Home > Linux > In Pursuit of Good Desktop Linux In Pursuit of Good Desktop Linux Submitted by anonymous 2005-08-05 Linux 47 Comments So, you are not sure what makes a Linux distribution a good desktop Linux but you know it when you see it, right? Perhaps but perhaps not. So, what does it take to be a good desktop Linux distribution? About The Author Thom Holwerda Follow me on Twitter @thomholwerda 47 Comments 2005-08-05 10:12 pm …that Xandros doesn’t include Konquerer. Because we all agree that without Konquerer Linux isn’t ready for the desktop, right? 2005-08-05 10:33 pm Is this article a joke? I’m not sure if I understand the humor. 2005-08-05 10:48 pm Jedd Well personally I find SlackWare Linux a perfect desktop linux as well as for my server, and file-print server. SlackWare is just great, but I DO understand it is not for the “new-to-linux” crowd. Mandrake (now Mandriva, gay name, IMHO. :-p), is great for the beginner, easy to setup, loaded with graphical tools , and lots of autodetection features. I reccomend this distro above all others to people I know as a good way to “break into” linux without getting to overwhelmed. These are some other great distros IMO: 1) SLAX (http://slax.linux-live.org), SlackWare / KDE Based, live CD, but can be installed to the HD. REALLY easy to re-master your own blend by adding modules, etc. 2) VectorLinux (http://vectorlinux.com) 3) Suse (http://www.novell.com/linux/suse/) [personally I have never liked this distro, but that’s just personal taste, but it IS a good desktop/beginner distro) 4) Yoper (http://www.yoper.com), good distro. ) There are a few others I could list here. but you get the idea. –Jed 4) 2005-08-05 10:48 pm Jedd ^ Sorry for the extra “4)” typo. hehe 2005-08-05 10:52 pm By a good Desktop Linux you mean a system that administers the whole pc without asking the user for details, gives him a determined interface to start working and guides him with assistants like M* Office Clip. Right? Well, that won’t happen for two reasons: 1- Like it or not, the user needs some EDUCATION to use a computer. If you think WinXP is easy to use, I tell you that I have to help some of my friends almost every week, because they crap their pants everytime they see an error message, or try to do some everyday tasks. I myself have spent whole afternoons trying to connect two XP computers to share files, and I could fix that problem after two weeks, when somebody told me to install the IPX protocol. Why do I need the Novell protocol to connect M* computers? I still don’t know. 2- From the beginning, Linux was created and designed for performance, security, stability, to be used for professionals, not for ease of use, and trying to make an easy-to-use Linux goes against natura, distros like Mandrake, Fedora, Suse and the like are botchery that gives more problems and headaches than the ones they fix. Nuff said. 2005-08-05 11:00 pm Celerate I don’t like the name, but Mandriva has always worked the best for me. I had some success with Slackware, and still have some attachment to the cleanlyness and simplicity of that distribution, but at the same time it requires more maintenance than I’m willing to give it which is why Mandriva is still the best match for me. The main reason I’m still using Windows XP on my laptop is because of hardware support, there is a real problem here. Hardware vendors won’t write drivers until Linux has enough users, and most potential users won’t come over to Linux until there are good drivers. 2005-08-05 11:01 pm cyberpsi openbsd faq has answered this question already… why people keep making the same mistakes? 1.10 – Can I use OpenBSD as a desktop system? This question is often asked in exactly this manner — with no explanation of what the asker means by “desktop”. The only person who can answer that question is you, as it depends on what your needs and expectations are. 2005-08-05 11:40 pm This is definitely the worst desktop article ever written. It basically repeats the same thing over and over, andthe gist of the whole article can be summed up in one line: The best linux desktop is relative, The best linux desktop is one that allows you to acces your windows files after installation by mounting NTFS partitions, and sharing files with other windows on the Lan. There are two distros that allow this: Mandriva , xandros. Mandriva is the best however because xandros doesnt include konquerer fora web browser. Buy mandriva yadda ydadda If you read that article it may kill brain cells, as it repeats those lines over and over. For those of you who want to see your linux files the manly way: mount /dev/hda /mnt Not that complicated. 2005-08-06 12:19 am morgoth hahaha, they’re talking about good usability on that page layout! I don’t think so! Dave 2005-08-06 12:25 am Would be easy enough for any grandma to use, but modular enough so that power users could tweak it just to their liking, and geeks can run it soley from the CLI if they want. When I think of the perfect desktop system, I think of an analogy to Directory Opus, the file manager. When you first install it, it’s very usable out of the box and you might even swear that it is little more than a Powerdesk clone. But the more you use it, the more you start to discover all of its features and the more you learn, the more proficient you get with it. By the time you have mastered it, you’re doing god-like things with it that nobody would’ve ever guessed a file manager would be able to do That’s the right way, IMHO. Make it basic enough out of the box so that anyone can use it, but hide the advanced features only enough so that those who want to find them can do so with relative ease. How does this apply to the perfect Linux desktop? Take the package manager, for instance. Make an easy to use GUI-based package manager, but allow geeks to completely turn it off/uninstall it and go CLI all the way. This way, everybody wins 2005-08-06 12:30 am pravda All this bitching and moaning about “desktop Linux” and the magic ingredients needed to make it work. Everyone has a different recipe for Linux desktop soup. But they all taste bad. Linux cannot deliver on being a “desktop” OS until Linux is redesigned from the bottom up. Today Linux is a poor man’s UNIX clone with UI copied from Microsoft Windows. That fearsome combo is not a good base for any OS other than specialized server apps and a few other niches. And on the whole is rather unappealing to many people. The choice of desktop OS will not be “Microsoft or Linux”. It may be “Microsoft or Mac OS X”. But my guess is that it will be something that is not on the radar today. Something more advanced that the cruddy software people have to choose from today. 2005-08-06 5:10 am Celerate “Linux cannot deliver on being a “desktop” OS until Linux is redesigned from the bottom up.” That is a gross and inaccurate generalisation, it really doesn’t say anything at all except: “I want to say X is crap and sound like I know what I’m talking about”. Try elaborating on this if you care to discuss it further. “Today Linux is a poor man’s UNIX clone with UI copied from Microsoft Windows. “ That is an obvious copy and paste right out of the troll handbook. The funny thing is that the few similarities between Linux and Windows are either because there is no equally good alternative way of doing things, or because the same people that complain about Linux being similar to Windows were also the same people who asked for those similar features. Come on Pravda, if you’re trying to say something think it through instead of airing raw frustration. If, however, you are in fact just trying to be contrary, or are trying to troll then please don’t do it here. 2005-08-06 6:00 am pravda The funny thing is that the few similarities between Linux and Windows are either because there is no equally good alternative way of doing things, or because the same people that complain about Linux being similar to Windows were also the same people who asked for those similar features. You know progress can only be made when you start with the truth. And the truth is that it is much harder to come up with new good UI ideas and much easier to copy from Windows. For example, Borland invented the modern usage of right-click. Even BeOS came up with some new GUI ideas. As did Amiga. As did Xerox PARC and Apple. There are companies that THINK and make new systems to make things work better for people. Much as I do very much like to think one day there will be alternatives to Windows for many people, the road there will not be through wholesale copying of Microsoft Windows. That allows for precious little evolution not to mention exposure to a company that will only win the future through corruption (including legal attacks). For Linux to have a place, it must do the work to make a real place for itself. There is no substitute to the integrity of doing the work, the thinking, the invention. I have used many Linux distros and they are all cheap imitations of Windows. None of them has a modern software installation system. They all have totally incomprehensible command shells that require a UNIX/Linux guru to run. The apps are all non-standard and store stuff in directories that have names based on some computer science crap of decades ago. Coming up with flimsy excuses on why Linux is a cheap copy of Windows just does not cut it. Maybe the downtrodden people of today cannot bear to listen to words urging them to a higher standard. I would not be surprised. But it doesn’t change the truth. 2005-08-06 6:33 am Celerate “You know progress can only be made when you start with the truth. And the truth is that it is much harder to come up with new good UI ideas and much easier to copy from Windows.” I did start with the truth, you complained that the graphical side of Linux was a cheap immitation of Windows, and now you are making it sound like it was something completely different. I’ve used KDE and Gnome and I can tell you for a fact that the parts which people such as yourself claim were taken from Windows, such as the concept of a right click menu and a main desktop panel + application list button, were chosen because to the majority of people it’s the best system. Linux has been the setting for lots of innovation; I’ve seen many features in KDE long before they were implemented in Windows. ” For example, Borland invented the modern usage of right-click. Even BeOS came up with some new GUI ideas. As did Amiga. As did Xerox PARC and Apple. There are companies that THINK and make new systems to make things work better for people. “ KDE and Gnome have innovated as well, I can’t remember the specifics because it’s been a while since I was really involved in Linux, but KDE definately came up with grouping in the taskbar long before Windows XP took the idea for itself. I can definately e-mail my other fellow Linux users and get a bigger list if you still stubbornly insist that Linux doesn’t innovate and everything there was taken from Windows. “I have used many Linux distros and they are all cheap imitations of Windows. None of them has a modern software installation system. They all have totally incomprehensible command shells that require a UNIX/Linux guru to run. The apps are all non-standard and store stuff in directories that have names based on some computer science crap of decades ago.” – Linux distros are definitely not cheap immitations of Windows, you are trolling. – Linux also has brilliant package managers such as apt-get and urpmi that are years ahead of what Windows has. – Linux doesn’t need for you to use those “incomprehensible command shells”, Mandriva definately doesn’t and neither does SUSE, Xandros or Linspire. You are really making yourself sounds like a case of pebkac. – The directory system in Linux is actually fairly straightforward, and not difficult to understand if you would take ten minutes to read the documentation. There are some people like youself that dislike the filesystem, and they have decided to put together distributions with modernized folder layouts. Because of the advanced package management in Linux keeping folders separate isn’t as critical, and for many people it provides a much simpler and straightforward solution. 2005-08-06 7:09 am pravda When Linux gets to 5% market share for mainstream desktops in the Western world, let us talk again. Without Linux being redesigned, I don’t believe this day will come. Windows got its stack from BSD, not Linux. BSD is of much higher quality in many respects vs. Linux. Grouping in the task bar was done far before Linux by Windows add-ons. No, not by Microsoft. There are so many UI features in KDE for instance that are straight lifts from Windows, it would take weeks to enumerate them. I am not going to waste further time debating simple facts. When there is something that Linux contributes that is easily seen by many people as a contribution then that will be a good day. Today there is nothing technical where that Linux can stand up and say “this is our innovation”. Having been involved with personal computers since the early days, I can see that the Linux UI is a cheap copy of Windows based on a patchwork imitative implementation of UNIX. I could make a list of hundreds of things that simply do not work properly because they were not designed well in Linux. Sound is one big area for one. I find it sad that all dissentful personal opinions are classified as “trolling”. Using insults to control communication is the mark of someone who has no foundation for debate, but is just a shill with an agenda. In today’s world, there is a great cry for simplicity. I don’t see Linux delivering on any substantial simplicity until it is redesigned. This is my opinion. 2005-08-06 7:27 am “In today’s world, there is a great cry for simplicity. I don’t see Linux delivering on any substantial simplicity until it is redesigned. This is my opinion.” Your opinion is stupid. I am not going to waste further time debating simple facts. It would take weeks to enumerate them. 2005-08-06 12:41 am >Thus we see absolutely no acceptable reason that Xandros should not include Konqueror in its Linux products Urmm Hello? 1> Open command line 2> Type Konqueror 3> Hit Enter 4> Use Konqueror to your hearts content You can even make an icon for it on your Desktop and include it in your menu. Who knew!? 2005-08-06 1:33 am Linus is an ADEQUATE desktop OS RIGHT NOW. The only thing slowing adoption is the necessity to re-educate people who never wanted to learn Windows in the first place, so they’re doubly resistant to learning Linux. As somebody I know often says, “People use computers not because they want to, but because they have to.” But since people today are actually THROWING OUT their Windows PCs due to spyware and buying NEW ones, I think sooner or later they will be amenable to expending a few brain cells to noticing that Linux and Windows are similar enough to make learning Linux a relatively simple task. I had to learn Windows 98/2000/XP AND Linux at the same time (and I’m over fifty five years old), and I can tell you there isn’t a PENNY’S worth of difference between them as far as usability. (Security and reliability are another matter entirely – Linux wins hands down here.) As I say often: Windows is CRAP. Linux is ALSO CRAP. BUT – Linux is FREE CRAP. 2005-08-06 1:35 am Linux is already a better desktop than windows XP. Every time I have to boot my win xp for play games I hate it. It is slower than kde 3.x/linux on my Pentium 4 3GHz with 768Mb RAM and Nvidia GeForce video adapter ! Fuck if idiots have no brain to use a CLI. When everybody was using MS-DOS people don’t care about CLIs but after win9x stupid people began to think they can use computers. 2005-08-06 1:52 am Simply bizarre article, with a strange obsession over Konqueror which is ironic on a site called MozillaQuest. 2005-08-06 1:55 am morganth You evaluate a Linux desktop’s readiness based on its ability to… mount ntfs drives and browse Samba networks? Hello, a few lines in /etc/fstab can do that for you on _any_ Linux distro today. Is this guy serious? Oh wait, I’m sorry. The actual criterion is that it must include the “best web browser on the market…” namely, “Konqueror.”? What the hell? Where does OSNews find some of this stuff? Mozillaquest? 2005-08-06 2:28 am So why doesn’t Linspire Five-O meet your standards? 2005-08-06 2:30 am Linux isn’t ready for the desktop just because everyone uses Windows at work so they’re comfortable with it. Please no garbage about installing Linux, how many people can install Windows? Heck, people get viruses and malware and throw out the Windows box and buy new ones per an article here and Slashdot recently. 2005-08-06 3:10 am That their website is soooo UGLY. Come on people it’s not that hard to choose an appropriate font and menu style. The early 90s style of htmling is OVER! 2005-08-06 4:27 am I like the click and run of CnR in linspire – the same is in klik in the debian/knoppix based Kanotix – except free. I’ve got a nice ibm thinkpad t23 that it flies nicely on. I picked it up recently for just over 500 cdn. Thus it works.. my friend just bought a $1200 acer from newegg, i think he’s already having problems with xp. I told him to get an older laptop, and find a linux distro on it he would like, linspire, mandriva, k12-ltsp, slackware, ubuntu, kanotix, xandros etc and I have more, in typical win-user fashion he said ‘ linux is evil it won’t run my windows programs ‘ oh yeah? like what…(as his usage is very light) -word and excel.. sigh. He deserves all the spyware and crap, his laptop is ~1 week old and its already slowed down. This is not FUD, this is a useless/clueless user who clicks on popups and runs everything as an administrator. I told him to run antispyware, he doesn’t want to install it, i told him to make a user, he refuses, i told him to not use office, he installed it anyways – he doesn’t NEED it, he just writes essays for his courses. He’s a self proclaimed windows expert…. Its an industry that needs a facelift. Yeah, i know, no flames, pointless post – but he’s already considering running a recovery cd and he’s asking me for help – posting this on my couch, on my thinkpad, comforatably from my couch using wireless. some just don’t get it. -One 2005-08-06 5:14 am The points adressed on the article would make for a better “Windows interoperability” than a good Linux desktop. I didn´t bother to read it all because, like already pointed out by a previous poster, it is kinda redundant with the same phrases over and over and the summary kinda suggested that they only mentioned issues with using a Windows network and mounting a Windows partition. While these are indeed two good reasons to evaluate a good Linux desktop, they are just a small part of the whole experience. What makes a good desktop is a responsive GUI, stability, security, good looks, crisp and readable fonts, availability of good applications, API/ABI stability among other things. Linux already has achieved a lot in some criterias and has some room to improvements in others, but what really matters is that it is already usable now. It is easier to install and mantain than Windows (depending on the distro, of course) for people with light requirements (Browse, e-mail, chat, listen music, etc.). It is sad that nowadays people seems to be aiming for a Linux more tailored to Windows users – and being plagued forever for not being just like Windows by these same users – instead of making Linux better for Linux users, whose couldn´t care less if something is done different on Linux. DeadFish Man 2005-08-06 5:40 am Freakin’ hilarious. Just look at it from that point of view. As someone said, judging the “best Linux desktop distro” based on its ability to mount windows shares (which they carefully explain that this is like “mapping a drive”) and ability to see network shares (which, let’s be honest, just barely started working correctly in XP). Strange obsession with Mandriva and Konqueror, all of this on a circa 1992 website. Hopefully they weren’t really serious… hmm… 2005-08-06 6:49 am Coming up with flimsy excuses on why Linux is a cheap copy of Windows just does not cut it. Linux doesn’t ow anyone an excuse about anything.It’s an OS for people who can think but don’t necessary have the time nor desire to learn more basic skills you have to master on any modern (desktop) OS. I have used many Linux distros and they are all cheap imitations of Windows I’m glad they skipped the virus part:-) Maybe the downtrodden people of today cannot bear to listen to words urging them to a higher standard. Exactly they can’t indeed bear the sound of learning and thinking for themselves. The apps are all non-standard and store stuff in directories that have names based on some computer science crap of decades ago. So you judge quality on the date of origin?You must really hate your car to,the princype of the wheels underneath is been thought of for the first time more than a few decades ago.Still they function.And so does the file hierarchy have it’s purpose.Linux(*) partitions don’t have to be defragmented,saves time and money. For Linux to have a place, it must do the work to make a real place for itself. There is no substitute to the integrity of doing the work, the thinking, the invention. Where did MS get his tcp/ip-stack from? I quess you have never been in a server room?While you sincerely like it or not Linux and apps will continue to evolve.Linux allready has three times the growth of MS on the server market.That growth will eventually bring even better hardware support to Linux and the desktop growth will increase.It’s not that it’s obcessive but a simple realistic view on the nearby future.Take the financial world,most silently migrated to Linux. 2005-08-06 7:28 am In today’s world, there is a great cry for simplicity. I don’t see Linux delivering on any substantial simplicity until it is redesigned. This is my opinion. The ultimate ease of simplification is an utopia unless one is willing to migrate to a unhabitat island somewhere in the south pacific and even there you have to make a lot of choices.Life is full of it.So get used to it and start thinking for yourself.A lot of problems aren’t necessarily one.They are often created to make money. 2005-08-06 8:34 am pravda A lot of problems aren’t necessarily one.They are often created to make money. I agree with you here. The complexity in Linux is created by IBM who derives massive service revenue from Linux. IBM pushes the design of Linux to be as incompatible with simplicity as possible. Because simplicity for IBM is bad for the bottom line. There will be a new Linux — not called Linux — that redefines computing. It will be designed for simplicity and reliability. But it is not here yet. 2005-08-06 9:03 am Absolutely hopeless article, both in terms of content and awful website styling… I haven’t used Mandrake for a few years but the quality control issues drove me away from that distribution. For new users, I would have to recommend Ubuntu at this point in time. Hardware support on this distro still needs work but it provides a good taste of Linux software and rapid updates. Apt is obviously a superior installer but the Mac style of installing is obviously easier. My only complaint is a dearth of applications on Ubuntu. Making a second disk available as an optional extra would be good for those of us without highspeed network connections, so that a wider range of GNOME applications can be included. It would be good if quality applications not normally found in other distros were available too, such as Leafpad. Hopefully, they will take this direction in the future as Ubuntu has the potential to become the killer desktop distribution for those who prefer GNOME. 2005-08-06 9:30 am A good Linux UI should not look like mozillaquest.com web site where the article is posted. 2005-08-06 10:09 am MadDwarf Troll article that says very little beyond “Can it see my network” and “Can it see my Windows partition”. If it had been an article about “Is Linux ready for the network” or “Is Linux ready for Dual-booting” then it may have made more sense. Followed closely by the troll comments. “My OS is better than your OS!” “My OS can beat up your OS!” “Your OS is so bloated … ” “Your OS looks like poo” etc … And there was me hoping the new team would make some improvements. 2005-08-06 10:19 am So, you are not sure what makes a Linux distribution a good desktop Linux but you know it when you see it, right? Perhaps but perhaps not. So, what does it take to be a good desktop Linux distribution? > > *Sounds of footsteps echoing in a empty building such as a empty warehouse or abandoned factory* “This is the mind of the typical OSNews Editor or OSNews article Submitter” Explains the tour guide explains to the tour group as he leads the group on its tour though the strange and mysterious relems of the universe…. 2005-08-06 10:35 am Linux has been ready for the desktop for ages, just that 99% of the desktop is unaware or not ready for linux 2005-08-06 12:10 pm It’s really way ahead of its time. http://livecd.gnustep.org LOL 2005-08-06 3:14 pm It is SOOOOO terribly boring. Is linux ready for the desktop? Yeah, sure it is if it is configured correctly but so what? How many people are actually going to bother going out and installing a brand new operating system? Not many. Gosh I have been using linux as my main desktop since 1997. That was when I used Wingz spreadhseet, WordPerfect 8.0 word processor, WindowMaker as my window manager, FSviewer as my file manager, Postillion for my email, I think I used kppp to get online, and used neXt themes for gftp and gimp and other apps. Now that I think about it I had a pretty uniform look and feel and it was a hella fast. 2005-08-06 3:39 pm re_re what i find ironic is when vista comes out and impliments a bunch of features that will have been in kde and gnome for years, most people will just assume it was a MS innovation and the same people will say….. linux sucks because it dosen’t innovate and they will say…linux is a cheap copy of windows when in fact windows in some respects will be an expensive (and probably poorly inplimented) copy of linux kinda funny really 2005-08-06 4:45 pm when Linux is ready for the desktop: Anybody will be able to walk into a store and buy a system with linux preinstalled instead of Microsoft windows or when a mega company like dell say “we recommend using linux instead of windows”. 2005-08-06 4:50 pm Mystilleef More contributors, less whiners. 2005-08-06 7:12 pm hraq Well. I was new to Linux once and I know how difficult it was to deal with an operating system that refuses to show you the content of CD when you insert it; what was their solution: You have to know what is the CD Drive file form /dev folder; which was (hdc) then write a command line to mount it “mount /dev/hdc /mnt/cdrom”. Then you have to define the file system of the CD “iso9660” and to add this syntax to the command line. This was too much for me! Second, when you have a program and want to install it you basiclly have to be a command line trooper. ( write “rpm -Uhv <path to file>” and even though it never worked smoothly. Could you ever imagin how difficult was it to install nVidia dirvers. ( first install development packages because you have updated you kernel; second turn off your Xserver then install the package then reboot then attempt to configure the drivers to support 3D acceleration) What I like here to say is that xandros was the only linux OS that showed how smart it is to solve all of these issues with respectable stability. Yes stability because otherwise I will put mandriva 2005LE instead of xandros; mandriva is so unstable OS since version 7,why I don’t know?!! 2005-08-06 7:16 pm slaxmod1: http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=26859 2005-08-06 8:11 pm It takes commercial software companies that take Linux porting seriously. The OS is fine, just need some native options that other platforms have. 2005-08-06 10:20 pm The apps are there, they are just the unknown (or scary) variants of other well marketed apps. Some opensource apps are even better I think (in quality, usage etc.) just because of the people use app A with it’s proprietary fileformat, codec, or whatever that is forcing others to use it also, it’s all very cleaver tactics. (there are companies actually begging to switch their desktops to unix or linux, but pissing their pants it might not be 110% MS office compatible in case they have to exchange files with a buisness partner that runs windows) It’s not about readyness, It’s not the Apps, it’s not this that or such and so. It’s about what is being pushed and what is known/trusted by the majority of the users. 2005-08-08 1:15 pm The apps are there, they are just the unknown (or scary) variants of other well marketed apps. Its not the apps its the thievery quite frankly. If people did not regularily steal or leach copies of these apps off their companies sucking down a liscense etc… People would be quite amazed at the idea of a free desktop where apps like the gimp and OpenOffice or others roam free of charge. But that is not the case. There is such a huge culture of theft in the PC world that people do not care if they can get an app free because they get the commercial stuff free of charge from friends or family or download sources. The warez culture has so jaded the population that free has little or no meaning or value to the consumers out there in the world. If everyone actually had to pay for Office then there would be a great value placed on a truly free alternative. The culture of “Hey buddy I can get you a copy of Office, Dreamweaver and Photoshop with no problem … why are you paying money for it?” wore on me and my ideals and became one of the reasons I sought to use free software. While not as feature-rich many times as the commercial alternatives I actually prefer the interface and find Abiword, gnumeric and the gimp as examples more comfortable to use than the pay-alternatives. Free has no value though in a world where theft has essentially made all these apps “free” for the using. Warez kiddies in a sense are one of the biggest detriment to free software adoption. 2005-08-07 7:02 pm John Nilsson This article got one thing right at least. It talks about a dekstop Linux as oposed to Linux on the desktop. I just wish more peole would realize the truth in this. You can talk about a linux system but you really can’t talk about linux as a system… 2005-08-08 3:16 am They are all ready for the desktop but they are not ready for people who want convenience. If you don’t wanna mount your drives or never open a prompt, use a Mac.