The Current Problem with Linux... imho

[tom56]

The same with crtl+v, the macro has nothing in common with the desired command.

I always thought ctrl+x is used because X looks like an open pair of scissors, and ctrl+v, because V looks like a handwritten insert symbol (the upside down V that editors often use to add a new word in a sentence).

[jrusso2]

My view on all this:
Linux was never designed for the n00b user, and I doubt it ever will. It is something to learn, yes, but it is very powerful once you know your way around. I use the CLI the majority of the time, mainly because it is just easier to execute one command to edit a text file vs having to open Nautilus/Thunar/etc., navigate to the directory the file is in, then open it with a text editor. Linux does not aspire to be Windows, it aspires to be Linux. You have to take into account the fact that Linux has evolved from being a server OS to being used as a day-to-day OS. It takes time. Over application stability: I have never seen anything as stable as Linux, both in itself and with applications running on top. Over updated software: Ubuntu (or most any Debian branch) is not widly known for being extremely up to date. Every release, things get updated, so it does stay fairly current. Arch is what you want if you want extremely up to date software.

Actually Linux evolved as a desktop by Linus then was used as a server, and is not trying to be used by a desktop again by certain users. Linus was looking for a version of Unix to run on his i386 desktop but at the time Unix was too expensive for him to afford and the alternative was DOS which did not do but a fraction of what Unix could do on the same hardware.

[billgoldberg]

I don't have those issues.

Apps never crash here (well, it's been a long time since one did, not counting video editors ).

[davbren]

I don't have those issues.

Apps never crash here (well, it's been a long time since one did, not counting video editors ).

Video editor isn't an app...? Is that through lack of RAM?

[davbren]

So... From the responses given, am I to assume, that the current Linux community doesn't want Ubuntu to be ready for the general public and should stay a, for lack of a better word, 'geeks OS'?

I'm a self confessed geek. I personally want my friends and family experience what I am experiencing. Is that a bad thing?

[xarte]

I'm not saying 'Get rid of CLI' It's very powerful and useful. The *vast* majority of computer users aren't going to want to use it.

More work needs to be done for the accessibility of the n00b user. The n00b user doesn't really know what they want, it is required for the experienced user to empathise and use that experience to tell them what they need.

I think its entirely possible to put together a proper package like iLife say. I'm not saying copy the idea. It's more about publicity, there needs to be more advertising for things like Gnome Office, and the standard Gnome applications like f-spot and rhythmbox. Once the standard package has been identified. The stability issues can be worked out.

one word : PROGEX - this thing installed with every box and dice known to man. It was a fast, easy install and once I'd figured out how to reset the themes so the windows would behave normally, it was perfect. I had Progex - and most other Ubuntu based distros - up and running in less than an hour.

Re-installing windows took HOURS and I had to find the drivers at the HP website, burn them to disk and then copy them across. Service pack updates took forever. And I'm going to have to buy a security suite. Microsoft Messengers PLAYS ADVERTS for goodness sake and the thing STILL has a truckload of hardware driver conflicts that I have to figure out.

Linux is still flawed but you can't tell me that windows is better. Ever.

I couldn't run Fedora and SuSe due to problems with Alsa sound and wireless respectively. Some power and fan problems due to my specific laptop model, finally sorted those.

One of the things I hated about Fedora KDE was that it took me ten clicks to GET to the command line.

One of the BIG things we need to improve command line is to make sure the compilers etc are already installed, and that the editor is intuitive - the first time I tried to edit a file, I couldn't figure out how to 'save' it. And so many times I 've tried to compile or make and 'command not found' or whatever. THAT stuff needs to 'just work'.

The other thing is that a lot of the time when you google a problem, you find 'old' fixes that use CLI and often assume prior knowledge that you don't have. (For example: that you have to create a directory to mount your raid array to)

A lot of the time, the latest distros with package manager and so on enable you to do all that stuff right from your desktop, taking care of dependencies and everything.

There are two reasons I ended up going back to windows on this machine:
One, there are several programs my son wants to play that will only run in windows (could have gone wine, I know) and two, that I NEED decent Webcam, and I can't get decent results with Linux. When I buggered up my wireless by uninstalling a webcam driver, I had a dummy spit and went back to windows. But I wish I hadn't.

I'm buying myself a new linux-friendly laptop. I don't try to run Windows on my Mac, after all.

[xarte]

So... From the responses given, am I to assume, that the current Linux community doesn't want Ubuntu to be ready for the general public and should stay a, for lack of a better word, 'geeks OS'?

I'm a self confessed geek. I personally want my friends and family experience what I am experiencing. Is that a bad thing?

Recently a friend of mine (WHO HAS AN IT CERTIFICATE) couldn't connect to her wireless internet, and another found that they had to turn off their router and turn it on at 'just the right moment' in order to connect. They were also having explorer.exe hang at shutdown. (even after SP3). Just a small selection of windows problems that I was able to fix and I just make it up as I go with a bit of help from google. Last time I ditched windows it was because the altiris backup software was doing a bizarre loop that google couldn't help with.

IMHO if you get a CORRECTLY installed and configured system on COMPATIBLE hardware from the get-go, your Linux experience should be pretty much trouble free, or no more troubled than with windows.

[tsali]

When I say install I mean an install root-canal disc (system builder style), not a system re-imaging disc. Mwaahahahaaaa--you know that maniacal preview of the BSoD type installer, Mwahahahaaaa. I got your "intuitive".

I install OEM Vista routinely. As was mentioned, a chimp could probably do it.

Why would you think this is so difficult?

[cardinals_fan]

So... From the responses given, am I to assume, that the current Linux community doesn't want Ubuntu to be ready for the general public and should stay a, for lack of a better word, 'geeks OS'?

I'm a self confessed geek. I personally want my friends and family experience what I am experiencing. Is that a bad thing?

I want my friends and family to use whatever works for them, and in return let me use what works for me. Is that a bad thing?

[sydbat]

I install OEM Vista routinely.

I hope you mean this as "I work for a company that requires this (like a computer build shop or a large IT department)". If not, and you are meaning this for your own computer, I would begin questioning why anyone should have to reinstall an OS "routinely"...