that it involves solving the dependency issue. It deals with solving that and solving how to use it in a more user friendly way...

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 07:47 PM

I'm sorry, I probably overreacted, but if people start to talk about how terrible and snobish Linux users are instead of debating the issues, I tend to overreact, as I have seen this line of argument to often already. And after all you did so in an answer to something I wrote, so I felt you meant me.

I was actually thinking about a guy at work who thinks that "real men" compile everything, and all binaries are for "girlie-men" and Windows Lusers. Don't even get me started on Gentoo users... :roll:

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 07:51 PM

Thank you that proves my point to a degree, it suppose to be open source and people are suppose to help you out, at least that is my impression on what "humanity to others" is suppose to mean...

As a moderator on this forum...I can tell you that "humanity to others" means whatever damn thing the person that wants to be right in a conversation wants it to mean. I have seen it be warped into many different things.

I personally think the whole humaniy thing is just good PR and marketing.

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 08:14 PM

And packaging everything a program needs is not a solution to the dependency problem, but a dirty workaround. And it does lead to security problems. Recently there was a problem with a graphics library on windows that is used by a lot of programs.

Not thinking about Windows here. Windows is insecure by design. (Do some reading about Active X) The way Apple does it may be a "dirty workaround" but it is a 100% successful work around. Everything installs. No dependancy problems. None, zip, nada, zilch...

Now if you have a package manager like Ubuntu does, all you have to do is update the one instance of the library and all the programs are fixed. You don't have the possibility to do anything remotely like this on Windows or OSX.
Apt is without a doubt the best Linux packaging system, and beats RPM hands down. I have personally run into the "X depends on Y and will not be installed" scenario however, and I have never installed random .debs from somewhere else. I can't remember the exact issue now, and it may well have been my fault, but if I can screw up, newbies are far more likely to screw up.

On top of it you seem to forget that Linux is an open OS, so programs make a lot of use of shared libraries, because they can and because this is one of the great advantages of an open system. Packaging all the dependencies into one package wouldn't really be practical on such a platform.

No I understand this, but the way Apple does it is like this:
-application one depends on "libdivxdecore.so.5.0.1", and the lib comes packaged with the App. (picking a completely random lib here)

-Later, some other app depends on "libdivxdecore.so.6.0.9", and it comes packaged with that. App one is left alone, and is not disturbed.

Yes, this uses more disk space, and can therefore be seen as an ugly hack, but it prevents a TON of problems for the user. It also makes uninstalling any app a breeze - just delete it, and you're done.

Now I can see your point about security, in that app #one is now left with the older lib in which someone just discovered a buffer overflow exploit. The thing is though, for system stuff Apple puts out regular and timely security patches, and if you check the stat's, Apple has maintained a VERY good record for security, and I _think_ not sure, but I _think_ it is considered more secure than Linux.

ryanoliver

July 4th, 2005, 08:16 PM

TravisNewman

July 4th, 2005, 08:28 PM

OK, package manager: We need to have a good way of installing programs NOT in the repositories. For example, point synaptic to a source tar.gz and it automatically solves dependencies to the best of it's abilities and compiles it using checkinstall.

Alternatively, putting links to dependencies in the make file so they're automatically resolved regardless of whether they're in repositories would fix that pretty well.

Far as the filesystem goes-- I don't think it needs to be changed-- if anything, gobolinux and mac OSX have the right idea of symlinking them, but keeping the underlying filesystem.

And none of the issues discussed here violate or promote the Ubuntu Code of Conduct-- as poof said, people interpret it to their needs to try to win arguments a lot, and I'm not saying anyone is intentionally doing it now, but I really don't think it applies here. If someone wrote a Nazi text editor, or a goulag package manager, for example, then we'd have issues.

Kvark

July 4th, 2005, 08:33 PM

What you should ask yourself is "Is [insert OS/distro] easy to use when it works?". IMO ubuntu is easier to use when it works then windows is when it works, if it was the other way around then I would be using windows.

To make design changes to the file system and package manger as the article suggests is not needed. The only place you need to keep track of when things work is your home directory, can't get easier then that. It is "add/remove checkbox to add/remove program" when things work, can't get easier then that.

The design of the user environment is already ready for the average desktop users and user friendly enough for grandma.

On the other hand more things are broken in ubuntu then in windows. Most notably sound and drivers for some hardware. The things that are broken needs to be fixed. That will save the average desktop user a lot of trouble(shooting).

What we need is specific bug fixes, not complete user environment redesigns. A new fancy drag n' drop package management gui won't make it any less troublesome that some things doesn't work as they should.

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 08:37 PM

Well, if you read the forums, virtually all of these problems occur because people start to install random debs they downloaded from somewhere, or added repositories for other distributions.

Amen knome_fan. You sound like my kind of kat- a logical one.

EVERY SINGLE TIME I see a apt-get problem in the Ubuntu forum its because:

1. Someone is tryin to force a debian repo to work with Ubuntu. We used to need to do that...but now the backport repo has most of that stuff. If it doesn't...ask for it.

2. Someone is trying to install random debs off the internet. People hate to hear it...but debian and Ubuntu are two different things. They were never meant to be compatible.

3. They are using the 64 bit version. My reply is "the 64 bit version is a work in progress. It is meant for VERY experianced Linux users. For regular use, please install the 64 bit version. Thank you." This 64 bit stuff is new. When you can go into bestbuy and get a fully working 64 bit Windows...we will have it hammered out.

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 09:16 PM

No I understand this, but the way Apple does it is like this:
-application one depends on "libdivxdecore.so.5.0.1", and the lib comes packaged with the App. (picking a completely random lib here)

-Later, some other app depends on "libdivxdecore.so.6.0.9", and it comes packaged with that. App one is left alone, and is not disturbed.

Yes, this uses more disk space, and can therefore be seen as an ugly hack, but it prevents a TON of problems for the user. It also makes uninstalling any app a breeze - just delete it, and you're done.

Now I can see your point about security, in that app #one is now left with the older lib in which someone just discovered a buffer overflow exploit. The thing is though, for system stuff Apple puts out regular and timely security patches, and if you check the stat's, Apple has maintained a VERY good record for security, and I _think_ not sure, but I _think_ it is considered more secure than Linux.

No, I don't think you understand this, or I didn't make my point very clear, which I think is the case here.
So let me try again, open source programs make much wider use of shared libraries than closed source programs do. Think about it, if a closed source program wants to use a closed source library by someone else, they'll have to pay for it, open source programs can simply use all of the open source libraries that are available. So this alone would lead to having to package a whole more for one program than is the case with OSX.

Add to this that Linux contrary to the Mac is a moving target. If you write a program for OSX there is a base set of libraries always available. This is clearly not the case with linux, as basicly you can be sure that the linux kernel is running, but that's about it. I think this fact alone would make installing apps on Linux the way they are installed on OSX totally impossible.

Take for example some KDE app. Now how are you supposed to package a Konqueror needs into one package? This would be insane.
So in a system like this there is no way around having some kind of a packaging system and dependency resolution.

And let's not get into the one OS is more secure than the other thing. Though I'm sure that there are people who will argue with religious zeal that OSX is more secure, as there are people who will argue with as much zeal the other way around, let's always keep in mind that there are also people who argue that Windows is the most secure OS out there. :wink:

Edit:
Oh and thanks poofy, /me is blushing. :grin:

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 10:04 PM

No, I don't think you understand this, or I didn't make my point very clear, which I think is the case here.
So let me try again, open source programs make much wider use of shared libraries than closed source programs do. Think about it, if a closed source program wants to use a closed source library by someone else, they'll have to pay for it, open source programs can simply use all of the open source libraries that are available. So this alone would lead to having to package a whole more for one program than is the case with OSX. Yes I see your point here.

Add to this that Linux contrary to the Mac is a moving target. If you write a program for OSX there is a base set of libraries always available. This is clearly not the case with linux, as basicly you can be sure that the linux kernel is running, but that's about it. I think this fact alone would make installing apps on Linux the way they are installed on OSX totally impossible.

Take for example some KDE app. Now how are you supposed to package a Konqueror needs into one package? This would be insane.
So in a system like this there is no way around having some kind of a packaging system and dependency resolution.And yet Apple has somehow managed to do exactly that with software such as the Safari browser for example. Safari is a close "relative" of Konqueror, and uses the KHTML engine. The Mac developers work with the KDE team on this, and provide patches back to KDE. (There has been some recent controversy about this, with some questioning if Apple is living up to the spirit of the agreement. )

I really do understand what open source software is. Quoting myself from earlier in this thread:
One of my problems with Apple is that they are only partly "open", and actually mostly "closed" software. This is the area where Apple does NOT "get it."
Fow what it's worth, the only software I've installed on my Mac has been open source software, and to my knowledge, it is all packaged like everything else on the Mac. Examples are: Firefox, OpenOffice (actually NeoOffice which is a java version), Pan newsreader, The Gimp, DrPython (editor) and more which I can't think of right off the top of my head. I'm sure you'll agree, some of these are rather significant apps. I don't remember there being anything different about the installation of these compared to any other Mac package. If I'm wrong about this, perhaps some Mac guru will correct me. I did, of course, have to install the X11 server, and run X in order to use Pan, and the Gimp. NeoOffice and Firefox are native Mac versions.

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 10:16 PM

You are right about the close relationship of Safari and Konqueror, however I think that is irrelevant here. What I mean is this, if Apple provides the Safari package it is clear that it will be installed on a base system that is basicly the same for every install of Safari. OSX with its Api and shared libraries will be there, this is a sure thing.

Now take Konqueror. Konqueror relies heavily on a lot of things, for example Qt, kdelibs, whatever, yet noone who creates a Konqueror package can be sure that these are installed. The only solution to this would be to package all that is needed with the konqueror package, which would be totally insane, or rely on some sort of package manager that is responsible for providing these dependencies automatically, which is what Linux distributions do.

About your other examples. Firefox and OpenOffice also deal with a fixed platform when dealing with OSX, so it doesn't really matter if they are open source or not. Besides, Firefox and Openoffice also provide installers for linux. :-D

phen

July 4th, 2005, 10:42 PM

I've read the whole thread by now, and i am wondering, if someone actually has read the article?! The article DOES NOT say windows or Os X is really better than linux! it compares different approaches and gives good ideas on how a operating system could improve in the future! while i do not understand the package manager critic, too

note that windows is not a good desktop-os in the view of the author either!!!

I actually think that ubuntu is nearer to be THE desktop system than win is. why?

because it has a clear layout and synaptic is easy to use (icons would be a great idea btw, or maybe an option to hide all librarys, so that only apps are shown). overall i like to install applications under linux. just try it with win. it is described above :-). i find it annoying to close hundreds of ads to download a lousy free archiving software. Of course, there is still the need of the CLI, and some packages dont install menu entries. but these are minor problems which should can solved in the future.

i am using linux for my desktop, because i was completely pissed off the 200 tray icons my windows needed to run properly. no one can say that windows is more user friendly than ubuntu. all the hardware issues (because of a lack of support for linux by hardware vendors) can't be taken into consideration here. my mother loves linux. i installed her a clean desktop, removed everything she does not need, altered the taskbar to her wishes (3 apps and a log off button). try this with windows. now that i've set up everything, i can be sure that it will stay like that.

my moral is: linux needs better hardware support, but is headed in the right direction. i think that people writing articles like this can really provide ideas for the future. i would not like to have a desktop like that, but for many users it would make linux more usable then windows is today. thats the freedom, you choose.

cheers,

kai

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 10:56 PM

my moral is: linux needs better hardware support

Problem is that lots of time Linux and its community can't do a thing about hardware support. Some companies (I'm glaring at you broadcom) seem to hate Linux and refuse to help it in any way. No much we can do then....except boycott their damn products.

Optimal Aurora

July 4th, 2005, 11:02 PM

Problem is that lots of time Linux and its community can't do a thing about hardware support. Some companies (I'm glaring at you broadcom) seem to hate Linux and refuse to help it in any way. No much we can do then....except boycott their damn products.
Agreed, linux can't do a lot of things for hardware support. But I am not going to boycott any products because I like my hardware my saitek joysticks and my natural keyboard... So if I won't change then Linux will have to and this is not just my opinion but others as well...

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 11:10 PM

Agreed, linux can't do a lot of things for hardware support. But I am not going to boycott any products because I like my hardware my saitek joysticks and my natural keyboard... So if I won't change then Linux will have to and this is not just my opinion but others as well...

Don't you ever get tired of telling us that you are not using Linux?
Anyway, considering the situation Linux is in (with MS having a near monopoly on the desktop) I think it is amazing how much hardware runs without a problem with a modern Linux distribution. And believe it or not, I never ever had problems getting my hardware to work with linux and I don't feel I'm missing anything hardwarewise.

Optimal Aurora

July 4th, 2005, 11:27 PM

Don't you ever get tired of telling us that you are not using Linux?
Anyway, considering the situation Linux is in (with MS having a near monopoly on the desktop) I think it is amazing how much hardware runs without a problem with a modern Linux distribution. And believe it or not, I never ever had problems getting my hardware to work with linux and I don't feel I'm missing anything hardwarewise.
I am showing some restraint this time, (learned lesson from FedoraForum.org)...
Yes I am using Windows as my primary and I am GLAD you haven't had any problems, but I speak for myself and for others like Venus said that may be looking at the forums first and letting them as well as people I know that use to and some that still do use linux. I am just letting them and those that still use it voice their opinions because even them have problems with hardware and software. They suck it in and try to do like you do and say that they like haven't had problems, but yet I know better...

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 11:33 PM

I am showing some restraint this time, (learned lesson from FedoraForum.org)...

Don't, I'm not that easily offended

Yes I am using Windows as my primary and I am GLAD you haven't had any problems, but I speak for myself and for others like Venus said that may be looking at the forums first and letting them as well as people I know that use to and some that still do use linux.

I'm having a really hard time making sense of what you wrote.

I am just letting them and those that still use it voice their opinions because even them have problems with hardware and software. They suck it in and try to do like you do and say that they like haven't had problems, but yet I know better...
This isn't much better either, but if you are trying to tell me you know better if I had poblems, you might want to reconsider that statement.

Optimal Aurora

July 4th, 2005, 11:36 PM

I am showing some restraint this time, (learned lesson from FedoraForum.org)...
Yes I am using Windows as my primary and I am GLAD you haven't had any problems, but I speak for myself and for others like Venus said that may be looking at the forums first and letting them as well as people I know that use to and some that still do use linux. I am just letting them and those that still use it voice their opinions because even them have problems with hardware and software. They suck it in and try to do like you do and say that they like haven't had problems, but yet I know better...
What I am saying is that I am OVERJOYED that you are using linux and have no problems. I know others like you that try to admit that heck I was once one of them, but in actuality you are only right now not experiencing any problems, you will in the future have some problems that no one has solved. Then what do you do...

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 11:37 PM

I am showing some restraint this time, (learned lesson from FedoraForum.org)...
Yes I am using Windows as my primary and I am GLAD you haven't had any problems, but I speak for myself and for others like Venus said that may be looking at the forums first and letting them as well as people I know that use to and some that still do use linux. I am just letting them and those that still use it voice their opinions because even them have problems with hardware and software. They suck it in and try to do like you do and say that they like haven't had problems, but yet I know better...

Not sure if I understand correctly, but I _think_ you're saying Linux users claim to have no problems, but you "know better"????

If we're talking about hardware, I can tell you Ubuntu works perfectly on my Dell notebook. If we're talking about software, I can tell you Ubuntu is working better for me than any other distro, and I've tried, ahh.... pretty much ALL of them!

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 11:37 PM

But I am not going to boycott any products because I like my hardware my saitek joysticks and my natural keyboard...

Fine...don't. Luckily enough companies make enough hardware that works 100% with Linux. That is the stuff I'll buy. Other Linux fans will too. You just want to buy anything and have it work...yet another way of saying "I'm the target market for Windows" Aurora....

So if I won't change then Linux will have to and this is not just my opinion but others as well...

How can Linux change this? Do us zealots go to the houses of the CEO of companies whose products don't work with Linux and say "make us drivers or someone will get hurt." I hope not....I'd rather not have drivers.

I'm amazed as many things work as they do. You are not. Enjoy Longhorn...I won't think any less of you for it....

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 11:41 PM

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 11:43 PM

What I am saying is that I am OVERJOYED that you are using linux and have no problems.

Thank you, very moving. I'm close to tears.

I know others like you that try to admit that heck I was once one of them, but in actuality you are only right now not experiencing any problems, you will in the future have some problems that no one has solved. Then what do you do...
Sorry, but what a senseless statement.
1. You don't know me, yet you try to lump me in with a crowd you describe as delusional. I don't really like this kind of behavior, to put it mildly.
2. You claim that I will have problems in the future. What kind of argument is that? A total non-argument. Do you know the future? Apparently you think you do, yet you describe others as delusional? Interesting, to say the least.

So what on earth are you trying to tell me?

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 11:46 PM

Big Venus

July 4th, 2005, 11:49 PM

So what on earth are you trying to tell me?
Maybe what he or she was saying is that you should show both sides of the equation. Like I said earlier today, I am trying to show both sides of the fence.

crashtest

July 4th, 2005, 11:52 PM

What up between you all and Aurora... Well never mind, maybe I shouldn't ask.

I do have another question however, are yal sure that linux will ever be on the desktop. Personally, I like ATI Radeon cards and they are propietary (however you say it) software. I like netgear and they work on my linux platform, but they all required effort from me on the end user side to get them running properly.

Linux already works on the desktop for anyone willing to make a little effort, or for anyone not afraid to try something new. I still say it's not "ready for Grandma" - I know, I'm repeating myself. I have used nothing but Linux on the desktop for the past 5 years -and recently Mac OS X, but as I said earlier, the Mac doesn't get a lot of use.

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 11:52 PM

What up between you all and Aurora... Well never mind, maybe I shouldn't ask.

I do have another question however, are yal sure that linux will ever be on the desktop.
I'm sure that linux is already on the desktop. If you want to know if I'm sure if linux' market share on the desktop will increase, I'm pretty certain that it will, also it will take time, but unlike some other people I don't actually know what will happen in the future.

Personally, I like ATI Radeon cards and they are propietary (however you say it) software. I like netgear and they work on my linux platform, but they all required effort from me on the end user side to get them running properly.
Can't comment on ATI, as I'm using an Nvidia card. The nvidia driver at least is very easy to install in ubuntu and seeing that ATI is finally improving it's linux support and now even has a graphical installer afaik, I don't really see your problem.

And what netgear equipment did need effort to get it to run?

Knome_fan

July 4th, 2005, 11:53 PM

Maybe what he or she was saying is that you should show both sides of the equation. Like I said earlier today, I am trying to show both sides of the fence.

What exactly are the two sides and what's the side I'm not showing?

poofyhairguy

July 4th, 2005, 11:54 PM

What up between you all and Aurora... Well never mind, maybe I shouldn't ask.

Aurora is the resident Windows fan. I appreciate it because otherwise no one keeps us on our toes.

I do have another question however, are yal sure that linux will ever be on the desktop.

Yep..its on my desktop. Thousands of other peoples desktops too.

Personally, I like ATI Radeon cards and they are propietary (however you say it) software.

Actually thats hardware not software (not to nit pick but thats a big difference). And my ATI card works fine in Ubuntu. I'll admit its a little hard to set up (compared to "next,next,next,next,") but it works fine.

If its too much work for you (and millions of others) then fine...use XP. XP is stable, easy to find documentation and drivers for. And we won't think less of you for it....but we will keep using Linux because its what we like.

I'm trying my best to be a eloquate zealot....

crashtest

July 5th, 2005, 12:04 AM

Yep..its on my desktop. Thousands of other peoples desktops too. The Linux Counter Project has made the greatest effort to come up with the number of Linux users. This is a difficult task, but they've been at it for 10 years now. Their latest estimate is 29 million users - no idea how many of them are desktop users, but there may be some info on the web site.

Get Counted: Linux Counter Project (http://counter.li.org)

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 12:50 AM

When you can go into bestbuy and get a fully working 64 bit Windows...we will have it hammered out.

By the heart-shaped **** of Helen of Troy, I can't even get a fully working 32 bit Windows at Best Buy, or anywhere else. Microsoft never even got the 16 bit version working perfectly.

Stormy Eyes

July 5th, 2005, 12:54 AM

I do have another question however, are yal sure that linux will ever be on the desktop.

It's on mine. It's on my wife's. It's on my father's. That's good enough for me. What strangers run on their PCs is none of my business, and therefore not my problem.

Personally, I like ATI Radeon cards and they are propietary (however you say it) software. I like netgear and they work on my linux platform, but they all required effort from me on the end user side to get them running properly.

That's your complaint? That ATI and Netgear products don't work like magic on Linux, but instead require a little effort on your part? If you want a computer that can be used without any effort on your part, I recommend Nintendo. Good luck doing anything but games on one, though. :)

Kvark

July 5th, 2005, 01:25 AM

The Linux Counter Project has made the greatest effort to come up with the number of Linux users. This is a difficult task, but they've been at it for 10 years now. Their latest estimate is 29 million users - no idea how many of them are desktop users, but there may be some info on the web site.

Get Counted: Linux Counter Project (http://counter.li.org)

That page got some interesting statistics. If you compare those estaminations to the total number of computer users in the world, then linux got only a very small portion of the users. But that portion is growing and many use it at home according to those statistics.

Perhaps most interesting of all. Go to "Statistics" and then "Linux Counter Summary". Find the toplist named "where linux users live" and look at the top country....

thagame

July 5th, 2005, 01:59 AM

you know that people that complain online about something being junk after trying it is just thier way of saying they werent intelligent enough to make it work and now they wanna complain about it. and about linux taking to long to get going is bull. the amount of time spent on windows update getting your xp up to date is close to the same about of time it would take to go through ubuntuguide and get your system going. and that wont even get good media players, all codecs, graphics apps like blender and gimp. plus messengers in windows. not to mention you also have to install antivirus and sware apps in windows. so in reality installing ubuntu and going through the whole guide is way faster then installing xp, all updates, plus even half of the software you get in linux.and also about having no life to use linux is total bull and if you ask me i think it takes more of a loser in life to go to a forum and complain about your lack of intelligence to use something and blame it on the program then someone that uses it and goes on with his life.

papangul

July 5th, 2005, 03:15 AM

poptones

July 5th, 2005, 04:04 AM

"The modem issue" is NOT a factor. Here's my evidence:

A couple years ago my system was zapped by lightning (not unusual here, it happened several times). So of course, I had to get a new modem for my system. Being cheap, I went to Computer Geeks to see what was on sale. I found two different modems on sale for about $15 each. Of course these were winmodems, at the time I was using win2k so it wasn't an issue. I placed an order for one of each, and a few days later the modems arrived.

First problem: win2k couldn't deal with either the Motorola chipset modem (which I had heard good things about) and seemed only partially able to deal with the lucent modem. I had never liked Lucent modems and anyone who has ever had to troubleshoot or reinstall one will know why. But it at least had some "default" drivers that let me get online at 28k.

So I get online and spend a few hours searching for Motorola drivers and Lucent drivers. I download what I find and burn them to a CD along with the web pages I was able to find with relevant info.

I was NEVER able to get the lucent to connect above 33K, and the Motorola wouldn't install properly at all. It was also a giant pain in the butt to REMOVE the motorola modem, which caused my dialer settings to be all screwy. I spent so much time screwing with trying to remove it, in fact, I gave up and just reinstalled windows to get rid of it.

Winmodems are junk - period. The only reason they "work in windows" is some manufacturers support them on some systems. If you don't have one of those supported system, you're screwed. This is different than linux... how?

A few days later I went back online and found a surplus gateway branded US Robotics. NOT a winmodem, in fact it was ISA but not a problem since I have a few old ISA systems sitting around here. Of course that meant I had to use on system as a "gateway" and share the internet connection. And after screwing with ICS on win2k for several more months I decided I had seen my last "the document contains no data" message in explorer and converted the "gateway" machine to IP Cop... and thus began my flight from the windows lockdown.

bill

July 5th, 2005, 05:17 PM

I don't use windows i prefer to use linux but i do agree with the original post linux does have a long way to go before it can ever come close to being user friendly like windows.
90% of people have no interest in spending alot of time trying to get something to work in linux when windows is plug and play.I have Ubuntu on one laptop and SuSe 9.3 on another i think SuSe 9.3 is more newbie friendly than Ubuntu because it detects eveything and comes with a big multimedia package so a person doesn't have to spend alot of time downloading software and getting it to work.
i still use Ubuntu the most but that's because i spend most of my time on the computer for email and web.My wife also has a laptop with windows xp and she has never gotten spyware or viruses because she never uses internet explorer she has always used Opera, every couple of months i will download some anti spyware programs for her and they find nothing if you don't go into your browser and set up cookies correctly than it's your fault for getting tracking cookies when using windows
.Like i said i prefer linux any day over windows but i have noticed that alot of people on linux forums will call someone who perfer's windows over linux as a troll which i think is wrong because people has a right to choose an os that's right for them.
I do have to admit that sometimes i will have an urge to put windows back on one of my laptops because when my wife and i buy something for our computer's she just install's and she's on her way when i'm still trying to figure out how to get it to work in linux hours later.I also think that Ubuntu is not that newbie friendly other than good at detecting hardware when other distro's also are just as good at detecting hardware and comes with most of what a newbie would want to start out with until he or she feels more comfortable with linux.
Bill

Bill

darkmatter

July 5th, 2005, 10:47 PM

linux does have a long way to go before it can ever come close to being user friendly like windows.

I would have to disagree with that Bill -- It's not that Linux isn't as user friendly as Windows, it's just different. (like Mac OSX or any other operating system).

The learning curve for any modern Linux distro is no more difficult than the learning curve for a first time Windows user. You say that 90% of people aren't interested in spending time downloading software from the net to bring Linux up to speed, when that is exactly what 100% of Window's users do. If you actually take in to account how long it takes to get things up and running, you'd have to concur that Windows is the one that looses out in this category. I've installed enough of both to know the difference (I can set up a Linux box in a couple of hours (full multimedia support, etc), yet the same setup of Windows takes the better part of a day), and have yet to find myself 'spending a lot of time' getting things to work in Linux -- it's just as plug n' play(if not more so) as Windows (by my experience).

Have you ever done a system overhaul (mobo, processor, graphics card, etc.) under both Linux and Windows? I have, and guess what -- Windows didn't like it.
In fact it required a complete reinstall of XP (and thus all the associated software), in contrast to most Linux distro's, which -- aside from having to reconfigure audio, graphics, and a few other devices -- have happily accepted the hardware changes. Now which do you think sounds more user friendly?

The above isn't a personal attack on you or your post, just a valid counter-argument. And one that is coming from someone who is not biased against Windows.

manicka

July 5th, 2005, 11:00 PM

Darkmatter, I'd have to agree with you. If faced with a windows or Linux box from scratch then Linux would win everytime.

Our issue then has to be manufacturer/vendor support. I think most people refer to the ease of windows becuase most machines are preconfigured to just work with windows by the manufacturer. If more vendors gave great Linux support like I've heard HP does, then I think we'd be having a different discussion.

For many Linux users this isn't an issue because we prefer to do things from scratch, but with proper support Linux could definitely make a dint in the 'Prime Time'. So the issue isn't wether Linux is ready for prime time it's wether or not the prime time(manufacturers/vendors) is/are ready for Linux. :D

P.S. I think it's a classic argument when users downlaod a live cd/dvd fo a Linux distro then complain that everything doesn't work as they'd expect. I'd love to see a windows live cd/dvd (if they'd ever exist) get even close to doing what these great products do.

DancingSun

July 5th, 2005, 11:34 PM

Ever seen the amount of sound and 3D issues on these forums? How about getting a USB printer to work?

Granted most of these issues have to do with manufacturer/vendor support, but they are nonetheless problems that adversely affect user experience. If Ubuntu and Linux want's to be ready for "prime time", these problems need to be solved somehow.

Ever wonder why sound start to distort when PCM volumn is on full blast? Or why you have no sound on mp3 playback (with the decoder installed), video playback, or 3D games? Having problems with multiple sound streams? These things are easy enough to fix, but should also be preconfigured to so that even Joe can have a great time on Ubuntu.

The good thing about Ubuntu and Linux is that, if something doesn't work or work correctly, you can often find some ways to fix it. That's the open source, open architecture advantage. This is something that a Windows user can't do, even if she/he is a competent computer user.

The Bad thing is that, Ubuntu and Linux often don't give the kind of quality experience when you want to, say, install and play a 3D game. Or change the refresh rate of your monitor (on Ubuntu, I had to edit the xorg.config file to raise the refresh rate, while Windows automatically detected the supported resolutions and associated refresh rates). Some of these simple things that you expect to just work, doesn't seem all that simple on Ubuntu and Linux.

I like fiddling around with stuff, poking here and there and hope that by the end of the day my finger is still intact :D. But I think there are much more users like Joe than there are users like me.

If Ubuntu wants to be ready for "prime time", Ubuntu must be ready for Joe. To Joe, the ability for an OS to work on a overhauled system isn't as important, as Joe will just buy a new computer rather than upgrade it part by part. To Joe, it's the OS developer and the hardware manufacturer's job to sort out the support issues. Joe will just choose the OS that's less of a hassle and will work with whatever equipment (digital camera, camcorders, multifunction printers...etc.) that he buys. Manufacturers/vendors are not the "prime time". Joe is the "prime time".

The good new is I think Ubuntu is "getting there", but not quite yet.

Lets do Joe a favor, make him feel like he 0wns the OS, and not the other way around (as the case when he's using Windows). Joe, hang on tight, Ubuntu's almost there.

sunscape

July 6th, 2005, 01:03 AM

Interesting, it sounds a bit like a microsoft "get the facts" addy.

I would like to share my experience with windows xp and the "not ready for prime time" problems.

About one month ago I purchased a hp laserjer 3030 (scanner/printer/fax) and tried several times to install the latest windows xp drivers. Yet, no matter how hard I tried my new hp device would not scan. No matter how much i tried! I was puzzled...

For about two weeks I only had a printer/fax device... Until i tried SuSE linux 9.3 and installed the latest hp linux drivers from Novell. AMAZING IT WORKED! Linux could do something windows xp could not and it was soooo easy!!... I then tried ubuntu 5.04 and AMAZING!!! the same results as SuSE.

It seems windows xp is simply not ready for prime time. Maybe I will try again in a few years.

manicka

July 6th, 2005, 01:17 AM

It seems windows xp is simply not ready for prime time. Maybe I will try again in a few years.

LOL :D

poptones

July 6th, 2005, 01:19 AM

Granted most of these issues have to do with manufacturer/vendor support, but they are nonetheless problems that adversely affect user experience. If Ubuntu and Linux want's to be ready for "prime time", these problems need to be solved somehow.

Windows has many of the same problems. I have a windows game I have never played because it has never managed to install on any machine I have tried, in spite of my attempting to install it under everything from win98 to win2k. Seems it might be related to my "oddball" Nvidia graphics card - last time I go there.

If windows wants to be "prime time" these problems need to be fixed.

If Ubuntu wants to be ready for "prime time", Ubuntu must be ready for Joe. To Joe, the ability for an OS to work on a overhauled system isn't as important, as Joe will just buy a new computer rather than upgrade it part by part. To Joe, it's the OS developer and the hardware manufacturer's job to sort out the support issues. Joe will just choose the OS that's less of a hassle and will work with whatever equipment (digital camera, camcorders, multifunction printers...etc.) that he buys. Manufacturers/vendors are not the "prime time". Joe is the "prime time".

and joe doesn't know or care what refresh rate his monitor is running, joe doesn't even know what refresh rate means. And because joe is counting on the OEM to package everything for him joe doesn't have to screw with installing all that stuff you foind so hard to install under linux - that's what the OEMs are for.

Everything you are complaining about is an OEM issue. Microsoft spends most of its investment on just this sort of thing - luring in OEMs, supporting OEMs, running winhec conferences so vendors can test interoperability - it's what they do.

Linux needs more OEM support. So does Apple. thing is, all the linux folk need is decent documentation. Again this isn't a linux issue... it's an OEM issue.

DancingSun

July 6th, 2005, 01:44 AM

Interesting, it sounds a bit like a microsoft "get the facts" addy.

Interesting, perhaps there are some truth to those ads then? Because I have never even seen one of those ads!

Apparently HP makes their own Linux Drivers, so it's possible that SUSE uses those:
http://hpinkjet.sourceforge.net/supportstatement.php

In that case, it's HP's fault for providing faulty drivers under XP. Or, blame MS for certifying the drivers (if it's certified)

Nonetheless, many of the digital gadgets don't seem to have vendor/manufacturer supported drivers. That's the problem! My Logitech MX510 mouse does not have Logitch provided/supported Linux drivers. My back/forward buttons don't work, I don't even know if my mouse's ultra-hi resolution is being exploited properly...

If most hardware worked with Ubuntu/Linux without problems, then great! "Prime time" is all for Ubuntu/Linux's taking. The thing is, most hardware vendors sell their hardware along with the Window drivers, and Linux is usually secondary if even supported.

I'm all for Linux, but I believe Linux is not quite at the tipping point yet. It's not so much of a technical superiority problem. It's getting others to joing the movement to complete the puzzle.

Maybe XP really isn't ready for "prime time", since that one damn printer can't work! But hey...whether we like it or not, 98 percent of the computers are still loaded with Windows, even though it is not free, and is arguably technically inferior!

DancingSun

July 6th, 2005, 01:52 AM

Everything you are complaining about is an OEM issue. Microsoft spends most of its investment on just this sort of thing - luring in OEMs, supporting OEMs, running winhec conferences so vendors can test interoperability - it's what they do.

Linux needs more OEM support. So does Apple. thing is, all the linux folk need is decent documentation. Again this isn't a linux issue... it's an OEM issue.

Exactly my point! Technically, I think Linux is there, and even beyond the current batch of Windows. But why isn't Linux widespread yet? There are many answers to that question, but one of the main one is definitely OEM support. If Ubuntu ever want to break the niche that the current batch of Linux is in, and become a real "Linux for the Human Beings", having decent support from computer equipment manufacturers is the key.

Hardware support on Linux has gone through leaps and bounds for the past 5 or so years, but it's not quite there yet. The focal point for Linux's future sucess will be convincing companies to invest in supporting Linux.

Sye d'Burns

July 6th, 2005, 02:06 AM

In that case, it's HP's fault for providing faulty drivers under XP.
...

Nonetheless, many of the digital gadgets don't seem to have vendor/manufacturer supported drivers. That's the problem! My Logitech MX510 mouse does not have Logitch provided/supported Linux drivers. My back/forward buttons don't work, I don't even know if my mouse's ultra-hi resolution is being exploited properly...

If most hardware worked with Ubuntu/Linux without problems, then great! "Prime time" is all for Ubuntu/Linux's taking. The thing is, most hardware vendors sell their hardware along with the Window drivers, and Linux is usually secondary if even supported.

So, basically, you give XP a free ride when there are no drivers issued or they don't work and blame (appropriately) the vendor. Yet, when vendors do not put out Linux drivers or issue inefficient ones that is somehow the fault of Linux. Though I do empathize, I think you should focus more of your angst against the vendors and less against the OS.

Here's something to try when you're feeling as though MS is prime-time and Linux is not. On a fresh partition install windows and add no external drivers. Not for the 4 in 1, video card, etc. At least in my experience Ubuntu holds up about the same as MS.

bill

July 6th, 2005, 02:54 AM

What i really like about Ubuntu is that it detects my digital camera where most of the other debian base distro's wouldn't for some reason.
Ubuntu is alot faster than any of the other's i've tried,i don't know about Kubuntu since i don't like kde i never tried Kubuntu so it might be just as fast or faster.
Bill

darkmatter

July 6th, 2005, 03:25 AM

Ubuntu is something that definitely grows on you. This is my first experience with GNOME and with a Debian based distro, and so far it's gone smoothly.

If only Ubuntu (and Linux in general) could afford all the butt-kissing contracts (you know -- the type Microsoft dishes out for proprietary driver support), then more people could start using Linux instead of whining about it.

And there's my two cents worth.

DancingSun

July 6th, 2005, 03:47 AM

So, basically, you give XP a free ride when there are no drivers issued or they don't work and blame (appropriately) the vendor. Yet, when vendors do not put out Linux drivers or issue inefficient ones that is somehow the fault of Linux. Though I do empathize, I think you should focus more of your angst against the vendors and less against the OS.

Here's something to try when you're feeling as though MS is prime-time and Linux is not. On a fresh partition install windows and add no external drivers. Not for the 4 in 1, video card, etc. At least in my experience Ubuntu holds up about the same as MS.

You misunderstood.

If HP's Linux drivers don't work correctly, then blame HP!

I've edited my post to hold MS responsible if they certified the drivers, yet they do not work. Perhaps you read the post before I finished my edit. My whole point is that Linux should actively seek hardware vendor's support. XP has much more official hardware support than Linux. This is a fact.

While we could all blame hardware vendors for not supporting Linux, they do have a valid point for not supporting. From their point of view, there simply isn't enough Linux users to warrant the support costs. If most users of Linux are tech savvy, then they have less reason to support Linux officially, since customers are able to get by. However, without adequate hardware support (I have to re-iterate that users shouldn't have problems with multiple sound streams, getting sound in 3D apps, and shouldn't have to learn the numerous config files), the average user will not be compelled to adopt Linux. Hardware vendors are ALL for profit organizations.

If we ever want to see Linux going mainstream, then this responsibility falls upon the companies and communities behind these Linux distros. Until we can push the vendors to provide support for Linux, the Linux community will always be playing catchup to the latest release of hardware, and will always be almost ready for "Prime Time".

Sye d'Burns

July 6th, 2005, 04:02 AM

You misunderstood.

Yep, I must've been rambling while you were re-editing. It sounds like we're on the same page. :)

fastluck

July 6th, 2005, 05:51 PM

While we could all blame hardware vendors for not supporting Linux, they do have a valid point for not supporting. From their point of view, there simply isn't enough Linux users to warrant the support costs.

I think that's a cop-out on their part. If they would publish API information (or better yet, source code), the driver problem would take care of itself because someone in the Linux community would write drivers. (See my previous post in this thread for my rantings on that subject.)

Hardware vendors are ALL for profit organizations.

...which is all the more reason for them to publish API info and/or source code. Linux support would become an added feature they could advertise, without them having to lift a finger.

poptones

July 6th, 2005, 06:04 PM

Not for the 4 in 1, video card, etc. At least in my experience Ubuntu holds up about the same as MS.

ROTFL. Actually I will pit XP against Warty on my machine any day. At least with warty I get a high resolution screen, sound and a network. With XP I get 800x600 resolution, no sound, and no network.

While we could all blame hardware vendors for not supporting Linux, they do have a valid point for not supporting. From their point of view, there simply isn't enough Linux users to warrant the support costs.

They do not have a point at all. It costs nothing to document how these things are done. the documentation already exists, if it didn't they would not have drivers at all. But because the documents are wrapped up in NDAs and secresy, the community i sunable to support them.

I think that's a cop-out on their part. If they would publish API information (or better yet, source code), the driver problem would take care of itself because someone in the Linux community would write drivers. (See my previous post in this thread for my rantings on that subject.)

Source code is not practical. Even APIs are not needed. what is needed is hardware level info, and they do not even supply this because it is "trade secrets." the reality is those 'trade secrets" can be found out by anyone with the resources to do it (ie their competitors) but this turn of the century mindset persists.

think it's bad now? Just wait until intel and AMD go TCPA.

phen

July 7th, 2005, 10:48 AM

youre right. but to become the user friendly desktop os of the future, hardware installation has to be as easy as it is for nvidia cards! installing one single package out of synaptic is the way it should be.

I know that this is not the fault of the linux developers/community, but the fault of companies not caring about linux. because of that many programmers came up with really amazing reengineered drivers. thats cool, i like it. but to become the super popular windows substitute, it has to change.

i would like more hardware support, and a bit more software. Or even better: open standarts for things like mobilephone computer connectivity, documents, multimedia, etc. but on the other hand, i dont really care whether linux's gonna substitute windows or not.

and to the windows fan: you're not loving windows, you love to have the hardware support! it shouldn't be a talk about operating systems but about some company's policies. and for the record: i installed ubuntu on my laptop, and EVERYTHING worked out of the box, because the hardware vendor cares about linux. i think you have to reconsider your oracle-like statement...

cheers,
kai

papangul

July 7th, 2005, 05:27 PM

i would like more hardware support, and a bit more software.

What you are asking for won't happen until the corporate bottomlines take a hit for lack of linux support. Even google won't release linux versions of their awesome softwares because the no. of linux desktop users is not impressive enough for them.

tjleeland

July 8th, 2005, 12:27 AM

t2kburl

July 8th, 2005, 05:57 AM

hmm ... seems to me XP has a hardware compatibility list ... and not everything is on it.
In fact, I own a scanner that will ONLY work in win98. I had to resurrect a machine from the scrap pile just to run my scanner.
Based on the initial argument of this thread, one could say that XP is not ready for "prime time"
It is certainly a true statement for anyone that does not have XP compatible hardware.
As far as ubuntu not being ready ... well ... my 8 year old can use it. Kids at her day care use it. Not everyone is (or needs to be) a system administrator. In my opinion ubuntu IS ready for the average everyday PC user.
feel free to use whatever works best for you. Finally, at least, we have a valid choice. And that is a beautiful thing. \\:D/

nocturn

July 8th, 2005, 07:10 AM

Just a thought:

I've seen a lot of responses that insult the non-Linux user for not being "smart enough" to figure Linux out, but then turn right around and talk about how they can't get something to work in Windows.

By that person's own standard, nothing's wrong with Windows, they're just not smart enough to use it.

The person who said that is plain wrong!
Some tasks in both Linux and Windows are difficult and take a lot of time. The main difference is that windows is mostly installed by stores/OEM's when you buy a new computer, so the consumer is confronted with these problems far less.

I've been lucky as far as Ubuntu is concerned, it installed o n 4 different machines without any problem whatsoever (all in ~30 minutes, except my ancient laptop - 1 hour-).

I know it is difficult, but please ignore comments like that. They are made by individuals and do not represent the feelings of the entire community.

It is sometimes frustrating however to see people leave Ubuntu because something does not work right away when they are prepared to spend 4 hours or so getting their old scanner to work in an OS they paid 200 € for.

nocturn

July 8th, 2005, 07:21 AM

What I am saying is that I am OVERJOYED that you are using linux and have no problems. I know others like you that try to admit that heck I was once one of them, but in actuality you are only right now not experiencing any problems, you will in the future have some problems that no one has solved. Then what do you do...

Well, I had problems running the 2.6 kernel on an Abit board, I contacted the kernel devs and *it got fixed*.
I used to have Windows (98SE) (it's been a while). On one of my two systems, uptime was 10-30 minutes, from startup it started eating memory till it crashed. There was no fix but to maybe wait until Win2K and *buy it* (Linux ran fine on it).
My other system had an S3 videocard, I had to copy back the drivers daily because of some naming conflict - Never fixed -. My onchip soundcard did't work, no drivers in windows and the supplied drivers didn't install, it took 1.5 years for a fix.

Since 1999, I only have Linux, I have had some problems (like the kernel), I seek support, contact devs. I get *free* advice and even custom patches to make things work. No company I have dealt with ever offered that level of support.

fastluck

July 8th, 2005, 03:39 PM

Just a thought:

By that person's own standard, nothing's wrong with Windows, they're just not smart enough to use it.

Hear, hear.

fastluck

July 8th, 2005, 03:43 PM

hmm ... seems to me XP has a hardware compatibility list ... and not everything is on it.
In fact, I own a scanner that will ONLY work in win98. [snip]

You're telling me! I bought a few really good laser printers at an auction, hoping to resell them on eBay. They were probably close to 10 years old, but the printing quality was excellent. But they only worked on Windows 3.1, Windows 98 and any version of Linux.

Once a driver is built on linux, at least it stays there. Can't say the same thing for Windows.

tjleeland

July 9th, 2005, 03:59 AM

hmm ... seems to me XP has a hardware compatibility list ... and not everything is on it.
In fact, I own a scanner that will ONLY work in win98. I had to resurrect a machine from the scrap pile just to run my scanner.
Based on the initial argument of this thread, one could say that XP is not ready for "prime time"
It is certainly a true statement for anyone that does not have XP compatible hardware.

But then, one would have to say that NO OS is "ready for prime-time" since Windows XP undoubtedly has the largest HCL in the world, especially with hardware made since 2000.

Without going into the Mac department, I challenge you to go to CompUSA, find 10 computer items that won't run under XP, and post them here.

tjleeland

July 9th, 2005, 04:09 AM

It is sometimes frustrating however to see people leave Ubuntu because something does not work right away when they are prepared to spend 4 hours or so getting their old scanner to work in an OS they paid 200 € for.

Honestly, I think that they call me instead of spending four hours trying to get it working. And I think that might be part of the problem, I don't have a Linux version of me to turn to. When you're stuck with Windows you can find that guy in the office that everyone turns to, but with Linux you're a bit more stuck.

Though I must admitt that this forum has already helped me with the only serious problem I was having: MD5Sum Mismatch errors on most of my installs. I just reinstalled Ubuntu using the UK settings and now I think I have things under control.

Least anyone get the wrong idea, I'm actually impressed with Ubuntu. The MD5Sum errors almost did that in, but for now I'm happy. And Ubuntu even found my Intel Pro 2200.