Linux Desktop Readiness Thread

[Mateo]

I switched to Linux (first to Fedora, then to Ubuntu) because I got tired of my computer taking 2+ minutes to load up all of the background applications AFTER the OS was fully loaded (even after weeding out as many unnecessary applications as possible). And because I got tired of loading simple programs taking up a lot of CPU and time. And because I hate software that has a splash screen.

So as you can see, it's all about load time for me. I like that OpenOffice and Gimp are the only software I use any more that have splash screens. Or that once the taskbars appear in GNOME, the computer's finished loading.

I also like the simplicity of many programs (like VLC and Rhythmbox). I still have issues with how difficult it can be to install a lot of hardware and software, but it's usually worth the headache.

I don't have the ethical problems with Windows like a lot of people do. Nor do I particuarly care if a piece of software is open sourced or closed source. I still have a windows partition that i use for some things until i can figure out how to get them to work in ubuntu.

[phatlip]

well, atleast when you installed you could actually bot. My experience has been worse - perhaps there is not enough testing with a variety of hardware? Not enough bug fixing and too much feature creep?

Not sure, don't know enough - but I'm really hoping when i try Dapper instead things are better for me..i really like the idea of using ubuntu - but i guess something like suse or fc would be more practical.

[phatlip]

Oh please, post install config? Ubuntu is the 'Linux for real people' and it simply doesn't work for real people.

There must be some reason that things are difficult to get working, that shouldn't be (some things should - because that allows them to also be customisable). I just want to understand why i can't boot a fresh install with a perfectly working system (ie hardware) after installing two different ways, twice. Is it simply not tested? Or do they make _booting_ an 'easter egg' for linux nuts.

[phatlip]

have 2 HDDs and 3 computers. SLES 10 on one, working perfectly as a server. windows working OK as a games machine. and a mac i use for most everything.

so i don't really need to take it slow, because i'm risking and losing nothing - and i'll most definately persist. however, i really want to put my attention to more intersting things and have some things 'just work'. for example, booting after i install.

atleast if things don't work once you have a working OS, you have logs and infomation. i have nothing but this forum and IRC - and i can't get help from either of them. it just really frustrating!

I know no one gets paid and etc. but it goes against the philosophy to just fob issues off with 'you need to do alot of post install config - now go RTFM'

[Shay Stephens]

...'you need to do alot of post install config - now go RTFM'

Early on when you are still dealing with all the windows only hardware this is true. As you cycle out that hardware for more os neutral hardware, things get a lot easier. However, there are still a lot of things that need to be learned with linux. Not so much is hidden from the user, so a degree of getting your hand dirty is going to be required.

That is one reason I suggest taking it slow and patiently. It takes time to retrain and relearn new skills and ways of thinking. But in the end, the payoff is huge. I am actually getting back into programming, getting back into hardware and how the computer works again. After being lulled to sleep and incompetence with XP, this is rather exciting now. But it only happened once I passed the critical mass of learning and understanding.

So, yes, RTFM, it's good for you, it will help slow you down and learn something important. Once you have learned a few things, bam, things start getting fast again. Zoom zoom!

[adriantry]

Oh please, post install config? Ubuntu is the 'Linux for real people' and it simply doesn't work for real people.

Oh, please! You are the sort of person who I recommended should start with an easier distro.

Freespire/Linspire and Xandros are the easiest I know. PCLinuxOS is also quite good, but Linspire and Xandros make lots of changes to the interface so that it is easier for people who are used to Windows.

Freespire's software is a little dated, but there should be a new version in January.

You may have to pay a bit of money for Linspire or Xandros, but they work pretty much out of the box, which is what you're looking for.

Personally, I spent my first Linux year with Xandros. I found it a great stepping stone to learning Linux.

Adrian

[houstonbofh]

Heh... Sounds like me. It was not ethics, but a better tool for the job. I prefer to work in Ubuntu. Cleaner, easier (eventually) and faster. And no security issues. (By comparison)

[Soarer]

I see this sort of nonsense a lot. It is simply not true to say Windows just works. People who say that have never installed it. I have, many times, and I NEVER had it 'just work' Almost always the wireless card needed drivers to be downloaded - not easy when you use wireless to connect to the Internet! Also video, sound, the list goes on.

And as has been stated, Sony did a lot of work to make the innovative Vaio hardware work -with Windows! They did not do it for Ubuntu. Blame Sony, if you want, but not Ubuntu. It's a bit like expecting a car built for petrol (gas) to run on Diesel (gasoil) and then blaming the oil companies when it breaks. Get real!

[mahiyar]

What can I say, I spent a month dabbling in linux using knoppix, compared with 2/3 years ago I liked what I saw. Then I tried installing debian, stable version, Xwindows would not start, conflicting with Nvidia card. Then I used Ubuntu and I'am glad. Of course everything is far from OK. My videos are not working, I needed an hour installing my printer, getting flash work in firefox was another journey, and so many other things. But at the end of the day there is something achieved (better than spending hours playing games). As far as comparison between windows and linux is concerned there is a very fine article, I suggest everybody who wants to "move over" to linux should read it http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm.

[Mateo]

I see this sort of nonsense a lot. It is simply not true to say Windows just works. People who say that have never installed it. I have, many times, and I NEVER had it 'just work' Almost always the wireless card needed drivers to be downloaded - not easy when you use wireless to connect to the Internet! Also video, sound, the list goes on.

But that's worst case scenario. You never have to fire up CMD and hunt down How-tos to get your hardware to working, having to configure a million different things along the way. Worst case scenario you have to find the proper drivers on the manufacturer's website and watch the install program do the work for you. I prefer linux as well, but windows really is infinitely easier for the common PC user. The typical PC user is simply not capable of using a command line program or edit config files, etc.