Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 17th Mar 2007 00:26 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu During my 8 years of Linux on and off usage I have tried more distros than I have chocolate bars. Each one of my previous encounters meant that I had to spend at least 2 days configuring before I have a desktop that I was somewhat comfortable with. With Ubuntu Feisty Fawn's latest test beta --for the first time ever-- this was not the case. I was up and running with all the niceties I wanted within 2 hours.
Thread beginning with comment 222152
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
unoengborg
Member since:
2005-07-06

From what I can tell kubuntu is not any worse/better than other KDE based distros. If you have any special needs perhaps you should tell them.

The rest of your problems unfortunately relates to market share and development costs. So why complain that your favorite programs doesn't run in wine or some wine derivate. Why not complain that they are not ported to native Linux to the company that made them, In this case Adobe and Canon.

Microsoft isn't even close to provide drivers for as many devices that Linux supports out of the box. Yet it is always a fault of Linux when some device doesn't work under Linux, and the fault of the device manufacturer if it doesn't work on Windows. We need to be careful to place blame where blame belongs.

Today the Linux desktop is easier to use, and looks better than current versions of Windows. What is holding it back is lack of applications that people are used to use. E.g. Gimp may be a good editor, but if you have used Photoshop half a lifetime it is unlikely that you will be prepared to relearn, at least not until Gimp is significantly better than Photoshop. Currently this is not the case.

Preloaded Linux would be nice too, but it is not as important to get commonly used apps ported. The main advantage with preloaded Linux, as I see it would be that there would be less machines that ship with windows. Modern Linuxes are so easy to install that everybody can install provided the hardware is supported.

Reply Parent Score: 4

robertojdohnert Member since:
2005-07-12

" From what I can tell kubuntu is not any worse/better than other KDE based distros. If you have any special needs perhaps you should tell them. "

If you want a better KDE based Ubuntu derivative besides Kubuntu I suggest SimplyMEPIS. Maybe Freespire or Linspire are better but I havent used Linspire much.

" Microsoft isn't even close to provide drivers for as many devices that Linux supports out of the box. Yet it is always a fault of Linux when some device doesn't work under Linux, and the fault of the device manufacturer if it doesn't work on Windows. We need to be careful to place blame where blame belongs. "

If you want Linux drivers from hardware manufacturers make your voice heard. Speak up. This is not a blame game. After working in both the hardware and software side of the business I can tell you this. A company is not going to do anything if it doesnt make A) Financial sense or B) there isnt demand for it. But its a give and take, if you want the device and app support you must be willing to abide by and follow the licensing terms of the manufacturer. Adobe at one time had Framemaker on Linux and they didnt follow through with it because when the community was polled Linux users wanted it for free or wanted Adobe to Open Source it.

" Today the Linux desktop is easier to use, and looks better than current versions of Windows. What is holding it back is lack of applications that people are used to use. E.g. Gimp may be a good editor, but if you have used Photoshop half a lifetime it is unlikely that you will be prepared to relearn, at least not until Gimp is significantly better than Photoshop. Currently this is not the case. "

I disagree. I like the Windows Vista look. Windows isnt as customizable out of the box as KDE or GNOME but Microsoft has the look down. if people want Photoshop on Linux until a native port is done I can testify that Photoshop works very reliably with Wine in its current version.

" Preloaded Linux would be nice too, but it is not as important to get commonly used apps ported. The main advantage with preloaded Linux, as I see it would be that there would be less machines that ship with windows. Modern Linuxes are so easy to install that everybody can install provided the hardware is supported."

The current plan for preloading is offering choice. either Linux or Windows. People will go with what they know. Linux needs the wow factor and when people find out that they may need to do more work to get a Linux machine up and running than they do a Windows machine whats the point?

Reply Parent Score: 1

melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

Eh? Excuse me? I've probably used Linux a whole lot more than you, and probably know a lot more about it. So, don't talk about my 'special needs'.

An operating system has to do what I need it to do. If it can't, then it's not suitable - period. At the moment, Linux continues to fragment. Whilst this is good, and offers choice to the user, the downside is that it doesn't encourage software vendors to port their software to Linux.

I'm not going to blame Canon, etc. I've done my bit, I've asked for them (previously) to support GNU/Linux. I can ask, but that doesn't mean I'll get what I want. If it makes you feel a bit better, an engineer at Canon Australia told me that they're looking to natively support Canon cameras in the near future for Linux. Adobe? I'd love Adobe to port Photoshop, and I honestly don't think that it'd be that hard for them. If they can get it running on OS X, then they can it with Linux as well. Unfortunately, I can't make Adobe port it. You could have a million emails go to Adobe, requesting that Photoshop be ported, in the end, they won't do it unless they feel that they have to. Photoshop is their baby, and they'll do what they please. Until Linux has an equally powerful, and usable Photo editing/imaging application, there'll be no pressure on Adobe to port. Plain and simple.

I can from the GIMP to Photoshop btw. I don't mind the GIMP, but it's simply not intuitive, and it doesn't let me do the things that I need to do, as a photographer. Plain and simple. Photoshop does. If Adobe ports to Linux, and the other pieces of software that I rely on are ported, I'd switch back in an instant. I prefer GNU/Linux, I prefer the GPL. Early in 2006 I needed to make a distinction - stay with Linux and be hampered as a photographer, or move back to Windows (or OS X) and grow as a photographer. I chose the latter.

You're not telling me something I don't know (drivers, etc), I've used Linux long enough and extensively enough to know what I'm doing. I'm not some newbie troll who has no idea what he's talking about.

Anyways, to me, Ubuntu doesn't give me choice, real choice. If it offered the 2 major desktop environments, I'd consider it. Until then, I can't honestly recommend Ubuntu. If it pleases you, 3 of my friends have tried Ubuntu and all have been unimpressed, with an attitude of "what's all the fuss about?". One much prefers Mandrive, another Fedora, and another Mepis.

Dave

Reply Parent Score: 2

Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

Melkor, my husband is a prosumer photographer (Canon 5D) and he as well can't use Linux to do what he needs to do as a photographer (samples: http://www.geocities.com/jbqueru/ ). There is no secret there.

However, this is how it is, and I suggest you use Windows or OSX to do your job. Use the best tool for the job, and for your line of work, that's Win or OSX.

Use Linux if you just want a desktop aside from your work.

Edited 2007-03-17 06:20

Reply Parent Score: 1

Kokopelli Member since:
2005-07-06

If it offered the 2 major desktop environments, I'd consider it.

Ubuntu (and Debian) rely on the repositories more than providing options during install. It makes for a trimmer install and empowers the user to make their choices as they use the system.

1) the desktop installed initially or "sudo apt-get install ubuntu-desktop" if you use the server install.
2) sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop
3) sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop
4) sudo apt-get install fluxbox
5) sudo apt-get install fvwm
etc....

You are not some newbie troll, but anyone who has been at OSNews for more than 2 days has heard the argument about missing Photoshop. It has been beat to death. If you need Photoshop use OS X or Windows. Linux is not a fit for every user's needs. Nor is Windows.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Coxy Member since:
2006-07-01

Adobe won't ever release their apps on Linux, at least I don't believe so.

Why? It's because they know hardly anyone would buy it. Many poeople may tell Adobe they would want to USE Photoshop on Linux, but how many people would actually BUY Photoshop if it was released for Linux? People who use Linux, where everything is free, would just crack a trial version and be knowledgeable enough to stop any product activation from 'phoning home'. Adobe know this... so does every other large software co. that won't release Linux versions.

Businesses won't pay for it... they already purchased Macs for their design departments or have the Windows versions. I don't believe there could be very many 'businesses' for Adobe to target on Linux, certainly not enough to make it worth the development costs.

Edited 2007-03-17 10:57

Reply Parent Score: 2

ngaio Member since:
2005-10-06

I am a serious photographer (with exhibited work) so I cannot help but comment on the claim that GNU Linux is not useful for serious photographers. Professional photographic workflow software exists that runs on GNU Linux, e.g. Bibble Pro, but there are also others. I use Ubuntu to take RAW files off my camera, categorize by date and immediately backup to multiple hard drives (using python scripts I have written myself), Bibble Pro to convert the RAW files into 16 bit TIFFs, and then I use Photoshop CS2 to convert those TIFFs to jpegs in a variety of sizes. I run Photoshop in VMware or under dual boot. I agree that Photoshop is currently superior to the Gimp for photographers for a number of compelling reasons, but I would say they are related to features rather than the user interface. The UI of both programs have their pluses and minuses.

I am also a student currently doing my MA, and here too while I use Ubuntu all the time (I'm using it now), there is specialized software that only runs under Windows (or Mac) that makes the life of a student far easier. Endnote is one of these programs (bibliographic management). While I have high hopes for Zotero, Endnote is a great time saver, again for a number of compelling reasons. Dragon NaturallySpeaking (voice recognition, Windows only) can also be extremely useful for producing papers. Fortunately VMware player does the trick in this situation, meaning I can run Ubuntu while at the same time having access to Endnote and NaturallySpeaking.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Finalzone Member since:
2005-07-06

I can from the GIMP to Photoshop btw. I don't mind the GIMP, but it's simply not intuitive, and it doesn't let me do the things that I need to do, as a photographer. Plain and simple. Photoshop does. If Adobe ports to Linux, and the other pieces of software that I rely on are ported, I'd switch back in an instant. I prefer GNU/Linux, I prefer the GPL. Early in 2006 I needed to make a distinction - stay with Linux and be hampered as a photographer, or move back to Windows (or OS X) and grow as a photographer. I chose the latter.

Ever heard about Cinepaint? It is the second image editor used not only by professional photographers but also movie studios after Adobe Photoshop.
http://www.cinepaint.org/

Edited 2007-03-17 21:33

Reply Parent Score: 2