Linked by David Adams on Mon 24th Aug 2009 09:21 UTC
Linux A reader asks: Why is Linux still not as user friendly as the two other main OSes with all the people developing for Linux? Is it because it is mainly developed by geeks? My initial feeling when reading this question was that it was kind of a throwaway, kind of a slam in disguise as a genuine question. But the more I thought about it, the more intrigued I felt. There truly are a large amount of resources being dedicated to the development of Linux and its operating system halo (DEs, drivers, apps, etc). Some of these resources are from large companies (IBM, Red Hat, Novell). Why isn't Linux more user-friendly? Is this an inherent limitation with open source software?
Thread beginning with comment 380262
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Please rephrase the question.
by mtilsted on Mon 24th Aug 2009 14:07 UTC
mtilsted
Member since:
2006-01-15

When he write "Linux" which part of Linux is he talking about?

Linux the kernel is really user-unfriendly but that does not matter at all, unless you are a kernel-developer or are making your own linux distribution.

So he must be talking about either the "linux distributions" or the "linux software"

If the question is about linux distributions, then my answer would be: "Which one". Linux distributions are made by different people, and with different goals so there exists no answer that can cover them all.

But having said that,I do think that the question is invalid. I do at least think that the Fedora Core 11 I run right now, are far more user friendly then Windows Vista. And here we are talking about Operation systems/environments and the software needed to manage and control them. This does not include 3. party production applications.

But he might also be talking about the production applications. That is: The software that you use because you need to do something with the computer. But then the question should be rephrased as
"Why does the userinterface for some linux software suck" and the answer would most like be the same as the answer to "Why does some windows software sucks" having something to do with the fact that its difficult to design good user interfaces, and sometimes software change its focus without changing its userinterface.
Let me take Itunes as an example: Some time ago a Windows user friend asked me how to use ITunes(Version 6 i think, or maybe 7) to rip the audio cd that was in his cd-rom drive. Well after having spendt 15 minutes, looking around in the entire interface, I simply had to give up, and said he should use some other software, because I could not find that function in iTunes.

Reply Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Some time ago a Windows user friend asked me how to use ITunes(Version 6 i think, or maybe 7) to rip the audio cd that was in his cd-rom drive. Well after having spendt 15 minutes, looking around in the entire interface, I simply had to give up, and said he should use some other software, because I could not find that function in iTunes.


I also tried the windows version of iTunes to see what all the noise is about, and thought that if this is where the "state of the art" for UI design is at, Linux has absolutely nothing to worry about. It was a slow pig with unexciting UI.

For slick UI's, Qt Creator is the one to learn from:

http://static.kdenews.org/danimo/qt_creator_visualizeqstring.png

Reply Parent Score: 2

Wrawrat Member since:
2005-06-30

Well, it looks good at the first glance... but its UI doesn't match the theme of your OS and "slick" becomes "cumbersome" when you use the window designer. It's not a bad IDE, but it lacks maturity. Sometimes, SDI/floating windows are more functional/easier to use than MDI.

Reply Parent Score: 2