http://www.osnews.com/story/7833/Opinion_How_Desktop_Linux_Should_Behave Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:47:26 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I think that 90% problems tha peaople have comes from difficult installation of programs and drivers to linux. This is also main reason why driver vendors doesn't support linux, there is just too many incompatible distros to support. LSB and FHS standard are nice, but there is much more unification needed in dostro world. As long as you need to read readme.txt before you install anything, 90% of population is excluded from the Linux world. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I believe that a lot that you speak of HAL and hotplug is trying to be solved. Or, at least, building the foundation of hardware identification, notifications, etc. so that programs can be built to solve the problem. DBUS will also fit into this category for communications between the system, applications, and themselves.

Right now, some of the things you speak of are addressed by the individual distribution--like network settings and such. This is because how they configure these varies from distro to distro. If you want a cross-distribution tool, look into the Gnome System Tools. It is written in a way that a backend can be written to each distribution to be supported. Kind of similar to Webmin.

Automounting of media? Covered by supermount. Pooled storage? LVM (Linux Volume Management). X11? Xorg is actively working on new features such as composites. See this OSnews article: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=7634.

I believe you have some valid points, especially when it comes to the interaction of users with hardware and drivers as well as 3rd party installation of programs (which really doesn't happen all that often yet due to the lack of commercial applications at the user level). You've mixed up some major issues regarding hardware and such with some trite issues that are dealt with at the distribution level, or just aren't that important to begin with.

Cheer up, things aren't as bleak as you are making them seem. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The only complaints the author presents involves the lack of alpha blending and transitions, both of which are possible without breaking the X11 standard. Check out Keith Packard's work on XServer and Xorg at www.freedesktop.org.
The reason X11 is 20 years old and still chuggin' is that it's excellently designed.
Why do people keep bashing X11 without a single valid complaint? Reminds me of SCO... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This article has a good spirit, but ultimately fails in content and research.

I'll go through each of the points.

THE HARDWARE LAYER
discover and kudzu are two hardware detection tools that work. discover is recommended very heavily, as it does a lot of the dirty work involved in hardware probing, and does it well. It has a library (libdiscover2) which provides programmers with a way to get information on hardware information. Havoc Pennington has commented on getting hardware to "just work" and Freedesktop.org is hosting a project, HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) which is attempting to provide programmers with access to hardware in an elegant way. In other words, there are efforts underway here.

As for configuration for things like a network card, distributions like SuSE (with YaST) have provided ways to do this which are very similar to Windows for a long time. Yes, if you are running a barebones distro, you will have to edit this information "by hand" in /etc, but remember, Linux is just a kernel; it's the distribution that matters.

ON X11
X has already been identified as a bottleneck for desktop linux, but don't underestimate the power bad video card drivers have on this impression. Nvidia produces very good drivers for Linux that provide excellent performance in X. But X's free DRI support via the DRI project, although commendable in its effort, isn't up to snuff in terms of raw graphic speed. Plus, ATI's proprietary drivers are a joke. But this doens't have much to do with X.

X does have problems, but listen to the editors: it needs to be taken in a new direction, not scrapped entirely. Keith Packard is on the right track at Freedesktop.org. Y Windows is something entirely different from X in MANY ways, by the by. Read the paper by the CS student coding it.

ON GTK/QT LOOKING THE SAME
This is such a minor issue IMO, but desktop "pundits" seem to constantly latch onto it. Windows users deal with non-standard interfaces all the time, but they don't care. Look at ICQ, Yahoo messenger, WinAmp, iTunes, Easy CD Creator, LimeWire, to name a few. These are still popular and usable applications. And Mac OS, for all its uniform interface broo-ha-ha, has those metal apps and those aqua apps intermingled with blatant disregard for the user's sanity

There are actually already efforts to unify gtk and qt, but it's pointless to me. Besides, KDE and GTK already look pretty much the same (I think GTK apps tend to look a little nicer), so who cares? The more important thing is providing a way for a Gnome user to start up KDE apps without having to load up a billion KDE libraries, or at least make that process less noticable.

ON "NEW" IDEAS
Pooled storage? This must be a joke. I can pop in a new hard drive and mount it wherever I want on my Linux system. What the hell is the author talking about?

Nautilus viewers. Guess what--they existed. In some early 2.x version of Nautilus, there was a "View As Music Collection" that was a music player. Was buggy as hell though, so they removed it. The framework for view panes is there though, just that nobody has been stepping up to code some new views.

BOTTOM LINE
Stuff author is clamoring for is already under development, so put on your coding hat and help out. Most ideas in this article aren't new, though some are.

By the way, I hate the tagline. "Why has DL evolved at such a glacial pace?" Glacial pace? It's taken Microsoft like 8 iterations of Windows to come to "Windows XP," with a UI not much better than Windows 95. In half that time a slew of DEs, Window Managers, and desktop environments have evolved and flowered on Linux. Glacial? C'mon. Give these guys some credit. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? 1. X11 needs to go
2. kernel should not be tied to hardware so much. there was a article about dirrent kernels few days back. there should a base kernel which handles all low level stuff (memory management, scheduling..) and rarely changes.
3. dependency hell should be cleaned up. no not everyone has uber fast 1MBPS connections to use emerge/apt-get Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? No one person or group has enough control to make changes that impact several other projects.

There are simply to many involved parties and individuals for one person to say "everybody, please change this"

Linux is very layered, and changes can be made to one layer so long is it does not effect compatibility with other layers. This greatly limits what can be done to the system.

That, and even if such changes could be made, there would be another guy that wants to do it a different way, so instead of doing it, they just argue about who is right.

For as long as Linux is an open community project, it will mostly not change. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? X11 is not the problem. I agree with Dev about exciting things like the Cairo project at freedesktop.org which will make X even better than it is now.

I agree that better hardware integration is needed. Project Utopia with HAL, D-BUS, and udev will achieve this, and will even include a GNOME front end for making hardware more user friendly on the Linux desktop.

Compared to where it was a few years ago, the Linux desktop is amazing and the pace of improvement is accelerating! Who here remembers trying to surf the web on a Linux box with Netscape 4.x and wishing just once that the fonts didn't look like total garbage. There was a time when everyone was seriously worried that Linux would not have a competitive web browser at all! I remember reading an article on it. Now there are several excellent web browsers.

Go back and play with KDE 1.x or GNOME 1.x for a while ;-) (KDE 1.x was really the beginning of it all, I was amazed by it at the time). Or better yet fvwm95 which looked and behaved horribly, even for its time.

The Linux desktop got there for me this year. It meets my needs perfectly, though I will grant you I am not a typical user. Still, it didn't meet my needs before. The pace of improvement is starting to really show. Wait another 12 months and if you have an open mind, you will be astounded. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? As long as there are two dominant desktops(KDE and Gnome) and linux systems are cobbled together with programs/libraries with maintainers that might live in Outer Mongolia and have no accountability, then Linux on the consumer desktop will remain marginal at best. What needs to happen is for company(not some random hobbyists) to take the kernel and build from there. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Wait another 12 months and if you have an open mind, you will be astounded.

Yeah, and they year 2000 was supposed to be the year of the linux desktop. KDE will never be dominant because its based on a toolkit from a proprietary company in Norway. Gnome is technically inferior, but probably has a better chance in the longrun just for the fact that its underlying toolkit has a better license. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I don't get it when people say that having two competitive desktops is detrimental to linux. Since when is choice a bad thing? KDE and GNOME are both fully functional, they compete with one another vigorously, they offer the user choice and variety.

I don't understand what people have against variety. It is like they insist on a monolithic software culture... a one size fits all approach. Different users have different likes, needs and priorities.

I'd much rather see a healthy assortment of technologies and desktops that can interoperate using open standards, but allow for variety and competition. You just try to get every KDE user to use GNOME instead and see how they feel about it! Try and take Fluxbox away from the nerd accross the street and tell him that he must use GNOME with Metacity only. I don't think the response will be very friendly ;-) Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I find some author remarks valuable, since I also think Linux lacks a lot of poslih, integration and API's.

But, in my opinion, the goal of GTK+ and Qt cooperation can be only intermediate solution, not "final soklution".
My ideal distro should support only one desktop, and even only one GUI library (GTK is my choice).

Reason is simple: when I start any Qt based program under Gnome it takes around 10 seconds just to start it the first time (loading Qt I presume). Gnome apps start almost instantly.

My point is: having dual/multiple toolkits supported is stupid in the long run, and makes Linux distros look slow and bloated, raising memory requirements big time. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "KDE will never be dominant because its based on a toolkit from a proprietary company in Norway."

Yeah, and that MS-DOS thing would never fly, heck those Microsoft guys are a loosely run gang of college dropouts and nerds from New Mexico... all they know how to do is make programs run in BASIC!

I am not a KDE user primarily (Go GNOME!) but even I know that Trolltech has released their toolkit (QT) under the GPL so referring to them as a proprietary company is a tad misleading. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The thing Linux needs the most is a bunch of clueless people posting on osnews every week opinion about what other people should do with Linux. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I think the biggest problem with gtk(this coming from a Gnome 2.6 user) is Glade. Its an absolute abomination compared to QT designer.

When Mono 1.2 is released in Feb with its new GUI designer, I think well see many new gtk developers. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? When will be see real working solutions to desktop Linux unreadiness rather than rants.

How come we don't see opinion articles about how FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, OS X, Window XP, Amiga, SkyOS, Menuet OS, RiscOS, OS/2 etc suck? And how some of them look like tricycles instead of concords.

No, it's always about how Linux isn't desktop ready. It's like Linux is the only OS that isn't desktop ready. And guess why it isn't desktop ready?

Because it doesn't work like the author's favorite "desktop ready" OS. Opinion articles are exactly what they are, opinions.

If you had to know my opinion on these so called "desktop ready" operating systems, I'll probably be skinned alive. I'd rather read patches, bug reports and desktop reviews than rants and bogus "opinions." Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Here we go with another "Linux desktop" article. Can someone tell me what changed from yesterday? Oh nothing, so why the "news" item? Actually it's not news, it's propagandha hype. Can we end all those "ready for desktop" articles please.

What will make Linux ready is switching to some other kernel and building a complete system and not just a kernel. Yes some would say distros, but that's not solving anything. Linux has to become an operating system, not just a kernel, which is why all these articles are bogus to begin with. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Errr...toolkits don't make an OS desktop ready. If so, how many toolkits do we have for Windows? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Let's get some points straight...


Repeat after me: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH X

X as a protocol is fine. Try X on Solaris or an SGI box before you begin making rash, all encompassing statements. Bash Xfree86, not X. X is portable, extensible and definitely not slow - as mentioned earlier, the fact that it's still used 20 years following it's conception is a testament to it's quality. Also, if a switch was made the Y-Windows, it puts everything back to square one - what a waste. A new Xorg release is due in less than a month's time . The release will include several performance and visual improvements, and work is on going. Problem solved.


Configuring your system from GNOME...

apt-get install gnome-system-tools - solved.


Smart device management is on the way!

HAL & Udev solve this, and are already usable to a degree. Problem (almost) solved.


Smart package management exists

It's called Debian and APT, or Gentoo and Portage. This is, IMHO, a far superior system to Window's one. Everything in one place. All that needs to happen is someone needs to write a good front-end, and it's set. Solved.

GNOME and KDE interoperability

Forget it. GNOME is a platform, KDE is a platform. There is no requirement for them to mingle and no reason they should. Use GNOME or KDE, not GNOME and KDE, and it's not a issue.


Next time you're about to offer your opinion, try doing a bit of research before spouting uninformed drivel to the world at large. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I'm on the y-windows list. The project got off to a good start then died. It was forked and development continued, but I haven't been paying attention. I'd place y-windows as a very long shot to replace x. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You don't run a linux operating system. You run a Redhat, Suse, Debian, Gentoo....operating system. All the fanboys clamor about choice (usually the leftist types which always struck me as strange), but in the end too much choice is just bad for a desktop operating system. You're lucky that there aren't 3 or 4 incompatible linux-like kernels. Maybe there could be 3 or 4 toolkits that have about equal marketshare, as well as another dominant desktop to throw into the mix. Have fun with that cobbled together mess. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? We don't see articles about how Windows XP and MacOS X suck because they are here at the average user's desktop and they perform well for that average user's needs. Parhaps they are not perfect, but really usable on their native hardware.

The whole OS world is now about searching for a Windows replacement. You can't change it. The first alternative was OS/2, first aimed to replace DOS, and then -- Windows. Due to marketing issues (IBM's faults and Microsoft's big wins) OS/2 failed. We have been left with Windows only.

The next one was BeOS. While the BeOS developers had seen it as a niche multimedia and content creation OS, the public tried to use it as a Windows replacement OS, especially when it became available for free. But BeOS failed, too. Unfortunately.

Now, there's only Linux left to fight with Windows. And I think that because of the Windows monopoly there's no reason to say "Linux is not aimed to replace anything". Even if someone decides not to use Windows right from the start, installs Linux only and is sure that Linux is ready for his or her desktop, in fact he/she has replaced the industry standard OS -- Windows -- with Linux. And there are lots of people who are willing to replace Windows -- in reality, by switching from it -- in the moment Linux offers the same features set with similar GUI. Noone can deny it, we just have to accept it and either keep Linux different and hear "Linux is still not ready for the desktop" voices once every week, or change it so that it seems closer to Windows and make more people switch.

And about FreeBSD, SkyOS, AmigaOS and the rest mentioned: they just don't seem to be an option for a Windows user. And that's why hardly anyone writes about them.

I am a day-to-day Linux user and Linux server administrator, and I see many points where Linux is far from catching up with Windows, especially on desktop. While it may be sufficient for some people, it doesn't mean that it should not be enhanced. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Linux will be ready for the desktop when their usable GUIs (ie KDE, Gnome) don't each up all a systems resources.

128-192mb of ram is insane. I'd rather use Windows XP, atleast I'd get compadibility.

I loves the old KDE, that would run fine on 64mb of ram. Now what are my choices? Using some POS like Fluxbox? No thanks. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? --- "Linux will be ready for the desktop when their usable GUIs (ie KDE, Gnome) don't each up all a systems resources.

128-192mb of ram is insane. I'd rather use Windows XP, atleast I'd get compadibility."

Your perceptions on RAM usage are a bit skewed, both for Linux and WIndows XP, and as far as how much is too much.

I have a modern Gnome 2.6 desktop setup with a 2.6.7 kernel on a modern machine with 512mb RAM that I use regularly for various multi-media and gaming, but after booting and starting X Im generally using LESS then 100mb. After using it all day, and with Firefox, Gaim, and a few minor background things running to check my mail and update my xplanet generated background (so cool!), Im using only 113mb RAM.

There is no way Windows XP can be this lean. I know, I still have it installed, and I used it primarily for a while before I was finally comfortable to make the switch completely. Neither uses too much RAM though, not for a modern desktop anyway. Also, have you tried Vector linux? Its a great Win95-like graphical desktop that works ok on 32mb RAM.

If you want a light desktop, they are there, you are just ignoring them. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Please stop saying Linux isn't evolving so much.. As a KDE programmer I can tell you that this isn't true.
GCC, X.org, KDE, reiser4, QT4, the new kernel.. These only some of the great things that are in the "work in progress" list. The impact will be huge.
WAIT AND SEE... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Linux will be ready for the desktop when their usable GUIs (ie KDE, Gnome) don't each up all a systems resources

Yep, and when you use that one KDE app on your Gnome system you're bringing in most of the KDE libraries along with it. Today's linux desktop is more bloated than XP, unless you use one of the boxes, maybe XFCE, and don't run any QT/KDE apps. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? proof is on my box at home: I have only ONE application that really forces me back into that other OS. And as soon as someone points me to something for creating video DVDs with menus and stuff, as easy and user friendly, yet powerful as DVD Lab on Windows, there's none left at all.

Anything else I use my box for, I can do (and in fact do) on linux as well as (if not better than) on windows. And that's not counting the "hee hee i don't care" i get every time I see the daily worm/virus/exploit warnings on various news sites.

Oh and for the Article: there's nothing left to say that hasn't been said already, so I just throw buzzwords around.
"SuSEplugger" "kernel 2.6 hotplugging" "subfs" "SuSEwatcher" "apt-get (apt4rpm)"

Only one thing left to be said: I fully agree with this comment here...
Here we go with another "Linux desktop" article. Can someone tell me what changed from yesterday? Oh nothing, so why the "news" item? Actually it's not news, it's propagandha hype. Can we end all those "ready for desktop" articles please. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Only one thing left to be said: I fully agree with this comment here.

Yeah, and then did you read his second paragraph?


What will make Linux ready is switching to some other kernel and building a complete system and not just a kernel. Yes some would say distros, but that's not solving anything. Linux has to become an operating system, not just a kernel, which is why all these articles are bogus to begin with. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Don't you have anything more worthwhile to do? If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? proof is on my box at home

That arguement is tired, so stop using it. I think the yugo is a good car. The proof is *I* drive one to work every day.

I think diet cola is just as good, the proof is *I* drink it.

I think "Hooked On Logic(tm)" is a successful program, proof is you used it. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Lemmy, checkt this out if you are interested in Linux DVD creation:

http://www.apple.com/shake/

http://www.apple.com/dvdstudiopro/ Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You're lucky that there aren't 3 or 4 incompatible linux-like kernels.

Erm... What do you call the Solaris kernel? the FreeBSD kernel? the Hurd? the AIX kernel? Darwin? But I suppose you're right. There's substantially more than '3 or 4' of them... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Hey,

Look everybody is Jimbo, back at the usual time for his share of anti-Linux warfare.

Everybody, say hi to jimbo!

He is here to tell us how much Linux sucks. He does it every night with the incessant zeal of a paid astroturfer. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? >The thing Linux needs the most is a bunch of clueless >people posting on osnews every week opinion about what >other people should do with Linux.

I wish OSNews had a moderation system like slashdot, because I'd put that at about +20. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You know you are winning when they cannot tone the rhetoric down. If Microsoft was not fearful, they would not send all of these paid astroturfers out en masse.

I have it on good word that they have a whole group of people that they pay to comeo out to osnews.com and even slashdot and post endless anti-Linux tirades.

I mean, if Linux is so hopeless, leave us alone. Don't write about it. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? A article like this was here yesterday, and today there is another!

WAIT!

I'm not against the author like the (almost) rest of you, I think the author not only has a good point but my own opinion is even more extreme, I won't say my opinion because I would be flamed with 200 comments or more but anyway I agree with the author of this article and with the other one.

But the thing is why that there are a lot of articles like this, probably because as more people start using Linux, either completely new to computers or comming from Windows, they that are not blinded by geeky and freedom (anarchy) dreams, can see the obvious and write articles about what they see...

So it's just a matter of time until these issues are fixed or another OS takes Linux place, my wish is that is wasn't so slow.

As for some of these stupid comments I have to say some things:

1. You are always babbling about freedom, so let people express their opinion freely on medias (OSNews for example)

2. Not everyone is a coder so flaming with comments about patches, fixes, coding and compiling is not nice, that's the programmer job, not users.

3. Comments saying to people go buy OSX are quite dumb because not everybody has the money to buy one.

4. To those who say that some basic features like desktop integration will never happen unless you pay the developers to do it, well... you are probably right and that means I'm (and probably many people) willing to pay about 100? to 150? to have a good Linux desktop, that work, behave and do what I expect from a desktop.

5. Finally about Qt, I don't see anything wrong with it, is GPL but even if it was closed source and commercial I wouldn't mind as long as it work and doesn't make the final product too expensive. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? If you don't like Linux, if you find it unusable, don't use it.

You, like everybody else who contributes nothing but constant whining, won't be missed.

If you honestly would like to see Linux succeed on the desktop, then do something useful - file bug reports, join user communities and make it crystal clear what is is the 'masses' want, or get off your ass and learn to code.

Scratch your itch. Thats how it has to happen.

And it's the only way it's going to happen. Spare me your 'I don't have enough time, or I don't know how, or I don't see why i should need to'.

Thats just utterly irrelevant, either you personally make the choice to help, or you deal with the fact that nobody really gives a crap about what you want, and any support you get will be from companies who think they can make money from you eventually.

Basically, you might as well stick with Windows, because theres nothing for you in 'Linux Land'. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I would have thought that you people would have worked it out by now.

Look in any major web site promotion book by companies like New Riders, published in the last three years or so. They say very clearly:

"To get more traffic, it is better for a web site to be controversial than well liked and in agreement."

Simply put, Eugenia is posting articles that she knows will drive traffic from people saying "Hey... There's a really stupid article on OSNews... go and have a look". It gains more traffic, and ultimately, more advertising hits as well, I'd imagine.

Welcome to the new web media. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Don't you have anything more worthwhile to do? If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

Since Linux is the problem obviously and not Windows I wonder why all you zeals don't have anything better to do.

On another note, why would one want Linux to have world domination? Why not diversity? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What pisses me off is how every other operating system is perfect, well except "desktop linux." I would love to see equal opportunity opinion whinning about how other OSes aren't desktop ready. Yes...yes we all know Linux sucks. But can we get over it already! Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? So when will Linux on the Desktop become a reality? Well, it's not going to happen in it's current state. The reason is simplicity offered in Windows.

Everything in Windows can be acheived through an easy to use task-oriented interface. System configuration can be done through the easier to use Control Panel and the more technical Microsoft Management Console. In Linux, much configuration and setup must be done through a command-line interface. This is changing, but complete, consistant GUI tools for Linux are not here yet.

Another problem with Linux is the multiple tools to get one job done. While this can be seen as a benefit, Windows gets everything done with one Window Manager, one web browser, one Media Player, etc. Linux distributions aimed at Desktop users should follow this model. Distributions should pick KDE or GNOME (probably GNOME because it's simpler), one web browser (most likely Firefox), one Office Suite (OO.org), etc. Most users don't care which they are using, just as long as it works and it's easy to use.

The final aspect that would make me a full time Linux convert would be better device support by OEMs and easier to install drivers. But this probably won't happen until Linux acquires a greater market share. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? quit saying linux sucks.. linux fucking rules it's the FREE SOFTWARE on top of linux that SUCKS the kernel is pretty damn standarde, make all the software on top play nice, then get the kernel to add stuff. the only thing wrong with the linux kernel itself is that supermount has to be patched onto it. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? It's a rant. So is this.

"The Current State of Desktop Linux"
Did the author expect the Linux desktop to be as good as a commercial desktop - with development being salaried work during working hours as opposed to voluntary work outside working hours? I think the current state is remarkable considering those odds.

"How To Fix The Hardware Problem"
Has the author tried YaST? Read about it? Never heard of it?

"Interoperability & Aesthetics Issues"
It'd be a mistake to fuse KDE/Qt and GNOME/Gtk. Let them evolve freely on different paths. Let them compete freely from different paths. It will make them stronger - also against Windows. It's not like one DL has 50% of the apps while the other has the other 50%. If an app is present in one DL and missing or no good in another then fill-in the void with a new app rather than bending the existing app to fit the void.

Why has DL not yet taken off in the work environment?
FUD. Inertia. No guts. Playing it safe. And the various Linux Office wares could be a little better. But that'll come. As time goes by more and more old systems reach retirement - like the NT systems in Munich and Paris. And by going Linux they are providing the leadership and push that others need to cross over. That in turn will increase the pressure for better apps. And suddenly the flood gates burst open. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This has to be one of the worst articles published on this site recently and it is running against strong competition.

So, why is it so terrible? Because no one is allowed to criticize linux? Because linux is perfect?
No, because the author doesn't seem to have a clue what he is talking about.

Take for example his claim that you have to edit something under /etc to get your networking working. This is simply false. Sure, there are distros where you have to do that, but if you take any of the more "userfriendly" distros like Suse, Mandrake, etc. you don't even have to know something like /etc exists.

I'm sorry, there is a lot of things to criticize about linux on the desktop but if you want to write a critique of the state of desktop linux do yourself and the readers a favor and inform yourself about the subject before writing an article. This way we may be able to read an article about the subject that is actually worth reading and that could lead to new ideas and a fruitfull discussion and not simply an uninformed flamebait. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This article runs arguments that are simply based on factual assertions that are simply false. For example:

How can I configure hardware from a graphical control panel on my GNOME desktop? The answer is I can't, because GNOME doesn't yet deal with that portion of my system. Why do I need to tell Linux what disks I have in my system? Because it doesn't know! Windows and Mac OS both know when I stick a disk in my drive.

First point - control panel. A lot of distros provide graphical config tools. They all work on a gnome desktop - Yast and Drakconf. Both work on the gnome desktop. They are not part of gnome, but so what. They are available on end-user oriented distros.

With respect to disk identification, why is it on Mandrake that every time I put a CD-R in my burner, K3B opens automatically? I find that quite annoying, because I burn using the command line, but there's auto detection going on. Why is it when I plug my digital camera in to a usb port, an icon appears on the desktop for a graphical application that will download photos off my camera? Why when I put a music CD in the drive, KSCD opens? Why is it when I change my motherboard, cpu, graphics card, and sound card (leaving my hard drives as is), and reboot after that massive change, linux boots, detects all hardware, configures it, and I'm up and running without reinstalling th OS, or manually installing any drivers? Because linux is capable of doing this. Your factual assertions are just plain wrong!

Then there's software. Drakconf, and urpmi solve the problems discussed. A wizard to set up network - just like windows. A package installer that resolves dependencies without user input - and it's graphical as well. Furthermore, there are many package managers that do this for other distros - apt, yum, portage. Again, factually inaccurate.

X11 - I don't know enough about X11 to respond to this. However, I do know that kde3.2.3 on kernel 2.6 feels just as snappy on my pIII 600mhz laptop as Windows NT on my big arse overpowered desktop machine at work.

KDE/Gnome - What is the obsession with consistency. There is no consistency in Windows, so why does KDE/Gnome need to live up to such high standards. Despite this, there is a tool (GTK-QT theme from kde-look), that will faithfully reproduce the kde theme that is installed on gnome/gtk based apps. Hey presto - consistency (at least on a superficial level).

To argue that the Linux desktop has not moved very far in 7 years is just a joke. I started using linux when Mandrake 8.0 was released. The desktop has come a long long way since then. kde has become more featureful, and yet less bloated and quicker. When compared with Windows, that is a fantastic acheivement. The key application areas are now repleat with high quality apps: K3B, Digikam, Kino, Kaffeine, Gaim, Firefox, Thunderbird, Open Office, Gimp and on and on. A lot of people that see my desktop who are windows users just drool at some of these apps. To say that the desktop has not progressed seems farcical. Nothing is perfect, and Windows is far from perfect, but this article is an insult to the developers who have spent the last 7 years taking it to the heights that now is. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Linux has almost everything it needs now to make a good DE. Unfortunately OSX has a few additional tricks which put it anywhere from 1 to 4 years ahead of Linux in its GUI, but most of that useful functionality can be copied or is currently available in metacity. Other windowmanagers might catch up to OSX sometime in the next few years, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Anyway, the problems Linux faces are mostly just taste, style and having a person/group focused on providing a simple default configuration. This will be addressed eventually, but until then we have to deal with the ugly defaults chosen by Redhat, Slackware, etc. I haven't seen the latest Linspire, SuSE, Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake configs but I would assume they aren't much better. Mandrake is probably the most user friendly, from my perspective, but its been a while since I looked at it.

I would tell you what is needed, but I think it would be easier for me to show you. So I'll continue my work and one day will be ready to contribute my idea of the perfect linux DE if someone else doesn't beat me to it first. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? X11 is a big problem, the configuration sucks, selecting a resolution sucks, using different mice and tablets sucks. wacom tablets are supported by the kernel but x11 uses it's own driver which just doesn't work.
Not even to mention the 20 different window managers which
are either slow or lacking in features, write ONE that does work.

I still like the BeOS way of doing things most of the time. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I think the most fundamental mistake people have when it comes to Linux is assuming all the developers out there are working together towards some kind of utopic-distribution for the average Joe. Seriously, this is not the case.

It is clear that the people who write these pieces want to help. Opinions and criticism are helpful, but this stuff is so old and reiterated. It isn't helping. Helping is doing some kind of development, words don't do much. Not all development is code. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? My take: stop posting bs of users who just found out about that OS called "Linux" and think they are all knowing while they don't even have the capability to do some basic research.

I know it's the season for cucumbers, but that's not a valid reason to post bs. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? how much does redmond pay for such posts? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? KDE and Gnome aren't the only usable desktops/X-environments available in Linux. Yes, they have useful system configuration tools but several distro makers offer similar tools, so KDE or Gnome are not really necessary at all (think of Libranet's Adminmenu). Once you've got your system configured to your liking, there are better alternatives to the bloated KDE and Gnome.

XFCE4 looks and feels nice and you can configure it's behaviour graphically. I like WindowMaker's look and feel even better, and WindowMaker also has a graphical program to configure the desktop. Fluxbox is a bit more simplistic but it has nice looking themes. My point is that you can install any of these smaller desktops and use them to launch your usual desktop applications. They are good-looking, easy to use, stable and fast. And they don't imitate Windows.

If you want to convert the Windows desktop users to using Linux on the desktop, you should offer something different, preferably something better. If people are offered KDE and Gnome as the only usable choices in Linux, they will inevidently feel that Linux on the desktop is the free but uglier, slower, and less user-friendly version of Windows. Instead, Linux distros should offer Windows users something refreshingly different. IMO, they should forget about KDE and Gnome altogether and build their Linux desktop around XFCE4, WindowMaker or Fluxbox. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Since anyone who has read all the posts/BS (like me) must have too much time on his/her hands I can freely use this thread to post my BS-test.

I just wanted to test the HTML tags.

Thanks for reading this. Sorry for the trouble. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You just made this crap thread worth reading Thanks. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Why do I call this a troll article? Quite simple, cause that author did not mind to verify if his claims still are valid, if at is worked on solving them. For the hardware detection problem for instance I just want to ask what he guesses, why the entire Linux kernel has become hot-pluggable, why sysfs has been introduced, why devfs is obsolete now. Did he ever hear about freedesktop.org's desktop bus (http://freedesktop.org/Software/dbus) and their hardware abstraction layer (http://freedesktop.org/Software/hal, http://freedesktop.org/~david/guadec2004-hal-and-gnome.pdf) - First programs for it exist, the virtual file system of GNOME 2.8 will be able to use it. Only purpose of this stuff: Make hardware gadgets easy to use.

Same ignorance applies for eye-candy like transparency in X11: Transparency was one reason for the XFree86 fork (know Keith to fight for it for years now). The next release of the xorg-server definitly will contain true transparency plus window-update notification (aka. DAMAGE extension) - which allows efficient support for on demand remote user support via VNC (as known from windows). Did he mention the VNC problem? Don't know, as I give up reading the entire article, after being upset by the initial thesis. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? X11 doesn't suck. The examples you gave are examples of Xorg/XFree86 sucking, not X11. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? My first computer experience (1982) was on a DEC PDP-11 minicomputer. Starup consisted of flicking a few switches and it was command line only from there.

My first computer was a Commodore 64 in 1983.

Some other "fun" experiences - using a teletype terminal on a HP 300 mainframe and a Sanyo desktop running MSDOS 2.0 (I think) with a single 360k floppy and no hard drive.

I'm always amazed by people who seem have to have only being using computers for 5 or so years saying that something isn't ready for use. If you were properly taught to use a CLI you would probably think a mouse and GUI was a a silly way to operate a computer. "Desktop readiness" is mostly a matter of familiarity with the OS.

I switched from MacOS 8.6 to Win 98 and found the experience strange for a few months until I became familiar with windows. The same thing when Itried Linux- once I became familiar with a system it was desktop ready. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You know you are winning when they cannot tone the rhetoric down. If Microsoft was not fearful, they would not send all of these paid astroturfers out en masse.

I have it on good word that they have a whole group of people that they pay to comeo out to osnews.com and even slashdot and post endless anti-Linux tirades.

I mean, if Linux is so hopeless, leave us alone. Don't write about it.

some of us poor windows n00bs want more thn anything for linux to suceed, but we feel that will only occur when the 'usability' approaches that of the current flavour of windows.

i dual boot with windows and SUSE, and i am trying to transfer as many of the thing to linux from winblows as i possibly can, but i cannot run all my games on Linux otherwise the transition would be complete.

i installed UT2k4 on SUSE the other day (you may laugh but for me it was a triumph), and i had to mount the blinking DVD in order for SUSE to recognise that it was really a collection of CD installation disks, i mean WTF!?!? yes i managed it (with assistance), but seriously guys this has to change. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Lemmy, checkt this out if you are interested in Linux DVD creation:

http://www.apple.com/shake/

http://www.apple.com/dvdstudiopro/


and software for apple hardware and mac os x is helping me how?

yes, i saw, shake is available for linux as well. for the little amount of five thousand us dollars. which still does not account for the fact that shake is not for dvd creation, only for special effects. now, go ahead and compare that price tag with the $99 for DVDLab. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "However, it's been 7 years and DL hasn't progressed much at all since then"

we can say that of windows since windows 3.1... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Let me guess, suse Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? How many articles are people going to write about how DL is not this and is not that. And how come all these writters seem to ALWAYS overlook Linspire, Xandros and Lycoris?? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I don't get it when people say that having two competitive desktops is detrimental to linux. Since when is choice a bad thing? KDE and GNOME are both fully functional, they compete with one another vigorously, they offer the user choice and variety.



Unfortunately having two desktops limits the choise. Once you have chosen your desktop environment applictiations from other environments will look foreign and give your desktop and inconsitent look & feel. E.g. if you have a KDE app in Gnome you will have to manage font and color settings both in the KDE way and in the Gnome way.




I'd much rather see a healthy assortment of technologies and desktops that can interoperate using open standards, but allow for variety and competition. You just try to get every KDE user to use GNOME instead and see how they feel about it! Try and take Fluxbox away from the nerd accross the street and tell him that he must use GNOME with Metacity only. I don't think the response will be very friendly ;-)



The secret of a succesful desktop environment is having good defaults. Even if there was one standard Linux desktop environment there is no reason to disallow individual users from making their own choises. If the geek doesn't like Gnome he will have no problem installing his favorite Fluxbox. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The secret of a succesful desktop environment is having good defaults. Even if there was one standard Linux desktop environment there is no reason to disallow individual users from making their own choises. If the geek doesn't like Gnome he will have no problem installing his favorite Fluxbox.

Finally someone figured it out. This is what sucks in windows, you can't tweak it enough without getting a buggy environment (Litestep etc etc). Linux problem is that nothing is consistent ever however tweakable for the experienced. So they really not even competing with eachother... I'd say Linux main competitor is the BSDs and other Unices but not Windows. Even if some distros try to be consistent it is impossible as GNU/Linux in it's nature is inconsistent.

I don't even want Linux to "succeed on the desktop". As far as I'm concerned, BSDs or Solaris or Haiku or SkyOS are better choices as their future seem to have far wider options than the current GNU development model. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/os2004/view/e_sess/5195
http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/3450

"Did he ever hear about freedesktop.org's desktop bus (http://freedesktop.org/Software/dbus) and their hardware abstraction layer (http://freedesktop.org/Software/hal, http://freedesktop.org/~david/guadec2004-hal-and-gnome.pdf) - First programs for it exist, the virtual file system of GNOME 2.8 will be able to use it. Only purpose of this stuff: Make hardware gadgets easy to use."

I agree it is mostly usable for the home end users, but its not only for hardware gadgets. See above! See any sane review of it. It's for ALL the hardware including when you plug in an external harddive, out in a CDROM, etc etc etc Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? ON "NEW" IDEAS
Pooled storage? This must be a joke. I can pop in a new hard drive and mount it wherever I want on my Linux system. What the hell is the author talking about?


He is talking about logical volume management LVM. This is already available in Linux. But most distros doesn't turn it on by default though. The idea is that you have an extra layer of abstraction between your mount points and your physical media, making it possible to extend and schrink the available storage space available at each mount point.
This is very handy e.g. if your mail system requires your inboxes to reside on /var/spool/mail and you get out of space. You just add some more disk and to the mount point holding /var/spool/mail. No need to copy files to a new and larger disk, just add some space. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Problems of todays Desktop solutions:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=201237
http://micke.hallendal.net/archives/000170.html
http://ed.asisaid.com/blog/index.php?p=40

A possible solution for the future:

http://www.goneme.org/ Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "The thing Linux needs the most is a bunch of clueless people posting on osnews every week opinion about what other people should do with Linux."

Genius! Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The promise of Desktop Linux (DL) has been long coming. It's made significant progress since the mid-90s when GNOME and KDE came out, giving Linux users a somewhat modern desktop to work upon. However, it's been 7 years and DL hasn't progressed much at all since then. Today, DL is still nothing more than a UNIX-clone with a task bar, a start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it. But why has DL evolved at such a glacial pace?
>
>

Hey idiot, what should a DE be other than a task bar, a start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it?

If you want something that's more than that then write it yourself and quit bothering people who aren't interested in your lame ideas. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? > Hey idiot, what should a DE be other than a task bar, a
> start menu, and a desktop with some icons on it?

Ever heard of Ion or things: no fucking taskbar, desktop icons, etc. but still fully useable:
http://modeemi.fi/~tuomov/ion/

And btw: no matter how much you disagree with somebody there's no reason to call somebody 'idiot'. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This article has lots of "should have" or "wouldn't it be better if".

I like ideas.

I prefer plans to implement them.

Worthless article. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Right, I've finally had enough. I'm deleting my OSnews.com bookmark - if drivel like this is considered news, it's really not worth coming here. Bye! Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? if some the windoze sheeps really find it to be a more intuitive WM, then try to install XPDE on your box.
Maybe it makes migrating to linux a less frightening experience.

http://www.xpde.com/ Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Now, there's only Linux left to fight with Windows. And I think that because of the Windows monopoly there's no reason to say "Linux is not aimed to replace anything". Even if someone decides not to use Windows right from the start, installs Linux only and is sure that Linux is ready for his or her desktop, in fact he/she has replaced the industry standard OS -- Windows -- with Linux. And there are lots of people who are willing to replace Windows -- in reality, by switching from it -- in the moment Linux offers the same features set with similar GUI. Noone can deny it, we just have to accept it and either keep Linux different and hear "Linux is still not ready for the desktop" voices once every week, or change it so that it seems closer to Windows and make more people switch.
>
>
The parasites you are refering to can go and off themselves as far I'm concerned.

I don't care about them and never have or will. I don't care if they never switch from Windows to Linux. I use Linux because *I* want to and not because a bunch of idiot Windows users think the OSS world *OWES* them asomething. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What pisses me off is how every other operating system is perfect, well except "desktop linux." I would love to see equal opportunity opinion whinning about how other OSes aren't desktop ready. Yes...yes we all know Linux sucks. But can we get over it already!


If it makes you happy, I could whine about both windows and MacOS, there is plenty of reasons in both of them. But unfortunately neither MacOS nor Windows follow a development model that makes it worth while. When whining at Linux you can at least hope that some skilled developer will pick it up and do something about it. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "...because a bunch of idiot Windows users..."
"...Hey idiot, what should a DE be other than..."
"...if some the windoze sheeps really..."

Now this is one reason why I lost my interest in Linux, OSS, and especially its community.

Too bad, I really liked Mandrake. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? And a lot of people have lost interest in you and your constant whining about "linux should be like windows".

So you lost interest. Good riddance I say. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? And a lot of people have lost interest in you and your constant whining about "linux should be like windows".

Mmm, I didn't write this article, so I'm not really sure what you mean. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? it is an absolute support NIGHTMARE!!!
i've worked 3 years in tech support before getting a porgammer job and even the tiny differences between different windows versions where complicating support. when offereing tech support for inexperienced users, having two desktops doubles support costs (at the minimum) and in many countrys you are required by law to offer tech support for a coomercial product. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Now this is one reason why I lost my interest in Linux, OSS, and especially its community.

Too bad, I really liked Mandrake.


Well, I'd say, your other reasons were a reason why you got to read something like that, especially if you repeated them endlessly.

I hope that at the same time you also learned that really _nobody_ (who you dont pay) actually cares or even should care for your reasons. Nobody owes you anything.

If among various OSes MS Windows or even the Mac OS meets your needs the best, just stick with that. Theres nothing wrong with choosing the best tool for the job and nobody will whine about your decision. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I wished those article "authors" actually tried to *use* their Linux distro (better yet: try a few) before telling others what they should do.

I am telling you, I've used Linux for about 2 years now and using SuSe for a bit over one month now and ditched XP (well it's still on my dual-boot but I don't use it any longer). But I can tell you only now am I beginning to get 'loose' of the Windows "brainwashing" (or "Windows paradigms" if you prefer to be more tactical about it). Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I think Thom Holwerda uses SkyOS or Beos or a Beos-clone (wasn't he author of that Haiku or SkyOS article of last week?).

Thom appears neutral to me, so I don't think it's any use getting all hot-headed on him. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What is desktop Linux? I'm using Linux only for more than 2 years. Because it's more comfortable and easier to use for me. How can you say that i don't have a linux desktop? Of course I do! It fits my needs far better than Windows "desktop".

Hardware.

The apps from top layer are not supposed to communicate with the bottom layer. Try to study more about layered architectures. Even my Linux knows when I stick anything in my computer. But it doesn't do anything on its know, it would have to know what i want to do. But it can't, noone else can know what I want to do! That Windows "action predict" system really sucks. I have just put a CD into my computer, containing many different files, how do you know what am I going to do with it? View the images? Play the video? Check the total size? Copy something? Search for some content? Burn another track on it? Rip the audio part? No, boy. I just put it in to protect it, because i cannot find the original plastic box for it!

Do not compare to Windows. Compare to your memory. Do you know how to do it? If not, ask some one else.

I plugged in my firewire hard drive into the windows box and after several month of perfect work it decided not to show it up on the desktop (even in the hardware manager). So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?

I plugged my mp3 player and copied some music on it. Now I want to pull it out. Windows says that I can't do it right know. Ok, I wait one hour. Nothing changes. I wait another 5 hours. Nothing changes. Finally I pull it out anyway. The files are damaged. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?

"Other Computers" in windows sharing don't show up, even after several Windows professionals tried to fix it, with cooperation of everyone in the local network. They failed. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?

I choose to switch the computer of. It says it cannot stop the battery meter (on my desktop computer, the only battery hold the CMOS memory alive), and than, instead of switching of, it ends up with well-known BSOD. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?

Firing up any HW accelerated game leads to immediate reboot. Windows even don't recognize it and do'nt check the disks afterwards. So, what do you do? Reinstall the OS?

The problem is. We tried to reinstall it completely many times, but these problems didn't go away. Linux runs absolutely ok on that box, memory+disks+hardware tests pass without any problems.

These are daily problems. Every day, some critical flaw comes out on that windows box. Do you dare to call this "desktop ready"?

Why do you think that alpha blending and transitions are modern features? They are modern fashion. For proper work you don't need it. Desktop environment may be very cute and usable without them. And it is, indeed.

Why do you mix up Gnome and KDE apps? Do you mean, that desktop ready means having no other interfaces to choose? Use just one of those. I use neither. I stop pretending that Windows are consistent. Try to install all the applications from the CDs you get with your computer. Those CPU temperature meters, strange multimedia centers, add winamp, CDR Win, Avid, Cooledit, some video players and enjoy the "consistent desktop". When in Rome.... When using Linux-like system, stop behaving like a Windows user.

Linux made by Geeks for Geeks. Yes, you understood. Not for average Windows user. "The user's Home directory should be the center of the Linux desktop rather than the root filesystem." said the saint Bill. Any reason? What the hell is Home directory, that it is so important for you? What do you store there? Apps? no. Data? no. Just configuration and a few private files, nothing else. Average joe cannot accidentaly trash any system files when not in Windows. My computer is made of bare metal, not rubber-duck-plastic.

Pooled storage? Like two harddrives behaving as one big? Do you mean RAID? Well it's not OS-thing at all, man.

Nautilus, hm... How do you wnat te dive into directory with more than 20000 minutes of music, if it tried to scan it in advance? I just use one keypress for the music to be played. Do you really think it is too much?

Why should be inatallation web-based? Do I really need to connect my computer to the internet, to be able to install anything? How would you click on that link on a computer without a monitor? Or do you really mean that I need a monitor just to run my router? Oh my god, nobody told me that ;-)

Welcome window? Why would I switch the computer of? When I want to read mail, a read it. When I want to read RSS, I do it. I can't image, that I can save that one keypress I need to do that.

You complain that other people just complain, and do not propose anything. OK, here it comes: I suggest you not to tell me what should my desktop do. I am the only one to decide it.

And I recommend you to use Windows. Because they are the best desktop around for you. Windows look like Windows, they have applications compatible with Windows, they even sometimes behave like Windows, and finally they have all the Windows bugs, that you are a must-have for a desktop to be called READY! Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? @ drynwhyl
I hope that at the same time you also learned that really _nobody_ (who you dont pay) actually cares or even should care for your reasons. Nobody owes you anything.

Of course they should care! They lost a potential customer! Your post makes sense in total, but this remark doesn't at all.

If among various OSes MS Windows or even the Mac OS meets your needs the best, just stick with that. Theres nothing wrong with choosing the best tool for the job and nobody will whine about your decision.

That's the whole point! People do whine about it! for instance, in the time I use Windows (BeOS is my main OS) I prefer IE. I just like it, never had any problems with it. People yell at me for that! I'm called a troll, and MS idiot etc. simply because I prefer IE! That's crazy!

@ Anonymous:
I think Thom Holwerda uses SkyOS or Beos or a Beos-clone (wasn't he author of that Haiku or SkyOS article of last week?).

I've used almost every OS for the x86 platform. But yes, BeOS is my main operating system. Windows is my second. And yes, I was the author of that SkyOS article/interview.

Thom appears neutral to me, so I don't think it's any use getting all hot-headed on him.

Thank you. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What pisses me off is how every other operating system is perfect, well except "desktop linux." I would love to see equal opportunity opinion whinning about how other OSes aren't desktop ready. Yes...yes we all know Linux sucks. But can we get over it already!

There is a good reason to that: Linux (and not Slackware, Mandrake, RedHat, Debian, etc) has been hyped as a desktop replacement for Windows (and had that ambition) for years. A lot of people have said that it was on the path for world domination, and Microsoft's demise.

That hasn't been the case with any other OS. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What will make Linux ready is switching to some other kernel and building a complete system and not just a kernel. Yes some would say distros, but that's not solving anything. Linux has to become an operating system, not just a kernel, which is why all these articles are bogus to begin with.

Could you tell me was is explicitly different between the two systems other than increased configurability and modularity for the Linux approach? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? A possible solution for the future:
http://www.goneme.org/

Definitly not, since our trolly friend oGALAXYo explicitly refuse usage for modern techniques like D-Bus or HAL. At least that's what he writes on his Goneme site... Better: That's how I understand his statements on his site. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Ah come on. I dont, and I suppose you dont too go on Beos and SkyOS boards and list all the points why you cant use their system.

I mean, I never saw Thom repeating "I want a My Documents folder, or I wont use Linux and I'l tell anybody not to use it" or a similar childish troll, but I'm quite sure that he _knows_ what requirements and problems tend to annoy a typical linuxer when you throw them repeatedly at him, and one of these are without doubt the often heard threats that one will quit using linux because another user responded in a way he doesnt like.

I personally simply dont care if he uses Mandrake or another distribution, or if he or somebody else quits using Linux at all this very evening, but I find it annoying when he has to make all other Linux users indirectly responsible for his problems.

(I personally havent been laughed ot trolled at even at the time i didnt know how to shutdown (!) a machine, which without doubt wouldnt be so if I had firstly griped that the system is unusable and there is no Start/Shutdown button, and than asked for help. Or so.) Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I loves the old KDE, that would run fine on 64mb of ram. Now what are my choices? Using some POS like Fluxbox? No thanks.

Hey! I know it's only opinion, but I've got my desktop set up with fluxbox 0.9.9, rox filer and gtk apps, and it is SWEET and intuitive, mostly drag and drop driven.

Yeah!

The truth is that Linux is set, in 18 months, to be a killer, complete OS. Right now, it's only right for me and those like me. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Unfortunately having two desktops limits the choise. Once you have chosen your desktop environment applictiations from other environments will look foreign and give your desktop and inconsitent look & feel. E.g. if you have a KDE app in Gnome you will have to manage font and color settings both in the KDE way and in the Gnome way.

Yeah, wouldn't it be great if there were only one application for each purpose? Each could be so highly developed. You could even have a locked down suite of languages that all development was done in, and stop support for all others. Of course, you'd have to use forceful tactics to get this done. Maybe ignoring standards on the web and the like.

You could even have only one OS!!!

This is a great idea. Why hasn't this occured to anyone yet? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I never claimed that you did.

I guess I'm just so sick of *all* whiners that I wasn't very discriminant. "Linux neeeeeds this, Lihnux[sic] neeeeds that, it doesn't work like windows, X is a resource hog, x gotta go, linux is bloated, linuxs is slow, choice is bad, linux is this and linux is that"... bleh. What a lot of uninformed drivel.

What is *needed* is

1. People realize this is *not* windows, never was, and hopefully never will be.

2. Something isn't bad just because you lack knowledge. Hell, you aren't even capabel of riding a bike with out some pains i the beginning. Yet I have not heard anyone complain about the usability of bikes.

So, as long as people fail to acknowledge those two points there will be whiners, and I won't miss any one of them if they decide to use some other tools. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I personally simply dont care if he uses Mandrake or another distribution, or if he or somebody else quits using Linux at all this very evening, but I find it annoying when he has to make all other Linux users indirectly responsible for his problems.

The only people I'm holding responsible are those people who cannot stand critique, who cannot stand someone saying something they might just not in some way agree with. I know a lot of Linux users who are perfectly sane and who can stand critique, whether the critique is viable or not. They just reply with sane comments instead rambling on about the virtues of OSS (note: I'm not syaing you are one of the last group ). Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? [i]Let me guess, suse Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Of course they should care! They lost a potential customer! Your post makes sense in total, but this remark doesn't at all.

Of course the companies behind Linux should care. And also the distributors should care! But not the non-profit hobbyist community (which is still the main driving force in free software development), especially when day after day, somebody overwhelms them with complaints how unusable their system is, and succesive threats how one will stop using it.


That's the whole point! People do whine about it! for instance, in the time I use Windows (BeOS is my main OS) I prefer IE. I just like it, never had any problems with it. People yell at me for that! I'm called a troll, and MS idiot etc. simply because I prefer IE! That's crazy!

Of course is it crazy! As crazy as people who yell at Free Software developers because of their dissapointment that a system with such a nice price tag (zero comma zero) is unusable for them, whereas others dont seem to have problems with using it. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Why is everyone in such a tizzy over turning Linux into a 'consumer desktop.' Who cares if Aunt Agnes can use it or wants to?

I use it because I like it. It doesn't affect me at all if someone else doesn't like it.

What's the deal, yo yo? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? ... is that all his issues are already being addressed. Not to mention his bizarre claims about X11, when they've already been shown to be false (fd.o X-server supports alpha, whee), and his odd rant about the lack of graphical configuration tools (uh, FC, SuSE, Mandrake, Lindows, Lycoris, Xandros?). Sounds to me like he's never used anything but Debian, Slack, or Gentoo.

You know, Eugenia, the fact that someone writes in half literate English doesn't make what they're writing worth reading. When I read OSNews, I'm looking for new insights and factually correct articles by intelligent people who know what they're talking about (GNOME/KDE devs, distro devs, etc.). People who just want to rant should get a blog and leave the rest of us alone.

-Erwos Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I'm looking for new insights and factually correct articles by intelligent people who know what they're talking about (GNOME/KDE devs, distro devs, etc.).

Dude, users are just as important as dev's. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? in the OSS world in general
my reason is i've always thought computers should help humans accomplish real life tasks... instruments, no more no less with the advantage of development speed and flexibility that SW "openness" in my opinion could carry...
now i see that advantage is a chimera, because of the "community" being shredded in competing development parties who work on their own little field and hordes of supporters who accuse others of not being able to "bend" to the philosophy of the tools: but the tools are in service to man, they are to be designed to adapt to man, or at least to offer man a uniform way of dealing with the problems

if one replis to this post "you're not accepted here" or "nobody will miss you" the snobbish attitude it would would confirm my perception that linux or other OSS are seen not as mere democratic (in the sense of accessible by everyone) informatc tools, but as a mean for personal gratification, or to prove one's superiority

PS: the other argument a "free" SW would offer is, not costing additional $/€ to the user.... i see Maya 6 is available for linux (Red Hat only) - but that's obvious given the SW was born on SGI's Unix, ...
but for someone buying an application like that, wouldnt it be better to run it on a tested OS costing very little in comparison?

PPS: X IS SLOW, that's true: not only Xfree was an awful implementation, according to not just one source, the synchronous (locking) calls the protocol is based on , cause higher latencies and make a thread safe implementation more difficult
to me it seems not by chance that BeOS (the highest responsive OS ever imho), MAC OS X and Enlightnment dont use X (the latter 2 have emulation layers for X though) Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? >> users are important as dev's

agree! :-)
if users arent valuable, who/what does one develop for? ;-)
other dev's ? (hmmm sort of tail biting snake here)
gratification of the personal ego? uhmm maybe :-| Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? http://www.linuks.mine.nu/gnustep/ Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Because they are Redmond worshipers. They can't see past Gate's legacy long enough to realize there is more than one way to do things. They're stuck on gui configuration (which btw, I've met Average Joe and he can't work gui configs either) and centralized system registries. They want proprietary binary file formats that get oversized and difficult to read. They want package managers that don't clean up that central registry, and they want their desktop to be the configuration for their whole OS. They want properties to be synonomous with settings, and they want little dialogues with tabs and a picture of the end of logical thinking (a broken Window).
Linux becomes ready for the desktop when people use it on the desktop. And no it's not just the 1337 uber geeks using it, some small time geeks who just like to tinker on their computer like it. Sometimes you even find Aunt Tillie's chatting away in Gaim and e-mailing their friends on Evolution.
I suppose I should stop feeding the trolls, but I think these articles are getting quite old. They just repeat the same tripe over and over. It's like those 80 FC2 reviews we had. How about a big expose on how the Y-windows project is coming along? How about a big story on what x_org is doing? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Most surveys on public computer experience show only 5-8% of the computer users in the US are experts capable of solving "complex" problems, like terminal commmands and solving dependencies and God forbid, compiling from source.

If the Linux community is aiming to saturate that market, which would also include prying Windows .NET programmers away from ther $65k jobs, then Desktop Linux shouldnt be a priority.

However, if the community hates the hold Windows has on 97% of the market as much as they apparently hate each other in discussion forums, then consideration HAS to be made to those who haven't seen a terminal prompt. They'll still call the 'guy down the street' to get a program to work if they cant figure it out, just like they do in windows of OS X. Linux just needs to be on the same playing level.

My grandmother brings cash with her all the time, because CHECKS are too much to bother with. My uncle can't for the life of him understand why she just doesnt use an ATM card. "Its simple, just put the card in, press a few buttons and your PIN, type the cash amount...." .. from the same uncle that is ammazed by his inkjet's ability to PRINT COLOR on shiny paper.

Business 101 (also applies EVERYWHERE): Know your market. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I'm a longtime Linux user and frankly the zealotry (which was always present) and constant inner arguing has scared me off from the linux crowd. That's not to say I hate linux, I love the kernel itself and I applaud all the hard-working developers who get paid little or nothing at all to provide software for all of us to use. These past few years I've been using Slackware because it suited MY needs (for servers and desktops). However, recently I've just switched almost all my servers to freebsd with two boxes reserved for openbsd and netbsd respectively.

The beauty of the times we live in is that their is choice! If windows works for you and you are happy, by all means use it! If linux/bsd/any "alternative OS" (i hate the term) does it for you, than use it! I frankly do not like windows because I find it too complicated and not powerful enough for MY needs, thus the reason for my use of BSD servers and workstations and along with my new powerbook that I'm writing this on (Great Job Apple! OS X won me over!)

So please linux users, let windows users be if they are content. Same goes for windows users to linux users. Healthy competition is a great thing, but please try and put the "Distro Jihad" aside for two minutes. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The only people I'm holding responsible are those people who cannot stand critique, who cannot stand someone saying something they might just not in some way agree with.

Critique of course should be funded, not just some irrelevant rant of an avid computer user that has played with pretty much every OS out there, who knows obviously nothing about the purpose and the principles free software gained its success with. The last two OSNEWS articles, on the topic what linux should do, were both either totally ignorant, or intentionally "provocative" (popular euphemism for trolling), and with both possibilities theres is nothing one could seriously give an answer to.


I know a lot of Linux users who are perfectly sane and who can stand critique, whether the critique is viable or not. They just reply with sane comments instead rambling on about the virtues of OSS.

In my eyes it perfectly reasonable that many get frustrated when a major news site they read daily gives such an author a place to troll its regular readers, when it should be obvious that it would leave many of them disgruntled.

Again, even this could be tolerated when both of the authors would start something as a fork tomorrow, and correct anything they think is broken, or, if they are no developers, pay something to do it. Or do anything more than just gripe and expect to be served at no cost. Instead, we got somebody who feels he had the right to request something, features and services, as he were a paying customer. As I said, it is more his arrogant attitude which draws so many comments to this article, and his usage of the word "we" (although it is obvoius he has no inclination to the community at all) than his arguments. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? When it can encompass the features of a real OS - XP - like these:

- When running a hidden taskbar, force it over top of program windows with every change in 802.11 signal strength. Don't provide a quick timeout (such as Mozilla's mail notice), force the user to click in a 3/16" square box to close the dialogue, one surrounded by a 3" square dialogue which brings up another unwanted window if you miss the first
- When running a hidden taskbar, force it over top of running programs when clicking on an e-mail saved to the local drive and force the user to click on the parent Outlook interface before re-hiding.
- Don't provide a time setting for the hidden taskbar, unhide it over working windows at the slightest hint of the cursor touching the screen edge. Make sure it block program windows for far longer than the cursor touched that edge.
- When running a hidden taskbar on a roaming profile, pop it over top running programs during periods of high network latencies. Ignore the auto-hide settings, force the user to stop what they're doing and toggle the 'autohide option' on and off in properties before hiding again.
- Use a 'wizard' for printing graphics, one that walks the user through six or eight unwanted dialogues, asks them if they want to print every other graphic they didn't select in the same directory, and doesn't provide a 'print selected page' option, forcing them to manually count to page 53 of an 87 page .tif of a phone bill. Unlike Infraview.

There are plenty Linux shortcomings, but IMHO this is more than enough to keep the developers busy advancing the LDT in the right direction towards an enriching and efficient 'professional' user experience. And it's a HO based on daily use of the discussed desktop, unlike the parent article's info apparently culled from Slashdot trolls. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "The beauty of the times we live in is that their is choice! If windows works for you and you are happy, by all means use it! If linux/bsd/any "alternative OS" (i hate the term) does it for you, than use it! I frankly do not like windows because I find it too complicated and not powerful enough for MY needs, thus the reason for my use of BSD servers and workstations and along with my new powerbook that I'm writing this on (Great Job Apple! OS X won me over!)"

Brilliant. Give this poster a medal for "getting it". It _doesn't_ matter if Linux has 1% or 25% worldwide market share as long it meets the needs of people like you and me. Linux happens to meet my needs admirably on my desktop (I use BSD for my servers as well, FreeBSD for web/email and OpenBSD for my NAT/firewall/DNS) but that doesn't mean that it will meet the needs of my mom and dad. While I do try and show people what linux is about, the only ones that are remotely interested are people who are interested in learning UNIX, usually because they want to make more money with that skillset.

While I do happen to like the idea behind free software, I realize not everyone agrees. I wish more people could cling to the ethical benefits of sharing information, but what are you going to do? The thing I find truly irritating are people who want to kill the variety in the open source ecosystem in the name of market share. Leave the zillion open source projects alone, they make linux a fresh, exciting and diverse place to be, a real tinkerer's paradise.

I'd love to play around with OS X, especially now that Gentoo has released portage for it. Sadly the only realy barrier there is the price of Apple hardware. If it ever comes down however, look out! Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "Did the author expect the Linux desktop to be as good as a commercial desktop - with development being salaried work during working hours as opposed to voluntary work outside working hours? I think the current state is remarkable considering those odds."

This is why OSS will never measure up. It is based on alreasy failed economic model. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I found this article very non-tecnical for this site. It didn't go into detail at any point, and while basically, opinion articles are not a bad thing, if they are that short it is just the language which makes a difference to comments or mails from the one kind of user we hate so much (your OS sucks....).

But he is right about Y-Windows. it would be good from a techical point of view (i.e. libraries directly in the window management system, no more GTK or QT) as well as from a community point of view (no more possibilities for GNOME vs. KDE flamewars).
This also shows a very difficult point for Y: Apart from having to do all the work to program the system, they will also have to be careful to be the most customizable Desktop on the market, otherwise the users won't be happy with it.

For the moment i wish people would stop ranting that "linux is not ready for the desktop" and about package management (which IS user-friendly because you always have to take the same steps, it is nonsense if every application has its own installer like it is handled on certain other operating systems. Have you ever tried to completely remove an Application from Windows? See, it's not possible without expert knowledge - just say registry... Or try to remove many applications - you know how much time that takes? Oh, and long live Gentoo MacOS!) and just use it. Sure they will need to adapt their habits, but maybe that's just because they've already totally adapted their habits to Microsoft?
In the long run, i wish Linux stays as a Server OS (hey, it is a monolithic kernel) and Haiku obeys world domination on the Desktop. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This is why OSS will never measure up. It is based on alreasy failed economic model.

You obviously fail to see that Free Software, aka OSS, was in the first place meant to be free, and not to "measure up". I dont even see that the community wants to "measure up" (in winning Joe User's favor), besides of some Joe Users themselves (neither paying, no contributing otherwise), who think it should.

Free Software and Linux arose from the community, and currently, there is just no incentive to develop for someone (like a non paying Joe Schmock) outside of the community. This wont bring Linux on the mass desktop, but I think the only ones who will whine about it, are not the part of the community, because in it, Linux has been on the desktop for years! (You remember, the last 5 years for example, every on of them the famous "year of the linux desktop"?) Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Bill Skyes wrote: "This is why OSS will never measure up. It is based on alreasy failed economic model." Precisely, and that's why it's failing in the file and web serving arenas too. It's humbling to be in the presence of so much insight. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "3. dependency hell should be cleaned up. no not everyone has uber fast 1MBPS connections to use emerge/apt-get"

The thing is, you have to download those dependencies some time. They are either packaged with the app, or downloaded separately. So, the speed of your connection is irrelevant.

If the dependencies are packaged with the apps, you have to download the same ones again and again with each new app, even if you already have them on your computer. Also, you if dependencies are kept seperate rather than shared, security holes cannot be fixed for all the apps that use the same libs at once.

If for example, an app needed QT+, would you advocate including the whole of QT+ (it's big) with the app in the same package? No, as it would make the packages massive and be pointless as you would already it installed after installing only one app that needed it.

This is why emerge and apt-get are so good. It's not dependency 'hell' if it works automaticly, only downloads what you need, and saves you bandwidth in the long run. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? After reading the Opinion piece (yes it was an opinion mind you) and the subsequent responses, I feel there's something I must contribute to this discussion.

The community seems to be experiencing a bit of schizophrenia when it comes to Linux.

On one hand, many of the responses on this article (and on linux topics on OSNews in general seem to be focusing on Linux becoming a more dominant technology, thereby promoting it's growth.

On the other hand, many of the responses on this article and the aforementioned topics also have a preconception of how Linux should become more dominant. Some want to craft it in the mold of Windows; others are staunch in their support of more organic distros (Gentoo, Debian and etc), and many are distro centric in their beliefs (Fedora vs SuSe vs Mandrake, Slackware vs Xandros; you get the idea).

I guess the biggest question in my mind when I read these responses and articles is: What does the community really want?

Here's the logic I keep coming to on this:

-The market has been well defined. Unfortunately, Microsoft and Apple were here as a dominant force for users first. They helped define how Grandma, Dad and your sister uses their computer, and how PC based servers are set up for individuals, or business users.
-Users have been given a level of expectations on how a computer works (whether or not you believe that's how it's supposed to be done, that expectation is there)
-If Linux is to grow and become stronger than it is, Linux has to penetrate 2 markets that up until this point have been largely untapped : Enterprise Business/Government and the Individual Home User.

-In order to tap both of those markets, some changes have to be made to compete with existing products in that market space. A distro may have to come out that is more Individual User Friendly than robust in advanced features for acceptance in that user market.

-Following this logic, changes to how Linux and the DE's are done would have to be made so that the Individual User is comfortable enough using it to continue to use it. GUI interface windows that are intuitive (a GUI that understands the user doesn't know what all of this is for, and explains it in a way that a user can grasp the basic idea), and functions that don't require the use of a command line.

(yes, I said it...no CLI) Remember, the standard by which Linux is judged for home users is Windows and Mac, which do not use CLI's for functions anymore.

-The logic of "But Linux is completely different, and should be treated as such" isn't going to work with 15-20 years of Microsoft entrenchment for the Individual User or Business User. The basic functions of a Windows machine have to be fused with the stability, security and interoperability of Linux in order for home users to take advantage of it.

The community seems to have knocked this article, because one person made the comment about things he though should be improved. While the information he supplied may or may not be entirely factually correct, the message is: Make distro's more user friendly, and linux will begin to make inroads on the desktop.

Do you want Linux adoption to grow, or would you like to see it die like BeOS and OS/2 did? Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Does anyone of you know, wether Magix Music Maker 2004 Deluxe is running with Wine under Linux (using no Windows partition)?

Found no report on that in the net.... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? As far as no CLI is concerned, the user should not have to access a CLI for most if not all of the configuration that needs to be done by Joe User. Giving a user options is the key.

However, I am quite a fan of having a powerful CLI alongside a GUI (for a desktop, not a server of course) and thats why I think Apple got it right with OS X. An amazing GUI which is responsive and user-friendly, but underneath it all the "power user" has the power of a unix-like system. Something for everyone would be the best bet i suppose, but to refer to my previous post just use what works best for you, thats the beauty of having a choice. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? >> KDE will never be dominant because its based on a toolkit from a proprietary company in Norway.

I prefer using a toolkit comming from a "proprietary company" from Norway, that practices intelligent policy toward software : ie, GPL for GLP-Systems and non GPL for Non-GPL-System, it's honnest and correct, than a whole non-free system like MS Windows.

But, what did you call "a proprietary company in Norway" exactly ?
All companies are proprietaries, Free Software doesn't mean that companies should be under GPL too :-) Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? An earlier poster asked:

"Do you want Linux adoption to grow, or would you like to see it die like BeOS and OS/2 did?"

Ironically enough, the usability of Linux is not what will drive its survival. Draconian intellectual property laws are what will decide whether or not Linux survives or thrives. Linux is built on the premise that information is to be shared and that collaboration is a good thing, wheras filthy corporate thugs only like collaboration that benefits them under their terms.

In a perfect world, there would be many competing platforms and operating systems, some open, others proprietary, it wouldn't matter, as long as all of them spoke the same standard protocols and could interact with one another. The monolithic software entity that Microsoft has built with Windows is the worst case scenario. Why would anyone want to turn Linux into a grotesque copy of that? It benefits nobody. All you do is make it easy for virus and spyware authors.

Just imagine if everyone was forced by market forces to drive a Dodge Neon, or a clone of a Dodge Neon. "Hey bud, that Nissan X-Tera has a stickshift, that isn't user friendly, it has to go. No, I don't care if it gives you more control of your vehicle... it is too complicated for my grandma to use, so you cannot have it!"

The Way of the Penguin:

1. Find your niche, beacuse you can't please everyone and it is stupid to try.
2. Execute really really well within that defined niche and make all of the penguinistas gloriously happy.
3. Profit!!!! Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I tried it. It was way, way more trouble than it was worth. Software installation was a PITA! I don't want to hear anything about "command line" this, edit this cryptic file that. Compile it, for Pete's sake this is 2004 no desktop OS should need to have software compliled on it for it to work. Software should just install and work. I should not need to know the differnece between rpm and pkg. I should not have to care. If a package says it is for RH then installing it should not bring up an enless amount of dependences that take forever to resolve. The problem with DL linux startes with the Zelots. Everyone wants it there way and anyone who disagreess is torn apart by the community. It wasn't just using Linux that drove me from using Linux it was the community. There are way too many "hands in the soup" and it will never come together in a unified way. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Just comment on an article that is full of factual errors, point these errors out and voila, inevitably people will come out of the bushes and complain about all these bad bad zealots that can't take critique. Makes you wonder who the zealots really are.

And of course these people will tell us that though they are sympathetic to linux in general all those bad bad zealots are the reasons why they can't and don't use linux. Wow, how incredibly intelligent to base the decision on what OS to use on some perceived zealots in the user base.

To sum it up, this article is full of factual errors so if people complain about this article it doesn't mean they are zealots or that there is nothing to criticize about linux, it is simply a very bad article that shouldn't have been published on any site least of all osnews. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? First, let me say that I don't think Linux distributions should become exactly like Windows. The fact that they aren't is one reason I switched two years ago. (Quite frankly, I get lost whenever I have to use my wife's XP machine.)

However, I think it is important for at least some developers to think about "Joe User" (who is this guy anyway?) when developing applications. Arcane commands are fine for those who know them or have time to learn them. Others should have an simpler option. Options and alternatives are what I am suggesting. After all, the idea of choice is what many Linux advocates scream it's all about.

I am glad to see that some developers take this idea seriously. I have not tried Xandros, Lycoris, or Linspire, but by many accounts they are working to provide a somewhat affordable (so don't suggest switching to Mac - can't afford the necessary hardware) alternative to people (much like I was) looking to break away from Windows.

I am not a Joe User, but I am not that far removed from him. I don't know how to code (other than basic HTML); I'm still uncomfortable with CLI (but getting better); I don't know a lot about the inner workings of my laptop (and don't care that much). However, I have used Linux exclusively on my desktop for two years (Mandrake, Libranet, Vector SOHO, ELX, Libranet again, Feather, Puppy, DSL, OneBase Go) and hope to do so for a long time. However, I have found that some distros work better than others, which may be why some have argued for some level of standardization.

For instance, Libranet works with all my hardware (printer, scanner, zip drive, PCMCIA modem). ELX and Vector could never get the Zip drive working. Feather and DSL both worked with my modem (DSL also worked with my printer - didn't try setting up Zip or scanner), but neither Puppy or OneBase could find my modem.

While I don't care whether Linux one day dominates Windows, I do care that it become a viable alternative for Joe User, even if he or Jane User does not choose to use it. It should become a choice based on the fact that they don't want to use it rather than the fact that they can't use it.

"Stick with Windows" isn't to me a worthwhile suggestion. It seems to me to be on the same heartless level as someone who tells a sick person, "Since you can't get the medicine, you'll just have to die" rather than looking for ways to make the medication more available and more affordable.

When I first switched to Linux, I read the words "just stick with Windows" or some such more times than I could count. I chose to ignore them, and I'm glad I did. If anything else, articles like this serve to show just how far some in the community have to go in order for the community to really become a community and not a country club. Thankfully, there are many more who want to open the doors to others. Unfortunately, they don't talk as loud. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? now i see that advantage is a chimera, because of the "community" being shredded in competing development parties who work on their own little field and hordes of supporters who accuse others of not being able to "bend" to the philosophy of the tools

I disagree. To me, the spirit of cooperation is much stronger than the spirit of competition. Even the KDE/Gnome developers communicate and cooperate a lot...you don't see the kind of flamewars that pops up between users of the DEs among the two projects' developers, on the contrary.

Now, if you're going to let a handful of Internet Trolls negatively influence your choice of hardware, that's your own problem. If I had the same attitude, I'd stop using Windows products altogether, since anti-Linux, pro-Microsoft trolls are more numerous on OSNews than pro-Linux ones (not to mention more arrogant and quicker to insult people who disagree with them).

if one replis to this post "you're not accepted here" or "nobody will miss you" the snobbish attitude it would would confirm my perception that linux or other OSS are seen not as mere democratic (in the sense of accessible by everyone) informatc tools, but as a mean for personal gratification, or to prove one's superiority

I don't think anyone will say "good riddance" or that you don't belong...but even if they did, it would be unfair to characterize the entire community based on a troll, and unwise to change one's computing habits accordingly. I mean, that would put you at the mercy of anti-Linux advocate who pose as rude Linux advocates to push people away (what we'd call an agent provocateur.

It does seem you've chosen to exclude yourself from OSS based on a few trolls' attitude. Again, this seems a rather immature position: software should be based on its own merits, not on the behavior of some of its advocates.

PPS: X IS SLOW, that's true

Let me respectfully disagree again. X is not slow, but it does give the impression of slower redraws because desktop double-buffering isn't officially included yet. However it's just a matter of weeks before it will be. Even then, redraw speed is comparable to that of Windows on identical hardware, and on my system (an Athlon 900 with 1GB of RAM), X flies. So my personal experience contradicts your assertion.

X has got new momentum since the X.org fork of XFree86. Expect some really exciting stuff over the next year. I do believe we'll get hardware acceleration and other nifty eye candy before Longhorn comes out... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I don't have time to read all the comments; however, I wanted to point a few things out:

1) There is a configuration app for FSAA and similar setting for NVidia cards. It's called nvidia-settings and it comes with the newest drivers. It uses GTK and uses your current GNOME icon theme, etc.

2) With the newer extensions recently added to X.org and the possibility of OpenGL acceleration through Glitz - what exactly is outdated about X? The work at Xorg to make a completely modular X server - known as Debris - should speed things up; Glitz should speed render acceleration dramatically. X can do anything that other graphical systems can.

3) There is a lot of work on interoperability between GNOME and KDE. However, they are separate environments. Ideally, you won't need to use apps from KDE when using GNOME. This may not currently be possible, but in my experience minor discrepensies like button order and widget theme aren't that important to those I set up with Linux. Think about Windows apps - they're not exactly consistent on this level either. The only KDE app I typically set up on a GNOME-based system is K3B. Not that big of a deal. And OO.org is going to rather seamlessly blend in with all major environments in 2.0. Even using the right file and print dialogs.

4) Glacial pace? Bullshit. I started using Linux two years ago and GNOME was unbearable at that point. I had to drop to the commandline to play a movie - using a command like mplayer /home/brad/Movies/Filename.avi; now I use Totem for all movie playing (a situation that is much nicer than Windows or Mac OSX because of Totem's simple interface and ability to play absolutely everything I throw at it). I had to use XMMS to play music; now I have muine, which is really slick and easier than any other music library manager out there. The amount of polish put into GNOME in the past two years is astounding. It's surely developing faster than Windows (and GNOME has an increasing rate of development not a level/slowing one) and I think has kept up well with Mac OS X.

The term Linux Desktop makes no sense. Hackers use the Linux kernel and the GNU toolkit for their projects. It isn't a single company with a strategy for domination. It's a bunch of different people with different ideas about how this all should work - and they use the Gnu/Linux tools to get it all done. Yeah, it's kind of imtimidating if someone sets you up with a hodge-podge of multiple environments. That's one of the trade-offs we make: we are willing to have excessive options so that we can have excessive development. Have a small project team is generally considered a good thing in software engineering. But in the FLOSS model of development we overcome that general rule with other benefits. "Desktop Linux" is the same way. If you're worried about the intimidation of multiple environments, use one - this is an especially critical idea to keep in mind for corporate deployments (the current target of development firms like Ximian/Novell). You criticisms don't apply much at all in a corportate environment. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I'm a longtime Linux user and frankly the zealotry (which was always present) and constant inner arguing has scared me off from the linux crowd.

Flamewars and trolls can really get on one's nerves, that's true, but to be fair they are as prevalent among anti-Linux posters as they are among pro-Linux ones. And I do believe that some of the most strident and annoying Linux advocates are really "wolf-in-sheep's-clothing" anti-Linux posters who want to give Linux users a bad name.

Anyway, that's nothing compared to flamewars between game console owners...which are as ridiculous (I own an Xbox AND a PS2, and they're both great consoles).

On a final note, though, notice that it's not so much the Linux users telling MS users to try Linux that are a problem, it's all those pro-MS people telling other MS users that they shouldn't try Linux, or at least go out of their way to say that it's not ready for the Desktop yet (implying that they shouldn't even bother trying it).

I say, if you're a Windows user curious about Linux, try the latest Knoppix CD (or other LiveCDs) from time to time, to see where Linux is at and get familiar with it. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Well said, sir. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You gotta calm down with the personal attacks dude. Debit cards etc take two seconds to go through and you have the added benefit you dont need to carry a lot of cash on you. You swipe the card (2 seconds), enter a pin number (3 seconds), and approve the total (3 seconds). For someone like me who does not like to carry loads of cash (in case i drop my wallet or get mugged), its a conveniant way to pay for things. To each his own... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The idea having more than one DE in an OS isn't necessarily a bad thing, except when I set up fonts in one DE and they still look like shit in the other ...
I don't care what the technical explanation is, if you try and deny that this is a problem, you're just not dealing with reality. If the fact that this can be worked around means that this isn't a problem, then security in Windows isn't a problem either, since it's possible to set up a Windows box to be very secure. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The Linux desktop ( or the NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD desktop ) has the necessary basics and requires to improve from there. X11 doesn't need to be removed. It requires to be made more efficient. Having multiple desktop environments such as KDE, GNOME, etc is not an issue because other desktop environments have different types of APIs, or widgets, for that environment. For example, in a Windows environment a programmer can write programs using Windows APIs, Swing APIs, SWT APIs, qt+ apis, etc. The availability for hardware drivers requires to be improved and overtime I am sure vendors will come out with more drivers for Linux. I am using Debian now and I would have to say that it is easier for me to installing many things because I can use a GUI interface and click the choices I want and Debian resolves the dependencies for me. For software that isn't found as part of Debian repository that becomes the problem. Linux is just the kernel. It would be nice if certain software was standardized but not an entire Linux distribution. There is no reason why I should expect a distribution of Linux, that deals specifically with creating server software, to be the same as a distribution that deals specifically with desktop Linux. ( I think Progeny is working on a component based distribution which could be provide an answer to this problem ... ) Linux gives a user choice and freedom to customize their operating system. I use Linux as my main operating system because of choice and freedom and I believe that Linux has a lot of potential. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Is my refrigerator ready for my kitchen?

I wish somebody would write that article.

Hum, I'm kind of lost... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I don't know how it works where you're from, but in any civilized country paying with a ATM card is a lot easier than fiddling with coins. Swipe the card and enter your pin. I can do that in 2 sec, and I don't have to carry a pile of annoying coins around.

I use cash because it's none of my bank's or anyone's else's buisness what I purchase.

Have you read Idoru by William Gibson? I guess it describes your worst nightmare Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Obviously I'm "not dealing with reality", but I have recently been dealing with the latest Suse, the latest Mandrake and am running gentoo as my main system and don't have the problem you describe. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Obviously I'm "not dealing with reality", but I have recently been dealing with the latest Suse, the latest Mandrake and am running gentoo as my main system and don't have the problem you describe.

So you're telling me that once you've got your fonts loooking great in KDE apps, then your fonts are also bangin' in all non-KDE apps such as Mozilla, OpenOffice, etc, and vice versa?
If you are able to do this (make fonts look great in ALL toolkits/DE's WITHOUT having to configure fonts seperately for each DE/toolkit, including Crossover apps), you should write an article on how to do that. Or teach me how to do it in Slackware and I'll write the article myself Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This is how KDE and Gnome can live together. A new desktop called "freedesktop" or whatever, can use the KDE base. The KDE base with Qt under the GNU/GPL will insure the base will always be free software. Based upon the new freedesktop inter desktop communication standards, D-BUS, a new and more uniform GTK+ based toolkit could be built, unifying such components and bonobo, pango, gdk, glib, and gnome libraries.

This insures that applications written on top of the KDE core of the new desktop, will always allow developers to have software based on the LGPL GTK+ like toolkit, so proprietary and free software can be developed, while insuring the core technology, the KDE base, is always GNU GPL freesoftware. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? GPL for GLP-Systems and non GPL for Non-GPL-System, it's honnest and correct, than a whole non-free system like MS Windows.

The SDKs for windows are freerer than QT. You can download them and use them in commercial, opensource or whatever kind of development and you don't have to pay Microsoft anything. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? No, I'm telling you that I simply didn't have to set them up. They were fine the way they were for both qt and gtk apps. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Since anyone saying that "linux" don't need whining users that basically wants nothing more than a gratis windows is a "troll" or a "wolf in sheeps clothes", please explain what good they and their frequently unfounded complaints are for. Please share you wisdom and enlighten us "trolls" of what use there is for people making hens out of fethers, and spreading their ignorant misconception of how things are (see debate on X) as fact?

And how is it snobbism to tell such people to stick to windows if that makes them happy, and to shut their traps about stuff that they know nothing about? For example: Most people complaining about X's memory usage does not know that it lists the memory on the grapics-card, or that you should remove buffers when you look at system memory usage. They are just repeating stuff that isn't true. Why should such people get listened to? Corrected yes, given an obscene amount of time and space airing their woes, no. The listening will come when they stop sprouting drivel.

Further more it obviously also snobbism to tell people that when they start using new stuff, they'd better be open minded and be prepared to learn.. tsk.

Now that has probably put me in the 31337 crowd, wich I'm not, but - by God - I'm tired of whiners. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? A large portion of the things out of everyone's mouths seems to be a smear campaign against the users of either Linux or Win or MacOSX or whatever.

There is no unified community that feels exactly the same across the board.

"I stopped using ... Because the community is so f***ed up."

How stupid of you. Are you sure you aren't simply referring to a group of users or did you actually talk to every user of ... in the whole world?

The average poster's age on osnews at times seems to be below 15 years of age.

Have fun, kids. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 19:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I have no idea what's wrong with having both KDE & Gnome. People complain that Windows does not give you the opportunity to customize the whole desktop unless you pay for ObjectDesktop or something of the sort. And now the same people are complaining that they have a choice to customize and change the whole desktop to whatever they want by just choosing a GUI from the dozens of stable ones out there! What hipocracy. Maybe we need, as Linux users, to stop criticizing Linux and begin to fix the problems, have a positive outlook, and speak highly of the product. Why would anyone want to use Linux when its very users are critical of it? Think about it... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The SDKs for windows are freerer than QT.

Can you redistribute them?

You can download them and use them in commercial, opensource or whatever kind of development and you don't have to pay Microsoft anything.

Can you develop Mac and Linux applications with them?

It's a bit dishonest to compare Qt and the Windows SDK. Qt is TrollTech's main (if not sole) source of income. Microsoft can afford to give away SDK because a) they don't know what to do with their money and b) people making more Windows apps helps further their OS monopoly, which is one of their two main source of income.

A little intellectual honesty would be appreciated... Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? In matters of zealotry, it's not the content of the message that counts, but the way you say it. There are some who fall for the anti-Linux trolls and respond with warranted but ultimately counter-productive indignation. Others (whose numbers are greatly exaggerated, in my view) are true believers who don't care much for the sensibilities of others. Finally, I'm sure there is the occasional poseur who will go out of his way to sound rude in order to discredit the camp he pretends to belong to.

Those last two types of posters are hard to distinguish from one another. IMO, it's better to keep cool and respond to irrational attacks with cold, hard facts, and to always be friendly or helpful to people, even if they don't always display the best manners. That way you keep the moral high ground.

I think you misunderstood my message. I'm not saying that responding to attacks and false statements is bad (heaven knows I've been doing that myself, for a while, now). I'm just saying that we should try to keep cool when confronted with anti-Linux trolls and flamebaiters, and be suspicious of the most foul-mouthed members of our community, as they often - intentionally or not - do more harm than good. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Well stated, very well stated.

Everyone keeps calling it "the community" as if we are all one group. That's a joke. Linux isn't about coming together to help each other. It's about fun. GNU on the other hand is about openness, and IMO science in general. Science (and computer science) will not progress well if we can't "stand on the shoulders of giants." If you miss my point it's this: One person doesn't make an OS, a group of people do. And the bigger a group you have, theoretically, the more progress you can make. By opening things up for others to use, you allow an even bigger group than before.
Of course, not everything can be developed this way. But quite a bit can. IBM has realized it (in their own profiteering way), it does work quite well.

And the guy with all the taskbar comments. You might want to go find out what Linux and GNU tools are before you make comments about things that are totally out of the scope of the "OS". A lot of the stuff you want is just preferences for apps, some of it will never get implemented because it is counter-intuitive for most but some of it may especially as notebook support improves and more hackers buy notebooks and have to travel with them. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Not only a correct critique, but offers solutions. Linux is either a sophisticated server system, or a simple surfer setup, but middle road use is undeveloped, in hardware recognition, applications, and user interface with the OS.

If I build a computer and make the mistake of putting in an old Winmodem--which I own, I can only get it running on, say, SuSe OS by buying a 20$ driver from Linuxant. This is 5$ more than the modem cost way back when. Ridiculous. Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? No one person or group has enough control to make changes that impact several other projects.

There are simply to many involved parties and individuals for one person to say "everybody, please change this"

Linux is very layered, and changes can be made to one layer so long is it does not effect compatibility with other layers. This greatly limits what can be done to the system.

That, and even if such changes could be made, there would be another guy that wants to do it a different way, so instead of doing it, they just argue about who is right.

For as long as Linux is an open community project, it will mostly not change.


You hit the nail right on the head. This is the fundamental problem with the community development model. When there are no clear decision-makers managing all development from end to end, then the larger problems that require end-to-end solutions never get solved.

FOSS development produces excellent small-to-medium products (Ogg Vorbis, Gimp, FileZilla, Mozilla, etc), but it never can scale well enough to product a coherent OS that is as well-organized and user-friendly as Windows or Macintosh.

Take a look at SkyOS. It actually looks well-organized and intuitive, and has made amazingly fast progress -- all because it's controlled by one developer. And yet it will still an OS that delivers on what the majority of users want, because that one developer has based a lot of the higher-level decisions on a democratic process of surveying users, and then implementing their desires. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 00:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "You hit the nail right on the head. This is the fundamental problem with the community development model. When there are no clear decision-makers managing all development from end to end, then the larger problems that require end-to-end solutions never get solved."

Not really. At best you have not proven the theory. Only argued it with examples and some i-see-the-future babble. By stating a broad statement like this one, you do not take the distributor's power in account. Creating some dictatorship analogy on MSFT would be the opposite to yours, and it would be just as short-sighted.

"FOSS development produces excellent small-to-medium products (Ogg Vorbis, Gimp, FileZilla, Mozilla, etc), but it never can scale well enough to product a coherent OS that is as well-organized and user-friendly as Windows or Macintosh."

Since you're generalizing: strange how Apache does, isn't it? What do you know about the decision-making process in the various projects you name?

"Take a look at SkyOS. It actually looks well-organized and intuitive, and has made amazingly fast progress -- all because it's controlled by one developer."

(Strange compare. It is a single user OS only capable of doing a very small % of things which Windows, Linux distributions, MacOSX, Unices are able to do. Also, is the design really that inventive? When you are able to study what others have done or are doing and learn from their mistakes, it makes the process of applying that knowledge to develop a better alternative better in regards of time investments and quality. Humanity used to have problems with catching the elephant since it was dangerous for human's life; look at how easy it is now with the development of various tools and weapons. The tool crafted to "kill the elephant" which is of similar power than the previous tool, is much faster and easier made because of science has improved.)

You work at Microsoft so you know the details much better than i do, but i tell you that the hierarchy under which you fall does not have 1 decision-maker either. This is normal for big corporations and it is normal that dept X has nothing to do with dept. Y. Should i point out the possible (and in some cases, proven) consequences? Heck, i even know one which involves the dept. you work at.

Also, the Linux kernel itself *is* in the end controlled by one developer just as much as one person in one dept decides what the end product looks like, as in what code gets in and what stays out. Torvalds decides what happens with the stable tree, nobody else has any final decision over it. This while there are various development branches. Finally, several software utilities help to top the scalibity, such as BitKeeper.

Welcome on OSnews. c00l nickname, btw. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 00:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "Reason is simple: when I start any Qt based program under Gnome it takes around 10 seconds just to start it the first time (loading Qt I presume). Gnome apps start almost instantly. "

Pure Qt apps load as fast under Gnome as under kde... If you're talking about kde apps, that's another story. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? It's funny to read all the comments. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of valid points but one thing sure does stand out. On one hand you have the group that says linux should not be a "clone" of windows but just a better OS and differences are good. On the other hand you have the group that says linux should be as close to windows as possible. The funny part is that both groups complain about the other's position and I personally believe that both groups are right to a point. Without outright saying it, one group says we need all these particular features so.....it will do exactly what I'm used to in a windows machine. The other group says we need to fix this and that so it will be a better OS, not worrying about the similarities or differences. The key here is ballance. I think that today's distros are far superior for the end user than anything on the market. Without the individualists, the monopolist, the economist distros and the complete GNU worshipers, linux would not be where it is today.
Anyway, enjoyed all the reading as usual.

b2man Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Sorry, on the second the the last line I meant GPL worshipers.

b2man Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? On one hand you have the group that says linux should not be a "clone" of windows but just a better OS and differences are good. On the other hand you have the group that says linux should be as close to windows as possible. The funny part is that both groups complain about the other's position and I personally believe that both groups are right to a point.

Don't you think that it is, in theory, possible to have 2 parts: one which tries to resemble Windows as much as possible in the environment (which is in theory more than currently although i do not want to discredit any work done on this level because it is my opinion there are huge development on this layer, done and in progress) while the other is actually free to research, invent, innovate and develop as it wants leading to a system which is in some ways similar as Windows, but relatively not FAR as much as the 1st part? There are aspects which make Linux and its fundamental layers Linux, but if you ask me both roads can be driven and *are* driven. The conflict is there where the road one group drives is in conflict with the other one. There we are. That is one of the primary reasons why discussions like this take place. Even though as much as one prefers diversity, if that diversity kills of one's own choice which was chosen from that same layer of diversity (and btw, related layers are certainly able to count too) one might like that diversity and the freedom of one other less than before the conflict.

I believe this conflict is solved as i speak, though not in the extend as some would like to see it. It is solved by the final decision-makers, the distributors. Because of this, i indeed agree that the keyword is balance, but it is also my view that there is much freedom to drive *both* roads simultanously. Which is in correlation with what i wrote to c0dehax0r in my first alinea.

The key here is ballance. I think that today's distros are far superior for the end user than anything on the market.

Even more so than for a system or network administrator who works at *that* ISP? I know this is not related to the desktop, my point (with which i do not either agree or disagree with) is meant to articulate the doubt of both your and my statement. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Clearly you need a little perspective on what has been achieved
and what an amazing pace Linux has surpased Windows. Not quite
to the MAC's standards yet, but soon. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 03:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Your comment is invalid. X11 works fine and has everything the author of this article says that it lacks. Even then, it's very nicely written and stable for what it really is. Let's see you write something better on your own. Oh, I forgot: YOU CAN'T! Thu, 29 Jul 2004 06:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Pause for a moment if you will. Why do you want to see Linux on the desktop? Just because it's free?

Or is it about freedom of choice?

In my opinion, there is only one thing preventing worldwide adoption; all of the rest of the reasons given is just so much drivel.

With Windows, applications install into a menu, or create a desktop icon. With X, I have yet to see an X application automatically make itself known to the window manager.

If X application installations were just to create a symbolic link to their runtime executable in a fixed directory in a fixed location (or structure), together with their icon (optional), window managers or tools could use this information to provide a consistent view to all installed applications.

That's really all there is to it. Why should one have to manually configure menus and desktops every time you want to try a new window manager? Why do I not see an icon or menu entry appear when I install a new package? That is the real barrier to entry.

And yes, I do know about menumaker.

Paul Thu, 29 Jul 2004 07:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? This is really getting annoying.
Apps do exactly what you want them to do and show up automatically in the kde and gnome start menu. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 07:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I beg to differ.

There is no standard. KDE & gnome have registries, this is true. How about I switch to using xfce or windowmaker? This is what choice is all about. Compile & make install from source? Why, oh why is there a need for menumaker?

Applications do not show up automagically as you say, unless the installation was part of your distro, in which case you might have a script that is specific to your distro which might if you are lucky add the menu entry to your KDE or gnome menu.

Paul Thu, 29 Jul 2004 07:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? 1. AFAIK there is a freedesktop.org standard.
2. Nearly all software is part of your distribution and software you install from source should also show up if it adheres to the fdo standard.
3. If windowmaker doesn't do what you want this has nothing to do with a missing standard but is simply windowmakers fault. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 07:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Ok, thanks. I would suggest then that before we start looking at replacing X, that we start looking at punting the standard, or tools which use that standard to generate appropriate configurations for window managers that don't subscribe to the standard.

I for one, was unaware that such a standard exists (and I have been a linux user since 1994). Articles about the standard would be far more helpful than ones that simply whine about X, it's limitations and some screwball attempt to make linux ubiquitous on the desktop.

Regards,
Paul Thu, 29 Jul 2004 09:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I agree.
In case you are interested, there are a lot of specification in place or in the making on freedesktop.org:
http://www.freedesktop.org/Standards/Home

And I found those about menu entries:
http://www.freedesktop.org/Standards/desktop-entry-spec
http://www.freedesktop.org/Standards/menu-spec Thu, 29 Jul 2004 09:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? With Windows, applications install into a menu, or create a desktop icon. With X, I have yet to see an X application automatically make itself known to the window manager.

You've been using wrong distros. When I install an application in Debian, a shortcut automatically appears in the desktop menus of all window managers. This feature is part of the Debian packaging system, called APT. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? With Windows, applications install into a menu, or create a desktop icon. With X, I have yet to see an X application automatically make itself known to the window manager.

You've been using wrong distros. When I install an application in Debian, a shortcut automatically appears in the desktop menus of all window managers. This feature is part of the Debian packaging system, called APT.


You illustrate my point beautifully. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 12:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? That GNU/Linux is a big thing and it has many varied version, and saying GNU/Linux and then complaining about it's desktop is remarkably stupid because GNU/Linux does not entail a desktop environment or X11?
You people whine when we assign issues to Windows and fail to say which version, and then you go and generalize GNU/Linux into more than it really is.

Oh and btw, RH does it too with RPM. Most any package manager can, if it can run scripts (about everything but Slack's packages).
Now if you complain about the confusion of multiple distros you will once again concede your point when you show your inability to understand the difference between a distributed OS and a base that many distributed OS's use. People don't have to understand this, they just need to know to look for support on their distribution, although most of the time anyone familiar with Linux can fix problems in any distribution. For example at work we run all RH machines. When I started I was pretty unfamiliar with working with RH. But I quickly discovered it was all very easy to learn. All my sys configs were somewhere in /etc, just like any other distribution.
Even moving over to a BSD flavor is fairly easy. Why? Because it all works similarly. It's like moving from Windows2000 to WindowsXP; it's just not *that* different as the system administration level. Differences are usually in polish, package management (still easy to learn, they all do the same thing), and default packages. Sometimes you can barely even tell the difference between two...
There are about 260 active distributions. Of those there are probably 10 major, and truely different and popular ones. A lot of the rest are small modifications, often simply for better localization. Between those major ones, there are a few that even use the same package manager, Fedora, Suse, Mandrake..
And you can compile your own stuff on anything. And if you can read the file in it called "INSTALL" you can figure out how to do it. Yea most people will have to be guided the first time. And some people will always fear it, understanding many people refuse to install software like Microsoft Office, but anybody who can learn to tame their fear can figure it out.
You should see Average Joe try to setup networking in Windows before you guys whine about what he has to do in Linux. I work with Average Joe (Computer Renaissance), and he often can't install any windows packages. Clicking next is scary for him, and right clicking on network places and selecting properties is even scarier.
It all comes down to the fact that people don't want to be bothered with admining their machine, and whatever OS can keep you adminning the least will likely be their favorite. If we sold it, I'd sell as many as possible on Mac because it's just easier to administrate. Trouble is, people get on OS X and load IE and bring problems over *sigh*. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Putting icons on a desktop/menu isn't X's job, but rather the Window Manager/Desktop Environment - for the simple reason that X doesn't handle menus and/or desktops.

In Mandrake, the distro takes care of adding menu items and desktop icons. It does so for all WM/DEs installed. So if you install a new program, new menu items will appear in KDE, GNOME, WindowMaker, XFCE, etc.

I fail to see what the problem is, apart from the fact that you want X to do something it's not supposed to do... Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? My first feeling about the article is the author don't know some new features in Linux Desktop. Like when he writes "Why do I need to tell Linux what disks I have in my system? Because it doesn't know! Windows and Mac OS both know when I stick a disk in my drive." (supermount do it).

Second, I think much of the criticism on X11, is about Xfree86. The author omits that there are some efforts to bring a new X (like freedesktop project).

Third, seems to me that the main critic to Linux is because the author don't understand the free software development process, that is based on parts and independent projects. The other approach, for proprietary software, is monolitic.

I think the author's opinion is only one vision about how we can make software. And definitely, in my opinion, it isn't the way free software must be written. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Ok, folks. Lets get a few things straight. I am not suggesting that X needs to do menus. I merely pointed out in my previous comment that a typical Windows desktop user has a completely different (more positive) experience from that of a Linux user when he installs apps.

I further made the point that it should not be the task of the package manager to create menu's. Possibly I underestimated this audiences ability to infer the reasons:

a) RPM, APT, slackpack etc. (and the rest of the what was it 260 distros?) are all maintained by different people with their own ideas about how to do things. Therefore, there is no consistency between distributions as to what gets a menu entry on a particular desktop, and what does not - because of a ruddy script produced at the whim of the distro maintainers.

b) If I do decide to post-install and use a new window manager (esp. from source), the chances are that those magical configuration files are not around yet, so I end up doing manual configuration.

c) If I, a programmer decide to build an app, or I, a user decide to compile from source, I do not have a simple way to include my nice new program and icon in all window managers. This is a no-brainer with Windows.

d) If I, a producer of the latest & greatest window manager want to make a default layout based on what is currently installed on a system, there's no easy way for me to do that either.

I remarked previously that there are no standards for menu layouts, and turned out to be partially mistaken. However, I do find a vast disparency between kde and gnome here (standard slackware 9.1 install): KDE list 1808 .desktop files all nicely arranged hierarchically within /opt/kde/share, whilst gnome seems to like putting its grand total of 101 .desktop files in /usr/share/.

Run KDE, and we see some apps in the menu. Run Gnome, we see some others. Run Windowmaker, we see but nothing. Run XFCE4, & we see just the XFCE stuff. The unfortunate apps which happened to be around before and are sans .desktop files are lost & gone forever.

Wow. That's really standard.

Folks, what I am getting at, is that all of the software is actually installed on my machine, through one means or the other, but still find myself manually defining menu entries, browsing through a box that has grown with me over 8 years for executables and trying to remember what they do.

In another 8 years, I have every hope and chance of being in the same position.

I am ecstatic to find that we actually do have .desktop files, and that at least we are gravitating toward a common way (the KDE way) of doing things. I was less than ecstatic upon inspection to find that they are spread all around my file system.

My simple suggestion was to use ordinary symbolic links within a directory structure to define a dynamic system-wide menu hierarchy in a fixed location. Ok, so .desktop files seem to do this in an arguably better way- but their location seems everything but fixed.

Do you think for one moment that were we to have a standard location such as /var/menu or even /var/share/menu as the base for system-wide X menus, that developers of window managers would not jump at the opportunity to integrate? Or that tool writers would not be tempted to build menu configurators?

If I could create a menu entry through a simple 'ln -sf /usr/bin/mynewapp .menu/System Apps/mynewapp' and do the same for 'ln whatever to mywinapp.ico' I could script the whole thing quite easily.

Now I do realise that my usage might not be typical of that of an average user, but I take umbrage at the sort of negative response I seem to be getting from what I originally intended as a positive suggestion. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 18:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? RPM, APT, slackpack etc. (and the rest of the what was it 260 distros?) are all maintained by different people with their own ideas about how to do things. Therefore, there is no consistency between distributions as to what gets a menu entry on a particular desktop, and what does not - because of a ruddy script produced at the whim of the distro maintainers.

You are wrong about desktop menus lacking standards. All that is needed is that distros follow these standards.

http://packages.debian.org/testing/admin/menu-xdg Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? You inadvertantly make Paul's last point for him when you say "You are wrong about desktop menus lacking standards. All that is needed is that distros follow these standards."

If the distros (in general, apparently) are following these standards, they can't really be called standards yet, can they?

Personally, from my own experience using Libranet with IceWM is that not all applications get added to the menu automatically when they are installed. I am not comfortable editing the menu files and really shouldn't have to unless I want to reorganize the menu(s).

With regard to those that are put into the menu, the rationale is sometimes suspect. For instance, I wonder why RealPlayer is placed in my Viewers menu under IceWM but not under Sound. I use it for the latter much more than for the former. (Being on dialup usually precludes viewing streaming video.) And why do some things appear in the main IceWM Applications/Games/System/Utilities menus while others require going to a separate Programs menu and then into Apps>System? I've gotten used to it, but it doesn't seem very standard to me. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 20:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? That should read "If the distros (in general, apparently) ,b>aren't following these standards, they can't really be called standards yet, can they?"

That's what happens when you post in a slight hurry - and can't type! Thu, 29 Jul 2004 20:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Linux on the desktop is just taking it's first steps. There already exist some standards but you need to give distros some time to implement them. Just because all distros aren't (yet) standards-compliant, this doesn't in any way confirm that standards don't exist.

Debian has provided users with the "menu-xdg" package so that they can make their desktop menus compatible with standards. I don't know which repositories you use, but if you're using the official Debian repos in your Libranet, then you can install this package too.

If packages don't automatically add menu entries, this is in Debian considered as a bug. I'm not familiar with the Libranet policy considering the packaging issues. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 21:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? They have themes to make Gnome and KDE look good and ways to make them work together. Package Managers already automatically resolve dependencies. KDE and Gnome are different approaches at the desktop. Like Apple and Windows, things work differnetly and were not designed to work together. As far as hardware setup, etc. distrobutions attempt to solve these problems. Nautilus doesn't have many viewers for things like playing media and such which I find to be a fult, but keep in mind that it is a File Browser and not a file manager/web browser. Konqueror is great because it can do both. Although I understand the Gnome's technique for File Management is differnt than that of KDE, ex. Spatial Natilus, I do wish they would either incorporate web browser functions or allow for utilization of features from a web browser. I still think that Linux Desktop is great, but not perfect. Than again what is perfect. Thu, 29 Jul 2004 23:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I don't understand why you make a big deal about menu items with regards to "desktop acceptance"...for one, newbie users are not likely to switch Windows Managers (even I, who consider myself a intermediate user, never do).

Also, you present Windows' way of doing as an example to follow, but in fact it is the installers that create desktop entries - try to compile from source on Windows, as you say, and see if you get any kind of shortcut...

My point is that, for Windows, the responsibility of creating an icon falls on the developer, through the installer. But Linux software is rarely installed through installers - it is done by distro-specific package managers. So it's only natural that those apps manage the creation of menus and shortcuts...

Note that this is in fact quite newbie-friendly, as newbies will install from software repositories.

Personally, I'd like drag'n'drop support for the K Menu, but apart from that I consider this a false problem since my distro (Mandrake) does a great job of managing menu items. It keeps system-wide items in /usr/share/applnk-mdk, and lets users customize their own menus in ~/.kde/share/applnk-mdk - remember, on multi-user systems, not all people use the same apps, and sometimes they may even use different versions of the same app (which are most likely installed locally).

Efforts to standardize Linux take time, because there is no central authority. This is both a strength and a weakness. While your proposal is well-intentioned, I'm not sure how feasible it is at this point. I think it's better to standardize around the freedesktop definition (IIRC, XFCE now also follows this, as well as GNOME and KDE). Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? that the real problem is that this was never meant to be a desktop system. Why do you people keep trying to push it there? You'll have an easier time designing something from scratch, because the only part of linux that wasn't designed for general unix use (translation for the slow: use by geeks) is the kernel itself. Gnu was developed for HURD, and pretty much everything else was made as a generic unix app.

You want a desktop system that isn't supposed to be geeky? try Zeta when it comes out. Or get an Apple, and escape the horrible x86 cpu line (easier, and less expensive than finding a good Alpha system). Or, as obvious as I'm sure this is, if you really want a system with all the features that windows has, just use windows.

Sure, it's a little unstable, but it's only unstable because it has all the crap that you say "linux" lacks (nevermind that all the problems are with sofware and not "linux").

You want your system to know when you put a cdrom or floppy in? great, go out and write a disk detection daemon like the volume manager in solaris, it works wonderfully. I know that's overly simplifying things, but really it's a stupid thing to complain about since your beloved KDE and Gnome have ways around this

You want devices to work after a fresh install? make a file with all the device IDs (similar to /usr/share/hwdata/pci.ids, but with corresponding module names) in the form of "######## module" in it and make a script that scans that and loads modules for you at boot time (requires all modules to be built at kernel build, the way that the BSD systems do it, but most distros do this anyway). I'm sure it wouldn't take more than a for loop and a couple greps and cats to accomplish reading the /proc/bus/pci/devices file, clean up the output (remove first 8 characters), check the IDs against the ids in the new file, and then send the module names to /etc/modprobe.conf, then have it reboot the computer, or even ask the user to do it. Problem solved, no wasted time. You could write something more complex than a shell script, but really, that's all that's needed in most cases for the majorityy of hardware.

I would do this as a demonstration, but I don't use linux, and I really don't care enough...

You want alpha blending and other stupid crap? Find a window manager that supports it. I'll admit that xfree86 is a bit bloated, but if someone made a new X windows server (since it's a set standard), it would go a lot faster since it would cut out a great deal of the design phase, and would probably have much better community support.

You want better memory usage? stop using redhat, get a window manager that isn't a resource hog, or turn off some of the eye candy. I've been using XFCE4, and have had no problems at all. The memory bloat you mention is because of all the "features" of kde and gnome. If you get rid of all the "pretty" in XP you can get it up and running with a 40mb memory footprint, and you can do that just as easily in linux using kde or gnome.

GTK and Qt don't have interoperability trouble provided you have both libraries installed. You want them to look the same? make a gtk theme. or better yet, use the GTK-Qt Theme Engine at freedesktop.org. But the whole toolkit being varied argument is just dumb, really

really, all the things you bring up already have fixes or workarounds available (use google from time to time?), or aren't really issues. Nobody says "I'm not switching to linux because it has no alpha-blending support in the x-server", rather talking to them goes something like "hey, you seem to get a lot of viruses, why not try a different OS?" "what else is there?" "lots of things, Linux, BSD, unix, BeOS, Zeta, SkyOS, Syllable, and quite a few more" "oh, well I know how to use windows" "I can make it look exactly the same, and act exactly the same" "will all of my programs work?" "you mean your web browser and office? yes" "ehhh. no, I'm happy with what I have. I don't want to learn something else"

the only thing holding linux back from the desktop (aside from the fact that it's really nothing but a big geek toy, no matter how you neo-revolutionary goobers want to say otherwise) is the people who would use it. People who are afraid of change, who **don't know how search engines work**.

:P Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? ma chicks tara bau la lado kha ho ko ho is na. raja ko chora ma hu. rimro naam ka cha ? rati rati kati kati . um tum chum bata kara huru time and India KDE huru ramro cha. RED HAT pani ramro cha. ka bhanu timi like sathi ho Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? test Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "that the real problem is that this was never meant to be a desktop system. Why do you people keep trying to push it there? You'll have an easier time designing something from scratch, because the only part of linux that wasn't designed for general unix use (translation for the slow: use by geeks) is the kernel itself. Gnu was developed for HURD, and pretty much everything else was made as a generic unix app."

Designing from scratch? That has been done several times already. Developing is something totally different. Developing something like X from scratch will take LOTS of developer time.

Slow? Fast enough for me. I like the added consistency in networks more so than AmigaOS, Windows and all those alternatives which don't allow this (in an easy manner). The speed drawback is worth it.

GNU was developed "for the HURD"??? HURD _is_ part of GNU! Glibc was originally developed for GNU (which includes HURD) and it was ported over to Linux. No problem at doing that. GNU even runs with NetBSD's and FreeBSD's kernel these days.

Also GNU was meant as an alternative for the proprietary Unices. As you might be aware, proprietary Unices include X. All of them, from Digital UNIX to IRIX. All. Why no X on Linux?

But "was not meant for" is a moot point compared to what is able right now. If you look to what KDE and GNOME have achieved so far, they're pretty much able to win customers over.

"You want a desktop system that isn't supposed to be geeky? try Zeta when it comes out."

Zeta, lol. They don't even have the source for most of their own OS. Almost all additions on the OS from BeOS are open source applications. Zeta has pretty much flopped. Other projects like MorphOS, AmigaOS4 have more chance to win the people who want a single user OS with a really fast GUI. If you thought those will win much customers in professional and corporate environments, i think you're hugely mistaking. Even more on Zeta!

"Or get an Apple, and escape the horrible x86 cpu line (easier, and less expensive than finding a good Alpha system)."

Alpha??? What does that have to do with this? Who would even advise people to run a desktop on Alpha's? Windows NT on Multia, yeah baby! Buy 10 for the price of 9! Or buy 20 new, top notch x86 workstations which provide enough stability for the common corporate and home user. No need for Alpha.

As for Apple. I'm not gonna look into that flamefest. Lets just say both the Linux desktop and Apple desktop are viable alternatives to Windows.

I stopped reading your post after you started advising Zeta. My keyboard is full of coffee now, thank you already.

One more thing. Your Solaris comes with X and GNOME. Moreover,

"You want your system to know when you put a cdrom or floppy in? great, go out and write a disk detection daemon like the volume manager in solaris, it works wonderfully. I know that's overly simplifying things, but really it's a stupid thing to complain about since your beloved KDE and Gnome have ways around this"

They do have ways around this indeed. At least, distributors do. The more elegant (and better) way upcoming in GNOME 2.8 is Project Utopia. (Available for KDE as well if they wish to; specs are open.) Fri, 30 Jul 2004 09:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments