OSNews

Try Xandros. The difference is like night and day. You won't have any of the problems you had with Mandrake, and you'll be up and running and surfing the internet less than 20 minutes after inserting the install disk.

I don't think that Xandros (or any linux) supports USB ISDN devices without the use of special drivers for the device that might or might not come by default with the latest Linux kernels.
The author also mentions Bluetooth, which is not part of Xandros either.
And while Xandros has some features that make it easy to use, it lacks other things that Mandrake has, like personal firewalling and internet connection sharing or nicer fonts...

"Note: All packs also include third-party applications such as Zope, Jonas, and additional drivers that support devices such as Conexant® modem and Alcatel Speedtouch® USB." From the mandrake feature page.. It seems the download edition does not come with many drivers, due to the fact they aren't open source, so one has to download them and install them on his/her own. Unlucky for this guy, it was his modem

Regarding AUMix - if Mandrake had called it SoundMixer
in the menu, would people be angry and accused them of ripping off the AUMix developer?

I can only use the text mode installer. I dont have any exotic hardware (athlon 1800, GF4/4200/8X, 19160 scsi). The installer goes straight to black screen and keyboard lights flash. weird eh?

I think thats part of the Joy of Linux from the Desktop experience. The anticipation that somehow the next (Latest) release will be it.

This article does a good job of tracking the experience of a user through the daunting task of installing and actually USING linux. Who cares if I can install it in 10 minutes if it won't play any sound, even if it says it recognizes my soundcard? Linux is still a hobby OS for the most part. I keep trying various distros hoping that I can find one I can use for 90% of my computing tasks. Like the author, I want to like Linux. With every distro I'm able to do a little bit more without getting under the hood. I'm intrigued by the success stories of individuals, major corporations, and even governments switching to Linux. Bravo to all the people who are working on making Linux easier to use for the masses, and I hope a few years from now there is a TRUE windows alternative.

i have a similar machine (athlon xp 1800, 512 ram, geforce 3) and i havent noticed any slow down, it defnitely does not feel slower in kde than it does in win2k. a couple of weird things, the usb mouse bug during installation prevented me from installing on 1st try (used my ps2 adapter and plugged it, then it worked fine), sound was turned down, aumix isnt exactly easy to find if you dont know what to look for (i didnt, i thought it hadnt configured my sound card or something); but so far, i'm really enjoying this release, its definitely more user-friendly than redhat 8 for me (kde menu is less chaotic, despite of course that redhat prefers gnome), the amazing thing was the installation process, it went by so quickly (i'm used to long, sometimes tedious, microsoft os installations and configurations), i was up and running a full-install/3 desktop-env mandrake in 25 minutes

"I think thats part of the Joy of Linux from the Desktop experience. The anticipation that somehow the next (Latest) release will be it. "

Bingo, (big time).

Yes, and it swells the ranks of those who want the "latest
and greatest" in Linux to more than it will be when product
maturity comes to Linux.
Beleive it or not there will come the a day when news of
a new release of OpenOffice or KOffice is met by most
Linux users with a big fat yawn.
the beauty of this is not just the maturiy of applications but that it will make questions of ease of
upgrading in Linux as well as pricing for interim release
versions less important.
Here's to the day when Linux's biggest competition is it's own users.

I was a reluctant Linux user, I didn't want to make the switch until I'd found the distro that suited me. I'd tried Red Hat, Mandrake, Yoper, Knoppix (okay, not really a distro in the sense of the others), until I finally decieded one day to try Gentoo.

The documentation for Gentoo is amazing. Even a Linux novice would be hard pressed to fail. Gentoo downloads and builds everything from source. Don't let the stuff you might have heard about install failures put you off. It installed great first time on my P4 2.53/1GB RAM machine. After about 16 hours, I had the Linux desktop machine *I* wanted, optimised for *my* machine. Portage is a great tool, and blows apt-get or BSDs Ports out of the water, imo.

Want to install gaim? It's as easy as "emerge gaim". All the source will be downloaded, compiled and installed. It's just as easy to uninstall too.

Trust me, once you've used Gentoo, no other distro comes close.

(I don't work for Gentoo, btw.

http://www.gentoo.org

You've got to be kidding! Linux is too much like Unix? Really??!!! The first thing you need to realize when and if you get serious about Linux, is that Linux is not Windows. Do not compare it to XP, it's not trying to be like XP. You are the poster boy for RTFM. Don't mean to be rude but how many years did it take you to learn DOS and Windows? And you're ready to criticize Linux because you give it a half-ass try over four years time?
Why were you trying to install OOo from a magazine CD when it comes with your Mandrake 9.1? Oh, and by the way, the conflict you ran into is because you most likely already had OOo installed !
You weren't looking for an alternative to Windows, you were looking for a direct comparison so you could bash it. Linux isn't the problem for your hardware problems. Ask your modem vendor. Typically when there's a hardware issue, it's the manufacturer that's the bottle-neck, not Linux. Either the driver is proprietary or none of the hardware specs are released. Tough to write a driver when you don't get any help from who makes the hardware.
You want to have an alternative to Windows with Linux? Then get serious. Check the hardware compatibility lists, read up on rpm, and get used to going back to the bottom of the learning curve. Linux is a great system if you stop thinking like a Windows user.

Yeah, right. You tell a newbie to use Gentoo.
Well, I used Gentoo for a year and things are not as sugar-candy-kisses as you present it here.
Refer to our gentoo articles and comments for more information about it.

That is precisely what we DON'T want to hear when we can't get the latest attempt at migrating to fly right. I've read the article and I agree wholeheartedly with what he's writing. I too didn't get the sound working (why on earth is Mandrakes sound muted as default?), had innumerable problems installing packages, didn't get my modem to work because of lack of drivers and have been amazed at how long it took to start upp apps.

I've got about 20 years of computer savvy (from roughly age 10 in 1982) and with 5 years in the amiga demo scene and 5 years as a windows user. I write this to make it clear that I actually HAVE had some computer experience, ie not a complete noob. I also want to migrate soonish, but... I've tried Red Hat 7.2, Mandrake 9.0, Knoppix and various fringe distros but it always ends up with me in tears. The situation now is that I've got a dsl modem that has the driver support from hell (Telewell 300b) so I'll have to buy a new one to get an internet connection. And as for package management, well, I'm just going to wait for Autopackage and see. I'm using Win98SE now and I'll just probably have to use it until it's totally obsolete at this rate.

Anyway, he makes a plethora of VERY good points in his artice. I suggest you really read it carefully - because I think it really gives an accurate description of what it's like to try to migrate to Linux. I really wish the driver & app installation procedure will get fixed in the near future, because at this rate my migrating will probably happen after the last copy of Win98SE has crumbled to dust. Just my 2 cents worth.

This is an excellent review from a new user's perspective. It outlines exactly why linux is not ready for the desktop. This user is able to read and follow instructions, but Mandrake doesn't provide the user with sufficient information to make intelligent decisions or solve problems with things like boot loaders, sound servers, and application installation.

Additionally, it shows that linux (at least Mandrake) is broken from a memory management point of view. When reboots are required to free up memory from dead processes that indicates a real problem. (it doesn't matter that he could have grep|kill|ps whatever to fix it; Mandrake did not provide him the tools necessary to manage memory on his machine)

Yup, the zealots are in full force on this one as they always are, giving the same two lame responses:

1) The author was using the wrong distro. (Of course, if this has been a less than favorable review for either Xandros or Gentoo, there would be other distro fanboys on here telling them to use Mandrake - go figure.)
2) Personally insulting the author - 'nuf said.

Of course, when anyone has a bad experience with Linux, it's their own fault, as we all know Linux is perfect, right? *pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft*

Haha, nice one Darius!

--- "You want to have an alternative to Windows with Linux? Then get serious. Check the hardware compatibility lists, read up on rpm, and get used to going back to the bottom of the learning curve. Linux is a great system if you stop thinking like a Windows user."

Although I think the experiences of this user should be kept in mind by Linux developers, I do agree. If he was as uneducated in using windows as he was in using Linux, he would be saying the same things about windows, possibly from a Mac! This fellow seems to think that just because he put the tremendous time and effort in to learn windows so well, he should automatically be as capable in Linux. The fact that he complains that it should be "Com1" makes this plan as day. Does he think this is any less confusing to someone who does not know EITHER operating system?

Imagine how I felt back in the day when I felt just like you: wanting a serious alternative to the Windows paradigm.

This was back in 1994. I was at some store and found this 4 cd set of "linux" for 10 bucks. I had no idea what linux was, the only thing I thought was "Woah, thats a lotta software AND an OS for 10 bucks."

It was quite a process to install and get running. There was no installer, no hardware detection, no fancy pancy graphical voodoo, just linux.

What I am trying to say is, toughen up a bit. I mean I understand why we want it all to be easy and functional and powerful, yada yada yada. But the researchers think we all need to be more information technology fluent. If you dont agree, read the book:

http://stills.nap.edu/html/beingfluent/

Its available online.

"I'm not a novice computer user and consider myself fairly technically-minded"

"Moving on to to Openoffice then, I know that OOo comes with a nice install program that makes it easy for idiots like me to install it"

I suggest you download that 2nd mandrake CD and install all your juarez off of that such as abiword and openoffice. Then you can be a happy bunny without having to write a 2 page 'Personal Review' to bore us with.

Another point: Linux is free to use for anyone. Not just the kernel, but a whole distribution like mandrake and the others. You shouldn't compare something you must pay for and somethng you get for free. I have been using Linux and freeBSD since 1998 and every time I ran into any problem I just thought: "Ok that's because I'm not intending to pay several hundred dollars for Windows, Office and all the other windows-based proprietary software. Linux is not just about a free OS it is about free tools, apps as well.
It's precisely like when you go onto a package holiday. You pay the price you go into a five-star hotel, you try to get by free, well...
On the other hand I must say linux and the BSDs have several strengths where they can meet many people's needs. Not people's with USB modems but many average person's.
On my system, I had no probs with hardware since 1998:
Celeron 900Mhz now
SiS 6326 PCI graphics
SB 16 (the sound is NOT muted on this card by the way)
LAN internet RTL8029
etc

So linux more less perfect for me but that doesn't mean I would recommend it to anyone. I won't say Linuy is ready for THE desktop. I can only say Linux and BSD is ready for MY desktop. And that's the main thing. The author of the article is on the right way, probably some time he will find that Linuy is ready for his desktop as well.
But let's not forget something. Linux is not a MUST to use. Windows is superior in many ways and Linux is superior in many (mostly OS design related, technical) ways. You choose. On the base of your feelings (eg I wouldn't like to use any MS product, that's a grave point for me, maybe not so for others), circumstances(not supported hardware -> goto win), and budget. It's all a question of devotion, time and money. That's all. And let's quit this silly ever-lasting debate which is better. I tell you: NONE. Each can be better for YOU though.

the reviewer wrote:
"Turns out there is an applet in the start menu called AUmix. Unless you know what this does, AUmix is meaningless to the average person and it was just by sheer luck I stumbled upon it - surely renaming it to something useful like "sound mixer, or Volume control" would be better. "

If it isn't in a folder that says Sound, then it should be.
Plus for every app in a folder (or desktopicon) a
mouseover should yield a "popup" that at least gives a generic name for the app. eg,Aumix Sound Mixer.



Ro

Portage is a great tool, and blows apt-get or BSDs Ports out of the water, imo.
Ok...Does Portage support reverse depending ? apt-get does.
Gentoo is an interesting distro but as Eugenia said, it still have drawbacks and is far to be that perfect...

C'mon HagerR15, 'Linux is a great system if you stop thinking like a Windows user'

Most of us uses windows since what? windows3.1? It's been almost a decade now. We've been through so many bugs, glitches and blue screen. We won't switch for nothing less than XP. XP is like a gift. It boots fast, support everything, reliable , easy and flexible. I'd like to switch, but if I do, it'll be for something better, that boots faster, that support even more hardware, that is more reliable, easier.... see? I have suse 8.1 at home, and it's ok, I guess. But there is no great DVD burning tools, still some problems with video codecs, and you know what I hate the most? when you start an app, and nothing happens, no error message, no nothing, grrrrrrrrr.

I have the same card, and I did'nt even have to use the mixer. It worked perfectly. I think a problem might be a bug that makes Mandrake choose the Audigy2() driver instead of the emu101k() one. Goto MDK Control Center -> Hardware and start the Hardware manager. Choose the Live! and change the driver. It should work. Ideally, do it during setup at the summary page...

Another type of response I'm seeing here is something along the lines of "Why do you expect to pick up on Linux so fast? It took you years to learn Windows, didn't it?"

Well, yes ... techically it DOES take some people to learn Windows. So then why do they expect to just be able to pick up Linux and go? I can answer that with one sentence, using a quote from the Suse Linux website:

The installation and operation of SuSE Linux 8.2 is quick, easy, intuitive, and transparent!

Yeah, I'd say that is a far cry from 'RTFM', wouldn't you? Perhaps if these damn distro makers and the 'Linux is ready for grandma' crowd would stop blowing smoke up people's asses, then maybe ... JUST MAYBE you wouldn't have this problem.

One other point of contention - if people are using Windows and something 'blows up', as I mentioned in a recent thread, people can usually call up their Windows-literate friend/relative/whoever to come over and help them straighten out the mess - many people won't have this option with Linux, because they don't know anybody personally who knows it well enough to help.

Oh, and SBLive worked flawless for me in Mandrake 9.0, as well as Redhat 8.

I just wish linux could detect my raid and sound, both onboard on a KT400 motherboard :/

Did you ensure that the disc is not scratched/corrupted? and yes, you should have downloaded disc2/3 for office. If this was not a n00b-oriented review, you are not at all techno-competent as you claim to be.

I think the "writer" has forgotten all about the adwantage of a pre-installed machine and has probably newer installed anything by him self previously. The story is thus totally worthless.

I have a KT400 motherboard - MSI KT4V. My board had onboard sound... Find out the chipset's name- Mine was Via8235. I had to compile ALSA drivers from www.alsa-project.org

Obviously Linux is different to Windows and a user has to be willing to learn when switching to a new OS. But I feel that some Linux fans use that as an excuse for every ease of use problem in Linux. Some things are simply far more complex, problematic and time consuming in Linux, regardless of how the user thinks.

Mac OS X is different from Windows too, but I don't see people having the same problems switching between those two OSes. I certainly don't see Apple saying that switchers need to change their way of thinking to use it.

IMHO, the most reliable PCs you can buy are the ones that have the little sticker " Designed for Windows _ _ " on it - because you know if the HDD fails that you can install windows and it will just work.. no being stuck without drivers for sound or graphics or most particularly, modem.

third party drivers and hardware not supported by default are a pain in the backside on any OS. if you want your system to run an OS well, buy hardware known to work with it.

Installing an OS on a PC built from parts with no consideration of what would run on it is not a recipe for stability, reliability or ease of use.

Apple learned this 10 years ago. We , apparently, still have not.

I have to say Mandrake made an enourmous mistake with this one. Muting the audio, by default, is plain stupid (it did this to me, though alsamixer was my first port of call, once I noticed I had no sound).

Reviewing Mandrake 9.1 only using the first CD is a bit of a joke. If I had a friend who wanted to switch, I would atleast give them a 3 CD copy, however I would highly recommend that they buy a PowerPack box, for the manuals and so they have as much software as possible (in an easy to install format).

>> For a lot of users, Windows just works, things (mostly) just work, and when they don't it's fairly easy to investigate, even if you can't always fix the problem yourself.

I really can't let this go by without comment. Whilst things in MS-Windows generealy 'just work', when they go wrong, and it isn't just something superficial, they are near impossible to investigate.

>> 505Mb of system and 100Mb of swap - Bear in mind that I had nothing else running except 1 Konqueror window at this point. 500Mb!

How much of that 500 MB was used by programs and how much was used by buffers and caches? Unused RAM is wasted RAM. Your system doesn't gain anything by having free RAM, but it does loose out by having an undersized cache.

>> In all the time I've been trying to use Linux I have never ever managed to install anything via rpm. Not once has it worked for me, it always complains about dependencies, or internal conflicts or missing libraries that I haven't got installed or just simply fails to give a reason that I understand.

RPM doesn't complain, it explains, if you don't pay attention to it's explanation then what do you expect. Have you ever tried persevere with Linux? Did you learn all you know about MS-Windows in afternoon?

>> Why does this have to be so hard and confusing?

Well if you take one look at the error message, and decide that it is gobble-de-gook and you don't want to try to understand, how can it be anything other than 'hard and confusing'.

Thanks OSNews for the entertaining read, sometimes I forget that there are those who won't accept Linux on the desktop till it is in the form of a black stick with white tips.

I also have the same card. You can also swicth to emu101k() on the MDK installation summary. I have not seen anyone metion this yet until now. Not even Eugenia.

Well I think that for the money ($0.00) Mandrake does a pretty damn good job at what it does. Yes, there are some obstacles here and there but hey, if you want it to Just Work - go spend $1,500+ for a mac or $600+ for WinXP + Office.

Even if you get the MDK boxed set ($50? - too lazy to check the exact price :-) think of what you get. A nice OS, full-featured office package, multimedia apps, graphics apps, web publishing apps (not as easy as FrontPage or Dreamweaer but still usefull) and tons more.

Funky hardware has always been a problem for Linux but that's mostly fault of the hardware vendors who don't want to open their hardware specs or release drivers for linux. Look at Nvidia - why do 70%+ of linux users have nvidia cards?

normally I give the benifit of the doubt to newbie reviews, but this one just has to a troll (yeah I know you shouldn't feed them)

I dont usually say RTFM, but rpm from the command line is not a lot

rpm -Uvh, rpm -i rpm -e and --nodeps and --force flags
I think I learned these five minutes after first install in the RH 5.2 docs

The author states he only downloaded a third of the installation cd's and then complains about neding software.

Comments about gnome - "too unix like" WTF, so because you feel that something looks like your impression of unix (god knows how - this I am pretty sure is gnome 2.2, ie: the "dumbed down" version) you dont even try it seriously

Lastly, pet peeve, criticising Linux for stuff that MS doesnt have (and giving the impression that it does).

My understanding is that MS made a deliberate decision not to include bluetooth support.

And windows problems easy to investigate - give me a break. If windows works everything is fine, if they dont, real fun time.

I can't hear or read it any more! Why all this "first impression", "my personal experiance", etc with Linux?

If you want to use it, then install the Linux OS and live with it. Linux is not a "click&run" OS, but I don't see any real reason to not use it. I have serval small customers, where they only use Linux and I have other customers only using Windows. At the end of the day it counts only if you can do your job or not. It is not a question of beeing ultra-cool or some thing like this!

To be 100% honest, I eaven have customer where their business critical applications are runing on the host. They would go very quickly off the business, if they would not be able to use the host for more then 1 day. And the end-user clients run Windows and some of them eaven run Sun Solaris. But all of those end-user clients are in no way business critical. If they crash or would be unusable for serval days... who cares? As long they can connect with a dumb therminal to the mainframe, everything is okay.

I realy don't get it!?!?! What is all this Linux <-> Windows <-> Mac OS X <-> etc war about??

I use Windows and Linux. All my servers are Linux and in no way I would choose Windows bevore Linux for the server, if the application or service I want to run on the server allows me to choose. As for the client: I have a mix of Windows and Linux (not dual-booting! I have to computer with a switch-box). But on the other hand: my secretary only uses Linux (gentoo). She is happy and does not miss Windows at all (for her it is just another system. I think she does not realize the difference). But for me this means, that all the other employees (3 of them) are not able to support her (at least they can not fix those "very deep" problems as they where able on Windows. Anyway... they are not that great on Windows either. When they got problems in Windows, they often just reinstall the OS, where in gentoo, I never reinstalled it. I was able to fix all the problems with either reinstalling/recompiling a package or changing some small settings).

Of course there are some hardware wich do not work in Linux. But I avoid buying them anyway. On the other hand I have some things wich I can do excellent in Linux and I can't find a replacement (at least not for that money) in Windows. But this is normal!

I am not concentrating my energy to find what is great in Linux and what is great in Windows and what is great in Mac OS X etc. I want to do my work and that's all. If I find a problem, then I try to fix it. But looking on the other platform and thinking: "ohhh... in that OS I would not have that problem!" is just contra productive and does not help me at all to solve my problem.


cheers

SteveB

after reading just the first half of his review, when i got to the part about the reviewer getting "Cold Sweats" over trying to figure out hard drive partitions such as /hda, hda1, hda5, hda6 etc...etc... i know this guy does not have a clue and should get some REAL help in better understanding, in disk partitioning, Linux file formats & structure...

common Eugina, i know you know better than to bother letting this get posted to your website, don't make me delete OSNews from my bookmarks!!!

The sound certainly wasn't muted for me. On the contrary, when Linus did his little "Linux as Linux" bit, he almost burst my eardrums -- this is with the volume slider on my headphones as low as it will go.

I disagree Eugenia. I find the Gentoo distro and its docs and forums to be the best out there. Install is long but not troublesome .....sowhat if you have no gui installer. One of the biggest benefits of the Gentoo install is the wealth of knowledge you learn by building linux from scratch. Once the install is completed, I find Gentoo with its Portage system to be ultra easy to use. No rpm hell, no dependency hell, no manually compiling anything, no searching your system wondering where news things installed to, etc. You want to upgrade to a new version of KDE....no problem: emerge KDE and the rest is automated. Linux is not like windows. It requires you to get your hands dirty sometimes. Of all the distros Ive used, I ended up on SuSE for the longest time, but still lacked the proper knowledge of Linux itself. I was bound to YaST to get anything done right. Even some of the simplest linux commands would stump me. I played with Gentoo 1.4 RC3 for a week and learned more than the previous 1.5 years of using SuSE. Now Ive replaced SuSE on my 2 servers and Desktop with it. Also put it on my desktop at work. Never ran into a single problem. I even got it running on my new Asus A7N8X Deluxe nforce2 board without issue.

I would recommend SuSE 8.2 or Mandrake 9.1 to a user that was curious to see if they could get away from windows or dont have a lot of time to fuss with their computer. Most of those users cant handle it and go back to windows anyway. For those that are serious and are basically at a point where they dont want to run windows, Id have no problem recommending Gentoo. With the assurance that "Dont worry, the long install process is worth the end result"

the author was using the right distro, mandrake rocks! (i use gentoo) the author probably knows about as much as my thumb when it comes to computers. i think linux should stop being for mainstream uses and more for the technoliterate. people like the author make it sound hard when it's very easy and in the end we hate ourselves for having ever used windows! the use of linux is a privilege for people who know WTF they're doing. to conclude :-) linux is perfect but only to those who can do the black majicks required to conjure up the penguin spirits.

Gentoo doesn't solve the hardware detection problems. You have to compile your own kernel. The biggest complaint this guy had was that hardware detection sucked.

The other complaint, package management issues, is not easily solved by gentoo. There is no need to build from source. apt-get is a much better tool for what he wants.

Honestly, I think that to fix hardware detection, distros should start bundling an install cd and a package cd. The install cd should mimic knoppix hardware auto-detection. The user can see everything that was autodetected, and *know* that if it was autodetected, it will work properly. Then the second package cd should contain the binary packages (really .deb or .tgz is the best existing choice).

We shouldn't criticize distros for having bad ui design. They will get there when desktop environments have good ui design and enforce higs on apps.

My two cents.

Linux is for people who want/need a UNIX like environment.

End of story.

"Mac OS X is different from Windows too, but I don't see people having the same problems switching between those two OSes. I certainly don't see Apple saying that switchers need to change their way of thinking to use it."

That's because Mac OS X is a desktop operating system. Linux is not.

I'm glad you love your OS, but Gentoo is not the be all and end all of linux distros. Gentoo users have this hammer mentality - they act like Gentoo is the only linux distro for the job in the same way that a 2 year old walks around swinging with a toy hammer thinking it's the only tool for the job. I'd like to debunk many of the Gentoo myths but this is not the place, and in any event, the days of compiling that Gentoo users have spent would compel them to deny these outright for fear of having wasted a tremendous amount of their time. For the time being, let's just agree that Gentoo is not in the same ballpark as Mandrake. Who cares if it has great documentation - newbs can't find this documentation on their own, and if they do find it, they aren't willing to spend that much time following such delicate instructions.

because god forbid hardware companies want to stay competative and not release their specs, right?

I understand the linux zealots can be irrating with comments like your using the wrong distro or you dont know what your doing and are an idiot.


It is equally irrating when the opposing faction of equally condescending attitude of well the zealots are in and baggin on this guy therefore linux must be at fault and it will always suck as long as the zealots are around.


Neither approach addresses any issues and is childlike and thoughtless at best. Frankly its true that linux is different than windows, some people do like using it and have little trouble doing so. So be it, the author's experience wasnt good and therefore he would be better off using windows. As much as I feel more my use of desktop linux is a no-brainer and I spend less time dealing with things I care not to deal with, I'm not going to bag on someone else who is bewildered by linux (no matter how half hearted they're attempts may be, frankly there is more to life than computers and understandibly its not a priority for everyone to explore and learn said subject).


This is a technically oriented website, and is called osnews, not thisossucks.com, or linux/windows/skyosadvocacy.com. Zealots on either side make me waste my time on posts like this to say stop wasting my time looking through garbage to get to something informative. I guess I should have known better, I will stop wasting words on zealots now (as the tendency is to dismiss any opinion differing from theirs, ergo zealots).

just tell me what is so difficult in the hardware dedection in linux? if the lspci -vv command does not help you, then you better buy a box, where everything is installed and you don't need to install any driver or any application!

First of all I'm using Linux my self (Debian), and thought I don't agree with author in many places he is right about one thing: installing new software.
IMHO installing *any* distro is peace of cake for almost anybody (hdaX? c'mon, hard disk a(first), partition X...),
but after you got your eye candy up & running you will need some stuff which didn't came with distro. Anything... and if it doesn't got deb, rpm for *your distro* problems begin... compile, get headers, -dev packages... KDE 3.1.1 seems so different from KDE 3.1 (looking ant Qt libs) that all tad bit older programs won't be binary compatible etc. etc. etc...
To put it short: if you start wanting new cool KDE/GNOME apps, you start asking for trouble, atleast little:)

I can't say that I took the review as a serious read, but people really don't need to go so base as to insult the guy on a personal level. Equally what's the point in making guesses as to his technical know-how just because he can't install Linux. If someone can't install a BSD do you see the users of BSD go hunting for an easy flame?

Linux isn't ready for the desktop and I doubt ever will be any time soon, when against Windows. Windows has had a long time and a huge cash stockpile and so have a lead Linux won't make up for even with 100's of developers.

Linux is though fine for workstations and the like - and also for those who do know how to install it, it isn't a hobby OS, and it's not a gaming OS. The distro's really need to sort out who IS buying their product (or downloading in this case) and cater to them before worrying about chipping away at Microsoft's userbase of the non-tech-savy.

Use Mac OS X man, in an Apple Computer, Mac OS X is the best operating system, like Windows, Linux and Mac OS, test it! very good.

Main difference between switching to Mac OS X and Linux? Mac support by Mac users actually answers the users question, or at least points them to a reference that does. Linux responses are 99% "you're a noob", "RTFM", "you don't deserve to use Linux", etc. If all the so called Linux Experts would either take 5 minutes of their precious time to explain it, or actually point to the resource - most new Linux users would be glad to RTFM (finding it is usually the problem, reading/understanding is not).

"That is precisely what we DON'T want to hear when we can't get the latest attempt at migrating to fly right. I've read the article and I agree wholeheartedly with what he's writing. I too didn't get the sound working (why on earth is Mandrakes sound muted as default?), had innumerable problems installing packages, didn't get my modem to work because of lack of drivers and have been amazed at how long it took to start upp apps."

Why would you need a driver for a modem? Surely you just plug it into the serial port and it works. You might want to know a good Init string for that modem, but a standard one will work.

I too tried out the newest release of Mandrake 9.1 and honestly, I had much the same experiences. I've been trying to use Linux since Redhat 6.2 and I've never stuck with it, always going back to my main boot of Windows 2000 or XP. Mandrake 9.1 is probably the best distro I've played with out of the box, but the key word is play. I don't want to spend weeks tweaking the system just to do what I need it to do. Its ridiculus that it mutes the sound from the start (I have a Gametheater XP card...C-Media chipset) and the audio quality blows ass in it. Its ridiculus that to install Opera (which wasn't installed by default even with all the CDs downloaded and used and it wasnt even a choice) I have to hunt down something like five other packages just to install. Yet I'm given something like five other browsers out of the box that I've never even heard of and can't even render the majority of pages out there?

Linux has INCREDIBLE power, yet you need to spend a great amount of time to access that power. Let alone to do what you need to do on a daily basis. Some companies are marketing Linux as the Windows replacement, its not, and it won't be for some time. I don't know if it even should be, its power lies elsewhere. The Linux obsessed crowd attack this writer because of his knowledge and how he can't get Linux to work. Hell, I know PLENTY of people who've worked with computers for years that can't get Linux to work. Not all of us want to spend hours pon hours locked in our basement tweaking an OS to work. Thank you but no...Windows XP does work out of the box, the majority of the time, doing basicly everything a normal person could want. When Linux can do that...thats when we'll switch.

..is that ACPI support still doesn't work for my very very mainstream laptop.

It's not Mandrake's fault, but this is where OSS isn't living up to its billing.

ACPI support shipping in XP years ago, and we still can't get it?

Argh.

You need to have a lesson on hda's, b's and c's. They are much easier than C, D, E, F drives? hda is the master on the primary ide bus. hdb is the slave on the primary ide bus. hdc is the master on the secondary ide bus; hdd is the slave on the secondary ide bus. Simple so far? hda1 is the first partition on hda. hda2 is the second partition. et cetra.

This is much more direct than having a "C" drive. Why is not the first drive "A" ;-)

LINLW - Linux is not like Windows, but differences are good.

your right technical knowhow is not an issue however he did like most people who feel they know computers claim to be one. Not defending the trolls but he should have known better thats foolish to claim your technical and then cant back that, I doubt linus torvalds or euginia make a habit of calling themselves technical when they write something.

I have been watching the Unix v. Linux v. Windows v. Mac OS X for sometime now. I have used all of them at one point, but I currently own a 2000 box and a Powermac.

with that said....
I, like the reviewer, would love to use Linux a lot more than I do, but it's to damn hard to figure out. I think I will agree with what a lot of the local Linux people tell me. Linux is for serious geeks..newbies need not apply. Which is sad because Linux has so much potential. This also begs a question...

Why is it that Apple can make an easy to unix in about 4 years with a handful of engineers and programmers and Linux can't with hordes of people hard at work. Another thing, why does Linux GUI behaves the same as Windows?
Where have all of the unique Ideas gone?

Maybe you ask in the wrong places, or maybe you are being equally obnoxious (sp?) when asking, which makes people ignore you or brush you off?

Seriously, i never see this kind of attitude unless people are asking rudely, in which case i think a RTFM answer is just fine.

As for the review, i too find it pretty worthless. I mean, if i give my mom a blank computer and a windows cd, im sure she will have most of the same problems too. I am however sure that both my mom and this reviewer would have a lot more luck if they got a preconfigured system to play with.

If he would, after trying out a preconfigured system for an extended period of time, not just a few hours, still have major problems, then i think it would be a whole lot more interesting.

This is i believe why BOTH Linux and Windows seem to be doing well on the business desktop, as people just have to get their work done, and let others worry about the setting up.

i'm a linux user/promoter for a few years. . . but we must accept the reality, linux+xfree86+kde/gnome can't beat xp in speed, ease of use. . . in desktop terms or course.

linux is more stable. . . ok
has better file system(s). . . ok
. . . generally faster (without gui). . . ok

linux is a perfect server OS, i'm testing oracle 9i and is far better tan w2000, xp, nt4, etc. but again, liux still needs people that knows what's a computer.

This "article" is of rather poor quality. All it says is how not all hardware worked correctly or at all, and details the troubles this person had with installing software. Hardly worth being posted on osnews, or?

Linux is like a democracy, not a dictator ship. So don't be afraid of the choices. If want to drive the OS car blindly, use Windows or Apple or .... . But even these systems have learning curves. All systems have a learning curve. Some things can be done easily in Windows, but others can be done way more easy in Linux. IMHO Linux is a better option, because I have A CHOICE. And choice is IMHO the most important characteristic of Open Source.

Stick with one distro and stop complaining !

than other distros. It's a start at least.

Let me start by saying that I'm desperate for a real alternative to Windows on the PC platform

How about eComStation? I really think it's worth a try. Still I wish they had a demo disk or a trial version...

Why is it that Apple can make an easy to unix in about 4 years with a handful of engineers and programmers and Linux can't with hordes of people hard at work.

Because the Mac is closed hardware, more or less, whereas Linux is expected to run on a huge range of hardware, from obscure modems to run-of-the-mill Intel Pentium 4s.

"Why is it that Apple can make an easy to unix in about 4 years with a handful of engineers and programmers and Linux can't with hordes of people hard at work."

To be fair to Linux, Apple used NeXTSTEP as the basis for Mac OS X and NeXTSTEP was an easy to use UNIX over 10 years ago. Linux has existed for quite a long time, but until recently it hasn't been aimed at the desktop, much desktop software is still immature. Also it's much easier to make a consistent and easy to use OS when one company is controlling it. With Mac OS X there aren't multiple distributions with different features, package managers, desktop environments, etc.

It's funny, but the thing I think is lacking most in Linux isn't what everyone else generally points to; it isn't a viable Photoshop rival - the Gimp is fine. It isn't a decent groupware app - Evolution is sufficient and becoming more and more refined. It's a decent rival to Illustrator.

OK, I am not reviewing the 9.1, but bear with me, because this is relevant.

First, I ordered the CDs, received them after 4 weeks, so I did not dowload.

Next, the computer I chose is a Micron Millennia PII 450Mhz, 256 Meg RAM.

Installation:

I pulled out the CD. So far so good. The CD was shrink-wrapped in an opaque plastic that really clung to the CD. That is when trouble started. There was no obvious place to start tearing off the plastic. I was afraid that if I used a knife, I might scratch the surface of the CD, and I also did not know which side had the data on. Now, before you say RTFM, get this - there was NO documentation as to how to unwrap the CD - it was not included in the box set! However, I am more skilled with computers than your average grandma, so undaunted, I went online. I hit the online forums at Mandrake and searched and searched, but could not find the topic dealing with my problem (

So, I went googling. Same problem. I got tons of hits on saranwrap, and various cooking sites, but still no help with my problem.

Finally defeated, I had to re-evaluate my move to Linux. Now, I have heard of other distros that use different ways of shipping the installation CDs, but why does all of this have to be so difficult? When I bought my Windows computer, the OS came pre-installed on it already. That's a lot easier, than having to deal with complicated and unfamiliar ways of software packaging under linux - and further every distro packages their CDs differently! I can assure you, I have never seen this particular wrapping on any other installation CD - only Mandrake uses it. I can well imagine, that after I have finally gleaned the secret of unwrapping Mandrake installation CDs, I'd have to re-learn it all over with SUSE and so on. Why don't they all just standardize their wrapping?? FRAGMENTATION IN LINUX MUST STOP! Plus, after all this, the pre-installed Windows XP was just an easier installation from my point of view - and I approach it as somewhat of a geek (at least that's what a girl called me at the supermarket when on impulse I asked her for a date).

OK, so you ask - never mind the installation - I too hate it when reviewers concentrate on installation and don't pay attention to LIVING with linux. OK, so here are my experiences. I have now lived with the shrinkwrapped CD in my living room for almost a month. I can report that doing laundry is just as much a chore as it was before. Girls still refuse to date me, even after I've taken to heart remarks from well-meaning friends ("pay attention to your grooming, don't just spend all your time in front of the computer - go out sometime".) After spending years in front of the computer did not result in meeting any girls (I tried "emerge-girl" and "fetch-girl" and "apt-girl", and never has a girl emerged from my computer screen - except on those XXX sites, where they ask for my credit card number and then I get emails like "Lisa - see me", I go to the email site and Lisa just asks for more money). Well, with Mandrake 9.0 CD lying somewhere securely on my messy desk, my love life did not improve. So I got out to the supermarket, and cosistent with the grooming tip, I cleaned my coke-bottle glasses, and replaced the tape holding up the frame of my glasses with new tape. The first girl I walked up to in the supermarket, I asked if she'd like go hacking with me, cause my ManDrake is a 9.0 now. She called me a geek and ran away. So, Mandrake 9.0 has not helped me there either. My diet contiues to be Moutain Dew and donuts because breakfast is the most important meal of the day. No improvement under Mandrake 9.0.

My overall conclusion - linux is still not ready for the desktop.

"I can only use the text mode installer. I dont have any exotic hardware (athlon 1800, GF4/4200/8X, 19160 scsi). The installer goes straight to black screen and keyboard lights flash. weird eh?"
It's not ODD, it's the Linux kernel. Try pressing F1 when the CD boots up and then type "linux noapic" and press <ENETR>.
That should fix it.

I consider myself to be an advocate of using Linux, but I can see how someone with not much technical know-how could have problems, even with a distro like Mandrake.

Windows is easy to use initially, but when something goes really wrong you quickly hit a brick wall, the trail of documentation dries up (or is not available to the public), and your only option is a re-install. Sometimes what you want to do is just plain impossible, because Microsoft has not made allowences for your particular needs. (Minority language support, strange or demanding hardware requirements etc).

With Linux, many users hit the wall pretty quickly. Most give up, but others relax, take a break, read a little and realise it's not such a big wall after all. Once you are over that barrier you see it's not such a big deal. You start to make decisions about how your computer should work for you, rather than just picking from someone else's pre-sets.

Most people who are interested in switching to Linux already have at least five or six years of Windows operating and fault finding experience. When they come across an OS in which they have zero experience, their first reaction to problems is that the OS is fundamentaly flawed, rather than drawing on experience or asking for help to fix whatever configuration problem they encountered.

To the statement...
"Why spend lots of time and effort re-learning a new and seemingly more complex way of working with your computer than you have already?"

I would quote him again..
"I'm desperate for a real alternative to Windows on the PC platform"

Yes, you are going to have to re-learn a few things, and it is going to take a little effort, but it's not as hard as the evening you spent with it may lead you to think.

I got the impression from the article that the writer had installed Mandrake for the purposes of writing a review, rather than any real intention of using it as their main or alternate OS.

Iain-

I'm sorry, but your whole article makes it abundantly clear that switching from XP is not right for you. I don't subscribe to the idea that any OS is, or is not, right for the desktop.

I agree that some things are strange, obtuse, and even downright hostile to the person switching from windows to linux, but, I also havve to say that in all fairness: you can't switch OSes and expect everything to be "like windows."

Alot of the equipment you have is designed with windows in mind-hardware support is, and will continue to be, linux's achilles heel. Alot of people run Linux on fairly high end boxes, some on MicroTel junk. You mileage can vary.

And that's the point. If you want to switch, it's going to be bumpy.My rule of thumbs is: if you can handle the quirks of linux, that is, if you have the willingness to tweak away until the cows come home, then by all means go for it. It's a great OS.

If you can't, why hit your head against the wall? If you have a philosophical problem with Microsoft, then switch to a mac. It too "just runs".

Otherwise, stick with XP.

You know something?

Linux ain't windows. Going into it like it's going to be an upgrade of your windows just ain't going to work.

I think distros can actually be somewhat harmful to the extent they seduce noobs into thinking they don't need to know anything about Linux to use it. It's actually far better to go through something like Gentoo stage 1 install (ideally with a second computer next to you attached to the gentoo.org site) and LEARN while you install. Then you can manage the system properly, resolve problems when they pop up EASILY. Frustration comes from ignorance; the more you insist on remaining ignorant because it's your "right" the more frustrated you will remain because you won't understand how to handle any difficulty you bump into.

All right, so you say why should you learn the workings of your o/s, you don't have to with Windows, right? Well, most people don't use Windows properly either. Most people don't even INSTALL Windows because it just comes on their machine pre-loaded. I've done significant Windows tweaking on four system in the family and the results are amazing for speed and stability. But if I insisted on being an ignoramus, guess what? I could be bitching about Windows problems like everyone else!

To use any operating system effectively, you need to overcome your mental resistence to learning about how things work. It's a small investment considering how many years you're likely to use a stable system.

I played with Lycoris, Mandrake, Redhat, etc. but in the end, Gentoo worked so much better because I was willing to learn while I installed because I KNEW it wasn't a load a cd and click CONTINUE install. I also took the attitude that learning what to do (and scribbling it down in a notepad) was going to serve me longterm as I wasn't just going to continue dancing between distributions, frustrated because none of them combined everything I wanted.

Gentoo let me do things my way: I built the kernel (actually turned out to be quite simple if you take the time to know the devices in your system... my stripped-down kernel worked first try) and chose the packages I wanted. Gentoo happens to have great documentation and a great community at Gentoo.org. And because I compiled everything, it's optimized for my i686 Athlon. Talk about fast.

I'm sorry Eugenia has had problems with Gentoo, but I think it depends on what attitude you take. If you make a list of core requirements you need like office suite, dvd, cd burning, genealogy, web, mail, instant messaging, mp3 music, etc then just install them and use them until some significant new version comes out rather than update to every latest bit of alpha software every night, you might have a stable system.

This is a long message but for a reason. I've played in the Linux world for a year now and was never remotely satisfied until I went with Gentoo.

Gentoo not for noobs? A slighlty higher learning curve to install, but well worth it in the long run. No o/s is for noobs. Just listen to support calls for Windows. Just look at the "Macs for dummies" books.

Why spend lots of time and effort re-learning a new and seemingly more complex way of working with your computer than you have already?

This is one of the many unfair criticisms people throw at linux and it really gets me rattled. Linux is not really "more complex" than windows. The same things are going in each. The difference is you know windows already. People think that knowing how to do things in a Win/Dos world makes them computer savvy and that is pure rubbish. It simply means you happen to have experience with a given OS. Then they are surprised that when learning a new OS with a completely different architecture it takes a little work.

I am telling you. Sit a complete noob who has never used a computer down in front of a linux box and a windows box they will be equally confused by both. They will probably take about the same amount of time to learn either one once they get started as well (as long as they find the right web site or book to help them).

People forget how long the actual learning process takes. I know, I felt similar when I started using linux. Then I realized it wasn't harder, just different.

If you really TRIED ANYONE can do it!!! USE SOME FORUMS!!! You guys have no idea how many hours/days I spent just typing messages in forums to learn about the system. I took the time to learn as much as possible from people that already knew about the system. LINUX CAN BE USED ON THE DESKTOP! You don't even need good hardware to do it. I have a Pentium 150 MHz with 16 MB of RAM running linux in a graphical interface www.vectorlinux.com enjoy (the installation has some bugs, but after 3 installation attempts I got it). That is the problem with you guys, you expect everything to be done for you. Think back to windows 95 or windows 3.11 It wasn't as easy, but you still had hardware compadibility because Microsoft had a monopoly.

I spent half a month getting my winmodem working when I first started. It took me 26 hours to set up a network. Thanks to the people on the message boards I posted to, everything is running smoothly now. OpenOffice is buggy, and I don't know why, but I like Abiword more anyway. That's the only software package that gives me any problems. The is installed. Some things aren't the easiest to install from source. The community knows this, and projects like stow are trying to make this easier for the user. You have to realize this isn't a mature operating system and TAKE THE TIME TO LEARN IT! I can't stress this enough. If you WANT to use linux you CAN make it WORK for you. I have it running on 2 computers fine, and there will be another added as soon as I can get another monitor.

In principle, I agree, but the flip side is that articles purporting to be a review of an OS cannot simply discredit the OS because it essentially is not windows.

That's the whole point of alternative/hobby/non-mainstream OSes-they aren't the dominant paradigm. They are different, they may take some work to get running, and they may explode in your face.

I suppose there are legitimate reasons for switching OSes, such as a legitimate political difference of opinion with Microsoft's business practices. But, if you think that something else is going to be XP-Free Edition, then that's just plain naieve.

Face it: alternative OSes are not for everyone, and no amount of evangelizing will change that.

Yeah, right. You tell a newbie to use Gentoo.

Lots of newbies do, and it isn't strange or wrong to tell a newbie to use it! Most of the people I know who are really fast and effective on Windows (including myself) started out on DOS. Thos of us in this rare breed tend hit Win+R a lot or keep a terminal emulator open. You see, back in the early DOS days you had to understand your computer to use it. You gain a kind of knowledge that makes you more able to fix your problems later.

When my family bought our first computer (a Tandy which costed $2000 at the time) my dad had to get a book on DOS, and this was in the pre-* for dummies days. He sat, and read the book, and actually became quite knowledgable about it. To this day fixes his friends' computers all the time. This is a guy with no college education! However, everyone now thinks it would be a shame if they actually learned what is happening under the hood. If people would quit being so lazy maybe I wouldn't have to be bombarded with idiotic tech support calls all day.

Yup, the zealots are in full force on this one as they always are, giving the same two lame responses:

This is pretty insulting. Of course people are going to reccomend their favorite distro. How is that zealotry? If I go to a bar with a friend and reccomend he order a Boulevard, am I a Boulevard zealot? No, I just like that beer, so I tell my friends so they can try it. The same goes for any suggestion I make to someone. I do it in the hopes that they will enjoy it as much as I do. If not, then that's too bad. I don't expect to get insulted for it though.

We won't switch for nothing less than XP.

Good, don't.

Ever...

I'm serious.

MHO, the most reliable PCs you can buy are the ones that have the little sticker " Designed for Windows _ _ " on it - because you know if the HDD fails that you can install windows and it will just work.

Windows will cure HDD failure! That's incredible that windows can physically repair a broken harddrive. Quick, somebody patent that technology.

"This is one of the many unfair criticisms people throw at linux and it really gets me rattled. Linux is not really "more complex" than windows. The same things are going in each. The difference is you know windows already."

I can only comment on my experience with Windows and Linux, personally I found using Linux much more complex and time consuming. There were things I needed to learn when I switched to Windows and I had a few problems, but nothing I couldn't easily solve even as a Windows novice. Everyday use of the system, including installing software, hardware drivers and OS upgrades has been easy and problem free. I certainly never spent days studying documentation and asking for help on forums with Windows.

While in Linux, for the first month of running it I did practically nothing but read FAQs, HowTo guides and man pages trying to learn the system and get things working. Over the past decade I've switched between RISC OS, Mac OS and Windows as my main desktop OS and played with quite a few others, including NeXTSTEP, OS/2 and BeOS. Using Linux for a few months was more work than learning to use all of the other OSes put together.

For me Linux has been much harder to use, not just different from other OSes. Obviously not everyone has the same problems so YMMV.

The review is well written and informative. However, on my disease ridden system, it runs perfectly. Unlike RedHat 8.0 which crawls, MDrake 9.1 is zippy and fast. Runs like butter. Purrs like a kitten. I, however, installed all available packages, which might have been helpful. Frankly, for the past week I have been using nothing bu MDrake 9.1! I only need to figure out a way to convert Outlook Express folders to KMail or somesuch app, and install Wine and I'll be set! For me, this was the Switch. I won't need any other OS unless I find a better distro in the future, or Bill Gates (or Steve Jobs for that matter) comes aknockin' at my door and begs me (support by wads of cash) to return to Windows (or "switch" to Mac).

--Mike.

These "Personal reviews" are really getting tiresome. If I want a personal user's experience, I'll goto a forum and read.

Please try to keep OSnews more professional with real reviews from people who spend more time actually using/testing the OS than they spend downloading it.

That way I can actually read something semi-intelligent as opposed to rant like this 'review' was.

Why is it that Apple can make an easy to unix in about 4 years with a handful of engineers and programmers and Linux can't with hordes of people hard at work.

This is an easy one. Apple controls the platform. That means that OSX only has to support a limited set of hardware devices that are chosen specifically by Apple. That means that everything "just works" because Apple knows in advance what the OS will need. In contrast, Linux is supposed to be able to run on a multitude of setups using a variety of processors setups, networks adapters, sound cards, video cards, etc, etc. I would have no problem popping out a linux distro that will work for everyone who buys the specific computer I put together for them. However, supporting ridiculously esoteric hardware is difficult when the manufacturer doesn't release drivers.

WRONG!!!

I got my first PC when I was 13, it took me less than a month to learn EVERYTHING I needed to know to setup anything I wanted quickly! by the time I was 15 I had tried Linux a few times and always gone back to Windows(98SE at the time) because Wine was horrible so I had no games, and everything was slow in Linux.
I am now 16 and have tried Linux a lot more and with almost all of the "bigger" distros(ex. RH,SuSE,Mandrake,Lycoris,Gentoo...) everytime I install it I find old problems solved and new ones slapping me in the face! I am eagerly waiting to download mandrake 9.1 and try it but the servers are always overloaded.

You see, back in the early DOS days you had to understand your computer to use it. .

Yeah? Well, back when I was your age, I had to walk butt-naked through 40 miles of snow .....

If people would quit being so lazy maybe I wouldn't have to be bombarded with idiotic tech support calls all day.

This kind of attitude pre-supposes that everybody has time to sit around and fuck with their computers all day - try telling this to some single mom who has 3 kids and uses the computer about 30 minutes a week.

Of course people are going to reccomend their favorite distro. How is that zealotry?

Because:
1. It pre-supposes that the problem(s) a person is having is with the distro, not the OS and ...
2. There's a lot of cross-distro recommending. Is Debian installations giving you headaches? Try Readhat. Is Redhat RPM hell giving you headaches, try Debian. I mean, whwere does it end?

If I go to a bar with a friend and reccomend he order a Boulevard, am I a Boulevard zealot? No, I just like that beer, so I tell my friends so they can try it.

Would you recommend this drink to someone that you know who hates beer in general ?

Why is it that Apple can make an easy to unix in about 4 years with a handful of engineers and programmers and Linux can't with hordes of people hard at work.

This is an easy one. Apple controls the platform. That means that OSX only has to support a limited set of hardware devices that are chosen specifically by Apple.

Yes, you're right ... but also because OSX doesn't come with 11 window managers, 5 web browsers, 3 email programs, 3,000 emacs clones, etc ....

While in Linux, for the first month of running it I did practically nothing but read FAQs, HowTo guides and man pages trying to learn the system and get things working.

I find this interesting. Obviously, everyone will have different results with everything. However, I switched to linux after being a Dos->Win3.1->Win95->Win98->Win98SE->WinME->WinXP user for the past 14 years or so. We are talking about Dos experience (and even BASIC programming) from a very young age (7 or so). All I can say is, it didn't take me that long to get the hang of linux. Now, at first I used "shrink wrapped" distros like SuSE, Redhat, and Mandrake. Those didn't teach me much, but I used them as well as most people use windows (which isn't that great, but most people don't know the difference). Once I tried Gentoo I really started learning linux in the same type of way that I had learned windows. Now when I am working in xp I find myself accidentally typing top and ls into the command line.

Hard? Maybe. Harder, not really.

kinda is typical.... you dont know the latest windows version.. cant fix.. you start calling support.. wait!! isnt this the same thing you would do for Linux? duh..

First off, you sound kinda pissed. Please don't be (it is hard for me to tell someones tone online... it is a big flaw in internet communication).

This kind of attitude pre-supposes that everybody has time to sit around and fuck with their computers all day - try telling this to some single mom who has 3 kids and uses the computer about 30 minutes a week.

The person you are describing is probably not installing their own OS from scratch. I would reccomend that they don't either. Otherwise, a pre-install or friend-installed linux would work as well for this person as any other OS.

Because:
1. It pre-supposes that the problem(s) a person is having is with the distro, not the OS and ...
2. There's a lot of cross-distro recommending. Is Debian installations giving you headaches? Try Readhat. Is Redhat RPM hell giving you headaches, try Debian. I mean, whwere does it end?

From Merriam Webster: zealot - a zealous person; especially : a fanatical partisan

I think we can both agree that neither of those points indicates fanatical partisanship.

Would you recommend this drink to someone that you know who hates beer in general ?

No, but if he were already drinking beer (ie, experimenting with distros), I could reason to assume he does not hate beer.

Yes, you're right ... but also because OSX doesn't come with 11 window managers, 5 web browsers, 3 email programs, 3,000 emacs clones, etc ....

There are plenty of Linux versions that don't include that stuff either. Besides which it is offtopic and doesn't address the original question.

A few things.

1. 99% of my time I'm using a Linux system.
Whenever I got to a Windows XP machine
I plainly get frustrated because nothing seems intuitive to me.
I never know where my files are being saved, and navigating through
the file system is just a pain in the neck. Plus, the fact that
the window is raised when I click on it just plainly irritates me.
Even a simple thing like using ftp to transfer files to my linux box is
difficult to do because the windows command line blows, especially
when dealing with Folders and filenames that contain spaces. AFAIK,
windows by default comes only with a command line ftp,
and I would have to download version with a GUI.
AFAIK, XP doesn't have by default ssh, so I have to download this too.

2. The same thing happens when I use OS X. I have no idea how
to navigate around and and I just can't get used to the 1 button mouse.

The POINT is most people have only seen Windows and that's what
they're used to. I'm not used to XP, and so I don't feel
comfortable with it. For me, because I use a DIFFERENT system which
has a DIFFERENT user interface, I initially have a hard time in another
environment until I get used to it. This is only natural. And I
consider my self to be quite a savvy computer user.

3. Whenever I purchase a computer, say from company X, it already
comes preinstalled with the OS and all drivers for all devices.
Therefore, there is no fuss about installing an operating system and
making the details work for you. Whenever I purchase a new mouse
or and other piece of software, the software comes with a CD containing
a driver, and it knows how to automatically install itself.

The point is, if Joe purchased a computer with Linux preinstalled
from company X, where
all the small details have been taken care of by company X, do you
think he'll have to make his sound driver work? Probably not. Will
he have a problem connecting to the internet. Probably not
since company X installed the driver for the modem that came with the
PC, or because he installed the driver which came with a CD for
his OS.

4. I've never heard of such strange memory problems under Linux,
and I started using it around 1997. I speculate that the process
which used up the memory never exited, and that's why the system
was coming to a halt. Probably the programs that make up the
desktop were being put into swap space, and that's what would cause
the system stagnation. In any case, not that a newbie could
deal with this, I've never had anything like what the author
describes happen to me... He was unlucky.

The person you are describing is probably not installing their own OS from scratch. I would reccomend that they don't either. Otherwise, a pre-install or friend-installed linux would work as well for this person as any other OS.

Ok, so your choices are then to either ...

a) RTFM
b) Have the OS pre-installed

Only problem with b is that Linux doesn't really get any less complex after instalation if you need to do something that requires you to RTFM, so you're still stuck with the same issues as installation.

As for the other comments, I have to get back to work (15 min break) and don't have time to finish this post ... sorry

Only problem with b is that Linux doesn't really get any less complex after instalation if you need to do something that requires you to RTFM, so you're still stuck with the same issues as installation.

I really don't know what kind of things you are talking about here. Editing fstab? Well, most people won't need to do it, but if they do, I am pretty sure there are graphical tools for it. Same for other command-line things like top, and network setup.

I do all these from the command line of course, so I am not really knowledgable about the gui tools. All I can say is, it doesn't seem that complex to me. The stuff I am doing there is stuff most users wouldn't be doing, especially if the os was pre-installed.

You can't compare a Linux distribution to OS X, for one simple reason, Apple controls everything. They know exactly what hardware is available on the various version of their hardware. Guess what, things aren't that easy on PCs? You have hundreds of manufacturers making slightly incompatible hardware. Apple has it easy.

Back to the review:

Installing just disk 1 of most distributions gives you a running Linux computer. It may not have all the software you want, since everyone actually makes a 3 disk download, and most of the applications you are looking for aren't on the first disk. Mandrake comes with Open Office, and many other applications. Complaining that they weren't there because you didn't download them is silly. Mandrake wouldn't install the Open Office from a disk the reviewer had laying around, which is probably for the best, because it might have broken their system. Installing random RPMs can do that, which is why Apt and urpmi (Mandrake's tool for installing RPMs) were invented, to make life safer.

The biggest disservice that cable and DSL vendors have committed is the USB modem. USB was not designed for networking, and needs wierd drivers to be able to talk on a network. Even then, it doesn't work all that well. If the computer had a standard network card, and a DSL modem that went with it, then it would have worked better under Windows, and would work with Mandrake.

I'm sorry the reviewer didn't have a better experience, but 9.1 installed perfectly on my computer, network and all.

//This is only natural. And I
consider my self to be quite a savvy computer user.
//

You consider yourself a "savvy" computer user, yet you can't navigate around Windows XP or Mac OS X without a lot of difficulty?

Ok. Yah, you're savvy, all right.

Shaddup.

It's a breath of fresh air seeing someone reviewing a Linux distro for what it is and not what they want it to be.

This review yet again establishes my point on newbies. Why does any review include.. "MY <insert piece of hardware> did not work". Ummm obivously RTFM was not applied here haha. Problems adjusting sound volume?? Aumix on the 'start menu'. Dude... go back to windows. Obivously Mr. Gates has washed away the ability for you to look beyond his products. I could go on an on and create a firestorm as i have in the past, but reviews as such should not even be posted online. A little bit of reading before hand makes things go a long way.

Hi,
read your review. The effort you have put the migration seems to me is NOT ADEQUATE.

GNU/Linux is NOT simple 'click and install' - it might never be .. Lets say you want to learn 'bicylce' - You will have to put an effort and a bit of practice into balancing, pedelling, looking out and finally multitasking -doing all of these at THE SAME time - I remember when I learnt to bicycle - it was fun, frustrating and exciting when I could finally do it...

Put more effort - DO NOT EXPECT IT TO BE CLICK AND INSTALL.. You say that you are trying to emigrate to Linux .. PLEASE CONSIDER BUYING THE WHOLE DISTRIBUTION - YOU WILL GET A MANUAL ..and PLEASE, PLEASE for your own sake, read the MANUAL. Have you considered using a linux newsgroup for asking your questions ?? Cnet has a good one..

Try Koppix [please GOOGLE] for learning linux.. try it out for a couple of days.

If you are not willing to put an effort on learing GNU/Linux, PLEASE DO NOT EMIGRATE TO LINUX (atleast at the moment) (hopefully things will change to make Linux a 'mindless' installation) .. Stick with MicroSoft OS's - but give this a thought 'MS OS's are easy only because you are acclamitised to them'


My 2 cents

-PB

You consider yourself a "savvy" computer user, yet you can't navigate around Windows XP or Mac OS X without a lot of difficulty?

Ok. Yah, you're savvy, all right.

Shaddup.

Not only did you completely miss the point of the original post, but you went ahead and went the extra mile to respond with insults. Now that's class.

Maybe Linux Distros should force people to take an IQ test before they hit the download button. If it's too low, "Sorry, you're too stupid to use linux, go post something on slashdot". If it's too high, "Sorry, you're too smart, try a using mac".

Sorry, but I don't think this was a fair review at all. Denigrating the OS because you have some weird hardware that causes conflicts is just not reasonable to me. I installed Mandrake 9.1 as an update to 9.0 on a dual-boot P4 system, and never had any real trouble despite this being the first time I've ever installed or used Linux. 9.1 fixes the few problems I had with my own hardware in 9.0, and as a longtime Windows user I would say that it is almost at the point where it could seriously contend with WIndows on the desktop. So you have a weird ISDN connection - don't blame the distro for it!

Angry because you couldn't get AOL to work with linux?

Someone wrote that the review was great. How? How is someone that does not understand the mechanics of a linux OS be qualified to write a review. An opinion is fine, but an evaluation is not. Linux is not windows. The review was like having granny writing her experiences flying an apache first time-- crash and burn. haha.
One more point. We KNOW linux distro's has not grown to the point to be a successful desktop OS....yet It was never intended. Numerous posts on this are not needed. When linux gains half the home user market share than comparisons vs. windows can be made. Although I wished this was the case I'll be grey by the time that occurs haha.

I like the previous responses. Maybe someone should look into that IQ test haha

Simply having a lot of free memory doesn't mean that your memory management is top notch. Linux often uses _all_ of the available memory to its fullest potential by using it as a kind of disk cache that holds recently used files or processes. This way, if you open OpenOffice, then close it, then decide that you want to re-open it, it'll open considerably faster the second time. It doesn't prevent new processes from using that memory either, because the memory manager knows that what memory is being used for this purpose is available to other processes. Just keep in mind that if you have 512MB of memory, it might be nice to use it all. There's no point in having 1G of memory if you only ever use 200MB of it.

This only proves that people aren't readdy for thinking a while.. or at least that people don't have any patient.
Most ppl think that when a system doesn't work it's the system problem but it isn't. If people tried to solve their problems they would probably learn more and enjoy themselves more. Even in Windows any little problem is solved by formatting and starting all over again, I'm sorry but most windows peoblems can be solved without format C:, in linux people have to try harder and think awhila because it's something new to them and they can't expect to know everything from start... most people don't even understand windows totally and they have been taught for a long time how to work with it (schools, uni, work, society).

In some ways, this review shows how far the desktop distros have advanced. No longer is Linux thought of as a second rate windows, people now install a modern distro and *expect* everything to work first time. Indeed, for most people it does.

The questions of the new adopters have moved in the last few years from 'Why are there no mp3 players for Linux?' to 'Why are there no good games except Quake3, Unreal 2003, Halflife, Neverwinter Nights etc for Linux?'.

I don't think Linux at the moment is as easy to use for a newbie as Windows, but this is changing. I already have two pieces of hardware (an m-audio 1010 soundcard and a webcam) that required drivers to be downloaded and installed in windows 2000, but just worked straight out of the box with zero configuration on a Mandrake 9.1 install.
It's hard too see how advances like this will lead in any direction but the desktop.

About a year ago, I decided I had had it with Windows and started to look at this thing called Linux. I played with various distributions for several months, learning what I could from each. Today I am running one Libranet box and one Mandrake box with great success.

Sure there has been much to learn. But who learns an OS overnight? My Mandrake 9.0 installed without incident or problems. That was 3 weeks ago. To meet my need to run Quicken, I also purchased and installed Win4Lin. My Mandrake/Win4Lin combo has met every need I have in a computer environment.

Stability? This thing has been rock solid for almost 21 days. Even Windows 98 runs better under Win4Lin.

Why are things working so well? Probably because my hardware is older, allowing the OS to become mature and not run on the bleeding edge. With minimal support from hardware vendors, I think it is wonderful what the Linux community has done to provide me with a robust computer experience.

So yes, anyone can subject Mandrake or any Linux to the latest hardware, then fault the OS for poor performance. But I say, if you the user do your homework, use hardware that has allowed the Linux community time to develop drivers which are mature, you too can have a successful Linux experience.

I feel that this reviewer gave up before he started, but I still agree with him. I work for a company with 1800 computers. I am tech support/sys admin/pc janitor. I have owned a computer since my IBM AT. I am fluent in moving around in DOS and WinAll. I used to have a Mac SE crica 1990(yes with the 9" B/W screen). The other day we had a Mac user who's system was FOO. Our Mac guy was out sick so I was called in to troubleshoot. It had been 10 years since I had sat at a Mac. I managed, with some minor help from the manual, to complete a reinstall of the OS, apps, and hook him back into our Novell network (printers and all). I mention this because there have been many comparisons to the word nOOb and RTFM when it comes to Linux. I read everything I can find when work withing Linux. Yet somehow I still end up reinstalling all the time because I installed something or changed soemthing and can not figure out where or what happened. No, Linux is not an OS for people new to computers, but shouldn't it be easier than it is for people that are not?

Ice: "We KNOW linux distro's has not grown to the point to be a successful desktop OS....yet It was never intended."

To you this is a given, to many (or a vocal few) advocates it is not. There is nothing wrong with reviewing and evaluating Linux on the desktop without giving it an "underdog" handicap. What you are saying essentially is that it's pointless to even review Linux as a serious desktop operating system in its current state. Maybe all the 100% positive reviews of Linux are indirectly saying "for a product that just not desktop ready it's pretty good". Maybe _they_ are wrong for not being more direct in what was meant by the review.

I think the issue is that Linux distros are missing some basic points, and when you are givving your firsts steps, it always leaves you bouncing from one ally to another.
For instance, a week a go I installed Lycoris, as I was unsure if it would recognize my video card tried to go the safe way and opted for the most basic config I found (VGA 16 col.), first "älley": the GUI was loaded but distorted in a way that made it unreadable, second "älley": the system does not default itself to a low but universal and usable configuration.
in the rare case that you already knew there is a key combination that makes the system boot to only the command line you could try some commands there, but this distro seems to lack all of the commands to config linux from here, at least all of those that I remember from other distros, 'welcome "alley" three.
I know that Linux is free and that you should be willing to re-learn to deal with you computer, but I think this is also true:
- It is easier to learn than it is to unlearn, if you bundle KDE to attract windows users, then "stop thinking as a windows user" is not an argument
- How much sense thas it make to have 4 terminals , 3 word procesors and 10 windows managers and not having an at least partially-thought plan for when such a basic thing as a video card detection doesn't work
- Yes, in the begining there was no plug and play, but not having video at all unless you download a source and compile it, is reinventing the wheel. You cant deny there is something wrong when this happened on red hat 5 and still happens on the latest distro.
- A lot of the potential users (if not most) are people using they very limited spare time, and already using an (made-for-free) alternative that is much less painfull, ignoring that is just plain silly.

Don't get me wrong, I like Linux a lot, but it wont run if it doesn't learn to walk first.
PS: the video card issue is just an general, illustrative example.

- How much sense thas it make to have 4 terminals , 3 word procesors and 10 windows managers and not having an at least partially-thought plan for when such a basic thing as a video card detection doesn't work

You act like hardware detection is simple. Shoot, windows xp has the best hardware detection of any os I have used and it still screws it up sometimes. Hardware detection is not a "basic" thing. It is a nice thing to have. It is good when it works, but whoever is installing the OS should really know what hardware is in the machine. Sure, people get a little spoiled by Xp, but I know that Windows 98 sure wasn't that great at autodetection and I survived. If linux developers had access to all of the hardware info that companies hand over to MS, we might have better detection in all linux distros. Until that happens, I'll live with less than stellar hardware detection. I built my pc from hand-picked components, so I'm well aware of what is in there.

Mac is a hardware/software combo, if you cant install a mac then go change your job.

If your a tech support and cannot understand how to install and maintain Linux, I also sugguest you change your job.

Also all the user who think that their technically savy because they can work with Windows, you are not because Windows by default is a dumb down system for average joe. Dont over estimate your skill set. Your limited subset skills in Windows does not equal to being technically savy.

A girl could not get online so she called her friend who came over and setup her computer to access the internet. After signing in her username and password, she told the guy, "wow your really great with computers." Upon hearing this the guy smiled proudly and pulled out the AOL install cd.

Your Truely,
Abby

Iain,
I have some observations and some questions I would like to share with you:

1) You seem to be dissatisfied with Windows XP. Fair enough,
there are plenty of folks like that.

2) You're willing to give Linux a try. Ok.
a) You only download 1 cd so whatever software you're going to have installed will it be on that cd.
b) You didn't purchase a boxed Mandrake 9.1 set with a
manual, in spite of the fact that based on your experience
it would be fair to say you have little or no experience
with Unix in general and Linux specifically.
1) How much time did you spend with Suse 8.0? 1 hour? 1 day? A week?
2) How much time were you planning on spending on familiarizing yourself with your Linux operating system?
3) Do you know where to go for help?
4) Do you know how to use the documentation that comes with Mandrake 9.1? You'll find it on the pop-up menu under documentation.
5) Did you consult with someone who extensive experience with Linux who could help you over the rough spots?
6) Did you assume that Linux was a free version of Microsoft Windows (tm)? Based on your article it would seem so, although why anyone would confuse a Unix operating system with a Microsoft operating system is a little surprising.
7) Would you permit a 10 year old to drive your car (assuming you have a car) with you as a passenger in the rear seat on a highway with a speed limit of 70 m.p.h.?
Why not? What about an adult of say age 40 driving the car, but who has never driven a car in his life before, say an
Amazon indian? Surely it would be safe having any adult driving a 2-3 ton vehicle on a crowded highway at high
velocity, even though said adult doesn't know how to steer,
much less use the brakes.

What does this have to do with you? Consider your approach to Linux as stated in your article. Here's a quiz for you
to help you understand why your approach is not anywhere near optimal in learning to use Linux:
1) What does Linux stand for?
2) What does RPM stand for?
3) What is the purpose of a Linux distribution?
4) What is the point of open source software? What are its advantages? Disadvantages?
5) What does GPL stand for? Why are so many people adamant in using GPL software? Why is Linux under the GPL, and not another license?
6) Why aren't the BSD operating systems as popular as Linux?
7) Can you think of a BSD variant that appears to be roughly
as popular as Linux? Why is that? Hint: It's not FreeBSD.
8) Why is freedom of choice so important to Linux users? Why is freedom from choice (apparently) so preferrable for Windows users?

Couldn't comment without trolling down or laughing at him. I'll hence just quote the funniest part of the review:

"I've installed and tried really hard with various distributions in the past, going all the way back to Red Hat 5. I'm not a novice computer user and consider myself fairly technically-minded."

Yeah, sure, it matches so much the rest of the review

Maybe all the 100% positive reviews of Linux are indirectly saying "for a product that just not desktop ready it's pretty good"
-- I actually agree with it. Where I disagree is when people take the "for a product that just not desktop ready" and compare to windows -- then say negative things about linux (as a whole) instead of stating that the problem lies with the GUI's and certain appz. In my eyes those are seperate issues. There's linux and then the optional Visual aspect know as the desktop.

"Windows is superior in many ways and Linux is superior in many (mostly OS design related, technical) ways."

Oh really, how about the 1000's of vulnerabilities, constant crashing of explorer, APIs stacked on 1 after the other. Bash/Tcsh scripts leave bat for dead. Try parsing an online database, adding users from that list and creating random passwords with a set criteria for these users and adding them to your system, or grepping through an error log and automatically comparing it to the /proc filesystem to detect stray processes. How would you do that with windows? Probably write a C app after reading 100's of pages of API material. With Linux/*nix, its easy (and so much more).

If you can give me an example of where Windows is shown as "superior in terms of OS design and technical merit" i would be most interested to hear it.

Cheers,
matt

like the author, i wanted to like linux and move away from windows because i had windows ME, and it was the worst O/S i'd ever seen. i considered myself a technical person and decided to give linux a whirl using mandrake 8.1.

but unlike the author, two years later, i'm still happily running it and haven't looked back at windows ever since. some things were a little challenging (like setting up a wacom tablet under xinput) but most of it was easy... and seriously, how can this guy screw up rpm's? i tend to shy away from tarballs, but i like rpm's even more than the braindead windows installers. anyway, this seems like he just popped in the CD and exptected XP to pop up. oh welll... if you're a newbie and your actually interested in linux, don't listen to this guy. it's not as terrible as he makes it out to be.

I am an old DOS/Windows user turned Linux newbe. Over the last year I have tried installing every kind of Linux distribution I could get my hands on (cable download helps). I simply have to ask this Linux wanna-be a few questions.

1. Have you ever paid $50.00 for a Windows program only to find that it is, at best, a very marginal tool? (I have banana boxes full -- worthless now.)

2. Have you ever had a Windows message like: "This program has performed and illegal...and will be shut down," then clicked "OK" only to have a blue screen in your face? Did you lose the work you hadn't saved yet?

3. Have you ever paid $89.00 for a Windows upgrade only to find out it didn't work any better? How many times?

4. Have you ever made a long distance phone call for tech-support?

5. Have you ever had a computer virus ruin your day?

6. Do you really want to learn how to take control of your computer, or do you expect someone else to continue to do that for you ?

7. Do you want to contribute to the destiny of you computing experience, or are you just along for the ride?

My thought is, Linux is about self-determination, learning how to go where you never believed you could go, and teaching yourself new skills along the way. It's about being more than just a rider on the way toward the future, its about being the driver and steering toward the future. Like Ken Kesey said, "...you're either on the bus, or you're off the bus."

Regards, Linux Newbe

PS: Count for something, keep filing your bug reports.

ANY operating system has a learning curve.. If you jump from one to another please dont expect it to be like the other OS unless you are a MORON.

I know that when i switched from windows -> mac -> linux i felt encouraged to write dumb articles like this complaining " OH Why didnt they make it like the other one..? "
Thank God i didn't because when i finally found out how to work the operating systems i would have regreted saying something that would make me look just plain stupid.

The difference between me and the author is that i actually sat down and learned the Operating Systems before deciding to comment on any VS talking with my head on my arse..

//
You consider yourself a "savvy" computer user, yet you can't navigate around Windows XP or Mac OS X without a lot of difficulty?

Ok. Yah, you're savvy, all right.

Shaddup.
//

I suppose I set myself up for this comment. I should have said
that the interface completely annoys me when I use it, and it does
because it's not what I'm accustomed to. You
missed the entire point of my post, however, and you jumped the chance
to make an insult without even knowing my background and technical
abilities.

As for your comment on my savviness, well I think it would blow your
mind to actually see me work, especially when I'm coding/hacking away
using emacs and vi while I use hot keys to resize windows, iconify
windows, traverse desktops, launch terminals, browsers, etc..

Interesting, when I installed Windows XP, it did not detect my video card (ATI Rage fury pro) it did not setup my ADSL internet connection, it did not recognize my scanner (Cannon USB) is did not recognize my printer (Epson Stylus) it did not recognize my DVD drive (Toshiba)

I had to download drivers for all of these and install them manually.

With Mandrake 8.2, 9.0 and now 9.1 all of the above (except the scanner) were recognized and drivers installed during the installation of the operating system.

(For me) the Windows XP installation took longer and required several reboots. After installation, Windows XP takes about twice as long to boot up.


The (illogical) conclusion...

Windows is still not ready for the desktop.

See topic. Why in the hell was this printed? It's not a review, it's a two-page troll / whine which boils down to a few hardware problems (one incredibly minor) and some vague whines. But to get suckered in anyway:

The sound levels thing is the minor bug. That's an ALSA problem, it defaults to 0 sound level for all channels, for some unknown reason. There's discussion on some kind of fix for Mandrake, but it's not entirely straightforward. Anyway, it's really not a big bug. I refuse to believe people don't know what an application called "aumix", in the Multimedia / Sound menu, is going to do.

Now he spends two paragraphs whining about hardware support. USB ISDN adapters aren't in the free version of Mandrake because they're almost all only supported by proprietary drivers. As Eugenia points out, this is clearly explained on the Mandrake home page. You want support, buy a pack, or work it out yourself.

Bluetooth is a legitimate problem, but then Windows support for Bluetooth is also generally terrible. It's being worked on, and it won't be an issue by the time Mandrake 9.2 comes out.

The whining about lack of some sort of GUI "Answer all my questions magically" tool is just laughable. What do you want, AI? Could you please describe exactly what "GUI tool" you're looking for? The Ultimate Encyclopaedia Of Everything, Ever? It also seems bizarre since you're comparing to Windows. There's certainly no "GUI tool" in Windows which helpfully tells you what's going on when there's a hardware problem. It's the same drill as in Linux: check the manufacturer website and ask other people.

The next paragraph is just pure misunderstanding of the RPM system.

JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE RPMS DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD USE THEM.

Would you install a Windows XP program on your Windows 3.11 box because they're both in the same file format?! This is absolutely basic procedure. Please learn about it. You should use RPMs that are designed for your distribution only. If you're using Mandrake 9.1, use Mandrake 9.1 RPMs. Just because it's on a magazine cover disk doesn't mean it's going to work, yeesh. Installing abiword on Mandrake 9.1, for the record, is very easy if you're just willing to learn what you're doing first. Go to the package manager and install urpmi.setup. Use it to define a source for the Mandrake "contrib" repository. Now install the abiword (for 1.0.4) or hackabiword (for 1.1.3) package. Easy as pie. Use Mandrake repositories and use Mandrake RPMs. This is the drill. It's not difficult. If you do it right, it is neither hard nor confusing. Your problems are YOUR FAULT - you refuse to learn and are using a tool in a way for which it is not designed. Would you use a screwdriver to bash in nails?

Why are you trying to install OpenOffice from a magazine cover disk? It's included in Mandrake.

By the by, I'm 100% sure your magazine will have said somewhere in it what version of Linux these programs are intended for, and it certainly won't have been Mandrake 9.1. Why don't you read the damn instructions before doing this?

Distributions ship with more than one WM because different people like different WMs. I like GNOME. Someone else likes KDE. We both install Mandrake. We're both happy. What's the problem with this? Why should one be dropped? Just for some abstract ideal of "neatness"? It's NOT bloat. You're completely misunderstanding the concept of bloat. It's bloat if it's included, you can't get rid of it, and it's useless (like 90% of MS Office). None of Mandrake is bloat because it's all useful to someone, and you don't have to install any of it. Don't want GNOME? Don't install it, or remove it.

"It looks great, thanks to KDE 3.1 and the anti aliased fonts, and seems straightforward enough for most users, providing of course that all their hardware is detected correctly and they don't want to install any other software, ever!"

Your hardware was detected properly. Mandrake knows what it all is. It doesn't have drivers for all of it. Identify problems correctly if you wish to be taken seriously. As has been noted, the non-free editions of Mandrake will have support for your USB terminal adapter. And installing software is way, way easier than on Windows if you just take the infinitesimal trouble to LEARN HOW TO DO IT PROPERLY, which is explained in the Mandrake manuals and documentation. Which, of course, you never read.

johnny. may Itake your quiz.. perhaps it will show truly ignorant I am

1 - I wasn't aware Linux Stood for anything, I had heard that Linus originally called it Freeix but that it was changed to Linux when the webmaster posted it.

2 - RPM stands for Redhat Package Manager (or Management?) that was supposed (IIRC) to be a simple way to install software of Redhat systems.

3 LInuix Distributions are there to promote and evangelise Linux as an Operating System. For Some it's a means of generating revenue and hopefully profits. For others its a way to create linux distro that best suits their needs or the perceived needs of the users
4- open source software gives transparency of code creation to encourage the improvement of the code base and application.

5 - GPL : Gnu Public License? My understanding of GPL (never actually read the license itself... has anyone?) is to enable any creative work to remain freely available and any derivitive works created from them to be freely available

6 -BSD variant: Would you be thinking of MAC OSX?

Freedom of choice is important to many computer people and not merely confined to Linux users. Windows user also want choice, hence why many are concerned by Microsoft's corporate tactics and why many (myself included) are actively looking for an realistic alternative.

Regarding your other points:
I have used Unix in the past, I have been a web developer for the past 7 years initially starting out using web servers running apache on Solaris (admittedly only ever dealt with solaris in terms of using it as a web platform, so probalby didn't delve that deeply into it)
Did several parts of my degree course using HP workstations running HP/UX - again probably very limited exposure, but it was exposure to X.
Also did most of my degree on Macintosh (OS 7 and 7.5)
I had Suse installed on my machine for severalm months but was unable to dedicate lots of time to sitting learning it, so invariably would do so in chunks of days (usually weekends) Hard to say how much time I spent on it.

I didn't plan on spending any allocated time familirising myself with new linux desktop.. .I actually planned to just use it and learn as I went along (as I have done with windows, macOS, AmigaOS, Beos etc)

did I consult with anyone before installing Mandrake? Are you suggesting that you can only use a new OS with a consultant around. (but No I didn't)


I'm quite aware that the bulk of the extra apps were contained on teh extra download ISOs. however, I hoped and suspected that ISO1 would be enough to get me up and running - it is 650Mb of stuff afterall. (I kind of hoped I could install the basic OS and then install the things I really needed later as I needed them)

yes I know how to use help. but if you try searching for "ISDN USB" it's not fantastically helpful (although perhaps too this would been more complete had I installed all 3 discs)

Do I think Linux is a free version of Windows XP? Certainly not, I WANT it to be better than XP so that I can encourage everyone I know to migrate. But I was looking for a similar user experience to Windows XP, MacOS, Beos etc.

However, now I've taken the test,....
what exactly was the point of the questions and I'm sorry but I don't understand the driving analogy at all?

yes, it's rare to have trouble with OS X, for a simple reason. The meat of this article was whining about hardware incompatibilities. These are a direct result of the bewildering amount of hardware available for the PC. everyone has different hardware, half of it is made by companies that don't even exist any more. The amount of hardware that works with a Mac is *tiny* and it's a closed system which Apple is entirely in control of, so it's comparatively easy to ship an OS which supports all the hardware you can plug into your Mac.

Can people stop propagating the "Mandrake muted my audio" myth? Mandrake didn't. ALSA did. It's an ALSA default. Fixing it is non-trivial, because it involves finding sane default volumes for every device ALSA supports. Which isn't a trivial set of devices.

AdamIV:

2 points about RPMS.
1 - the rpsms I tried to install were created for mandrake 9.0
2 - the fact that there has to be a different rpm for each distro just empahsises what's wrong with the system. How on earth is a Novice or at least inexperienced linux user supposed to understand what is best for them? Can they use Redhat RPms (Mandrake was originally supposed to be based on Redhat afterall). Can they use Rpms for an earlier version of Mandrake 9.0 8.x etc?

What were your specific problems with SuSE 8.0?

I've been using SuSE 8.0 for almost 2 years, from my experience,
it happens to be one of the most solid distributions I've
ever used (in my 6 years Linux experience), and I've installed
it on a number of different laptops which are always worse
than desktops when it comes to hardware detection.

Most everything
works, and Yast2 allows you to administer the system
without much hassle.

It's not perfect, but it's hard to believe that you couldn't get
anything to work.

"Fixing it is non-trivial,"
I'm not sure that this is the case. If a mixer app like ermixer can control any alsa device, why not start mandrake with the mixer at a default 1/4 volume? This would be quiet, but at least it would send the user looking for a mixer app, rather than assuming that the card was not working.
I went looking in the alsa code to see how it was done, but got lost very quickly.

This is the worst revue I have ever read!

I know that GNU/Linux (and not Linux) is quite difficult to handle when you come from the windows world. But either you are really clumsy with your computer, or you're really not lucky!

Your problem, is that you try to resolve the problems like you used to do on windows. On GNU/Linux you have to think on a different way.

I use a debian GNU/Linux as my only OS. There is nothing (except some games), that I did with windows that I can't do with GNU/Linux.
If you tried a debian, I could understand that you were lost. But here we are talking about a Mandrake!!
I installed a Mandrake 9.0 on the laptop of one of my friends. She nearly doesn't know anything about computing but she has no problem to configure her Mandrake the way she wants. The configuration of all new desktop GNU/Linux distribution is really easy and more coherent than the windows one!

Moreover, you should have a look at http://www.gnu.org , I know that Richard Stallman looks like a hyppie, but read his papers about computing philosophy can only be a good thing.

I'm sorry if I look rude, but I'm fed up with people who judge GNU/Linux after using it for one week. You have used windows for 10 years, so stop complaining and try to understand the way it works. And instead of criticize the work of thousands of voluntary, just fill in a few fonctionnalies request, or explain to the developper what you want so at least you can help the community to improve.

P.S. : sorry for the english, but it's not my native langage

"I refuse to believe people don't know what an application called "aumix", in the Multimedia / Sound menu, is going to do."

Aaarrrggghhh!

This is one of the reasons why Linux can be so confusing to newcomers.

OK, so I would have picked up on the fact that "aumix" was the [au]dio [mix]er, but why, for heavens sake, did Mandrake not simply rename the application to "Volume Control" or "Volume Mixer" or simply "Volume". Then everybody would know what/where it was.

It isnt hard to change the names of the menu items now is it?!

If you want "everyone" to use Linux (and I think a lot of interest is currently focused on this) then use language in a way that "everyone" can easily, straight away, and without thinking, understand.

Jamie Burns,
http://www.desktopbsd.org/

Then why doesn't AOL have its name changed to Newbie Internet Connection haha

I think people should realise that criticism probably does better for Linux than any amount of worshipping. I really want to see Linux succeed. There are some things I believe normal users should not have to make choices about. Imagine if, when buying a car, you had to specify everything down to the gasket and the piston and had to choose a crankshaft.

I have said this many times on this forum, choice is the most overrated attribute of Linux. Users sometimes do not want a choice. They expect some decision to be made for them, (Blame Microsoft). Any distribution trying to be a desktop distro should realise that shipping ten terminals is not helping the user.

And also the most important thing for an internet born OS, is networking.

This article shows why a little knowledge can be a bad thing. This user has been using DOS/Windows for a while, and for some reason feels that it's fair to directly port Windows concepts to other OSs. If you expect Linux to be Windows then of course you're going to be disappointed. It is a fine OS in its own right, and you cannot judge it fairly by giving it a quick try for a few hours.

Sure, Com 1-8 was in brackets next to each ttys port, but why still use this confusing and seemingly archaic terminology if you have to then clarify it by sticking "Com1" next to it.

I don't know if this is the result of ignorance or arrogance. Just because DOS/Windows calls them "Com" ports that doesn't mean that "Com" is the one true label and that everything else is wrong. In the Linux world, these ports are ttyS ports. It's just another name. The "Com" name in brackets next to it is so that Windows people like yourself can understand what it means.

Your complaints about memory display a massive level of ignorance. Linux takes the opinion that "unused memory is wasted memory", which is true. The memory system in Linux is designed to balance your memory between RAM and swap to achieve maximum performance. Memory that is unused by applications is used for hard drive caching, so at first glance it may look like your RAM is full when it really isn't. This is a good thing.

Some of your hardware problems seemed strange. I get the feeling that your machine may be at least partly to blame. And no, "It works on Windows" isn't a valid excuse. Most manufacturers and assemblers design and test their hardware only for Windows, and a lot of hardware these days is so-called "Win-hardware", designed specifically to work with Windows and nothing else. Your sound card should have been detected with no problems but there's probably something wrong with the way it has been installed. Your file copy problem in Konqueror should not have happened, either. From my experience, I would say that this is likely due to bad hardware.

How can anyone make a review without doing some homework first? It's okay not to know much for the actual installation and usage of the OS, because you are writing from the perspective of a Windows user. However, when you actually write the review you should have done a bit of reserach on little things like ttyS ports and explained them in the review. Otherwise you're just being incendiary by making incorrect statements, particularly when you ignorantly call Linux concepts "archaic". Isn't it important to know what you are talking about so that your review may be fair and balanced? Some parts of your review read like a rant to me.

I can imagine why you cannot understand the existance of many window managers and environments in GNU/Linux. Windows users like yourself were never given any choice as to what environment they used, so they were forced to conform to what Microsoft shoved down their throats. Although there are some alternative 'shells' for Windows, the changes they make are mostly cosmetic and not functional. Most people don't know of these alternative shells, and many that do don't bother to try them. Of course, it doesn't help that Microsoft doesn't support these alternate shells, and that they may break your apps. In GNU/Linux, people have always had freedom to do what they want, and they have taken advantage of that. They are not going to give that up, and nor should they. KDE may be good for you, but that is probably because it resembles Windows. Did it ever occur to you that not everybody likes a Windows-like interface? Why do you think an increasing number of people are buying Macintoshes?

Yes. Created for Mandrake 9.0. Mandrake 9.1 isn't Mandrake 9.0.

There isn't anything at all wrong with the system. It's just a different system. Mandrake package all the applications you want. Installing them from a Mandrake package is far, far easier than doing it any other way, and also far, far easier than installing software from Windows. SO USE THE MANDRAKE PACKAGES. You will notice the benefits of the system when, for instance, you're still using it three years after you set it up and it works exactly as well as it did when you installed it. I've run every version of Windows from 2.0 runtime through to XP, and *none* of them do this. Because they are way too tolerant of incredibly lax application management, so after you install a certain amount of software, bits of it start conflicting with each other and the system falls over. If you use Mandrake 9.1 with only Mandrake 9.1 RPMs and compile anything else you want from source and install it in /usr/local, this will never, ever happen and your OS will be usable from now till the day the hardware packs in. This is the *POINT* of sensible package management, which is what .rpm provides. It appears to be restrictive, but in point of fact it really isn't, and it allows for a far higher degree of interoperability and reliability. Learn the system, learn the reasons for it, before criticising it.

How on earth is a newbie meant to know? By reading instructions. If you read the Mandrake documentation, it tells you how to install software. Nowhere does it recommend you to go out onto the net or a magazine cover disc, acquire any old .RPM you can find, and install it. It tells you to use the Mandrake tools, which will install the Mandrake RPMs. This is what you should do.

And no, you can't normally use RPMs from old distributions. If you really want to know why, here's a lesson, which will hopefully help you understand why you should follow the rules I mentioned for packaging.

You can - not entirely accurately, but well enough for the purposes of illustration - boil it down to the issue of shared libraries. Both Linux and Windows use this concept. Shared libraries - .dll's in Windows, .so's in Linux - are libraries of functions many programs might want to use, so programs don't have to implement them separately. A program that uses them is 'dynamically linked'. A statically linked file builds its own libraries and incorporates them within itself.

You could simply make an OS entirely out of statically linked applications, and never have to bother with this whole system at all. Each application would be entirely self-contained and dependencies just wouldn't have to exist. The problem with this is it's a nightmare to develop for and it's hideously inefficient. So, the sensible system is shared libraries and dynamically linked applications. Now let's look how Windows and Linux implement this system.

Windows has a very lax regime. You can put .dll's all over the place, no-one follows the same scheme for what .dll's go where, and programs happily overwrite them willy-nilly. This has the advantage of making software installation very easy, because it allows Windows developers to be lazy. If they're not sure you'll have a .dll they want you to use, they'll just stick it in the package and install it during the installation progress, often overwriting a competing version if it exists. This is superficially very nice, because it means just about any application will install straight away with no seeming problems. The payback comes when you've installed more than some critical mass of software, and all the gung-ho scattershot distribution and over-writing of .dll's comes back to bite you, and applications stop working.

Linux is much stricter. You can simplify package management systems by pretending they're really all about controlling shared libraries. On most package management systems, applications packages DON'T install them. They have their own packages. Each distribution will have one correct version of the the shared library which, to work correctly, any program that uses it must be compiled against.

This is where dependency resolution comes in. Imagine program X needs library Y. This is how Mandrake works:

You tell urpmi or rpmdrake to install program X. It says "program X needs library Y", and installs library Y for you.

Let's track this back a stage. For this to work, library Y must be Mandrake's packaged version of it, and program X must have been compiled against that Mandrake packaged version of library Y. This is what makes the package of program X a Mandrake package (in our very simplified model, remember).

Now let's put this in your situation. You were trying to install abiword from Mandrake 9.0. so it told Mandrake's package management system "I need libraries Y and Z". It also tells the package management system what versions of libraries Y and Z it wants.

Because you're on 9.1, you don't *have* these versions. the abiword for 9.0 wants Y-9.0 and Z-9.0. You have Y-9.1 and Z-9.1. So it refuses to install.

This is obviously more restrictive than the Windows system. But if you've followed me so far, you should also see the benefits. Your system will only ever have one version of libraries Y and Z in the standard shared library dir, /usr/lib/. No badly behaved software gets to overwrite it, so no badly behaved software gets to mess up other software. The package management system ensures that every application on your system is singing from the same hymn sheet: they're all using the same versions of the same libraries. So long as you keep using RPMs which have been properly compiled for 9.1, you will *never* get the kind of problems Windows' more lax system can allow.

So this is the reason for the regime I described. You CAN take the cavalier approach some people in this thread seemed to describe. You can take .rpms from all over the place and bludgeon them into the system with rpm --nodeps and --force, if you really want to. But that's defeating the object of the package management system, which is to keep your system clean and functional. So stick to RPMs which are properly compiled for Mandrake 9.1. If you want an application which isn't packaged for Mandrake 9.1, the correct method to use is to compile it from source. This way, it will be built against the Mandrake versions of shared libraries, and thus will play nice with the rest of your system. It will also be installed in a different location from other software - /usr/local instead of /usr. This means you always have an entirely clean system in /usr and stops you polluting that system with non-Mandrake 9.1 software. The theory is that you can always revert to a completely clean Mandrake-only system simply by removing /usr/local.

I hope this is useful and explains *why* package management on Linux is the way it is. It may look odd, but it works the way it does for a reason.

The first computer I have ever used was a Microsha (made in the USSR). My father bought it around 1989, and they forget to give us the MC with software. So we basicly had an TV-typwriter. Fortunatly my father knew some people who could provide us with some software...

-- insert BK-0010, DOS, Windows 9x here --

2 years ago I was a not so happy windows 2000 user - it worked, it worked better than Windows 98 SE, but it still gave me an average of a BSOD a day. Then I had to change my HDD. W2K wouldn't install on the new one...
At this time I already had some GNU/Linux experience (screwing up my partition table while installing Mandrake 8.0, reading manuals and playing BSD games on Slackware).
Basicly I had 3 choices:
1) Finding out why W2K couldn't see my new HDD (no idea).
2) Installing Win98SE (and reainstalling it once a month to keep it going)
3) Installing GNU/Linux.
So I kept playing around with Mandrake 8.1 and booting into windows half of the time. Then came 8.2, I was hooked.
Sure, it had its quirks (just like every OS),but by this time I fortunatly had a DSL connection so I could seek out information. I solved the more serious problems and lerned to live with the minor...
Today I set before a fresh installed Mandrake 9.1 box (go galaxy and it works... for me.

Eugenia,
could you please stop playing with wannabe operating systems, and rather install a real profesional Unix, try Solaris x86!

We have just had a couple of XP boxes installed in our lab at work. I could not get the sound to work on one of them - until I found out the speakers need to be switched on. Why wasn't this in the XP help. Xp was not detecting the my hardware and telling me to switch them on.

Oh Shucks I guess XP is not ready for the desktop yet.

Yama, i have been using shells on various versions of windows and haven't had them breaking apps.

All a shell does is change the desktop. It's more akin to say, the desktop in gnomeKDE. It doesn't affect windows (managing or skinning).

Now, window changers (ms styles, windowblinds, shellwm, etc.) on the other hand are a different story. They can, and still do break some apps on some computers especially if they are beta. Though that has improved. I haven't had any signifigant breakage in XP using themes much at all.

If you want someone to do their homework on linux you should do the same for windows.

Every Linux newbie should hook up with a experience Linux user to help them along the way so that most of the problems become travial.

Create a website that list the available expert with their prefer platform and native language so that newbies can partner up with them.

Forums IMO are not really a good source of information for newbies.

Come on experts donate your time instead of personal attacks.
I am willing to donate my time for the cause.

BTW there should be a slash between gnome and kde in my last post. =Þ

dwilson, Hi, I don't mean that hardware detection should be perfect, actually I'm amazed at how good it is right now. What I mean is that, knowing it is not perfect, many distros do not have a B plan.
Maybe I am wrong, but is it really so hard to have some things (like the xserver) to deafault to a "safe" configuration.
To tell the truth, I can't stand that, after all these years, with the HUGE improvements done in other areas (including eye candy!), this kind of issues sre so stuck in time.

--
but I know that Windows 98 sure wasn't that great at autodetection and I survived. If linux developers had access to all of the hardware info that companies hand over to MS, we might have better detection in all linux distros. Until that happens, I'll live with less than stellar hardware detection.

The point (the only one) of this review was to show the wast majority of computer users how a Linux new commer feels when moves to Linux, or at least he tryes Linux. Thanks God this man hasn't tryed Slackware or Debian or even FreeBSD (which is not Linux), because if he would have, he'd probably be disapointed. DEEPLY! He thinks like a Windows user, he tryes to fix everything using the GUI and is still in search for the Control Pannel or Device Manager. Give the poor man a break:)

I would actually call Mandrake a mid range distro. It is friendlier than many but not very intuitive to a Windows user. I suggest Lycoris if someone is completely new to Linux and wants to be able to understand what is going on.

For example, the Lycoris start menu has an entry labeled "volume control". And Lycoris is the only distro that I have ever seen that recognized my Winmodem and INSTALLED THE DRIVERS AUTOMATICALLY without being told.

And as far as hardware, you can't really get the same degree of compatibility from Linux tht you get from Windows. MS has spent the last 20 year blackmailing and/or bribing companies into designing their hardware around one operating system. Now Linux is trying to adapt to the Windows universe and beat MS at their own game, using the existing hardware that was designed with Windows in mind. The fact that Linux works at all is amazing.

I have tried Mandrake 8.0, 8.1, 8.2 and 9.0. None of them were as intuitive as I would have liked. And RTFM doesn't help much if the manual does not exist because no one has written it yet, or only written it in geek-speak code. Lycoris uses Windows comprehendable language. It is a full featured distro BTW. Competely free. And if you are not interested in the source code or the development tools then you can get the entire distro on a single CD.

And it only offers one desktop, which is KDE. The Lycoris version of KDE has been customized with a lot of user friendly enhancements. You can also download upgrade RPMs from the Lycoris site which will give you the latest KDE upgrade capabilities without messing up the user enhancements. The Lycoris software installer will fix these for you. Just double click on them. Just like a setup.exe file in Windows.

BTW, as far as the missing dependencies in RPMS go it sounds familiar to me. Have you ever gotten a message inwindows about a missing dll file? Roughly the same kind of thing I think. Ever try to run a Windows program only to discover that you needed to upgrade your browser, or your media player, or download and install Flash? Same kind of thing.

Download the single Lycoris installation CD (or buy it for $29). Allow yourself half an hour to print the extensive list of how-tos and tutorials from their web site (all of which are available in PDF format and all of which are newbie friendly). Then spend maybe 20 minutes or so installing the OS. It will recognize most hardware automatically, with the possible exception of bleeding edge stuff less than a year old. Re-boot and run your system.

In the unlikely event that you run into a snag, the how-tos that are available from Lycoris should get you over the hump. Plan to spend about one day reading them.

After that, you are good to go. I don't know if it will recognize your modem, but it did recognize my USB crossover network cable with no trouble. And USB support in Linux sucks big time, no matter what distro you use.

If you are a new Windows refugee, grab a copy of Lycoris. It is written in Windows user-speak.

(I am not affliated with Lycoris in any way. i just like it.)

Anybody know how to get the nvidia drivers working? I mean, what has to be changed in XF86Config-4?

BTW, if you run GNOME under Mandrake, then the multimedia / sound menu has the GNOME volume control applet on it, named "Volume Control". Simple enough for everyone?!

Barry: The manual for Mandrake does exist. Buy Mandrake in a box, get a manual. Tada. This also applies if you want winmodem drivers. If you want non-free software, get the non-free version of the distro, which (amazingly!) you gotta pay for.

Well, I have used Linux for a few years now and it is better if you download all the cds needed for that OS! I run Mandrake 9.0 now and I love it. I have 9.1 on order now. You need to RTFM before you ever do another review of an OS. My new computer an AMD XP 2000+, 512 DDR ram, WD 60G HD and Maxtor 20G HD, external 56k modem, Nvidia nForce 220D video, and CMI 8738 sound card. Mandrake 9.0 install found everything and it all worked.

How can you say in one breath that you are deparate to find an alternative to windows, and then in the next breath complain that linux is fundamentally flawed because it's not the same as windows and too Unix-like?

What a waste of time this review is. If you want to get rid of windows, then you'll have to learn how to use the alternative. If you want an ALTERNATIVE, then by definition it will be different. If you want the same thing, then stick with what you've got. But don't go complaining that the ALTERNATIVE is not the SAME as windows, cos that is just plain dumb.

Sorry, had to vent.

How can you say in one breath that you are deparate to find an alternative to windows, and then in the next breath complain that linux is fundamentally flawed because it's not the same as windows and too Unix-like?

What a waste of time this review is. If you want to get rid of windows, then you'll have to learn how to use the alternative. If you want an ALTERNATIVE, then by definition it will be different. If you want the same thing, then stick with what you've got. But don't go complaining that the ALTERNATIVE is not the SAME as windows, cos that is just plain dumb.

Sorry, had to vent.

Bluetooth support is included with Mandrake 9.1. I know because I put it there. The downside is, it's not integrated into the Mandrake Control Panel. You simply have to install it yourself. The second problem is, it's not called bluetooth; it's called bluez. Hopefully by 9.2, it will be integrated into the main Control Panel.
Austin

Installing Mandrake w/o the second and third disks is downright silly.

No wonder you couldn't get sound and other things to work.

You should have tried it with all three disks before posting this nonsense.

Anybody has heard problems of installing
mandrake 9.1 on a laptop (sony vaio) with
pcmcia cd-rom? It will boot up with the cd
but it will freeze when the kernel boots up
and the installation program trying to reset
the cd-rom drive. It's frustrating because
I don't have an external floppy drive to use
the pcmcia boot floppy. Anyone knows if
there's an work around? (e.g. rh allows you
to boot up with the cd but install from iso
images stored on the local hdd. I don't want
to use rh though)

despite all the newbie-complaint comments about how they're expecting flawless (*cough*) hardware detection because they're used to windows (yeah, like it has flawless hardware detection.. whatever), i'll say that much: mandrake 9.1 has worked flawlessly with me, i'm not saying it cant cause some trouble to other users, i'm just saying its pretty damn good so far (for a still wildly unsupported operating system, for what's stil sometimes considered a hobbyist's os, or a ITpro-only cluster type of hardware servicing). i'm looking for a definite alternative to windows, i'm also a somewhat knowledgeable computer user and have used pretty much everything from dos 6 to every flavour of windows starting with 3.11-workgroups to macOS 7-8.x-9 to macOS X, and after all these year of using mainstream OSes, linux feels a liberation, a libration thta takes some learning curve learning, but that isn't tied up to commercial interesrs.

Nice article... I use Mandrake daily but it is refreshing to see a new user show where the stumbling blocks are...

With regards to window managers - Mandrake installs 3 by default... Not installing one of them is as simple as deselecting either Gnome or KDE in the install section. I agree that this should probably default to one.

The KDE sound mixer should have been installed by default... It is called KMix (Still cryptic but they put it's function in brackets ie sound mixer) (perhaps it is on the second CD)...
There is also a nice little applet that installs a sound applet into your KDE panel.(once you figure out how to hide the unnessary controls it is really really cool).

With regards to the Login manager choice - I have learned over the years - if in doubt go with the default.

Finally with regards to packages - you are best going with packages specifically built for Mandrake 9.1... You can get these from a number of locations...

I am waiting for a DVD edition of Mandrake which will include a whole bunch of contributed files...

Austin: Is there any chance that Wacom configuration tools will be added to Mandrake any time soon.

First I have used Xp and put it on several systems. Do not try to tell me that all hardware is supported I had to on several machine go hunting for drivers that were never writen for Xp. Then was challenged with the daunting task of making them work ing the system where they now conflicted with other hardware, not physical addressees or irq's that would be way too easy. While I have to admit I rarely had this problem with ME I did have a situation that left me frustrated. I needed a driver for my ethernet card and could not find one. I have high speed and connect to the net using the card. fortunately I had another pc that I was able to browse with and picked up the driver.

As far a your sound card goes, you said that you had kde running and under the "MENUs" under sound there is a little tool called kmix. now that should not be too hard to figure what it does.

The last thing I would like to say is that linux is about choice. If there is the option of running kdm.gdm, xdm or mandrakes they all work and the choice is yours to make. I am sure that you make choices in your windows software too, like what mail package do I use. At least with Linux you have the ablility to try several without throwing big $'s to discover that it really does not do the job you wanted it to do. Along with your choice to fire up xmms instead of noatun kaboodle juk mpg123 or several of the other players that are on your linux system. I will grant you that there is a learning curve to running linux but I would be willing to bet the first time you ever used a windows system there was a learning curve too.

There are many varitities of linux to choose from and they all work well. Some have a higher learning curve than others. Some perform better at some tasks than others. They can all do the same it is some times just a matter of playing and tweaking (I am sure you do that in windows) to get it running just the way you like it.

If you want to spend some time learning linux and the various options, I think you will find it time well spent.

If you are a newbie why would you go the download route, over a slow ass modem no less, instead of buying the supported versin once it hits the store shelves? That's not something a newbie should try to do, especially if you don't know shit about linux and not a lot about computers either for that matter. Most of your problems could have been solved by installing Mandrake completely from all the CDs and by having the support you get when you pay for the product.

Linux is a perfectly fine desktop operating system. Its fast, stable and cheap but if you don't know what you are doing you will have problems installing it just like you would with any operating system you are unfamiliar with. If you hate windows and want an alternative OS but are not very computer savvy go with MacOS X or buy a copy of linux where you can get some installation support.

You need to change 2 things in the XFree86Config-4 file...

1) look for a line that says Driver "nv" change it to Driver "nvidia"
2) make sure that glx is being loaded in the modules section it is for me on mandrake 9.0...

This is assuming that you have the Nvidia drivers loading successfully.

You are forgetting something. Linux companies sell INSTALLATION support, not usage support. This user needs support on usage, not installation. Therefore, buying anything won't do him any good.

AdamW:

"Barry: The manual for Mandrake does exist. Buy Mandrake in a box, get a manual. Tada. This also applies if you want winmodem drivers. If you want non-free software, get the non-free version of the distro, which (amazingly!) you gotta pay for. "

So far I have bought 2 versions of the Mandrake PowerPack. I bought version 8.0 before I knew anything about Linux at all. Then I tried download versions of 8.1 and 8.2, then I bought the 9.0 PowerPack as soon as it came out.

The manuals that come with the box set of Mandrake are useless to a true newbie. To someone who already knows the basics of a Linux system, and already understands the assumptions of a *NIX system, they are a valuable and useful resource. However, to a newbie refugee from Microsoft, they are incomprehensible and useless.

Manual writers have gotta stop assuming that total newbies already know the basic stuff. We don't. It took me six months of searching to find enough basic information to be able to install Red Hat 7.2 (which I bought) without terror. Then I had to buy still another third party how-to book about Red Hat before I installed RH 8.0 (which I also paid for).

Most Linux documentation is written of the Geeks, by the Geeks, and for the Geeks, so help us all. Very little, outside of a few college textbooks, is written using terms and a frame of reference that a Windows user can relate to.

I spent several months on learning, which was fine. I could afford to do that because:

1) I am self employed, I set my own schedule.

2) I was doing it for fun, not because I had a boss breathing down the back of my neck. I could spare the time.

3) I was using my own spare system and I did not care if I crashed and had to reformat the hard drive or reinstall the OS many times. There was no harm done since it was an old clunker. I would NOT recommend trying to install any Linux distro whatsoever on any box that actually gets used for productive work until you have done it several times.

See? Linux is only free if your time is worthless. If you have to work for a living, and you are not working in the IT profession, then you have to make time to learn and study Linux in between work, and family, and feeding yourself, and hopefully a social life. And in my case (as many others) being a parent.

Not everyone has unlimited amounts of spare time to wade through obscure and esoteric manuals, written by members of the in-crowd, and only comprehensible to those who are one of the Chosen Ones.

BTW, the Winmodem drives that came with Lycoris ARE free and open source. Why doesn't Mandrake grab some? Why doesn't Red Hat?

This is one of the reasons why Linux can be so confusing to newcomers.

OK, so I would have picked up on the fact that "aumix" was the [au]dio [mix]er, but why, for heavens sake, did Mandrake not simply rename the application to "Volume Control" or "Volume Mixer" or simply "Volume". Then everybody would know what/where it was.

What the hell are you trying to say? They called it "Aumix" because the damn author named the program that way. The fact that it's in the "Multimedia" section and it has a little sound icon should make it clear to even an idiot what the program does.

Are you saying that everything should be labeled by what it simply does? OK, let's rename "Microsoft Outlook" to "Email and contacts" or "Microsoft Excel" to "Spreadsheet" or CorelDraw to "Drawing thingy".

The intelligence of some of these people amazes me.

I don't have any problem with Mandrake, on my computers (#4) and laptops (#2) it installs in record time, all hardware is supported, and it runs faster than Windows (it's also capable of running more programs simultaneous than any version of Windows I've ever tried -> everything from Win 3.1 uptil XP).
Since about a year, maybe a few months more, linux supports 100% of my computing needs, I've erased Windows and never looked back.

If you have exotic hardware, then of course it could cause problems, but that is also the case with Windows : if your hardware driver is not available with Windows XP then tough luck.

I don't want to insult the writer of this review, but apparently he is an average computer user, and not an experienced one. Installing Windows is as hard (or harder since not all drivers are supplied with Windows as they are with linux) for a new user as Linux. On my systems (I built them myself using good quality hardware) I just pop in the installation disk, answer a few questions and go of for a cup of coffee, only returning to insert disk 2 and disk 3 (1,5 hours download for all 3 of them on my broadband internet connection -> Telenet/Belgium)

On current and common hardware I'm convinced that Linux (especially Mandrake) is a lot easier than installing Windows XP.

So don't let this review scare you from trying what is the best linux distro I've seen (and I've tried a lot of them...)

actually i have a friend like this guy. he has stucked with windows, but had the curiosity to try linux. but everytime i said: "yes, takes 3 seconds, fire up a command prompt" he ran away... he supposed to be an expert as well...
this is what windows makes: the user has no clue what he actually does...
however i encourage this guy to try suse linux 8.2, coming out an monday. suse did a great job with kinternet and wvdial, there is no better way to connect to the internet - no root password, just a click...
and i wish him patient to be able to learn new things.
cheers
gaboro

If you really want to make the jump from windows to Linux then don't dual boot. Being able to reboot into your comfortable windows setup when Linux doesn't make sense in thirty seconds is a crutch. Wipe out your windows installation, install linux and start learning. I was a lot like the author of this "review" until I did that and forced myself to learn linux. Now it's all I use.

Before I bought NT4 I checked the HCL. Before I downloaded a free OS known as Linux I checked the HCL. Before I installed my free OS - Mandrake Linux - I found and read docs. Now I buy the PowerPacks - more CD's and there' a book.
Still, it seems to remain a prominate truth that you can lead a Windows user to Linux but you can't make them think. In otherwords: RTM !

--
oNb
NOTE - using bogus email and name.
Look me up on aolm.

Most computer users, even those with some savy, do not want to have to put too much thought into their computing experience. The computer is a tool for them, and they want it to just work. They want to browse the Web, read e-mails, record income and expenses, track a budget, write WYSIWYG documents, work with spreadsheets, create a presentation, listen to music, etcetera. They want these things to just happen. Some of us, including myself, are a bit psychotic in that we actually enjoy the command line and tweaking things to our hearts desire. Most people are not like this. My wife is the perfect example of the average user. She's upset if she spends more than 10 minutes trying to get one thing done, and I'm not talking about Linux either. She gets pissed with MS Office, doing searches on Google, configuring her desktop to her liking, etcetera. Most people don't care about source code and its availability or unavailability as the case may be. They just want a working tool.

Having said all of this, I believe the reviewer should have realized by now that Linux requires some thought, some Googling, and some old fashioned manual reading. You have to do your homework if you are going to install any distro of Linux. You must make sure that a particular distro supports your hardware, and if not, be prepared to go to the command line to install and configure drivers downloaded from diverse places on the Web. You may even have to patch your kernel and recompile. These are real possibilities, and if you are not willing to go that far, then you must either find the distro that supports all of your hardware out of the box (You may have to purchase the box, rather than download the GPL version to get full hardware support.) or rebuild your PC with hardware that is known to be fully supported in Linux by default. Doing your homework is not OS specific. If you're going to upgrade to the latest version of Windows, you've got to do your homework because some hardware may not be supported or may require that you download and install drivers.

Anyway, don't give up on Linux. It is actually becoming easier to install, use, and administer. One day we will actually see Linux as just as easy to install and use as any commercial consumer OS.

Iain,
Thank you for answering my questions.

Based on your answers and comments I think it's safe to say
you passed with flying colors, demonstrating that you are not
one of the Eloi at all.

Now, based on your statements concerning Solaris, HP-UX, apache, I think it's safe to say that you had to be exposed to the
Unix philosophy of operating systems and programs:
a) small programs that do limited things, but do so correctly
b) configurability, configurabitly, configurabilty
c) well-exposed, well documented API's for those willing to learn.
d) Learning to learn: i.e., to quote the perl folks: there's more than 1 way to solve a problem.

Now, based on this, I am still baffled about your attitude
concerning rpms! Look, I'm not trying to insult you, but you
have UNIX EXPERIENCE. I would expect you to do what any
Unix user would do when faced with a problem he didn't know how to solve: Complain first, and then Go FIND THE ANSWER. This could be as simple as:
a) Read the Man page
b) Ask the local Unix Guru
c) See how someone else solved the problem
d) Do a google search on the symptom
e) Read the manual if there is one

Every good Unix user I ever met share some characteristics:
a) They don't suffer from learned helplessness.
b) They go and find the answer, preferrably on their own,
and when necessary with help from others.
And no, I'm not talking about the Kung-Fu masters of Unix,
I'm talking about the rank-and-file of Unix users.

This is why I'm still surprised by your article: YOU'VE BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT. Why has that point of view not been expressed in your article?

Yes, I expected you to talk about rpm hell with trees of dependancies. Yes, it's true. It could be a mine field for the
ignorant and unwary.

BUT I EXPECTED YOU TO EXPLAIN HOW YOU SOLVED THE PROBLEM: namely, do a little research on rpm's, and discovered that mandrake provides a utility called urpmi that protects the
user from rpm hell, by defining software repositories with all the rpm dependacies figured out ahead of time, so the user only has to use the mandrake software manager to install the rpms.
Why do I expect this? Because as you stated, you HAVE Unix EXPERIENCE.

Let's look now at your experience with partitions:
"Trying to remember the difference between hda1, hdb5, hdb7 and hdc always leaves me in a cold sweat in case I get it wrong and format my windows drive by mistake"

You are a UNIX USER. You are supposed to know that everything in Unix is A FILE. Why should a thing like labelling
a partition hda1,or hdb3 bother you? This is par for the course
for a Unix USER. Should mounting parititions onto the root filesystem bother you? Not if you are a Unix user!

Let's look at your comments on isdn:

" only to discover that there is no option to connect my isdn terminal adapter via USB. I get Com 1-8 listed, incidentally, so why can't Linux use the same notation as Windows here?"

YOU ARE A UNIX USER. You should know, and if you don't you are supposed to find out, what serial ports are called in Unix.
WHY would you expect a Unix to follow a Microsoft convention?
WHICH came first? Unix or Microsoft? Which one has a history
of spelling it out how it does things? Which has a history of changing notation, api's,hiding some or all of its API's from users?

I don't want you think this is a rant on you, but I want you to see from my perspective that you are not conforming to what I expect from someone who has had 7 years of Unix experience.

Let me try to sum it up into a couple of coherent sentences:

Don't approach Linux from a Windows perspective -- you will be perpetually frustrated by the inconsistent amount of handholding in Linux. Approach Linux from a Unix perspective where the best ideas and practices from Unix are kept, and (no pun intended) some window dressing is thrown atop of it to make
it friendlier to adepts and novices, without intefering with the
needs and desires of Kung-Fu masters.

Lots of the problems you have are easily fixed, the problem about it being slow, that can be fixed by upgrading to the latest 2.5 kernel (that might be hard though, and even with the stock kernel my Duron 1.3GHZ runs really fast in Linux). The reason your computer takes so long to start with linux is most likely because Mandrake installed tons of servers, which you probably don't need, and if you are a true newbie maybe give arklinux a try. The dependency probelm can be fixed by downloading all the CD's. I'm glad Mandrake is the way it is, and hope it doesn't become any more easy to use than it is already. The reason I use mandrake is because "it just works"

How can you even THINK on writing a "review" about an operating system that you haven't even downloaded completely. tztztz...
As many others have said before: if you want HUGE hardware support, you should BUY the full version.

I've been using Linux for quite a while for now. I think that Mandrake has REALLY improved it's software in this version.

Example1:
I have a HP3200c scanner which didn't work with older Linux version. I was quite surprised when I saw an fully functional icon appear un my desktop as soon I plugged the scanner in. There was no config needed. Everything just worked and I could start scanning inmediately.

Example2:
I have a HP850 digital camera. I put it into "drive" mode, and when I plugged it in, another icon, that of a mounted hard disk appeared on my desktop. I were able to read a write off and onto the camera without having configured anything.

Example3:
I have a FujiMX1200 digital camera. The GPhoto libs supported it with some tweaking in older versions. Now it is supported right out of the box.

Example4:
My hp scanner just worked fine (500c - very old / 640c - more recent)

*MY* Sounblaster Live Platinum was detected and configured *correctly* and I could start to enjoy digital music as soon I adjusted the desired volume. I agree that it's strange that the volume is muted after installing, but it took me 30 secs to figure out where the problem was. I personally go from the easiest solution to the complicaded, so my search started looking at volume levels...

I find that RPM installing now runs fine. I installed LMule without any problem. I also installed OCR software se same easy way. Teh thin is you have to choos those packets compatible with Mandrake. Would a Windows 3.11 program run on XP or viceversa?

Why SHOULD serial communitation ports be called COM?
Why SHOULD everything be the same as in Windows?

When a REAL computer newbie sits in front of a screen, he will find Linux equally complex as Windows. But if you "analyze" Linux, having Windows in mind, it's logical that you're lost inside a new sys.
Oh and please... don't write any review before trying a COMPLETE version of a system. Thik of Windows being distributed on two CDs, would it run if you only install one of them?


Greets
Merlin

> So stick to RPMs which are properly compiled for
> Mandrake 9.1.


I understand the problems with different versions of libraries, but is it really necessary to have a RPM for each distribution? Why can't we have a common system that just says "this package needs version X of library Y". How the distro handles these dependencies should be up to the distro, but the package should work with all distributions.

Hmmm... still comments like 'Windows just works'.
Er, Linux just works also, for me and every other computer I've ever intalled it on. I've actually had much bigger battles with my soundcard driver with Windows!
Most lately, I had an old toshiba laptop that I wanted to use to play mp3s in our workshop. Well, Windows and Winamp kept distorting the background image on the desktop, inexplicably... and plenty of other inconsistent behavior. I installed Linux and the system has worked smoother than a charm. Xmms plays all day, and all weirdness is gone from the system.
On my main computer, I'm using Debian unstable and I couldn't be happier.
My experience using Linux for the past few years has been very rewarding... sure, there have been times when I have been frustrated getting something to work right, but overall, the applications are modern and spiffy (browsers, file managers, ftp, image viewers and editors, email res clients, console utilities, etc) and the features of the system in general are outstanding.
So.... one just has top make a decision: is what I could potentially get out of using a computer worth learning something different?? Do I like computers enough to learn to use Linux? Do I want super cool features and programs never before seen or even imagined by Windows users (highly customizable window look and behavior, things like mouse focus behavior, a capable command line that is taken seriously, one command system upgrades, applications available for download from a central repository in a very handy way (eg apt-get, urpmi, etc), excellent stability, and tools for system monitoring, extreme customizability and flexibility in many other ways, browsers with cool tabs and stuff, comparative freedom from viruses, and much more)? If the answer is yes, Linux is out there and it sure is frickin' cool. Don't bother finding out if its worth using. if you are into computers, its way more than worth checking out.
Ha ha, ironically, I'm on my girlfriends windows running laptop.

First of all,

If you want to try a new OS, you have to download only a part of the installation disks. I'd strongly advise you to download the 3 disks or at least the first 2.

Second, try searching the websites of your hardware manufacturers to see if they have linux driver. For example my Alcatel USB ADSL modem has no problem at all connecting to the internet, but I had download one file for the installation manually from www.alcatel.com. Some manufacturers support the open source projects and provide linux-drivers, others, like Eicon have waited a long time and some keep waiting.

My system runs very smooth and everything worked quite fine after the installation. This is my system:
AMD Athlon XP2000+
DVD Lite-ON
CDRW MSI (48x16x48)
512 MB SDRAM PC133
40 GB Maxtor HD (7200rpm)
GF2 MX-400 (64MB Tv-out)
sound and lan on-board
Safeway multimedia keyboard and mouse.

If you want more info on how to set up your system, go to www.wannes.tk

Just my 2 cents. I am using Win-XP on 3 machines at home (a Gateway, Dell, and HP). The Dell and HP came with Win-XP Home installed. The Gateway with Win-ME and I did a clean install of Win-XP Pro on it.

Anyway, all 3 PCs are networked, sharing files and a broadband connection fine. Have had 0 (yes, zero) crashes/blue screens/etc on any of the 3.

I would love to try Linux. But the review here just reinforces my fear. It seems that installing and using the various distros are perfect/middling/horrible depending in large part on luck of the draw.

I want to leave Microsquash. But I fear I (and Linux) are not ready to take that step yet. OK - Flame away if you wish, just sharing my thoughts...

The author expresses some interesting (but also weird) comments and opinions.
He says he has likes & dislikes about XP - even after carefully scrutinizing the article, you cannot find much. So why does he claim to be so stoked to change to Linux.
Obviously most of his needs are met - he should stay with M$.

If one really wants to migrate, it is safe to assume a few things.
1) is totally unprepared to pay the (imho) obscene amount of $ that M$ charges (& cies that sell software to go with it).
2) is doing it for personal convictions (freedom, community of service, ...)
3) likes to learn/tinker and believes that some lack of automation can actually generate better control/performance (not unlike auto. vs std cars).
4) Completely exasperated with BSOD, viruses, ...etc.

Then again you can go 1/2 way. I migrated several people to Xandros (for which we had to pay between $40-$99 usd depending on the specific requirements (read M$ apps or not).
Most chose the non-m$ btw.
-And they are very happy campers - on hdw that varies between P266-P800, 64ram, 2gb hdd) ... all in all nothing outlandish or fancy.

Since I install most things for them as soon as it goes beyond the supplied GUIs (printer, internet connection, ...etc) like scanners, I do it for them. Mostly I don't need to to tons of researches or spend to much time.
{not to mention I lock the root account, none of them have managed to trash the system yet}

I must admit this changes radically on older iron like P100 with 32 ram, the user-friendliness of distros that will install on that would scare most people. But then again - I seem to fit in all 4 of the above categories.

So about 3 years ago, I bit the bullet, decided to learn the stuff - and I must admit, today although no *nix-guru, I am a happy camper, and happier still that some people are around to give freely of their time to help other - the essence of the linux community.

To newbies with older hdw - I strongly recommend Corel or Storm (hail), else on newer stuff - definately Xandros.
- Leave the other distros to more technically inclined folks and who knows, if you hang around the linux world - you may actually learn something and someday be proud to say you installed an isa-pnp soundblaster16.

There is no shame in being a newbie. Frustrations exists in both worlds - all depends on which ones you can live with better.

To each his own.

Sawthpaw.

Linux is not Windows - its not a product designed by a business to make money, its designed for the most part by a diverse collection of developers who want to get the fundamentals of a Unix-like OS right, even to the point of scrapping something and starting over. The fit and finish GUI elements are coming later (the command line has always rocked,) which is the opposite of get the eye candy working first, and "fix" the basics later for a price. It really helps if you are willing to spend some time to learn Linux (buy a book!) and your Windows knowledge may not help you that much, which is by design thanks to Bill & Co. On the other hand to keep increasing the user base you have to cater to people who feel they have paid their dues with Windows, and don't want to get under the hood with Linux. All I can say is Linux has made tremendous progress in usability (I started with Redhat 5.1,) it always keeps getting better, and its a lot of fun. But no matter how good it gets there will always be people who don't like it and prefer something else, and choice is a good thing.

You don't need the Windows CD to fix that. Type in "fdisk /mbr" and Windows will reassert itself on your primary drive's MBR.

Linux uses memory differently. It's not bad that it's using more than 90%. That does NOT mean that it's not available for processes (read programs) -- it is. It's generally not wise to bring a MS mindset to Linux. They're not similar.

secondly, your problem copying the file from a CD/DVD is more than likely a problem with the CD/DVD. A more informed response to the problem would have been to inspect the CD/DVD on another computer or another OS. Don't blame the first thing that comes to mind. We've all had to wait while the OS never quite figures out where on the CD/DVD the file is.

I have seen many so called reviews but this one is very uniques. The reviewer downloads 1/3 of the operating system and then complains about failed dependncies?

Let me ask you, dear reviewer: when you buy gloves, do you try them by sliding just one finger in and then complain that the glove is made poorly?

This article is ridiculous and worthless. What a waste of time!

Btw. for the last 5 years Linux has been used by me and my now 13 year old daughter. Snap to install, easy to use. Asked about the possibility to switch to WinXP, all she had to say was: "I don't have time for this toy, I have homeworks to do".

Mandrake 9.1 recognizes ALL of my hardware on 3 PC's one's a proprietary Sony, what's his? a micro-he**? or some freeky, as proprietary as possible PC? Under the menu K->multimedia->sound->Kmix (Sound Mixer) plane as DAY and Aumix has an icon of a speaker by it, duh* what could that b for? I use an Asus A7V8X mainboard and ALL it's hardware + my Geforce3 video card, tv tuner, extra nic, all of it is supported, my CD-burner HP, my DVD-rom drive, my SONY video cam-ieee1394 firewire, USB digital cams also sony, the author just needs a decent PC. not necessarily fast, but something with standard hardware, and there is plenty of hardware out there that works, the first time, every!!! time. Sure the typical end user may not have such hardware, but what was he using anyway? i didnt notice where he mentioned the manufacturer of the PC??? And unlike windows2K or maybe even XtremelyPathetic, u can actually unplug a USB device w/out the system complaining... i thought USB was hot swapable? maybe not in Windowz... Also my HP photo smart printer only prints half a picture in windows 2000, but prints the whole picture every time in Mandrake 9! and sure windows problems are sometimes easy to fix, re-install, prob solved, oh oops u mean that can take upwards of 2 hours to do, as it has to copy all it's files once, than go through and install again, and yes i know i've installed XP, have you? it's as but as* ugly as installs come, until u get into the second/third reboots, and what is the crap with installing hardware/software, and still have to reboot the PC?? I never have to, it's ridiculous to reboot everytime u seeze. But windows insists, intall new drivers reboot........ any little thing, reboot, oh, how bout this fun error, windowz starts to boot, 2K and then comes up with a blue screen, that says "inaccessable boot device" how the F**** is that possible it just did access it ... not to mention win2K would not intall on a 80GB WDC hd, apparently it's not compatiable, and won't re-partition the drive for me, so i had to use Linux to partition it! what a RIP, took 2+hours to copy all it's files and y? because it didnt load smartdrive, well why the F not? u see, windows has it's BS, and it's harder, look at it's definiton of disks partitions disk(0) rdisk(0) part(1) etc... makes no sense, hda1 hdb1 hdc5 make much more sense to me, always have. and drive letters, ugh, ever install a second HD and have it change your drive letters so now your programs can't find the CD-Drive? well, not in Linux.

:-) GO LINUX!

I am a relativly new Linux user, about 1 year, and I was also in the position of wanting to be free from MS an their outragous cost/licensing issues.
I put in some hard yards, dual booting for a while, and eventually now am very happy with my choice. Don't forget *choice* is the key. I was looking for a replacement for windows and the apps I need daily, I found it but it took some effort on my part. Every release I have tried has been better and easier to install and use but still with some issues - but then again so has windows - but I don't pay big $$$ for the priviliage of using it.

After reading this article I found a few disturbing items.
The first problem found was this: The author only downloaded 33% of the distribution. One CD (out of three) is not the proper way to review anything. Many intended features are missing. I installed MDK 9.1 and it had everything I needed except for libdvdcss, java and flash. After a 30 minute install it took me another 10 minutes to install these three things.
The second and most disturbing item was this: The author feels that MS knows the best naming conventions for us, the people.
He mentions that serial ports should be labeled “com” ports in Mandrake, because it is that way in Windows.
The general population is so entrenched in the MS way to do things that any change is incomprehensible. This type of thinking is scary. The com port (short for communications port) labeling was ,and always will be, odd. What is a com port? Isn't the modem a com port? The RJ45 connector for the LAN is also a com port, so are the lpt, usb and firewire ports. A name is just that, ttyS0 is as good as or better than com 1. MS brainwashed this person that com is the best way to describe a rs232 serial port.
The third item that I found troubling was the amount of choices was a bad thing. Another brainwashing case. One OS, one WordProcessor, One Spreadsheet. Even the USSR had a choice of three different automobiles.
The author also didn't look as closely in the menu for his sound issue, Kmix appears with the word (sound mixer) next to it. I was surprised that he didn't mention that it should be called the volume control as it is in Windows.

I wanted to respond to a couple of posts that claim Linux is still a "hobby" OS. I work for a large (70,000 employees) global company as an Information Security Consultant. All we use (Info Security Consultants, that is) is Linux and BSD. MS Windows is a joke when it comes to security tools. I have 4 computers on my desk, 3 Linux machines and 1 FreeBSD machine. Linux and the various BSD's win by a long shot.

I'm just sick of hearing comments like this. For some reason, when someone has issues with Linux/Unix, it suddenly becomes worthless or a "hobby" OS.

Do yourself a favor and get the entire distribution. If you can't download it, buy it from Cheapbytes. It helps to have all the extras. If you are coming from windows, you have to get used to the way things are done in Linux. It is worth it! Just think how foreign windows would seem if you had never used it before.

After 3 yrs of trying various distro's I
have settled on Knoppix (www.knoppix.org), where
almost everything "just works" or does so
with a very slight push. It is also, a lot of
linux on one ready-to-run CD.

The review does have some good gripes but also some not so good. You have to understand that Linux uses resources differently than Windows. So having a huge amount of resources, like RAM, already dedicated doesn't mean they aren't available for apps because Linux uses RAM differently.
Also, expecting ANY OS other than Windows to use USB communications devices is expecting alot. I hate these things. Networking through USB is wrong <g>. I avoid these devices like the plague! That being said, you have to research things before going in. What will and will not work.
BUt expecting a general ease of use is not an invalid criticism. If Linux distro's are going to target the masses, then they have to understand them to some extent and cater to them to some extent.
Look, I love Linux. I use it daily. But I too get pissed that Evolution requires a separate piece to turn on Calendar reminders. Why have a calendar at all? Why not make the calendar itself a part of the plugin and make it more logical? Why have such an illogical menu layout? Why not have a better menu editting system? These are all valid points that are not just coming from a Windows perspective, but are simply logical.

<<JAV>>

ok, to start with i am not a computer expert by any stretch of the imagination. as a matter of fact, i started using mandrake linux 7.0.2 and win 98 se at the same time. i have since completely moved to linux because i got tired of the windows blue screen and 5 hour installs. maybe if the author had bothered to download the other 2 discs, or found a friend to download them for him,(which i did up till this last release) he would have had a little more of the windows-like functionality he was obviously critisizing mandrake for not having.
typically i can install mandrake in about 1 hour or less if i let it pick the packages on it's own, (which i rarely do btw) and no more than 2 hours if i go through the packages. (i install all the dev stuff, libraries and games that are presented to me)
i have only experienced a hardware problem once and that was with 8.0 and the driver for the promise technologies ata100 card.
muted sound is not a default. i installed 9.1 as soon as i got home the 2nd day after it was released. (cable net is nice. (-: ) as my desktop appeared following only 1 reboot, i got mandrake's normal audio equivalent of a splash screen. (it was actually at full volume)
now i'm not saying the author is a total moron or something and that linux is perfect. i have my issues with this release, but they aren't nearly as overwhelming as this guy makes it out to be. if he wants to give an honest review of linux, then he should do what i would tell anyone else to do 1st. do the homework. also, don't blame linux if it doesn't have drivers for the hardware you have, yell at the manufacturer. if they don't want to write their own drivers, give the linux community the specs to write the drivers. i've sent e-mails to several manufacturers telling them why i'd love to use their products but have to use their competitors.
heh. well enough of my ranting. i doubt anyone will read this far through the comments anyway. lol
have they started writing service packs for xp 2003 and server 2003 yet? they should probably get a head start this time. hee hee heeee.........

It literally went flawlessly. Detected my soundcard, SBLive MP3 (wasn't muted and sound comes from all 4 of my speakers and subwoofer), my USB Zip 100, my Pioneer 120 DVD, my Plextor 1210A CD-RW, my USB Mouse (I ain't found that bug in it yet either), my HP 1100 printer (on LPT1), my Epson 870 Stylus Photo (USB), my Radeon video card and even my Microtek X6 USB scanner. It took about 40 minutes to install (including the post install stuff) which was about 30 minutes shorter than my Mandrake 9.0 install and about the same amount of time it takes to install Windows. But I forgot, then you have to install the drivers for you video card, printers, scanner, sound card. Then you have to install Office then run all the updates and two days later you've got Windows up and running just like Mandrake 9.1, except it only took me 40 minutes to get Mandrake up and running.

I still use Windows for a few things but with this release of Mandrake the things I use Windows for grows shorter.

Just my thoughts,
Mark M Young

In regards to the article of boy meets linux, I have to say that his thinking process is screwed up. Even if he was installing windows, he would be nonfunctional now. This isn't a personal attack, because he's just one of many that shouldn't use computers at this point in history. He should come to the realization that even grandmothers understand that they need to prepare for, go through with, and finish a project for it to work(My grandmother did). He sounds like he has untreated ADD.

If you had installed Win98SE, and only installed half of the files(you guess half- cause you didn't check), then some things are going to be missing.

I could go on, but there would be no point. The jist of your failure's are, you are using shit hardware(usb tcp/ip?) and are doing a half-assed install without reading one damn thing before you do it. If your computer were a toaster or a Mac with static parts, this would work- but it isn't. You cannot do this on windows or linux. That's why Windows comes pre-installed! Cause of the lemmings like you!

Windows knows this. Linux knows this. But, you don't seem to know/care about this. When and if you do, your hardware such that it is, will be functional. And you will be happy in knowing that your computer works to the best of it's hacked together ability. It is a self-discovery of sorts- where you finally realize how completely naive in hardware choices you have been. And if you don't, no problem. My shit works.

I think this review made some good points. It is the average story of what happens when a better-than-average windoze user tries to migrate to Linux.

In life, you get either reasons (excuses) or results. In this scenario I believe both the reviewer and Linux gave us a little of both.

The reviewer gave us a decent attempt, but worked with only one CD of a set. That was not the fault of Linux. So we read instead detailed reasons for half-assing this installation--not results.

All that aside, windoze users who try Linux casually will get frustrated, blame it all on the penguin, and run for the comfort of their C: drive. Pay attention, Linux enthusiasts: Linux will never overtake MS until Linux hardware support is really plug and play (not plug and pray and tweak and pray and...). To be everyone's favorite OS at home, Linux must require fewer reasons/excuses and deliver results more easily.

The author makes one point with which I agree: Any distro for home/desktop users should offer a single desktop. KDE is customizable enough to make most everyone happy. ...and any distro that's not for home use probably doesn't need more than one window manager, and maybe not even one. (How many people really need to see a desktop on that big ftp/http/whatever-corporate-server anyway?)

--Fuzzy

New and unknown things can be scary and difficult. It's hard to part with those old and trusted tools. They might not be the best, but atleast you know what they can and can not do. Right ?

This article did point out to us some of the problems for new users, but it should not be generalized too much. Others will propably have a lot smoother experiences with Mandrake.

Harware support continues to be a problem that can not be magically solved. The best I can recommend is to use only hardware that is known to work. This will save you from nasty surprises. It will also give you better chances at a stable system. If you want stability never go with the latest and greatest.

Never directly compare memory usage on Win and Linux. They are not comparable, since they have different strategies on memory management. Linux will try to use all the memory you have by buffering and caching as much as possible. Example: I have 256M of memory of which 248M is used at the moment. Of that 26M are used for buffers and 95M for caches. This is quite normal for Linux and will positively impact performance.

Installing from RPMs is not quite the same as installing programs in Windows. Mandrakes urpmi is certainly a good tool, but I see constantly that people are confused about it's features.

First of all. RPMs are distribution specific. This is regrettable but fact. So if you happen to have a CD from a magazine with RPMs make sure they are for your distribution and your specific version of that distro. Doing this will make your life easier. On chance an RPM from another distro might work but it can have unanticipated consequences like making you application behave strangely. So don't do it.

Second learn to use urpmi properly. If you use Mandrake, knowing this tool will be worth the effort. Read the man
pages for urpmi. If you don't like the console you can use the Mandrake install tool rpmdrake (which is just a frontend for urpmi). To use these tools you must understand the consept of software sources. These can be managed with the gui tool (software sources manager) or with the commands urpmi.addmedia and urpmi.removemedia. Also let us not forget urpmq for querying the urpmi databases.

Some sound drivers default to being muted. So this problem is not Mandrake specific. Always remember to use a mixer to set and save your soundlevels after an installation. I hope this will be corrected in the future. I see no reason why we should default to muted.

Finally give Linux some time. It will never be quite the same as Windows (not even KDE) so there are some things which must be learned. And never fear asking questions.

Go back to WINDOZE. Or maybe mac, I hear people that don't like computers enjoy macs more.

good comments HagerR15 while I was reading this I was thinking exactly what you said, and also windows doesnt come with every driver possible out there you have to either download it or it comes on the cd with the hardware and until hardware vendors help linux by making those drivers(which some are doing) its not linux's fault that you dont want to learn how to use command line to fix things that could be fixed, when you are presented with a problem in windows do you give up right away? Or do you do a little reading and find out how to fix something?

I first got an interest in Linux with Mandrake8.2 and I have since tried a few distros out there. The evolution of GNU/Linux has been fabulous! It becomes more and more user-friendly and supports more hardware with every release. Mandrake9.1 is really GREAT. Of course there are still a lot of things that can be improved, but you should also look at the evolution. If things continue to improve with this speed, Linux will get more and more an alternative for Windows. I think you should try to get the 3 CD's of Mandrake9.1 and give it another try.

The sheer laziness that oozes throughout this review is precisely the reason that the author will _never_ find a Linux distro that's suitable for him. If you're the sort of television-sedated consumer whose not willing to do more than the "minimum amount of reading," then why bother looking for an alternative to Windows in the first place? It will spoon feed you everything you want (for a price), and certainly never requires that you <<gasp>> read anything.

... is that it's not Windows.

This about this review. This guy wanted to know why the serial port was called "/dev/tty0" instead of "COM1" (even though the COM1 notation was also there)? Is "COM1" really obvious to a computer newbie? Or is this a case of someone who knows Windows and expects Linux to be _exactly_ like Windows, even to this fine level of detail? I would guess so. Notice that he even claims that "/dev/tty0" is "archaic". Why? Why not call it "more descriptive than 'COM1'"? Because unfamiliar = bad, period, that's why.

Unfortunately, this is a real problem for Linux. Even if it's kind of silly, Windows is what people expect to see when they boot up Linux (or a Mac, or any other computer). If they don't see it, they're confused.