Guest post by The true reason for this article is to point out some sensitive points and to start a discussion. Hopefully, this discussion will produce some useful outcome and if some people in the Linux community are willing to listen to them, I would already be very enthusiastic. Let’s start, shall we?
First of all, this document is a comment and at the same time an addition to many articles that have recently been posted on the internet concerning the fact if Linux is ready (or not) to face the desktop and if it is ready, why it is still lacking behind. This articles formulates certain ideas. You either agree with them or you don’t. However, this is of no importance. The true reason for this article is to point out some sensitive points and to start a discussion. Hopefully, this discussion will produce some useful outcome and if some people in the Linux community are willing to listen to them, I would already be very enthusiastic. Let’s start, shall we?
Linux has potential, there is no denying that. The success of a distribution like Ubuntu is not something that has gone unnoticed. Out of nowhere, this distribution managed to make it to one of the most popular distros in a couple of months. The innovations are there too. Enlightenment, Luminocity and many more are wonderful technologies that improve the Linux experience like never before. Finally, the bling is finding it’s way towards Linux. Furthermore, there are a lot of companies who are beginning to offer some very decent support for Linux. Even graphics drivers seem to have matured. NVidia has been out there for a long time offering support for the Linux community and the speed of their drivers under Linux are better than those of the drivers under Windows.
Yet, with all these wonderful assets, Linux does not manage to become commonplace in the average household. Mind you, I’m not talking about servers or geeks here. Nor am I talking about the family of some geek. Very often, you will find that his parents, his grandparents and a lot more of his relatives use Linux because he single-handedly installs, updates and manages them. No, I’m talking about the average human being, with little to no computer experience. Why is it that he cannot get the hang of Linux on the desktop?
Well, for some reason, the largest amount of the Linux community still believes that people actually intend to struggle their way through a hefty manual to get the thing installed and configured as they wish. Strange, especially when you see how successful an operating system like OS X is becoming, simply because this operating system is so simplistic and easy to use, even for a complete newbie, that it gives the user a very powerful feeling.
And for some reason, the entire Linux community seems to hide themselves behind the idea that one needs to “grow into” a distro. One should apply for leave for a month before being able to actually getting used to his or her distro of choice. Some may find this absurd, and it is, but this is actually advice people have given me in the past. A lot of you will also agree that if you do want to get acquainted with Linux, you should do it like this, one does need to grow into it and that’s where the shoe pinches. People do not like to be told to grow into something, unless it is worth it. And Linux simply is not worth the trouble.
But then, why is it that operating systems like OS X and Windows are so much more suited for end users? One needs to look beyond his own nose to see why this actually is. If you only focus on the end-users, this is essentially a computer-illiterate, it is hard to see why Windows would be any better than Linux. They both have a start menu, they both have a taskbar, they both have a traybar and I could go on summing things up that are exactly the same for most users. If a user is unable to operate a mouse and point and click on an icon, then he won’t be capable to do a single thing with a computer nowadays. If he can, then he can do all he wants, as long as the computer has already been configured and all his favourite apps are to be found on the desktop.
At this point, you should start to see where I am taking you. Measuring how good an operating system is for an end-user is not a thing someone can measure by looking at how well an end-users can point and click the icons on both systems. What is important, is to see how many people are around that can actually configure the operating system to the needs of this end user. Furthermore, I am once again not talking about the geeks here. Once a person attains a certain level of computer knowledge, he will be held back to do simple things like configuring a computer for a computer illiterate. Believe me, there is nothing so tiresome as having to configure a computer for someone who is a true computer illiterate.
So, one needs a broad base of people who can do simple administrative tasks, like installing software and configuring the system, yet not someone who works in a computer store as a computer technician. The first group, the illiterates, can’t do jobs like these. The latter have done it too many times in the past, and have outgrown the phase in which they found such endeavours to be challenging.
If we look back at Windows, we see how this operating system has a huge base as we want it. The illiterates working with Windows are numerous, but it is safe to say that every five illiterates are backed by at least one person who can configure the machine more or less as they would like. Let us from now on call these people disciples. If these disciples need help, they can always fall back on the geeks, who are also numerous for Windows.
The reason why Windows has such a neat distribution of this knowledge pyramid as I will call it from now on, is because of historical reasons. It has nothing to do with a better system than the others on the market. It has to do with power, and widespread usage. You may love this, you may hate this, you may love to hate this, but the fact remains. Windows is powerful, and it will remain so for a long time to come. If you believe otherwise, you are most likely one of those stubborn geeks who has not yet found the virtue of self-criticism. Please, for once and for all, stop believing you and only you are right, because you are not.
Moving to OS X, we come across a system who has earned every bit of respect thanks to their great efforts. If you have ever worked with OS X, you know what I mean. For those who don’t, I’m talking about simplicity. Installing a program on OS X is nothing more than dragging and dropping the folder where you want it. In fact, OS X even hides the fact that it is a folder, and it simply appears to be the program. Drag the icon of the program to where you want it, and you are ready to rock and roll. Same goes for the control panel. This is much like in Windows a central place where you can make some of the most important adjustments.
Final thing to look at when it comes to installing software, is how different sources interact. This is, when you install from a file from your computer or from a CD, how much difference does it make? As for Windows, thanks to autoplay, there hardly is any difference for the average user. For OS X, it is even better, since every install program automatically behaves as if it is actually a CD. This further increases the consistency of performing an installation.
We not only need to look at how easy it is to install a program or to set some options, but we also need to look at how consistent this is with earlier versions. Here, Windows has done a great job. From Windows 95 and onwards, it should be a breeze to configure the system as you want. While not looking as lovely on one version as on the other, the functionality is to be found at about the same place, and one can rather quickly set everything to his preferences. The same goes for OS X. This is, once again, mainly thanks to Apple itself. Apple is constantly pushing people to use the latest and greatest, and with success. This saves Apple quite some money on support costs, and Apple has wisely used this money to promote people to switch even faster. One has to admit that a family license of OS X (which allows you to install OS X on 3 computers) sounds a lot more attractive than Windows XP Home edition that you can install on a single computer. Oh, and yeah, they both sell for about the same price.
Too bad for Linux, but it is time to evaluate them too. Linux has some share in the end user market, about none when it comes to the disciples and way too many geeks. This is caused by, again, numerous factors. Linux has outgrown the hobby stage, and a lot of geeks had a hand in this. However, as popularity grows, the other two groups should have started building them up themselves and grow into a nice looking knowledge pyramid. But for Linux, this has not happened. Why?
Linux has a learning curve, that is more than just steep. Linux is not something that one learns to configure after a couple of hours of clicking around. Furthermore, where the other two OSes could fall back on a large group of geeks who are more than willing to help, it seems like Linux suffers from a so-called uber-geek effect. When one needs to simply know how to install a driver, and one is offered a solution that resembles more the activation of a nuclear rocket, it is not so hard to understand why the disciples are so thinly spread amongst Linux users. If they ask for more advise, it is not so rare that they get an answer that is full of disbelief and contempt. I know a lot who have tried to make the move to Linux, who struggled their way towards becoming a disciple, but who have failed. Not because they didn’t try. Most of them even tried too hard. No, Linux is open software with open documentation. So you just try to struggle your way trough the sometimes way too complex documentation and please, leave the geeks alone. They are evangelising Linux as “almost” ready for the desktop. So please, do not disturb them. Maybe later. But not now.
When it comes to consistency, I’m afraid to express my opinion. Simply because I know that a lot of Linux geeks will simply activate their defences again and tell me that Linux, well, isn’t Linux. Linux consists of many different OSes where every OS has his own set of rules and own set of features. However, as soon as it fits them, they will once again join forces again and come out as Linux. The Big One. Well, for end users and disciples, Linux is Linux. Debian, Suse, Gentoo, Ubuntu, Mandrake, Fedora, Vector Linux and so on, they are all just different flavours much like Windows 95 and Windows XP. And once again, I agree with them. There is just too little of a difference to actually say they are all different OSes instead of just flavours of Linux.
Getting a disciple to work with a single distro is certainly doable. Linux has some great ideas, and if one only focuses on one distro, things look great. However, even two distros can make a world of difference to a disciple. I think it doesn’t need clarification that getting something installed in Mandrake does not mean you will be able to do the same thing in Fedora. Or Debian. Consistency is the greatest deficiency of Linux. Simple because it is absent. And this is, sadly enough, present in every aspect of Linux. Think about Gnome. Think about KDE. Think about repositories. Think about installation packages. Think about every single aspect of Linux, and you are confronted with an OS that seems to be schizophrenic. For some unclear reason, Linux users are in constant conflict with themselves, trying to outperform the others and building a better copy of what they are making. Not only does this waste most valuable time, it also makes that Linux has too little money to do something (however, combined, Linux would be quite wealthy) and that the good programmers are spread out over projects that are making exactly the same thing.
For some reason, the Linux community simply doesn’t understand what Caesar was saying when he invented the very successful strategy of “Divide and Conquer”; this does not mean that one needs to split up his own troops, but this means that the troops of the enemy should be divided, so that your mighty large army can come and squash those silly small troops. Right now, Linux is nothing more than a bunch of silly small troops. I am not the only one pointing this out, and attempts have been made to make this possible. However, they were all in vain. Yet, people are more than ever saying that Linux should unite. And these aren’t any longer only small fish, but even an executive of Redhat has recently declared that Linux should unite. And he is right.
Linux also needs to leave behind their ubergeek image. Configuration panels are there for disciples, not the geeks. So don’t confront them with options that they would never set. Simply because as soon as one knows what the option is for, one would already have reached such a high level of experience with this operating system that one would be able to simply alter the desired files directly. So keep it simple and stupid.
Innovation is another thing that Linux lags. Linux is a copy of a lot of other things, all pieced together. This is not immediately something bad. However, it needs to be done right. When you copy, you need to innovate, or at least, make a good copy. It is no use to reinvent the wheel, so don’t do it. But don’t copy it and think that a square wheel will do the job as well. For example, look at Abiword, KOffice and OpenOffice. If you throw them all together, you would end up with a more than wonderful package. Leave them as they are now, and they all represent both a small amount of good value and a huge bunch of real annoyances. To tell you the truth, Word will remain my favourite editor for quite some time (oh, and before you start to doubt my credibility, I’m using Word on my trusty iBook running OS X Panther). So please, now is the time to unite. Well, actually, it was yesterday, but you all seemed to have missed the train.
Some other huge things where Linux lags behind is the fact that they have the urge to bundle every possible application and that they are terrible at localising their software. There’s nothing like a distro like Ubuntu. It is small, easy to install and without too many options to set. No filling up your hard disk with useless programs, but most of them are simply necessary programs of a very high quality. This should become the standard for Linux, however, due to the broad range of different ways to install software under Linux, this is not yet truly achievable. The only exception is when you offer a large website with installation packages or when you offer a central repository. In both cases, these things cost a lot of money to maintain.
The other deficiency that Linux has, is even more important than the one I just stated. It is their localisation. Getting Linux to work in English is no big deal, however, trying out other languages is a huge challenge. For example, go ahead and try to get it all running in Dutch. Dutch is no small language, with over 30 million people who have it as their native tongue. Yet, getting a version of Linux that is in Dutch is harder than ever. Not often you are confronted with bad translations, or, even worse, half translations. When it comes to trusting an operating system, I can tell you that there is no trusting a system that can’t even get the translations right. Therefore, why not move to the Apple way of doing things, and make every program de-facto multi-lingual? Truly, Linux lags way behind here. Windows works like a charm, OS X does it even better (allowing two users on the same computer to operate in different languages), but Linux, well, it can zijn better. (and no, the last part of this phrase does not include a clerical error. It is the Linux way of saying things in other languages).
It’s is somewhat funny to see that an operating system with such a high potential as Linux suffers so greatly from tearing itself apart. Face it, why oh why do we have for example KDE and Gnome? While this is not so terrible, it is terrible that every desktop has his own set of software of which the most of them are just copies of one another. Only, they have been designed without working together and once again most valuable time has gone to waste in building two suites of applications who do the same thing.
Lastly, I would once again encourage those who evangelise Linux to start using self-criticism. To tell you the truth, Linux has not made any advancements when you compare it to Windows. Windows has gone forward with leaps and bounds towards becoming a secure and productive system. Linux hasn’t made such advancements. Linux has only made some small steps, and there can only be hope that one day, Linux will actually start to make some leaps. Windows is a lot better than Linux because in the past, Windows has learned from their mistakes. Linux hasn’t. And OS X, well, they play in their own league.
Let me once again remind you that this article only holds a very slim amount of reasons for Linux not being successful on the desktop. Other articles will most certainly pop out other reasons and some other articles will be very correct. I do hope that I have started a good discussion with this article and that I, in a limited manner, provide a general solution to the problem. However, as I said, I’m only pointing out a very limited amount of possible reasons, so please, read other articles who are to be found almost anywhere and try to learn from them too.
About the author:
Kim Bauters is a 20 year old student in applied computer science with special iinterestin automation, artifical intelligence, operating systems and compression.
If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.
Oh, a “Linux on the desktop” article.
Quentin Garnier.
or are these Linux in Desktop articles getting bigger?
Why is it OSnews feels a need to bring this topic out every other week.
It is a lame topic that only results in flamewars.
and at that, it truely is an uninteresting topic because anyone that is actually doing the work on linux, isnt reading what anyone has to say here to begin with.
please stop with the constant “linux onthe desktop” bullshit.
it is a waste of time
Why is it OSnews feels a need to bring this topic out every other week.
Because readers keep sending them in. OSNews is about open-nes, everyone can write an article and if the quality isn’t too bad, it goes up (however, we do try to *not* make humungous errors like osViews has on a regular basis). It’s something that I value a great deal. *Everyone* should be able to express his or her opinion; it’s part of who I am, and before me, part of who Eugenia is. We don’t reject articles simply because we don’t agree with them or because we find the topic tiresome or uninteresting.
You always have the freedom to:
1) not read articles/comment on articles you don’t find interesting;
2) write an article yourself;
3) both of the above.
> You always have the freedom to:
>
> 1) not read articles/comment on articles you don’t
> find interesting;
> 2) write an article yourself;
> 3) both of the above.
Yeah, but this is probably coming from a guy whose time is obviously too precious to write an article. Hell, his time is too precious to skip an article he doesn’t like.
One must admire his frugality with respect to time management.
how true,
who are the authors of “is linux ready for the desktop” articles trying to convince? certainly not us linux users. heck, when someone mentions windows I immediately think pacman (er. or rather “GTA San Andreas” ;-)).
who are the authors of “is linux ready for the desktop” articles trying to convince?
>
>
Nobody. They’re for the most part GUI fanboys who bet on the wrong OS/Technology. You see, most of the people who keep on harping about the Linux Desktop are people who can’t deal with the fact that Linux is growing and thriving while not adopting the latest and greatest in “Useability Research” while OS’s and computers like Amiga,BE,OS/2,Atari ST and so forth are either footnotes or are on their way to becoming footnotes in computer history despite their “critically acclaimed “User Interfaces”
Remember, most of the people writing and posting here articles about the “Linux Desktop” here on OSNews *WERE NEVER LINUX SUPPORTERS TO BEGIN WITH* Eugina is a perfect example of this. She was a big BE fangirl.
And like most of the BE fanclub she ran around proclaiming to the world how Linux wouldn’t really amount to anything and that Linux developers the would over would abandon Linux in favor of the BE platform once they realized Linux wouldn’t amount to anything.
When that didn’t happen they started heming and hawing about how Linux developers would abandon Linux in favor of OSX.
When *THAT* didn’t happen they started cranking out the articles you see now proclaiming their “LOVE” of the “Linux Desktop”
Of course the Linux base never really paid any serious attention to what the Amiga,BE and Mac crowd were saying about them then and still aren’t doing so now.
I agree with the first two posts. This topic comes up too often and this one just reiterates what’s been said a thousand times before.
I think if we brought up the topic once a year that would be enough time to allow progress to have occured to actually have something to discuss.
Considering the rate of progress of linux and associated applications, I quite enjoy these articles on a reasonably regular basis – there’s always a little more food for thought.
As this article is pretty long I’ll comment while I read along.
“Well, for some reason, the largest amount of the Linux community still believes that people actually intend to struggle their way through a hefty manual to get the thing installed and configured as they wish.”
Hm, if that’s the way the article is going to continue it isn’t really off for a good start. How you can claim to know what the largest part of the Linux community thinks is beyond me, as is what this community actually is supposed to be.
“And for some reason, the entire Linux community seems to hide themselves behind the idea that one needs to “grow into” a distro.”
Another unfounded adhominem against the oh so evil community. I hope this article will get better…
“But then, why is it that operating systems like OS X and Windows are so much more suited for end users?”
Are they? You sure might hold this opinion, but you should at least try to argue it, not just make yet another unfounded assumption.
“The reason why Windows has such a neat distribution of this knowledge pyramid as I will call it from now on, is because of historical reasons. It has nothing to do with a better system than the others on the market. It has to do with power, and widespread usage. You may love this, you may hate this, you may love to hate this, but the fact remains. Windows is powerful, and it will remain so for a long time to come.”
Wow, now he’s actually starting to make sense here.
“If you believe otherwise, you are most likely one of those stubborn geeks who has not yet found the virtue of self-criticism. Please, for once and for all, stop believing you and only you are right, because you are not.”
Only to destroy the first good impression I had by this kind of drivel.
Ok, we are now two pages into the article and the only thing that made any sense was the insight that one of Windows major strenghts is its market share. Wow.
This is exactly what the author is talking about!!
Do you think a company would be able to survive with this attitude (open source, closed mind)?
Will Linux? Not in my business – That’s why I hire employees with a different attitude than yours!!!
Now analyze that!!!
> This is exactly what the author is talking about!!
>
> Do you think a company would be able to survive with
> this attitude (open source, closed mind)?
> Will Linux? Not in my business – That’s why I hire
> employees with a different attitude than yours!!!
You might want to do what Microsoft does: run /FreeBSD/ on all their critical servers.
I agree completely, the article started of with some promise but then just descended into a series of cliches, over generalizations and outright insults of anyone enthusiastic about Linux. The following statement is quite an amusing accusation of the authors own statement:
“If you believe otherwise, you are most likely one of those stubborn geeks…
…Please, for once and for all, stop believing you and only you are right”
The author might as well be writing about himself there.
and ask *why* everyone wants the notion of Linux for the Desktop. Everyone seems overly eager to push this topic, but no one has a really good reason why.
I could see the “if more people used it, drivers would be supported by major vendors”, but doesn’t that go against *Free* if it isn’t open source (and you can bet it won’t be)?
I see the point of wanting to be part of something successful, but isn’t that just a bit silly? It seems to be perfect for all the fans of it already. Why push it on to grandma?
What I don’t see is the argument that everyone seems to be happy to use blindly. “It is better than Windows.” I’m not going to touch this one, but let’s see there is room for argument.
Point is, Linux will be what it will be. No series of articles is going to push it to the desktop or spur crazy development to get it there.
I know this idea isn’t going to go away, but please come up with a reason why it should be the hot topic. I’m still searching for one.
cujo wrote: and ask *why* everyone wants the notion of Linux for the Desktop. Everyone seems overly eager to push this topic, but no one has a really good reason why.
Maybe this is not what you’d call a good reason: Somebody else commented that the origin of Microsoft’s market share was basically Microsoft’s market share. Turn this around and you’ll find that Linux’s small market share might be the origin of an even smaller market share in the future. You only need to stop the hype around Linux.
Others may respond that Linux is successful on servers and will ever be. I don’t buy that argument: You can easily replace a few servers when the alternative would be to replace a few hundred clients.
With less desktop users, you will have probably less developers. Even if you’re a developer, I doubt that you’d be able to code all you need yourself — not because of missing knowledge but because of missing time.
With less desktop users, and less server deployments, there will be less Linux related jobs. You may not mind about it, but maybe others do.
However, you’re basically right: Articles about reasons for the slow adoption of Linux on desktops won’t change the situation!
Maybe, such articles should be viewed as signals of a large demand. Being rather new to Linux, I can still recall some frustration about GNU/Linux developers doing great things on the one hand while obviously bad things (from a switcher’s point of view) on the other.
Being a little bit more experienced now, the only thing that is going the change this is money, IMHO. This, however, is a tricky business, and other’s have already failed to implement a solution. Meanwhile, we’re going to ‘enjoy’ a few more articles about the topic, I guess.
> I see the point of wanting to be part of something
> successful, but isn’t that just a bit silly? It
> seems to be perfect for all the fans of it already. > Why push it on to grandma?
Because, otherwise, there will always be the threat of things like software patents. The EU measure was bitchslapped…quite thoroughly I might add, but this is always on the horizon.
So, first off, we need to defend what’s ours. By becoming larger, this kind of crap will not fly. Vital projects like MPlayer will not be crushed. If they want to ruin our shit, they grant the same right to us.
Why doesn’t anyone talk about that? We (OSS camp) are not the wolves in sheeps’ skin and I though this was already plain to see who is.
Second off, there’s a difference between using certain software at home and using it at work. As a youth involved in technology, I was invited to a seminar on the same at a local business. I was talking about OSes and the guy said…”We kind of sold out” with a sheepish grin, in reference to his day to day use of Windos. He then compared it to the “VHS vs. Betamax” era.
I did not find this funny. In fact, I was nothing less than incensed. “Leave me out of your horsesh*t.” I was very pleased to see, in a business magazine, an article on the burgeoning CIS industry in South Asia, where Indian workers were clearly depicted using Red Hat Linux. I could see the familiar interface in the pictures. http://thelinuxlink.net/~fingolfin/indiaRedHat.jpeg
I met a businessman from India name of Uprenda; he said Linux was really taking off. I am moving to Asia after college where, hopefully, I can get a job where I do not have to put up with Windows garbage. This field is fortunately burgeoning over there.
I don’t know if I’m the only one, but technology is my life and I think Windows is soul-crashing garbage. It has no redeeming value in my eyes. I couldn’t stand to be reduced to a glorified data entry clerk babysitting Windows every day. I’m not a sellout. Period. And if I want something real bad I will work that hard for it. I want to avoid Windows even more than I want to avoid having a white wife. That’s quite a substantial compulsion.
Third, the encroachments on privacy that will apparently be introduced into Longhorn are frankly disturbing. Such as the keystroke logger, which Microsoft assures us will be secure…hm, yeah…given their track record with security (BILLIONS of dollars lost to viri in the past decade), methinks this does not bode well. Where is this leading us?
Ideas all have their time. Some must stay, others must go. Windows fits into that latter category. How many large-scale headaches must we tolerate before we realise we’ve paid more than enough for the mess it’s left behind?
Linux is not the Betamax of OS technology. It is the analogy to the DVD and, hopefully, it will kick VHS’ ass from Ayodhya to Ayutthaya.
But I don’t think there is any point in debating the subject. It’s up to the people who do Linux desktop distros to resolve these obvious issues and history has shown they are unwilling/unable to do so.
Perhaps it is that we are seeing all the dev branches of what might become the future reference Linux distro ? But there is no saying which it will be….
I run Linux on my desktop and know many others who do the same. Your Grandmother might not be able to get /dev/esoteric to work under LFS, but why should she? On Windows it would have been configured out of the box. Do you see dozens of “Is Windows Ready for the Desktop?” articles? It certainly wasn’t ready for mine.
This article, along with several others, complained that a large part of the linux community expects users to read through man pages to get things working. Funnily enough, this happens in Gentoo, Slackware and LFS communities, not in response to your average newbie asking questions about Ubuntu. These aren’t the people pushing Linux on the desktop – it works for them and their computer literate associates and they’re quite happy with that. Is Windows not ready for the desktop just because your local NT admin is sick of “lusers” messing up his perfectly configured machines?
This article, along with several others, complained that a large part of the linux community expects users to read through man pages to get things working. Funnily enough, this happens in Gentoo, Slackware and LFS communities, not in response to your average newbie asking questions about Ubuntu.
>
>
You have to understand something. There’s a *WHOLE* history here that either the people creating these Linux Desktop “articles” either don’t know about or are choosing to ignore.
It basically goes back to the early/mid 80’s-basically around to the time of the orginal Mac,Amiga and Atari ST computers.
Basically a major rift developed between people who were trying to shove the GUI interface onto every and anything and people who prefered using the CLI interface for the most part. There were and still are some *VERY* hard feelings over this particular issue.
The two camps went their seperate ways, with the GUI camp migrating towards Windows and the Mac, and the CLI
camp developing Linux and the BSD’s.
> The two camps went their seperate ways, with the GUI > camp migrating towards Windows and the Mac, and the > CLI camp developing Linux and the BSD’s.
Funny. Most Linux users I know are Windows converts. Some old-school Unix, but not much. I personally wasn’t ALIVE in the “early-to-mid 80s”.
Which certainly casts a shadow of doubt on your theory about the origin of a rift. Most of the time you can avoid the CLI on Linux, but it sure helps. I have some linux-using friends who haven’t a CLUE what to do on the command line. They’re fine and I only have to fix shit every so often, like for something large such as a modem driver. Get a PCI modem I say…it’s better for performance anyways.
The same can be said about Windoze; nothing makes the Registry more user-friendly than a CLI. And there are instances where an expert must step in to fix things. I know Windoze has f*cked up at my school plenty of times and I ended up fixing it.
> I run Linux on my desktop and know many others who do
> the same. Your Grandmother might not be able to get
> /dev/esoteric to work under LFS, but why should she? On > Windows it would have been configured out of the box.
Maybe. Maybe not. I have a Windoze box that can’t seem to recognize a Goddamn USB keyfob. And unlike Linux, I will probably have to dig through some registry rigamarole to get to it. Under Linux I would have to edit a text file. The worst it could possibly get it is…GASP…an XML file.
Well, back to VL5 RC 2.
its pretty easyer .. most ( not all ) dont belive in such words as newbie friendly, automatic, easy its just not in their dictinary
Yet, with all these wonderful assets, Linux does not manage to become commonplace in the average household. Mind you, I’m not talking about servers or geeks here. Nor am I talking about the family of some geek. Very often, you will find that his parents, his grandparents and a lot more of his relatives use Linux because he single-handedly installs, updates and manages them. No, I’m talking about the average human being, with little to no computer experience. Why is it that he cannot get the hang of Linux on the desktop?
The article is well written and thought out — but I feel it’s “thought out” from a fairly bad vantage point. Right from the get go, the author assumes “normal users” are looking for operating system (and btw, i’m no GNU zealot, but when you’re writing a OS view article, Linux really is just the kernel — if you’re talking about KDE or GNOME or use of the CLI, you gotta say so).
“Normal users” aren’t looking (or shopping) for operating systems — they are shopping for computers. People don’t go out and but Windows or OS X — they go out and buy a Dell, or an Apple, or a Gateway, etc etc.
“Normal users” don’t install operating systems, it’s that simple. Once someone decides to try out something new then they are no longer “normal.” For that matter, OS X users aren’t “normal” — they are arguably more “normal” than GNU/Linux distro using people.
“Normal users,” just like everyone else, need to have an open mind when searching for the tools they need to do the tasks they want to do. If it’s play online 3D games, well, get a PC with Windows. Do it. If your needs extend beyond that you need to survey what is available to you. Don’t people do this with everything else? How do people choose lunch? cars? books? movies?
All these articles are so completely askew from the “real world.” *** Who cares if someone else sees you as a “normal” user or a “power” user or a “developer” ***. Can you get your job done effectively with the tools you use? Hrm? There you go, if you’ve really asked yourself that, then you’re either running with the right tools or your not.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Everybody uses Windows because that’s what came on everybody’s computers. Apple has made their market by being cooler and more secure than Windows but still compatible (especially with MS Office for OS X). Linux has made their market by being a hobbiest OS and now a server OS. Don’t get me wrong, I think Linux is great. I’ve been using Xandros at work for about 6 months now and it works extremely well. However, I’m not an average user. My experience with average users is as follows:
User 1: Not very computer literate but needs to upgrade ancient computer. I recommend a Mac. Her kids want a Mac. She decides to get a PC because all of her friends have PCs and she is comfortable with Windows and doesn’t want to try anything new.
User 2: Upgrades ancient Win98 box, wants a new OS, doesn’t want to pay for Windows XP. Does it run MS Office? No but OpenOffice.org is compatible. Work uses MS Office. Goes out and buys XP.
User 3: How much does MS Office cost? About $379. Can I get it for cheaper? You can get OpenOffice.org for free. Can it read and write MS Office files because work uses MS Office. Yes, just do “save as…” I don’t want to have to remember to “save as…” all the time, I’ll just buy MS Office.
Perhaps this sounds nutty, but many users aren’t that comfortable with computers in the first place and don’t want to learn anything more than they absolutely have to. The will willingly pay the MS tax in order to avoid learning something new.
If businesses start using Linux on the desktop, then users will start using Linux on the desktop. It’s that simple. Until then, it’s mostly for hobbiests.
We get these articles about once a week, and does it really matter if Linux ever is signficant on “the desktop”. It seems like its always the newbies that are fixated on converting everybody. I’ll probably always use Linux, windows, and hopefully OSX in a couple years when I can triple boot.
P.S. How about OpenUnix on the desktop instead of linux on the desktop. There is no “linux desktop”.
To me, the _main_ thing missing from THE linux desktop is INTEGRATION. For all it’s worth, Windows XP as a whole is much better integrated than any Desktop Linux Distro with KDE or Gnome, for example.
Moreover, you can have all the eyecandy in the world but If the desktop doesn’t feel like a cohesive whole then you always feel something’s missing. It seems Gnome 3.0 (Project Topaz) – and maybe KDE 4.0 ? – will address these issues such as making everything in the desktop a first-class citizen where you can drag and drop anything to the Trash, for example.
I don’t really buy that. How? Certainly, Windows XP apps don’t have the kind of unified look GNOME and KDE apps do. I mean, does anybody seriously argue that MS Office, with its tacky blue theme, looks anything like the rest of the OS? Look at something like Fedora. Where is the lack of integration? The apps look similar, the system configuration utilities are all there in GNOME form, etc, etc. What is unintegrated? Sure, you can make it unintegrated, by installing KDE apps or mucking around in the CLI, but why would you want to? Furthermore, you can do that to Windows too. Indeed, nearly all Windows users run an unintegrated desktop, since they run MS Office.
Ok how well ICQLite, the new msn messenger, windows media player to name few integrate into XP? Do they look the same, feel the same as the rest of windows?
Does double clicking on mp3 file in linux produce much different result than on XP? Can you do copy/paste between apps in Linux?
Corel uses different methods for accessing fonts. File Open/Save dialogs look different in Word and AutoCAD for instance.
By the way what the hell desktop integration means at all?
“From Windows 95 and onwards, it should be a breeze to configure the system as you want. While not looking as lovely on one version as on the other, the functionality is to be found at about the same place, and one can rather quickly set everything to his preferences.”
Huh? This is simply not true. I know a lot of people who had problems finding the stuff they were used to after switching to XP.
“One has to admit that a family license of OS X (which allows you to install OS X on 3 computers) sounds a lot more attractive than Windows XP Home edition that you can install on a single computer. Oh, and yeah, they both sell for about the same price.”
Yep, sounds great, especially when you consider that you also need 3 Macs to run OSX.
“So you just try to struggle your way trough the sometimes way too complex documentation and please, leave the geeks alone. They are evangelising Linux as “almost” ready for the desktop. So please, do not disturb them. Maybe later. But not now.”
Sigh, another unfounded and uncalled for adhominem at some “evil” group..
“Well, for end users and disciples, Linux is Linux. Debian, Suse, Gentoo, Ubuntu, Mandrake, Fedora, Vector Linux and so on, they are all just different flavours much like Windows 95 and Windows XP.”
But they aren’t. I know you tried to prevent this argument by preventive namecalling (oh those evil geeks), however that doesn’t invalidate it.
“For some unclear reason, Linux users are in constant conflict with themselves, trying to outperform the others and building a better copy of what they are making. Not only does this waste most valuable time, it also makes that Linux has too little money to do something (however, combined, Linux would be quite wealthy) and that the good programmers are spread out over projects that are making exactly the same thing.”
Blah, blah, blah. Yes, if only all would work on my pet project, not something different, the world would be saved…
“Innovation is another thing that Linux lags. Linux is a copy of a lot of other things, all pieced together. This is not immediately something bad. However, it needs to be done right. When you copy, you need to innovate, or at least, make a good copy. It is no use to reinvent the wheel, so don’t do it. But don’t copy it and think that a square wheel will do the job as well.”
Insulting, dumb and unfounded and of course in stark contrast to the authors earlier claim that innovation was taking place.
“For example, look at Abiword, KOffice and OpenOffice. If you throw them all together, you would end up with a more than wonderful package.”
Ouch, but it only gets worse.
No, uniting three different apps, that have different purposes and work differently into one up would not lead to something better, but to something horrible.
Ok, now we are at the end of the fourth page and there still isn’t anything resembling a well thought out argument (apart from Windows having a hughe market share, doh).
These articles will keep coming because linux for the non-techical user is still a way off.
It’s got nothing to do with linux,
The desktop enviroments are wonderful.
The applications are great.
There should be no need for consistance between distros.
(People need to be told that ‘Ubuntu is an OS that is fairly compatible with Fedora but they are not the same and should therefore should be regarded as different OSs by non-technical users.)
The main problem with desktop linux is drivers.
If I go out and buy a digital camera I can be sure that it will work with windows without a problem, I can’t say the same about linux.
This won’t change until vendors open source their drivers (I’ve no idea why they don’t, It seems insane not to)
OSX doesn’t have this driver problem because any hardware running on it is generally made by apple anyway.
– Jessta
And of course, if the PC that “Harry Homeowner” buys came preloaded with Windows or OSX and the PC vendor says they won’t support the machine unless it continues to run Windows or OSX, it’s going to take a disaster to prod him to switch.
Actually I have found the opposite to be true, at lest about cameras. i have Canon EOS 300D. I plug it in my Suse Linux and I can just browse the photos. For Windows I would need to install a driver. Of corse I have lost the disk that came with my camera, so i have to search for the drivers on the web …
Of course, when one see the vast amount of duplication, reinvention (how many packaging format does Linux need?) in Free software, it is painful.
But no amount of wishful thinking will change this, sorry!
Anyhow, I’m quite amused that the author think that Word is a good program, this clearly show that he is only twenty year old.. I doubt that he has many experiments with other software like FrameMaker for example..
Of course, when one see the vast amount of duplication, reinvention (how many packaging format does Linux need?) in Free software, it is painful.
But no amount of wishful thinking will change this, sorry!
Of course, when one see the vast amount of duplication, reinvention (how many different spyware, antivirus, burning, media playing, office suites (hell MS themselves make 2, works and office) programs does Windows need?) in proprietary software, it is painful. But no amount of wishful thinking will change this, sorry!
For that matter, look at the amount of duplication in music. Eminem, 50 Cent, N’Sync, Backstreet Boys. I mean, everyone here at OSNews knows that there should only ever be one option, whether it be software, music, movies, games, etc. 😛
The funny thing most people don’t realize is that many of these projects share a lot of code, and even participate with each other on mailing lists and such, such as Xine and Mplayer….doesn’t happen as often in Windows or Proprietary software. Do you see the folks from Corel download the MS Office source code and politely pointing out bugs and reusing code from MS Office when it suits them? The fact that they don’t just goes to show how much duplication there is in the proprietary world….probably more so than in the OSS world.
A nice example, for scanning on Linux I have XSane and Kooka. For Windows, I have 2 HP scanners, both with different software. I then have another program for my portable Canon scanner. My mom’s computer has yet another program for her Epson scanner. I think that could be classified as “reinventing the wheel” just an insy teensy bit, doncha think? 4 scanning programs between two members of my family?
“(how many packaging format does Linux need?)”
2 packaging formats, .deb for the native repository and .rpm for the lsb compliant packages.;)
are we talking joe user desktop or companyXYZ desktop
a good reson to run linux….M$ licensing and the costs that go with it…. and maybe I DONT want to upgrade…
Well, there are reasons for the less widespread usage of Linux on the common desktop. But those are not neccessarily the same mentioned in the article. A friend of mine, used to Linux from the time I administrated his machine but not really tech-savvy, moved to a different city – he downloadad a copy of Kubuntu and installed it in no-time. No manual required, everything just worked. But he knew that Linux isn’t Windows. And there’s the problem for the common user…
Take a Mac. Macs are trendy and stylish, the creative/ advertisement sector shows us all the time. Some people with enough money to spare go out and buy a Mac, just becuase tey’re hip. Plug it in, works. Cool. Exceptionary user friendly? Not really. Every preinstalled OS just works, and they are all easy to use to pretty much the same extent. And of course everything works a bit different compared to Windows. You’ll also need different software and drivers…
But there’s the difference to Linux, and the main problem: a Mac is a Mac to the customer, not a PC with a different OS. Halflife² wont work? Well, no, but it’s a Mac – nobody expects PC software to work. With Linux, things are different. To the customers, PC == Windows. They expect any PC OS to look like Windows, behave like Windows, and be able to use the same software as Windows. After all, it’s still a PC, right? Read noob-posts on a Linux forum of your choice: “Will my warezd Photoshop/ 3DSMAX/ whatever work?”, “Can I play Age of Empires?”, “Linux is crap! My winmodem doesn’t work!”. Well… Of course that stuff doesn’t work, because you’re not using Windows. But the mere consumer usually won’t get it, and goes back to Windows in no-time.
On a side note, read Mac forums these days: Just because Apple switches to x86, post after post pops up, asking exactly the same questions usually found on Linux forums… 🙂
From the article: “Windows is a lot better than Linux because in the past, Windows has learned from their mistakes.”
Say what? Windows learned from their mistakes???? Since When?! They still have LOT’s of design flaws in their OS specially in terms of security!
Additionally, when you make so many mistakes (like having to reboot to change IP addresses or DNS servers), it is rather easy to improve.
If the author took more than a second to reflect on the state of the “Linux Desktop”, he would know that KDE is light-years ahead of where it was on, say the 0.9 release.
Also, typical Liunx/FOSS software has a much more conservative point of view of its releases. Take the Gnome application – GPDF; it is 0.131. Anyone thinking that this software is 100% functional or finished is crazy.
Microsoft has released betaware it’s enitre history; it just happened to be the software that was preinstalled on every PC since ’87 or so. Windows 2000 should be considered Windows 1.0, and XP; Windows 1.1.
“From the article: “Windows is a lot better than Linux because in the past, Windows has learned from their mistakes.”
Say what? Windows learned from their mistakes???? Since When?! They still have LOT’s of design flaws in their OS specially in terms of security!”
It’s not “Since when?” it’s, but look how many time they had to get hit on the head when they could have looked at the good and bad of existing systems and used a more Unix like security model to begin with.
Seeing that the last page mainly consists of yet more name calling and unfounded allegations there is no real reason to comment on it.
What the author lacks in insight and knowledge he seems to try to make up for with insults and name calling. How on earth could a totally senseless article like this one be published? Please tell me this is not the level of “debate” osnews is looking for.
Finally, before people accuse me of being a zealot, which they will do anyway, I think that there are a lot of areas where Linux on the desktop could and should improve and I think that a debate about these issues really could be very interesting.
However in order to start a debate here you at least need an article that has at least something resembling an argument, not just some useless drivel by an adolescent.
“not just some useless drivel by an adolescent”
uh, thats a personal attack, i think… 🙁
i read some of the article…
I wont waste my time with most of it suffice to say
not all of us care if linux takes over the world, most of us HAVE seen linux grow by leaps and bounds, i personally do not feel like you have “learned” linux at all, sounds like you are one of those weekend players that like to install and get confused and swear it isnt ready…
please clarify what “leaps and bounds” windows has made please…
yea kde and gnome, actually xfce, e, icewm, so many more… and choice is good! the competition between kde and gnome is what keeps them both humping… no stagnation for me thanks….
awww shit, why do i waste my time… you know what, Im not anymore…
i officially swear I will not waste any posts on obvious flamebait, no one who thinks linux isnt ready will ever accept the argument that it is and vice versa, but the fact is that numerous people use it and I dont think the fact that YOU dont use it somwhow concludes that it isnt ready for anyone….
nuff said
JT
I’m sick of this whining about different desktops and toolkits. Maybe people just like Microsoft’s way of deciding what people want. I don’t. I like KDE, my brother likes Xfce and my friend likes Gnome. If somebody doesn’t understand the difference, can’t he/she use the default desktop? Then the toolkit issue. Yes, different apps might look different in GNU/Linux. Fortunately all apps look like same in Windows. Or do they? Have a look at these screenshots: http://www.owenrudge.net/desktop/xpshots/freedos.png and http://www.owenrudge.net/desktop/xpshots/vstudio.png . I can see three different visual styles without changing any preferences, or even installing any additional programs. And that’s not all, there are also programs like Media Player and Ad-Aware, in example. Why has nobody never whined about this?
Regarding GNU/Linux on the desktop, the reason it is slow to adopt is that there is no real pre-installed mainstream option. Couple that with the largest monopoly in the world and the task becomes more difficult. End of story. Linux is there. It just take time. First it will happen like it is the “third world” where budgets are small to no existent. It will slowly spread but not take over.
This is exactly the reason that “linux isn’t ready for the desktop.” If there were companies like Dell pre-installing linux on their computers that they ship out to corporations, then Linux would take off extremely well. From that people would start using them at home more. This is what happened during the 80’s. Even though the AtariST and Amiga and Macs had a better power/price ratio than IBM compatibles, they still lost out in the end because people needed the IBM compatibles for working at home.
If this could happen, then all the Photoshop, or EA Games etc, would start pushing to get their products ported over.
The article stayed 3 computers, however, Apple Store states below its licensing usage.
Family Pack Software License Agreement allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on up to a maximum of five (5) Apple-labeled computers at a time as long as those computers are located in the same household and used by persons who occupy that same household. By “household” we mean a person or persons sharing the same housing unit such as a home, apartment, mobile home or condominium. This license does not extend to students who reside at a separate on-campus location or to business or commercial users.
I believe if you are going to distribute information to the masses it need to be correct otherwise it can be viewed as slanted or bias by someone familiar with the product and misinformation for those seeking knowledge.
I remember when I first got a computer, having never used one before in my life, I knew I used the mouse to point and click on things, and then stuff would happen. I must have spent 48hrs straight mesmerized by this thing, and was just clicking here over there on here for hours until I got acquainted.
When I first installed Mandrake 8.0 it was the same thing. I spent quite a few hours just clicking around and learning about the system. After that I could do most things I wanted on the computer, installing apps was (and still is) a complete pain unless you know what you’re doing, this is where Linux needs development. Just allow me to click and have an application installed, on windows I just click yes/ok through 5 menus and it’s good to go, this is far simpler for the average user than the nightmare of Linux.
Having said this.. I couldn’t care less if Linux ever challenges Windows for the desktop, I have no reason to, what do I care if my relatives are using an *OMG OPEN SOURCE WORD PROCESSOR!11* in the scheme of things it really doesn’t matter, computers are nothing more than slaves that we expect to work like and how we say so. None of them meet this task all the time.
LOL. I remember when I first got a computer, I couldn’t figure out the concept of a double-click. It wasn’t until the next day that I read the manual and figured out how to do it. A couple of months later, I got a copy of King’s Quest for my birthday, and couldn’t install it until a week later when my uncle showed me the concept of “install.exe”. I also remember struggling through the concept of IRQs and COM ports and master/slave drives, etc. Take my dad as another example. He started using computers back when his office had word-processing terminals hooked up to a central mini-computer (mainframe). It wasn’t until the late 1990s that I showed him how to use CTRL-C, CTRL-V instead of clicking on the copy and paste icons.
There is an immense amount of Windows-specific knowledge that most users have. People really underestimate how Windows seems easy mainly because they’ve been using it for years, and have gradually learned its new features. When dealing with that sort of inertia, unless you’re dramatically better, most people will still percieve you as worse.
i wonder when people will see that these three operating system are different and they all have different ways of doing things.
i think people can’t take that Linux is becoming more and more common everyday. the first time i’ve installed it in 99, i wasn’t telling anyone that i was using linux, just to keep it to myself. it was better even then…
anyway, the real thing i want to say is, using an operating system is just like fashion: “fashion is what looks good on you” – so, the best operating system is the one you feel great with. you can help linux community, increase the quality of the l10n or i18n, or write a few programs, it’s all up to you. these kind of essays, talking about the design flaws, ease of installation, etc are simply subjective. if i was able to use linux in 99 without complaints, anyone, who feels like it, can use it now… people like taking attention.
you all take care now
What the guys building linux have to do? And more who is to do the things. Linus with the kernel team, the people behind the GNU stuff, the Gnome. KDE, XFace developers, RedHat, Novell, Debian, Cannonical? We the users? What we have to do? Have the KDE, GNOME, WindowMake teams forced to stop developing for linux and say “Hey we the users want everything to look the same, act the same (be consistent you say). You either do that or stop writing for linux!” Do the same with the oh so awful disto vendors?
If you want windows use windows. If you like MakOS use it. Why Linux should become like them? Why change “Windows on every desktop” with “Linux on every desktop”? Why geeks shouldn’t have an OS done the way they want it, and not the way “joe-user” wants it?
Simply another pointless article.
The whole article was a big waste of time, starting with some untrue drivel of how hard Linux is to install and the usuall “force the users to read manuals” line. Those old lines are just becoming more and more untrue, as the modern Linux distributions continue to increase in quality and easier of install. And I’d dare say its easier than installing windows, and after the main install you are not forced through the 10 to 30 minutes installing 3rd party drivers and and reboots like with windows. All the modern distributions does have point and click configuration utilities just as easy as the windows ones, and the default settings make as much senses as the ones in windows. Making the need for reading manuals just as big as for windoes, to achieve the same end result. Those two “arguments” are to old and have not been true for years. The only reason windows still are considered easier are because it comes pre-installed, afterall no installation are always easier.
The rest of the article boils down to “choice is bad” and “to many options confuse the users”. Those “arguments” have as always a very minimal validity, and using them generally to fit his conclusion does not help either.
And when he refers to Word as an editor he just confirms he is just another clueless pundit. If he is an indication on the state of current CS students, the future of computer industry don’t look too bright.
The rest of the article boils down to “choice is bad” and “to many options confuse the users”. Those “arguments” have as always a very minimal validity, and using them generally to fit his conclusion does not help either.
Even though I think the authors isn’t aware of it. I think there is some truth in the “choice is bad” argument.
Choice, per se, isn’t bad, but uninformed vs. informed choices, important choices and nonsense choices all can have a negative impact on the end-user.
I, f.ex., choose to run Gentoo (my choice, good choice) which in turn presents me with a “meta-distribution”. In beeing a “meta-distribution” it is expected that I make all the choices necessary to turn it into a distribution and then from there to a operating system.
While installing I’m forced (not entirely forced, but it will suffice for this argument) choose how to compile my packages, choose what implementation of standard components I want (I think there was three diffrent crond implementations) and choose what DE to stack ontop of it all. All these choices have a high probabillity of beeing uninformed (the Gentoo documentation does an honest effort in minimizing this though) and are, from any point of view, totaly nonesense. It was my choice to be confronted with all those choices thought so I won’t complain.
In the other end we have Ubuntu and a few others. They are for all intents and purposes complete operating systems. The end-user is only confronted with the choice of running Ubuntu, or not running ubunutu. The rest is taken care of by the developers. The probabillity of taking informed choices is much higher this way, and the end-user is not confronted with nonsense.
The problem layes in between. This is where debian, redhat and other “distributions” lives. They market their products as if they were operating systems, but in reallity they are more like… distributions. What they do (and do well, mind you) is to distribute OS components that is meant to work reasonably well together.
The real market for these products are OS developers who pick components to further integrate into a polished OS. Note that by OS developer I’m not only referring to companies such as Cononical whow mainly create an OS for mainstream consumption, but also consulting companies who sell complete sollutions and all the inhouse IT-departments and server administrators.
The problem as I understand it is that many new Linux users (as the author seems to be) is confused and tries to treat a distribution as an OS.
The main problem with desktop linux is drivers.
True, but the turningpoint will be here soon. No production unit can afford to let say 10% of a potention market share slip through….. just ‘coz no-one in the company can write a simple driver.
The companies that will write the drivers will get the business….. simpel market mechanism 🙂
The problem is that there is no incentive for anybody to create a killer desktop since the Linux community isn’t going to actually pay for a desktop.
KDE and Gnome people actually have no money to pay for experts in Human-Machine-Interface – yeah there are actually such people – ask BMW or ask Sony or ask Apple how they design cool products. Such people have no concern for open source – they just want to get paid like everybody else. (and to those of you who have paid for Linux software and shout from the rooftops about it – you’re a minority – for every one of you there are 10,000 others who haven’t paid).
Once open source and Linux can come up with a model where people are actually forced to pay for software then you’ll see innovation. You’ll see talented people drawn to linux because they can make money.
“KDE and Gnome people actually have no money to pay for experts in Human-Machine-Interface”
It’s not the money. I (for example) just don’t feel the need to argue with 16 year old kid who likes to write kilometers of commands just to install some app. He feels good with it so be it. I hope linux comunity will grow up to understand the need for human interface guidelines, power of simplicity and standards.
“It’s not the money. I (for example) just don’t feel the need to argue with 16 year old kid who likes to write kilometers of commands just to install some app. He feels good with it so be it. I hope linux comunity will grow up to understand the need for human interface guidelines, power of simplicity and standards.”
“apt-get install abiword” This is kilometres of commands just to install some app? You are stupid. This ten times quicker and simpler than standard installer.
“apt-get install abiword” This is kilometres of commands just to install some app? You are stupid. This ten times quicker and simpler than standard installer.
oh … I can see it now … “apt-get install abiword” magically appears on my wall and now I can install everything …
…and btw apt-get is specific to some distros you idiot
I (for example) just don’t feel the need to argue with 16 year old kid who likes to write kilometers of commands just to install some app.
Especially when you have no clue :
– apt-get install firefox
– emerge firefox
– urpmi firefox
– …
Well, you get the idea. That’s what you MS shill call kilometers of commands to install some app, which just shows your degree of knowledge about Linux.
I hope linux comunity will grow up to understand the need for human interface guidelines, power of simplicity and standards.
MS shill like you need pointers obviously (takes 30 seconds of googling) :
– http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/ OMG they are already at 2.0 !! Which just shows as uninformed you are
– http://www.kde.org/areas/guidelines/html/ OMG KDE has one too !!!
– http://freedesktop.org/ OMG !!!
Clueless morons wanting to argue what they don’t know about …
I hope YOU will grow up, but I doubt it.
I agree. If you start up an open source project, what is going to motivate you if don’t receive any money?
You can’t rely on donations. You have to earn money from the project otherwise you’ll end up no motivation at all in the end.
yea, you are right… that is the reason debian went belly up three years ago, no wait five years ago, no wait….
tooo funny
lesson one of management – money is NOT motivation
This comment is kind of odd:
“Windows has gone forward with leaps and bounds towards becoming a secure and productive system. Linux hasn’t made such advancements.”
Leaps and Bounds?? you mean installing numerous antispyware, antivirus, etc that only hoses down your resources so bad because of constant monitoring, you cant do anything?? on top of that installing 100’s of megabytes worth of Software updates only dragging down more resources and Hard Drive space. What if you have Dial-up, which a lot of “standard users” have because its all they need. It could take hours to download these updates.
I would not quote spending tons of money buying software in order to make a system secure “leaps and bounds” ….HARDLY. Wait for longhorn, here we have XP SP3. yippy, another NTFS buggy system that eats more resources with its “prettier” interface…hmmm…
It seems always to be a debate between Windows and Linux advocates, I never hear about the BSD’s, MacosX, OpenSolaris, or any other OS out there in OS space.. 🙂
I don’t really buy that. How? Certainly, Windows XP apps don’t have the kind of unified look GNOME and KDE apps do.
Well, this only holds up if you used only KDE apps in KDE and only Gnome apps in Gnome. I guess this is ok if your needs are limited, but I have found that there are decent apps made for each DE, so assuming I were using Linux, my apps would be a combination of both Gnome and KDE-centric apps.
I mean, does anybody seriously argue that MS Office, with its tacky blue theme, looks anything like the rest of the OS?
It’s not really the look that that breaks the integrated feel. For example, when I’m using Winamp, it looks nothing like any other Windows app I have never used, but it still feels like a Windows app. Contrast this with non-SWT Java apps – even though they may have the Windows look & feel, they stick out like a sore thumb simply by the way they handle. I can tell instantly its a Java app, even if it’s not advertised as such. If we use a car analogy, the Kia Spectra and Hundai Elantra both use the same engine, so they handle similarly, even if they don’t look at all similar. On the other hand, if you took the engine out of a Ford Focus and put it in a Kia Spectra, even if it looks like a Kia, it’s not going to handle like one.
And I’d dare say (Linux is) easier than installing windows, and after the main install you are not forced through the 10 to 30 minutes installing 3rd party drivers and and reboots like with windows.
Personally, I’d rather spend 10-30 minutes installing drivers provided by hardware vendors instead of spending weeks trying to get shit working when drivers from the manufacturer aren’t available
I would not quote spending tons of money buying software in order to make a system secure “leaps and bounds” ….HARDLY. Wait for longhorn, here we have XP SP3. yippy, another NTFS buggy system that eats more resources with its “prettier” interface…hmmm…
Come on, guys. Do you know how much you really need to spend? Try $0. Of course, most of you wouldn’t know that, would you?
Well, this only holds up if you used only KDE apps in KDE and only Gnome apps in Gnome.
And you can almost always get away with this, particularly if you use only GNOME apps.
so assuming I were using Linux, my apps would be a combination of both Gnome and KDE-centric apps.
So you don’t use Linux? So what worth does your opinion have? I’m not trying to be rude, but anybody looking at an OS from the outside is really in no position to judge it. They don’t know how users adapt to their OS (all users have to adapt to their OS). Choosing a consistent set of apps is one way people adapt. And adapt they do — all the big distributions (SuSE, Ubuntu, RedHat, Mandriva) have a primary desktop and don’t by default install apps for the other desktop.
As a Linux user, its really infuriating to hear the same drivel from people who don’t even use the OS. Yes, Linux has lots of problems. No, the pundits complaining about things on OSNews are not hitting on the right ones. Use Linux (full-time), for six months. You’ll come up with a long list of complaints. Vague shit like “it lacks integration” won’t be one of them. Instead, you’ll get stuff like “not all apps accept URLs in the same way”, or “epiphany is a buggy POS”, or “Firefox’s use of pixel sizes instead of point sizes in the font preferences is retarded”, “gnome-terminal is the slowest thing in existance”, “gstreamer’s plug-in coverage sucks by default”.
For example, when I’m using Winamp, it looks nothing like any other Windows app I have never used, but it still feels like a Windows app.
BS. How does it still feel like a Windows app? Here are the minimize/maximize/close buttons? Here is the main menu? It doesn’t feel any more like a Windows app than Xine feels like a Linux app. Totem and Amarok — those apps exemplify how media players should be designed.
<humor>
This article reads worse than typical OSS documentation, are you really expecting us to read it all
.
</humor>
design flaws in their OS specially in terms of security!
Not only in security.. I hate it if Firefox can throw down the whole OS. Should not be possible IMHO.
Also if I have a server, I don’t want to reboot after *every* update.
Manufacturer’s dont release drivers under readable open source because they’re afraid it would give their COMMERCIAL competitor and advantage if they use a similar platform. If I was Aiptek, I’d love to see Canon’s drivers.
And for some reason, the entire Linux community seems to hide themselves behind the idea that one needs to “grow into” a distro.
You can use todays modern Linux distros practically in the same way as you would use any other modern OS.An user who has never touched any computer but is smart enough and quite willing to learn will still have to aquire basic the skills independant of the OS currently being learned.For eg: Burning a CD/DVD or making an audio CD still requires user interaction and pre knowledge.So i would like to describe “growing into a distro” as learning in general of the basic skills needed to make even the slightest use of an PC.Not so hard to understand there’s thus something universal in it.What is different though is the recipy that has to be run (performed) in order to get the desired effect in this case an audio CD burned from a certain mp3 collection.Well k3b (!XP) and Nero (XP) are pratically equivalent apps.
A lot of you will also agree that if you do want to get acquainted with Linux, you should do it like this, one does need to grow into it and that’s where the shoe pinches
The same is true for first time computer users who see MS for the first time.But you don’t have to switch if you are satisfied with the things you accomplish on whatever platform you are currently working with.Nobody forces you to do otherwise.
People do not like to be told to grow into something, unless it is worth it. And Linux simply is not worth the trouble.
Well sometimes you have to wether you want it or not.In order to get your drivers license you will have to “grow into” (aka learning) driving a car unless you love to pay fines.For some it’s not only but also necessary to learn something about Linux.Wether it’s worth the trouble is relative and differs from person to person.
If you only focus on the end-users, this is essentially a computer-illiterate, it is hard to see why Windows would be any better than Linux.
I would say Linux has a different approach to many subjects.One of them is security.It’s up to the end-user to decide wether he or she thinks it’s better not having to watch all the adds,not to collect spyware etc..
Windows has done a great job. From Windows 95 and onwards, it should be a breeze to configure the system as you want.
For whom, the illiterates or the “geeks”? I remind you you said yourself , the so called illiterates absolutely need a large knowl3edge piramid to help them out.
For some reason, the Linux community simply doesn’t understand what Caesar was saying when he invented the very successful strategy of “Divide and Conquer”; this does not mean that one needs to split up his own troops, but this means that the troops of the enemy should be divided, so that your mighty large army can come and squash those silly small troops. Right now, Linux is nothing more than a bunch of silly small troops/i]
There are fortunately a lot of *distro’s*.I think it’s a delight to have the *freedom* to choose a distro from the many that exist.
[i]While this is not so terrible, it is terrible that every desktop has his own set of software of which the most of them are just copies of one another.
Isn’t it delightfull the freedom to choose your apps,the way your desktop looks like? Don’t you have different clothes to wear as anybody else?
Let me once again remind you that this article only holds a very slim amount of reasons for Linux not being successful on the desktop.
Indeed slim if any.By the way i hope this isn’t going to be your thesis.
Take your average user who knows nothing about computers or networks. Ask him, in Windows because this is easier on it without any wizards, to configure his network to work with his dhcp router.
He’ll likely plug it in, hopefully with a patch cable but maybe now. He’ll then with a lot of guidance find the configuration for his network card: Only to discover when you explain this to him that it was already setup correctly. (Remember, the IE wizard isn’t allowed today).
Ok, we’ve run our user into two problems so far:
1.) Patch cables and crossover cables, wha?
2.) IP Who?
Our user at this point doesn’t know what he’s clicking, he only selects “setup automatically” because he has no clue what to fill in. But it still doesn’t work, because with no guidance he didn’t know whether he needed a patch cable or a crossover cable.
So why doesn’t this happen to everyone?
1.) Store clerks functioning as manuals: He goes to the shop for a cable, asks the clerk which kind he needs and is told. He just learned something, something he could have read just as easily.
2.) Most things use DHCP. It’s like a … standard … or something.
What’s going to happen when he gets into something that’s not so simple? He’ll probably read the manual. After all, most devices still come with at least short manuals: And people read them; geeks don’t.
I don’t know where this manual hatred comes from. The real problem with most *nix manuals is that they’re sometimes too short or written at too advanced a level: But a quick glance into the Windows Help file will reveal it’s far too shallow as well. It’s typical.
You can’t replace manuals with fancy GUI’s. You just can’t. There will never be anything intuitive about network configurations, device driver issues, or any related things. This stuff just doesn’t get intuitive; and people really need to understand it at a very shallow level.
I think I speak for a lot of people when I say: Sorry for trying to help you educate yourself; I hope you enjoy your naive life where you’re afraid to read documentation. Good luck with your anti-reading craze and I hope you enjoy your foolish attempt at having things magically work for you. Don’t call me when they stop magically working.
Indeed slim if any.By the way i hope this isn’t going to be your thesis.
Dear lord, why did you say that? I was hoping he would try! One less brain-dead CS graduate.
Business can buy an extremely powerful XP machine from Dell, with an LCD monitor, with XP Professional for $500. This system will easily serve the majority of business for 5 years. They will have guaranteed support and free security updates. They will be able to install 99% of all software written. To top it all off, within 3 years, they will be able to completely write off the expense. That computer and operating system will be free for the business thanks to tax savings.
Home users are in a similar boat. They can buy a Dell machine, with an LCD monitor, and XP Home Edition for $500. They won’t be able to write off the purchase but they won’t care that a machine with Windows cost $30 more. They will pay the extra money and get a better machine.
Linux on the desktop, in developed countries, does not make any economical sense. The only way people will use Linux is if it is a better desktop/workstation product. For some technical users doing certain tasks, it is. For the vast majority of other people, it is not.
Linux on the desktop, in developed countries, does not make any economical sense. The only way people will use Linux is if it is a better desktop/workstation product. For some technical users doing certain tasks, it is. For the vast majority of other people, it is not.
Not true for some businesses, governement and educational organizations have switched on Linux for desktop/workstations already. You don’t hear them as they quietly do transition. It depends of the need from people thus nothing do with the operation systems. The only problems are many people don’t know there is alternative for the current economic model.
Ya missed it. When that $30 is a significant chunk of someones wages for a year, it makes a difference. When the computers that are being used are 1st world cast-offs, paying retail for the current OS so that they can use a current Office is out of the question.
And that $500 Dell is a 5 year system…since when!
Having admined several large networks that have bought these type of systems, they genrally last 3 weeks before someone screams about the slowness of the system and you start the upgrade cycle. Go from 128MB of RAM to 512 or a 1024, add a decent sized HDD as not every one has massive NAS or SANS. Nor is the processor up to the load of Office (generally Word, Excel and Outlook) plus LOB (usually a ERP client and a some Java apps). Make sure that the periphals do not off load to the CPU (Ethernet, graphics and Modem).
We cannot even spec a system that will handle those demands for under $800 (we cannot build white boxes do to business contraints).
“Business can buy an extremely powerful XP machine from Dell, with an LCD monitor, with XP Professional for $500. This system will easily serve the majority of business for 5 years. They will have guaranteed support and free security updates. They will be able to install 99% of all software written.”
I’m a little skeptical about them being able to install 99% of all software written, but unfortunately it is close enough to the truth.
Unfortunate because…
There are too many cases where software doesn’t work and much time has to be spent or someone has to be paid to figure out that that something additional needs to be installed or updated for it to work correctly.
Too many cases where it doesn’t work because it needs an update to work with something else that was updated.
And too many cases where it updates something that causes another software program to have problems.
All of which could be avoided if Windows used a system that tracks dependencies and refused to install if something was missing or a conflict would be created and the person installing the software was informed of what is missing or conflicting so they could deal with the situation accordingly.
I would much rather spend some extra time looking for some missing peices or updating some outdated software than spend time attempting to find out how to repair some damage that was done by some “easy to install” software.
I don’t really view bunches of applications including their own versions of the same supporting libraries and eating up megabytes of space and adding megabytes to my downloads being viewed as normal instead of the exception being a good solution either.
The true reason for this article is to point out some sensitive points and to start a discussion. Hopefully, this discussion will produce some useful outcome and if some people in the Linux community are willing to listen to them, I would already be very enthusiastic. Let’s start, shall we?
We would, but you seem somehow determined to already know the answer
Strange, especially when you see how successful an operating system like OS X is becoming, simply because this operating system is so simplistic and easy to use, even for a complete newbie, that it gives the user a very powerful feeling.
Powerfull feeling and simplicity like installing applications for example?
Yeah, right. I’m not a newbie, but I was just f…ed by OSX. I’m on OSX because it is on one of my work places (and I’m too lazy to take out my notebook).
Example of this minute: Reply isn’t working on OSNews. So I looked FFox version. 1.0.1, now hell, I’m sure I put 1.0.4 on it. So I downloaded FFox again. Unpacked and thrown in Applications folder. Right side is displayed as list. From my MacOS times I’m used to throw on a list. Not even asking about replacing??? Run FFox, check version. ??? 1.0.1. After that it became obvious where the problem is. I thrown FFox on the Applications in the common places. Now OSX asks me if I’d like to replace??? Ok, I’ve now got 1.0.4, I’ve got about 5 versions of FFox copied under different application folders, because I always did the same mistake, and I still haven’t got working reply on OSNews.
Point of this charade is that no OS without bugs and quirks does or will exist. In my case usability of OSX (I ccan name numerous features that are to be considered hidrance for being desktop usable) is far away from being desktop ready. Neither is Windows and neither is Linux.
And for some reason, the entire Linux community seems to hide themselves behind the idea that one needs to “grow into” a distro. One should apply for leave for a month before being able to actually getting used to his or her distro of choice. Some may find this absurd, and it is, but this is actually advice people have given me in the past. A lot of you will also agree that if you do want to get acquainted with Linux, you should do it like this, one does need to grow into it and that’s where the shoe pinches. People do not like to be told to grow into something, unless it is worth it. And Linux simply is not worth the trouble.
Why do you ask about opinion if you’re predetermined with the answer?
But then, why is it that operating systems like OS X and Windows are so much more suited for end users? One needs to look beyond his own nose to see why this actually is. If you only focus on the end-users, this is essentially a computer-illiterate, it is hard to see why Windows would be any better than Linux. They both have a start menu, they both have a taskbar, they both have a traybar and I could go on summing things up that are exactly the same for most users. If a user is unable to operate a mouse and point and click on an icon, then he won’t be capable to do a single thing with a computer nowadays. If he can, then he can do all he wants, as long as the computer has already been configured and all his favourite apps are to be found on the desktop.
Windows is just something you’re used to. But you’re used to its design flaws also. Mac always had its fanclub.
At this point, you should start to see where I am taking you.
No, but then again you don’t either.
What is important, is to see how many people are around that can actually configure the operating system to the needs of this end user.
At one point you preach about preinstalled system and now the other???
Final thing to look at when it comes to installing software
Read my example on OSX. I blame windows for allowing to specify where you would like software installed. It would be a lot simpler without that. I blame linux for many package managers. No one is perfect.
Too bad for Linux, but it is time to evaluate them too. Linux has some share in the end user market, about none when it comes to the disciples and way too many geeks. This is caused by, again, numerous factors. Linux has outgrown the hobby stage, and a lot of geeks had a hand in this. However, as popularity grows, the other two groups should have started building them up themselves and grow into a nice looking knowledge pyramid. But for Linux, this has not happened. Why?
It happened, alright. But you seem to have missed it. All the HIG efforts. All the usability efforts, help for dissabled. Talking about Gnome here, but probably KDE has its own (except that being as configurable as it is, kcontrol and 3 types of Preferences in menu is too much, but this is just my opinion not a troll topic).
Linux has a learning curve, that is more than just steep.
Not even one of my half iliterate friends said soo. The only ones who say that are the same ones that expect OS to behave as they are used to. I have few friends like that. And I ignore them (they seem happy to me already).
when one needs to simply know how to install a driver
I don’t remember when I did that last time. If I take out NVidia. But even there I already incorporated a little php script that autoconfigures xorg.conf for my friends.
When it comes to consistency, I’m afraid to express my opinion.
Distros mostly are consistant, but if you’re talking about *THE* one distro, that is a myth. And unfortunately that myth is not to be taken to the geeks side. It has to be corporate decision, where corporations decide on one and only distribution.
For some unclear reason, Linux users are in constant conflict with themselves, trying to outperform the others and building a better copy of what they are making.
This is what is result of freedom and diversity, yes. But then again sometimes not. Enlightenment is a clean example.
Not only does this waste most valuable time, it also makes that Linux has too little money to do something (however, combined, Linux would be quite wealthy) and that the good programmers are spread out over projects that are making exactly the same thing.
Problem is not in the waste. Why would I use the same and only editor as you. Maybe I find another much better. Same goes for coders. Why would he help code some other editor when his wishes don’t comply with the way project is going. Again, who is gonna tell him that his idea sucks?
The other deficiency that Linux has, is even more important than the one I just stated. It is their localisation. Getting Linux to work in English is no big deal, however, trying out other languages is a huge challenge.
Now, here is where you got the best. You obviously haven’t seen windows or OSX in our language. Windows translations are often used for jokes between ITs and OSX can’t translate to our language. Linux is much better at this department (at least our country).
…
Let me once again remind you that this article only holds a very slim amount of reasons for Linux not being successful on the desktop.
…
This article is either bad approach to bash over linux or good example of how *NOT* to become self proclaimed genius or political (OS) figure
Epilogue>
Quoted from Anonymous (IP: 208.54.94.—)
i officially swear I will not waste any posts on obvious flamebait, no one who thinks linux isnt ready will ever accept the argument that it is and vice versa, but the fact is that numerous people use it and I dont think the fact that YOU dont use it somwhow concludes that it isnt ready for anyone….
Amen, this sums all
For me Linux was ready for the desktop since SUSE 9.0, which I felt it was much better than Windows XP.
So for me this question was answered 2 years ago.
Of course it has got a lot better ever since.
Why do these people run on here and complain about Linux’s problems??? Can any of the people on this board honestly say they are a KDE developer??? Gnome? OpenOffice?
So why sit for hours (or minutes/seconds in the case of this awful article) and bitch about it on OSNews? Does anyone here agree with me when I say perhaps typing up your complaints (without calling people names) and sending them to the real developers might make things better? If you were at work and everytime the lazy person you work with went for another smoke in a 10 minute time frame you ran into the break room with all of the other dumb shits and bitched about it instead of talking to the person or your boss, anything would happen? Of course, despite being a complete waste of time, its fun and it lets off steam. But does it really help anything in the end? Other than to start YAOSNFW (yet another OS News flame war)? I personally don’t think this concept is too difficult to understand. I regularily talk to the developers for some of my favourite OSS programs, despite not being a developer myself. One I have been involved in a bit is amsn messenger.
Of course, judging by the quality of this article, I doubt the supposed CS under graduate could put enough cohesive thoughts together to make a posting to a mailing list that wouldn’t get deleted in 30 seconds.
Sweet irony, a person complaining about posting on boards being “a complete waste of time” using an acronym (which is designed to bypass many words for the sake of time) which he has to explain. We are all in awe of your clever use of the first letters of a heretofore unthinkable 6 words (2 for OS) we all applaud your efficiency.
(and before you get mad… I’m just teasing you)
> The problem is that there is no incentive for anybdy to
> create a killer desktop since the Linux community isn’t
> going to actually pay for a desktop.
This is bullshit.
People already _PAY_ real money for their distributions, so why shouldnt they pay for a new “killer desktop” of your wet dreams?
Oh, you mean some proprietary fuck like Windows or OS X?
Well, then, youre right. Nobody would pay to pollute a OS, Free Software by purpose, by another restrictive proprietary DE. There are already proprietary restrictive-as-fuck desktops available, and when they dont want to pay for them, why shoud they want to pay for a DE atop of Linux?!
If youre willing to pay for proprietary software _right now_, just go out and buy one of these two, who are available _right now_.
How can you be bitching about users of free desktops, who left Windows and Apple towards a free sollution, for not willing to pay for a proprietary desktop they initially left to join the free software movement?
Lol, I’m too lazy to find his comment again to respond directly to it, but I personally thought it was kind of insulting when he said that users should be forced to pay for Open Source software, and I’m willing to bet a lot of the developers would find it insulting too. People that don’t get open source should really just refrain from commenting on it to avoid making themselves look stupid.
What I don’t comprehend in articles about linux/windows/whatever is the statement of “users with little or no computer experience.” Okay, it’s 2005 and computers are everywhere. My bank just installed a new ATM and it’s plain to see that it’s simply a PC with a touchscreen in a nice, huge, secure shell. How can you live in this society and not come into some kind of contact with computers? The answer is (especially in America) that you would actually have more trouble not coming into contact with them. Most people who have had “no computer experience” are probably the elderly, and more than likely, they don’t want any computer experience anyway. A person with “no computer experience” has a learning curve EVEN with Windows. It’s inevitable. The thing is people are comfortable with Windows because that’s what they’ve always used, and they have forgotten what it was like to learn where everything was at first. And honestly, a lot people still don’t know much about Windows. They know how to click the “Blue E” and get on the web. They can click on the green jelly bean and find programs. All the while they have all kinds of spyware and junk on their computer. And this is what keeps your corner computer shops open–cleaning spyware off your PC with free Ad-Aware and charging $30/hr.
So, the next time that you try installing a Linux distro and it takes you a while to find where something is or how to do something, keep in mind that it is a DIFFERENT operating system and you may actually have to LEARN something. I think what most people are trying to say is “Make something EXACTLY like Windows so I don’t have to take time to learn something new, even though it’s free/stable.”
I mean, you gripe about something that’s free… how pointless. If linux is for you, use it. Heck, you can’t beat the price.
everyone have to try and choose – not to read comments like this…it is personal, it is dependent of what you do – im working as accountnant and use win on work…at home i make some music and using windows at home – just because of WONDERFULL software for it(one word – cubase…)if i just browsed the web allday for porn etc. or i was admin of some provider – well, linux is perfect. osx is gay-like for me:)
I like linux because it is a geek toy. It offers a million and one features that a geek like me can’t get out of OS X or Windows without buying a huge library of software.
Why does linux NEED to unite? I like having ten choices. Because then I can pick the one that has the featureset that works best for me. I don’t care if it confuses your grandma.
I like linux the way it is and I really don’t care if it’s not newbie friendly. I use it because it’s a power user OS, and that suits my style of computer use much better than Windows.
If you don’t want to know how to use a computer, but still want to use a computer, then use OS X and Windows.
These flamebait, “LINUX ISN’T READY” topics get more annoying by the minute.
So you don’t use Linux? So what worth does your opinion have? I’m not trying to be rude, but anybody looking at an OS from the outside is really in no position to judge it.
I guess by your logic, anybody not currently using Windows has no right to comment on it either, no? Of course, you could say that my opinion doesn’t matter, but if the opinion of those not using the system doesn’t matter, then you can keep it the way it is and those of us not using it will continue not using it
Choosing a consistent set of apps is one way people adapt.
You mean limiting themselves to either one set of apps or another is how they adapt. That doesn’t seem like a viable option to me. It’s like saying “Sure, everything in Linux is nicely integrated, so long as you only use these apps. So, by that logic, everything in Windows has a similar look, as long as you don’t use MS Office. Or Winamp. Or iTunes. Or …
As a Linux user, its really infuriating to hear the same drivel from people who don’t even use the OS.
Yeah, like the guy above who professed that you need to spend mega-bucks to keep Windows secure. Doesn’t this kind of thing work both ways? Anyway, I know of the inconsistancies in Linux (which is one of the reasons I don’t use it) – to get the fonts in KDE looking just the way I want, while the fonts in Gnome and its apps still look like ass, and vice versa. Are you saying this isn’t a possibility?
BS. How does (Winamp) still feel like a Windows app? Here are the minimize/maximize/close buttons? Here is the main menu?
Yes and yes (I’m using 5.x). It also responds to standard shortcut keys, such as pressing ALT+F4 closes the program. It also integrates with the system tray, supports drag n drop, global hotkeys, windows dialogs (open/save/etc) and does all that jazz.
Of course, when one see the vast amount of duplication, reinvention (how many packaging format does Linux need?) in Free software, it is painful.
But no amount of wishful thinking will change this, sorry!
Of course, when one see the vast amount of duplication, reinvention (how many different spyware, antivirus, burning, media playing, office suites (hell MS themselves make 2, works and office) programs does Windows need?) in proprietary software, it is painful. But no amount of wishful thinking will change this, sorry!
He was talking about package formats, not apps. There’s a difference between having different apps and having different package formats for the exact same applications.
For that matter, look at the amount of duplication in music. Eminem, 50 Cent, N’Sync, Backstreet Boys. I mean, everyone here at OSNews knows that there should only ever be one option, whether it be software, music, movies, games, etc. 😛
Using this logic, why not let everybody invent their own HTML standards like MS does? Afterall, more choice is better, right?
A nice example, for scanning on Linux I have XSane and Kooka. For Windows, I have 2 HP scanners, both with different software. I then have another program for my portable Canon scanner. My mom’s computer has yet another program for her Epson scanner. I think that could be classified as “reinventing the wheel” just an insy teensy bit, doncha think? 4 scanning programs between two members of my family?
I guess by your logic, anybody not currently using Windows has no right to comment on it either, no? Of course, you could say that my opinion doesn’t matter, but if the opinion of those not using the system doesn’t matter, then you can keep it the way it is and those of us not using it will continue not using it
It’s not so much that the opinion doesn’t matter, its that the opinion isn’t credible. Someone who doesn’t use the OS can’t render a valid opinion on what is and is not wrong with it. I render opinions on Windows because I’ve used it for years. I support at least half a dozen XP machines for family and friends. I don’t render opinions on OS/2, because I’ve never used it.
Let me use an analogy. Opining about an OS without using it is like opining about a country without ever having lived there. Visting someplace for a few weeks doesn’t give you nearly the kind of insight into a place as living there for even a few months does. Atlanta, where I live now, is a perfect example. When you first visit, it seems like a very nice place. It’s got nice wide roads, nice tall buildings, some nice attractions like the CNN center or the Olympic park. However, when you live here, you realize that it kinda sucks. The wide roads are hell for pedestrians to traverse (drivers own the city), mixed in with the nice tall buildings there are a lot of ugly concrete ones with grungy areas inbetween, traffic sucks, subway stations are few and far-between, subway cars smell of urine and are often late, roads are always under construction, and unless you’re into clubbing or art, there is nothing to really do in the city. These are the kind of things you just don’t see on a first visit. An opinion rendered by someone who lives in Altanta versus someone who has just visited Atlanta is going to be quite different, and guess whose is more valuable?
You mean limiting themselves to either one set of apps or another is how they adapt. That doesn’t seem like a viable option to me. It’s like saying “Sure, everything in Linux is nicely integrated, so long as you only use these apps. So, by that logic, everything in Windows has a similar look, as long as you don’t use MS Office. Or Winamp. Or iTunes. Or …
Yep. Things are nicely integrated unless you try to break the integration. This will always be true, as long as developers have the freedom to develop the software they want.
to get the fonts in KDE looking just the way I want, while the fonts in Gnome and its apps still look like ass, and vice versa. Are you saying this isn’t a possibility?
Saying what isn’t a possibility? That you don’t know the true shortcomings of Linux? Given that you refer to a font problem that hasn’t existed for years, I’m inclined to say “yes, it isn’t”.
Yes and yes (I’m using 5.x). It also responds to standard shortcut keys, such as pressing ALT+F4 closes the program. It also integrates with the system tray, supports drag n drop, global hotkeys, windows dialogs (open/save/etc) and does all that jazz.
So do KDE and GNOME, by and large. They just look different and have different visual layouts for things, and WinAmp is the same way wrt Windows.
For that matter, look at the amount of duplication in music. Eminem, 50 Cent, N’Sync, Backstreet Boys. I mean, everyone here at OSNews knows that there should only ever be one option, whether it be software, music, movies, games, etc. 😛
Using this logic, why not let everybody invent their own HTML standards like MS does? Afterall, more choice is better, right?
I was at first considering not justifying this stupid comment with a response, but I’ll bite.
How the hell is having different artists akin to having MS set their own standards?? That makes absolutely no sense! Having different artists is the same as having different interoperable software. Now if each artist had their own CD format and you had to buy an Eminem brand stereo to listen to Eminem your comment would make sense. My point was the software is interoperable so why not have choice? Are you saying we should have one OS, one office suite, one email client, for all computers? So are you now saying we should only have one band world-wide?
You know, it is possible to have software interoperability among competing products. OSS works quite well in this regard. Choice and interoperability can coexist.
Yeah, like the guy above who professed that you need to spend mega-bucks to keep Windows secure. Doesn’t this kind of thing work both ways? Anyway, I know of the inconsistancies in Linux (which is one of the reasons I don’t use it) – to get the fonts in KDE looking just the way I want, while the fonts in Gnome and its apps still look like ass, and vice versa. Are you saying this isn’t a possibility?
Font on Gnome and KDE are non-issue on my LCD LG Flatron L1730S and the 5 years old Viewsonic CRT monitor. I don’t know what monitor you use but fonts on both GNOME and KDE look fine for me. Did you verify the monitor setting?
“the largest amount of the Linux community still believes that people actually intend to struggle their way through a hefty manual to get the thing installed and configured as they wish.”
This indicates the author is obviously a moron since no significant distro of Linux requires a manual to install it. In fact, installation is now easier than Windows. There was no point in reading any further once I saw this nonsense.
I’m getting really tired of Microsoft shills pretending to be Linux backers issuing this sort of crap article. It’s time the Linux press gets its act together and stops running Microsoft shill articles masquerading as “proactive positive Linux improvement” pieces.
Microsoft astroturfers are everywhere these days, undoubtedly either directly or indirectly paid by Microsoft to issue FUD pieces on numerous Web sites, including those devoted to Linux. This isn’t paranoia, it’s quite common these days on the Net for companies and organizations to have paid shills posting articles and comments. It’s called “PR” and it’s no different from sending the stuff to newspapers and magazines.
A lot of people here seem to think that “UI consistency” only relates to looks. Let me burst that bubble: UI consistency is about a lot more than just looks.
UI stands for “User Interface”. This means that this also includes, but is not limited to, drag & drop, keyb. shortcuts, menubar order, menuitem order, etc. When looking at it that way, Windows and especially OSX, are a lot more consistent than Linux + DE. Heck, even BeOS is.
MS Office might sport a different look than other Windows apps (.Net, it’s called), but that means fcuk all for the menubar order, menuitem order, keyb. shortcuts, etc. They’re the same throughout the entire OS.
Same for OSX. OSX has three looks now (Aqua, Brushed, and that awful ‘Plastic’), but the *behaviour* is the same, no matter which look is used for an app.
*That’s* real consistency. I hope we can then give the author his point.
The last version of Office I used seriously was 2002, but IIRC, it didn’t put menu items in the same place as everything else. Its “preferences” menu was not only not under the usual “Tools -> Options”, but “preferences” were kind of scattered around the app. Visual Studio was the same way.
I’m sorry, but no, we cannot give the author his point.
For once, menubar item order is not the same in Windows because apps simply don’t all have the same menubar items. The most common ones (File and Edit) are always there, but the rest varies. Guess what: both KDE and GNOME apps are as consistent in this manner as Windows is (in fact, compare the menubar items of Abiword and Kword, and you’ll see that they’re almost identical). Therefore, on menubar items, there is no significant consistency advantage for Windows.
Keyboard shortcuts: are you kidding me? Except for the main functions (Alt+F4, Ctrl+Q, Ctrl+Z, Ctrl+X, Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V), these are usually unique for each Windows apps. Sure, there are common ones, such as Ctrl+W for closing a document, but guess what: even some MS apps, such as Visio, don’t use it. Again, all the main shortcuts named above are consistent in KDE and Gnome apps, so again no advantage for Windows here.
Drag’n’drop: again, while this works in most Windows apps, not all apps feature it in every direction. Meanwhile, drag’n’drop keeps improving in Linux, across desktops: I can now drag an image off of Konqueror and drop it in Gimp. Of course there’s some work to do here. I’ll give a slight advantage to Windows here, if you’re not using only apps associated with a single DE in Linux. However, that’s hardly reason to call Linux UIs inconsistent.
You left out my personal favorites: open/save dialogs. Ok, so KDE and Gnome have different open/save dialogs (I don’t really like the Gnome one, but I’ve learned to use it). However, in Windows, basically every program has its own dialog. On my work PC, I have different dialogs for MS Office apps, Photoshop, Lotus Notes, and basically every other program I use. Some even have annoyingly different behavior, such as Photoshop: if you click in the filename box, it automatically selects the entire filename. I really dislike that, as I’m often doing “Save As…” but I don’t want the name to be “filename copy.jpg”. I’m forced to click again and erase the “copy” from the filename. No biggie, but annoying.
Compared to this, ALL KDE apps have the same open/save dialogs (except sometimes for some additional features called on by the app itself). Same holds true for Gnome. So if in fact you use only KDE apps, the open/file dialogs are way more consistent than in Windows.
So rayiner’s critic still stands: there is no longer any significant UI consistency advantage for Windows over Linux. UI consistency is simply not a valid point of criticism for the modern Linux/*nix Desktop anymore.
Agreed on everything. Also the drag and drop thing is getting so much better.
I, for one, as an avid KDE user actually prefer to use XMMS (a GTK-1 app) instead of Amarok (A truly KDE app). Guess what?
When I create new playlists, all that I do is open a Konqueror window on my Music directory, select all the music that I want to hear *now*, drag the selection and drop on the XMMS Playlist window.
Really, people should let this one go because it really is becoming a lame excuse.
No, they won’t stop whining. People will use any lame, imaginary excuse they can find of to resist change, because change invalidates their previous knowledge and turns competence into incompetence. Their ignorance makes them feel stupid, and nobody likes that. So my bet is that they will never stop complaining no matter what. There will always be some $EXCUSE why linux doesn’t work, never will, and in fact must die ASAP.
Just see the dude who complains about having to use the commandline for fixing things. In his mind it’s apparently all right that you have problems that either
a) can’t be fixed by anything but a complete reinstall,
or
b) takes houers of digging with regedit to fix.
The point is, once you prefer this to going to the command-line and use the tools available there, it’s pretty obvious you aren’t ever going to be satiesfied with anything that is different.
John Gruber’s “Ronco Spray-On Usability” is still one of the best articles on the whole Mac vs Linux (vs Windows) UI debate:
http://daringfireball.net/2004/04/spray_on_usability
Other people have already commented on how you’re wrong about menu order and whatnot. And by the way, Office has it’s own look, it’s not called .Net. .Net apps have the .Net look and that is different than the Office look.
But for a big UI inconsistency, go and use the 3 different themes of OS X. There are huge inconsistencies about how they interact with the user. For example, you can move the window by clicking anywhere in the chrome of Plastic and Brushed Metal but can only move the window using the title bar in Aqua. The Finder is one of the most inconsistent apps out there (there is an entire ArsTechnica article detailing what a piece of garbage the finder if for consistenency and usability).
Linux is no better or worse in general and much better if you only use applications from a single DE. The authors point (and yours) are wrong.
If this article adequately captures your view of what Linux must or should become to be a “success” on the “desktop,” then you are destined to be eternally disappointed and you’d be much better off just finding another bandwagon to latch yourself on to.
Linux will never be a single, consistent, uniform product (or family of products) after the fashion of Windows and OSX. It’s pointless to even argue the merits of such a thing, as it is simply not a reasonable possibility that such a state of affairs will ever be achieved. Linux is not a product, it’s not even an OS, it’s more of an ecosystem where the Linux kernel serves as strong center of gravity around which other “projects” and “toolkits” (not products) orbit. Distributions are not going away for the simple reason that barrier to entry for creating one is so very small and marginal utility of doing so can be enormous. At the very outer realm of possibility lies the eventuality that market will choose one sole distro as de facto standard, but even a cursory glance at the prevailing trends should be sufficient to disabuse anyone of their misplaced hopes on this vanishingly small possibility.
Does this mean Linux cannot possibly succeed? Hardly. For all the dire predictions of doom coming from the desktop enthusiast quarter, the fact still remains that Linux has grown it’s install base faster than any other computing platform in history, and continued uptake only seems to be accelerating. To call Linux a failure requires a truly bizarre redefinition of that word.
Is Linux destined to failure on the desktop? That, of course, depends upon what you mean by desktop and succeed. If by “desktop” and “succeed” you mean being a drop-in replacement for Windows and OSX in the home user segment of the market with a market share above 10%, then the answer is most likely yes. Understood thusly, Linux is most likely not to succed. Now I use Linux extensively, I consider it to be a manifestly superior option to both Windows and OSX for my purposes, but I also consider it highly unlikely that Linux will ever grow into something that will challenge MS’s dominance in the home user market (although it may well grow to exceed OSX’s in the global market).
But that does not mean Linux is destined failure on the desktop, since the home user segment of the desktop market is only part, and not even the largest part, of the overall market. Additionally, the home user segment is the most undesirable part of the overall market; characterized by high user support requirements, broad hardware and software compatibility requirements, extreme price sensitivity, and razor thin margins for commercial vendors. The general purpose home computer market is the ghetto of overall computer world and, in my opinion, it would be extremely foolish for anyone to expend any great effort in tailoring Linux to fit this niche.
The enterprise/office desktop, on the other hand, is another story altogether. This is a very fragmented and various market, when taken as a whole, and Linux isn’t necessarily appropriate in every aspect of it, but Linux is most definitely ready right now for a very significant portion of this market segment, and, when paired with a thin terminal deployment model, offers compelling advantages over both Windows and OSX.
So is Linux destined to forever remain outside of the grasp of the home user? No. In fact, Linux already has an install base among home users much larger than Apple does. Now before you write me off as crazy contemplate two names: Linksys and Tivo. If Linux is to make serious inroads into the home user segment, beyond what it already has, it will most likely come in the form of an appliance where the average consumer is unlikely to even realize that Linux is any way involved. Imagine a Tivo-like home media server, which is also a console gaming machine, a Web-TV-like internet appliance (displayed on both a TV and on cheap thin clients scattered thoughout the home), and even a control center for your home security system.
One more thing, this article indulges in an absurd fallacy, one which seems to plaugue most criticisms of the Linux desktop, when it characterizes all of the competing projects which duplicate functionality as waste of resources. If–and it bears noting that this is an utter impossibilty–all of the current OSS developers were to be retasked to working on one webserver, one desktop environment, one media player, one email client, etc…, the result would not be a more efficent utilization of available resources but an unmitigated disaster. There is point of diminishing returns for simply throwing more developers at a project after which the end result is chaos not efficency. The kind of simple minded thinking which motivates such misguided attaks is the very same thinking which supposed that a centrally planned economy would achieve greater efficiency than a free market one where so many efforts were put to overlapping purposes. In practice, almost without exception, free markets have proven far more efficient than centrally planned ones, as the distributed nature of free markets is able to respond far better to rapidly changing economic inputs and then redistribute labor and capital in response.
This article could have done with more perspective. The author uses OSX, which he rightfully praises for its consistent UI and the fact that it works well with the hardware (duh!), however he never addresses the fact that OSX has a market share that is similar to Linux on the desktop. Following his own logic, he should start asking what is wrong with OSX, and what needs to be fixed so that it becomes more usable by the masses, since this seems to be the reason why its market share is so low…
In fact, this bears repeating: quality and ease-of-use have nothing to do with market share. Rather, the culprits are user inertia (they will use what they’re used to, even if it isn’t the best) and MS’ long history of anti-competitive practices (such as blackmailing OEMs into installing only Windows on their machines, lest they want to lose the “privilege” of being able to install Windows in the first place).
Another problem I have with the article is that it talks about Linux as if it were a GUI, when in fact it isn’t. We should talk about Windows vs. Linux, but rather Windows vs. KDE or GNOME (which can run on Linux, but also the BSDs, Solaris, etc.). What many people don’t understand is that in the land of Unix and Unix-like OSes, the Desktop is independant – which is a strength, not a weakness.
Finally, I’m a bit surprised at the criticisms about localisation: to my experience, Linux is a lot easier to localize than Windows. For starters, if there are some bad translations it’s quite easy to contact the localization package maintainers and advise them. Not only that, but you can do something with Linux which you can’t do with Windows, i.e. have more than one language installed on the same computer, and being able to switch languages on-the-fly. With Windows, if you want a french and english UI (which can be useful in a place like Quebec, Canada), you’re basically stuck out on a limb. You can’t do it, you have to install either the french or english Windows – and after that, if you happen to install a program in the wrong language, you’ll have both languages appearing at once in the same UI – not very consistent.
With Linux, I can easily install new language packages and switch from one language to another, and all apps will follow. Also, Linux is avalaible in small minority languages for which there is no Windows version yet.
I don’t mind constructive criticism, but this article was based on too many flawed premises to be really useful, except as the starting point of yet another discussion about Desktop Linux…
Agreed, but the one thing that IS hard is to get working is Asian fonts . XFree 4.5 now comes with them preinstalled and Xorg unfortunately does not so reluctantly I have switched to Xfree.
Even so, the fonts are often pretty ugly compared to windows . And don’t even get me started about
Input methods for Korean(which I need) or other Asian
languages.
It is NOT easy to get stuff like that workingh and I have spent many hours googling and testing different solutions like NABI(which works partially).
I really think linux has the potential for a lot of
progress here. And I hope it comes soon.
It’s been a couple years already that Linux has had a fantastic desktop, and now Linux is even better than WinXP. Check out Xandros, their filemanager is a million miles ahead of windows explorer.
All these articles about dumbing down Linux so the TOTAL RETARD can run it are stupid – the total retard can’t run windows or osx any better either. Both MS & Mac have so many “super secret settings” that it makes Linux look like a walk in the park by comparison. The total retard just runs windows and suffers every ad/spyware, every virus, every spam, scam & sporge.
So the Linux desktop question is really FUD that Microsoft perpetuates, and all these IT jouralist MORONS are simply Microsoft shills spreading Linux hate.
The Joe LUsers who whine can go screw themselves cos there will never be an OS that can compensate for their vast inifinite supidity.
Wondering if the follwoing scenario is possible.
– Define a special folder as Mac OS does, that has everything needed to run the app.
– It looks like a single file again like Mac OS.
– If it is run from anywhere other than the ../bin folder (wherever that is on the particular distro) then it gets copied to the /bin folder and registered as an application (shortcuts etc). The DE just looks up the applicable location for user apps and copies it there.
– When the program is run the first time it checks to see if the dependencies are met. If not it uses its own versions located in its app folder. If the libraries exist no problem use those.
– If the user wants to delete the application it can be done by using an remove application app or by deleting the shortcut in the ‘Start'(for want of a better word) menu or by dragging the icon into the trash. The DE then removes the application.
Would love to hear from application developers on the possibility of the above.
This already exists: check out klik for Knoppix. I know some developers are porting it to other Linux distros…
Sorry, for not replying directly, but FFox under OSX doesn’t work???
Lets take on your consistancy, and since OSX is currently in my hands…
1. some apps use system trashcan to delete, some don’t???
2. Again my previous post about installing with drag’n’drop (somewhere in the middle)
3. Network,Go to folder and Connect to server??? Same thing, different approach
4. Terminal, folder structure is different than GUI one???
5. Everytime Finder crashes, it changes order of desktop icons???
6. Search in 10.3 Finder window spells everywhere, why this isn’t everywhere
7. Got 3 Library and after installation software stores its data wherever possible. For example removing Acrobat is not a simple drag Acrobat to trash. It is stored in:
user/library/preferences/acrobat
user/library/caches/acrobat
systemdisk/library/application support/adobe/acrobat
user/library/application support/adobe/acrobat
user/library/acrobat user data
user/library/receipts/com.adobe.Acrobat.pro
+ location where you actualy installed acrobat
and god only knows where else
8. Webdav and ftp with finder never worked as it should, but it works wrong different with every system update
9. Printers, time to figure out how to print to a file (PS, not PDF with Acrobat), or how intuitive *NOT* this configuration is compared to the others
10. Desktop icons covering one another when apperaring, I now have at least 5 icons in my lower right corner (not every icon, just every once in a while)
11. Not every action shows that anything is happening, it is better none than some (at least it is consistant)
12. Closing last document, and not closing application?
13. Inconsistant Open and Save allover the system. sometimes it is a dialog sometimes not, sometimes offers you different location selection, while sometimes two?
14. Buttons on dialogs are either at the bottom centred, bottom right or right top?
I’m only naming few things present from 10.0 to 10.3.last, tiger is some dissapointment I actualy wouldn’t like to see. As soon as I saw how slow spotlight is (on 3 weeks old 17″ powerbook it lasted 5 seconds to start showing results and about 12 to finish), I saw that nothing new has happened.
And believe me, I have a list of them. You can call them bugs, just as I call inconsistancy 3 different looks of applications.
1. some apps use system trashcan to delete, some don’t???
Basically all apps in OSX can be deleted by dragging them to the trash. Some bigger apps, like MS Office, require an uninstaller because they need to install stuff in system directories. There’s a very simple rule: if you installed the app by drag/drop, you can remove it by drag/drop. Doesn’t get much easier than that.
3. Network,Go to folder and Connect to server??? Same thing, different approach
Nonsense, they’re not the same thing. ‘Network’ is a special folder where all network shortcuts (ie. SAMBA shares) are put. ‘Go to folder…’ is what you use to directly go to a local folder. ‘Connect to server’ is for directly connecting to a certain PC, or to a FTP using the ip address or simply the name. These are different things. According to your logic, typing in “/usr/local/bin” in a ‘Find’ dialog is the same as typing “cd /usr/local/bin”. Flawed logic, sir.
4. Terminal, folder structure is different than GUI one???
This is actually the best thing Apple has ever done when it comes to userfriendlyness. Only power users use the Terminal, hence that’s the place where the real FS structure is hidden. Actually, KDE and Gnome do exactly the same thing with “Computer” or “My Computer” or whatever.
5. Everytime Finder crashes, it changes order of desktop icons???
Finder crashing? Damn, never had my Finder crash.
6. Search in 10.3 Finder window spells everywhere, why this isn’t everywhere
What?
7. Got 3 Library and after installation software stores its data wherever possible. For example removing Acrobat is not a simple drag Acrobat to trash. It is stored in:
user/library/preferences/acrobat
user/library/caches/acrobat
systemdisk/library/application support/adobe/acrobat
user/library/application support/adobe/acrobat
user/library/acrobat user data
user/library/receipts/com.adobe.Acrobat.pro
+ location where you actualy installed acrobat
and god only knows where else
This is because those files store the user data and settings. So whenever you re-install Reader, it has the same preferences. Same happens in Linux, where deleting an app with <insert package manager> doesn’t always remove the “.application” folder in your /home dir. Why do you use Reader anyway? Preview is much better for reading pdfs.
8. Webdav and ftp with finder never worked as it should, but it works wrong different with every system update
Works fine here. When I click on a FTP link on a website, Finder connects and I can easily use the ftp folder as if it was a local folder.
9. Printers, time to figure out how to print to a file (PS, not PDF with Acrobat), or how intuitive *NOT* this configuration is compared to the others
Printer config is a breeze in OS X (can’t say the same for scanners though). Printing to a PS file isn’t useful for an end user anyway. At least OSX *can* print to PDF out of the box.
10. Desktop icons covering one another when apperaring, I now have at least 5 icons in my lower right corner (not every icon, just every once in a while)
Never had that problem.
11. Not every action shows that anything is happening, it is better none than some (at least it is consistant)
What?
12. Closing last document, and not closing application?
When I close *any* document, the app closes. You see, the little red bubble in the windowtitle means: ‘close window’, not ‘close application’. The latter is placed in the ‘File’ menu, or apple+q. I’s simply a different approach to UI design. I prefer it over anything else.
13. Inconsistant Open and Save allover the system. sometimes it is a dialog sometimes not, sometimes offers you different location selection, while sometimes two?
I always get the same “open” dialog suspended from the main window.
14. Buttons on dialogs are either at the bottom centred, bottom right or right top?
What? They’re always in the same place here.
1. Not talking about applications, use Mail for example and drag one item over trash, trash flashes just the same as with file, but nothing happens.
MacOS used trash for everything
3. Not really some of us do use Connect To Server by default, and for my surprise browse never found anything. Network shows only partial network resources (SMB and iTunes). And Open Location can do everything that Connect to server can. Read manual.
4. Not hidden, completely different
5. Often
6. In every finder window there is a quickfind which by default contains “everywhere”. I already got fed up of users that think that this is sherlock.
7. One location would be acceptable, but so many, c’mon
8. Depends on server settings. As I heard. But it is a major mistake
9. OSX Printing To PDF is not adequate for DTP.
10. Mostly
11. WHen you start app, icon jumps, but many operations are silent, do not show progress, and do not show any action.
12. So you don’t use no Adobe software, no TextEdit…
13. Look carefully
14. Yeah right, TextEdit and Addressbook. Textedit has dialog, while AddressBokk is different. Look at preferences etc, not just open/save for button layout
3. Not really some of us do use Connect To Server by default, and for my surprise browse never found anything. Network shows only partial network resources (SMB and iTunes). And Open Location can do everything that Connect to server can. Read manual.
Yes, but for less knowledgeable users, it makes sense to differentiate between connecting to an FTP folder and a local one. Think beyond yourself.
4. Not hidden, completely different
The normal unix FS structure is hidden in Finder. That is done to make it more userfriendly. As I said, KDE and Gnome do the same. The real FS structure is visible in the Terminal only for power users.
5. Often
Any actual cases and reproduceable scenarios, please.
6. In every finder window there is a quickfind which by default contains “everywhere”. I already got fed up of users that think that this is sherlock.
Not here. Input fields are all empty.
7. One location would be acceptable, but so many, c’mon
Doesn’t change my point.
8. Depends on server settings. As I heard. But it is a major mistake
Works fine, always. Never had problems.
9. OSX Printing To PDF is not adequate for DTP.
How many end users do true DTP?
10. Mostly
You’re doing odd things with your Mac.
11. WHen you start app, icon jumps, but many operations are silent, do not show progress, and do not show any action.
Can you give any examples instead of saying vague stuff like ‘many operations’? Bouncing dock icon instead of the sand-cursor.
12. So you don’t use no Adobe software, no TextEdit…
What? Please, please, try to make sense.
13. Look carefully
Still the same answer.
14. Yeah right, TextEdit and Addressbook. Textedit has dialog, while AddressBokk is different. Look at preferences etc, not just open/save for button layout
What?
—-
Seriously, you need to learn to give examples and describe in more detail, because now, you’re just making stuff up.
sorry about my post b4… user error
. I can’t see what the problem is using linux as a desk top personally. I do most tasks that most desktop users do, watch and record tv, rip dvd’s, play music, write the odd letter, surf the web, watch dvd’s, burn same, organise my files, touch-up pics, add/remove hardware and software, (i’m an os junkie ask my vmware installation) i just can’t think of what i could do in any other OS (ok games but i play doom 3, bzflag and america’s army so i’m happy), i use a Microsoft wireless k/board and mouse, my nvidia card is hardware accellerated, if i chose to add a sata drive,, np… so as i said for “me” i’m as happy with linux as a desk top as any other person using any other OS, it fit my needs. If your happy with windows or OSX or BSD then no matter what people tell you that their OS is better is purely irrelevant.
just my 2p worth
Note: I am a Gentoo Developer — so I have my bias as to what I like and what works for me.
If you’re looking for doing things in a more “contained” way, (on GNU/Linux distros) checkout:
– ROX: http://rox.sourceforge.net/phpwiki/
– Zero Install: http://zero-install.sourceforge.net/
– GoboLinux: http://www.gobolinux.org/
I’m just sick of reading these as well… Linux will be ready for the desktop when you start seing it on non-tech savvy users’s desktops. Period. Publishing pointless “Is Linux Ready For The Desktop” articles every other damn day won’t change anything other than keep annoying the regular OS News readers.
I mean, it’s the same crap over and over… Linux hasn’t changed that much since last week or the week before, so why keep publishing article after article with the exact same crap in it?
Not that topic again.
Depressing!!!
For that matter, what about all the different theming programs and alternate UIs available for Windows? Windows has just as many UIs available for it as Linux does (perhaps even more). The last I knew there was the classic windows ui, the xp ui, blackbox, litestep, MacOS work alikes, and a myriad of others.
People who see ‘integration’ see it only within the narrow spectrum that they choose to see. Its easy enough to do the same thing under linux, by simply using only gtk/gnome apps, or only qt/kde apps.
A few months ago Windows did something that really pissed me off, so I decided to look for another OS. Being that I like to play with partitions and such (I modified my bootloader, XosL, to include the latest version of Ranish for that very reason) I decided to try several OSes and see which one worked best for me. So I resized Windows to a DVD-sized partition and moved my Temp directories, Program Files, and “Documents and Settings” folder to their own partitions and created some space at the beginning of my drive to play with. Unfortunately for me, the first three Linux distro installations were much harder than the other OSes I installed (XP, 2k, DOS, and BeOS), and ultimately failed (some hardware issues with my laptop). I finally got SuSE installed, and was rather pleased when it actually worked. It had comparable hardware support to Windows 2000 or out-of-the-box XP, and was actually usable. Two of the main problems were that the font smoothing looked horrible on my laptop screen (which is one reason I currently hate to use it) and networking didn’t work. After figuring out where the network settings were (different configuration programs with overlapping functions… not fun to learn) I found it was a DHCP issue (not surprising given my router). So I go into Windows, copied my network settings to a USB thumb drive and tried mounting it. Talk about more complicated than it needs to be… ouch. Several reboots later I was able to get onto the internet. Being that my router’s DNS forwarder isn’t the best I tried to install a local DNS server (like I do with Windows). That was when I stopped trying to learn Linux (I hope to learn it later, but BeOS didn’t give me anywhere close to this much trouble). Its seems to me that installing software in Windows (or BeOS a lot of the time) is like going to a fast food restaurant and ordering something. A guy asks what you want and in a minute or so you have it. Installing in Linux (from my limited exposure) is like ordering a hamburger and having the guy say “here’s some ground beef, a bun, and on the wall is a general recipe; you’ll find a grill on your table and condiments/toppings scattered around the restaurant; you can fix your burger any way you want, aren’t you glad you have a choice?” Just some food for thought for everyone who thinks that it’s easy to get started with Linux.
> Installing in Linux (from my limited exposure) is like
> ordering a hamburger and having the guy say “here’s
> some ground beef, a bun, and on the wall is a general
> recipe; you’ll find a grill on your table and
> condiments/toppings scattered around the restaurant;
> you can fix your burger any way you want, aren’t you
> glad you have a choice?”
OK, so oyu willingly admit that you were to dumb just to klick on a name in the software package manager of your distribution, and then to klick on some large “INSTALL” button?
If you didnt even manage _that_ (without having to write silly restaurant analogies why it doesnt work) you should not only not be using linux, you shouldnt be using computers at all.
the first three Linux distro installations were much harder than the other OSes I installed (XP, 2k, DOS, and BeOS), and ultimately failed (some hardware issues with my laptop).
What distro and what laptop? Did you check the hardware compatibility list before installing? I can’t imagine a laptop where BeOS works and Linux doesn’t…
Two of the main problems were that the font smoothing looked horrible on my laptop screen (which is one reason I currently hate to use it) and networking didn’t work.
which version of SuSE? Are you sure the screen was running at its native resolution? Define “horrible”. Last time I used SuSE was 9.1, and its fonts were just fine on my laptop LCD.
After figuring out where the network settings were (different configuration programs with overlapping functions… not fun to learn)
In SuSE, everything is in YaST. Exactly what did you have trouble with? YaST’s networking configuration closely mirrors Windows XP’s. You select your network device, then tell it to automatically get an IP. Its not as easy as Fedora’s “list of network cards in one dialog” approach, but it’s not any hardware than Windows.
So I go into Windows, copied my network settings to a USB thumb drive and tried mounting it.
what, the thumb drive didn’t work? I haven’t used SuSE in awhile, but if its like Fedora or Ubuntu, plugging in a thumb drive should just pop an icon up on the desktop.
You proved the other poster right. It is not a Linux problem, it is distro (Suse 9.1) problem *loud laughter*. Please spend another day trying another distro. Thank you!
How did I prove the poster right? I never blamed the distro, I asked which version he was using. I can’t very well consider his complaints if I don’t know what he’s using, can I?
It’s suspicious that the anti-Linux folks are so cagey about providing specifics…
Then spare us and please don’t consider his complaints. If he needed technical help, he would not come to osnews, would he? He was just sharing his experience and you tried to make him look like he is lying. It works in Fedora, so what? It didn’t work for him and thats it.
Oh, brilliant idea. He complains, and the Linux side isn’t allowed to respond to it. How do you know he didn’t do something stupid (like start mucking about in the CLI)? There a lot of Windows “power users” who start using Linux thinking they don’t need to use the interfaces designed for the total newbie crowd. I mean, if I messed up a Windows install because I tried to change my network settings using the registry, well, I’d be rightly flamed. Knowledge about an OS is not universally applicable. I see the same complaints all the time — some Windows user thinks that RPMS are equivalent to install.exe, and bitches about “dependency hell”. You’d flame a Mac user (and rightly so) who expected to be able to install apps in Windows by copying around a folder, and you should flame a Windows user who thinks they can install apps in Linux the same way as in Windows.
The basic fact is that there is no way to verify the validity of his complaint without his providing specifics. His complaint could very well be valid, maybe the SuSE version he used just didn’t like his laptop. But given the fact that BeOS worked fine on his hardware (with its extremely limited hardware support), I’m more inclined to believe that he wasn’t using it properly.
(I am the original poster.)
You bring up a very good point. I’m a Windows power user who thought that a few more of my skills would transfer (as they did with BeOS, DOS, and a couple other OSes I’ve tried over the years). However, most people’s computers are designed for Windows and Windows only, so I’d expect hardware issues are not that uncommon. You’re kind of diving people away if it doesn’t work perfectly the first time and it requires Linux-specific knowledge to fix the issues that arise. If someone wants to try Linux then an expert usually isn’t around to help them. I expected hardware problems, so that’s why I persisted as long as I did trying to get things to work.
SuSE supported about (semi-random guess) 60% of my hardware (upper end Sony VAIO laptop, great stuff but proprietary), whereas BeOS supported about 40%. The three or so distros I tried before had various issues that wouldn’t let the installation finish, or the GUI launch after the install (or only with a resolution around 320 x 240). Probably my graphics card. BeOS had the same problems, but I was able to continue by using a couple safe mode options (standard advice, I had to use fail-safe video mode and disable multiprocessor support). Once inside BeOS I was able to download the drivers I needed and read the readmes on how to install them (drag and drop or an installation script).
In SuSE I had enough hardware support that I didn’t need to seek out drivers initially (the major hardware was supported). When I inserted my USB key nothing happened (I think my laptop has a wierd USB setup, it often confuses me, like one USB port powering three times as many devices as should be possible). So I got on the internet and found out that I needed to go into the command line as root and use a rather long mount command (first useful instructions I found on Google). So I rebooted and loged in as root (I’ve since heard I could have used “su” or something, but had no idea at the time) and was able to eventually get it mounted. I did look into improving the font smoothing, but it seemed way too complicated for my level of experience. I don’t remember exactly how the fonts looked (and realize a screenshot wouldn’t help), but I remember it was kinda hard to read and the worst by far of the OSes I’ve tried.
As for software installation, in every other OS I’ve used you go to a program’s website, download something, and either extract/copy the files somewhere, run a script/install file, or it’s a stand-alone binary. Using a package manager was not what I was expecting to do, and I didn’t want to compile anything (the only things I had to compile before were written in Java).
As someone mentioned before, I’m not looking for a solution to these problems, and it’s not my intent to complain. Nor am I trying to say my experiences are typical and/or that Linux sucks. I’m just sharing this because I’d assume people who know how to use Linux don’t find such things difficult, and to demonstrate how getting Linux installed/setup can be a headache for a newbie.
When ever you debate Linux on the desktop you have to look at the development.
The article reiterates a well-known pattern:
* Linux has no xx% market share, therefore it lacks …
* Linux has these problem, currently they are
** consistency
** installation difficulties
** complexity problems
** hardware support
** unfinished software
Proposals:
** doublicated effort —> get together
** no innovation allegation –> innovate
etc.
Both proposals are bullshit. First of all there is a lot of innovation going on and you will learn to know it when you work with the system. The allegation that software is not innovative usually is attributed to evolutionary developed software. But make a diff, look what innovation took place.
3 years ago we also had the same debate and other issues were quoted as the “reason” which are now fixed and nobody talks about it anymore. I guess when your issues are fixed then you will come up with the next “reasons”.
I think that Linux works fine for me on the desktop and it is desktop ready. I know that some distributions have problems. Esp. Fedora or RedHat simply is no Desktop distribution, so no wonder it fails.
Do you remember Mozilla pre 1.2 ?
– slow
– buggy
– ugly
– second choice
but finally Firefox emerged and is known as the better browser.
OpenOffice also will make a giant leap with 2.0. There is a lot of software that now matures.
My windows observation is:
– when I look closely at windows programs you see much gui inconsistency, esp. with third party software.
– installation with windows is very buggy from a usability perspective. I once wanted to add a component to a driver and I accidently deinstalled the driver and got serious trouble. the modify/deinstall button, you know. Installation usually also has the problems that it clutters your menus, you have to clean this up by yourself.
Now regard the development:
– Today you can make a gtk app like Evolution look like a KDE app and vice versa. The main real difference is the different colour set Gnome uses.
– cut ‘n past now works
– KDE configuration is now very good, many persons complained at ealier occasions
– motif and other apps die out
– there are application for many purposes.
– Word import is no problem anymore, the OO 2 drivers are really perfect
– almost every dos program runs under Linux using dosbox or dosemu
– Wine has no a structure that does scale, so improvements of windows compatibility are just a matter of time.
– Linux is very much used, many of my friends use it, no geeks. It depends on where you live. In Germany Linux is really strong.
As usual I expect
* a lot of development will take place
* no one will applaud Linux as the innovation progress is done evolutionary and there will be no Steve Jobs surprise show.
– the dublicated effort argument will get reiterated by people who do not understand the economics of open source development
– Linux gets more and more intresting as a desktop operating system
– contra arguments will melt away
– the network effect will still be a problem for wider adoption but this will break on the long run.
You could also give autopackage a shot, it works exactly like this (almost anyways)
…not another one of these “is it ready?” articles!
Why is it that every time a person decides Linux is not ready for “their” desktop, they think it’s not ready for anyone else’s desktop, either?
Even after 7 years, my mother-in-law has never been able to understand, or use Windows. Does that mean it’s not ready for the desktop?
If everyone would simply stay within their limits and use whatever works for them, it would make for a much happier computer world. More users should also try adjusting to the OS rather than thinking every OS should be tailored just for them.
Truthfully, I hope every user finds the operating system that suits their needs so they don’t spend so much time ranting about those that don’t.
Welcome my friend to receive the wrath of hardcore linux fanatics. Truth really bites in Linux community. Now you will see 100 of people coming and telling that it is your mistake you couldn’t get Linux to work and how it is much better than all other OS in the world.
Linux has the worst community on this earth. They have no trust at all on their users, they think that if you criticize Linux, its because you have a hidden agenda. Please stay with Microsoft or Apple, atleast they listen to their customers and try to improve.
Personally, i pray that this attitude of Linux community continues specially people like archisteele and somebody and soon we can see the rise of a better OS and open community like opensolaris or freebsd
Linux fanatics take Linux as religion and can’t hear anything bad about it even if its for real.
Also please don’t call these fanatics as geeks because if they had true developer skills, they would listen to users and try to improve. They are not geeks, they are a burden.
Welcome my friend to receive the wrath of hardcore linux fanatics. Truth really bites in Linux community. Now you will see 100 of people coming and telling that it is your mistake you couldn’t get Linux to work and how it is much better than all other OS in the world.
Linux has the worst community on this earth. They have no trust at all on their users, they think that if you criticize Linux, its because you have a hidden agenda. Please stay with Microsoft or Apple, atleast they listen to their customers and try to improve.
Personally, i pray that this attitude of Linux community continues specially people like archisteele and somebody and soon we can see the rise of a better OS and open community like opensolaris or freebsd
Linux fanatics take Linux as religion and can’t hear anything bad about it even if its for real.
Also please don’t call these fanatics as geeks because if they had true developer skills, they would listen to users and try to improve. They are not geeks, they are a burden.
Lol, your comparing the Linux community to the dumb asses that hang out at OSNews (at least most of the people are). Gee….intelligent. If you want to see a glimpse of the real community, and not the people who hang out at OSNews and see the need to flame over the tiniest difference of opinion (FreeBSD vs Linux, Linux vs Solaris, Windows vs Linux, Gnome vs KDE, the list goes on and on, it is quite funny to watch actually…albeit being kind of pathetic at the same time), check out places like http://www.linuxquestions.org or different irc channels. A good one is #ubuntu on irc.freenode.net. I doubt OSNews is that popular that the entire Linux community hangs out here….most people are too mature for this site (at least for the comments section).
Mod away people!
archiesteel has been posting thoughtful messages that have actual details. You’ve just posted in invective that contains no real message and no specifics.
Personally, i pray that this attitude of Linux community continues specially people like archisteele and somebody and soon we can see the rise of a better OS and open community like opensolaris or freebsd
Linux fanatics take Linux as religion and can’t hear anything bad about it even if its for real.
If you have a problem with something that I wrote, then I suggest you offer counter-arguments instead of resorting to personal attacks like implying that I’m a fanatic.
Now, I’m curious, what makes you think that FreeBSD or OpenSolaris advocates are any less enthusiastic about their OS? Perhaps you should try going into a OpenSolaris thread and say that “OpenSolaris isn’t ready for the desktop” and see the kind of response you’d get.
Personally, as far as the desktop is considered, I make NO difference between Linux, the BSDs and Solaris, since they all run KDE or Gnome. So it’s really all the same desktop, despite your lame attempt to turn this into a “wedge” issue.
Linux has the worst community on this earth.
Ah… Stereotyping. A sign of a strong mind in action.
atleast they listen to their customers and try to improve.
Yep, exactly the reason I kicked Windows to the curb 4 years ago, cause they were so receptive to my needs and I was so happy with my wonderful customer experience.
Anonymous
It’s been a couple years already that Linux has had a fantastic desktop, and now Linux is even better than WinXP. Check out Xandros, their filemanager is a million miles ahead of windows explorer.
So the best file manager on Xandros is better than the worst file manager on Windows. You could’ve knocked me over with a feather! Did you also know that OpenOffice is better than Wordpad? If you don’t know where I’m going with this, power users don’t use Windows Explorer
rayiner
It’s not so much that the opinion doesn’t matter, its that the opinion isn’t credible. Someone who doesn’t use the OS can’t render a valid opinion on what is and is not wrong with it.
Or what about somebody who hasn’t used an OS in years? i.e. – people who haven’t used Windows since Win98 complaining about how unstable it is?
Saying what isn’t a possibility? That you don’t know the true shortcomings of Linux? Given that you refer to a font problem that hasn’t existed for years, I’m inclined to say “yes, it isn’t”.
I dunno … maybe you’re right. Last time I really paid attention was Xandros 2.0. Have they fixed it since then? Don’t get me wrong – fonts in KDE/QT apps looked good, but fonts in non-QT apps were horrible and way too small. There wasn’t a way to fix this with the font configuration dialog. This was a well-known problem documented on the forums. Supposedly, you could apt-get another font config (that’s simplicity for you), but I never was successful at it.
rm6990
How the hell is having different artists akin to having MS set their own standards?? That makes absolutely no sense! Having different artists is the same as having different interoperable software. Now if each artist had their own CD format and you had to buy an Eminem brand stereo to listen to Eminem your comment would make sense. My point was the software is interoperable so why not have choice? Are you saying we should have one OS, one office suite, one email client, for all computers? So are you now saying we should only have one band world-wide?
Look, as I already told you, I was talking about package managers, not applications. Packages aren’t applications any more than zip files or web pages, so you need a standard way of dealing with them.
CrazyDude0
Welcome my friend to receive the wrath of hardcore linux fanatics. Truth really bites in Linux community. Now you will see 100 of people coming and telling that it is your mistake you couldn’t get Linux to work and how it is much better than all other OS in the world.
Or my personal favorite – you were using the wrong distro! Either the fault lies with the user or the distro, because everybody knows Linux is perfect.
I learn more reading the actual posts than reading the article itself. To me why does everyone get angry if an article says such and such needs more work or it sucks. I like using Windows and I always hear people tell me how it sucks, but I never let it bother me. So the people who likes Linux keep using it. Who cares what people think. Also it creates a healthy competition for both OS, like AMD and Intel. It’s a win win sitution in my book.
addresses all the points above.
not mentioned so I assume you haven’t tried. it.
Suggest you do.
why can’t you just accept Linux for what it is and move on? if you like linux use it. if you don’t, use M$ and leave the rest of us alone.
and as a recent cs grad, let me extend a collective apology from all of us for this article..:)
I don’t see why the author of the article thinks that KDE existing next to Gnome and other desktop environments is a bad thing. In my opinion using Linux is about having choice. I can’t choose to use a lightweight desktop environment in Windows on my old laptop. No problem in Linux though. It might be true that the average PC user is not able to configure the system in that way (although I don’t think it is too difficult considering distributions like SUSE giving you almost Windows like tools for configuration) but those people can still use the default configuration.
Another advantage of similar programs coexisting is that they have greater possibilities to evolve. The developers can look at the other programs and say “Hey, I (don’t) like the way this and that is being done there, I’m going to do it this other way!”. This encourages different solutions for all kinds of problems. It is the same with games in Windows. Why the heck would one need more than one FPS or more than one strategy game? Because different people prefer different software and developers love to develope own solutions to problems.
All together I can’t share the authors view that Linux is “schizophrenic”, I would rather describe it as an OS with many facettes.
I can’t believe I just read 5 pages of drivel written by a 20 year old student. Just proves that OSNews will publish anything.
In my opinion, Linux isnt for the desktop, from the core.
Only two words:
Zeta AND Haiku.
I’m waiting for a review by Thom Holwerda, so we will se WHAT OS is for the desktop.
ok, quick question for you all
If the linux community unites (which it won’t) and linux becomes a major force in the desktop market…. how many linux developers would jump ship to bsd or maybe gnu hurd
.. I think a lot of it has to do with the challange and thinking differently…… as soon as linux becomes overly mainstream (loses it’s geek appeal), linux will lose many of it’s best developers to something else.
this is not to say new developers wouldn’t come along, but linux as we know it would be gone.
Is it ready for MY desktop? Yes. I can use Linux for day-to-day work just fine.
Is it ready for my mother’s desktop? No.
Is it ready for someone who never really upgrades or installs new hardware or software? Yes, once it’s set up.
In short, configuring it (especially for more esoteric hardware that your distro doesn’t have handy support for) is a pain in the butt right now, but once it’s done it can look and feel great.
Compared to Windows, Linux is a lot less integrated, and less supported. However, it’s far more useful than some people make it out to be, considering it’s free and to some extent built on a volunteer basis. (Yes, I know lots of the more important products are written by people paid to do what they do).
first time i used linux was probably back in ’98 installing it on the gf’s packard bell.. id always worked on macs and there was no way i was going to use windows (in those days).. i don’t remember if i ever got red hat installed or not.. i know i did end up erasing her hard drive.. aaaaaah the thrill of being a new user!
a few years later i was getting one of the newly anounced g4’s so i was pleased to have the opportunity to install some alternative os’s onto my 6500.. installed BeOS.. loved it, just like everyone did.. but it didn’t really have enough apps in those days to even warrant my casual use, but, it still holds a dear place in my heart.. ordered linuxppc.. i think i got it installed this time.. i believe the default window manager was afterstep.. i dont think i spent any time in it really..
and that was it for me and linux for a long time.. but a month or two ago i was watching revolution os, and i thought “say, lets give it another go!”, id heard some fine things about ubuntu, so i downloaded that and installed it on a spare drive on my now aging g4.. while i can say the installer aint so pretty, it worked flawlessly and installed perfectly.. (if only i could find some damn drivers for my audiowerks 2 card!!) anyway.. messed around in gnome a bit.. looking at settings and all of that.. gnome doesn’t really do it for me.. the fonts just look squished and hard to read (my opinion only folks).. so after some looking around online i saw how to switch to KDE (yes, i know its obvious, but hey, i am really new to the whole linux thing again).. anyway, logging into KDE.. wow.. things have changed..
for fun i downloaded and installed a couple other distros, but have returned to kubuntu.. and while i am still os x 90% of the time, i look forward to replacing this box with a new mac so i can run linux full time on the old one..
obviously i still have a lot of work to go with being a power user.. but thats not the point, the point is that even as a “newb” with linux now i can actually do something, whereas before, as a newb, i couldn’t even get it to install..
javajazz here.
just got back from PANERA, also known as The St Louis Bread Company. I recently bought a mag with Mandriva first edition 2005 on a dvd install disk. I installed it on my thinkpad with a belkin pcmia wireless card and I am surfing. too cool.
my life is near complete.
by the way I installed pc-bsd on the pc at home and that dang thing configured my 1810 video chip, my ich sound chip and my mouse with scroll wheel with NO QUESTIONS asked. freebsd has never done that. I quess everyone knows that pc-bsd is freebsd 5.4 with fancy installer. A very fancy much appreciated installer. Thanks pc-bsd.
When was the last time you went out and bought an X brand of Camera and plugged it into an XP box? Have you tried it? Does it recognize every piece of hardware out there? Now don’t you get started on driver Cds. I don’t remember when I even last used them as coasters for my coffee mug.
Now let us take plugging a digital camera via usb cable to the computer. Surprise, surprise, an icon appears on my desktop (KDE or GNOME) showing me that I have a removable disk of XXMB. Depending on the distro, you will also get asked if you want to import pictures that it found on the removable disk. Am i telling you a fib tale a-la Harry Potter? No sir. If I were to do the same with windows, it would take me much longer to get the driver CD installed (and it would insist on installed some extra trash which I may not require). So, which one do you prefer? Simple clean recongition of *most* devices or a cupboard full of driver CDs to rummage through each time your machine goes down from malware or viruses? You know my answer!
from article: “as long as the computer has already been configured and all his favourite apps are to be found on the desktop.”
–as has been said time and time before whenever this topic comes up — therein lies the rub. The biggest use by home users on their computers today is the internet. And just what encompasses the internet hmm? IE only web pages, pages with windows media or apple quicktime. And a second reason is DVD movies. Games are not absolutely necessary anymore since the new generation of consoles are computers essentially and rival them in graphics and processing power now.
So to solve those problems (and even games) one needs third party commercial apps such as Crossover which doesn’t always work right, or pay extra for the LinspireOS which has licenced codecs but surprise surprise doesn’t ship with the tools to actually use the Linux part of the OS making you have to download the tools which then often causes the whole system to break.
So where’s this leave us then hmm? It leaves Linux in the category it’s always excelled in – very pointed specialized apps. It is not a full featured OS and WON’T be until its accepted by the other companies Apple, MS, hardware vendors for drivers and support etc… and that just won’t ever happen on a wide scale.
Wish it would, but it’s a pipe dream.
And just what encompasses the internet hmm? IE only web pages, pages with windows media or apple quicktime. And a second reason is DVD movies.
Very few web pages are IE only – Firefox and Konqueror correctly render 99%+ of web pages out there.
As for Windows Media, Apple Quicktime and DVD movies, I was able to quickly set these under Ubuntu. It took a thirty-second Google search and following the clear instructions found on the Ubuntu support site. I imagine most people would be able to find this out very quickly.
Now, unless I’m missing something, Windows XP will NOT read Quicktime movies nor will it play DVDs out of the box…
Linux has the worst community on this earth. They have no trust at all on their users, they think that if you criticize Linux, its because you have a hidden agenda. Please stay with Microsoft or Apple, atleast they listen to their customers and try to improve.
I guess it’s true what they say then … that you get what you pay for.
Linux is free – so your not losing anything are you? …by camparison how much is that bloated, spyware magnet XP crackin your wallet for?
Do the world a favor and take your Linux complaint’s and wishlist and jam them up your @$$.
P.S. everyone has a hidden agenda … so do you Micro-troll.
Articles like this create flamewars.
flamewars create more posts.
more posts create more pageviews.
more pageviews = more ad revenue
I don’t see a single well supported point in this whole article. It seems to be a big straw man against imagined ‘Linux zealots’, eg:
“Well, for some reason, the largest amount of the Linux community still believes that people actually intend to struggle their way through a hefty manual to get the thing installed and configured as they wish”
and
“If they ask for more advise, it is not so rare that they get an answer that is full of disbelief and contempt”
Go to any good Linux help discussion board (www.linuxquestions.org) and you’ll see how wrong that statement is.
Not to mention trotting out the old argument that the fact that the open source community has produced more than 1 program of the same type (KDE and GNOME, OpenOffice and Abiword) is somehow holding back desktop adoption. What utter bullshit – the Windows world is full of many programs that do the same thing as well. Its called ‘variety’, ‘competition’ and ‘choice’ 3 words which the author obviously doesn’t understand.
“Compared to Windows, Linux is a lot less integrated”
can someone explain this, because the way I think of this is as a benefit….. im confuzzed….
“The biggest use by home users on their computers today is the internet. And just what encompasses the internet hmm? IE only web pages, pages with windows media or apple quicktime. And a second reason is DVD movies.”
please show me all of these IE only websites, and second of all if that is the case who is to blame, someone using a standards compliant web browser or the person that used frontpage to write a god awful page that probably wont work right in different version of IE much lessw anything else….
so if i choose to make the videos on my web page with divABC are you going to forsake IE and tell me how crappy IE is when it is actually my fault for using a certain format that I know excludes some of my visitors?
dvd movies? huh, i have a tv and a forty buck dvd player….
awww shit, i forgot…. you will never convince anyone that doesnt think linux….. and vice versa…and so forth….
and i love how every linux user is a zealot….
actually i think that guy does just cut and paste his same rants over and over…
i say linux users start ignoring these flame topics and let the windows fanboys copy and paste and look like idiots by themselves….
the term “fanboys” was used to counter the zealot label….flame on…
Am I the only one who thinks Kim may be female?
Anyway, she talks about the success of Ubuntu and then rants about long manuals. The Ubuntu Guide is the easiest manual I’ve ever seen!
http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktop.php
Linux kiddies can whine all they want, the reality is that their desktop dream seems to be getting screwed day by day. Market share proves this
Todays arguments were even more fun to read, to see linux kiddies crying again 
)
Linux is good, its better, its best….this works that works, USB works, still market share doesn’t grow
ahhh how sad
Actually, market share numbers have been increasing. Sure, it takes time, but it’s not easy to overcome an aggressive monopoly. Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Anyway, your entire troll is based on false premises, since Linux use is in fact increasing.
If I had one cent every time an article with this kind of title appears, I’d be richer than Mr. Gates
I agree with most of his points.
Here’s my summary of what Linux needs:
hardware support/update/maintenance –
This needs to be able to be done by
any ‘disciple’. If a particular hardware
is not supported, there should be a one-
click update or help page that describes
how to fix this; WITHOUT USING A TERMINAL
TO HACK-FIX IT.
uniformity –
Applications need to work in a similar
predictable manner. Custom skins and
custom functionality breaks ‘disciples’
becoming accustomed to general useage.
convergence –
All these various applications that all
do the same thing (KDE/GNOME etc) are
counter-productive to ‘disciple’
acceptance.
intuitive –
Applications that describe what they do
(XMMS vs Media Player?).
simple –
GUI-configuration driven for ‘disciples’,
with terminal options for geeks or,
preferably, advanced options in GUI.
compilation –
Compiling apps for your system? What am
I a developer or something? Linux needs
to be less kernel version-dependent for
drivers/apps. Linux should release
service packs that have base libs – apps
developed against those, and if lib not
included in SP, included as part of
source build/release app.
Biggest mistake on this essay, assuming a distro as the whole Linux which is not true.
hardware support/update/maintenance –
This needs to be able to be done by
any ‘disciple’. If a particular hardware
is not supported, there should be a one-
click update or help page that describes
how to fix this; WITHOUT USING A TERMINAL
TO HACK-FIX IT.
Hardware support is mostly kernel related. It is also related to hardware manufacturer themselves. If one of them refuse to provide Linux support, simply don’t buy that piece of hardware.
uniformity –
Applications need to work in a similar
predictable manner. Custom skins and
custom functionality breaks ‘disciples’
becoming accustomed to general useage.
That is very true for Windows application. On a Linux distro like Fedora, most applications match the desktop.
intuitive –
Applications that describe what they do
(XMMS vs Media Player?).
You compare apple and orange. XMMS is dedicated to audio while Media Player is all-in-one media. On desktop menu, XMMS is classed as audio/video categories (on both Gnome and KDE) while Media Player on Windows XP is classed as accesories –>entertainment(not logical at all). Both Gnome and KDE menus are more intuitive than Windows XP’s.
simple –
GUI-configuration driven for ‘disciples’,
with terminal options for geeks or,
preferably, advanced options in GUI.
You are seven years late. Majority of modem Linux distros already provide that choice.
compilation –
Compiling apps for your system? What am
I a developer or something? Linux needs
to be less kernel version-dependent for
drivers/apps. Linux should release
service packs that have base libs – apps
developed against those, and if lib not
included in SP, included as part of
source build/release app.
Completely disagree. Driver supports are for the kernel. Most kernel update include extra support for new hardwares. Drivers in Linux world are called modules. Most modem distros already provide applications that can be installed via package manager (apt, yum, smart, etc.)eliminating the need to recompile source package.
Many essays about “Linux not ready for distro” failed to list a distro they have tried thus completely discredit them. A IT teacher will simply grade that essay a big F.
I have never encountered any of those problems. I’ve tried several times to get people to switch to Linux, and the problem is always the same–Drivers. Usually wireless network drivers. They just aren’t there, and these days what good is a computer that you can’t connect to the internet? I’ve tried the standard solutions for these…the universal drivers, the programs that run windows drivers…but I’ve never managed to get one to work. I mean, I’m not an uber-geek, but even with help from mandrakeusers.org I couldn’t get this damn thing figured out. I think next time I have to do this for myself (which will be pretty soon probably) I’m just gonna use another computer on windows to bridge the wireless to normal ethernet…easier that way…
But seriously…if we had some driver support, we’d have more people…that and games and/or decent emulators. Cedega, Wine, and Crossover Office just don’t cut it from my experience…
The driver situation is improving. I’m currently writing this on my wireless laptop, and it works great using the RaLink Linux driver…I did check to make sure it worked before I bought it, mind you.
As far as games go, the fact is that the entire PC games industry is moribund except for a few players (Id, Blizzard, Microsoft and Bioware). I work in the game industry, and let me tell you that except for the few dedicated PC games publishers left, PC ports are an afterthought – it’s all console gaming now. So the issue of games is less and less relevant.
Regarding Cedega (which is not an emulator, btw), I’ve actually had quite a bit of luck. All the games I’ve wanted to play are supported, and one (Half-Life 2) actually installed better using Cedega than on my roommate’s Windows XP machine (it keeps crashing on the opening sequence with the G-man – I’ve looked on forums and I still can’t fix it…very frustrating). There’s a bit of irony there, but the fact is that the Cedega setup is actually more standardized than the myriad Windows installed out there…
BTW Crossover isn’t for games, though you can install a few with it.
in short; i would be a total linux user if:
1.i had support for my lexmark all in one, kooka nor xsane work with the scanner.
2.music production suites, ardour is not in the running with cakewalk sonar.
I use open office and it is just as good as office xp,this is on a windows xp machine.
I have ubuntu installed on another partition and have tried most other distros.
if it wasn’t for the printer scanner issue linux would be my main os, only using windows for my music production software.
I have personally asked a 100 people over the years: “what do you consider market share ”
I got 100 different answers.
I usual ask them, if they think that Windows is so much better than Linux, I get an answer like: Yes, yes, ofcourse. Windows is very good. bla bla bla.
So, I asked, did you pay the licence to microsoft for the OS.(….. silence)
Did you pay the licence for office xxx (…..silence )
Did you pay for A
Did you pay for B,
etc. etc. ( lots and lots of silence )
Next question. If the Government would FORCE you to choose between Linux and Paying the licence to MS, what would you do ?
2 seconds silence only.
We will use Linux ofcourse !!
So, as far as the *majority* is concerned ……..the cheapest is good enough and ready for the desktop.
And market share ……hmmm….very debatable
Not another Linux on the Desktop article… or should I say ‘OSX’ on Linux Article.
Get over it, and buy a mac if you’re so much of a fan.
Again, stop asking linux on desktops. Linux is a server OS.
Try ReactOS instead !
http://www.reactos.org
From the article:
“Linux also needs to leave behind their ubergeek image. Configuration panels are there for disciples, not the geeks. So don’t confront them with options that they would never set. Simply because as soon as one knows what the option is for, one would already have reached such a high level of experience with this operating system that one would be able to simply alter the desired files directly. So keep it simple and stupid.”
Okay, I’m going to have to disagree with this statement. Being something of a “disciple” myself (perhaps bordering on “geek”), and coming from the Windows world, I much prefer GUI interfaces, even for arcane settings. Put it in an “Advanced” tab or button, fine, but I’ll take a well-organized GUI control panel interface over a bunch of arcane text-file syntaxes in a convoluted variety of obscure files and directories any day.
The tools are there (YaST and SaX in Suse come to mind), they just need to break out of their distro-specific roles and start being used as standards across multiple distros.
These kind of articles are doing the best thing for Linux.Something that Windows have : advertising. Lot of it.
Wether Linux is good for desktop or not is less important.People start hearing about something else.And humans have one habbit : curiosity.
One day they will check,just for the sake of it and because IT’S FREE, a Linux distro and ,as expected,some will stick with it,some will threw it away.
I would say let them come.Maybe not at this pace,but once a month maybe.Big guys (MS,Apple) they know the potential of Linux (on the desktop as well).
Is for that they are founding these “independent” reviews.But the only thing they do is make people aware that THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE.
And that is important.
Sigh. I’ve heard the “Linux needs to unify and stop reinventing the wheel to be worth a darn” argument so many times. It seems quite compelling at first glance, and I have no doubt there is some truth to it.
But let’s use the same argument to study if human beings are ready to do international (and sometimes even interstate) interaction: “Different people from different countries speak different languages, write using different alphabets with the letters going sometimes left to right, sometimes right to left, sometimes top to bottom. They drive on different sides of the road, eat different foods, and have different customs and cultures.
Quite plainly all this is going to make international commerce and collaboration impossible. People need to unify. We must throw out every language in the world except one, every alphabet except one, every group of ethnic foods except one, and every culture and set of customs except one. We must all drive on the same side of the road, have the same speed limits, and listen to the same music. Only by doing this will people be able to understand one another and get ahead”.
See the problem here? Linux, like human culture and language, evolves at the whim of the participants, not at the point of a gun held by a dictator. That means splintering, parallel evolution, duplication of efforts, and lots of redundancy are inevitable. That hasn’t turned out to be disastrous for global business or collaboration, and I don’t think its going to be disastrous for Free and Open Source software.
See, Free really means free – people get to do what they want, not what they’re forced to do. Shocking, isn’t it?
-Gnobuddy
Well….. i still like windows,linux on desktop
or not
There is nothing more integrated in this world than KDE and its apps. Period. I´m sorry…. There is not, no matter how you look into it.
Apple comes close but even they have been abusing their HIG lately (A wise choice IMHO since the HIG should be more of a set of guidelines than a set of rules. Yeah Apple… Go ahead and change it whenever it makes sense.).
why did the author have to wait until the last paragraph before he nailed his windows fanboy flag onto the mast… he could have stated it right at the start and saved me some time.
to the author… you are 20 years old, come back and give us your thoughts when you have had at least 15 years experience working with systems, like the “vast majority” of regular users here.
He quotes KDE and Gnome as bad ideas for Linux ? He thinks lots of distros is a bad idea ?
hmmmm… Ubuntu is a distro that targets people mioving from Windows. It has a predefined selection of apps, and ONE desktop, GNOME
Sun Java Desktop, it has a predefined selection of apps, and ONE desktop, also Gnome
Novell Desktop, it has a predefined selection of apps, and ONE desktop, emmm, Gnome too
Can you see a pattern here ?
But what nearly made me choke on my coffee was that statement that Windows has been making vast improvements compared to Linux which has only been making small steps….. have you actually had a look at a linux man ?
> You could also give autopackage a shot, it works exactly like this (almost anyways)
Would you please stop promoting autopackage on every article you comment on ? This is getting on like spam recently, I see you commenting about autopackage on Slashdot, on Pro-Linux, on OSNews.com and probably other places too, in articles that are totally off topic to to what you promote.
What a fuck is your problem with autopackage?You don’t like it?Then don’t use it! You want to promote other,then do it.Fuck face.
> What a fuck is your problem with autopackage? You
> don’t like it? Then don’t use it! You want to
> promote other, then do it. Fuck face.
You seem to be embarrassing yourself in the public with this kind of statement and attack. I don’t have any problems with autopackage, I only have a problem to READ everywhere about it even in articles not related to it. It’s like someone would write about pizza boxes and someone shows up and write ‘hey have you tried autopackage’. I find this quite annoying and wrong. This article was all about Desktop Linux and not about autopackage. If that guy is such a fanboy of autopackage, then why not writing a new article just about it and have it published here, so people who don’t give a damn for it can skip it and read the realy interesting things.
You seem to be embarrassing yourself in the public with this kind of statement and attack
I have a thick skin and I come from civilizations outskirts.Thus I cannot be embarrassed.Not even by myself.
Like it or not,autopackage or any other packaging systems have everything to do with Linux on desktop. Your annoyance shows how lame your analogy is.If that guy was an autopackage fanboy ,you definitely hate it. Which is also wrong.So yes,get the fuck out of my face. At least I don’t hide myself under great name of Anonymous.
Well, Caesar died two thousand years before and in the meantime other strategies were developed that are at least as successfull.
If your oponent wants to conquer you with caesars strategy, the right thing to do is probably to fight a partisan or guerilla war.
Devide your own troops into very little forces, that your openent has no more substantial targets to attack.
MS-Word and Excell are rock solid Applications, no doubt. It is hard to believe that launching an attacking on those mighty armies will result in a victory for OSS. (Caesar would never attack such armies anytime sooner, than having successfully conquered all the remaining forces.)
That beeing said, the community shouldn’t focus on “Linux on the Desktop”, because the “desktop” is the big and mighty army of the enemy. Attacking the desktop is like rallying all your forces and attacking all the forces the enemy rallied so far. This would end up in a big and mighty clash with all forces of both sides. This isn’t what caesar strategy is.
The question is, how to devide the three big enemy forces, that build the heart of the desktop (Windows, Word and Excel.)
Let’s concentrate on single smaller Apps (like Firefox, Thunderbird, video- and music-players, p2p-apps) or even just very little things like RSS-feeds, blogs and blogcasting, adblock, firewalls and so on.
Pretty much anything that makes “good user experience” and lacks goot user experience in the opponents ranks will do.
Innovation with “big killer-apps” almost seems to be impossible nowadays, not even big companies are able to innovate a single new “big thing”. The small things are, what gives the “drive” these days … and that certainly is something, where those widespread OSS guerillias can score all lot.
Any attempt to create a “desktop” shouldn’t focus on the (buisiness) office, it should concentrate on the home users desktop.
Remind yourself what people want to do at home … surfing, watching video, listen music, teaching their children something (that includes gaming to some extent, but a gaming-platform can be considered a whole big topic/army of its own, nothing to launch a big attack right now.) … and don’t forget the most generalized but as well the most important part … communicating with releatives, friends other people.
These are the things, where the enemy forces are devided and where OSS can achieve a lot of victories not the “office desktop” an not the “gaming-platform”.
But as always, 2 people with 4 opinions.
why do you windows fanboys always bring up marketshare ?
can you not understand that you cannot judge the uptake of a system which can be given away as a FREE download against something that has to be payed for ?
Linux marketshare is miniscule if you judge it on sales from RedHat, SuSe, Xandros etc etc.. add them together and you have a larger marketshare…. so what ?
how many people who actually use linux bought it ?
most… sorry, to use the example of the article….
the “vast majority” of linux users, download a free version…
if there was a count of linux users, then these windows fanboys would need to think again about this marketshare.
retards
“if there was a count of linux users, then these windows fanboys would need to think again about this marketshare. ”
http://www.linuxcounter.org
Of course, even that site has to make a guess on the number of Linuxes out there, still interesting though.
that site is assuming that everyone who uses linux has been there and registered
1.5million is nothing, considering there has been 9million downloads of mandrake 10.1 alone….
Your’re right, about the numbers of registered users, that’s nothing … and obviously nobody is forced to register.
But you might want to take a look on the “guess on linux-users” and the methodology used on that.
(I once used folding@home OS distribution to calculate the number of linux-users worldwide. The result is pretty much the same … ~30 million.)