Submitted by “10 days? Well that hardly sounds hard enough! Sure, it doesn’t sound so hard but take in account that over 500 million of us use a Windows OS at least once, everyday of the week and you too will see that going cold turkey from XP to KDE might be harder or more limiting than first thought.”
10 Days as a Linux User: A GNU Perspective on Things
121 Comments
-
2005-08-23 4:50 pm
jeffbaxAh I see..
well… I still hate the Gimp
haha… I really wish Corel would put Paintshop Pro or something on Linux, thats about the only other roadblock in my way.That or someone fork GIMP and give it a real GUI.
2005-08-21 7:46 pm
2005-08-21 7:46 pm
Anonymous
Ummm… Someone studying Computer Science has no experience using Linux? They use Windows 2000 for everything, and the instructors get angry if you use anything else? Other students are amazed that non-Windows systems can take notes and connect to a network? It wasn’t too long ago that I went to the University of Maryland for CS. All programming projects involved compiling on RH Linux using vi and make. However, you were free to use whatever you wanted otherwise. Sorry, I just get the value of a Computer Science education that doesn’t involve some sort of Unix-like system…
-
2005-08-21 8:07 pm
evertComputer Science with a Windows 2000 only attitude, yeah I wonder how those kids can learn something I would like to call “comparative operating systems studies”. Without comparing it will be difficult to really understand the benefits of your OS of choice. Comparing different possibilities and technologies is a Good Thing for CS students, and should be applauded. I wonder how much real knowlede such instructors really have.
-
2005-08-21 10:46 pm
Ronald VosComputer Science with a Windows 2000 only attitude, yeah I wonder how those kids can learn something I would like to call “comparative operating systems studies”.
It was more that they weren’t allowed to install their own software on the computers, and the computers already had a paid for OS installed. After all, when asked, he was allowed to play with a livecd.
-
2005-08-22 5:17 am
-
Anonymous
Yep. I just graduated from SDSM&T in May 2005, and the only in Computer Science 1 and 2 (the first two courses) were project required to work in Windows (VS 6.0 at the time). After that, all courses required projects to work in Linux/Solaris and had to have a makefile for building project. Now, you didn’t have to write your programs in Linux, but they had better build on a Linux system, or else you might not get a very nice grade. I remember my Data Structures professor (the first class I took that required programs to build in Linux or Solaris) handed out a couple sheets of paper with common Unix commands and common vi commands at the beginning of the semester. He said something along the lines of “you don’t have to use vi, but it’s what I use, so it’s the editor I will give you help with.” Now I use vim on Linux and Windows, and find the Unix environment much better than the Windows environment. (My Operating Systems professor was an Emacs fan, so we gave eachother a hard time about our editors of choice.)
By the way, how do you study something like Operating Systems on Windows? I guess if the CS program is all about Java programming, you don’t need OS, but then I can’t see why you can call yourself a CS major.
2005-08-21 7:52 pm
zombie process
I keep thinking about his last day, and how he talked about people at his local LUG telling him that linux is a fad. This part of the write up bugs me. I have come to the conclusion there are four possibilities surrounding the situation:
1) The author is lying, and never actually attended a LUG meeting. He made that part up.
2) The author never attended a LUG meeting, but mistakenly talked with a group of tourists in the local mall food court.
3) The author is an insufferable prat, and the LUG members told him that in the hopes that he not return. Ever.
4) The author’s local LUG sucks. Not everything at a LUG meeting needs to be linux advocacy, but describing linux as a fad to a newcomer is inexcusable.
-
2005-08-21 10:02 pm
elsewhereI keep thinking about his last day, and how he talked about people at his local LUG telling him that linux is a fad. This part of the write up bugs me. I have come to the conclusion there are four possibilities surrounding the situation:
1) The author is lying, and never actually attended a LUG meeting. He made that part up.
2) The author never attended a LUG meeting, but mistakenly talked with a group of tourists in the local mall food court.
3) The author is an insufferable prat, and the LUG members told him that in the hopes that he not return. Ever.
4) The author’s local LUG sucks. Not everything at a LUG meeting needs to be linux advocacy, but describing linux as a fad to a newcomer is inexcusable.
I dunno, I would consider linux a fad on some levels and I’m not surprised that people that are serious about linux (ie. a LUG) would think so. Many people/newbies have only a superficial interest in it because it’s new (to them) or the press it’s getting, but they quickly lose interest and fall back into the comfort zone (Windows). How many posts on this board have been along the lines of “I tried to install xxx on my system but it didn’t yyy or I can’t play zzz so it sucks and I uninstalled it and went back to Windows”? These people aren’t serious about linux, since linux requires a commitment to embrace something new, bumps and all (which I think the author made a serious attempt at).
Doesn’t mean I think linux is going away, on the contrary I think it will keep gaining more and more momentum but the hype will subside and people will start getting down to business with it. Linux could probably replace 80% of the existing desktop platforms out there if people looked at what they really use their systems for. But I do think that these articles that focus on installing linux as a replacement for Windows kind of miss the mark. The people who’s opinions will really determine the future of desktop linux will be the sysadmins that roll it out across corp. desktops; the users that interact with the desktop for standard applications without having to install/configure; the people who can purchase a system with linux pre-installed and properly configured and just focus on using it etc. etc. At the end of the day these are the challenges that Microsoft overcame and has made them the default, they’re the challenges that Linux will have to overcome to become accepted as a viable desktop in the marketplace.
But right now, I would agree it is a bit of a fad for many people.
Just my 2c.
-
zombie process
I dunno, I would consider linux a fad on some levels and I’m not surprised that people that are serious about linux (ie. a LUG) would think so. Many people/newbies have only a superficial interest in it because it’s new (to them) or the press it’s getting, but they quickly lose interest and fall back into the comfort zone (Windows). How many posts on this board have been along the lines of “I tried to install xxx on my system but it didn’t yyy or I can’t play zzz so it sucks and I uninstalled it and went back to Windows”? These people aren’t serious about linux, since linux requires a commitment to embrace something new, bumps and all (which I think the author made a serious attempt at).
Okay – this is a very good point, however I wouldn’t call this phenomenon a fad. I’d call it tentative steps followed by succumbing to fear of the unknown. I’d also call a good bit of it straight up bullshit – ie many of these people *never* installed linux. Trolling, in other words.
For what it’s worth, I’d lean towards #4, especially if he was basing what he wrote on the off the cuff comments of one or two people rather than the etched in stone mantra of the LUG.
2005-08-21 8:50 pm
DoctorPepper
I work on Windows 2000 all day. I use Debian on my Linux workstation and servers, have a dual-boot Windows XP and Debian notebook, and use an Apple iMac with OSX as well. I have no problems switching between these operating systems, and I would suspect there are a whole lot of folks out there, using different OS’s each and every day, with no problems switching between them.
While I can see that a person new to Linux would have a bit of difficulty adjusting to using it on the desktop, most of those same people had a tremendous difficulty adjusting from Windows 3.1 to Windows 9X, and from Windows 9X to XP. Once you get used to a particular desktop, using it on a daily basis, switching to something else is always traumatic and requires a bit of time to get used to. The more you do it, the easier it gets.
My wife, who is hardly a computer “jock” made the transition from Windows 98 to Mandrake Linux on the desktop back in 2000, then over to OSX in 2002, with minimal difficulties. Yes, I was there to help when she ran in to problems, but she did learn the systems in record time.
People, especially the media “pundits” are making a mountain out of a mole-hill, just to pull more people over to their sites to read their tripe. It just isn’t that difficult of a task to switch desktop environments.
-
2005-08-22 1:05 am
ma_dIt’s easy for users. It’s hard for power users and administrators.
I have no problems between Digital Unix 4, 10 dists of linux, fbsd, and OS X; but that’s because they’re all Unices. And with the “Unix Rosetta Stone” I can translate some of the programs I’m most dependant on like “dmesg.”
And when a Windows box breaks: Knoppix
. Unless it’s a software problem, but they hardly get used enough to have those.I wish the article weren’t slashdotted…
-
DoctorPepper
“It’s easy for users. It’s hard for power users and administrators.”
At the risk of sounding like a pompous ass here, I’d like to say that no, I think you’re wrong there. Or at least not completely right.
I am a power user. I have been for a very long time now. I was an MS-DOS power user back in the mid 80’s to early 90’s, a Windows 3.1 power user, 98, NT, 2000, etc. While I won’t lay claim to being a Linux/Unix adminsistrator, I do believe I’ve progressed, in the past eight years of using Linux and Unix-like operating systems, to at least the level of power user.
To me, there are no problems. I realize there are some differences between the way commands work in Linux and FreeBSD, but the basic command stays the same between os’s. FreeBSD offers some commands that aren’t on Linux, Solaris has some of it’s own as well.
I guess it would also depend on how much time you spend in each environment on a daily basis. I have the great fortune of being able to work in a multitude of os’s each and every day, so it always stays fresh for me.
2005-08-21 9:31 pm
Anonymous
1. Realize there are other equaly good Operating Environments out there.
2. Realize all things different take some time getting used to.
3. Begin poking around and reading up
4. Try to find the similarities between this new environment and your old one.
5. Explore the deeper concepts in this new environment.
2005-08-21 9:52 pm
Anonymous
The author “works in robotical and anatomical engineering”. Did anyone catch this? AFAIK, most such laboratories use Linux/Unix as their development environments. He admits to this too.
He evidently knows (or should know) a lot more about Linux than he is apparently willing to admit. So this article can’t be written from the perspective of a Linux newbie.
So don’t get the idea that this reflects experiences of a n average Windows user switching to Linux for the first time.
2005-08-21 11:18 pm
Anonymous
http://img305.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot3bl.png
how does that look dusty?
It’s not dusty, but it’s ugly as hell … seems to exemplify Linux on the desktop quite nicely.
2005-08-22 12:00 am
2005-08-22 2:20 am
monkeyhead
if you’re happy using w2k then why are you whining about linux not footing the bill for you? use whatever tool works best for you.
personally linux has more features that i want in my home PC and allows me to use the computer in the way I want to, so i run it at home.
At work I work a lot with PLC’s and almost every PLC manufacturer writes their development software for the Microsoft platform, so I use XP.
whatever tool gets the job done…
-
Anonymous
>if you’re happy using w2k then why are you whining about linux not footing the bill for you? use whatever tool works best for you.
I am not whining. It is true, I’m an happy w2k user. I am practically using only free software (FireFox, OpenOffice, LaTeX, Python), so you understand I want to give Linux a try.
Linux seems to me a strange phenomenon. I’m not interested in knowing that distro A can do this and that. My questions are different. I do not understand why my mouse is working with the distro A and not with the distro B, why I can use the euro sign on distro C and not on distro D, why are the basics so different among the distros. All points of this type seems really strange to me, and never discussed.
2005-08-22 2:43 am
Anonymous
I started (or attempted to start) using Linux with a modern graphics card a few years back when I started university, just out of plain curiosity. My buddy and I downloaded the ISO images of Red Hat Linux 8.0, and from that point forward, it all went to shit.
I figured it would be no problem, I used Sun’s Solaris quite a bit so I understood the shell at least. Install went well, even though I was confused why I needed seven million partitions which I had to allocate manually and to have a root password since it was a single user machine. After my install, I restarted my machine, saw a bunch of ugly crap being spewed to the screen, and before you knew it, X Windows loaded up and I was in Linux. “Ooh, this looks neat, just like Windows. Let’s see if I can surf the web!”
This is the point where I discovered the ‘magic’ of Linux. It couldn’t find a driver for a simple ethernet card. So I got onto another computer running Windows, and found some type of driver for it. All right, I’ll just burn it to a cd, pop it onto the Linux machine, and we’re good to go. I started looking around for the CD ROM icon…where was it? Apparently I had to mount it manually, luckily I know UNIX. Then it asks me for root password. Okay, so I enter it. Then I can see the CD ROM, great. Oh look, the driver is in the form of source code, I have to compile it. So I tried to compile it with the configure script that came along. Oh wait, I need some !@#$ing stupid C library. All right, so I download that as well in the form of a RPM, which luckily worked, and then I was able to compile the driver.
Okay now what? According to the instructions, I had to recompile the kernel making the driver a part of it. ‘Recompile the kernel?’ I thought, ‘What kind of sick operating system makes you recompile its kernel…’ Apparently I didn’t know what kind of twisted people designed Linux. Oh wait, it wants the stupid root password again…good God. So after about 5 hours, I had Internet…given that I knew how to use a UNIX machine. Four days later I tried installing something else, it asked me for the same stupid C library but version 1.2.3.4.5 instead of the version I had…God forbid…1.2.3.4.4 (oh what a fool I was for not updating every 10 minutes!) Within an hour, my drive was formatted (twice out of spite) and running Windows XP.
A few months back I was inspired again to run Linux. If you read the tech news, there’s no doubt about it, it’s taking over the server market. A Linux sys admin will make 20 grand more than a Windows sys admin (Makes you wonder if 20 grand is worth eventual suicide), so I felt I should pick it up. Of course now I was more prepared, I’ve read books, admin guides, worked as a student UNIX operator, 3 years under my belt as a computer science student, two internships, and had studied the Linux kernel in depth.
I decided I would try a whole bunch of distributions, I tried Red Hat 9, Fedora Core 2, SuSe 9.1, Debian, and Mandrake 10. All special in there own little way…like retarded children. As soon as SuSe loaded up, I was like…”nice nice, very sleek…”, then a hissing came out my left speaker that wouldn’t go away. Nice autodetection for the sound driver. Bye bye SuSe. All right, let’s try Red Hat 9…oh look Red Hat won’t give any more automatic updates because now that it has a little bit of money…!@#$ open source, let’s become the next Microsoft! Oh Debian and Mandrake, just plain ugly and slow.
What about Fedora Core, Red Hat’s latest method of getting code for free rather than having to pay programmers in India $0.85 an hour to do it. Why pay someone when you can have some idiot from GNU or some grad student do it for free, then sell it for 400 bucks a pop. It was surprising though that that experimental piece of crap worked better than all the other distributions, even though its autoupdate some how corrupted my kernel and I had to overwrite it.
But what I find most stupid is the philosophy behind it. Why make something so complex for free? I’m an excellent software engineer, good software is hard to make, it’s beyond art, takes incredible amounts of education, hardwork and talent, and it should be kept proprietary and one should be paid to make it. I shouldn’t have to run around asking for donations and shouldn’t have to live in my mom’s basement to get by.
Go to the GNU assholes’ site, their feeling is that it should be my ‘moral obligation’ to code for free and give that code away as well. Those guys don’t care about the rest of us, they have jobs, they’re being paid by the government to design their half ass compilers and shitty OS. Some of us aren’t shady recluses with no other goals in life other than to understand every little thing about computers. After our 8-5 day, we want to live our lives…and giving away software for free is not helping anybody except big corporations who save even more money.
2005-08-22 3:15 am
Anonymous
why do we need articles like this ? 10 days with Linux, 20 days with apple 30 days with gnome 40 days with ipod
but fact remains 4 years with WinxP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2005-08-22 4:34 am
Anonymous
Whether you like Windows Vista or not, the fact remains that the graphic performance (with a fully DX-composited desktop) is going to kick Linux’s ass. Vista (like OS X) will be able to offload a lot of processing to the GPU (ie. pixel shaders, geometry, texture management, etc) — and the result will be better performance, cooler effects, and better appearance. How long is it going to take Linux to provide that kind of capability? Answer: A long time. And, in the final analysis, owning a computer for many end-users has more to do with the “coolness” (meaning, it looks nicer) factor than anything else. You wouldn’t believe how many copies of Windows were sold because people wanted flying toasters and dancing baby screensavers.
-
2005-08-22 5:19 am
Who is Thatumm.. there is already an X extension that has a working beta that does everything vista will do and more on an intel graphics chipset. hardware accelerated mind you, not software rendered.
-
Who is That
Incase you need a link to see what I am talking about…
http://www.gnome.org/~seth/blog/xshots
videos and everything.
-
Anonymous
Most people aren’t using Windows by choice. They using Windows because that’s what their computers come with. Period.
And just so you know, in something as simple as color rendering, the Linux driver that came with SuSE 8.0 (I use Gentoo now) was better able to render the entire palette than Windows 98 ever could.
As for Vista being able to render better than Linux, that’s just plain BS. Linux already has (in my opinion) much better rendering than Windows ever had. It just seems that Linux programmers are better able to take advantage of the entire graphics engine.
You couldn’t sound more like a Microsoft fan boy if you tried. Since Vista’s not even out yet, either you’re a geeky little beta tester, or you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.
-
jeffbax
Er…. maybe it was my ATi Drivers, but Windows UI always seems more “teh snappy” than Linux any time I try it.
I’ll see again when I build my new box with nVidia but thats just my experience personally.
2005-08-22 7:15 am
Anonymous
The guy haven´t done his homework in the chapter dedicated mainly to P2P on Linux. I tend to think of Linux´s P2P applications as much better or at least on par with their Windows counterparts.
He barely scratched the surface on the options available, forgeting pearls like those below:
Apollon – It is probably the most popular P2P app on Linux, even among GNOME users, which allows one to use just one application to connect to popular P2P networks such as FastTrack (Yes, that´s KaZaa!), Gnutella and OpenFT. I´m yet to find a peer-to-peer application with a cleaner UI and so straight forward to use. Good alternatives for the Gnutella portion of it are GTK-Gnutella and Limewire. I´ve heard of others giFT front-ends like giftoxic and even some ncurses front-ends but never felt the need to check them out, but maybe they bring something new to the table for some.
(Actually, now that I thought better about this subject, a ncurses giFT client would be awesome to be controlled remotely thru the SSH + screen combo. I guess I´ll try it sometime…)
KMLDonkey – Like Apollon, KMLDonkey will let you connect to several networks including but not limited to Gnutella, Gnutella2, E-Donkey/OverNet and BitTorrent. Where it really shines is at the E-Donkey 2000 network. It is so good at it that at some point in the past (not so long ago) some server administrators banned mldonkey clients from their servers with the half baked excuse that it gave their users more features than the regular e2k clients. Fortunately, this is a thing of the past.
E-Donkey still is the network of choice for large files like movies, TV series, entire CD albums and the likes, though it has been losing ground to BitTorrent lately.
I used to swear by Azureus, but it really brings my (admitedly low specs) machine to its knees due to its Java dependency. Then I tried the BitTorrent backend on KMLDonkey and never looked back. It doesn´t feel like a truly BitTorrent client, but it gives all the relevant information regarding the torrent and is damn fast. Unlike Azureus, I can let it doing downloads on the background and keep using the machine meanwhile.
Valknut – Amazing DirectConnect client and my favorite P2P app nowadays. For those who haven´t heard yet, the DirectConnect is somewhat similar to IRC in several aspects, but more inclined to file sharing. You have hubs where people discuss and share files regarding a certain subject. There are a lot of private hubs being maintained where people must meet certain criteria to be alllowed to join but there are lots more of public hubs where you can find almost anything – just take a look at http://www.hublist.org
Valknut has been suffering some discrimination in certain hubs in the same molds of mldonkey in the past – I still am not sure of why – which will literally block your access to them. They´ll look for the DC and DC++ identification tags and won´t let you get in without it, but that has been improving. My favorites hubs already stopped that practice, so this is practically a non-issue anymore but still annoying when you try to join new hubs. DC is the fastest P2P protocol on earth. It pushes my ADSL connection to the limit when downloading. If you still don´t know it, I´d advise you to try it. You won´t regret.
All this on top of the Linux TCP/IP stack which feels a lot faster than on Windows (I´m not sure why, perhaps a different MTU setting or something like that, but it is definitely faster).
P2P on Linux is much more pleasing than on Windows and keep improving by the day. You just have to look around to find the goodies…
Cheers,
DeadFish Man
2005-08-22 8:34 am
hraq
I have implemented Linux on 5 machines so far with great success. I like linux because it gives me confidence of my system security. But lets have a look about its weaknesses:
1. Power Management: We Know that Linux is still a work in porgress [currently I cannot hibernate my system with ease & reliably; I cannot turn off the hard drives after a period of time (especially on laptops) which will boil my thighs; standby will not be activated when closing the laptop lid; The CPU frequency does not throttle down which will drain the battery very quickly…In my opinion these are major disadvantages of linux when compared to Windows and Macintosh.]
2. Special hardware features still are not supported at least with current available drivers: [Examples: a- Advanced Sound Cards ( eg: Audigy surround sound channels configuration aren’t available in linux), b- video capture ( eg:ATI all in wonder), c- Specialized keyboards, pointing devices and PDAs, d- MIDI devices: I cannot attach my digital synthesizer and Piano to my system]
3. Very advanced Software are still unavailable for professionals [eg:I cannot find powerful linux applications that resembles AvidXpress, adobe premier, vegas, 3dsmax, adobe InDesign and many many others]
4. Multimedia is hard to configure on most distributions for average Joe:[eg: To allow your media player (like Xine in my system) to playback a .vob .mpeg .mov .wmv(including wmvhd) .avi(Divx+XviD) you need to install codecs and add-ons by the command line]
So finally we come into the conclusion:
“Linux is not for everyone!”
-
Anonymous
Well, I agree to some degree that Linux is not for everyone, but some of your complaints weren´t really fair.
1. Power Management: We Know that Linux is still a work in porgress [currently I cannot hibernate my system with ease & reliably; I cannot turn off the hard drives after a period of time (especially on laptops) which will boil my thighs; standby will not be activated when closing the laptop lid; The CPU frequency does not throttle down which will drain the battery very quickly…In my opinion these are major disadvantages of linux when compared to Windows and Macintosh.]
Agreed. There is a lot of room for improvement here.
2. Special hardware features still are not supported at least with current available drivers: [Examples: a- Advanced Sound Cards ( eg: Audigy surround sound channels configuration aren’t available in linux), b- video capture ( eg:ATI all in wonder), c- Specialized keyboards, pointing devices and PDAs, d- MIDI devices: I cannot attach my digital synthesizer and Piano to my system]
Agree to some extent. Linux has achieved a lot regarding device drivers but there is a lot that needs to be done. Unfortunately, this is not really Linux fault and there is nothing that the developers can do until the hardware manufacturers are unwilling to provide specs to their products.
3. Very advanced Software are still unavailable for professionals [eg:I cannot find powerful linux applications that resembles AvidXpress, adobe premier, vegas, 3dsmax, adobe InDesign and many many others]
Here is where I disagree most. There is a lot of professional grade for Linux in some of these categories, but you don´t hear about them that often due to the fact that they aren´t OSS. I believe that Avid has some ports of their highend softwares to Linux. Main Actor fills the gap for a fairly capable non linear video editor and post processing package. Alias Maya and XGI SoftImage are arguably two of the best 3D packages that are also available to Linux and high quality renderers as Pixar´s Renderman are also available.
Adobe used to have Unix versions of Photoshop but decided to stop for some unknown reason (I should know since I own a copy of Photoshop 3.0 for IRIX) and were tipping their toe in water with FrameMaker, but decided that it wasn´t worth it.
In the categories where commercial offers are lacking, the OSS version are struggling to catch up and in some instances, even surpass their commercial competitors, as in the case of CinePaint that can handle images with higher color depths than anything that Adobe provides. Inkscape (vector illustrator) and Scribus (Desktop Publishing) are almost reaching a stage where they could be used by graphic designers. GIMP is arguably on par with Photoshop when the final result do not need to be on CMYK.
When you think about, it makes a lot of sense since Linux really shines as an workstation. The movie Shrek is just one nice example of what can be accomplished on Linux alone (artists workstations, render farms, etc.).
4. Multimedia is hard to configure on most distributions for average Joe:[eg: To allow your media player (like Xine in my system) to playback a .vob .mpeg .mov .wmv(including wmvhd) .avi(Divx+XviD) you need to install codecs and add-ons by the command line]
Here I disagree as well. Windows can be much harder than Linux unless your average user knows where to get and how to install codec packs like K-Lite. On Linux, you can just tell a user to click on Synaptic, give his root password when asked (say “administrator password” if he starts to look funny at you when hearing the word “root”), click on the category of Multimedia and look for KMplayer or Kaffeine. Since both rely either on Xine or MPlayer, innevitably the win32codecs package will be fetched as well leaving this user with a multimedia box more capable than Windows…
So finally we come into the conclusion:
“Linux is not for everyone!”
You got a point here. I don´t really think that Linux is so hard to learn, specially with today´s desktop environments, but just because it is conceptually different from Windows in so many aspects, people really are unwilling to learn. But then, Linux indeed has a lot of quirks that must be addressed as soon as possible.
-
hraq
1. You Said “I believe that Avid has some ports of their highend softwares to Linux.”
I say: Go to their online shop and discover the fact that their beautiful software are written for Windows and Mac.
the link to AvidXpress DVD v 4.6 is “http://www.avidstore.com/index.cfm?page=templates/product_index&cat…
2. You Said “Windows can be much harder than Linux unless your average user knows where to get and how to install codec packs like K-Lite. ”
I say: You don’t need to install codecs in windows XP unless you firewalled your video application. wmplayer (windows Media Player) will be able to retrieve and install codecs on-demand on the fly and play immediately the file you’ve double clicked, no codecs no command line to confuse the customer with.
3. You said “Inkscape (vector illustrator) and Scribus (Desktop Publishing) are almost reaching a stage where they could be used by graphic designers.”
I say: thanks for this info I will try to install these two and check their maturity.
I know that all of us are trying to defend our beloved linuxes, But the fact remains “Linux is not for everyone”
I use “Xandros 3 business Edition” on all of my systems. At home my family used to ask me almost every day how to do stuff with it, but now they do not ask anymore because I configured their systems to their wishes. If your family and friends complain about windows instability and if you know how and welling to support them then install linux for them, if not then tell them to buy a mac as it’s a huge platform and It’s a Unix afterall.
-
Anonymous
2. You Said “Windows can be much harder than Linux unless your average user knows where to get and how to install codec packs like K-Lite. ”
I say: You don’t need to install codecs in windows XP unless you firewalled your video application. wmplayer (windows Media Player) will be able to retrieve and install codecs on-demand on the fly and play immediately the file you’ve double clicked, no codecs no command line to confuse the customer with.
I know that WiMP is supposed to connect to the Internet to get any codec needed to play a given file but does this actually works?!?!? It never worked for me in my entire life…
And even then, I think that it would only get codecs blessed by MS, leaving a lot of really popular codecs out in the cold due to their dubious legality such as DivX and Xvid, for starters. Honestly, how can your average P2P user survive without those codecs?
You could argue that the average P2P user already know where to get his/her codecs, but what about his/her computer illiterate friends, who made a copy of some episodes of that popular anime in order to play in their computers?
But the point remains indeed: Linux is not for everyone. It could be but some issues still need to be addressed in order to make it more friendly to the end user.
DeadFish Man
-
Anonymous
1) No comments. Means nothing to me :p
2) Actually this doesn’t work in wmp or winamp … it only works for a very small number of codecs. WMP cannot automatically retrieve the divx-codec, nor can Winamp. The same goes for .mpc and Ogg video and Ogg Vorbis (audio) – and many other codecs. These are quite easy to install _if_ you know where to add information. There are many small steps to get through in windows before you can use divx, Ogg video, Ogg Vorbis, .mpc and so on … and no ordinary user knows how to do that. If you know it, you’re not ordinary. Period.
In linux however … support for all kinds of codecs for any mediaplayer is a simple one-click operation – something windows doesn’t have and probably never will have. It didn’t in windows 3.x nor in 4.x (95/98/NT). And Windows 5.x (2000, XP og 2003) does not support it either. So it’s not coming :p
3) Inkscape is good, but Scribus disappointed me. Even Microsoft Publisher is better. Scribus is promissing, but quite cumbersome at the moment. At least the version I tried on Fedora Core 3. Perhaps it’s a better of compile options?
/dylansmrjones
kristian AT herkild DOT dk
-
Anonymous
For most of these weaknesses you gave the wrong causes :
1.1. Power Management : We Know that Linux is still a work in porgress [currently I cannot hibernate my system with ease & reliably; I cannot turn off the hard drives after a period of time (especially on laptops) which will boil my thighs; standby will not be activated when closing the laptop lid; The CPU frequency does not throttle down which will drain the battery very quickly…In my opinion these are major disadvantages of linux when compared to Windows and Macintosh.]
Nothing to do with the OS (though yes, Linux is still a work in progress for power management), all to do with the manufacturer support. Windows will work WORSE than Linux on any laptop. What you don’t realize is that most of the time, the only Windows version that will work on your laptop is a custom one from the manufacturer. It’s already possible to turn off the hard drives automatically in Linux, only there are no GUI to tweak, it is set in command line (actually, there is no GUI for that in Windows either). All the things you described are available and working in Ubuntu on my HP laptop that I bought without OS. Windows won’t work at all on this laptop without special drivers from HP for example. So it’s actually a driver problem.
2. Special hardware features still are not supported at least with current available drivers
You said it yourself, same problem as before.
3. Very advanced Software are still unavailable for professionals
This is just not true, but someone already debunked this myth.
Multimedia is hard to configure on most distributions for average Joe:[eg: To allow your media player (like Xine in my system) to playback a .vob .mpeg .mov .wmv(including wmvhd) .avi(Divx+XviD) you need to install codecs and add-ons by the command line]
This is the same … No, this is actually worse in Windows.
And no command line is involved in installing codecs for a linux distribution. In Mandriva at least, there is no need of command line to add codecs. Most are in one or two packages.
-
hraq
You said “It’s already possible to turn off the hard drives automatically in Linux, only there are no GUI to tweak, it is set in command line (actually, there is no GUI for that in Windows either).”
My comments on the first sentence: If this feature will work with no problems you would find the developers of many distributions add it to their GUI interface and compete between each other who did it first; Beside I wish you wrote in your comments the command you used.
My comments on the 2nd sentence:
In Windows you can turn off the hard disks by GUI like this:
1. Starr>Control Panel>Power Options>”power schemes”Tab>”Turn Off hard disks”
2005-08-22 12:59 pm
Anonymous
“If ur just gonna use ur PCfor wordprocessing, browsing and chatting then LINUX is fine but if ur a gamer or into developemnt”
What if I’m into spelling?
I don’t know what developemnt is, but I can’t imagine developing on anything BUT Linux. Perhaps when you’re a big boy, and you go out into the world, you’ll see how incredibly useful Linux is…
2005-08-22 1:32 pm
zombie process
GIMP is arguably on par with Photoshop when the final result do not need to be on CMYK.
I’m nearly a Linux Zealot at this point, and even *I* disagree with this statement strongly. The Gimp is far closer to elements than PS. Don’t get me wrong – it is a very nice tool, but it doesn’t touch PS. Of course, it doesn’t touch the absurd PS price tag either.
2005-08-22 2:08 pm
Anonymous
Jesus Christ, 10 days? That’s pathetic. Rewrite your experiences when you’ve gone six months to a year using only Linux, otherwise STFU we don’t care. I don’t bother reading articles like this and similar ones like “Disco lover listens to Rock music for a few days and shares his experiences” who gives a fuck, seriously? If someone uses an OS for years and uses another OS for a few days, the experience with the new OS used for such a short time is useless, next time write such experiences down with toilet paper and put the review in a better place, the toilet.
2005-08-22 3:46 pm
Anonymous
I had serious problems with the remark about development being ‘easier’ on dozer. That is SO not true. I switched to a Unix based system, purely for development reasons – dozer’s little pathetic command line was too limiting. With a Unix cmd line, and slickedit (yes, a commercial editor) I can crank out code. Find some text within a file? Easy, within seconds, blast out a command before I lose my train of thought. On dozer?? Start, find, blah… Then a dog icon shows up. What the @#$@! Then you go to run the app on dozer, even if you had the cleanest code, you’re relying on the OS which has a problem staying up and running for more than a few hours – so how good IS your code in the end?? Exactly. That’s why I switched and if I had to go back to dozer, I’d probably find another career (I feel that strong about that pile of shit and how much time I wasted on it).
-J
2005-08-22 4:10 pm
Anonymous
How can you go cold turkey when Konqueror is years ahead of explorer?,
Tabbed file browsing
multiple split window viewing
Previewing of all kinds of file formats, music, ect…
Grabbing files while moving into directories.
PDF intergration
koffice intergration
And much more then XP ever had.
2005-08-22 4:25 pm
Best
Interesting, because I’m a bit of an amatuer astronomer as well. So maybe it is an astronomer thing.
2005-08-22 4:36 pm
Anonymous
It took me one day to switch from XP to Linux and the second day I was already very comfortable with it. What’s up with this guy’s 10 days story? Sounds like he is a bit on the slow side.
Anyone who thought it would be easy for the ordinary user to change from XP to KDE over night has misunderstood something.
Just as it is equal hard to go from KDE/Gnome to XP… which I’m constantly reminded of every time I’m forced to sit down at a Windows computer.
Changing OS requires the will to do it.
GUI = Graphical User Interface
This is something I have been finding odd. To me, Gnome looks dusty, no matter what I do to it, it looks dusty to me. KDE and XP both look brighter and cleaner. But I’m finding there are people out there that disagree with me. It’s making me wonder if there is something different physically, like the way my eye captures the light, or my brain process the image, than those who find Gnome to be as clean as KDE and XP. I find my eyes to be very color sensitive, and I prefer very bright, white light as opposed to dim, intimate lighting. Many times, my monitor’s brightness and gamma are turned all the way up, and I’m often having to adjust those settings up in the OS as well.
Why I bring this up is the author states he chose KDE for reasons including it’s bright and clean. And it’s a description I hear of KDE often, but hardly ever of Gnome. I wonder if there is something different in the way the desktops are rendered, and I’m a noob so sorry for sounding so ‘duh’, but I thought both desktops were rendered by the Xserver so there shouldn’t be a difference between them. But I swear I can see the difference.
I have a bright eye and a dark eye so I notice this a little bit also.
Gnome’s default gray for the windows is a bit darker than the default KDE. their line borders perhaps might be a bit thicker too.. been a while since I last ran Gnome.
Well, the brightnes of KDE isn’t a plus point, it’s very tiring if you have to look at it a lot of time one after each other, but luckily one can change this so now it’s all black (kinda) instead ‘greyish-white’
Clearlooks-Quicksilver should suit your taste? It’s part of the latest Clearlooks release. I used it for a while, but now returned to the warmer colors of DeepSky (which are from the GNOME palette). This is just a matter of taste, some people like to run around in bright pink outfits, others find moderate colors more attractive. I personally like both styles.
I have Clearlooks on my Gnome desktop. It’s probably the best one I’ve used so far but it still has that dusty, kinda powdery look to it.
http://img305.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot3bl.png
how does that look dusty?
I can’t tell from the picture, I would have to running Gnome and see it in person to be able to tell. Nice desktop btw.
That looks UGLY. You have terrible taste and I hope you never get anywhere near a UI design team or focus group.
Ah the familiar “Its not blue! It doesn’t look like MacOS X! Its ugly!” reaction. I admit the current icon theme is dated. I’ll be switching to a toned down version of Dropline Neu or something else before too long though, Gorilla is really showing its age. The great things about my current theme are:
1. its consistant
2. its easy on the eyes.
3. No Blue! (this is much the same as #2)
What? It is excessively blue and it has faux OSX brushed metal window decorations. I noticed that you posted a screenshot of your own (which isn’t bad) but it wasn’t what I replied to – I replied to this:
http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=11621&comment_id=20956
I caught that a second after I replied… OSnews doesn’t have a delete button. Teach me to only half pay attention to respond chains.
Your theme for the root user doesn’t match, and that’s why Firestarter has that ugly white box around the icon, btw.
bah… KDE looks cluttered.
Gnome is slow…
I use Window Maker and I love it.
KDE looks cluttered.
I have to admit that this is the one big reason that I have always felt that Gnome was a better looking desktop than KDE. I have heard so many people claim that KDE somehow looks so much better than Gnome. I could never figure out why they think that. KDE is just too cluttered to be nice looking. Gnome is much cleaner.
Even though I have never had any problems with Gnome being slow, I imagine, since so many people tend to think it’s slow, there might be something to that. Personally, I can sacrifice a few microseconds here and there for a cleaner desktop.
<quote>KDE looks cluttered </quote>
I would have to agree with that. I like KDE alot, but I
use Gnome instead. Why do I use gnome, because (to me )
it looks a lot less cluttered. I am one those people that
can’t work in a clutterd room.
I occasionally switch to KDE and Iove it but find unuseful for day to day tasks. (I am not trolling just giving my opinion here). I prefer to use gnome for day to day tasks.
I use KDE for development, and development only. The DE seems to support that a lot better. One slight problem I have with KDE is that on some systems/distros it
flickers when you are doinig refreshes. I don’t if its a double buffer problem but its annoying.
I think we need to separate how we evaluate DEs by what we use them for.
I don’t hate KDE, i like for its look,speed and its configurability, but paradoxically those are the some of the reason i don’t use kDE.
I find the colours and number of buttons in KDE to be cluttered and “busy”, no matter whether I use Plastik, Ceramic or any other theme. I actually find the number of buttons distracting. This is not a slur; I do appreciate the power and flexibility in KDE but I do not like the aesthetics. I do not like the default look of XP either.
My favourite look for Windows was actually 3.1’s theme. ’95 was far too grey by default but I do not find GNOME at all “dusty” or difficult to view, using either Bluecurve in Fedora or “Human” in Ubuntu.
I have found the HIG work in GNOME has made it extremely easy to use and aestheitcally pleasing for me, though I am very curious to see what will eventuate from the KDE 4 project.
As a Gnome user, I agree with your summary. I would just describe it a bit differently. Default KDE, to me, seems too bright and shiny. Too plastic, which shouldn’t be a surprise since that’s the name of the theme. Default Gnome feels comfortable and lived in. Maybe even dusty as you say. I guess some people, like me, like that better.
For non aesthetic reasons I’ve been trying out KDE recently. After finally getting it to look nice and dusty I’m starting to like it.
Hmm, that’s interesting. You say “I find my eyes to be very color sensitive, and I prefer very bright, white light as opposed to dim, intimate lighting.” And that’s why you prefer KDE. I am an amatuer astronomer and I find that I have very sensitive night vision and I prefer “dim intimate lighting” and I also prefer gnome. And one of the reasons is that KDE and windows seem overly bright to me, almost cartoonish where gnome seems more muted and subtle, at least in terms of brightness. So maybe there’s something to what your saying.
>>>I am an amatuer astronomer and I find that I have very sensitive night vision and I prefer “dim intimate lighting” and I also prefer gnome. And one of the reasons is that KDE and windows seem overly bright to me, almost cartoonish where gnome seems more muted and subtle, at least in terms of brightness. So maybe there’s something to what your saying.
Miguel de Icaza also came from an astronomy background, IIRC..so maybe it’s an astronomer thing
I boot my winXP about once every 1-2 months. As for embedded devices don’t know what each are and don’t care
I know the registers at the grocery store are winXP (the accidentally had the default screen saver set still
) However I personally don’t use them, cashiers do.
For ATMs.. no clue but I prefer to go inside anyway.(like the person to person communication) I do know they use win2k inside.
Gas pumps? I ride a bike and borrow a car when I need one. the owner fills the tank.
so yes I can go 10+ days without personally using windows.
Only reason I have winXP installed is for those LAN parties. Games are no fun unless played with others IMO.
Review wasn’t bad. Author was in depth, interesting(humorous).
“It’s got 20+ languages in support, supports every processor imaginable, graphical installation and also has buttons that look edible. All of these things are possible “wow” factors that would grab a skeptic in, especially the purdy buttons.”
As long as it supports the language and processor that he’s going to be running it on, the average user won’t care which distro supports the most languages and processors. And it’s not as if Mandriva is ahead of the pack in those two areas, anyway… Debian, for instance, supports around 30 languages and 11 architectures.
Anyone who thought it would be easy for the ordinary user to change from XP to KDE over night has misunderstood something.
Well i went from win2000 to Linux.Was pretty painless.On w2k i allready made extensive use of the CLI and things turned out for the better.Average users don’t see the need to change and are pretty happy with what they do.Only people who are tech savvy enough will notice the alternative OS’s and their distinctions.For them it will be almost painless to swith over if they want and can because of required working environmental issues at hand.
Changing OS requires the will to do it.
Without stamina you get almost nothing done.
Nice article…..my experiences and feelings about LINUX have been pretty much the same. If ur just gonna use ur PCfor wordprocessing, browsing and chatting then LINUX is fine but if ur a gamer or into developemnt then LINUX just doesnt cut it.
I disagree Linux is an excellent development platform, with lots of developer tools available. Of course if you are going to develop widows only programs windows you naturlly will need to use windows. How else would you be able to test your programs. Howeer, for serverside and cross platform stuff you would probably be better of using Linux.
i disagree….i mean iam no microsoft fanboy…i have both LINUX and WINDOWS on my box but until LINUX gets something like Dreaweaver or VS.NET i just cant consider it an easy to use developement platform.
RTFWHS He said “if you are going to develop widows only programs windows you naturlly will need to use windows … for serverside and cross platform stuff you would probably be better of using Linux.”
If you are using VS.NET you are programming for Windows. Some website designers live by Dreamweaver some do not its you choice but their is plenty of website design done using Linux as a platform.
No i dont think u guys are gettin the point iam tryin to make….iam well aware that u can carry out webdevelopemnt using linux and program using python but the thing is linux lacks easy to use apps like Dreamweaver or VB6/VB.net…. suppose a normal user like me wants to write a simple app in windows all i do is just fire up VB6 because its so simple and easy to use….what if i wanted to write something for linux what would i do ? (really i have no idea what i would do…iam not bein sarcastic)
> suppose a normal user like me wants to write a simple app in windows all i do is just fire up VB6 because its so simple and easy to use….what if i wanted to write something for linux what would i do ? (really i have no idea what i would do…iam not bein sarcastic)
I think we were talking about ‘real’ development (not that you can not do real development with VB, of course). I quickly tried VC++ Express and if VB Express is the same, I agree they look like cool applications. Under Linux, there is this thing called REALbasic (which works under Mac and Windows, too). I think it is what you are looking for.
if all you are doing is dreamweaver and VB then it is no wonder you are incapable of learning how to use anything else.
Bluefish and Quanta are great tools for web DEVELOPMENT. forget the graphical webpage building.. it is crap.
and python is a better structured language than VB, pluse, designing a GUI in text is not that difficult, but if you really want a graphical designing tool, they exist.
if all you are doing is dreamweaver and VB then it is no wonder you are incapable of learning how to use anything else.
Bluefish and Quanta are great tools for web DEVELOPMENT. forget the graphical webpage building.. it is crap.
and python is a better structured language than VB, pluse, designing a GUI in text is not that difficult, but if you really want a graphical designing tool, they exist.
Thanks for providing a good example of somebody who doesn’t have a clue about the poster’s complaints. He isn’t saying that he can’t learn how to use alternate tools. He’s saying that the tools simply aren’t as good on Linux. Fine. So you prefer to use command-line and vi for editing your apps. He’s more productive with a RAD environment. I don’t see anything even remotely close to VS.NET for Linux.
I wip out Python and GTK. By the way, Dreamweaver and VB.net ain’t “easy to use.” The fact that you are familiar with those frameworks don’t make them easy to use. Get familiar with their Unix counterpart, or the Unix way to developing applications.
>>>suppose a normal user like me wants to write a simple app in windows all i do is just fire up VB6 because its so simple and easy to use….what if i wanted to write something for linux what would i do ?
If you like VB6, you should check RealBasic. It is cross-platform (Win/Lin/Mac) and seems very professional. Gambas has also some good reputation although my experience with it (more than 1 year ago) was not that good, very unstable.
I guess that is where we differ in opinion. I think VS.NET is a bloated waste of time with ridiculous dependencies and dismal performance.
Dreamweaver is a nice tool, I guess, but it generates too much junk in my HTML code.
I’ve heard of a Dreamweaver wannabe for Linux called Nvu, or something like that, but I prefer a simple editor like Kate or Vim for doing development. That’s just me though. To each their own.
> […] LINUX is fine but if ur a gamer or into developemnt then LINUX just doesnt cut it.
It depends. If you need (and can afford) to use proprietary development tools, Windows is probably better. But if you want to use free development tools, Linux and BSD are much better platforms.
I don’t see where you are coming from with your development remark. I am a developer and the main reason I use Linux is because it is a superior development platform. Windows is a mamed cripple by comparison.
I use Windows XP too (I’m posting this from a Windows box) when it makes sense (games, client requirements, etc) but for development, you can’t beat Linux and/or BSD.
I am a developer and the main reason I use Linux is because it is a superior development platform. Windows is a mamed cripple by comparison.
Yes, this is absolutely true. Back in school, most of the computer science majors I knew prefered the UNIX/Linux environment over Windows as far as development is concerned. Need to do some performance testing on that code? Just write a shell script to run the program several times with different parameters, and go do something else (like have fun!). Windows doesn’t have a functional shell. You could write a BATCH file, but those pale in comparison to the power of a fully functional shell script. Then there are really good programming languages that just seem to work better in a UNIX/Linux environment, like O’Caml, Python, Lisp, and Haskell. Sure, code completion (IntelliSense in VS.NET) is nice, but there is something lacking in the Windows environment when it comes to having the full power of an operating system at your disposal.
Yes, this is absolutely true. Back in school, most of the computer science majors I knew prefered the UNIX/Linux environment over Windows as far as development is concerned.
Well, duh. That’s what they used in school. No wonder.
Development? what?
Linux is possably the best platform for development.
if you mean .Net development, well then you are right.
Nice article…..my experiences and feelings about LINUX have been pretty much the same. If ur just gonna use ur PCfor wordprocessing, browsing and chatting then LINUX is fine but if ur a gamer or into developemnt then LINUX just doesnt cut it.
I am a gamer, but most of my favorite games were ported to Linux (and the rest run fine under Wine) so I don’t feel the pain of being a Linux gamer. (If only HL2 had a native port
)
I do agree that Linux is *not* for ‘generic’ gamers, though. Too much of a hassle.
As for the development part… well, I doubt that you catch the irony of your statement.
First of all linux was designed by free software developers for software developers; You can literally change the OS to suite your needs.
Second, Linux comes with a wrath of development tools and by far suppress anything Windows has to offer.
I assume that by development you mean: .NET vs. World. I can’t really argue with you on this one; while my current workplace is chewing rocks since they switched from cpp to c#, it may be a clear case of YMMV.
However,
A. Software development ranges from asm code inside a kernel to web scripting. .NET is only a (small?) part of the story.
B. Linux has very good java tools that match anything has to offer.
C. While kdevelop + qt still fails to compete with .NET 2003/2005, it does offer something Windows cannot offer: Out of the box portability to anything with a CPU on it.
D. Mono.
Having said all that, nothing beats vim! (on both Windows and Linux)!
Gilboa
You probably right… and that’s probably why I prefer Gnome. It’s the apps, I’m using… not the desktop environment. And thus the desktop environment should IMHO draw as little attention as possible. I find KDE too “bright”.
As someone once said about XP:
“There might be a real OS in there somewhere, but there’s a mountain of LEGO duplo keeping me from using it”
I think the key is striking a balance between exciting colours and intimate, unobtrusive usability and KDE & Gnome are at opposite ends of the extreme. However the new Clearlooks mockup (see here: http://www.stellingwerff.com/?p=5) looks much brighter *finally* some unbotrusive use of colour. I’d like more use of colour in Gnome but only when it makes things feel more usable, highlights important things that need your attention for example. I guess what i’m asking for is careful use of colour as opposed to this make everything look like fisher price toys *or* make it look like an old dusty book approach and absolutely no middle ground.
“There might be a real OS in there somewhere, but there’s a mountain of LEGO duplo keeping me from using it”
ur callin windows LEGO DUPLO ? have u seen KDE with its ugly ass tooltips and god knows what else ?
Not a bad article. At least this guy kept it real and believable, unlike the fake and doctored “Windows girl goes Fedora” article recently. This guy actually stated what was wrong and the problems he had. He made it sound professional like thats what he was really doing. I can’t say the same for the imaginary “fedora girl”.
>”It’s got 20+ languages in support”
I’d say that’s a rather important for the common users, having support for their language is more than simply wow factor.
“I’d say that’s a rather important for the common users, having support for their language is more than simply wow factor.”
Please go read what I wrote again. I said that users wouldn’t care about language support other than their own language(s) being supported. The “bonus” of Turkish and Hindustani support (for instance) is completely worthless to me unless those are actually languages that I speak.
I was shocked that he knocked xchat like that. I’ve been using mirc for over a year. every single day. It’s open right now actually, and I found xchat to be great.
I agree with the conclusions of this article. I have tried ~5 differents distros, without finding any satisfaction – too many issues.
Finally, the real question should be – at least for me -: why should I use and attempt to install a Linux distro, if my win2k is perfectly working? Strange, isn’t it.
BTW, may I expect to have less problems with BSD?
If you weren’t able to get Linux to work for you, I highly doubt BSD will be any better for you.
I could be wrong though. Some people hate Linux and love BSD (personally, I like both). It depends on what your expectations are, I guess.
Strange. I’ve never used Linux before and it took me only about a day to do the switch from Windows XP to Linux and get used to it and I don’t think I am smarter or more computer savvy than the average user.
Me too my friend. And I am more than satisfied with linux (Freebsd was two days more 🙂 )
I also do all my soft development on linux/eclipse and Anjuta. WIN$$$ suck do not even try to do development on it. Bad documentation , many programs crash and java is a nightmare on WIN$$$.
What sometimes I miss, is some handy HW utilities but Linux has much better support in some places , like printing.
I think it is how you look at it. Some people seem to be mentally tied to specific applications or something. The way I look at a computer is more abstract.
For example, I want to send an email so I look for a program that does that. I know what information is necessary to send an email, or set up an email account, so it really doesn’t matter what application I use.
For others, it seems that Outlook Express is the only way to send an email and without it, to them, an email simply can’t be sent.
You’re probably one of the abstract types.
For people that think abstractly, a switch to Linux is quite simple, and usually, once people find the power of shell scripting, cron jobs, etc, Windows simply ceases to have any attraction. At least that’s how it was for me.
good point
I think it is how you look at it. Some people seem to be mentally tied to specific applications or something. The way I look at a computer is more abstract.
For example, I want to send an email so I look for a program that does that. I know what information is necessary to send an email, or set up an email account, so it really doesn’t matter what application I use.
For others, it seems that Outlook Express is the only way to send an email and without it, to them, an email simply can’t be sent.
You’re probably one of the abstract types.
For people that think abstractly, a switch to Linux is quite simple, and usually, once people find the power of shell scripting, cron jobs, etc, Windows simply ceases to have any attraction. At least that’s how it was for me.
You hit the nail on the head. That gotta be the most reasonable post about the reasons to use Linux that I ever read in my entire life!
DeadFish Man
I boot my pirate Windows XP at each month only to do antivirus ans OS updates and, eventually, play Half-Life 2 (it is a pitty thah it doesn’t have a linux & OpenGL option like Doom 3). All my serious job and internet access is made using linux & Firefox. I never would trust in IE and windows to access my homebanking with tons of worms and malwares that only affect those products.
In the last windows update, I was forced to install WGA and then I only can make security updates. M$ has the right to do this but it is more one reason to remove windows.
Probably I will never install Windows Vista on my computers, even a pirated copy. Linux and BSDs are the right way to follow.
Cedega plays Half Life 2. If Half Life is the only thing you keep windows around for, why not pick it up?
A nice article. I think it sums up pretty well the issues that might pop up when switching from windows to Linux. It’s not without problems, but it’s also not impossible.
Nice article.I guess a lot has changed over time.In ’86 i had to work in order to have something to eat and a place to live in during my college time.I didn’t have a PC much less all the other gadgets.Nonetheless an interesting article.
Congratulations to the author, that was one of the most entertaining articles that has been on this site in a while.
The end of the piece was excellent by alerting Windows users to the better choices of software from the open source side of the fence, however, let me include some more which started on Linux and moved to Windows.
MPlayer (Multimedia player)
Gaim (Instant Messenger)
AbiWord (Word Processor)
Mame (Arcade emulator, yes it was Linux first)
STonX (Atari ST emulater, also on Linux first)
UaE (Amiga emulator, guess what ? yep, Linux first)
Xen (Virtualisation)
GtkPod (Ipod software, now for Windows)
Have a google for all them for the links
Was vmware first on windows or Linux?
it was on linux first
but then it does not matter as it is not the best choice
Reading the article is worth the time, I really enjoyed it. He is realistic, gives good advise, and I agree about his conclusion. Windows is the way to go if you use strange devices or if you like gaming, but if the only thing you need is www, email and office then go for Linux.
Well i used to dual boot for a while and used windows solely for gaming until i discovered the game console superiority.Especially with the coming new consoles for me windows is obsolete and i can separate profession from entertainment/gaming.Watching tv is better on a Plasma HDTV,listening to music on my accuphase set and gaming on a PS3 is faster there are more titles avaible,doesn’t need defragmentation,updates,new kernels,bugfuxes,you don’t have to install and it’s worm and virus free so long as you don’t connect it to the net.
Which leaves me and my dual opteron Gentoo Linux box to code and make a living as freelance Linux dev while not using any of the other *tools* above.
That drabber, dustier appearance is easier on some people’s eyes. There are eyecandy themes, and then there are themes that are made more to be easy on the eyes.
My own desktop (rather easy on my eyes)
http://droplinegnome.org/home/paulbest/screenshots/20050812a.png
The default dropline look (hard on my eyes)
http://dropline-gnome.sourceforge.net/pics/screenshots/01.png
If its eyecandy you’re after, check out the still incomplete clearlooks-cairo theme.
You’re post somewhat illustrates what I’m talking about. I prefer the desktop you don’t like, since it’s brighter, your desktop is too dark for me. I like bright color and stark white. Earth tones and dim colors make it hard for me to see what I want without having to interpet in my head first what it is I’m seeing. I also find shiny and bright to be more soothing and pleasing to my eye.
Maybe it’s a difference between how many rods vs cones we have. I’m guessing I have more cones than rods, and it seems to me that it makes sense you might have more rods than cones. This could explain why you like dimmer desktops for eyestrain and I prefer brighter ones for clearer colors.
But it doesn’t explain why it seems to me Gnome has that dusty, almost powerdery look to it. I’ve changed themes, used different Gnome desktops like Drop-line and Sun’s Gnome desktop. I have Clearlooks on there now (PCLinuxOS – KDE, Gnome, Xfce, and Fluxbox). Writing that list reminded me, Xfce is like Gnome, and it has a dusty – powdery look to it as well (I don’t really care for Xfce, too basic, rarely ever use it). And I’ve tried a few different themes that are pretty dramatic and it still has that look. When I look at pictures or movies, I don’t notice the dusty look, so realizing that now makes me wonder even more. Because pictures look like they do in KDE and XP.
So all I can say is I don’t know, because I can’t put my finger on it right now, but hopefully the ‘whys’ of this will be revealed to me in the future.
I’d guess two much simpler reasons, I probably have a brighter monitor than you, and/or I spend much more time at a computer than you do.
As for the powdery look as you put it, I think that drab colors are used in gnome more because they’re less distracting. Bright colors do tend to draw the eye. Some things just don’t need to scream ‘look at me’.
I have dual viewsonic pf790 “19 monitors. I’m not sure how to gage how dark or bright they are, but they are exceedingly clear and crisp but I do have the brightness turned all the way up and the gamma 2/3rds the way up (which I would turn up more but it starts to wash everything out).
As for time behind the keyboard, anywhere from four to eighteen hours a day, usually is around 10-12 (accounting and home use such as this).
Tho, I feel you are probably correct, at least in the sense the answers are simple and not nearly as complex as I perceive them.
I’m always amazed when I learn that intelligent people actually prefer windows and use it by choice. To each their own, I suppose.
I just tested cd live SLAX, downloading, burning iso, rebooting. So far, so good. Then, came my usual Linux problems.
1) Unable to configure and set up my printer
2) Unable to configue and set up my ADSL connection
3) Test a pdf file from my hda1 parition (win). Simply unreadable, fonts are ugly. (The pdf is generated in the state of the art, (pdf)LaTeX, embedded Postscript fonts).
4) Please, remove these stupid shadowed mouse pointers. The i-beam is just not usable in every text control or editor. (Even MS has a shadowed theme without a shadowed i-beam])
5) I wish/want fonts with an euro currency symbol.
Small things, that just make me condidering Linux as unusable.
Regards.
I’m always amazed when I learn that intelligent people actually prefer windows and use it by choice. To each their own, I suppose.
Not only that which is not allways the case i’m afraid.But it seems most of the posters are badly programmed and respond only to the things they have been brainwashed with.As long as i don’t write KDE,GNOME,MS,Black-Berry,Nokia,i-pod,coca-cola,smart-*, chances are everything goes unnoticed and they post happily ever after.
I’m getting a new dual Athalon MP 2600 box from a friend this week and I think when I get it I will give my dad my P4 box which has Gentoo on it, I will tweak it and make it easy to use as possible for him.
He is 100% computer illiterate….. we shall see what happens.
If it dosen’t work I will reinstall XP Pro, this is my little experiment
I just don’t want to have to deal with fixing his damn comp all the time…. hope linux works out.
heck, we’ll see how it goes, maybe I’ll even write a review about the experience.
Make sure you’ve got all the apps he’ll need on it and the configuration is pretty good as-is. Those seem to be the two biggest stumbling blocks for new Linux users (adding new apps, configuring the OS and its services). My computer illiterate dad has been using Linux since last Christmas with no problems (and he’d never even used a computer before), and my brother who is only marginally computer literate has used it for over a year now.
yes indeed, I for one would be very interested to find out the results of the little experiment.
good luck
Outlines many things I agree with.
On one hand, I would love to ditch Windows… after getting a new PowerBook there are so many “isms” about the Windows desktop experience I just abhor and see the same problems in Vista… OSX Aqua just kicks ass, and I love the customizability of both KDE and GNOME and XFCE Ect… When I build my new Athlon 64 X2 box I am going to try going Linux only… hopefully I can make it.
The problem is… games!
I am also a PC gamer. While there are a handful of games with native Linux binaries now, its hard to ignore the likes of HL2, Rome: Total War, Pirates!, Thief: Deadly Shadows, Deus Ex, Blizzard titles. I just can’t do it. And don’t tell me “go buy a console” because I have an Xbox and Cube and while they are great they can’t match top end PC titles IMO… at least they aren’t as satisfying for me. Not being able to play those games really hurts, and Cedega isn’t a great solution. Having to pay for just the initial 3 months will cost more than my copy of XP Pro from school ($10 from Carnegie Mellon University – fully legal… same price for Office 2003 and Office 2004 Mac)
So it would cost me MORE to have a handicapped gaming experience on Linux
Dual booting sucks too, its no fun having to quit everything you are doing rebooting playing, then rebooting again… only to want to play a diff game maybe on a whim then rebooting again! Its madness!
Plus, there is the fact that Linux games generally run slower than on Windows with less graphical goodies… (see Doom 3… and Cedega can never be as fast as the real deal I don’t think… and its slow to add new games)
I wish that devs wouldn’t be so dependent on DirectX but what can you do its a great tool
Also, personally I like FreeBSD more than Linux, but then it gets even MORE difficult to do games!
Plus, there is the fact that Linux games generally run slower than on Windows with less graphical goodies… (see Doom 3… and Cedega can never be as fast as the real deal I don’t think… and its slow to add new games)
Have you tried the native Doom3 port? (http://zerowing.idsoftware.com/linux/doom/)
I once tested it on an old Athlon XP 1900 machine (running Windows XP and FC3) and the Linux port was between 1fps faster to 2fps slower then the Windows port.
Being OpenGL, the visual effects were the same. (At least to my eyes.)
Needless to say, Doom3/Linux runs just fine at 1600x1200x4FSAA on my FC4/x86-64’ed dual Opteron workstation
Gilboa
Linux Doom 3 performance is generally good on Linux, but there is still a discrepancy
See:
http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2241&p=1
And if I was a Linux only gamer I am sure I wouldn’t be complaining as the performance isn’t too bad. But when it comes to WINE I have read many things that the image quality is not as good as native, and missing stuff entirely in some instances (like movies in Blizzard games… something I could never sacrifice from the Single Player campaigns!)
Plus again… Cedega is $15 + $5 a month, Win XP Pro cost me $10 for a fully legit version and does all the games with no hiccups at all… so as much as I would like to switch over to Linux (because I could easily do that for about everything but games… especially with my PowerBook around to handle my iPod and that type of stuff) its just not realistic for me yet… I wish Cedega would just help regular Wine out instead of charging a subscription fee… or hell maybe a one time payment but what they ask for is too much for hit and miss gaming.
Another article…
http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=in…
Linux Doom 3 performance is generally good on Linux, but there is still a discrepancy
See: