“Can the ordinary computer user ditch Windows for Linux? The question came up when I decided that my six-year-old version of Microsoft’s Windows operating system had to be replaced. My Sony Vaio computer was still too young for the trash heap. And I was hesitant to spend $200 on the Windows XP operating system, especially with Microsoft planning to launch XP’s replacement, Vista, in January. So, I decided to give the operating systems that run on Linux technology a try.”
“In the end, I decided to buy an upgrade copy of Windows XP for $100. That normally wouldn’t be a good idea since it doesn’t upgrade the file system. But it’s a good solution until Vista arrives.”
I thought that if you had an upgrade version of windows, you could do a fresh install providing you inserted an “original” windows disc during the install process.
Just boot off the CD and do a regular install, and it’ll prompt you for your old media. It just goes to show how “tech savy” the author of this “review” is. That would also explain his difficulty and his lack of understanding that Linux isn’t Windows, and that there would be a learning curve involved. Whatever works best for him, I suppose.
Though I’m a long-time Linux user, I can clearly see the validity of most of the user’s complaints in this article.
However, I’m not sure where along the line in the last decade or so users began to get the idea that everyone can (or should) switch to Linux?
There are different reasons for different people when trying something new or evaluating whether or not they can do their jobs better w/ something different. For most people, the PC they buy at Your Local Computer Store, pre-loaded w/ Windows is more than sufficient for everyday tasks.
This user is like most people who have bought a PC in the last 10+ years – they’re used to Windows.
In Windows you need specific drivers for devices and it can take just as much manual trial & error to get a fresh Windows install to work correctly on the same exact hardware. However, mfg’s are making drivers and supporting software specifically for Windows due to its market dominance.
If Linux were the dominant OS in the retail PC market you could easily see the situation reversed and there would be people out there trying to get Windows to run acceptably on their computers.
Okay okay, I am as linux fan as the next guy but Saying that “If linux were the dominant OS … would be people trying to get Windows to run acceptably on their computers” says NOTHING.
That said I think I should disclaimer that I have a “WinTendo” (as I like to call my games-only windows install, an Arch Linux and a FreeBSD in my system (Arch for my everyday work and FreeBSD to test some applications I develop) so NO, I am not by any measure a Windows advocate.
But it makes no sense saying that statement above.. is like sayin “If Germany had just made 3 goals that game then they’d be the last Soccer World Cup champion”.
Ok, I have to admit that I am brazillian and talking about Soccer World Cups are fun for me… hope I don’t get modded down for that, for the argument is still valid.
The statement wasn’t necessarily meant to be taken literally. The point was simply that, Linux is more than capable and is a wonderful piece of software engineering. If it dominated the market as Micorosft Windows does today, it could have the same level of 3rd party support that Windows has today.
The market has not yet turned in favor of Linux on the desktop unfortunately, so we see more hardware incompatibility and quirkiness than there should be given the full capability of the Linux kernel and it’s respective desktop environments.
One thing noobs who are dial up need to consider when switching to Linux. Make sure your pc has serial ports because USB modems are still a problem as are most internal modems. Serial modems are still the easiest way to go.
Serial modems yes, but not winmodems which are the most common kind. Easiest method for me was to connect ADSL modem via ethernet (I use pppoeconf script with modem in bridge mode), while it is even easier to set it up in router mode.
It’s a fair review. Linux distros and applications are not perfect or interact well with commercial closed source and closed protocols applications. But that is not because of FOSS developers, but from Microsoft, Apple and others, that make all what’s necessary to prevent FOSS alternatives to be compatible. I find it sad that people are still locked in those products, and they only harm us free software supporters.
About multimedia applications, well, if you buy products or services specifically designed for Apple or Microsoft it’s your fault. Go bitch anywere else.
Considering that the most prevalent types of music players on the market are either ipods or WM type players, and that there is no alternative if you want to play DRM’ed music, your comments are nonconstructive, as well as closeminded and typical of the types of comments that new linux users hear all the time. And please don’t say don’t buy DRM’ed music, that’s just infantile
He never said “don’t buy DRM’ed music” but so what if he did? Emusic.com sells non-DRM’ed music for approx. twenty US cents per song on their most basic subscription. This music works just fine on any hardware or software that can play normal MP3 encoded files. Emusic is only one example, too. There is absolutely no need to buy DRM’ed music unless you want to support consumer lock-out. I’m not saying “don’t buy DRM’ed music” either, but I personally don’t because I don’t need to when there are better, less closed, legal alternatives.
And I’ve never seen a music player or jukebox software on the market that ONLY plays DRM’ed music, for that matter. Any player available, even the notoriously DRM-friendly Windows Media Player, can play non-DRM’ed music. It would be far more accurate to say that only CERTAIN players can play DRM’ed music. I believe you are the one being close-minded.
And please don’t say don’t buy DRM’ed music, that’s just infantile
Well, i think RMS should make another sign:
Don’t buy from Apple/Microsoft
enemy of your freedom
😉
Edited 2006-05-16 10:43
That doesn’t make a lot of sense, seeing as apple/microsoft didn’t create the need for DRM on music and movies, the studios and labels did
Not at all slamming the guy, but he should have researched the distro better that he chose. If he were going to go through the trouble of really writting a review, then he should have seeked advice from others in the Linux community, stating what he needed, and what he was looking for. There are distros out there that are multimedia “ready”, since he didn’t feel like he should have to install anything himself (even though he’d have to on Windows). I applaud his willingness to try Linux, but he was lazy in his approach.
I take a more cynical line. I think he was looking specifically to debunk it. Read between the lines and you will see the clear Windows bias.
Sticking it on a Vaio was a good way of doing that.
“Sticking it on a Vaio was a good way of doing that.”
I disagree with that. Sony Vaio is well supported under Linux.
Really? Perhaps I’m misinformed. Though the article itself does say that some parts of the Vaio hardware are not well supported.
These days, video hardware not working properly (beyond, perhaps, lack of 3D hardware acceleration) is a pretty embarassing showstopper.
I will say that I have never had a real problem running it on a Vaio, but maybe I got lucky.
In my experience the performance of any Unix-like system varies widely according to distribution, even on the same hardware.
On this laptop SuSE 10.0 works wonderfully, FreeBSD 6.0 works apart from suspend modes and the wireless, and NetBSD 3.0 wouldn’t even boot properly. Gentoo and Debian (more or less) work fine on my desktop, Solaris fails miserably on both but dislikes my laptop less. (Weird!)
Once you have an OS that can be sourced from multiple suppliers, it’s much more like the tired old metaphor of buying a car. Any car, from all but the criminally negligent, gets you from A to B; but some are a joy, some are noisy, some drink petrol/gas, and some are a real pain. And not everyone will agree which is which.
Perhaps but, I have to ask one simple question — what versions of these distros did he try? I don’t know what version are contained in the “…For Dummies” books but, I would imagine that they are not the latest and greatest. For example, a quick look on Amazon show the 6th edition is available (7th edition will be out May 22). In it, it lists Fedora Core 3 as one of the systems on the DVD. Perhaps, if he had been able to get a more recent version of one of those distros, his experience would have been better.
Indeed, the Vaio is VERY well supported under Linux. As is the Lenovo (IBM) Thinkpad.
/2 cents
I stuck Ubuntu on my Vaio and everything worked just fine out of the box. I have had poor performance with the touchpad as I couldn’t seperately configure its sensetivity and a USB mouse.
I also haven’t not gotten my Netgear wireless to work but typically just use a wired connection.
>>I stuck Ubuntu on my Vaio and everything worked just fine out of the box. I have had poor performance with the touchpad as I couldn’t seperately configure its sensetivity and a USB mouse.
I also haven’t not gotten my Netgear wireless to work but typically just use a wired connection.
Everything worked just fine… then you list two things that didn’t work right… RIGHT. Dee Dee Dee.
I own an almost 3 years old Sony Vaio desktop. In its original state everything but the softmodem was supported by almost every linux distro.
It was when I upgrade the graphics and sound card that I began to have problems. Now everything is supported again.
Lack of research!?! THIS ARTICLE WAS HIS RESEARCH.
HE TRIED 6 DISTROS! WTF do you expect? Go to distrowatch and track down 100000 pages of documentation on 500 distros????
Some of the posters on this thread are the same ID10Ts slamming XP and OS X (and some even BSD) on threads about non-Linux OS’s telling everyone how much better Linux is; when if FACT XP OSX and BSD are the BETTER CHOICE for some users.
Nothing is a better choice for some users.
Yes, Fuji, lack of research. I’ll try to make it easy for you (since you felt unable to have a rational debate without resorting to name calling). If you’re in the job market for a vehicle, do you just go to one dealer’s lot, without knowing what type of vehicle you’re wanting, and just pick something on that lot? Or, do you have an idea of what you’re wanting to buy, and what features you’re looking for in the car? Do you research the reviews on the various models of the style you’re looking for, and see what features they have? Do you run a CarFax report on it (looks up history on the car)?
Fact is, I run XP as well as Linux, and I have no problem with XP. In fact, if you looked at my history on here, I’m not someone that is on the “bash MS bandwagon”.
Choosing some CD’s that came with a book without researching if they could do what he wanted it to do is being lazy, or perhaps naive.
So tell me, how exactly did he research the distros that he chose to make sure that it would accomplish what he wanted? I’m looking forward to seeing some more “WTF” and “ID1OT” responses from you.
Yes, OMRebel, lack of research.
Spin it how you like. There are enough Linux users around here you’ll continue to get modded up.
Someone tries six distros on a machine and lists issues he had. That *is* research. Because you don’t like the conclusion: “Linux is not for newbies” does not mean his methods were flawed. So actual experience using six distros; buying a book on the subject; and speaking with with different companies and developers of certain distros/applications apparently is NOT research. He did all of this. What are you an ID10T (don’t want to disappoint). SO AGAIN; no matter how you spin it YOU ARE DEAD WRONG no matter how many of your little buddies mod you up (or mod me down) it does not change a damn thing.
He wasn’t writing a research paper for professionals. He’s an average user writing an article for other average users and what they may expect from downloading and installing some of the more mainstream distros. He even stated that some of the issues could be (maybe) overcome if someone intended to spend a lot more time (more research), though the representatives of some distros and apps told him he was SOL in some cases.
Again, WTF (hope your happy, agian I don’t want to disappoint) did you expect? You never answered. What would you have someone tell newbies in his situation. Please enlighten us. After you provide some answers, please explain why this is a better choice. And remember use real merits that average users care about not philosophical BS that you *think* average users should care about. And please tell us what “real” research is because I was under the impression he did OK.
Not just lack of research. I’m saying lack of substance of any kind.
Read the article, he did buy a book, he did try 6 distro’s. The 6 he tried came with the book, and through his own ommision was out of date.
He’s told the later version of OpenOffice is more compatible, does he try it, NO. He finds two documents that don’t work, Is that one in every 5/50/5000. Was it a quick fix to make it work, or was it the fonts where different.
Is there any contrast/comparison with the upgrade between 98? and XP and that of Linux. Whats better whats worse. What about ease of installation. All I know is someone who can’t type convert D: /fs:ntfs and yet the filesytem is his major problem with the upgrade, and yet he manages to install not One but six distributions, and Old ones at that.
He actually contacts these people to talk about last years distribution.
And then there is DRM, that is DVD’s and lets face it iTunes, why don’t these work. I’m pretty sure the reason is covered in his Book. I’m pretty sure that the
answer to these are not just all over then net. Really the answers are not that tricky. I might learn why non of his tunes will work in 2-5 years time.
And then there is the cost(I would say comparison), $200 for XP, which becomes $100 for the upgrade, and he sort of does cost comparison, but doesn’t $30 For the book + $40 for Crossover(Not Wine or some visualization) + $40 to play encrypten DVD’s. Sudenly Windows XP Upgrade is cheaper. Its like he sat down and thought of the most expensive way of doing things and did that, or didn’t.
I have 98 next to me, I know that without me installing a codec pack is won’t play and video’s. I also know It won’t play DVD’s unless I install a 3rd party program for it to play DVD’s. I know for certain I can’t edit any Office application, without buying Office. I know I will have to download iTunes, Apple Quicktime, Adobe Acrobat, and to some extent Learn these. I know that not everything works between 98/XP, I know that the drivers for his computer will be years out of date, and he will have to search the web for these, inculding his ipod / printer, as well as the stuff insude his computer.
He did the least work possible to bang out an article, knew what didn’t work before hand becuase its common knowledge and focused on that.
You’re having problems grasping the concepts correctly. “Trial and Error” is something different than “Research”. “Research” takes place before you being a project, and it involves looking up specifications, asking questions, etc.. “Trial and Error” is what takes place AFTER you do your “Research”, and is the process of working on the project. This really isn’t rocket science we’re talking about here. If you were raised in the US, then surely you’ve had to perform a science fair experiment. And, if so, then you know I’m right in that research was not performed. Just an experiment.
He only asked questions once he began installing the distros that came with his CD’s. Again, not a difficult concept. Research takes place BEFORE the project has begun.
Linux is not for newbies, in most cases, to tackle on by themselves. They will require assistance (just like the author needed). However, take a look at what the author did at the end. He decided to run an upgrade on a ’98 (or was it a ME?) machine because he felt that he didn’t want to shell out the money to buy a full XP CD. Again, if the author had done any research on installing XP, he would have realized something that he was wrong about. You can perform a fresh install of Windows XP on a computer with a XP Upgrade CD, as long as you have a valid CD of a previous version. This was a Windows Newbie mistake on his part of not knowing that.
As far as your question, what did I expect? I’d expect for a “review” to actually get published, that the person writting it would actually know what he was talking about. This wasn’t the case. He neither knew much about Linux, nor did he know much about Windows. For such a review to be complete, he would need to finish the article on how his upgrade went, and the time it took him on that. That did not happen. But, I can tell you from experience that he probably spent about 5 hours upgrading XP. All he had to do from the start was to go to a linux forum (not distro specific), list his machine specs, and what he was wanting his machine to do “out of the box” (so to say), and the community would have pointed him towards a distro that would have worked for him. I’d say it would have taken about 15 minutes to find a linux forum, register to post, and make his post. Then, he could have come back an hour later, found an answer for a distro that would have accomplished what he wanted. Did he actively seek out this information before he tried to switch to Linux? No, he did not. He had a book, that contained 6 distros, and he decided that was enough.
But, therein lies a problem with Linux. Too many distros. I can understand how it would confuse users who have no computer knowledge, and don’t know there’s a thing called “forums” out on the Internet to ask questions on.
For this particular author, Windows is probably his best option, because of a couple of reasons:
1. He is comfortable with it, and WANTS Windows. Reading the review, he was wanting something that worked like Windows, and worked with this Windows programs. That is not what Linux is.
2. He has very poor knowledge when it comes to computers to begin with. From reading the article, he doesn’t know much at all about Windows, a system that he has always used (see his claim that he couldn’t perform a fresh install with a Upgrade CD).
3. He was not wanting to change. If someone were truly wanting to make the change, then it’s obvious that he would have to learn something different. He didn’t want to bother with that.
Now, I have never gotten into any philosophic discussions on Linux. Computers are tools that I use. I don’t invest my life in them, nor do I feel some sort of bond with a computer. I don’t have a vision of a great society being united by a OS, and daisies blooming because of the GPL, etc.. I use what works best for the tasks that I aim to accomplish. None of my posts have anything to do with the philosophical movement of Linux. But, nice attempt.
The bottom line is this. The author is naive, didn’t do his research before he began his project, didn’t invest any time in working out any of his problems, and it was obvious that he just wanted an upgraded Windows from the start of the article. I simply don’t see why this was viewed as “news”. I could write an article, I suppose, on how my 5 year old nephew uses a computer loaded with Ubuntu for his Nickelodean (sp?) games, but what would that prove? Is my 5 year old nephew smarter than the author of this article? No. Does this mean that Linux is perfect for newbies? No. Does this mean that Linux is simple enough for a 5 year old to get on the Internet and play games? Well, yes, it does.
But, back to the larger picture. This “review” is just FUD.
PS – I am typing this on a Windows XP Pro machine (but using FireFox of course!), so you can hold back that “zealot” comment that’s been rattling around inside your head.
PSS – I hope wherever you’re employed, that your boss never asks you to do any research for a project. Your job could be in jeopardy.
His research was adequate for his intended purpose: To described the Linux desktop replacing Windows experience from the viewpoint of noob Windows users.
Real world trial-and-error is research. I’m sure you could study France in countless books, but until you just go there for yourself you have not experienced it. He was describing his experience; not theory on operating systems 101. I can link to a hundred different definitions and types of “research” but any good definition also deals with context and does not apply across the board. So if we go ahead and use your definition, I concede – he lacked it. But I would then add it was not required warranted or needed for his purpose. He accurately depicted the experience to be expected from average noobs that decide to give a popular Linux distro a try. His story is like countless others on folks who tried Linux and it didn’t cut it. Yes, many of these people could perform “research” and overcome any of the issues they may have, but these are average users who WILL USE trial and error and not even consider doing what your strict definition of “research” entails. I’ve used Linux off and on since Slackware came of floppies and still use Linux today (and OS X and BSD). I have been very productive with all three OS’s as well as BeOS and OS/2 in the past. According to your definition of the term; I have never done research on any of them.
Fair enough.
Unfortunately, choosing a Linux distro is part of the problem.
For users such as the Author, too many choices will only confuse them, especially when evaluation requires a greater technical understanding.
This yet another area where complete operating systems such as OS X, the BSDs, Solaris, and even Windows are easier choices to make for new users venturing into a new operating system. Consistency can be worth more than the sum of some Linux distro’s parts, especially when new users try to seek appropriate contextual help.
“This yet another area where complete operating systems such as OS X, the BSDs, Solaris, and even Windows are easier choices to make for new users venturing into a new operating system.”
OSX would not work for the author, as he’d have to purchase another computer to try it out. In fact, I think that’s one of the things that is holding Apple back from gaining a large market share. I, for one, would purchase OSX if it ran on my machine. Because I have put a substantial investment in my computer (it is a well above average PC), I’m not gonna go out and buy a new computer anytime in the near future. I’m not familiar enough with BSD or Solaris to comment on those though.
Despite the problems with the review that others have stated here (and that I agree with), he did at least say that he would continue trying Xandros or some other distro in order to work out the problems he had. So he seems to actually want to use it. Who knows, maybe he’ll be convinced after a month or two.
I know I swore more than a couple of times that Linux ‘wasn’t ready’ when I was a noob.
True enough. I have experience of friends who went back to it pretty quickly after writing it off.
Of course, one in particular tried to jump in at the deep end and use Gentoo! He’s now happy on Ubuntu, which he got from his Dad 🙂
I use Gentoo, and love it, but (no disrespect to my mate JP or any other noob), I know what I’m doing, or at least enough to Gentoo happily.
Still learning, though.
The author’s perspective was from the point of view that Windows is the standard OS, so Linux should be graded solely on how interacts with Windows and Microsoft formats.
I suppose a lot of people take that view, so they will appreciate the article. But I use primarily Linux and am frustrated with how poorly Windows interacts with me.
Sure but almost everyone view Windows as the standard OS. Even though osnews is dominated by loud Linux fans you never see them outside of OS forums. At least not where I live.
So basically you are saying, that the experts (those who know) are using GNU/Linux and the newbies (those without a clue) are using Windows?
In that case we can conclude you consider GNU/Linux to be the best operating system atm.
I don’t see WHY the linux community (of which unfortunately I am part of just because I use a very good piece of software) has to be so immature.
Now we mod down the guy (Grand Parent) who just said the TRUTH ? Is he breaking any OS News rules by saying that windows IS the Standard OS in the market these days ?
Even if we could mod down lies (which we cannot by the rules) … IS HE LYING ???? I for one think that 90% of the desktop market share is kinda like being a de facto standard… perhaps I am wrong.
It just bother me that the OSNews trolls are getting bigger… and now they learned to use the mod system… at least our trolls are smart.
My Apologies to Dylan’s Mr Jones to replying to his post with this rant, since he is not at fault (or I cannot say he is at least) for this modding down. I just felt I’d like to say that, even being a Linux Fan, I am forced to agree with the grand parent post.
… but a great article nonetheless. I am very happy to see that this guy was open-minded, pretty objective and did a lot of research. I feel some things were missing from the article though, and I sent him an email. Namely:
– the list of the distros (he mentions a few of them, but not all six if I’m not mistaken)
– the version numbers (yes it’s important… OpenOffice2’s office format support cannot be compared to the 1.x series)
– the age and model of his laptop
Yes, all technical details, but without them, I’m kind of left nowhere to be able to determine the possible causes of his problems.
For me, though, using the Linux systems didn’t make sense. I often send documents and spreadsheets between my home PC and the one at work, which uses Microsoft Office. And the files are sometimes complex. Meanwhile, for both personal and professional computer use, I want access to all multimedia functions.
That paragraph summed up desktop Linux’s single biggest problem and dilemma. Not only does the software need to be worked on, and distributors need to make the OS a coherent whole like Windows, but there is a strategic game at foot.
How do you get the software out there, and in enough of a critical mass, to ensure that people stop sending Office documents and start sending ODF ones? How do you make sure that open formats that work well on any system are used at the expense of proprietary ones like Windows Media and Real on the internet? How do you ensure that this ball gets rolling and starts a snowball effect, supporting desktop Linux in a non-linear, upward, fashion as it rolls?
Unless that strategy is worked out and those questions are answered, you can forget desktop Linux being used in more of a widespread way than it is now. Most distributors seem to think that the answer is running around frantically trying to provide limited and unreliable support for Windows Media (cementing its position even further in the process!) and Microsoft Office files. Unfortunately, that is treating the symptoms rather than providing a cure, and will ensure that desktop Linux really never amounts to anything.
Edited 2006-05-15 22:50
How do you get the software out there, and in enough of a critical mass, to ensure that people stop sending Office documents and start sending ODF ones? How do you make sure that open formats that work well on any system are used at the expense of proprietary ones like Windows Media and Real on the internet? How do you ensure that this ball gets rolling and starts a snowball effect, supporting desktop Linux in a non-linear, upward, fashion as it rolls?
OpenOffice supports MS Office documents very well so you don’t really need to worry about people switching to ODF. As far as media formats, realplayer is available for Linux and is better than the Windows version in my opinion. Most formats don’t even play out of the box on a Windows machine anyway. In fact I would wager that most Linux distros support more formats out of the box than the XP upgrade the author finally settled on.
As far as media formats, realplayer is available for Linux and is better than the Windows version in my opinion. Most formats don’t even play out of the box on a Windows machine anyway. In fact I would wager that most Linux distros support more formats out of the box than the XP upgrade the author finally settled on.
How many DRM’d formats does Linux support, and how many will it support in the future? And more importantly, for the ones it does support, how big of a pain in the ass is it to get them up and running and communicating with portable devices, especially the ones that only work on WMP10 on the Windows side?
The idea of DRM’d media formats might be irrelavent to the overzealous Stallmanites out there, but to Generation iPod, such a thing is very relavent.
Edited 2006-05-15 23:17
and for some reason i hope that “generation ipod” gets hit with a big dose of natural selection very soon…
[rant] I can see OSNews mod system being put to a whole lot of misuse these days… shame [/rant]
They already have. It’s called “joining the workforce”. If they’ve got an ipod and they’re using iTunes, chances are that they have a job that allows them enough discretionary income to be able to make those purchases, along with the computer that goes with them. That they chose differently than you or I might makes not difference.
Sure, a number of them probably recieved some, part, or all of the components required to make an ipod work as gifts, but I’d be willing to stake money that it’s a smaller percentage than you’d think.
“The idea of DRM’d media formats might be irrelavent to the overzealous Stallmanites out there, but to Generation iPod, such a thing is very relavent.”
Au contraire: DRM’d media is very relevant to Stallman, which is why he spends a lot of time campaigning against it, and rightly so. Instead of people complaining about how some system they’re evaluating doesn’t interact with various corporate agendas (highly restrictive “copy protection”, patented “standards” and so on), perhaps they should stop and question those agendas for a change.
The problem with Stallman is that there doesn’t seem to be any middle ground for him: It’s either completely open — or he’s opposed. He seems to want to ignore the commercial implications to content owners (ie. movie studios, record copanies, etc). You’re never going to make progress with content owners when you take an attitude like that. They’re going to ignore you. They own the content. They’re not going to relent without “some” kind of protection. I think that Stallman and others are missing the boat. What they should be focusing on is a royalty-free, general-purpose DRM mechanism that would work across closed and open platforms. I think that Stallman could make a very strong argument that making content available across many platforms would expand these companies financial prospects. But, instead, what’s happening is that DRM has become fractured, with various companies taking their own, differing approaches (iTunes, WM, etc).
Which misses the point. WrkNMan’s post made no judgements (That I could see) as to whether DRM was good or bad. Personally, I can’t stand DRM, and I prefer to buy CDs and rip them rather than deal with it.
DRM support for Linux, however, is going to be important to a greal deal of users. If their favorite device isn’t supported in linux because of the lack of DRM support, it’s going to be a strike against Linux in their minds. That they shouldn’t be supporting crippling their own media in the first place won’t matter to them.
[i]How many DRM’d formats does Linux support, and how many will it support in the future?<.i>
hopefully, NONE.
your post seems to show that you think DRM is a good thing, are you retarded or something ?
Formats using DRM is simply another way to destroy one of YOUR liberties.
As a side note, do you think the Bush administration is doing a good job on its “war on terror” and more so, do you think it will win ?
your post seems to show that you think DRM is a good thing, are you retarded or something ?
Whether I think it’s good or bad is not realy relavent. What is relavent is that unless people get smart and stop stealing the content, then the consumer DRM is only going to increase. And if you want desktop Linux to increase in marketshare, you’re gonna have to get this shit working in Linux and make it easily accessible too. If not, then Generation iPod will ask you, “Can I get xyz DRM’d device working in Linux?” And if the answer is no, that’s pretty much the end of the discussion. You can try to convince them that DRM is going to destroy the universe, but if they can’t watch Spiderman 3 in hi-def, it’s probably not going to matter. Of course, some people are happy with the userbase Linux has, but I know many are not. They have this dillusion that Generation iPod is going to wake up someday and grow some brains. But if rootkits installed on their computer via a copy-protected audio CD wasn’t enough to convince them, then I don’t know what else will.
As a side note, do you think the Bush administration is doing a good job on its “war on terror” and more so, do you think it will win ?
I don’t know and I don’t know.
One of the things I didn’t like about this article is the unequal comparison he used.
His VAIO was pre-loaded by someone from Sony with all drivers, all software and all extras. Had he tried to do this himself, starting with Windows, he would have found the challenge just as daunting.
I think that’s what many who do comparisons seem to miss is that Windows for the most part is preloaded for most users. The majority of Joe Users aren’t installing their own systems; Dell or HP or in this case Sony has prepackaged the system.
Which to me makes Linux look a lot better because on his own he was able to load most of his system himself (sans video and sound).
“I think that’s what many who do comparisons seem to miss is that Windows for the most part is preloaded for most users. The majority of Joe Users aren’t installing their own systems; Dell or HP or in this case Sony has prepackaged the system.
Which to me makes Linux look a lot better because on his own he was able to load most of his system himself (sans video and sound).”
True, except that everyone must agree that getting most drivers for windows is definetly easier that finding the same for linux. not to mention possible license issues…
Yes, but looking at it from Joe User’s point of view, collecting drivers isn’t an easy task.
Video
Sound
Chipset
Network (ethernet)
Network (wireless)
Touchpad
Modem
Printer
Scanner
Quite a list isn’t it?
Is Joe User going to have the patience to go through and install all these?
finding drivers for linux is not a difficult task. they are almost all included on the install media, except for proprietary video drivers from ATI/Nvidia, you just download them from your distro repository and it will be set up after download automagically, or download binary from manufacturer website, and install… what so hard about those 2 ways.
as to licensing issues on drivers, what you talking about ?
The thing is that you most of the time don’t even have to install any drivers, everything is installed, except on nvidia or ati-drivers perhaps, where with windows I had to put in several disks, or find a lot of drivers on the net to get it to work (if you want the newer versions, but to go on the net I needed ethernet drivers for windows, then you’re telling me that windows supports more?
If you have a vaio pre-installed with linux, you’re most likely gonna have drm-support, since they can get a licence for it. Compare two pre-installed systems, and you might get a fair comparison, or compare two self-made systems.
not necessarily, as most drivers for linux are included as part of the standard kernel. it’s only if you want to use proprietary or rather esoteric stuff that you need to look elsewhere (and even that process has been considerably dumbed down the last few years).
example, I tried re-installing windowsXP (with a dell disk I believe) on a dell latitude d610. farkin’ pain in the posterior in that very little worked fresh from the install, including networking to allow to go to dell’s unwieldly site to find their drivers (no, I didn’t have the driver disk from dell)… pop in a suse linux set, voila, working computer. dig a little further with that install (linux) and you can even enable things that windows on that machine won’t do (that I’m aware of) such as simulating a mouse wheel on the touchpad.
yes, the comparison isn’t quite fair in that linux distros are continually being refreshed with new kernels which means greater hardware support than windows 2001 (XP) could possibly have in a virgin install. but then, isn’t that another reason why the dynamic linux model could be considered superior to the ultra static windows one?
You can boot from an upgrade CD and (xp anyways) will ask you to put in a copy of 98/me or windows 2k so it can make sure you are qualified for the upgrade, then itll proceed and you can do a clean installation. I did this not long ago.
And what do you mean about upgrading the filesystem? Converting it from fat32 to NTFS? If thats the case, then 2k/XP come with a utility called “convert”.
Simply click on start->run->type in ‘cmd’
in the cmd window type ‘convert c: /FS:NTFS’ then hit enter. It will tell you, if I remember correctly, that the volume is in use and that it will be converted on the next reboot. Just reboot the machine and before windows finishes booting up, convert will run and change the file system type to NTFS. Depending on the speed of the machine and size of the drive it can take a few minutes.
so if the author reads this, you may want to do that or just do a clean installation.
Edited 2006-05-15 23:53
Even though I thought it would be a pro-Windows pro-Microsoft article, I managed to read it all and I think the author did a good job, mainly when he requested the support from the Linux companies — they really enriched the article.
I contend that Linux is not THERE yet, but it’s as THERE as it can, now.
Actually I enjoy it when die hard Windows users try to use Linux for the first time, because it means that Linux is reaching them already. It’s just a question of time before they will be able to switch to Linux for good, because every feedback makes Linux stronger.
no way. windows users are used to be walked by the hand. bill gates have them trained that way, you know it’s like saying dance monkey dance. they want the simplicity of installing software,drivers ,etc.
what is more simple than opening Synaptic, click the software app or driver that you want, clicking apply, then waiting a few seconds ?
research things before comment please
Users shouldn’t even have to know what drivers are. It should “Just Work”
Not correct.
Users of cars shouldn’t know what the “speeder” is, or the “brake” or the “coupling”.
People shouldn’t know about “fuel” or “tires” or “speed limits” – it should “Just Work”.
They shouldn’t know about “Coffee Powder”, or “Water” – it should “Just Work”.
They shouldn’t know about “Food”, “Electricity”, “Fire”, “Storm”, “Sunshine”, “UV rays” … it all should “Just Work”.
They shouldn’t know about “Breathing” or “Walking” or “Taking Responsibility For Own Actions” – it should “Just Work”.
WTF happened to “Rule No. 1 – Learn How To Use The f–king Tool” ?
BTW: I want to file a bug against the Human Body. No matter what I do I still cannot fly by waving my arms. And when I put my hand inside the fire, it hurts. I don’t want that! Damn f–king lazy developers!!!!
. o O ( Just Another Glimpse Of A World Where Error 40 Is The Ruling Error )
“WTF happened to “Rule No. 1 – Learn How To Use The f–king Tool” ?”
While I don’t disagree completely, you shouldn’t have to learn to read/write code to use an operating system. An operating system should ease/speed the tasks for the users. Learning to program C is not a good use of time, say for example, a graphic artist.
In keeping with one of your analogies, you don’t become a mechanical/chemical/electrical engineer just to learn to buy a car and operate it efficiently.
As you can see, the difference is not the ability or desire to learn, only to learn what? Learning to use and learning to build are, or should be, two completely different skill sets.
Learning to use and learning to build are, or should be, two completely different skill sets.
When I looked at the gp that you replied to, it read to me that hes saying just that – learn your tool.
A car driver does not need to know how to build the car, but (s)he does need to know about gas, oil, driving conditions, etc.
Same with operatings systems – the user needs to learn how to use the operating system.
As has been pointed out several times, the original author did not really learn to use the operating systems – either MS Windows or Linux, otherwise, he would have answered several of his questions or showing some of his lack of MS Windows knowledge even before writing the article.
windows users are used to be walked by the hand.
You’re absolutely right about that. But it’s even worse, and not totally Microsoft’s fault. Sadly, many in our society (USA at least, and probably others) have adopted the notion that technical knowledge is beneath them.
I remember complaining to someone about “HTML email” and was shocked to realize she was actually PROUD that she “didn’t understand a single thing” I said. Proud?! of ignorance!
Earlier, I was trying to help some secretary with a word processor problem and was surprised to realize she was offended that I expected her to know whether she was using Word or WordPerfect.
I’ve found these are not isolated, odd events, but common. Being an engineer, I know that the very best things in life are technical. But I dare not share the best gems with just anyone or they will resent me. This is the environment in which Microsoft’s “you don’t need to know” style of hiding-the-truth-with-wizards has flourished.
A thread on Linux that COULD be exploited for OSX XP BSD “zealots” to come and trash Linux is virtually void of the type of behavior LINUX USERS at OSNews seems to practice in when articles are posted about other OS’s.
I think we know where the true “zealots” are.
yes, there is one talking in the post above this ^^^
Its just like the work I did at University, bit of cut and paste, retards guide to get it going, and a couple of e-mails to my friends who got off there arses.
As I can gather the articles not comparing Linux the experience vs Microsoft experience. He’s comparing XP vs Linux the OS with Microsoft on Top. Things like iTunes, WMP, Outlook, Excel, Word, Apple Quicktime, DVD player.
Its why there is no mention of version numbers, Its why other that openoffice(version whatever) no other application is mentioned. Which Media player?
The article is correct, when moving between windows98? and Linux+X+Desktop+Native Apps your not just changing the OS you have to change everything.
I want just once some serious journalism something that informs the readers.
Day 1 – Book out of date, ordered one from Ubuntu for free, and burnt a couple Discs.
Day 2 – Joined a LUG
Day 3 – Got a Hard Drive and Caddy did a fresh install(sweet), Bought compatible Wi-Fi card $20
Day 4 – Wow so much is free, and spyware safe, tried K3B, amoraK, Xine(BOB at the Lug got my DVD’s working)
Day 5 – iPod didn’t work installed iPodLinux now playing Doom.
Day 6 – OpenOffice not bad. Got Wine up and running that should help compatabily.
Day 7 – Been on the Forums, and IRC, and Newsgroups, Linux Documentation Project. I’ve had most niggles resolved, BOB releaved.
Day 7 – Conclusion – Lot of effort, but rewarding in many ways.
I Strongly agree with most you said about the reviewers way to “review” it but…
come on…. a User should not have to join a LUG or Search Forums IRC and Newsgroup nor TLDP.
Not saying they should not seek for help, but the Help (as in documentation and FAQ’s) should be available to him with the distribution, in a printer friendly format like PDF.
And if too much thing is needed in a “FAQ” then something is wrong… for the Average Joe User…
things are just right for <STRONG>ME</STRONG> in linux though.
The wrong word there is NEED.
No user needs to install Linux, XP is good enough.
So why I mention LUG’s or IRC, Newsgroups, Forums is that a key advantage is computing is a less solitary activity anymore. Your not battling with something on your own. People want a computer to do a task but don’t know that there computer can.
1) Find aliens
2) Play vinyl records
3) Become a games console
4) Record TV shows
5) Pray Bridge
6) Tell the temperature
7) Copy ringtones to your phone
I was writing the list, and I thought wow, who wouldn’t want to do that. Why would I try linux, to get out there and meet people who will show me more that 1% of what I can do with my machine.
As for actually learning something, everybody likes learning, as long as it doesn’t cut into there commitments
The problem with the article is that the author makes the move but wants everything to stay the same. I want him to tell me everything is different, and the reasons to change are.
1) Socially
2) New and exiting things
3) Learn about my computer
4) Understand Propriaty Formats, DRM etc.
5) Satisfaction
Why would I suggest someone try linux, becuase its 100 times the the fun you will ever get from a Microsoft Platform. Not becuase its more stable, malware free, modern, easily upgradable, everything out of the box etc etc
The reality is why would you switch if all you did was connect your ipod, send a couple of articles to work, and watch movies on it. I’m not even sure why he upgraded to XP.
Never..
I installed Kubuntu (actually, the distro doesn’t matter) to my father and he’s really happy with it.
He’s not able to install Windows or Linux, and the final result is the same for him, I still don’t get why people treat “normal” users as if they were able to install Windows.
Actually, if a normal user follow the documentation, he would probably be able to install any operating system he wants.
Actually, if a normal user follow the documentation, he would probably be able to install any operating system he wants.
Except then he wouldn’t be a normal user anymore.
He’s not able to install Windows or Linux, and the final result is the same for him, I still don’t get why people treat “normal” users as if they were able to install Windows
My experience exactly. Actually, that’s not simple “people” that think that, but Windows power-users. Even casual users of Windows (like the people I switched to Linux) use Linux just as easily as Windows, if not more easily.
There were already several articles about people switched to Linux. You see the difference, because, being computer illiterate, they are helped by knowledgeable Linux people.
With these kind of articles, the author has to do everything on its own. He got pretty far, despite the inevitable Windows bias, which is a good point for the state of Linux desktop.
It comes down to always the same problems : closed media formats that we can’t legally play, reluctant ISV for apps and reluctant hardware manufacturers for drivers.
None of this can be solved by FOSS alone in a short span of time.
Given what was accomplished in the short life of the Linux desktops, I think FOSS is pretty well doing : most of the remaining problems are not in the hands of FOSS devs anymore. Now they can concentrate on more drivers, more tools, niche but importants parts : accessibility consolidation for example.
A pretty good if rather depressing article. The gist seems to be that if Linux is not as easy to get running as Windows, does not enjoy the same level of hardware support, and does not interact 100 per cent with certain Windows apps (MS Office, e.g.) then it is not good enough for more than mundane tasks.
The problem is that Windows is not Linux. And if you just say “It’s called Linux but really it is Windows” then you are asking for the impossible.
Imho, Linux lacks persuasive and charismatic advocates from outside the tech community. Endorsements from well-known and respected people could make a lot of difference. They could tell a story that made Linux interesting and sexy to Joe User. The traditional tech-based advocacy of Linux – Microsoft bad, no viruses, FOSS, KDE vs Gnome, etc – is completely meaningless to most folks and a turn-off, I would guess. Linux needs to get way above the level at which you only find it on machines that are so cheap they are intended for folks who cannot afford a “proper” computer.
The other issue is quality control, not easy for small companies with limited resources. But they could do more to help themselves. I am typing this on Dapper. Despite being told that Dapper is in a period of polishing, hundreds of megs of updates continue to pour in for almost every file on my machine. This isn’t polishing; it is rewriting the OS at the last moment and pretty well guarantees that the final Dapper will be no more polished than the version that could have been released before Ubuntu announced a delay. You may not like commercial software houses, but they are a lot more ruthless at imposing cut-offs and dealing with situations like this.
Many of the article’s other points are to do with the perennial issues of packaging systems and multimedia. Personally I think that a big outfit like SuSE should cut through this by imposing its own system and bringing full multimedia to the table. It would require them to take a stand, perhaps, but sooner or later the successful distros are going to have to take a stand and stick to it. Passing the buck to the “community” is, again, meaningless to Joe User.
Edited 2006-05-16 08:16
cyclops… Mate what kind of dreamworld are you living in? Who the heck is going to go to ALL that trouble just to move to Linux? And why should he have too?
Think about it, just becasue your moving to Linux doesnt mean you should become more informed about how Linux works. Computers are a tool to most people mate, they jump on they write their documents, they chat, they browse, they game, they use their iPods / Cameras all that kinda stuff.
They want it to work, and they dont care how… Again why should they care how it works.
I hear lots of people talking about people need to become more informed computer users… Why? Do I need to go learn about the internals of my TV or my Guitars just to be able to watch/play get my work done? NO!
In my view the article shows exactly how its like for someone who uses windows to move to Linux, no one is going to go through all the steps you want to see when moving over.
———————–
I agree with you moleskine!
Think about it, just becasue your moving to Linux doesnt mean you should become more informed about how Linux works
Wrong. Of course you would have to inform yourself about it.
Computers are a tool to most people mate, they jump on they write their documents, they chat, they browse, they game, they use their iPods / Cameras all that kinda stuff
And despite what you think, people are not genius like you, and must learn how to do these things.
Even games have manuals to help you learn how they work.
They want it to work, and they dont care how… Again why should they care how it works
They don’t care because you are there explaining to them, but you don’t even realise it.
You forgot everything you had to learn. I don’t, having to deal with real users. Even using their digital camera needs learning.
I hear lots of people talking about people need to become more informed computer users… Why? Do I need to go learn about the internals of my TV or my Guitars just to be able to watch/play get my work done? NO!
But do these people need to go learn how to switch their TV on and off, change channels, tune them, switch to AV channel, connect cables, … ? YES.
Do people that use a guitar need to learn how to play it for it to be effective ? YES.
That’s the level we’re talking about, not the level of knowing the internals of your TV.
In my view the article shows exactly how its like for someone who uses windows to move to Linux, no one is going to go through all the steps you want to see when moving over
Actually, it’s not. It is rather a good show of how a power-user on Windows has difficulty adjusting to something else. All these steps, the power-user had to go through them on Windows. He doesn’t want to go through them again. Or he already reached some state, and he sees there is some work to reach the same state on Linux.
What is very good here, is that the same state can be attained in Linux, in far less time than it took on Windows (weeks instead of years).
was typical of what I expect from a ‘power user’ (in other words he’s mastered the brightness and contrast controls on his 14″ CRT) – he noted the two extremes linux works for, and he just happens to fall in the middle.
I’ve found that linux is entirely workable for advanced users who can do things like work from the command line (believe it or not, grandma can’t) and are willing to spend hours (if not days) dicking with downloading and ‘making’ files – at the same time it’s good for people who don’t care about graphics (you know the ones, the people who’ve run their 19″ LCD at 800×600 in 256 color mode for three years, you walk in and go Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?!?) don’t plug in devices (proprietary camera’s, scanners, bargain basement printers, etc) and think that chatting and e-mail is the be-all end-all of computer use.
It’s the semi-advanced user that’s left out in the cold; the one who has gotten used to being able to do things ‘out of the box’ or simply by running a single .exe – the ones who are used to going into any store, buying most any part and having it WORK when they get home – such users KNOW what their machine CAN do, but are easily lost doing things like “enabling repositories” or worse “tar | configure | make | make install” – much less spending time dicking with obscure and cryptic config files in even more obscure, cryptic and archaic editors like vi, nano, etc. (I was using vi in the 80’s – it sucked then)
As a desktop OS, it truly is the extremes that work – the total nube and the old hat. It’s the people in the middle who go “Why doesn’t this work, and this… and this… and how do I do this” and when you TELL them go “What dillhole designed this” and/or “Screw this, I’m going back to Windows”. The majority of people LACK THE PATIENCE to deal with:
sh NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-8756-pkg1.run -q
sax2 -r -m 0=nvidia
sh NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-8756-pkg1.run -K
Which looks at a glance like gibberish to me, and I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS… much less should it throw an error because the kernel sources aren’t present or WORSE, they have to rebuild the kernel by hand because the AGPGART or other motherboard interfaces aren’t in the distro they chose.
Sure, preloading kinda solves this – at least until they decide they want to upgrade to a new version of the OS… or use a program that is not in that distro’s repositories… or add a new external device that support isn’t present for… or add a new video card to play doom 3…
Sure Windows has security and stability issues, that’s because any idiot can install damn near anything on it – an area in which Linux makes Windows 3.1 look robust.
Linux is good for servers, good for security, good to have fun tweaking – but lands sake people be honest about it’s shortcomings. I’m often AMAZED at the hoops people are willing to jump through JUST to not use a Microsoft product, often for reasons that haven’t REALLY been true since Windows ME.
he noted the two extremes linux works for, and he just happens to fall in the middle
And lots of bright or at least helpful people are hard at work making this middle people able to use Linux more and more.
The situation didn’t change a iota since I’ve known Linux in 1999 : people still whine about this or that feature lacking, while the community is hard at work making these road blocks disappear. Only difference is that now, there are far fewer things on which to work, and they are more and more difficult to deal with.
It’s the semi-advanced user that’s left out in the cold
Actually that’s not true at all. I find that those who are left out in the cold, are those power-user of Windows, that have nearly nothing except warez on their Windows to get anything done. I’ve yet to meet one Windows user without warez on his PC, most have only that on their PC. Remove the warez, and most of them are lost.
And these power-user are very hypocritical when talking about Linux apps, as they will go through hoops a normal user would never go through, to install their warez.
Then most Windows freeware require at least reading some docs provided to use them. Look at the codecs packs (each incompatible with the other) example.
I’ve gone through all this on Windows, and the situation is still the same today. You need a good conservative $3000 more on a Windows PC to make it work like a basic download Linux distro (not even like a commercial one). I know that, because the people I switched to Linux, were ordinary users : they bought every app they needed. They have piles of software box they found unusable. None of them bought Photoshop or Office for sure. These people managed to get Office in warez, because they could’nt afford it. These are ordinary users. These people would endlessly call me, they were lef out in the cold on Windows. I even learned them how to install apps and games on Windows too, I shouldn’t have.
the one who has gotten used to being able to do things ‘out of the box’ or simply by running a single .exe – the ones who are used to going into any store, buying most any part and having it WORK when they get home – such users KNOW what their machine CAN do, but are easily lost doing things like “enabling repositories” or worse “tar | configure | make | make install” – much less spending time dicking with obscure and cryptic config files in even more obscure, cryptic and archaic editors like vi, nano, etc. (I was using vi in the 80’s – it sucked then)
Then why can’t these users go buy a Linux distro instead of compiling apps ? These are not the same as free downloaded ones, they are more complete and user-friendly.
It’s the people in the middle who go “Why doesn’t this work, and this… and this… and how do I do this” and when you TELL them go “What dillhole designed this” and/or “Screw this, I’m going back to Windows”
Must be true. The users I switched, and even my wife, when I explain to them, just say “OK cool, it works”. They don’t talk about design or changing OS, as they could not anyway.
The majority of people LACK THE PATIENCE to deal with:
sh NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-8756-pkg1.run -q
sax2 -r -m 0=nvidia
sh NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-8756-pkg1.run -K
So for these people, a Linux distro that does it automagically is the key.
Even I have no time to do that, it’s all automated on my hand made Linux OS.
Which looks at a glance like gibberish to me, and I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS… much less should it throw an error because the kernel sources aren’t present or WORSE, they have to rebuild the kernel by hand because the AGPGART or other motherboard interfaces aren’t in the distro they chose
Again, a downloaded distro is then not the right choice for these people.
Sure, preloading kinda solves this – at least until they decide they want to upgrade to a new version of the OS… or use a program that is not in that distro’s repositories… or add a new external device that support isn’t present for… or add a new video card to play doom 3…
We’re not in 1998 anymore. Let’s take the example of Mandriva, as that’s what I put on users PC. Upgrading works just fine, adding an external device means they ask me for advice; adding a new video card, they couldn’t do it themselves, and would never do that. Once one user bought an unsupported cheap multifunction Epson printer against my advice. The printing was good, but the scanner would not work. It didn’t even bother them !! I fixed it with adding a line in a config file (Epson could have done that without problem for Linux, it took me 10 minutes to find the info), saying it was unacceptable buying sth and not getting most off it. Next Mandriva version supported the printer.
As for programs not in that distro, that’s a classic false problem. What do Windows users do in this case ? And what do they do for programs available but too expensive (Photoshop for example) ? They wait or ask for alternatives.
Sure Windows has security and stability issues, that’s because any idiot can install damn near anything on it – an area in which Linux makes Windows 3.1 look robust
This is just BS sorry. You can’t install everything on a Windows version. You can install everything designed for this version of Windows if you have the knowledge. Which is true for Linux distro too. I doubt everyone could install a lot of specialised apps on Windows.
>> I’ve gone through all this on Windows, and the situation is still the same today. You need a good conservative $3000 more on a Windows PC to make it work like a basic download Linux distro (not even like a commercial one).
Beep, beep, beep, my BS alarm is going off. I’d be VERY interested to hear that $$$ amount explained.
>> I’ve yet to meet one Windows user without warez on his PC, most have only that on their PC. Remove the warez, and most of them are lost.
And these power-user are very hypocritical when talking about Linux apps, as they will go through hoops a normal user would never go through, to install their warez.
Uhm… Sure, right. First off, most of the users I’m thinking of would be LOST installing warez – and even that’s usually not too hard since most of the time it’s either run a .exe to patch the program, or replace the normal .exe – or just run a keygen; all of which makes dicking around in .conf files seem piss simple by comparison.
>> So for these people, a Linux distro that does it automagically is the key.
Even I have no time to do that, [u]it’s all automated on my hand made Linux OS.[/u]
Did ANYBODY actually understand that? If I’m reading that right, thanks for proving my point. (the underlined part)
>> Then why can’t these users go buy a Linux distro instead of compiling apps ? These are not the same as free downloaded ones, they are more complete and user-friendly.
Did you even READ my post? I chose that example for a VERY good reason. Name for me ONE distro that actually has WORKING nVidia proprietary drivers AND [u]working mainboard agpgart/pci-x16[/u] extensions… Only one comes to mind on the first subject – and we’ve got TWO other articles and rather lengthy list on how THAT’s working out.
>>As for programs not in that distro, that’s a classic false problem. What do Windows users do in this case ?
Go buy a CD, slap it in, let the autoplay run and install it, click on the icon and start using it. That’s what…
OR download a single .exe (or .msi, .zip, etc), run it, and let the installer take care of it…
MEANWHILE on the linux side unless you happen to be LUCKY enough for the program you want to be in your distro’s repository or happen to be available as a standard package for said distro you are SOL – unless you can tolerate the ‘so easy’ gzip | tar | configure | make | make install – and even then 99.99% of the time that only gets you as far as having it able to be run from the command line – you STILL have to make the shortcuts/menu entries for KDE/Gnome by hand – which AGAIN is the point at which most ‘middle of the road’ users are going to tell you to go take a flying leap.
>>Upgrading works just fine, adding an external device means they ask me for advice;
Really, how’d that 2.4 to 2.6 kernel jump work out for them? (or did you leave them on 2.4, in which case half the wireless cards out there you can’t even get working drivers for?) Not to mention adding an external device a ‘power user’ has to come to you for HELP? That there spells out a problem…
>>adding a new video card, they couldn’t do it themselves, and would never do that.
and
>>They don’t talk about design or changing OS, as they could not anyway.
and
>>The printing was good, but the scanner would not work. It didn’t even bother them !! I fixed it with adding a line in a config file (Epson could have done that without problem for Linux, it took me 10 minutes to find the info), saying it was unacceptable buying sth and not getting most off it.
It REALLY starts to sound like you are talking about nubes, not ‘power users’ as I meant it… That epson printer/scanner on Windows, let’s see… plug it in, run the install CD, done – and they could probably have done it themselves – if they couldn’t, we’re talking DIFFERENT levels of use… and frankly “I fixed it with adding a line in a config file” spells out EXACTLY what I’m talking about, editing some obscure config file in some obscure directory – the type of thing the user IS going to come running to you for – on something they SHOULDN’T HAVE TO.
>>This is just BS sorry. You can’t install everything on a Windows version. You can install everything designed for this version of Windows if you have the knowledge. Which is true for Linux distro too.
and it’s statements like this that are the real “What the devil is in that kool aid?” that you hear from linux people a lot. First off ‘this version of windows’ – this sounds like something someone who NEVER used windows would say. Sure, a handful of poorly written win95/98 games won’t run on 2k/XP – but lands sake windows compatability across different versions is the cornerstone of windows appeal (and also the cornerstone of it’s instability, fair is fair). I could run Office 1.0 for Windows 3.x under XP if I wanted without even a hitch in XP’s stride – NT4 software and much of NT3 works JUST FINE on 2k/XP – pretty much any software (other than a handful of games – mostly from activision) written in the past DECADE will install and run under XP with minimal hassles…
Meanwhile a major linux kernel revision completely breaks binary compatability, likely breaks ALL drivers, and has the habit of requiring recodes to even have SOURCE level compatability.
>>I doubt everyone could install a lot of specialised apps on Windows.
Again, I don’t see what’s so hard about slapping in a CD and letting the autorun installer or downloading a .exe and running it. Accept, Next, Next, Complete, Next, (wait a few minutes), finish, click on the icon. ANY IDIOT can do that.
While it takes a special breed of moron to handle configure | make | make install.
$3000 is cheap for what you get on a disto, you can argue that they are notas good, as the commercial Microsoft platform counterparts, but even in sterling $3000 seems very concervative, and I’ve just scratched the surface.
£114.20 Adobe Photoshop – Gimpshop
£2210 3D Studio MAX – Blender
£230 Cubase – Audacity
£71.00 Cakewalk – kmidi
£338 Microsoft Office – OpenOffice
£43 Quicken – Gnucash
£717.86 Quark – Scribus
£340.53 Adobe Acrobat – Ghostscript
£23 Winzip – File Roller
£41 Nero Burning Rom – K3B
£25.53 Norten Ghost – Partition Image
£18.14 Norton Antivirus – ClamAV
£20.16 Mavis Beacon – Ktype
£128.14 Visual Studio – Kdevelop
£1447.60 Microsoft SQL Server – MySql
£264 Microsoft Windows Server 2003 – Linux + X
Stealing is commonplace; software is so expensive. I use linux becuase it is. I also use it because (like you don’t have understand) products require activation.
As you are aware most users on Windows do not just slap in a CD but remember they have to install/activate/patch software regularly.
On most distro its unlikely that you have to do anything than click a button and all you applications are current and 300 programs are patched stable(oooh and the kernel too).
For a printer scanner etc I didn’t even have to put in a CD. I chose compatible harware, and all my interfaces look the same.
I understand the difficulty with Ati and Nvidia thats why I choose not to buy them. I own an intel, I’ll game on my console anyhow.
Absolutely compatibilty will have problems between versions, these *badly* written programs, but if you paid for them you should be a little unhappy. Windows is remarkably backward compatible, not 100%, but then saying it is, is noncence. Look how XP has been stagnent for years.
Linux on the other hand, regardless of what breaks, is moving forward, constantly, stuff breaks, stuff gets fixed, and this all goes by relatively unnoticed by the user. I think its a better model
One area which Linux absolutely kills windows on, is updating 200 programs with one click, as opposed to “(search for website)(Go to website),Accept(sign your life away), Next, Next,(enter activation key), Complete, Next, (wait a few minutes), finish,(reboot) click on the icon(repeat for all programs)”
>> £2210 3D Studio MAX – Blender
So the lions share of that amount is for a commercial package – that your free linux alternative HAS A WIN32 BUILD? (That’s easier to install?) – not to mention thats a specialty application 99% of users don’t need or use?
>> £230 Cubase – Audacity
>> £338 Microsoft Office – OpenOffice
>> £1447.60 Microsoft SQL Server – MySql
Uhm… You do know ALL of those ‘alternatives’ are available free on Windows too, right? I see a trend here.
>> £717.86 Quark – Scribus
because of course a desktop publishing program is mandatory on a ‘useful baseline’.
>> £41 Nero Burning Rom – K3B
Which comes free with 90% of the drives out there – or at least a lite version or reasonable equivalent.
>> £71.00 Cakewalk – kmidi
KMIDI compared to CAKEWALK?!? (Mein GOTT!) Comparing a glorified midi player (which should be something Totem or XMMS should be handling) to a full blown midi/wave/notation composition suite? The lions share of Midi software on linux consists of a bunch of little hobbyist utilities and crappy players that are like something from the dark days before the Atari ST… Unless of course you meant KMiditracker – which is on par with the software on the ST and Dos 3 (like the old DOS cakewalk). Jazz++ or MUSE would likely be better Linux alternatives, and guess what, those are available for Windows too and STILL fall way short of Cakewalks six year old products – much less full featured mixing suites like Sonar – Not to mention have you TRIED controlling soundfonts on linux? Sometimes it’s worth spending money to NOT have midi sound like CRAP and to be able to load/unload soundfonts on the fly.
>> £18.14 Norton Antivirus – ClamAV
or AVG, or Avast, or … or…
>> £20.16 Mavis Beacon – Ktype
people actually waste time USING that crap?
>> £340.53 Adobe Acrobat – Ghostscript
Not only is ghostscript available under windows – it’s not exactly an ‘essential’ for most users, for whom the reader (which is FREE) is all they need.
>> £114.20 Adobe Photoshop – Gimpshop
If you think the GIMP is the equal of Photoshop – you need to learn how to USE photoshop. Hell, the GIMP isn’t even on par with JASC’s Paint Shop Pro – it’s more like the old DOS zsoft Paintbrush that’s seen some updates to support newer file formats. GIMP’s a good program, but it has a LONG way to go before it’s in Photoshop’s class. The “Pixel Image Editor” (formerly pixel32) would be a much closer analogy (which currently costs $32 on ALL platforms – you get what you {shock} PAY FOR)
>> £128.14 Visual Studio – Kdevelop
First off, kdevelop is HARDLY on par with Visual Studio – and you seem to be missing that all the Visual Studio ‘express’ versions are now FREE.
>> £264 Microsoft Windows Server 2003 – Linux + X
Choosing the most expensive server version of the OS in a discussion about use as a desktop OS – Nah, that’s not predjudiced – and people wonder why we talk about Linux Zealots.
>> £23 Winzip – File Roller
First, that’s GNOME specific (meaning if you follow linus’ advice you are stuck with the slow api layer)… Second, you are aware Windows XP and newer have zip functionality BUILT IN TO THE OS?!? THIS seems proof enough you’ve not used windows enough to be making these statements.
TWO OF YOUR ITEMS ALONE accounts for 70% your total – which not only are the free alternatives you present available for windows – generally speaking aren’t ‘essentials’ to the lions share of desktop users and are easier to install than they are on linux if you didn’t ‘luck out’ and have them in your distro’s repository – mind you, if they ARE in the repositories on distro’s like ubuntu or linspire, then linux can be easier… unless it throws a dependancy error that cannot be resolved; Blender on dapper comes to mind… have fun building from the sources for someone who when you tell them they have to build from the sources tells you to go… well, being a good christian woman I can’t say it.
RIGHT, Good arguement there.
>>>> £71.00 Cakewalk – kmidi
>>KMIDI compared to CAKEWALK?!? (Mein GOTT!)… and to be able to load/unload soundfonts on the fly.
OK, Rosegarden then. Handles soundfonts beautifully, as well. Now soundfonts and SB’s in general, now there’s a pile of crap, if you are really intersested in sound!
>>>> £114.20 Adobe Photoshop – Gimpshop
>>If you think the GIMP is the equal of Photoshop – you need to learn how to USE photoshop.
You obviously haven’t used the latest versions of GIMP — it isn’t PS, and that’s a GOOD thing. PS interface has always pissed me off. If you like Photoshop, it’s your opinion, and your money, but it doesn’t turn everything else into crap.
>>>> £128.14 Visual Studio – Kdevelop
If this were the only free development tool/environment available, you might have a point, but it isn’t, and you don’t.
I run a small business on Linux. To replace the software I use every day on my systems, servers and desktops, with Windows licenses, it would cost me AT LEAST $10,000. This does not include additional anti-virus, anti-spyware, nor the upgrade to the servers to meet the minimum hardware requirements.
This would buy me nothing in productivity, or profit.
You may like your Windows programs better than the ones I use — that’s your business, and your money.
>> You obviously haven’t used the latest versions of GIMP — it isn’t PS, and that’s a GOOD thing. PS interface has always pissed me off. If you like Photoshop, it’s your opinion, and your money, but it doesn’t turn everything else into crap.
Heh, actually, I don’t like photoshop either, but I end up having to use it for the handful of filters that AREN’T IN other programs… My weapon of choice is the old JASC Paint Shop Pro 7 (which I OWN – major malfunction of mine – I believe programmers should get PAID for their WORK) as PSP 8&9 changed the interface to be closer to Photoshop… Because I agree – photoshops UI sucks (before we even get into the subject of bloat and bugs) but there’s a LOT of stuff photoshop can do the others fall short on.
>> OK, Rosegarden then. Handles soundfonts beautifully, as well.
Rosegarden has soundfont support?!? You can play a fully pre-loaded soundfont using a softsynth or by using the sfxload utility, but that’s a FAR cry from being able to load them as a direct ‘patch’ inside the program. Rosegarden still just outputs nothing but midi itself into ALSA – something we basically had back on windows 3.x (hell, I still have the win 3.1 voyetra and midisoft recording session around so I can port legacy files from those sequencers)
Not that it helps you generally end up having to recompile the kernel to increase the system timer to something USEFUL for midi… Most people recommend the 1,000hz over the 250hz 2.4 and the latest 2.6 uses (oddly early 2.6 was 1000?!?) but I’ve found that if you are trying to sync SMTPE even 1000hz doesn’t cut it.
>> Now soundfonts and SB’s in general, now there’s a pile of crap, if you are really intersested in sound!
I needed a good laugh. ONLY thing that sounds better than a creative card with a emu10k would be… an actual EMU card which is built around… an emu10k. (at least, once you master the use of the extensions)… either that or sinking a couple thousand on some EXTERNAL synth units like those made by Roland or Alesis. (which given the Live/Audigy is <$100 for the same capabilities as a $900 Emu Proteus) Let’s face it, joe user isn’t going out and grabbing an EMU 1820M for their desktop – they are grabbing Audigy 2 boards for playing Call of Duty 2.
>>major malfunction of mine – I believe programmers should get PAID for their WORK
Shows your bias. Open Source does not mean free as in beer, but free as in speech, choice — get the difference?
>>Rosegarden has soundfont support?!?
Yes, it does. The latest version lets you load and change soundfonts inside the program.
>>ONLY thing that sounds better than a creative card with a emu10k…
Sound Blasters are OK for gamers and casual use, but there are lots of things that sound better, especially when amplified to performance levels. My comment wasn’t aimed at “Joe User”
I have an SB Live in a desktop, but I would never use it for serious music. It’s like saying a $100 guitar that looks like my Telecaster is as good as my Telecaster — it is, if you can’t hear the difference, and I suspect most users can’t, but don’t claim there is no difference!
@deathshadow Thank you for your reply, Its a shame its getting a little off topic.
It is true, that lots of open-software is available for multiple platforms. I would argue *strongly* that it has value even though it is distributed freely.
Now you say program X is easier to install on windows, that is not true, for each of the programs you have to periodically go to the website, download, uninstall old version, install the new version, repeat. thats a major task. On linux you can install/upgrade 100’s of packages at just a click. This is one area Linux is better, Microsoft will catch up with this, they are already implimenting trusted partners to be part of their periodic downloads.
One of your arguments I find interesting, is the 99% of users don’t use package X. Thats true, but it still comes with the distribution, and still has cost. One of the arguments against linux is there is an often a application you can’t live without. For that 1% its not true anymore. More importantly in this instance, it allows users, who simply cannot afford to try their hand at a new computing skill the oppertunity to do so, and that is priceless.
I notice you have included, in the defence of the Microsoft platform Crippleware, and Adware. Thats not good enough.
I was interested by your responce of file archiving and how it was built into XP. What would make me a zealot(now now) is that recently I search my hard drives and converted all my RAR’s to Zips and compressed them using the 7z algorithm, from the CLI thats nice, but if you think Zip folders in Windows is cool really check out http://fuse.sourceforge.net/ now thats WOW.
Its true that two items alone account for 70% but in no way is it a comprehensive list, or a particularly good one, but already I’m hitting $10,782.43. Thats significantly more than two items.
Beep, beep, beep, my BS alarm is going off. I’d be VERY interested to hear that $$$ amount explained
You need explaining these $3000 ? That just conforts me in my thought that you’re part of those people praising Windows but using only warez on it : hypocritical about the worth of these software at best. If you actually bought software for Windows, you would not even have to ask me this very conservative number I gave.
First off, most of the users I’m thinking of would be LOST installing warez
Exactly my experience.
and even that’s usually not too hard since most of the time it’s either run a .exe to patch the program, or replace the normal .exe – or just run a keygen; all of which makes dicking around in .conf files seem piss simple by comparison
You forgot all the part about finding them, knowing they’re good, antivirus, antispyware, … Lots of things which are just impossible to even understand to average users (and they are not interested anyway).
Did ANYBODY actually understand that? If I’m reading that right, thanks for proving my point. (the underlined part)
What I meant is that I have a package manager on my hand made distro. I don’t use things like Mandriva for myself, as I’m knowledgeable enough to have my own Linux OS. I’m atypical, that’s irrelevant to the discussion.
Did you even READ my post? I chose that example for a VERY good reason. Name for me ONE distro that actually has WORKING nVidia proprietary drivers AND [u]working mainboard agpgart/pci-x16[/u] extensions
Any commercial Mandriva distribution available. Next question.
Go buy a CD, slap it in, let the autoplay run and install it, click on the icon and start using it. That’s what…
Which CD ? What you say is BS, you obviously never worked with ordinary users. They don’t even understand really if such CD exist. When they have a need, we go through a long discussion to know what they want. Then, I tell them what to search for in the repositories.
OR download a single .exe (or .msi, .zip, etc), run it, and let the installer take care of it…
Which .exe ? They are ordinary users, not know-it-all people. If I tell them one thing, it’s to never download .exe on unknown sites.
MEANWHILE on the linux side unless you happen to be LUCKY enough for the program you want to be in your distro’s repository or happen to be available as a standard package for said distro you are SOL – … even then 99.99% of the time that only gets you as far as having it able to be run from the command line – you STILL have to make the shortcuts/menu entries for KDE/Gnome by hand – which AGAIN is the point at which most ‘middle of the road’ users are going to tell you to go take a flying leap
And I say I don’t know what Linux made to you, but you have an irrational hatred against it (perhaps you were put to shame, thinking you knew about computing).
What you say is just false, but I won’t argue with you, you are just 5 years behind. None of my Mandriva users ever had the problem you talk about.
I wonder what app they need luck finding in the repositories.
Really, how’d that 2.4 to 2.6 kernel jump work out for them? (or did you leave them on 2.4, in which case half the wireless cards out there you can’t even get working drivers for?) Not to mention adding an external device a ‘power user’ has to come to you for HELP? That there spells out a problem…
2.4 to 2.6 was done without a problem through Mandriva upgrade. There’s nothing magical or hard about this jump, but you couldn’t understand.
External devices are no problem either, they changed them without any problem. In the worst case, Mandriva detected them and updated the drivers automagically.
They are ordinary users, none of them have a network of computers, nor Wifi.
It REALLY starts to sound like you are talking about nubes, not ‘power users’ as I meant it
I’m talking about average users yes. If you want, call them nubes.
… That epson printer/scanner on Windows, let’s see… plug it in, run the install CD, done – and they could probably have done it themselves – if they couldn’t, we’re talking DIFFERENT levels of use… and frankly “I fixed it with adding a line in a config file” spells out EXACTLY what I’m talking about, editing some obscure config file in some obscure directory – the type of thing the user IS going to come running to you for – on something they SHOULDN’T HAVE TO
Huh ? They plugged the printer in the machine, and it just worked on Linux, no CD to run. And no, they never came running to me for the scanner, like I told you. I found this unacceptable, they didn’t. I think they just wanted to buy a cheaper printer, they had no need for the scanner.
The config file was neither obscure nor in an obscure directory BTW, and the next Mandriva version detected it without problem. The multifunction printer was out after the Mandriva they had : how the hell would it know the driver for it without help from the printer or manufacturer ?! And no, this is not Linux’ fault, and yes, Epson could have provided an install that just edited this standard file (a SANE file in /etc, nothing obscure, and very easy to do), and claimed Linux support (it took me 10 minutes of Googling and I don’t know anything about configuring SANE or Epson printers).
First off ‘this version of windows’ – this sounds like something someone who NEVER used windows would say. Sure, a handful of poorly written win95/98 games won’t run on 2k/XP – but lands sake windows compatability across different versions is the cornerstone of windows appeal (and also the cornerstone of it’s instability, fair is fair)
That’s just BS you’re saying. Now you’re forced to tell me about poorly written win95/98 games. Let me make it harder for you : I’m also talking about my Mustek scanner and Miro TV card for example. I’m knowledgeable enough, and lost weeks searching for drivers and apps for these things, as none wold work on WinXP. None of my original Miro software even start on Windows XP, they just crash. So much for compatibility. BTW, Mustek says the solution is to buy another scanner : cool ! You are just an elitist Windows shill, and I think YOU never really used it like a normal user. A normal user don’t go buying other hardware when they have perfectly functional ones, just to satisfy a new incompatible OS. BTW, the Miro card works perfectly on Linux, and the scanner works BETTER on Linux (it was stuttering on Windows, and works smooth on Linux).
Oh, another example : VirtualDub was acquiring videos fine from the Miro and ATI card in Win98, and could not in WinXP. That’s in case you talk about poor Miro apps.
pretty much any software (other than a handful of games – mostly from activision) written in the past DECADE will install and run under XP with minimal hassles
If that’s your experience, that’s not mine.
Meanwhile a major linux kernel revision completely breaks binary compatability, likely breaks ALL drivers, and has the habit of requiring recodes to even have SOURCE level compatability
Given that most drivers are in the kernel sources, I guess this is another occurrence of your irrational hatred against Linux.
Again, I don’t see what’s so hard about slapping in a CD and letting the autorun installer or downloading a .exe and running it. Accept, Next, Next, Complete, Next, (wait a few minutes), finish, click on the icon. ANY IDIOT can do that
Another Windows user that would call my users idiots every time. Sad really. You elititst people tend to call people idiots when they can’t do what you find easy.
Fortunately I don’t do that.
>> What I meant is that I have a package manager on my hand made distro. I don’t use things like Mandriva for myself, as I’m knowledgeable enough to have my own Linux OS. I’m atypical, that’s irrelevant to the discussion.
Which means you are unable to separate your own experience from that of your users, which is likely why you have to basically handhold everyone on the simplest of things (like that printer setup and a couple other things you mentioned)
>> Which CD ? What you say is BS, you obviously never worked with ordinary users. They don’t even understand really if such CD exist.
and you have the balls to call ME a warez whore. You know, the CD they bought at this amazing thing we have called STORES? They come in cardboard boxes, you can go into these ‘stores’ with names like ‘best buy’ and ‘electronics boutique’ and actually put money on the counter (shock) and get these boxes with CD’s in them. If you were familiar with these items, you might not have the issue mentioned in one of your previous posts of your ‘users’ bringing you programs on CD’s and wondering how/why they can’t run them. I’m sorry, but I’ve seen some REALLY stupid statements in my time, but this one is just… WOW.
>> The config file was neither obscure nor in an obscure directory BTW
>> Oh, another example : VirtualDub was acquiring videos fine from the Miro and ATI card in Win98, and could not in WinXP. That’s in case you talk about poor Miro apps
In other words they ignored what MS had been telling them for ages and never bothered writing NT4 drivers. Blame the el-cheapo company (Pinnacle) and your $50 bargain basement video capture, not MS.
>> 2.4 to 2.6 was done without a problem through Mandriva upgrade. There’s nothing magical or hard about this jump, but you couldn’t understand.
What I understand is you got lucky and didn’t happen to have one of the many legacy devices that DIDN’T even GET drivers for 2.6 – Which there are a hefty number of.
>> If that’s your experience, that’s not mine.
and the experience of the half billion gamers who basically drive the video card industry and sink more money into their machines and those ‘mysterious boxes’ on store shelves than most of us do on groceries for a year.
>> And I say I don’t know what Linux made to you, but you have an irrational hatred against it (perhaps you were put to shame, thinking you knew about computing). What you say is just false, but I won’t argue with you, you are just 5 years behind.
You know, that’s a lot of praise for a distro that I’ve always found buggy, with poor drivers and poorer support.
and I don’t have hatred against linux, it’s just the wrong tool for a LOT of desktop users. My ‘day job’ has me working constantly with RHE3 and Debian servers and run Ubuntu on one of my laptops. I’m just not an apolist who will overlook its shortcomings as a desktop OS. It’s made great strides, but there’s a LONG way to go before it’s ‘ready for primetime’ IMHO.
>>perhaps you were put to shame, thinking you knew about computing
… and so it begins. You want to dance on credentials BOY? I cut my teeth three decades ago hand coding assembly, spent the early 80’s on ASA-400 and Dec Mainframes, the late 80’s on 6809 and 68K based *nix boxes, and managed Solaris and AIX through the 90’s… Frankly, you want to know the cause for the hostility – I thought we were PAST this shit. If I wanted to waste time dicking around in a shell designed for 150 baud use, I’d drag out my Trash-80 Model 16 and boot up Xenix.
Meanwhile I have the nasty feeling the poster in question is likely akin to most of the linux die hards – not even out of college and posting from his parents cellar. (hey, you want to go there, we can dance.)
>>Another Windows user that would call my users idiots every time.
I’m sorry, but if an autorun installer is TOO COMPLEX for someone who isn’t a total nube – then they HAVE to be a bit special… In the same way some Olympics are special. I’m willing to forgive great acts of stupidity from a nube – but I didn’t think we were talking about THOSE. In fact, it’s DAMNED apparant you didn’t understand and likely never will.
Hmmm … so many comments, so little time.
In other words they ignored what MS had been telling them for ages and never bothered writing NT4 drivers. Blame the el-cheapo company (Pinnacle) and your $50 bargain basement video capture, not MS.
The last time I checked, MS did not provide the drivers, but Pinnacle. Also, the last time I checked, Linux did not provide the drivers, but neither did Pinnacle.
What I understand is you got lucky and didn’t happen to have one of the many legacy devices that DIDN’T even GET drivers for 2.6 – Which there are a hefty number of.
Again, when did MS provide the drivers?
(statement discussing 3 decades of mainframe experience)
OK, I skipped 2nd period history class to play with a brand new TRS-80 at Radio Shack in High School. I also spent the better part of a Naval career (retired since 1996) playing with Combat Computers as well as mainframes at the assembly programming level.
Does this mean I’m well-versed in the internals of either a Microsoft platform or a Unix/Linux platform?
The parent’s post relays his real-world experience with helping non-technical people in his chosen environment. Your post appears to be a philosophical debate on how a user should be able to work. For example:
I’m sorry, but if an autorun installer is TOO COMPLEX for someone who isn’t a total nube – then they HAVE to be a bit special…
Speaking of which, that autorun feature caused me to have to rework my wife’s XP machine due to a rootkit that was installed by an audio CD and was not detected by the up-to-date virus checking software that was supposed to detect these issues. The rework also included trying to reinstall the extra software that was originally (factory installed) on the machine when she purchased it, but had to be repurchased because the disks that came with the machine did not include the same software that was originally (factory pre-) installed.
Do I sense a pattern here?
… the machine was an HP laptop – not exactly a fly-by-night cheap laptop.
I have the same machine, but mine is not running MS products by choice. I have less problems with mine than she does with hers.
>> The last time I checked, MS did not provide the drivers, but Pinnacle. Also, the last time I checked, Linux did not provide the drivers, but neither did Pinnacle.
>> Again, when did MS provide the drivers?
Is english not your primary language? We seem to be having major miscommunication here and twisting of words, to the point I’m tempted to go all “Samuel L. Jackson” on you.
My point with “one of the many legacy devices that DIDN’T even GET drivers for 2.6” is that what most people would see by the number as minor numbered revision broke a LOT of existing drivers, and they got left out and still haven’t caught up – many hardware manufacturers STILL only have 2.4.x and even 2.3.x targeted drivers (or even binary builds of applications and/or packages) on their sites… to be fair the SAME thing happened with the jump from 9x to 2K/XP, but that’s because a LOT of hardware manufacturers FLAT OUT IGNORED Microsofts REPEATED warnings to start making WDM drivers instead of 95/3.1 style.
Linux is good for servers, good for security, good to have fun tweaking – but lands sake people be honest about it’s shortcomings. I’m often AMAZED at the hoops people are willing to jump through JUST to not use a Microsoft product, often for reasons that haven’t REALLY been true since Windows ME
That’s shortsighted at best.
Why do I have a Linux PVR ? Because nothing (NOTHING) commercial is as powerful (not even SageTV), and can do everything I need.
Why do I have a Linux desktop ? For the same reasons : NOTHING is as powerful and easy to use for me, my family and my needs.
I’m lucky in this, I know. But even the basics prove you wrong.
I need to keep my data for an undefined length of time. Asking Windows guru, all they can tell me is that they have no valuable data on their box, so they can rebuild the OS clean every 6 months !!! I just can’t do that, and for nearly 6 years now, Linux allowed me to do that (no more lost emails or data), it survived these many hardware crashes in 6 years : one SCSI disk, 2 IDE disks, one sound card, one motherboard down.
I need to be able to switch from any user to any user, at any time, without anyone needing my help, and it must be simple. When I tried Windows user switching in 2001, it was just unusable for this, and still is (and it doesn’t work with networked accounts anyway). Only Linux allow me to do this to this day (I don’t know OSX though).
As for apps, besides examples like K3B, which is the only burning apps my wife ever managed to use (and yes, she tried Nero, which is still confusing even to me to this day), things like Digikam means even when her current camera breaks and she gets a new one, she will still use the same familiar app. Even better, Digikam is far better and more prowerful alone, than the 3 apps provided with the camera CD for Windows.
Still, there are shortcomings. What do I do when she asks me if I can install CSI game ? I say it won’t work, but I’ll try. Well, last time I tried, it detected Wine as a debugger, and wouldn’t install, but I’ll keep trying with the latest versions, and wait. Actually, I have a Windows client. It just have become very cumbersome to us to launch it. When she asks for an app to “build your house”, I say I will try to. When she brings me a warez CD from her colleague, I say I won’t install this on my machines.
She gets these stupid ideas and apps from her colleagues. They say it’s easy, it does everything. Then I realise they use warez, which my wife can’t even install herself, and in the end, the app is far from the dream described.
I had the same bad experience when I was using Windows, I don’t want my family having to deal with all these shortcomings.
My wife already suffer from this at work, where she was scolded for opening emails, or launching two apps at the same type, or having to use 3 (yes three) different PCs for her work, because the apps she uses are incompatibles (!!).
Some of the earlier comments wer in line with my own experiences
1) The truly naive user is fine on linux, because they just assume that’s how it works
2) People who are quite sophisticated users of Office have problems with OO because too many things don’t work exactly the same, and it slows them down.
3) Power users of windows, unless they are really committed, have problems, because they have trouble with how very different it is. Often because all they know is Windows, and don’t understand computers generically
4) If you are there to help with Linux, you’ll get calls – one ever couple of months. Mostly it will be about OO. I never get crashes, lost data or that sort of thing. I do get more calls than I used to get about OS9, which was none, ever. But, time moves on, and its a lot more sophisticated…
5) You have to give the right advice. If they want to play lots of games, no. If they have some special winapp they must have, probably no. If they do really detailed complex stuff in word, probably no.
But that leaves an awful lot of people.
Some people are so afraid of change. These are the ones in the family who drive huge pick-up trucks and say, “Hold my beer and watch this!”. Then I see them listed on the Darwin Award List later in the month.
Those using `Winders` are the natural selection list they just haven’t realized it yet. Billy Boy has and he is going to drain you of every last dollar.
Typical, albeit thinly veiled, bit of anti-linux propoganda, his only real complaint, “it’s not windows”, wah!
Mr. Golden,
I enjoyed your article, and generally speaking I agree
with your conclusion. I have been using both linux
and windows for many years now. While linux has come
a long way, it is not yet ready for the mass desktop
audience.
One thing to be fair though, you should consider
writing a follow-up article describing your experience
“upgrading” to Windows XP service pack 2.
I would be suprised if you can limit yourself to the
same “level of effort” that you were willing to expend
on the linux installation and end up satisfied with
the results.
I would also challenge you to “do the right thing”
security-wise and try to set up a “limited user”
account on your Windows machine and see how that works
out (or doesn’t). This is one area where linux has
Windows beat, hands-down.
I am doing my own family experiment. My Windows
computer recently was infected by malware (kids
clicking on web-pages they shouldn’t have?) and I
decided to buy a second hard disk. On disk #1 I
re-installed windows xp service pack 2, using all of
the best-practices for security that I could learn
about.
It took almost a full week of after-work sessions to
get back to a usable system (all software, plug-ins,
etc. reinstalled) including a fair amount of Google
searches to deal with problems that cropped up along
the way.
Last night, I installed Suse Linux 10.1 on disk #2. I
fully expect that it will take just as much time to
get the linux system working as smoothly as I want it
to as it did to get the kinks in my Windows
installation worked out.
My wife has the only account on the windows install.
The kids (3 of them, ages 7-11) will get accounts on
the Linux system. The experiment is to see if the
kids and I can stay on linux and make it work for us.
We will be able to share email accounts with my wife
as we are using Mozilla Thunderbird, and it works on
both sytems.
Anyway, good luck with your Windows install. I hope
you can limit your investment in the upgrade to $100,
but I seriously doubt it!
Sincerely – me
There are those people that think they can install Linux and have everything work and there are those that think they can’t. Both are right!
It’s not sit down and eat easy, but it’s not rocket science for anyone that has used a computer for a couple of years. Linux is just different, not harder or easier to install or use, just different. If a person is interested in trying something different, they’ll probably like Linux, because it’s just an OS that allows you to productively do cool computer related stuff, just like XP and OS X. If a person wants to try somthing new in the hopes that it will be just like his old OS, he’s really just looking to bitch and moan. I’ve managed to install Explorer, Office, Photoshop, and Itunes all on my linux box with just a little research and not once did I have to change a config file or hit the command line. All my multimedia devices work and there isn’t much that I have been able to do using windows that I can’t do using linux, so it’s all boils down to whether or not you’re willing to learn. If you just want an OS that works like windows, use windows. If you’re interested in trying somthing different, try Linux and let it rip.
Personally I love the Penguin, but then again, I’m not affraid to learn how to play with him!
There are a lot of MP3 compatible music players. Why should I want to play DRMed music? I value my freedom, and DRMed material doesn’t preserve it. You are being infantile, because you don’t recognize the danger DRM is. We are were we are thanks to people like you.
The Journal is not your local town newspaper. It’s supposed to be in the same league as the NYT and the WP on reporting.
Tasked with testing Linux, the author walked into a bookstore and bought a “For Dummies” book. He didn’t go online, he didn’t do a google search on distros, he didn’t ask on forums what he should do. He bought an old book which by the sounds of it had no *buntu releases.
He tested the out of date distros against a laptop, the platform most likely to contain nonstandard hardware optimizations. There’s a *reason* the *buntu releases have extensions for the Vaio and Thinkpad.
When repeatedly told by customer support that his issues were resolved in current releases, he failed to take the hint that he was unfairly evaluating their platform.
What it actually appears he evaluated in this article was the ability of 1) an old set of distros to perform on his laptop and 2) his telephone to solve all his problems. My experience with Windows users doing the same thing hasn’t been much better.
I put Kubuntu on a heavily souped up iMac for a friend who was still running OS X 10.1. We spent an hour going over the KDE desktop, her basic applications, and tested some hardware. A four year old USB CD burner was recognized immediately by K3B and it burned an audio CD without problems. A Canon Powershot had to be picked out by brand but was recognized by Konqueror when I went to the camera:// url. USB memory sticks mounted automatically.
I was also clear about multimedia/Flash being the weak spot and she confirmed that web surfing/OOo apps were the chief reason she needed the machine, not media.
The author’s chief skill in this article was hiding his ineptitude from his editor and giving himself an air of a fair, balanced survey. I wouldn’t put WindowsME on a Latitude and complain it lacked USB and wireless support without drivers.
“How do you ensure that this ball gets rolling and starts a snowball effect, supporting desktop Linux in a non-linear, upward, fashion as it rolls?”
You seem to forget that MSFT wasn’t the first. Word was up against WordPerfect from dos to Win3.1 days and in the 80s AppleWorks was the suite of choice in nearly every school out there. But of course in those days we didn’t have the web, any “file sharing” was done via sneaker-net. Years later I still remember the Fkeys for wordperfect for dos and Lotus 1-2-3 and the open-apple keys for AppleWorks’. But I have to hunt around constantly through the menus for Word’s shortcuts.
IOW it’s not impossible at all to get others to save-as ODF you just do what people did when companies started to switch to MSFT Office – you demand it and refuse to accept any other format. Frankly, I’m sick and tired of being told they have to be in MSFT Office format. College’s are notorious for requireing students to do that when it doesn’t really matter at all what program is used to produce the paper in at all as long as it can be read on their end. I submitted many of mine all the time as word format that I had in fact created in OpenOffice and never had any problems.
Sheesh, every time I have to move back to a windows machine, I find out why I moved to a Mac.
Downloading a large file, turns winXP into a piece of UnResponsive CRAP. Multitasking? We’ve herd of it.
So, Microsoft morons, you may win some stupid PC Magazine benchmark competition by giving 9 cycles to the download routine and 1 cycle to the desktop, but, the User Experience is Total CRAP.
Is anyone at Microsoft really Competent or are all the good programmers working on Linux or openBSD or openSolaris or Solaris or HP-UX or AIX or MVS or yes, even Mac OS X.
>> Downloading a large file, turns winXP into a piece of UnResponsive CRAP. Multitasking? We’ve herd of it.
SAY WHAT? What are you doing, running XP on a P150 with 128 megs of RAM?
I’ve generally got MULTIPLE downloads going at once and it’s fine… much less that I have bittorrents going most all the time…
Hell, the ONLY place I’ve ever seen that type of behavior under Windows was using Firefox… and I’ve found gecko browsers do that on all OS’ and versions; Which is part of why I don’t use it unless I have to (like site compatability testing) and why I think it’s… bah, beating a dead horse.
Postgres has the better Sql engine.
Don’t waste your time on MySql.