“So far, Linux has run just fine, hasn’t crashed, and seems to offer tremendous flexibility, but this comes at the price of complexity. Up to a point, Linux is as easy to use as any other mainstream operating system. But after that point is passed, the water gets very deep, very quickly–as my monitor resolution issue serves to illustrate. Windows also suffers from this “easy up to a point” issue, but the point is a good bit farther down the road than it is in Linux.” The second part of David Coursey’s trip to the Linux world.
I’ve Learned to Like Linux (but Not to Love it)
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Something struck me about the title. It’s obviously a back-handed putdown that insinuates that Linux isn’t good enough. But it got me thinking about the society that we live in, which craves “true love” in the form of strong emotions. Emotions that fade like fresh-cut flowers, and change direction like the wind. In today’s society, children are jaded consumers who will use a game or toy for a week, then never touch it again. And these children grow up to be adults who go through relationships and spouses at only a slightly slower rate.
So when I see that title, I think “Good!” I have my favorite pair of jeans and a comfortable chair that I like. But I don’t love them. The place they occupy in my heart is just right in the greater scheme of things. Love is reserved for things that really, really count — God, my family and friends. Inanimate objects can take a back seat to that, and it’s fine by me. As a matter of fact, I think that people who believe that the sight of a computer should cause them to become sexually aroused or to start religions are sickos.
As for the article, it became quite plain that the author was treating Linux as a red-haired stepchild. So it should come as no surprise that the conclusions mirrored this prejudice. Had the author taken a few minutes to RTFM, he would have learned enough about X to know better than to call it “X Windows” or be so clueless about how to change screen resolutions, or ignorantly ramble on about “the only way” that isn’t. And if the author had played on a level playing field, using the same new hardware that he runs Windows on, he wouldn’t have had an excuse to blame Linux for being slow. But that really wasn’t on the agenda, was it? Gotta keep those sponsors happy…
I don’t know what ur problem is, but i suggest that you start taking prozac or some other happy happy joy joy stuff, because you *REALLY* need it.
I don’t know why you like to flame so much and troll on on *ANYTHING AND ANYBODY*.
You should really lighten up.
About the author: I think this guy is really putting an effort into it. He is steadily making progress and he’s really learning.
I have to agree with you about the low-end pc that makes it all seem slow though; he should have gotten a descent pc to run it all on.
As for the love part: again you are exagerating LIGHTEN UP. One can love an os, yes, but not in the same way as your wife/husband/children/pet/whatever, you are again exagerating.
Now don’t take me wrong, everybody is entitled to an opinnion, but if your opinnion is just flaming ppl and trolling, then i think you should just stick to the facts and keep your flames to yourself.
>>As for the article, it became quite plain that the author was treating Linux as a red-haired stepchild. So it should come as no surprise that the conclusions mirrored this prejudice.<<
I disagree. I think he gave it a fair shot, and he did make some interesting points.
Two problems with Linux Distro’s :
1) Too much Choice – AKA too much crap thrown onto 3 default installation CD’s. Even for someone like myself who has actual work experience with linux – I can find it a tad overwhelming – and lets not evenbring up RPM dependencies. I can only imagine how it can be for someone who is used to the commercial consumer OS’es like Windows and MacOS.
2) Crappy apps. Sorry, but with 2 VERY recent exceptions (Mozilla and Open Office) – most apps were lackluster at best, and not up to par with their commercial consumer OS cousins. I’m sure that you can come up with a dozen or so exceptions to that statement – but the point is most apps are perpetual alpha/beta quality with not-yet-implemented features, and not-so-easy to use. Unless you are a linux geek.
>>Had the author taken a few minutes to RTFM, he would have learned enough about X to know better than to call it “X Windows” or be so clueless about how to change screen resolutions<<
Granted, he probably should have, but at the same time he shouldn’t have had to. Which says a lot about the usability of Linux for the masses. With whatever flavor of commercial consumer OS he was using – he didn’t have to. The applet to change the screen resolution was where it was “supposed to be”, so it was easy to find, and it was also easy to use. X isn’t.
> About the author: I think this guy is really putting an effort into it. He is steadily making progress and he’s really learning.
I agree. David writes it down as it is and as he comprehents it is, at this point.
He used that old PC with only 10 MB of RAM, because he hears from all these advocates that Linux works fast on old PCs. So what David did was to put that in practice, as he doesn’t have any other experience, and at this point, he just does what he has heard about. Problem is, the linux kernel works on 10 MB, but putting KDE or Gnome and X on top of it, it is completely different story…
The guy writing this article has so many things wrong I find it almost humorous he’s a respected writer. Then I came to my sences and realized this article is about people who don’t know nothing about Linux/UNIX and install it to see what all the hype is about. In that respect he hit the nail on the head. He’s not running Mandrake or SuSe for a desktop cause how is he suppose to know RedHat is for servers? He’s just some guy right?
If this doesn’t become a series of articles showing the progress of his learning curve im going to be disappointed for the fact he’s basically spreading rumors. All in all im happy to see him attempt to be unbiased and open minded.
> Not that it’s bad, it’s
> just really geeky.
Uuuh .. did I hear that before??? ..:)
> People who have a hard time
> with MS Windows would eventually
> find that making Linux do what
> they want is somewhere between
> extremely frustrating and impossible
I have tried linux on joe-users, including a five-year old, and the results are nowhere close to “extremely frustrating”. The most common complaint has been about speed. If they are users who just want to chat, surf, and do email, all they need is a few hours to know where to click, and to generally get used to the new OS. After that, getting to hotmail.com is easy!
Anyway, XP obviously has a more alluring interface, and a better browser, but if you are left with no other OS than Redhat, you will do most average things without suffering anything close to “extreme frustration”.
BTW, anybody who knows how to change resolutions and go to device manager in Windows would have had to learn it at some point in the past. Just becuase you now know it thoroughly doesn’t mean it was so intuitive the first time. In my opinion, the evolution of desktop linux in the last 3 years have been amazing, and I hope the improvements will contine at the same pace.
Almost unbiased. David does say at the end of his article “I’d find desktop Linux hard to recommend except in very special circumstances”
I don’t think Linux will make it as a desktop OS because it isn’t.
How many farmers go shopping in their tractor?
Although the responses to Speed’s post were pretty level-headed, his response seems to be what I see more of lately, rather than level-headed and rational evaluations of Linux.
I’ve used several Linux variants and my experience has been that, for the average user, Linux is NOT more stable than Windows NT or 2000, does NOT run faster, and is NOT easier to use. When something goes wrong with Linux (yeah, it really does happen), my experience has been that it’s easier to reinstall than to try to fix the problem. RTFM is an insult to a reasonably proficient user. Man pages would actually be useful if they included some common examples. Every article that finds fault with Linux or concludes that Windows is easier to use in some way is not necessarily written by an author on MS’ salary.
For servers, I recommend against MS. Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. rule the server space. For desktop use, I recommend Windows NT/2000, NOT 98 or XP. Of course there are exceptions. For businesses which already have tech support on-hand, making the move to Linux can be a real cost saver.
Hmmmm. Let’s see if this post appears…
I disagree. I think he gave it a fair shot
Let’s review:
“I’m doing this is to put to rest some of the complaints that I’m a Microsoft stooge…”
“I didn’t expect the Linux installation to be fast.”
“I’m installing Linux on … a hand-me-down … at the low-end of the specification for this OS.”
He didn’t want to find out what kind of video card it had, although he would have needed to to install Windows drivers.
“And, no, I didn’t bother to…”
He doesn’t bother to read the manual, and blames Linux.
“Linux has hurled at me in the way of problems”
All of the above are very prejudiced comments or actions. Together they indicate an unwillingness to give Linux a fair shot, so it’s no surprise that this very predictable conclusion was reached:
“I’d find desktop Linux hard to recommend except in very special circumstances.”
He also crowns Windows as the best choice, as any “Microsoft stooge” would.
If this had been a Windows review, would his editor have approved such a slovenly approach? I doubt it. Windows would have come preinstalled on the very latest hardware, and the author would have put years of experience with Windows “tips and tricks” to show off every advantage that Windows has to offer. And instead of complaining about spellcheckers, he would have also have given glowing reviews to the also pre-installed Office suite. That’s a double standard in my book.
Now let’s look at your points:
1. Too much choice. While it’s true that the major Linux distros offer a wealth of included software that’s alien to purchasers of the big commercial prducts, that’s not a bug — it’s a Good Thing! It’s not like you’re forced to pick through each and every one; just like with Windows, you can choose from a few common profiles.
2. Crappy apps. Well, I doubt that you have really evaluated each and every one of the tens of thousands of Linux application programs, so your casual dismissal gives me cause to suspect laziness on your part. And since you stated no criteria for evaluation, I have good cause to suspect that you didn’t really do any evaluation. It looks more like a pot-shot (witness “linux geek”) than a thoughtful comment.
Granted, he probably should have (RTFM), but at the same time he shouldn’t have had to. Which says a lot about the usability of Linux for the masses.
No, it says a lot about your faulty memory. You had to learn Windows or MacOS or whatever at some point in time! You’re holding Linux up to an impossible standard that you don’t do for things that you already put in the work for.
You always had the option of saying it honestly — that you’re just too lazy to learn new things. But then you’d be getting into different territory. Is it worth paying whatever Microsoft wants just to continue to be “fat, dumb and happy”? Even if the price soars to tens of thousands of dollars a year? Those are philosophical matters that aren’t in the scope of the article.
He’s not running Mandrake or SuSe for a desktop cause how is he suppose to know RedHat is for servers? He’s just some guy right?
Caveat Emptor.
It means “buyer beware”. It’s been standard operating procedure for consumers since ancient times. Every vendor wants you to use their products, but it’s your responsibility to find out which vendor’s product is right for you.
So how is the guy supposed to know? Well obviously not by reading ZDNet reviews! Ironically, product reviews are part of the process that consumers have at their disposal to learn just such things. Shoppers have the press, word of mouth, and even their own research to rely upon to make the right decision. So if the guy didn’t know, he could have found out. He could have done work worthy of publication.
Let’s not forget this “some guy” works for a huge publishing concern. He has far more resources at his disposal than you or I do. He has no excuse. It’s his job to find out! No, he’s not just “some guy”.
Linux is NOT more stable than Windows NT or 2000, does NOT run faster, and is NOT easier to use.
Have any evidence to back that claim up? I’m not holding my breath. So far exactly 0% of such requests have been fulfilled. In other words the BS flag is up.
When something goes wrong with Linux (yeah, it really does happen), my experience has been that it’s easier to reinstall than to try to fix the problem.
People do that with Windows too. You’re blaming Linux for something that’s not a trait of Linux.
RTFM is an insult to a reasonably proficient user.
AH-HA! This is the meat of the issue. It’s an insult. Without ego there can be no insult. But the truth is that lazy fools have nothing to brag about. Sure, almost everybody wants to be a big shot. But there’s a big difference between wanting something and accomplishing something!
Sure the lazy fools can deflect attention away from their inadequacies by acting insulted by this or that, but at the end of the day they are the ones who failed to make anything of themselves. If you don’t RTFM, then don’t complain when you fail.
Man pages would actually be useful if they included some common examples .
A. Most man pages do just that.
B. Today there are many more complete forms of online help. Every major Linux distro has a good HTML manual. If you had bothered to look…
>>…that’s not a bug — it’s a Good Thing! It’s not like you’re forced to pick through each and every one; just like with Windows, you can choose from a few common profiles.<<
Sure, and those common profiles install 8 text editors, 2 desktop environments, 6 window managers, 4 Word processors, 3 Speadsheet apps, 5 Web Browsers, 9 FTP clients, et cetera.
>>. Well, I doubt that you have really evaluated each and every one of the tens of thousands of Linux application programs, so your casual dismissal gives me cause to suspect laziness on your part. And since you stated no criteria for evaluation, I have good cause to suspect that you didn’t really do any evaluation. It looks more like a pot-shot (witness “linux geek”) than a thoughtful comment. <<
No I didn’t evaluate tens of thousands of half-finished, feature-incomplete pieces of GPL’ed crap. I was actually talking about programs like AbiWord – which sucks, and K-Word – which sucks (in comparison to their commercial or formerly-commercial-now-open-source counterparts). Would you seriously suggest I use Bubba and Joe-Bobs Office Suite version 0.0.16 RC1 that doesn’t support typing on the keyboard yet?
>>You had to learn Windows or MacOS or whatever at some point in time! You’re holding Linux up to an impossible standard that you don’t do for things that you already put in the work for.<<
What a control panel (like Microsoft, etc) or a Preferences Menu (like BeOS) isn’t a good enough place? If it’s good enough for everyone else, and it makes logical sense to put it there – then why isn’t there in a Linux distro?
Linux is a good OS kernel. Period. MOST distros absolutely suck, because they’ve learned nothing from the example companies like Apple and Be and Microsoft and GeoWorks, that spent millions on usability studies to find the best place for a screen resolution applet.
Speed: Bla bla bla bla…
Good God. Are you trying to write an encyclopedia or something?
“Brevity is the soul of wit.” — Polonius from Shakespeare’s Hamlet (I think)
Speed, I found this quote especially for you; Study it; Learn it. I don’t think all your rambling is helping your cause one bit.
“I’m doing this is to put to rest some of the complaints that I’m a Microsoft stooge…”
I think that’s a nice way of saying “I’m doing this because I want Linux zealots to leave me the hell alone.” It’s kind of like when you’re kids are screaming that they want you to take them to McDonalds, so you do it just so the’ll shut the f**k up.
“It’s not like you’re forced to pick through each and every one;”
Yeah, but then if I don’t, I end up having the package installed that adds Lisp support to emacs. Not a big deal by itself but add that by about 500 package that I’m not sure if I need, and the install suddenly becomes much bigger than it needs to be.
“Crappy apps. Well, I doubt that you have really evaluated each and every one of the tens of thousands of Linux application programs, so your casual dismissal gives me cause to suspect laziness on your part.”
Well, I assume that the ones being included with most distros and advertised on the box would be a good representation of the overall quality and except for a couple (most notably Galleon), I wasn’t impressed.
“You had to learn Windows or MacOS or whatever at some point in time! You’re holding Linux up to an impossible standard that you don’t do for things that you already put in the work for.”
Yeah, and you know how I got started? I clicked on the Start menu and then clicked on Help. And you know what? It was organized and even easily searchable. Just as a test, I typed in ‘resolution’ and immediately came up with instructions on how to change my screen resolution. As a matter of fact, it actually had a link right on the page that took me straight to the Display settings.
And therein lies the difference (what the other guy was saying) .. Linux is good, but it just doesn’t have the ‘polish’ yet.
Is it worth paying whatever Microsoft wants just to continue to be “fat, dumb and happy”? Even if the price soars to tens of thousands of dollars a year? Those are philosophical matters that aren’t in the scope of the article
“This is the meat of the issue. It’s an insult. Without ego there can be no insult. But the truth is that lazy fools have nothing to brag about.”
Yes, you’re exactly right, Speed. If everyone in this world were as intelligent as you, we’d all be a lot better off, wouldn’t we?
“Is it worth paying whatever Microsoft wants just to continue to be “fat, dumb and happy”? Even if the price soars to tens of thousands of dollars a year?”
(flame mode on) If it means that I don’t have to be associate with assholes like you who think that I’m a ‘lazy fool’, then I would gladly sell my soul to Bill Gates. (flame mode off)
BTW: I would say that I actually agree what you said about people having to reinstall Windows too, but I’m not giving you that much credit. Now, run along and build an altar for your Linux box and worship it, you little zeallot!
Sure, and those common profiles install 8 text editors, 2 desktop environments, 6 window managers, 4 Word processors, 3 Speadsheet apps, 5 Web Browsers, 9 FTP clients, et cetera.
Are you saying in a round-about way that you’re unable to make decisions? All you have to do is pick one. How hard is that? Certainly Linux isn’t to blame for your personal faults!
No I didn’t evaluate tens of thousands of half-finished, feature-incomplete pieces of GPL’ed crap.
If you didn’t bother to look at them, then how do you know they’re like that? Prejudice, plain and simple.
I was actually talking about programs like AbiWord – which sucks, and K-Word – which sucks (in comparison to their commercial or formerly-commercial-now-open-source counterparts).
Funny how sweeping generalizations come from narrow minds. You could have mentioned your limited scope of knowledge, rather than making such grandiose pronouncements.
Would you seriously suggest I use Bubba and Joe-Bobs Office Suite version 0.0.16 RC1 that doesn’t support typing on the keyboard yet?
I dunno — does it have a straw man feature? If it does, it would be just right for you.
What a control panel (like Microsoft, etc) or a Preferences Menu (like BeOS) isn’t a good enough place? If it’s good enough for everyone else, and it makes logical sense to put it there – then why isn’t there in a Linux distro?
What you wrote is a total non sequitur to the quote that you put up. Are you saying that you can’t find the control panel? Try looking for it, just like you would do in Windows or Mac OS.
Linux is a good OS kernel. Period. MOST distros absolutely suck, because they’ve learned nothing from the example companies like Apple and Be and Microsoft and GeoWorks, that spent millions on usability studies to find the best place for a screen resolution applet.
Your post is a gallery of your own personality flaws. You blame them all on Linux, as any irresponsible person would. (Another personality flaw…) But your indecision, sloth, exaggeration, dishonesty etc. have nothing to do with how well a Linux distribution performs.
And if “Apple and Be and Microsoft and GeoWorks” really spent millions to discover that it makes sense to put one control panel applet with the other control panel applets…well they’re even stupider than you.
Of the OSs that I have used.
Amiga – Preferences
BeOS – Preferences
CPM/86 – Prefs
MacOS (all versions) – Preferences
Windows (all versions) – Control Panels
Of an OS I have no plans to use.
Linux – ????? Some command line string that I have forgot after less than 24 hours after reading it.
Simple things should be easy. Hard things by thier nature are hard. But change screen resolution should not be one of the hard things when it is so easy on other OSs.
Earl Colby Pottinger
Simbad wrote:
“How many farmers go shopping in their tractor? ”
Hehe, this is the most succinct and precise graphic metaphor about Linux that I have ever seen !
Nice!
I think that’s a nice way of saying “I’m doing this because I want Linux zealots to leave me the hell alone.” It’s kind of like when you’re kids are screaming that they want you to take them to McDonalds, so you do it just so the’ll shut the f**k up.
Do you have any proof of that? As it stands, it looks like more of the same prejudice and ignorance that makes the article worthless in the first place.
Yeah, but then if I don’t, I end up having the package installed that adds Lisp support to emacs. Not a big deal by itself but add that by about 500 package that I’m not sure if I need, and the install suddenly becomes much bigger than it needs to be.
So in other words, you’ve made up your mind to be unhappy with everything, as long as it is connected with Linux. Again, that’s no failing of Linux, only a personal problem on your part.
Well, I assume that the ones being included with most distros and advertised on the box would be a good representation of the overall quality and except for a couple (most notably Galleon), I wasn’t impressed.
Contrary to the popular saying, when you assume you only make an ass of yourself.
Yeah, and you know how I got started? I clicked on the Start menu and then clicked on Help. And you know what? It was organized and even easily searchable. Just as a test, I typed in ‘resolution’ and immediately came up with instructions on how to change my screen resolution. As a matter of fact, it actually had a link right on the page that took me straight to the Display settings.
And therein lies the difference (what the other guy was saying) .. Linux is good, but it just doesn’t have the ‘polish’ yet.
Funny about how you go on and on about how you did the work in Windows, but not one single peep about doing that with Linux. That’s the very double standard that I’ve been talking about! If you’re too lazy to try to learn Linux, just say so.
Yes, you’re exactly right, Speed. If everyone in this world were as intelligent as you, we’d all be a lot better off, wouldn’t we?
I didn’t say anything about intelligence. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to be honest. And IMHO the world would be a lot better if there were more honest people.
(flame mode on) If it means that I don’t have to be associate with assholes like you who think that I’m a ‘lazy fool’, then I would gladly sell my soul to Bill Gates. (flame mode off)
I never called you a lazy fool. It was you who drew that conclusion! That makes you the asshole, then.
1. Too much choice…that’s not a bug — it’s a Good Thing! It’s not like you’re forced to pick through each and every one…
No, but the more redundant programs you have, the more difficult it becomes to sort the good from the bad. More importantly, a lot of the programs are named things that users wouldn’t expect. Sure, you have your gAIMs and such, but there are a lot of other applications with clever or nice-sounding titles that a new user wouldn’t understand as being an AIM client or whatever (“Fire” for OS X comes to mind). And most distributions do not organize things wonderfully (for some great proof, read the clock section of the Gnome usability reports). Remember, almost any new Linux user will be migrating from a different system. It needs to be easy for them.
Sure the lazy fools can deflect attention away from their inadequacies by acting insulted by this or that, but at the end of the day they are the ones who failed to make anything of themselves. If you don’t RTFM, then don’t complain when you fail.
Of course, the disastrous flaw with this “argument” is the presumption that a user should be expected to read a manual in order to do something so simple. If Microsoft were to add a new feature to Office such that you were required to type in, say, a 128-letter key every time you started the program, I could easily say “you’re just lazy” when you complained. You haven’t argued anything; “laziness” is tangential to the real point: should it be necessary to read the manual for simple things? That’s where intuitive design comes into place. Pretending that documentation can make up for non-intuitive-design is a fool’s paradise of engineering.
If there’s a reason why it’s important to have the user read the manual (some security features come immediately to mind), then “laziness” becomes a much more valid complaint against the reviewer.
No, it says a lot about your faulty memory. You had to learn Windows or MacOS or whatever at some point in time! You’re holding Linux up to an impossible standard that you don’t do for things that you already put in the work for.
I never had to look in a manual to know where to change Windows’ or the Mac’s monitor settings. The design was intuitive enough such that I could figure it out on my own, and such that this knowledge was not only easily retainable, but also applicable to other areas of the system. Not true with some random command-line program.
He didn’t want to find out what kind of video card it had, although he would have needed to to install Windows drivers.
Windows comes with support out-of-the-box for most video cards (and without asking you, so you don’t even have to think about it unless your card isn’t supported). And with Linux, you almost always need to know the chipset and not just the type of card. That can take a lot more effort.
All of the above are very prejudiced comments or actions. Together they indicate an unwillingness to give Linux a fair shot, so it’s no surprise that this very predictable conclusion was reached:
He gave Linux a much, much fairer shot than most general users probably would. And attitudes like yours don’t help the situation. If I had you as my image of the typical Linux user (thankfully, I don’t) I’d never touch the system.
>>Are you saying in a round-about way that you’re unable to make decisions? All you have to do is pick one. How hard is that? Certainly Linux isn’t to blame for your personal faults!<<
Sure I can, i’m an american after all. Which one is the “best” to use? Each has it’s strong and weak points. Some make it more suitable for usability, others for colaboration. This one has a better PPP dialer, this one has a better network configuration applet. A linux Distro is less an OS than it is a collection of tons of applications.
>>If you didn’t bother to look at them, then how do you know they’re like that? Prejudice, plain and simple.<<
I don’t need to examine every piece of crap in a toilet to realize someone took a dump.
>>Funny how sweeping generalizations come from narrow minds. You could have mentioned your limited scope of knowledge, rather than making such grandiose pronouncements. <<
What generalizations? They do suck – compared to the functionality available with say StarOffice or OpenOffice or GoBe productive.
>>Your post is a gallery of your own personality flaws. You blame them all on Linux, as any irresponsible person would. (Another personality flaw…) But your indecision, sloth, exaggeration, dishonesty etc. have nothing to do with how well a Linux distribution performs.<<
I blamed nothing on Linux. The kernel is fantastic. It’s the distros that are full of mostly useless crap to the desktop user.
>>And if “Apple and Be and Microsoft and GeoWorks” really spent millions to discover that it makes sense to put one control panel applet with the other control panel applets…well they’re even stupider than you<<
Apparently not, since each of these companies was somewhat successful (though two of those companies were not able to compete due to MS and have since withered on the vine).
>>Are you saying that you can’t find the control panel? Try looking for it, just like you would do in Windows or Mac OS<<
Is it possible you are suggesting linuxconf is user-friendly?
Now, since you wnat to make this a personal attack, rather than a friendly discussion, I suggest you “bring it on” you pompous, arrogant, self-important, self-righteous, weak-minded, slack-jawed, sawed off, spitefull, snivelling jackass. To have a battle of wits with you on an equal playing, I would need to be suffering from the effects of advanced senile dementia.
Linux – ????? Some command line string that I have forgot after less than 24 hours after reading it.
On one hand you claim to have an elephantine memory when it comes to the proprietary commercial products that you mentioned. But when it comes to Linux, that same memory fails you utterly. Curious. Sure looks like another double standard to me!
Simple things should be easy. Hard things by thier nature are hard. But change screen resolution should not be one of the hard things when it is so easy on other OSs.
There’s that word again — “should”. So now Linux is to blame because when you told the world what to do, the world didn’t listen? /me shakes head
Frankly I don’t see what’s so hard about pressing three buttons. You do it all the time in Windows — you have to just to log in! And in fact, two of those buttons are the same as two of the ones in the infamous “three finger salute”! Again, it’s a double standard — something that’s perfectly acceptable in Windows suddenly becomes an odious chore simply because it’s being done in Linux.
What’s the real reason why you refuse to give Linux a fair shake?
The guy writing this article has so many things wrong I find it almost humorous he’s a respected writer. Then I came to my sences and realized this article is about people who don’t know nothing about Linux/UNIX and install it to see what all the hype is about. In that respect he hit the nail on the head. He’s not running Mandrake or SuSe for a desktop cause how is he suppose to know RedHat is for servers? He’s just some guy right?
Most people think Linux is a product by Red Hat. In fact, I thought so, and my brother bought Red Hat 6.2, couldn’t install it. Then came along my geeky cousin and suggested Linux Mandrake 7.1.
But if it wasn’t for my geeky cousin, I would still think Linux is hard to use, because of Red Hat.
Besides, the edition of Red Hat he is using is one made for workstations, and on the product page, it have things like “Easy Installation” and so on.
BTW, anybody who knows how to change resolutions and go to device manager in Windows would have had to learn it at some point in the past. Just becuase you now know it thoroughly doesn’t mean it was so intuitive the first time. In my opinion, the evolution of desktop linux in the last 3 years have been amazing, and I hope the improvements will contine at the same pace.
Actually, Windows XP places the resolution link in a different place, though you could go back to where to knew it was always. (But I have got to wonder, David never used Mac OS before, yet he found it the most easiest to use OS…)
He didn’t want to find out what kind of video card it had, although he would have needed to to install Windows drivers.
If he was running an older computer (which he is anyway), no, he wouldn’t need to install drivers; unless he is using brandless stuff. Also, most hardware nowadays comes with Windows drivers, not Linux drivers. Plus, since Linux drivers are made by volunteers themselves, it is not gurrented to work in your hardware and software combination, and with your distribution.
He also crowns Windows as the best choice, as any “Microsoft stooge” would.
And you crown Linux the best, like any “Linux stooge” would. See his reasonings:
“If I were rating operating systems, Mac OS X would win on ease of use, but Windows XP would win overall usability (based solely on greater application support). Compared to either of these, and because OS X offers the same Unix benefits as Linux, I’d find desktop Linux hard to recommend except in very special circumstances.”
He gave Windows the crown because of an reason: it has most apps. An OS without apps is like a car without gas. Also, he rates OS X as the easiest to use; to a complete newbie, Linux doesn’t offer anything above OS X; especially in terms of ease of use. Try to rationalize, Speed. I’m a Linux user too.
He doesn’t bother to read the manual, and blames Linux.
Really, do you expect an complete newbie to read that thick book? Both XP and OS X comes with complete online (can be accessed on the computer) help files. And both of the OS makes it easy to find what you want.
If this had been a Windows review, would his editor have approved such a slovenly approach? I doubt it. Windows would have come preinstalled on the very latest hardware, and the author would have put years of experience with Windows “tips and tricks” to show off every advantage that Windows has to offer. And instead of complaining about spellcheckers, he would have also have given glowing reviews to the also pre-installed Office suite. That’s a double standard in my book.
In fact, one of the two only reviews of Windows XP I have read was done in this manner. Both are from ZDnet and CNET; both of which I wouldn’t really call positive reviews. CNET’s one was actually a deathmatch with OS X.
Except for the spelling checker for OpenOffice.org mistake (which it was his friend’s fault; and the spell checker really sucks in comparison with those found in Office XP, StarOffice 6.0 and GobeProductive 2.0 for BeOS), the review wasn’t biased towards Linux. In fact, I find him comparing more with Mac OS X, and questioning why he would use Linux over it.
1. Too much choice. While it’s true that the major Linux distros offer a wealth of included software that’s alien to purchasers of the big commercial prducts, that’s not a bug — it’s a Good Thing! It’s not like you’re forced to pick through each and every one; just like with Windows, you can choose from a few common profiles.
Yes, the average Joe would love 3 web browsers, 4 email clients, 11 window managers etc.; all in names he doesn’t know (Like for example, who would guess Galeon was a web browser anyway?). On Windows and Mac OS, they are presented with one choice.If they don’t like the bundled (or intergrated) apps, they could use third party ones. Does Windows come with three text editors? Does Mac OS X come 11 window managers?
2. Crappy apps. Well, I doubt that you have really evaluated each and every one of the tens of thousands of Linux application programs, so your casual dismissal gives me cause to suspect laziness on your part. And since you stated no criteria for evaluation, I have good cause to suspect that you didn’t really do any evaluation. It looks more like a pot-shot (witness “linux geek”) than a thoughtful comment.
Most of the apps for Linux was create in such a way it was obvious they didn’t have usablity experts. For example, Konqueror is a fairly good browser, but its UI isn’t that easy to use as Mozilla. A redo of the UI (especially the menus) would do great. Mozilla is a great browser, but its UI is obviously made for web developerss. GnuCash has a lot of features, but I found using Quicken much more easier (and no, I never used both before last month)
No, it says a lot about your faulty memory. You had to learn Windows or MacOS or whatever at some point in time! You’re holding Linux up to an impossible standard that you don’t do for things that you already put in the work for.
David Coursey called Mac OS X the easiest among the three. He never before this used a Mac. Really, you are making too much assumptions. On the usablity scale, I would say Linux still has a lot more to do. But I’m still using Linux. Why? I’m a geek. Next month or the month after that I’m moving to Gentoo Linux, once I get my ADSL connection (The price was cut to US$23 a month!). But when it comes to recommending it to my grandma….
(well, my grandmother wouldn’t use a computer anyway, she is 90, she can’t read, write and speak English; and only read Tamil (an Southern Indian language); and is close to blindness – but you get my point, no?)
Let’s not forget this “some guy” works for a huge publishing concern. He has far more resources at his disposal than you or I do. He has no excuse. It’s his job to find out! No, he’s not just “some guy”.
He is looking at Linux like most consumers would. The same way he looked at OS X. I just got to wonder, why OS X succeed in getting his “love” far much better than Linux? I’ll admit, I only use OS X at a Mac store (albeit for a lot of hours); and me never using Macs and impress the other customers :-). It is well… easy to use. And hopefully, Linux wouldn’t be like that, otherwise, I’m moving platform.
(flame mode on) If it means that I don’t have to be associate with assholes like you who think that I’m a ‘lazy fool’, then I would gladly sell my soul to Bill Gates. (flame mode off)
Me too, if being a Linux user means being like Speed.
Stay tune for Part 2 of this reply
Are you saying in a round-about way that you’re unable to make decisions? All you have to do is pick one. How hard is that? Certainly Linux isn’t to blame for your personal faults!
Actually, picking one is hard for normal consumers. Cause they don’t know what the heck they are chosing anyway. It is great for geeks, who would like choice. It is great for those who have read up a lot about Linux. But it is not great for Ma and Pa coming back home with a Wal mart PC with Red Hat installed.
If you didn’t bother to look at them, then how do you know they’re like that? Prejudice, plain and simple.
Most of the apps (the GPL’ed crap) are normally still alpha, and even the authors say it is bug infested, and doesn’t have feature XYZ implemented yet. So, if we compare Speed’s Office 0.0.1, and say it is buggy and low featured, Linux zealots (like you) would shout back and say “Hey! That’s not fair! It’s not even alpha!”
What you wrote is a total non sequitur to the quote that you put up. Are you saying that you can’t find the control panel? Try looking for it, just like you would do in Windows or Mac OS.
Actually, on my Mandrake desktop, there is two (one is system, the other is desktop). Before than, in 7.1, there was more than two. So, in linux Mandrake, I normally reinstalled the OS instead of meddling with control applets I don’t understand. Do you expect Average Joes to differenciate from the many control panels for many different jobs? I have tried many different distirbutions, Linux Mandrake (up to 8.2), SuSE 8.0, and Red Hat 7.0 (well, I was so dissapointed with it, I never touch Red Hat again) – all of which DON’T have a control panel like in Windows, OS X and Be OS. The closest is YaST2 in SuSE.
Your post is a gallery of your own personality flaws. You blame them all on Linux, as any irresponsible person would. (Another personality flaw…) But your indecision, sloth, exaggeration, dishonesty etc. have nothing to do with how well a Linux distribution performs.
Tell me one distribution which invested in some usablity experts? The “easy to use” distros like Lycoris copies from Windows anyway
Do you have any proof of that? As it stands, it looks like more of the same prejudice and ignorance that makes the article worthless in the first place…. So in other words, you’ve made up your mind to be unhappy with everything, as long as it is connected with Linux. Again, that’s no failing of Linux, only a personal problem on your part.
If you have read the TalkBack comments for if other OS-related article, it was the Linux users who ask him to use Linux. This just shows your ignorance.
Contrary to the popular saying, when you assume you only make an ass of yourself.
So really, a grandma who is dying of cancer who be the one choosing from 11 window managers? And she would be wonder “What the heck is a window manager?”
Funny about how you go on and on about how you did the work in Windows, but not one single peep about doing that with Linux. That’s the very double standard that I’ve been talking about! If you’re too lazy to try to learn Linux, just say so.
So here’s my experience finding the same thing on Mandrake (Be thankful, I log on in KDE 2.2.2 for this). I clicked on K-Menu>Documentation>Help. I click on Find, and searched for resolutions. Got “Search string “resolution” not found”. See? On the desktop, and on the menus, there wasn’t documentation for Mandrake. Why? Under recommended install, the “Documentation” group wasn’t installed by default, and me not needing it, decided not to click it. For new users, I would bet they wouldn’t click on it either. So there isn’t manpages on my machine.
I didn’t say anything about intelligence. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to be honest. And IMHO the world would be a lot better if there were more honest people.
I found him more honest than you. You are seeing Linux on the desktop from a Linux zealot mentality. Mac OS X and Windows XP is easier to use than Linux. get it? “But then, rajan, why do you use Linux?” I find it most fun, I’m a geek, and I like tinkering with my system, something I couldn’t do much on Windows nor on Mac OS X. Pre-XP, I admit, I have never use Windows. Before that, I was using Linux. Before that, I use Windows – but then, I hardly used computers, hardly know how to use Windows, because I couldn’t be more interested.
He gave Linux a much, much fairer shot than most general users probably would. And attitudes like yours don’t help the situation. If I had you as my image of the typical Linux user (thankfully, I don’t) I’d never touch the system.
He gave a much fairer shot at Linux than I did once. If wasn’t for my cousin, I would not be a geek anyway.
I never called you a lazy fool. It was you who drew that conclusion! That makes you the asshole, then.
Actually, you did. You call people who don’t read the manuals, don’t bother to find for control panels, don’t bother to try new apps lazy fools.
Frankly I don’t see what’s so hard about pressing three buttons. You do it all the time in Windows — you have to just to log in! And in fact, two of those buttons are the same as two of the ones in the infamous “three finger salute”! Again, it’s a double standard — something that’s perfectly acceptable in Windows suddenly becomes an odious chore simply because it’s being done in Linux.
Most Windows user don’t know the 3-finger salute (Ctrl+Alt+Del). And in Windows XP, it is not that needed anyway. Unless an app crashes, but I notice a lot of people just leave the crashed app open, unless they are using it.
But if you read the ending for the article, David said Mac OS X is the easiest of the lot. Windows is easier than Linux; but like I said before (in Lycoris related threads); IT IS NOT THE EASIEST.
“Simple things should be easy. Hard things by thier nature are hard. But change screen resolution should not be one of the hard things when it is so easy on other OSs.”
The configuration file lists all resolutions and color depths that are possible/wanted for the given hardware (known as mode lines). After that is done, it is a simple matter of pressing ctrl+alt+numpadplus/numpadminus to switch between these configurations.
I’ll give that setting up Xfree86 requires a more in depth knowledge of your hardware than would be needed otherwise. However, if you simply read the documentation, you would know it’s none too difficult to switch resolutions.
Since Xfree86 and GNOME, KDE, etc… are totally seperate software packages, it is no simple matter to try and make one control the other especially since GNOME and KDE need to work with more than one X11 implimentation. It would also depend on the configuration file being setup correctly before hand.
Since Xfree86 and GNOME, KDE, etc… are totally seperate software packages, it is no simple matter to try and make one control the other especially since GNOME and KDE need to work with more than one X11 implimentation. It would also depend on the configuration file being setup correctly before hand.
Never have I said (or anyone against Speed here said) that it was GNOME’s and KDE’s responsiblity to do so. In fact, my opinion is that it is the job of the distributor.
And BTW, the instructions sounds a little too complicated for the average Joes, no?
No, but the more redundant programs you have, the more difficult it becomes to sort the good from the bad.
You’re exaggerating my point to the point of ridiculousness. I never advocated burying the user in huge numbers of choices. And no Linux distro that I know of does this.
More importantly, a lot of the programs are named things that users wouldn’t expect. … And most distributions do not organize things wonderfully (for some great proof, read the clock section of the Gnome usability reports).
Specifically which distributions are you referring to? I’ve seen enough sweeping generalizations that amount to nothing. I’ve used all of the major players like Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE, Caldera etc., and they all have pretty good organization. If you can’t figure out the application by its name, you have a good idea of what to expect by its location in the menu.
Coming from a different direction, how many people would be able to guess what programs like “Excel” and “Outlook” do, only by their names? Again I see a double standard brewing.
Remember, almost any new Linux user will be migrating from a different system. It needs to be easy for them.
Why?
Of course, the disastrous flaw with this “argument” is the presumption that a user should be expected to read a manual in order to do something so simple.
It is a disastrous flaw, and the error is in presumption, your presumption. RTFM is an idiom — taking it literally is sheer foolishness. My point was that to learn, some source of information is necessary.
If you can prove to me that people can learn without studying, then you will have won your point. But the last time I checked, schools and universities are in no danger of closing.
If Microsoft were to add a new feature to Office such that you were required to type in, say, a 128-letter key every time you started the program, I could easily say “you’re just lazy” when you complained.
So your definition of laziness is the only valid one? I think not! Once more I’ll remind you that people’s personality flaws are not a trait of the OS. They did the work for Windows, but not for Linux. That’s a double standard.
You haven’t argued anything;
That’s a personal attack. Why are you afraid to answer what I wrote?
“laziness” is tangential to the real point: should it be necessary to read the manual for simple things? That’s where intuitive design comes into place. Pretending that documentation can make up for non-intuitive-design is a fool’s paradise of engineering.
LOL… So exactly what branch of engineering deals with “non-intuitive-design”? Get real, as a BS artist you’re failing miserably. How many people have managed to combine <Ctrl>, <Alt> and <Delete> through intuition alone?
I never had to look in a manual to know where to change Windows’ or the Mac’s monitor settings. The design was intuitive enough such that I could figure it out on my own, and such that this knowledge was not only easily retainable, but also applicable to other areas of the system.
That’s your claim. I’ll be happy to review the proof, if you ever come up with any. If you’re saying that you instantly knew exactly what to do in Windows, then you have an uphill road to belief. If you’re saying that you were willing to do an exaustive search of the Windows and Mac OS GUI, but couldn’t be bothered to do exactly the same thing with KDE or GNOME, then you’re guilty of the same old double standard.
Not true with some random command-line program.
What “random command-line program”? That’s a cheap shot that has no bearing on this discussion. Shame on you and your FUD!
Windows comes with support out-of-the-box for most video cards (and without asking you, so you don’t even have to think about it unless your card isn’t supported). And with Linux, you almost always need to know the chipset and not just the type of card. That can take a lot more effort.
That’s just not true. Every major Linux distro detects the video card, so you don’t even have to think about it unless your card isn’t supported, just like Windows. And I’ve never been asked about the chipset! Why do you lie?
(Coursey) gave Linux a much, much fairer shot than most general users probably would.
That’s a lousy excuse. And it’s no excuse for biased journalism.
And attitudes like yours don’t help the situation. If I had you as my image of the typical Linux user (thankfully, I don’t) I’d never touch the system.
You blame me, you blame Linux, you do a lot of blaming! But it’s your finger that you refuse to lift.
Every now and then there is a heated discussion about desktop linux. And every now and then, I post this link to my tale of romance, adventure, and why linux is getting it’s teeth kicked in on the desktop despite having so many programmers in its user community.
http://news.gnome.org/gnome-news/983984049/984280651/addPostingForm
Notes:
*I wrote this over a year ago. A few of the bad designs in the installer have been axed, but they have been replaced with designs that are just as bad, confusing, ambiguous, and unusable as their predecessors.
*While I talk about one distribution’s installer, most other linux distributions have graphical installers with interfaces just as badly designed. I’m not trying to single any one distro out. In fact, many free software projects (not just distros) have these horrendous designs. The story is just one particular case of this.
*People ask “why didn’t you try to help them design a better interface?” This is the linux community. UI problems are not considered to be problems, confused end users are considered to be stupid, and usability design is considered to be a BS field of study. They wouldn’t have listened and I’d fare slightly better talking to a wall.
*Yes, this is a real story. The names have been omitted to make LUG life slightly more civil.
Actually, picking one is hard for normal consumers. Cause they don’t know what the heck they are chosing anyway. It is great for geeks, who would like choice. It is great for those who have read up a lot about Linux. But it is not great for Ma and Pa coming back home with a Wal mart PC with Red Hat installed.
That’s bullshit. What Walmart does is Walmart’s responsibility. And they’re not using RHL! As I stated before, if you didn’t care what you were buying when you bought it, you have no right to complain that it wasn’t what you wanted.
Most of the apps (the GPL’ed crap) are normally still alpha, and even the authors say it is bug infested, and doesn’t have feature XYZ implemented yet.
That’s total bullshit. You are a liar. I know that you can’t prove that claim, so I’m not even going to pretend…
Do you expect Average Joes to differenciate from the many control panels for many different jobs?
I don’t know anybody named “Average Joes”, so obviously I can’t assess their abilities, and then know what to expect. And since you’re not defining any terms…
It’s moot, since the “many control panels” situation doesn’t exist.
So really, a grandma who is dying of cancer who be the one choosing from 11 window managers? And she would be wonder “What the heck is a window manager?”
That kind of wild exaggeration can only be described as insane. If that’s the length that you have to go to, then it’s a very good indicator that you’re not on the right side of this argument.
You are seeing Linux on the desktop from a Linux zealot mentality.
That’s a lie. So far all I have been doing is commenting on the double standards and dishonesty that surround this story. Your made-up name-calling falls into the dishonesty category.
Mac OS X and Windows XP is easier to use than Linux. get it?
Considering your not-so-impressive record of dishonesty, I am not about to blindly accept what you say. Caveat emptor.
I realize that it is not really Speed that I am replying to but the previous post. However, I liked Speed’s response and just wanted to add a couple things.
When something goes wrong with Linux (yeah, it really does happen), my experience has been that it’s easier to reinstall than to try to fix the problem.
People do that with Windows too. You’re blaming Linux for something that’s not a trait of Linux.
The difference between Windows and Linux when something goes wrong is that with Linux, and a little study and effort, you can get it going again. With Windows, for example, when the registry hive becomes corrupted, you are plain out of luck. It is possible to get the hive back, but then you have to reinstall all of your applications to reset the registry settings. Many other problems on Windows are only solved by reinstalling.
Man pages would actually be useful if they included some common examples .
A. Most man pages do just that.
B. Today there are many more complete forms of online help. Every major Linux distro has a good HTML manual. If you had bothered to look…
If you bothered taking five minutes and learn how to read a man page, you would find that they are actually quite useful in helping you use switches and options correctly.
I think it’s funny how many people learned Windows, or even DOS, by working with it for a long time, asking questions and reading either books or help files, but these same people act like using Linux should just be an automatic instinct. When it’s not they get all upset and make some incredibly uninformed statements. Or write uninformed articles.
> a lot of the programs are
> named things that users
> wouldn’t expect.
Indeed, even Linux should have been named “Lindows”, and “Outlook Express” should have been named “Microsoft Eudora”. Don’t sound incredible! Oonce you know the ugly beast-head icon starts a browser, where’s the problem?
> I typed in ‘resolution’ and
> immediately came up with instructions
> on how to change my screen resolution
And this was the first time you came across a Windows computer??? How did you even know to search for “resolution” instead of, say, “screen”? If your grandma didn’t like the look of her desktop, how the hell would she know to search for “RESOLUTION”, of all things? Don’t make me laugh. You are simply utilizing and presuming tons of Windows-experience.
> Windows comes with support
> out-of-the-box for most
> video cards
So does Linux, obviously. Unless your last
Linux installation happened three years ago, in which case you should be comparing driver support with Windows 98 standard. Give linux hackers some credit. For what they have to work with, they have done amazingly well.
> should it be necessary to
> read the manual for simple
> things? That’s where intuitive
> design comes into place
I have had the misfortune of introdudcing Windows computers to joe-user students who are totally new to it. Do you know how long it takes before they get accustomed to this simple mouse that you and I take for granted? Or to shift keys and CAP locks? Or to single/double-clicks? Or to saving word files? Or to printing from the print icon in word?
Experience is the best teacher, and familiarity often = intuition. You are simply presuming tons of Windows experience. I tell you, NOTHING IS SO OBVIOUS the first time. Not even how to achieve an orgasm! And certainly not Windows.
So both Windows and Mac have great UI, huh? Mac was designed by “useability experts”. It has MS office, internet explorer, Outlook, and everything great-great-grandma needs. Yet, it has only about 5% of the market, about the same as linux. In fact, to a great extent, it is also used by the same kind of people who use desktop linux -geeks, of the graphic/publishing department. Can the linux-gui-sucks crowd explain this one too?
> never had to look in a manual
> to know where to change Windows’
> or the Mac’s monitor settings.
You are a genius!!! I always had a Windows book by my side when I started with Windows. And when I moved from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95, I found the little Windows 95 booklet quite helpful, becuase I did need to consult it on a whole lot of occasions. Even now, I still have to read documention to accomplish certain things in word or excell. Like how to import from text file to Access.
>>With Windows, for example, when the registry hive becomes corrupted, you are plain out of luck. It is possible to get the hive back, but then you have to reinstall all of your applications to reset the registry settings.<<
That just means that you haven’t done a proper backup of the system state, and thus unable to restore the registry to a working condition. And – many factors can contribute to the corruption of a registry hive – especially VIA chipsets.
>>Many other problems on Windows are only solved by reinstalling.<<
Or, knowing what you are doing.
>>I think it’s funny how many people learned Windows, or even DOS, by working with it for a long time, asking questions and reading either books or help files, but these same people act like using Linux should just be an automatic instinct. When it’s not they get all upset and make some incredibly uninformed statements.<<
Good design is good design. Period. Solaris is easy to admin, as are most commercial flavors of Unix. The point of the article was about using Linux for the desktop. And whatever the desktop environment, it is crap from a usability and ease of configurability standpoint.
I “picked up” solaris 7 in less than a week. I picked up BeOS (okay, technically not a Unix, but close enough) in less than a day. If you want Linux on the desktop – it MUST be as easy to use as Windows or Mac or Be. An end user shouldn’t HAVE to read a man page or a book to learn how to configure X for screen resolution. He should be able to poke around a little bit and find a display applet to do it for him. He should have to to read a How-to or book to compile a kernel – but then again a desktop user shouldn’t HAVE to compile his own kernel.
Et Cetera, so on, and so forth; ad infinitum.
David is funny: He installed Linux the FIRST time, and he is comparing his linux experience with his Windows experience?? Huh?? Shouldn’t the comparison rather be between his FIRST WINDOWS INSTALLATION/EXPERIENCE with his first linux installation/experience?
And if he has only used Linux for three or so days, why would he be qualified to rank or recommend it?
Mac has MS Office, and Internet explorer, and Outlook Express. It is pretty and has everything Joe user needs. Why is joe user still using Windows? Perhaps there are other factors besides your famous UI arguments? Think again.
I just spent about a half an hour typing up a reply, then hit submit only to get the Error 110 shit, then hit the back button and THERE IS NOTHING HERE – GOD FUCKING DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry for the above post, please delete ….
So, you want honest? I’ll give you honest …
IMHO, this stupid topic isn’t even worth debating over. Why should I feel bad for the OS that I choose to use? Am I really a stupid person or ‘lazy fool’ as so many of the Linux faithful would have me believe?
I’ve tried Linux quite a few times – I installed a Slackware box (including Radius, web, email, and ftp) for an ISP which had approx. 2000 customers.
I’ve install it here at the house and compiled KDE 1 from source to get it working and used pkgtool for KDE2.
I’ve set up Redhat on both my spare and new PC and had a ‘Net connection going on both of them. I’ve tried several of the apps including Galeon, Mozilla, StarOffice, Evolution, XMMS, gFTP, Gimp, Grip, Gnumeric, Abiword, and several others that come to mind.
And do you know what? After several days of working with it, I was always back in Windows. Why? I dunno, really. I guess because it was more comfortable to me and I knew where everything was, and I never felt it was lacking for anything except security, which is easily fixable.
Why did I try Linux? Because of the Linux faithful that told me about how great and wonderful it was. But personally, I didn’t see. I didn’t find anything particularly wrong with it, though it just wasn’t for me.
But then came the insults … the zealots who tell me I sold me soul to Father Bill, and that the reason I didn’t like Linux is because I was too stupid to understand it.
I guess the reason why it bothers me so much is becaue I hate to be made to feel inferior or referred to as a ‘stupid Windows user’ or ‘lazy fool’, just because of the OS I use. That’s like somebody walking up to me and calling me an idiot to my face – it really pisses me off!!
But why? Why do they do this? I feel that Linux is more a fight against ‘The Corporation’ than it is a choice of operating systems. I mean, shit … if you hate corporations so much, turn off the damn TV and quit patronizing the RIAA too …….
Anyway, I am going way off topic. I’m just so sick and tired of people like Speed running around acting all stuck up because he uses a ‘superior’ OS and he’s not a slave to The Corporation …..
Well, whatever. I’m done this. Other people can fight the OS wars if they want. I’m done with this.
Peace out.
David is funny: He installed Linux the FIRST time, and he is comparing his linux experience with his Windows experience?? Huh?? Shouldn’t the comparison rather be between his FIRST WINDOWS INSTALLATION/EXPERIENCE with his first linux installation/experience?
That is what he did for his Mac experience. (which BTW, he found the installation easy, but not using the product afterwards). And amazingly, Mac won his heart, Linux didn’t. Why? Mac OS X was built for the desktop. Linux desktop is made by a bunch of geeks who want the best of both world – and I’m happy with the current situation. I can’t imagine giving up Linux for Windows.
And if he has only used Linux for three or so days, why would he be qualified to rank or recommend it?
Firstly, that was exactly what he did for Mac OS X. And Mac OS X got a much more favourable review than Linux. He wouldn’t recommend Linux because it is hard to use; which is true. Live with it :-). I really don’t care whether Linux is the easiest desktop in the world, or the way it is right now, as long it appeals to my geeks senses 🙂
Mac has MS Office, and Internet explorer, and Outlook Express. It is pretty and has everything Joe user needs. Why is joe user still using Windows? Perhaps there are other factors besides your famous UI arguments? Think again.
Mac have the basic applications, a very good UI. But it still lacks a lot of applications Windows have. People depend on these applications. If Windows is your only choice, you better learn to like it. Besides, I don’t see how Linux is going to get ISVs support Windows always has – it doesn’t have a proper IDE like VS.net (which argubly writes most of the software available for Windows), it doesn’t have standards (different packages for different distributions, choosing between the many API like Qt, GTK+ etc.) and so on. So I would forget about getting that much of ISV support.
I just spent about a half an hour typing up a reply, then hit submit only to get the Error 110 shit, then hit the back button and THERE IS NOTHING HERE – GOD FUCKING DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
… and that’s why I use Opera. When I get errors like these, all I do is press back and *always* don’t have that problem of the comment dissapearing.
Am I really a stupid person or ‘lazy fool’ as so many of the Linux faithful would have me believe?
I’m a Linux faithful (which almost gave up and pick up FreeBSD); and you aren’t lazy. Muslim radicals in Indonesia the most vocal, and most people think all Indonesians are like that; but most Indonesians are securalist, but they aren’t vocal (most of them). Same way with Linux and Linux zealots.
So both Windows and Mac have great UI, huh? Mac was designed by “useability experts”. It has MS office, internet explorer, Outlook, and everything great-great-grandma needs. Yet, it has only about 5% of the market, about the same as linux. In fact, to a great extent, it is also used by the same kind of people who use desktop linux -geeks, of the graphic/publishing department. Can the linux-gui-sucks crowd explain this one too?
Apple has 2.8%, and Linux 1% of global desktop sales. Apple is a niche player, who happens to have the most easiest to use OS. However, it is still a niche player, and lacks a lot of apps. Also, it lacks a lot of publicity, a lot of people know what are PCs, but don’t know Macs. mac hardware are also priced for the more well off, while PC prices can range from $250 to $10,000, depending on your configurations, needs and budget. There is more to a easy OS to win market. But the entire thread is about David Coursey calling Linux harder to use than Windows and Mac OS X.
“When something goes wrong with Linux (yeah, it really does happen), my experience has been that it’s easier to reinstall than to try to fix the problem.”
Thank god, I thought I was the only one. btw I replied to this part because it just happened to me, I messed up something in xconfig (dunno how it tested fine before I rebooted), but I rebooted to a blinking cli screen and the only way out was to reboot. Needless to say mandrake and lilo got partition magiced off my hard drive pretty damn fast (I’ll try again but not right now).
Speed
“He didn’t want to find out what kind of video card it had, although he would have needed to to install Windows drivers.”
wrong, most (95% at least) video cards have drivers in one form or another that come with windows. they may not be the fastest or the best but they work pretty damn well (98se has drivers that worked fine with my sister’s geforce 3, sure the newest detonator ones improved her speed but the ms ones worked pretty damn well).
“”And, no, I didn’t bother to…”
He doesn’t bother to read the manual, and blames Linux.”
Can you blame him? For anyone who isn’t inspired to become a *nix geek man pages are worse then my old 7th grade biology text (sure sometimes you have to read windows manual but its not 10 million manpages written by and for geeks).
“Too much choice…it’s a Good Thing!”
Choice can be a bad thing, mandrake 8.1 shipped with 3 different x servers (3.3.6, 4.1.0 and a 3.3.6 variant with experimental 3d support), how are us newbs supposed to decide? Oh yeah thats right read a couple hundred man pages, btw the inclusion of a beta one wasn’t smart but hey guis are hard, windows and apple have only had them for over a decade.
“Crappy apps…”
Most of them are crap, or blatant rip offs of commercial products, or both. Granted they’re are some great ones (in my limited linux experiance I learned to love kde, xmms and evolution), but they’re the exception not the rule. btw they’re are a ton of crappy windows shareware and freeware apps, its just that windows isn’t completely propped up with them like linux is (lets face it for all of linux’s promise and good points it relies almost solely on hobby software).
“No, it says a lot about your faulty memory. You had to learn Windows or MacOS or whatever at some point in time! You’re holding Linux up to an impossible standard that you don’t do for things that you already put in the work for.”
We all did have to learn windows (or mac as the case may be) but they’re not as hard to use. After years of using windows I had to use macs for a short period for work, in a day I was proficient enough that I had updated the browser, plugins and 3 drivers. In my year and a half of tinkering with linux (including many a week of nothing but linux) I’ve ruined dozens of installs and still couldn’t get drivers to work properly or easily uninstall applications. Do some people have no problem picking up linux? I’m sure they do, but for most of us who want to be able to install apps, uninstall them and update a damn driver (call them semi-power users) linux isn’t ready for primetime. I hope it is one day, but it won’t be because of 3 reasons; 1.)without a profit to be had companies like adobe won’t make “killer” apps for it. 2.)Until there are standards it will be impossible for large oems to bundle it. 3.)There is no compelling reason (i.e. killer apps) to make people convert. Unless those issues are addressed we will continue to see articles like this because linux will be a niche (small servers and geeks) os.
I use Windows (XP) as a deskstop system and FreeBSD as a server environement. While I have no real problem with FreeBSD (just dig in the docs, howto and forums to solve a problem), I’ve found Linux for the deskstop pretty frustrating :
– every distribution seems to handle things differently, which makes many docs useless (the conf file is not where it says it should be etc)
– the GUI (I tried KDE) is only good for a “mom and dad” activities (typing a letter or surfing the web). As soon as you want to do something more, you have to switch to the shell and edit zillions of obscure config files. KDE offers for example a way to browser network interfaces or hardware, but nothing to change the slightest setting (IP adress, drivers, etc). I think this is the greatest shortcomming of all.
– it’s fucking slow. KDE 3.0 on a Celeron 433+400 MB or RAM is swapping all the time (or loading stuff) ! Windows XP runs like a breeze on it.
There is no compelling reason (i.e. killer apps) to make people convert. Unless those issues are addressed we will continue to see articles like this because linux will be a niche (small servers and geeks) os.
Linux is used on more servers than just small servers. Even IBM sells mainframes with Linux. So much for small servers. Linux owns the server market, BTW.
– every distribution seems to handle things differently, which makes many docs useless (the conf file is not where it says it should be etc)
I know it is completely off, but all BSDs handles things differently. At least Linux distributions have common ground, the Linux kernel 🙂
Also, you should read documentation that comes with the distribution, not those found in linuxdoc.org and so on. It is as bad as using NetBSD documentation for FreeBSD.
– the GUI (I tried KDE) is only good for a “mom and dad” activities (typing a letter or surfing the web). As soon as you want to do something more, you have to switch to the shell and edit zillions of obscure config files. KDE offers for example a way to browser network interfaces or hardware, but nothing to change the slightest setting (IP adress, drivers, etc). I think this is the greatest shortcomming of all.
KDE isn’t Linux only. In fact, it is available for FreeBSD. Check out http://freebsd.kde.org/ –
Perhaps you should try putting Linux in the same standards as you put FreeBSD.
And in some distributions, it even easier (though non-graphical) to do thing which once FreeBSD exceled in.
– it’s fucking slow. KDE 3.0 on a Celeron 433+400 MB or RAM is swapping all the time (or loading stuff) ! Windows XP runs like a breeze on it.
Something is seriously wrong with your installation. Cause I have a machine with 64mb of RAM running KDE 3.0.1 and it doesn’t swap unless I use an app that isn’t part of KDE 3.0 (well, that too little RAM – I plan to add in 256mb of SDRAM in a few months time). Also, I found KDE 3.0 to be much faster than the Windows XP one.
On a seperate laptop with a P3 1.1ghz and 256mb of RAM, it frequently use the virtual memory for things like opening Mozilla and so on (things that take much less memory on Linux/KDE). In a month or two when I get ADSL, I would get Gentoo Linux, which would be even more faster than this bloated distro of mine (Mandrake).
“You’re exaggerating my point to the point of ridiculousness. I never advocated burying the user in huge numbers of choices. And no Linux distro that I know of does this.”
Mandrake 8.1 installed around 10 terminals, including 4 foriegn language ones (btw wtf do I need the chinese terminal to make the internet control work?).
“Coming from a different direction, how many people would be able to guess what programs like “Excel” and “Outlook” do, only by their names? Again I see a double standard brewing.”
I’d say 99% of computer users have heard of Excel and Outlook, you know why? Its something called advertising, it leads to product recognition, which in turn leads to ease of use. Now if linux would buy some ads, oh wait that won’t happen since no one is making money (damn capitalism, how dare it work against something).
“Remember, almost any new Linux user will be migrating from a different system. It needs to be easy for them.
Why?”
Here is the nub of your ideological problem. If you don’t make conversion to linux easy and compelling no one will switch. And lets face it, linux (or any other os) isn’t gonna grow too fat off the last computer hold outs finally buying a pc.
“That’s just not true. Every major Linux distro detects the video card, so you don’t even have to think about it unless your card isn’t supported, just like Windows. And I’ve never been asked about the chipset! Why do you lie?”
Almost true, but for some reason everyone I’ve tried has failed miserably to utilize my 3d card in the playing of 3d games, where as windows will let me play them using the shipping drivers. btw with a couple of the distro I tried I had to know the chipset of my card and all its refresh rates, plus the refresh rates of my monitor, then I had to pick a resolution and refresh and color depth they supported (I freely admit these were third rung distros or slightly older ones, but windows as early as 95 didn’t require any of this).
“Do you expect Average Joes to differenciate from the many control panels for many different jobs?
I don’t know anybody named “Average Joes”, so obviously I can’t assess their abilities, and then know what to expect. And since you’re not defining any terms…
It’s moot, since the “many control panels” situation doesn’t exist.”
In mandrake there are control panels for gnome, kde, mandrake, linuxconfig, and 2 others I forget (I no longer have it installed or I’d check). All are seperate, all do things that the others don’t. Not to mention having to edit xconfig by hand to do something as simple as play a 3d game.
“Most of the apps (the GPL’ed crap) are normally still alpha, and even the authors say it is bug infested, and doesn’t have feature XYZ implemented yet.
That’s total bullshit. You are a liar. I know that you can’t prove that claim, so I’m not even going to pretend…”
Mozilla, very promising program, but it was a public, bug filled, beta for how long? While its crashing a ton because it was beta gpl zealots are calling it the greatest browser ever. Evolution, same deal. I don’t mean to pick on either program, because I think they will both be great apps very very soon, but there examples of what you called bullshit. btw why not add to the list drivers, or wine, or winex etc.?
“Linux is used on more servers than just small servers. Even IBM sells mainframes with Linux. So much for small servers. Linux owns the server market, BTW.”
Linux does own the server market if you include every person running an apache server from their den. And yes linux is being used on more servers then just small ones, but most massive, expensive, commercial servers still use something else (if you look at just that segment of the market I’d wager ms has as large a share as linux). Of course a study like that would take time and money so it won’t happen.
btw kde runs slow because its default settings are much, much too high for “slow” processors. granted windows turns on all the bells and whistles by default as well, but some implementations of kde were so slow by default that I couldn’t open the kde version of the start menu, xp was just sluggish (celeron 400 with 256 megs of ram). btw Betcour I’d try kde again (just turn down all the options) because if you can live without all the bells and whistles (which I’m pretty sure you live without some in xp on your rig) kde is very nice.
on a side note rajan r I’d like to say more linux users like yourself need to speak up. If all would be converts to linux see are people like speed in discussions they’ll never try linux. Its people like him who will never let linux be more user friendly and unless more level headed people who actually prefer linux (speed and his ilk use it for geeky cool points imo) like yourself and a few others in this thread it will continue to try and fight ms and apple with hobbled together programs and sub-par documentation.
Reading the posts here makes me sick. Linux lusers always have some handy excuse for each shortcoming that makes them right and everyone else wrong. So here’s your shock treatment you morons: If Linux or any other OS was any kind of competition to Windows at all, Microsoft wouldn’t have felt confident enough to implement their arrogant XP registration scheme, but they did. Read the writing on the wall, Microsoft expects to remain invincible for the forseeable future. The impending WalMart/Lindows debacle will invalidate Linux outright among unsatisfied consumers, and that will be the end of the matter of Linux on a desktop. We’re already seeing a change in the smart mouthed posts from Linux droids. Whereas they used to say “If you weren’t so stupid you’d realize Linux works great on the desktop”, now instead they say “If you weren’t so stupid you’d know Linux was never intended for the desktop”. This change tells all. So cram your haughty arrogance and self-important posts, your emperor has no clothes appropriate for a desktop, and the next time you scream “RTFM” the world will scream right back “Read the writing on the wall”.
reading your post reminded me of conspiracy brother in undercover brother (funny as hell movie if you don’t care about political correctness), he’d say something along the lines of the whole lindows walmart debacle being a plot by ms (aka “the man” or “whitey) to undermine linux and hold the black man down.
This is actually a rather silly discussion. People should just whatever works the best for them. If you like Windows, use Windows. If you like Linux, use Linux. If you post on OSNews, be sure to praise BeOS 🙂
I use Linux myself both at home and at work. It’s the OS that gives me the highest productivity with a minimum of stress. I learned using computers on Unix (Solaris, HP-UX and IRIX) at university (apart from playing om my C64 and Amiga 500). I don’t find Windows all that intuitive, I have no idea how to configure and frankly I don’t really care.
Whenever I sit down in front of a Windows computer (have to do that at work sometimes) I basically guess and guess and guess. I get the job done but it usually results in several loud cries of desperation because Windows just acts weird seen from my Unix point of view.
For someone totally new to computers Windows probably has a less steep learning curve than Linux. I have no idea about MacOS X since I never used it. And for lots of casual users that is good enough. However, for people working with their computer each and every day, the customizability of a Linux desktop is a good thing. Configure the computer to suit you instead of changing the way you work to suit the computer. Yes, that takes time, but in my opinion it is time well-spent.
As for Linux distributions being filled with crap… I don’t know. I use Debian. I think that installs maybe two window managers, one being the fallback option of twm. The other being sawfish (for Gnome) or KDE’s window manager. There are maybe a dozen or two other window managers available but they aren’t all installed and you don’t even have to think about them unless you want them installed. You can compare a modern Linux distribution with getting you Windows cd along with the entire Tucows archive on CD as a bonus. It doesn’t get installed automatically but it’s there if you want it.
Whatever other distributions do, again I have no idea. I settled on Debian pretty much from the beginning after a few not so fortunate experiences with Redhat at work 3-4 years ago.
But please don’t just make sweeping statements about all distributions. I wouldn’t dream of installing Mandrake on any computer. But there are good choices out there for the people like me who likes to spend some time configuring the computer.
Unavailability of applications. Definitely a problem for Linux at least in the corporate world. For home users who use their computers for email and some occasional accounting/word processing/presentation stuff, there are viable alternatives to Microsoft’s products. The problem lies as aforementioned in the corporate world. As long as companies like Adobe won’t release their applications to any other OS but Windows, Windows will always be the OS of choice for companies (and yes, I do know that Adobe actually has some products for Unix but try comparing the prices with those for the Windows versions).
FUD. Fanatics suck. No way around that. Some call them fanatics, some call them zealots, some people just call them idiots/assholes/whatever. As long as you don’t want to listen, test, read, inform yourself and so on, your opinion doesn’t matter. And that goes for everyone, Windows believers, Linux zealots, Al-Qaeda terrorists.
I’m only going to respond to a few of the things here because there’s too much:
In mandrake there are control panels for gnome, kde, mandrake, linuxconfig, and 2 others I forget (I no longer have it installed or I’d check). All are seperate, all do things that the others don’t. Not to mention having to edit xconfig by hand to do something as simple as play a 3d game.
Never had a problem with control panels in mandrake, in fact, I was pleasantly suprised by how mostly straight forward mandrake was. So I used gnome, there was configuration for gnome and a seperate utility for the rest, so that’s only 2 panels I had to deal with but I was _never_ confused by this, one was to configure gnome, the rest was to configure the rest of the system, oh ya, it was really really easy to change my resolution, I never had to do a damn thing to get my 3d working, it worked out of the box which really impressed me.
Are you talking about nvidia 3d support? Blame nvidia for only making proprietery drivers (I’m guessing this is why Mandrake doesn’t ship with nvidia drivers), people don’t criticize BeOS around here because other companies wouldn’t support BeOS well or at all.
Are you confusing redundant control panels? Having a console control panel and one for X is not only good, it’s great, what if you don’t want to run a UI? This means you don’t get to have a control panel? What if some how your UI settings are broken, does this mean you should be sh** out of luck because you need the control panel to get it going again?
“Most of the apps (the GPL’ed crap) are normally still alpha, and even the authors say it is bug infested, and doesn’t have feature XYZ implemented yet.
Even if that’s true, that still leaves thousands of apps that aren’t alpha!
To the person who says AbiWord sucks… Well, that’s your opinion, AbiWord is my favorite word processor right now. I installed it on my mother’s (she is not technical in any sense of the word) windows computer because MS office is so bloated and slow for a celeron (a bit over 400 mhz), windows 98, and only 64 megs of ram. So guess what? Not only does my mother like AbiWord, she likes it more than MS Office and now uses it over MS Office, she likes that it’s faster and nicer but basically the same thing so she gets all the benefits without having to completely relearn this new word processor.
Mozilla, very promising program, but it was a public, bug filled, beta for how long? While its crashing a ton because it was beta gpl zealots are calling it the greatest browser ever. Evolution, same deal. I don’t mean to pick on either program, because I think they will both be great apps very very soon, but there examples of what you called bullshit. btw why not add to the list drivers, or wine, or winex etc.?
You forget that Mozilla came from a bug ridden and slow proprietery software, they had to replace stuff that couldn’t be open sourced, they had to fix flaws in code that that could be open sourced, think about this, they spent these years cleaning up Netscape! I wonder how long it would take with IE! How long for windows?
I have converted several windows users to Mozilla. Mozilla kicks much a**, it may have taken years to get so far, but IE has been around before the mozilla project started and still windows users can find mozilla preferable to IE.
This would have been a far more fair review if he had reviewed something more meant for the desktop, didn’t Bob Young himself say linux isn’t for the desktop? To me that would indicate that “desktop” is not really a goal of redhat. SuSe or Mandrake or Lycoris or other distributions actually meant for the desktop would have been the way to go. This is like giving BeOS a try but using it as a server OS and then complain that it wasn’t up to the task, BeOS wasn’t meant for servers! Redhat isn’t meant for Desktops (though arguibly Redhat is better suited for desktops than beos is for servers).
As for when something goes wrong with linux, it’s usually easier to reinstall… So wrong. Man, this is probably more true of windows than any other OS, there is almost always some way to save your linux install. Windows is the worst, or one of the worst OS’s in terms of “if something is f***ed up, reinstall!”, I know quite a few people who have to install windows several times before finally getting an install that cooperates! Being easier to reinstall linux than to just fix the problem is usually the sign of a newbie, but commonly I see people with years of windows experience still having to do reinstalls when things get b0rked. So Linux+newbies have an excuse, what excuse do Windows+experienced users have?
Almost unbiased. David does say at the end of his article “I’d find desktop Linux hard to recommend except in very special circumstances”
I don’t think Linux will make it as a desktop OS because it isn’t.
How many farmers go shopping in their tractor?
Ok, but shouldn’t he use a dist that’s more developed with the desktop in mind? How many farmers attempt to plow their field with a porsche and then complain the porsche sucks cuz it did a horrible job? Of course, when used for it’s intended purpose, the porsche is great.
>>With Windows, for example, when the registry hive becomes corrupted, you are plain out of luck. It is possible to get the hive back, but then you have to reinstall all of your applications to reset the registry settings.<<
That just means that you haven’t done a proper backup of the system state, and thus unable to restore the registry to a working condition. And – many factors can contribute to the corruption of a registry hive – especially VIA chipsets.
Yes, every newbie not only knows that there is a registry, but knows what it’s for and knows that it should be backed up on a regular basis, this is why windows is so great for newbies right? Get real. This is about newbies, not experienced users. Do you really expect the inexperienced windows user to have even heard of the registry? Not too common in truth. Can this even be fixed if you didn’t know/think to backup?
There are some things about the windows design that are stupid and I think make it more difficult (I don’t necessarily mean more than linux) for newbies to learn windows than it has to be. Take drive letters for example, what in the FSCK is that about? It makes far more sense to merely mount additional drives/partitions directly into the filesystem like how UNIX and Be do and it appears how Mac OS classic does it. Drive letters are stupid for many other reasons as well, but newbies are mainly the topic here so I’ll try to stay (relatively) on topic! So yes, Linux may have some issues for newbies, but don’t like act like window’s **** doesn’t stink.
I think much of the bias here comes from the fact that people forgot how it was when they first learned MacOS/Windows. You can claim all you want how OS X’s interface is so easy, but it still bares much in common with MacOS classic’s interface. BeOS had a very easy UI that was enjoyable to work with, but I didn’t magically learn how to use it overnight and no one else did either.
Windows is hard to learn for people coming from Mac’s or UNIX you know, in fact, in some areas, it’s harder for an experienced whatever user to learn windows than an utter newbie because the newbie isn’t already rooted in doing things a certain way.
Many of you call speed a Linux zealout and say that he’s trolling, but I find almost all of his points valid, he really is just being honest! Maybe his first post was more harsh than it needed to be, but it was hardly trollish.
And regarding all the flaming I am starting to see on this site now, check this out:
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html
Disclaimer: I havent installed any of the latest distro’s, I think the last was Red Hat 7.0, and before that 6.2 and Mandrake something or other.
Exactly what bit of manual would you suggest that a new user look at? Man pages, oh, what are they? How do I use them?
The HOW-TO’s? Where are they? Oh, which one do I read? Hmmm, it doesnt actually really tell me anything I can understand.
Is there anyone here who could stand up and say that the help system in linux is suitable for new users? I know my way around unix, and Im not even aware of all the help systems that are now available. I know that GNU dont write man pages anymore, but for the life of me, I couldnt find any instructions on how to access the new content.
In OS X I enabled the web server. Unfortunately it doesnt tell you how to access your new site. I opened the help window. All that was there was a question box, into which I typed “What is my website called”, and the first hit it found was the answer to my problem.
Saying RTFM isnt an adequete answer, when there are 20 FM, and no info on how to get at them.
I have read a number of times that X is hard to configure. IT IS NOT! Using a desktop orientated distro, it is EASY to do – use YAST in SUSE, Mandrake Control Centre in Mandrake or whatever it is in Lycoris, it is as easy as Windows. End.
Not sure what OS you are using, but you sound like a zealot to me.
Btw, my OS is oberon. It’s crap. Am I a zealot?
Just a little side note- on MacOS X, to change screen resolutions, click System Preferences, then go to DISPLAYS (The one with a freakin monitor icon). Ta-daaaa! To change IP address, go to Network (the one with a wired-looking globe icon) and then click Configure: MANUALLY. Ta-daa! Okay, enough of the side note. You know what my problem with man pages is? I can “man” anything, as long as I know what I want to know first. Now, I give everyone permission to come to my house and shoot me in the face if this is a faulty comparisson, but the Terminal for OS X has tsch, bash, etc. I can “man tcsh,” I can “man man,” I can “man mv,” but I can’t “man I forgot the goddamn command for renaming a file, I know I’m an idiot, Mr. Computer, but please tell me!”
The man pages are not all that helpful if you don’t know what you’re looking for. BTW, what IS the command for renaming a file?
Just a little side note- on MacOS X, to change screen resolutions, click System Preferences, then go to DISPLAYS (The one with a freakin monitor icon). Ta-daaaa! To change IP address, go to Network (the one with a wired-looking globe icon) and then click Configure: MANUALLY. Ta-daa! Okay, enough of the side note. You know what my problem with man pages is? I can “man” anything, as long as I know what I want to know first. Now, I give everyone permission to come to my house and shoot me in the face if this is a faulty comparisson, but the Terminal for OS X has tsch, bash, etc. I can “man tcsh,” I can “man man,” I can “man mv,” but I can’t “man I forgot the goddamn command for renaming a file, I know I’m an idiot, Mr. Computer, but please tell me!”
The man pages are not all that helpful if you don’t know what you’re looking for. BTW, what IS the command for renaming a file?
I want everyone to know I just proved what an idiot I am. My bad about the double post
Felonious Hiddenbottom Posted on 2002-06-19 04:01:31
> If you want Linux on the desktop – it MUST be as easy to
> use as Windows or Mac or Be. An end user shouldn’t HAVE to
> read a man page or a book to learn how to configure X for
> screen resolution. He should be able to poke around a
> little bit and find a display applet to do it for him.
> He should have to to read a How-to or book to compile a
> kernel – but then again a desktop user shouldn’t HAVE to
> compile his own kernel.
I agree, for people migrating from Windows you should have
an interface or ease-of-use factor as close to Windows as
you can get. However, look at what happens when someone
tries to provide that (see the Lycoris threads). They get
ripped a new one for “looking too much like XP”. I just
don’t understand that. If your target market is first
time Linux users, you don’t dump them into some alien
landscape and expect them to feel comfortable. (For all
those people moaning about Lycoris, it IS Linux, if you don’t like the look of it, change it or use a different
distribution).
Ever heard of “apropos”? Try ‘apropos rename file’.
That just means that you haven’t done a proper backup of the system state, and thus unable to restore the registry to a working condition. And – many factors can contribute to the corruption of a registry hive – especially VIA chipsets.
There’s that hideous double standard again! With Windows, it’s the user’s fault, but with Linux it’s Linux’s fault. How many people do a full (with registry) backup after every little change that they make? How many people back up their Windows systems at all?
Good design is good design. Period.
So now you’re claiming to be God? Sorry, but I don’t buy it. The real God made us all individuals for a reason. We are not mindless automatons with only one choice!
Solaris is easy to admin, as are most commercial flavors of Unix.
I take it that you’ve never seen a Solaris system. If you had, you would never have made a comment like that!
The point of the article was about using Linux for the desktop.
So why does the author not agree with you on that? You aren’t God!
An end user shouldn’t HAVE to read a man page or a book to learn how to configure X for screen resolution. He should be able to poke around a little bit and find a display applet to do it for him.
And that’s exactly how it is with Linux. So why are you pretending that it’s different? Why do you lie and FUD?
He should have to to read a How-to or book to compile a kernel – but then again a desktop user shouldn’t HAVE to compile his own kernel.
Nobody is forced to compile kernels! Why do you lie and FUD?
>>You aren’t God!<<
Please note the name change.
>>There’s that hideous double standard again! With Windows, it’s the user’s fault, but with Linux it’s Linux’s fault. How many people do a full (with registry) backup after every little change that they make? How many people back up their Windows systems at all? <<
Since Windows 98 – the system has done it for you. With Windows 2000 – that’s the Admin’s job. And, if you had bothered to RTFM from microsoft – they tell you to. Who’s double standard is it, hmm?
>>I take it that you’ve never seen a Solaris system. If you had, you would never have made a comment like that!<<
I could say the same. What, you find it exceedingly difficult? And I’m supposed to trust your advice on another *nix flavor? BTW – I LOVE Internet Explorer on Solaris.
>>And that’s exactly how it is with Linux. So why are you pretending that it’s different? Why do you lie and FUD?
It is different than any other OS – Where those things are EASILY found. Let’s see, hmm where is the display applet : In BeOS it’s Preferences, In MacOS its Preferences, In Windows it’s the Control Panel, In Linux its xf86congig or linuxconf. Yep that’s exactly how it is.
>>Nobody is forced to compile kernels! Why do you lie and FUD?<<
You are right, no one is forced to compile a kernel. Unless of course you NEED TO.
So, speed, why do YOU lie and FUD?
IMHO, this stupid topic isn’t even worth debating over.
Name-calling FUD like “Linux faithful” is low and scummy behavior. So is making up stories to defame people. Darius is a lair and a scumbag.
And amazingly, Mac won his heart, Linux didn’t. Why? Linux desktop is made by a bunch of geeks who want the best of both world
That’s a circular definition, and it’s wrong. You stand at the wall throwing stones because you’re an asshole, not because of any fault of someone on the other side. Calling people names (geeks) to justify your actions doesn’t acquit those actions.
Mac OS X got a much more favourable review than Linux.
Did he install OSX on some old computer that was lying around? Of course not! OSX doesn’t even run on anything but the very latest Macs. So it’s another example of a playing field that’s not level.
There’s a reason why the most respected consumer publications refuse to accept money from the makers of the products they review. Graft serves the businesses, not the consumer.
wrong, most (95% at least) video cards have drivers in one form or another that come with windows.
That’s a straw man argument. You didn’t address my statement. The truth is that installation of video card drivers is remarkably similar with Windows and Linux distros. You also chose the wrong person to BS. I’ve installed Windows too many times to buy that 95% claim.
Can you blame him? For anyone who isn’t inspired to become a *nix geek man pages are worse then my old 7th grade biology text (sure sometimes you have to read windows manual but its not 10 million manpages written by and for geeks).
There’s that circular definition again! It’s also a lie. Every Linux distro that I’ve bought came with nice printed manuals in book form. Does Windows? You are a liar, Genaldar.
Most (Linux apps) are crap, or blatant rip offs of commercial products, or both.
I have already asked for justification of this claim. Because you choose to repeat it and not prove it, my conclusion is that you’re lying.
– the GUI (I tried KDE) is only good for a “mom and dad” activities (typing a letter or surfing the web). As soon as you want to do something more, you have to switch to the shell and edit zillions of obscure config files.
That’s a lie. Nobody is forcing you to do that, and you’re wildly exaggerating numbers. You’re mindlessly repeating the same old EvangeList propaganda that’s been debunked many, many times before…
KDE offers for example a way to browser network interfaces or hardware, but nothing to change the slightest setting (IP adress, drivers, etc). I think this is the greatest shortcomming of all.
That’s a straw man argument. KDE is not Linux. And if you’re trying to claim that there are no graphical interfaces for configuring Linux, then you’re a liar.
Mandrake 8.1 installed around 10 terminals, including 4 foriegn language ones (btw wtf do I need the chinese terminal to make the internet control work?).
That’s a lie. The only way to install “10 terminals, including 4 foriegn language ones” in Mandrake is to manually intervene yourself. So blaming Mandrake for what must be your actions is extremely dishonest.
I’d say 99% of computer users have heard of Excel and Outlook
That’s a straw man argument. You’re evading the issue. And if you really believe that the value of a product is solely a function of how many advertising dollars are spent on it, then you’re a fool.
Here is the nub of your ideological problem. If you don’t make conversion to linux easy and compelling no one will switch. And lets face it, linux (or any other os) isn’t gonna grow too fat off the last computer hold outs finally buying a pc.
Who’s asking people to switch? Not me! Again you’re making a straw man argument. You’re creating a false dilemma. And you’re promoting the same old double standard that I’ve decried all along. I don’t see you screaming that Microsoft didn’t make MS-DOS “easy and compelling”!
In mandrake there are control panels for gnome, kde, mandrake, linuxconfig, and 2 others I forget (I no longer have it installed or I’d check). All are seperate, all do things that the others don’t.
That’s a lie. If you can’t remember two, they don’t exist. Linuxconf duplicates what the Mandrake Control Center does, so your “seperate” claim is BS. And since you wouldn’t use KDE and GNOME together, you have one to deal with at any given time. So the bottom line is 2 control panels. 2! That’s far from your “many” claim!
Not to mention having to edit xconfig by hand to do something as simple as play a 3d game.
Since you don’t even know the name of the file, it’s safe to say that you’re just making this claim up. The lie comes when you say “have to”. It’s an old EvangeLista trick. Invent the most boneheaded way to do som simple task, then proclaim that is “proof” that something is “hard”. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy; the product of prejudice. If you want something to be difficult, you’ll find a way to make it that way. Just don’t pretend that you have an open mind on the matter.
Genaldar, I asked for a list of the alleged “alpha” software that you claimed was in Linux. You failed to produce any! You are a liar.
bkakes writes:
I never had to look in a manual to know where to change Windows’ or the Mac’s monitor settings. The design was intuitive enough such that I could figure it out on my own, and such that this knowledge was not only easily retainable, but also applicable to other areas of the system.
Speed replies:
That’s your claim. I’ll be happy to review the proof, if you ever come up with any. If you’re saying that you instantly knew exactly what to do in Windows, then you have an uphill road to belief. If you’re saying that you were willing to do an exaustive search of the Windows and Mac OS GUI, but couldn’t be bothered to do exactly the same thing with KDE or GNOME, then you’re guilty of the same old double standard.
No, he’s saying that the Windows interface, in this case, made the actions one needed to take to change the monitor settings clear in a way that the interfaces most Linux distributions provide out of the box don’t or can’t. This is not a difficult concept to wrap one’s head around.
Sure, once your XF86Config file is set up correctly, changing resolutions is trivial. Setting up that file isn’t trivial for a lot of people, even with the XFree Project’s standard configuration utilities or with those provided by many distributions. It’s surely not rocket science and it’s not that difficult if you read the instructions, in most cases, but the instructions are unquestionably more complex than “I’ve learned the system’s settings are all in this thing called ‘control panel,’ so I bet if I look there I’ll be able to change the resolution.” With some configuration tasks in Unix, you cannot start with a piece of basic information like that–say, the equivalent of the control panel many Linux distributions set up, which most users find or learn about immediately–and intuit what to do next, since the equivalent of that control panel often doesn’t address things like video and sound hardware configuration.
And I think that’s all anyone is saying. This argument has nothing to do with a claim that we “instantly know what to do” in an operating system, nor does it have to do with reading manuals in detail on one OS and not the other. Realistically it doesn’t even have to do with usability in general–just this one aspect of it.
This is actually a rather silly discussion. People should just whatever works the best for them. If you like Windows, use Windows. If you like Linux, use Linux.
Absolutely! I’m simply amazed that so many are investing so much effort in making up excuses for why they don’t use Linux. They could have simply said “not my cup of tea”, but they spew all of this dishonesty and vitriol. What’s up with that?
If you post on OSNews, be sure to praise BeOS 🙂
Yeah…conform to their petty little clan, or they will flame you constantly — I know! But I’m not going to compromise my values to belong to a group, especially one with so little to offer.
I don’t find Windows all that intuitive, I have no idea how to configure and frankly I don’t really care.
Same here, about the “intuitive” part. It’s a myth. Saying it a zillion times will not keep it from being a myth! I welcome any scientific study that quantifies usability, but I’m sick of having BS screamed at me.
…Yes, that takes time, but in my opinion it is time well-spent.
An important point! The bullies on this board have been dictating what “should” be, but it’s still a law of nature that the greatest rewards come from a job well done. Those who promote fallacies which reward sloth are only trying to legitimize their own sloth.
You can compare a modern Linux distribution with getting you Windows cd along with the entire Tucows archive on CD as a bonus. It doesn’t get installed automatically but it’s there if you want it.
That’s a good way to put it. How somebody can spin a Good Thing like that to make it appear like a problem is beyond me!
But please don’t just make sweeping statements about all distributions.
Yep!
FUD. Fanatics suck. No way around that. Some call them fanatics, some call them zealots, some people just call them idiots/assholes/whatever. As long as you don’t want to listen, test, read, inform yourself and so on, your opinion doesn’t matter. And that goes for everyone, Windows believers, Linux zealots, Al-Qaeda terrorists.
Absolutely! The irony here is the people who are waxing fanatic about how it’s such a herculean task to RTFM could have just RTFM with a lot less effort!
That just means that you haven’t done a proper backup of the system state, and thus unable to restore the registry to a working condition. And – many factors can contribute to the corruption of a registry hive – especially VIA chipsets.
I don’t have the same corruption problem with VIA and Linux. There are times when Linux absolutely refuses to work with some hardware and the VIA chipset (which is why I don’t use VIA) but I would rather have that than have Windows’ registry hive mysteriously corrupt on me once a week. Your point about backups is noted, but the same can be said about configuration under Linux as well. The point is that most people don’t have the equipment to do backups correctly or simply choose not to do them. Under these circumstances, Linux is easier to fix in most cases than Windows is if you’re willing to read a little.
I mean seriously folks, how hard is it to go out to Google, type in the error message you’re getting and look for a solution? It’s a lot easier than calling some technical support phone number, that’s for sure.
>>Many other problems on Windows are only solved by reinstalling.<<
Or, knowing what you are doing.
That is not true. I worked on the Windows 2000 team for a couple of years. I know more about what I’m doing than probably anyone on this list. There are situations where Windows becomes messed up to the point that only a reinstall will fix it. It has gotten better with 2000, but worse in my opinion with XP.
>>I think it’s funny how many people learned Windows, or even DOS, by working with it for a long time, asking questions and reading either books or help files, but these same people act like using Linux should just be an automatic instinct. When it’s not they get all upset and make some incredibly uninformed statements.<<
Good design is good design. Period. Solaris is easy to admin, as are most commercial flavors of Unix. The point of the article was about using Linux for the desktop. And whatever the desktop environment, it is crap from a usability and ease of configurability standpoint.
That may be your opinion, but it isn’t so. It is just evidence of my first statement. Most users can’t install Windows by themselves let alone configure it. Those who can learned how through trial and error, study, asking, etc.
Why do those same people expect installing and configuring Linux to be a no brainer when Windows wasn’t. Why does learning turn them off so much with Linux when they had to learn with Windows. I can send you tons of screenshots of places where Windows interface is extremely unfriendly and unintuitive, or better yet, search on Google there are web pages devoted to them.
I “picked up” solaris 7 in less than a week.
I’ve used many versions of Solaris, and if you can’t figure out one of the many easy to use, pre-configured Linux distros, I highly doubt that you figured out Solaris in a week.
I picked up BeOS (okay, technically not a Unix, but close enough) in less than a day.
I can believe that.
If you want Linux on the desktop – it MUST be as easy to use as Windows or Mac or Be.
No it mustn’t. I already have Linux on the desktop and it is exactly what I want.
What you are saying is that Linux must be as braindead as Windows. Must have moronic little paper clips to tell me what to do, etc. Linux users don’t want that.
An end user shouldn’t HAVE to read a man page or a book to learn how to configure X for screen resolution.
Why not, somebody on this list said that Windows was easy. They just opened up help and looked up screen resolutions. Why is that any different from reading some documentation in a man page, web page, README, book, or anywhere else?
The truth is that most of the time most distros set up your resolutions for you during install. They even allow you to test them then and there so you don’t have to mess with it later. If users actually read the documentation, they would know that they can set up X during install so they can switch screen resolutions with the simple keystroke. But, we can’t possible ask a user to actually learn how to use Linux in the same way they learned how to use Windows can we.
He should be able to poke around a little bit and find a display applet to do it for him.
Last I looked that was entirely possible.
He should have to to read a How-to or book to compile a kernel
Now you’re getting into the spirit and truth of things! (Probably a typo on your part.)
but then again a desktop user shouldn’t HAVE to compile his own kernel.
Since when have they had to? When I first started using Linux seriously and began Windows abandonment (RedHat 4.something) it was several years before I ever recompiled my kernel. You are acting like it is part of the standard installation requirements. That is not the case.
Exactly what bit of manual would you suggest that a new user look at?
When you open up the box, those big things on either side of the discs are the manuals. Read them.
Man pages, oh, what are they? How do I use them?
You don’t really need to worry about man pages. They’re a relic of the days when UNIX was accessed only by text terminals. Today there are better forms of online help. Try the HTML help system. If you got to this webpage, you can use that!
The HOW-TO’s? Where are they? Oh, which one do I read? Hmmm, it doesnt actually really tell me anything I can understand.
The name “HOW-TO” gives you a pretty good clue! If you can’t figure out this intuitive name, you’re either a small child or have mental retardation. If that’s the case, you don’t need to worry about using computers.
Saying RTFM isnt an adequete answer, when there are 20 FM, and no info on how to get at them.
Since you never stated thw question, we have no way of knowing that, do we? Hey, if you can afford to have a servant read to you, by all means go for it. But if you’re claiming that you can’t even recognize a book, much less read one, then blame your parents, not Linux!
Btw, my OS is oberon. It’s crap. Am I a zealot?
ROFL!!! Good point.
You have to remember that this is bizarro world, where the “troll” is the victim of the trolling, not the troller. Knowing that, is it any surprise that they define “zealot” to mean the opposite of the accepted definition?
By the shear number of posts I would assume most of you are teenagers or college students on summer break.
As a professional software engineer, I have only seen Linux being used by low-budget companies. Anything at the Enterprise level is usually Solaris, AIX, or dare I say, HP-UX. Also the DB is usually Oracle, Sybase, or dare I say sometimes Informix or DB2.
Linux on mainframes and big iron is currently mostly marketing related… and time will tell whether or not the enterprise is ready for it.
You guys assume from all of the just because there is an IBM Mainframe Linux offering…. lots of people are buying these machines. In a couple of years we will know.
IMHO, Linux is a niche OS for comp sci students who previously could not find a *cheap* (e.g. free) UNIX to run on their machines at home.
Better get back to work….
ps: someone opined: “How many editors does Windows ship with?” <grin> It has more than one too…. notepad, wordpad, write (though I bleive wordpad is the same executable). Love SimpleText on the Mac though 😉
Please note the name change.
I don’t see you performing any miracles. So you’re just another cheap scam artist. Big deal.
Since Windows 98 – the system has done it for you. With Windows 2000 – that’s the Admin’s job. And, if you had bothered to RTFM from microsoft – they tell you to. Who’s double standard is it, hmm?
That would be your double standard — it’s your post. You’re also a liar. I’m a Windows administrator, and not once has a mysterious person (“they”) walked up to me and told me to RTFM. And while Windows 98 can do a full system backup for you, it doesn’t do it by default.
Let’s see, hmm where is the display applet : In BeOS it’s Preferences, In MacOS its Preferences, In Windows it’s the Control Panel, In Linux its xf86congig or linuxconf. Yep that’s exactly how it is.
Exactly, eh? OK, you lied. Live with your shame.
You are right, no one is forced to compile a kernel. Unless of course you NEED TO.
First of all, you have failed to describe any curcumstance where a genuine need would arise. Second, even a need would not lead to force. You lie.
So, speed, why do YOU lie and FUD?
I have provided proof of all of your lies. You call me names. Why do you lie about me?
No, he’s saying that the Windows interface, in this case, made the actions one needed to take to change the monitor settings clear in a way that the interfaces most Linux distributions provide out of the box don’t or can’t.
So you say. If you ever decide to move past sweeping generalizations and name specific instances that prove your claim, I might listen.
This is not a difficult concept to wrap one’s head around.
Like sophistry, right? If you tell a lie that’s plausible, you expect me to believe it without question. Looks like that scheme backfired!
Sure, once your XF86Config file is set up correctly, changing resolutions is trivial. Setting up that file isn’t trivial for a lot of people, even with the XFree Project’s standard configuration utilities or with those provided by many distributions.
Your logical fallacy in this case is slothful induction. You’re lambasting all Linux X setup programs based only on the failsafe xf86config program, but ignore all of the very nice and easy X setup programs that ship with modern Linux distros. And since you never deal with the XF98config file directly, you’re misrepresenting the situation.
You’re also making a straw man argument, since we haven’t been talking about the setup process.
It’s surely not rocket science and it’s not that difficult if you read the instructions…
Again, if you ever want to step out of the realm of fiction and into the real world, I’ll be happy to listen. But seeing as how your slippery slope is entirely made-up, there’s no need to dignify it with serious consideration now.
This argument has nothing to do with a claim that we “instantly know what to do” in an operating system
Good! Then stop making such claims.
nor does it have to do with reading manuals in detail on one OS and not the other.
Maybe you don’t want to face it, but that’s exactly what it’s about! I’ve cited dozens of instances where a double stsndard was applied, and then Linux was falsely judged to be inferior. You could say that it really has nothing to do with Linux, and I would agree with you. In this case, Linux is the convenient scapegoat, but the larger underlying problem is dishonesty and sloth.
My linux experience was also lackluster.
I purchased SuSe 7.3 pro from Best Buy when I bought it it had just gotten rave reviews from several of the alt os sites OSNews, Slashdot, The Register…
I skimmed all the manuals (suse includes a lot of manuals!) and read thru most of the install one before I started, looking for what I needed to do.
I fumbled around, but I knew that I wanted a dual boot install on my box-I had already left a partition open when I installed Windows. I didn’t know about root and swap and ext3, but I knew I needed to leave the space open for linux.
I tried to read ahead to get the some idea of the best setup, but what you guys usually recommed didn’t want to work–there was no easy way with the SuSe setup utility. (once again this is just grtting too hard)
When I go to the Graphics setup I had a older monitor. It would work under VESA, but when X took over it would scramble with no way to get it back, no way to fix it. I eventually got it working buy butchering a windows .INI file and guessing the right numbers for the refresh rates. (A newer multiscan monitor did work much better on the first try)
It did find my ATI radeon and SBlive cards and installed them to usable on its own. A good point there.
It was OK; it was usable. I didn’t have much to do with it anyway. Simple games played ok, the CD player worked. eventually I wanted to play a game so…
I had a Quake 3 Linux install disk to try out. Boxed Linux game from Loki with a Suse 7.2 demo disk! (I had 7.3 so I figured I’d be just right!) I tried reading all the readmes on the disc, and looking around for the SuSe 3D setup but to no avail. The game did install OK (I think? There wasn’t much to go by) But it wouldn’t play.
At that point I kinda gave up trying. That was 6 months ago, and that HD died so I didn’t bother to reinstall.
I gave it a fair try: reletively common system (BX mobo, 850 processor, 256MB ram, SBLve, Radeon , NIC) and I used a bought distro, and a game that came with an older copy of that same distro! I read the manuals, even hunted SuSe’s site for several issues that I resolved. But that’s way too much work for any average user to endure. I may try again, this time with Mandrake, but we’ll see
the error is in presumption, your presumption. RTFM is an idiom — taking it literally is sheer foolishness.
My sincerest apologies for reading what you wrote rather than what you meant. (not to mention that you did in fact mention HTML documentation)
If you can prove to me that people can learn without studying, then you will have won your point.
I claimed that they could learn by figuring it out for themselves. It’s the way problem solving works. If you have a “world” with rules you can understand and things are laid out well, you can often learn on your own. If your point were valid, it would be completely impossible for anyone to get any use whatsoever out of a program before studying how it should work. A well-made interface should more or less guide you along.
Once more I’ll remind you that people’s personality flaws are not a trait of the OS. They did the work for Windows, but not for Linux. That’s a double standard.
The whole point is that in the author’s experience, for Windows, it wasn’t much work, whereas it was a lot of work. Operating systems are made for people to interact with them. If they aren’t written to correspond to the thoughts, wants, and needs of the users, then the OS (or, in this case, the interface) truly is flawed.
That’s a personal attack. Why are you afraid to answer what I wrote?
a. I did argue against it, and might I say that you’re response was less than overwhelming.
b. Read the posts here and see who launches most of the personal attacks.
LOL… So exactly what branch of engineering deals with “non-intuitive-design”? Get real, as a BS artist you’re failing miserably.
What on earth on you talking about? You were essentially saying that the design isn’t bad because it makes sense once you “study” it. I responded saying that’s a cop-out. Do the words “User Interface Designer” and “Industrial Designer” mean nothing to you?
How many people have managed to combine <Ctrl>, <Alt> and <Delete> through intuition alone?
You pick one archaic example that most people will never need. Once you learn that the start menu is the place to go for most things, it’s pretty logical that “ok, I want to change the Settings. Oh, and there’s Display, with a picture of my monitor”. That kind of thing is intuitive design.
That’s your claim. I’ll be happy to review the proof, if you ever come up with any.
Sure. I have no Windows manual.
If you’re saying that you instantly knew exactly what to do in Windows, then you have an uphill road to belief.
You said instantly. I just claimed that I was able to figure it out pretty easily.
If you’re saying that you were willing to do an exaustive search of the Windows and Mac OS GUI, but couldn’t be bothered to do exactly the same thing with KDE or GNOME, then you’re guilty of the same old double standard.
If looking through the Control Panels is considered “exhaustive”…
What “random command-line program”?
I was referring to Xconfigurator.
That’s a cheap shot that has no bearing on this discussion. Shame on you and your FUD!
The last time I used Linux that’s what I had to do. I’ll grant it was about a year ago…
And I’ve never been asked about the chipset! Why do you lie?
Lie? Ok, listen, you can stop by and pick up my Diamond Stealth II G460 and install it in a machine. If your Linux distro says that name rather than the “i740” (the chipset) that I always get, then I’ll recant. If it’s detected as an “i740” (as it always is for me), then I think you should think twice before throwing your childish insults. A user can’t look at the box and know it’s an “i740”.
You blame me, you blame Linux, you do a lot of blaming!
I don’t blame you for anything other than costing Linux a lot of potential users. If I was thinking about trying it and ran into some of your posts here, I’d be very tempted to say, “Screw it. I neither want to be like nor deal with people like that.”
What’s the real reason why you refuse to give Linux a fair shake?
Many of us do give Linux a fair shake and find it lacking. I can surely give one more answer to things that turn me off from it: (everybody, all at once) People like Speed
Hi,
i’m a Windows, Linux and a BeOS user. I’m stunned how these “OS wars” always are so childlish. People are just insulting each other, which it reminds me of an “monty python”-sketch…..
It’s just an OS for crying out loud.
-sortey
>>I’ve used many versions of Solaris, and if you can’t figure out one of the many easy to use, pre-configured Linux distros, I highly doubt that you figured out Solaris in a week.<<
I never said that I didn’t. I was talking about usability factors for the masses, not for myself. Commands are commands for the most part. Finding the GUI tools was a bit like walking through a maze, but of course I had a general idea of what to look for, and where to find how-to’s on line and how to use man pages. Joe and mary six-pack don’t.If you want Linux on the desktop – it MUST be as easy to use as Windows or Mac or Be.
>>No it mustn’t. I already have Linux on the desktop and it is exactly what I want.<<
It’s exactly what YOU want – NOT what the average end-user would want. Hell, I want GNUStep with Windowmaker as my default GUI – But again, joe and mary six-pack are looking for something a little more fmailiar and easy to wrok with. As elegant as the NeXT GUI was, it’s still a bit geeky.
>>If users actually read the documentation, they would know that they can set up X during install so they can switch screen resolutions with the simple keystroke.<<
Of course, that argument assumes that they actually read how to do it in Windows. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done “house calls” where you see a Windows box running at 640×480 with 256 colors on a Rage Pro. Why? because they didn’t even know they could change it.
>>But, we can’t possible ask a user to actually learn how to use Linux in the same way they learned how to use Windows can we.<<
That’s been my point all along. An average end user needs to intuit how to use it. That’s what they did with Windows.
>>Since when have they had to? When I first started using Linux seriously and began Windows abandonment (RedHat 4.something) it was several years before I ever recompiled my kernel.<<
Some geek you are. No recompiles for new kernel versions that fix bugs, implement new features, or replace old features? Don’t get near my machine. i prefer working in the present, not the past.
Thanks for sharing, mabhatter! It’s refreshing to read a story that’s honest and free of blame-laying.
I’m not a gamer, so the whole idea of using Linux as a gaming platform is alien to me. I hear that Mandrake has a special distro just for gaming — you might want to check that out. You might not be satisfied with what Linux has to offer gamers, and that’s fine. The PC gamers who I know spend a lot of time building their own machines, and tweaking them. Seeing how much time they spend on hardware, I find their aversion to work when it comes to software kinda odd. It just doesn’t add up.
But to each their own. As long as you’re honest and up-front about it, I’m fine with it.
>>That would be your double standard — it’s your post. You’re also a liar. I’m a Windows administrator, and not once has a mysterious person (“they”) walked up to me and told me to RTFM. And while Windows 98 can do a full system backup for you, it doesn’t do it by default<<
Gee, doesn’t Windows ship with a book, you f***ing jackass?
I never said Windows 98 does a FULL backup – I said system state – WHICH IT DOES BY DEFAULT. In fact any REAL windows Administrator should know that it saves the last 5 system state backups, which can be easily restored with a simple command line utility. A Windows Administrator? An MCSE? A Minesweeper Consultant / Solitaire Expert?
>>First of all, you have failed to describe any curcumstance where a genuine need would arise. Second, even a need would not lead to force. You lie. <<
Gee, a security issue perhaps? Support for your spiffy new hardware which isn’t included in the distro’s pre-compiled kernel? If you wanted to take advantage of those things, wouldn’t that force you to do so?
>>I have provided proof of all of your lies.<<
You’ve provided arguments which “prove” your “superiority” in your own pathetic litlle mind. Your only real argument is that I am lying when i call you on it by presenting a fact.
>>Why do you lie about me?<<
Pot to kettle : You’re Black. Grow up Loser.
>>i’m a Windows, Linux and a BeOS user. I’m stunned how these “OS wars” always are so childlish. People are just insulting each other, which it reminds me of an “monty python”-sketch….. It’s just an OS for crying out loud.<<
Yeah, but it’s fun to get the Linux Zealots going. They get sooooooo upset, well it’s funny. At least to me.
Open-source software from a server standpoint is stellar. However, this guy’s doing his testing from the point of view of an average desktop user. (ie. the vast majority of pc users) Open-source desktop software — for use by normal people — is a joke. We all know it. Let’s quit being so defensive, listen to some feedback (such as this guy’s), and learn how to make this stuff more usable.
No I didn’t evaluate tens of thousands of half-finished, feature-incomplete pieces of GPL’ed crap.
If you didn’t bother to look at them, then how do you know they’re like that? Prejudice, plain and simple.
>>Open-source desktop software — for use by normal people — is a joke. We all know it. Let’s quit being so defensive, listen to some feedback (such as this guy’s), and learn how to make this stuff more usable. <<
A voice of reason rising above the din of zealotry. Thank You.
My sincerest apologies for reading what you wrote rather than what you meant.
What I wrote was “RTFM”. You obviously managed to expand that to “read the f* manual”, so it’s a little late for you to claim that you didn’t understand.
(not to mention that you did in fact mention HTML documentation)
Yes, I did. So how come there’s still so much “man page” FUD?
I claimed that they could learn by figuring it out for themselves. It’s the way problem solving works.
Right. And if you apply it equally to Linux, your problems get solved. I’m wondering why you and others refuse to do those things when it comes to Linux.
If you have a “world” with rules you can understand and things are laid out well, you can often learn on your own.
You’re trying to pass off a subjective preference as objective truth. That’s not going to work with me! To learn on your own, you have to make the effort. So again I ask why you’re unwilling to make that same effort when it comes to Linux?
If your point were valid, it would be completely impossible for anyone to get any use whatsoever out of a program before studying how it should work. A well-made interface should more or less guide you along.
Go ahead and test your theory. If a MArtian space ship ever lands, you can try to run that space ship without any training. If you fail, you’ll know that you must learn first. Just because you don’t remember learning doesn’t mean that you didn’t learn.
The whole point is that in the author’s experience, for Windows, it wasn’t much work, whereas it was a lot of work.
And my point is that I don’t believe that excuse for a minute. Am I really supposed to believe that this guy got a job writing about Windows because he knew nothing about the subject? C’mon!
Operating systems are made for people to interact with them.
Wrong. Operating systems are by definition for applications to interact with.
If they aren’t written to correspond to the thoughts, wants, and needs of the users, then the OS (or, in this case, the interface) truly is flawed.
Again you’re pretending to be God…a particularly impotent and helpless one at that! It’s not that Linux is failing you, it’s that you’re not as much a big shot as you like to think.
What on earth on you talking about?
That’s what I was asking! I called the bluff.
You were essentially saying that the design isn’t bad because it makes sense once you “study” it. I responded saying that’s a cop-out.
Quit lying! If you want to comment on words that I actually wrote, that’s fine. But don’t lie about what I said.
Do the words “User Interface Designer” and “Industrial Designer” mean nothing to you?
They sure don’t mean “engineer”! You lose.
You pick one archaic example that most people will never need.
1. I didn’t pick it. The people whining about how hard it is to press three buttons are responsible for that.
2. People don’t “need” to change their screen resolution either, and yet it’s whine, whine, whine…
Once you learn that the start menu is the place to go for most things, it’s pretty logical that “ok, I want to change the Settings. Oh, and there’s Display, with a picture of my monitor”. That kind of thing is intuitive design.
That’s a trait of Windows, not a law of nature! If that’s what you like, fine. But you have no right to be pissed-off just because the world doesn’t revolve around you and your ego. As for being intuitive, that remains to be proven.
You said instantly. I just claimed that I was able to figure it out pretty easily.
Weasel words. The point is that you must do something to learn. So far you ahve failed to show some tear in the space-time continuum that alters this basic fact when it comes to Linux.
If looking through the Control Panels is considered “exhaustive”…
Again, if you had bothered to make that tiny effort with Linux, you would have found what you were looking for. Isn’t ironic that you yammer on and on about how you can’t lift a finger? You’re proving yourself a liar! Face it, you hold a prejudice against Linux, plain and simple. Lying about is fooling nobody.
I was referring to Xconfigurator.
1.) I see nothing “random about it. 2. The name appears to be “easily retainable” enough for you to recall it in your post. 3. The command line paradigm certainly is “applicable to other areas of the system”.
So your claim proved to be total BS.
Let’s not forget that Xconfigurator is not the standard way of setting up X on any of the major distros, so you were also making a straw man argument.
Lie? Ok, listen, you can stop by and pick up my Diamond Stealth II G460…
OK, I’ll stipulate that you weren’t lying, and that you just don’t know what a computer’s chipset is. Still, it’s your bad for writing about what you don’t know.
I don’t blame you for anything other than costing Linux a lot of potential users.
So now you’re suddenly the self-appointed Linux recruiter? Well if I offend you, in your position of Linux recruiter, that’s too bad. I never agreed to be your deputy or anything!
Personally, I’ll take quality over quantity every time. I’d much rather go to a LUG meeting for a good time. My idea of fun doesn’t include dealing with clueless people who are pissed off because some 2-bit evangelist like you lied to them.
Gee, doesn’t Windows ship with a book
That’s a straw man argument. We’re talking about the Linux books, not Windows.
I never said Windows 98 does a FULL backup
So you were evading the subject. You don’t get the glory by running away.
…which can be easily restored with a simple command line utility.
There’s that double standard again! On one hand they complain about command line utilities in Linux, but in Windows the command line is a miraculous savior…
—–
Now, about your excessive use of profanity, personal insults and name-calling (which I do not quote). Whenever I point out another person’s misconduct, I make reference to that specific misconduct. What you are doing is lashing out at me personally, and without any cause. You’re a sore loser, nothing more. The fact that you handle your failures in such a graceless manner is a further reflection on your poor character.
Open-source software from a server standpoint is stellar. However, this guy’s doing his testing from the point of view of an average desktop user. (ie. the vast majority of pc users) Open-source desktop software — for use by normal people — is a joke. We all know it.
That may or may not be true. But the applications aren’t the fault of the OS. Drawing conclusions like that is inherently bogus.
And just because a lot of people are using their computers as very expensive typewriters doesn’t mean that the only measure of a product is how well it emulates a typewriter. Linux was born in the Internet age, so it should come as no surprise that Linux reflects that age.
As far as I’m concerned, that’s a Good Thing! Those reactionaries who see anything new as something to be feared and attacked, that’s their personal problem, but not a Linux failing. To put it in context, they’re doing the equivalent of complaining that a new Lamborghini doesn’t plow fields very well.
…I am talking about reverting back to Windows 2000 after having used FreeBSD as a desktop for about a year now.
I know this is about Linux, but my opinion is applicable to all *nixes.
For a year, I have been working on a *nix workstation, and at first the learning curve was steep. I reverted back to windows a couple of times, but once there realized that I personally got more satisfaction fighting and learning to do simple tasks on a *nix platform. The sense of accomplishment that I got the first time I was able to get KDE running on my machine is surpassed only by the time I figured out how to make a an email hyperlink in HTML (twas a long time ago).
I liken this to staying in a bad relationship with a chick that you put up with because the relationship “is good enough” and you are afraid to take the chance of finding something better…then you discover the other her. She may not be as pretty or easy to figure out at first, but she is a lot more flexible
, and once you learn how she works you can get her to do things you could only imagine with minimal effort. Sure, sometimes she rears her ugly head and you want to go back the other one, but then you realize after playing that game for a while that it is not worth it. The best part about the new chick, is that she gets prettier and more refined everyday, yet never loses the limberness that attracted you to her. All the while, the ex-broad is contiually contracting viruses and being nailed by countless shady characters all the time. Besides, if you get tired of the new chick, there are plenty others where she came from.
Eventually, people will come around, and they will have the choice to use whatever desktop they want. I just know that personally, I would much rather know that I may not be using the most popular OS, but I am using a solid system that doesn’t attempt to hide things from me or dumb down things so much that I lose control over my own system.
Brett
>>We’re talking about the Linux books, not Windows.<<
Really? So it’s OK for you to implement a double standard. i was talking about reading the Windows books in relation to backing up windows.
>>So you were evading the subject. You don’t get the glory by running away.<<
I was evading the subject? Perhaps it was just that you did not know that which you claimed to know,and you were found to be ignorant? And who’s running away? Apparently it’s you – because you simply declare foul when you are wrong.
>>…which can be easily restored with a simple command line utility.<<
I never said the command line utility was bad for a *cough* Windows Administrator *laugh* such as your self. It can also be restored through a GUI Utility. Or didn’t you know that Mr. Paper MCSE?
>>Funny how sweeping generalizations come from narrow minds.<<
>>Your post is a gallery of your own personality flaws.<<
>>…your indecision, sloth, exaggeration, dishonesty…<<
>>…they’re even stupider than you.<<
Who started the name calling?
>>What you are doing is lashing out at me personally and without any cause. <<
Aww, isn’t that what you were doing? Are your wittle feelings hurt? People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
>>The fact that you handle your failures in such a graceless manner is a further reflection on your poor character.<<
What failures? I’ve proved my point, while you just issue the same tired arguments. And, when I do prove my point with one of your points – regardless of the platform – you simply whine and say it isn’t fair. Too Bad. So Sad.
I would never consider reading the manual. But then I’m used to using Macs.
Dante, I audit networks globally for one of the largest computer companies in the world!
I’m not a teenager or a student. I know for a fact that MS have a small share of the server OS market. I know a global company based in Switzerland with 2,500 PC that are 99.9% Windows 2000, except for 1 Windows 98 and 1 Unix box. At the other end of the scale here in the UK I know a telco that are soley Unix with a high proportion of RedHat.
The DVLA use Novell, Unix and then MS running a far third place. JWT are 55% Mac in the US. What is in the public domain I couldn’t tell you. But in business the majority of servers are not MS, the admins tell me thattop of their list is reliability/security. It’s not like you can just restart a server like you would a desktop when you’ve got 10,000 users connected is it?
I repeat, Unix for servers, Windows for desktops.
Tractors are way to big for shopping!
Tractors are way to big for shopping!
About 30 years ago just outside Rochester, NY, a woman drove to a local shopping mall in a TANK. A deputy showed up and wrote her a ticket (tank wan’t registered, after all). She did it to protest the unsafe conditions in the parking lot. Maybe a tractor is necessary sometimes!
As for you, Speed, your type kept me away from Linux for a long time. There is no need for personal attacks on people with different opinions. If you can’t act like a civilized human, go to slashdot. *SYMBOLIC PLONK*
After finally deciding to make Linux work (removable hard drives help), I’m having a good time with Red Hat 7.1. I bought Ximian Desktop and now just keep it updated. EASY! Good apps. Even my wife, who avoids the computer, likes AbiWord. Apps are often slow to load, and sometimes X just refuses to start, but overall it is pretty good, and no Klez/32 to worry about! Love those multiple workspaces (though I miss BeOS’s ability to define different screen sizes and depths for each workspace).
Linux CAN be too much trouble for average home or even small biz users. It may not be impossible to learn, but sometimes it JUST ISN’T WORTH IT when alternatives are there that do all the same work with far less legwork. It doesn’t have to be this way, though. Some people/companies are making a difference there, such as Ximian).
A friendly and helpful community would make a BIG difference. I have had enough of the insults and name-calling, not just from Speed, but from many who hang out on the usenet. People coming from Windows to Lunux are not an inferior life form compared to geeks. We’re all just a handful of dirt and a few quarts of water, anyway (physcially speaking). Some people need to remember that and park their high horses outside.
What I wrote was “RTFM”. You obviously managed to expand that to “read the f* manual”, so it’s a little late for you to claim that you didn’t understand.
You’re absolutely right. It was very wrong of me to assume that your abbreviation “RTFM” could be expanded to what it was originally (and is very commonly) expanded to mean. My apologies.
(not to mention that you did in fact mention HTML documentation)
Yes, I did. So how come there’s still so much “man page” FUD?
When did I mention man pages? Earlier, you said that you never told the users to read a manual (with a semantic argument claiming that when you used “RTFM,” you didn’t literlly mean for the user to read the manual). You did, however, claim for them to read HTML documentation, which is tantamount to reading a manual. So, to use your type of language, you’re either confused or you’re lying. (normal people would try to be respectful, but your attitude here is anything but)
So again I ask why you’re unwilling to make that same effort when it comes to Linux?
Same type of effort, maybe, depending on your definitions. Much, much more of it is required for Linux.
If your point were valid, it would be completely impossible for anyone to get any use whatsoever out of a program before studying how it should work. A well-made interface should more or less guide you along.
Go ahead and test your theory. If a MArtian space ship ever lands, you can try to run that space ship without any training. If you fail, you’ll know that you must learn first. Just because you don’t remember learning doesn’t mean that you didn’t learn.
Again, like in my original post which you’re conveniently ignoring, some things are going to be hard, but not everything need be. Things like changing screen resolution fall into those categories.
Wrong. Operating systems are by definition for applications to interact with.
Whose definition? Maybe from the 1960s, when the applications were the interface. Nowadays the operating system does a heck of a lot more.
Again you’re pretending to be God…a particularly impotent and helpless one at that! It’s not that Linux is failing you, it’s that you’re not as much a big shot as you like to think.
When on earth did I claim to be God? (perhaps you’re confusing me with another poster?) I would also love for you to provide some quotes from me in this conversation where I show that ‘I like to think that I’m a big shot.’
That’s what I was asking! I called the bluff.
What bluff?
You were essentially saying that the design isn’t bad because it makes sense once you “study” it. I responded saying that’s a cop-out.
Quit lying! If you want to comment on words that I actually wrote, that’s fine. But don’t lie about what I said.
Fine, you don’t like that summary? How’s this? ‘We have to learn every interface at some point. People are so accustomed to the Windows interface that just because Linux is different we unfairly think it’s worse.’
Good enough? My response to that is that that’s true; the fact that it’s different alone doesn’t make it worse. But there are many valid examples of where things aren’t designed as intuitively in Linux as with other systems. The Gnome usability reports are one source for seeing this.
2. People don’t “need” to change their screen resolution either, and yet it’s whine, whine, whine…
This is a very, very weak argument and you know it. The most obvious reason being that not everybody has equal eyes. That the functionality may not be 100% crucial to the operation of the system doesn’t mean it’s not incredibly important.
just because the world doesn’t revolve around you and your ego. As for being intuitive, that remains to be proven.
Look at Microsoft and Apple’s usability tests vs. those of the Linux world. And, for better or worse, 100 million people know a variant of the Windows interface. I don’t see how “the world revolving around me” comes into it, nor my “ego.” If anything, your claim should be that “the world doesn’t revolve around those 100 million people,” which is a much more interesting argument.
The point is that you must do something to learn. So far you ahve failed to show some tear in the space-time continuum that alters this basic fact when it comes to Linux.
It’s not that you don’t have to do something to learn; it’s how much you have to do. With a well-designed system, you have to do less.
You’re proving yourself a liar! Face it, you hold a prejudice against Linux, plain and simple. Lying about is fooling nobody.
Please tell me what I was lying about. The last time you claimed I was a liar I proved you wrong completely (also addressed below).
1.) I see nothing “random about it.
What does “Xconfigurator” have to do with a monitor to your average person?
2. The name appears to be “easily retainable” enough for you to recall it in your post.
Sure, because I’ve been using Linux for six years now (even though nothing newer than a year or so old) and because I’m a techie. For some reason you’ve just assumed that I haven’t used Linux. I don’t think your average person would remember it, though.
3. The command line paradigm certainly is “applicable to other areas of the system”.
So your claim proved to be total BS.
Ah, but the point is that with Windows, everything that changes system settings is in one place: the Control Panel. That’s not really true with Linux’s command-line (unless you consider your entire hard drive to be “one place”).
Let’s not forget that Xconfigurator is not the standard way of setting up X on any of the major distros, so you were also making a straw man argument.
As I said in my previous post, that’s how I had to do it last time I installed Linux, and the author mentioned it in his article. I would be more than willing to believe that it’s gotten easier since.
OK, I’ll stipulate that you weren’t lying, and that you just don’t know what a computer’s chipset is. Still, it’s your bad for writing about what you don’t know.
I was talking about the video card’s chipset. I thought that was pretty obvious from the context (and especially my subsequent post), but I’ll make it more clear by stating it. Search Google for “i740 chipset” and you’ll find it all over the place, so it’s pretty common terminology. And I am well aware of what a computer’s chipset is, thank you.
I suspect, however, that upon reading my previous response, you knew exactly what I meant but decided to hurl the baseless insult that I didn’t know what I computer’s chipset is anyway. This, of course, is mere speculation.
I don’t blame you for anything other than costing Linux a lot of potential users.
So now you’re suddenly the self-appointed Linux recruiter? Well if I offend you, in your position of Linux recruiter, that’s too bad. I never agreed to be your deputy or anything!
Sorry, but I’m no Linux recruiter. And it’s not that I won’t recruit them because of you, it’s that your constant insults to other users here (and poor attitude in general) might scare someone off if he were exposed to you as “a typical Linux user” (which, thankfully, you’re not).
Personally, I’ll take quality over quantity every time. I’d much rather go to a LUG meeting for a good time. My idea of fun doesn’t include dealing with clueless people who are pissed off because some 2-bit evangelist like you lied to them.
I like this. I never claimed to be an evangelist (nor did I evangelize), but you call me one. I never lied, but you said I did. Pot, kettle, eh? And I simply love the “2-bit” part, since I’ve treated you much, much more politely than you deserve given how you’ve treated everyone else. The most interesting thing, though, is that when you first starting posting here a few weeks or months or whatever ago I thought you had some good points. Too bad they’ve long been overshadowed by your continually rude, trollish behavior. You don’t happen to be in the Bay Area, do you? You’d make an interesting case study on the social effects of the internet…
Nice take, Brett. I can totally empathize. There’s no greater reward than the satisfaction of a job well done. A UN*X system is a source of great satisfaction for its keeper. Some people will never understand that. All of hteir satisfaction is store-bought. I fully support their right to do that. But bragging about their non-achievement and putting down others for not doing things their way is something that I cannot support.
Nice analogy, BTW!
Oh, and somebody better stick a fork in Felonious Hiddenbottom — he’s done ;D
You’re absolutely right. It was very wrong of me to assume that your abbreviation “RTFM” could be expanded to what it was originally (and is very commonly) expanded to mean. My apologies.
Apology accepted. I give you credit for taking the high road on that point. I hope that you also understand my point.
When did I mention man pages?
I wasn’t referring to you specifically.
Earlier, you said that you never told the users to read a manual (with a semantic argument claiming that when you used “RTFM,” you didn’t literlly mean for the user to read the manual). You did, however, claim for them to read HTML documentation, which is tantamount to reading a manual. So, to use your type of language, you’re either confused or you’re lying.
Well, it might be you who is confused. If you will supply me with a quote so I can look at exactly what you’re referring to, I’ll be happy to take a look. If I was in error, I’ll gladly apologize. In the context of the article, I don’t think it’s expecting too much for the author to research his article. I read too many posts already from people writing all about what you don’t know. I expect more of the press. Do you understand that?
(normal people would try to be respectful, but your attitude here is anything but)
I’m plenty respectful to people who act respectable. Again, if you have any specific beef, feel free to point it out. If you don’t like my responses to certain people, pay a little attention to their disrespect to me. I don’t shame anybody unprovoked! If people don’t want to discuss the topic, and flame me instead, no they will not be rewarded by me. If you want to reward wrongdoing, that’s your business.
Same type of effort, maybe, depending on your definitions. Much, much more of it is required for Linux.
My complaint isn’t about how much effort is required. My complaint is about the people who make no effort, and then blame everything but themselves for the result.
Again, like in my original post which you’re conveniently ignoring, some things are going to be hard, but not everything need be. Things like changing screen resolution fall into those categories.
I gave you a direct answer. If you want to refer to an older post, then do so. But don’t blame me for not reading your mind. And if you define pressing three buttons as “hard”, I disagree with you.
Whose definition? Maybe from the 1960s, when the applications were the interface. Nowadays the operating system does a heck of a lot more.
As usual, I defer to an authority on the subject. “Modern Operating Systems” by Andy Tanenbaum is considered the seminal tome on the subject. If you find an authority that you think refutes that, please show same.
When on earth did I claim to be God? (perhaps you’re confusing me with another poster?) I would also love for you to provide some quotes from me in this conversation where I show that ‘I like to think that I’m a big shot.’
The quotes precede my answers. I never said that you claimed to be God, so there is no answer to your loaded question.
[i]Fine, you don’t like that summary? How’s this? ‘We have to learn every interface at some point. People are so accustomed to the Windows interface that just because Linux is different we unfairly think it’s worse.’
Good enough? My response to that is that that’s true; the fact that it’s different alone doesn’t make it worse. But there are many valid examples of where things aren’t designed as intuitively in Linux as with other systems. The Gnome usability reports are one source for seeing this.
That’s fine, and I agree about GNOME.
This is a very, very weak argument and you know it. The most obvious reason being that not everybody has equal eyes. That the functionality may not be 100% crucial to the operation of the system doesn’t mean it’s not incredibly important.
Funny thing about exaggeration, at some point it becomes falsehood. People who use absolute terms like “need” that aren’t absolutely right, are absolutely wrong. Yes, all of the dead-horse beating in defense of the author’s failure to research his story is indeed weak. That has been my point all along.
Look at Microsoft and Apple’s usability tests vs. those of the Linux world.
I would be happy to, but can’t if I don’t know where they are.
And, for better or worse, 100 million people know a variant of the Windows interface.
That in itself is true. Just remember that that knowledge is a trait of the 100M people, and not of Linux. So if you’re going to use that statistic to place blame, you could rightly blame the people, but not Linux.
I don’t see how “the world revolving around me” comes into it, nor my “ego.” If anything, your claim should be that “the world doesn’t revolve around those 100 million people,” which is a much more interesting argument.
But you don’t represent those 100M people. In other words, speak for yourself.
LMAO@Brett’s analogy, GOLD!!!
I’ve read every single post, and couldnt decide which side i’d be on. On the one hand i agree with Speed, but i do not agree with the way he approaches it. If you are willing to put just a bit of work, you can do wonders. I know of a guy who knew next to nothing about computers when he first installed linux, he was no geek, he was a jock (a boxer to be precise), but because he was willing to read a few instructions, he’s now _quite_ linux capable.
On the other hand i do realize that for newbies it can be overwhelming sometimes. But what i suggest is that newbies do the install with someone that is more knowledgeable around. My local LUG helps people install linux, that way they can ask “whats this Window Manager thing its talking about?”, or even simple stuff like “whats root?!”. I know plenty of people that cant install windows on their own (in fact i know a guy who cant install apps in windows himself), so i help them out with the install, there again, they ask questions like “why does windows 2000 always want me to enter a password?”, and stuff like that.
Like i said in part I of this guy’s thing, his article will mean nothing to the world in the end, it wont put an end to any debates.
It’s not that you don’t have to do something to learn; it’s how much you have to do. With a well-designed system, you have to do less.
While that’s true, it’s a straw man argument. What’s at issue is the unreasonable expectation that Linux should require no effort, and the fact that it differs from expectations for Windows. The double standard.
Please tell me what I was lying about.
Please refer to the quote that I furnish above my comment.
The last time you claimed I was a liar I proved you wrong completely (also addressed below).
I don’t see any evidence of your claim.
Ah, but the point is that with Windows, everything that changes system settings is in one place: the Control Panel. That’s not really true with Linux’s command-line (unless you consider your entire hard drive to be “one place”).
Another straw man argument. It has no bearing on the topic. And it also appears that Felonious Hiddenbottom disagrees with you. If there are Windows command line utilities, then you are wrong. Guess what?
As I said in my previous post, that’s how I had to do it last time I installed Linux, and the author mentioned it in his article. I would be more than willing to believe that it’s gotten easier since.
I read the article, and even did a text search. The author makes no mention of “Xconfigurator”, so that’s not a valid excuse. The truth is that the author had a different, much nicer interface to configure X with, and you were promoting a fallacy.
I was talking about the video card’s chipset. I thought that was pretty obvious from the context (and especially my subsequent post), but I’ll make it more clear by stating it. Search Google for “i740 chipset” and you’ll find it all over the place, so it’s pretty common terminology. And I am well aware of what a computer’s chipset is, thank you.
Don’t blame because you were imprecise when you made a wild exaggeration! Wrong is wrong, and you were wrong. There is no requirement to enter chipset data. GPU maybe, but only if you want to specify a driver manually. You’d have to do the same thing in Windows, so what’s your point?
I don’t blame you for anything other than costing Linux a lot of potential users.
You can’t even blame me for that! I’m under no obligation either way.
Sorry, but I’m no Linux recruiter. And it’s not that I won’t recruit them because of you, it’s that your constant insults to other users here (and poor attitude in general) might scare someone off if he were exposed to you as “a typical Linux user” (which, thankfully, you’re not).
I’m not responsible for other people’s actions. When you blame me like that, you’re lying. Rather than discuss the issues in a respectful and civilized manner, you’re attempting to win through character assassination, which is a dishonest and immoral act.
I’ve treated you much, much more politely than you deserve given how you’ve treated everyone else.
I reject your alleged authority over what I deserve. And whether I deserve it or not, you have conducted your campaign against Linux with dishonor. And whose fault is that? It’s yours.
Speed misses the point of my post.
They are rhetorical questions, from a user.
I dont know where you get your copies of linux, but a whole lot of mine came off of the front of magazine covers ( and Im sure a lot of other peoples do too ), no box, let alone a _printed_ manual.
My references to man pages are based on the fact that I do know how to use man, and only because I carry that knowledge into the situation ( using linux ) do I have a chance.
For a user who is trying out linux for the first time ( off of a magazine, from a friend, downloaded from some website – eg one of the free download sites for broadband users supplied by their provider, shipped with a product – one of my ethernet cards came with a linux cd ) there really is no guidance.
The help systems need to be unified, into to one singular, easy to find place ( and not xman
.
You cant say ‘use google’, the user cant get online yet, cos that is just screwed as well. How are they supposed to know what the hell kppp ( or whatever is is called ) does.
Jon, if you’re getting a freebie, then you have no right to expect such insanely high service levels. Can’t you understand that you’re expectations of Linux are way out of touch with reality? I suspect that they’re also way out of line from what you expect of other products, but for all I know you’re railing against Cracker Jack in some candy forum because the prizes aren’t rare gems and consumer electronics.
As for man pages, it’s a red herring. Take a look at the XFce screen shots (article somewhat above this one), and you’ll see the life ring icon in each. Every Linux distro that I’ve used in the past few years has the same icon. It’s hard to miss, and even if you can’t grasp the obvious, the tooltip will tell you it’s for help. So you’re just playing dumb, or you’re just too stupid to grasp a simple concept, your choice. No matter which it is, it’s your trait, and has nothing to do with Linux.
>>Ah, but the point is that with Windows, everything that changes system settings is in one place: the Control Panel. That’s not really true with Linux’s command-line (unless you consider your entire hard drive to be “one place”).
Another straw man argument. It has no bearing on the topic. And it also appears that Felonious Hiddenbottom disagrees with you. If there are Windows command line utilities, then you are wrong. Guess what? <<
Ah, no. I said for you, the supposed Windows Administrator who apparently knows nothing about the automatic system state backups in consumer versions of Windows – which I also mentioned could be done through a GUI application.
Good lord, man. Have you no shame? You’re not even a good liar.
I have not been involved in this discussion, and I have no wish to enter the fray, but I simply have to pop in and express my opinion that you are the most talented Linux zealot ever to grace a web page, anywhere. Until now, I had been admiring the postings of several Slashdot regulars, but you have proven that you are head-and-shoulders above the competition. Your knack for trolling is unsurpassed; your ability to engage in excruciatingly long, meandering arguments is second only to your ability to win them on even the most trivial technicalities.<p>
Bravo to you, my friend. I would present you with some sort of award, but I’m not in charge here. As a consolation, feel free to cut & paste the following text into a file and to print it out and hang it on your refrigerator (which you really ought to get around to cleaning one of these days):
<p>Speed
Unofficial OSNews Master Troller 2002
“Showers are for pansies; Let’s get the trollin’ rollin’! OPEN SOURCE 4 EVER”
<p>Congratulations once again.
That may or may not be true. But the applications aren’t the fault of the OS. Drawing conclusions like that is inherently bogus.
a) A OS without applications is like a car without fuel
b) A OS with faulty applications is like a car, running on water.
c) You use the same agrument at the person you are replying to against BeOS. Double Standard.
d) Linux has some faults on why it doesn’t get good applications
– There isn’t a proper IDE, like those available on Windows and Mac OS X.
– There isn’t any commercial hope for non-free software (remember AplixWare, WP Office, Loki etc.?)
– There aren’t proper standards. On Windows you have Win32, on Mac OS X, you have Carbon and Cocoa (which are compatible. On Linux, you have totally incompatible toolkits like Motif, QT, and GTK+, which also causes UI inconsitency.
– There isn’t any proper distro standards used by all distros. So, a developer would have to make a package format for different distributions (or use something like OpenOffice.org and Mozilla; but it wouldn’t be consitent anymore with the distro).
And just because a lot of people are using their computers as very expensive typewriters doesn’t mean that the only measure of a product is how well it emulates a typewriter. Linux was born in the Internet age, so it should come as no surprise that Linux reflects that age.
Which also explains why most Internet-related apps aren’t available on Linux, yes? Which anyway, computers give much more flexiblity than typewriters; and is worth the cost. Oh well, you are anti-anything-that-doesn’t-goes-well-with-Speed.
Who started the name calling?
Most people would say Speed. He makes a claim, when we say opposite, he start with the personal insults. And when we give a very much needed personal insult; he complains about use not being able to back up our claim.
I would never consider reading the manual. But then I’m used to using Macs.
I never read the manuals to use Windows too, when I’m forced to use Windows after a long time of using Linux (like now). But heck, on Linux, Mandrake never provides any readable non-boring manuals, so I end up going online and finding out myself, or buying a book.
I know for a fact that MS have a small share of the server OS market.
Though their market share is shrinking fast, in 2001, Microsoft still have the largest marketshare. But Linux is the fastest growing in terms of marketshare for servers.
After finally deciding to make Linux work (removable hard drives help), I’m having a good time with Red Hat 7.1. I bought Ximian Desktop and now just keep it updated. EASY! Good apps. Even my wife, who avoids the computer, likes AbiWord. Apps are often slow to load, and sometimes X just refuses to start, but overall it is pretty good, and no Klez/32 to worry about! Love those multiple workspaces (though I miss BeOS’s ability to define different screen sizes and depths for each workspace).
You do realize that Ximian Desktop isn’t a distribution, and David Coursey was comparing OS out of the box. There are far better desktops for Windows, why didn’t he try comparing with that? The default for Red Hat 7.3 is KDE 3.0.0.xxx
A friendly and helpful community would make a BIG difference. I have had enough of the insults and name-calling, not just from Speed, but from many who hang out on the usenet. People coming from Windows to Lunux are not an inferior life form compared to geeks. We’re all just a handful of dirt and a few quarts of water, anyway (physcially speaking). Some people need to remember that and park their high horses outside.
Scientificly, we are much more complex than dirt and water.
Sure, because I’ve been using Linux for six years now (even though nothing newer than a year or so old) and because I’m a techie. For some reason you’ve just assumed that I haven’t used Linux. I don’t think your average person would remember it, though.
Hey! Same here. So, we have two Linux users, and one Windows users who has a lot of experience with Linux vs. Speed, who claims we are all liars.
Nice take, Brett. I can totally empathize. There’s no greater reward than the satisfaction of a job well done. A UN*X system is a source of great satisfaction for its keeper. Some people will never understand that. All of hteir satisfaction is store-bought. I fully support their right to do that. But bragging about their non-achievement and putting down others for not doing things their way is something that I cannot support.
I keep a Linux system, and is very happy about it. But unlike you, I don’t lie about Linux. Linux is hard, so what? Flying rockets to space is hard, but not nessecarily less better than cars; but it also doesn’t mean car users must learn to use rockets or they would be “lazy”.
I’m plenty respectful to people who act respectable. Again, if you have any specific beef, feel free to point it out. If you don’t like my responses to certain people, pay a little attention to their disrespect to me. I don’t shame anybody unprovoked! If people don’t want to discuss the topic, and flame me instead, no they will not be rewarded by me. If you want to reward wrongdoing, that’s your business.
Hmmm, who was the first to insult people in this thread?
Who was the person who can’t back up his claims, and instead resort to personal insults?
Who was the person that lied the most here?
For all the answers, I bet most rational people who say “Speed”.
I can’t blame you Speed. Just half a year ago, I was exactly like you. If fact, that had caused me to be almost banned at http://www.osopinion.com/ (though later on, I was banned because I had a arguement with the owner of the site, he doesn’t agree with my opinion, and he wouldn’t appreciate opinions that goes against his own).
I gave you a direct answer. If you want to refer to an older post, then do so. But don’t blame me for not reading your mind. And if you define pressing three buttons as “hard”, I disagree with you.
Hear ye, hear ye, accroading to Speed, there should be a control panel applet in Linux that configures screen resolution (which anyway, the three main distributions don’t have a centralized distribution anyway, 2 of them have a manual lifted from Linux Documentation Project; which some of the advice doesn’t apply on the distribution).
Fine, you don’t like that summary? How’s this? ‘We have to learn every interface at some point. People are so accustomed to the Windows interface that just because Linux is different we unfairly think it’s worse.’
That doesn’t explain why David Coursey had a wonderful time in this 3-month trip (an extended 1 month trip, mind you) to Macland; and not a wonderful one to Linuxland. Even though Linux is more like Windows than Mac OS X (UI wise). Anyway, before using Linux, I hardly use computers, I hardly know how to do anything on Windows, because I couldn’t care less about them. Then came along my cousin, took out an old computer, install Linux, teach me how to use it, and KDE became the most familar UI I know. However, last year once my hard disk broke down; I manage to use Windows without a problem. Then this year again, right now, the only hardware modem in the house that is compatible with Linux blew up, and the only modem in the house is in a laptop with Windows and a Ethernet port that has been jammed with my 7 year old brother. 2 months time, I’m getting ADSL, and back to Linux. But I never had trouble using Windows, even if it’s out of my comfort zone. Why? Because it wasn’t made by geeks for geeks. It (Windows) was made by geeks + usablity experts for normal consumers. Still, I don’t know how to do some things on Windows; but that doesn’t make it a bad UI.
Funny thing about exaggeration, at some point it becomes falsehood. People who use absolute terms like “need” that aren’t absolutely right, are absolutely wrong. Yes, all of the dead-horse beating in defense of the author’s failure to research his story is indeed weak. That has been my point all along.
Funny thing about your points, it changes quite fast. Maybe someone using the nick “Speed” was posting in your name?
So far, there isn’t an easy way on Mandrake nor Red Hat to change screen resolutions. For most consumers, Linux comes from Red Hat, and many of the rest think that Mandrake is the only other one (Mandrake has the strong retail presence in USA).
I’ve read every single post, and couldnt decide which side i’d be on. On the one hand i agree with Speed, but i do not agree with the way he approaches it. If you are willing to put just a bit of work, you can do wonders. I know of a guy who knew next to nothing about computers when he first installed linux, he was no geek, he was a jock (a boxer to be precise), but because he was willing to read a few instructions, he’s now _quite_ linux capable.
I was like that. But most people aren’t. They want something to work with minimal learning. So far, Linux isn’t that.
On the other hand i do realize that for newbies it can be overwhelming sometimes. But what i suggest is that newbies do the install with someone that is more knowledgeable around. My local LUG helps people install linux, that way they can ask “whats this Window Manager thing its talking about?”, or even simple stuff like “whats root?!”. I know plenty of people that cant install windows on their own (in fact i know a guy who cant install apps in windows himself), so i help them out with the install, there again, they ask questions like “why does windows 2000 always want me to enter a password?”, and stuff like that.
Amazingly, there isn’t any WUGs, and yet users end up fine. Some people are embarrest to ask questions, think it is an stupid question. Others couldn’t be bother; if it isn’t in English, why bother?
As for unable to install Windows, installing Linux is by far the most easiest thing to do on Linux (or more like out of Linux…). And most people find Windows preloaded, so they don’t have to install it. Most PCs only come with a Recovering Disk, which can’t anyway install the OS.
While that’s true, it’s a straw man argument. What’s at issue is the unreasonable expectation that Linux should require no effort, and the fact that it differs from expectations for Windows. The double standard.
None of us are saying that Linux should not need any effort; all OS, from Mac OS on Macs to AIX on mainframes, requires some effort, but the effort needed is different for each OS. When comparing Windows, Linux and Mac OS, you require most effort to use Linux. Sure, I have heard stories about their grandmas using Linux, but I found that most of these stories is that “I installed <distribution> Linux on my grandmother’s machine, and configure <desktop> and let her to use it after teaching her how to use the <desktop>. I come back after <a period of time> and find her able to use Linux”; but most Windows users start using Windows by themselves, nobody taught them to do this and that for them.
I read the article, and even did a text search. The author makes no mention of “Xconfigurator”, so that’s not a valid excuse. The truth is that the author had a different, much nicer interface to configure X with, and you were promoting a fallacy.
A quote from the first part of the article, 2nd paragraph -“Alas, the only way to change the screen from low-resolution 640×480 to a more useful 1024×768 was to run a program called Xconfigurer from the command prompt. Or I could simply reinstall the OS, which seemed like the easier way out. ” – Who’s lying?
Don’t blame because you were imprecise when you made a wild exaggeration! Wrong is wrong, and you were wrong. There is no requirement to enter chipset data. GPU maybe, but only if you want to specify a driver manually. You’d have to do the same thing in Windows, so what’s your point?
Hmm, two contradicting statements in one reply. What he meant was the GPU chipset information. There is for most desktop distributions, GUIs for this, but only for the installation.
Jon, if you’re getting a freebie, then you have no right to expect such insanely high service levels. Can’t you understand that you’re expectations of Linux are way out of touch with reality? I suspect that they’re also way out of line from what you expect of other products, but for all I know you’re railing against Cracker Jack in some candy forum because the prizes aren’t rare gems and consumer electronics.
The way most people are going to try Linux is by using the free versions. In fact, in most pro-Linux sites, this is their main plus points of Linux. Amazingly, you don’t need to read the manual to use Windows, because a easy help system is there, as well as a troubleshooter for most things (like the inablity to use Internet). The only distro that comes with some readable manuals is SuSE, which is only printed. That means, users can’t search it, can’t get to the point and so on.
As for man pages, it’s a red herring. Take a look at the XFce screen shots (article somewhat above this one), and you’ll see the life ring icon in each. Every Linux distro that I’ve used in the past few years has the same icon. It’s hard to miss, and even if you can’t grasp the obvious, the tooltip will tell you it’s for help. So you’re just playing dumb, or you’re just too stupid to grasp a simple concept, your choice. No matter which it is, it’s your trait, and has nothing to do with Linux.
That icon is used in KDE for its own help pages; and none of it is for changing resolution, or anything outside KDE’s scope. GNOME 2.0 has the same kind of icon, and 1.x had a word ballon with a question mark, both of which is for GNOME help. Nautilus enables you to search the man pages, but it isn’t close to the ease of use of Windows and Mac OS X help system.
Good lord, man. Have you no shame? You’re not even a good liar.
Put him in Slashdot, he would sound the most honest there.
And for alexd, don’t fight fire with fire.
a) A OS without applications is like a car without fuel
That’s a false analogy. An OS can run indefinitely with nary an app insight. An accurate analogy is “an OS is like a car without passengers”.
I reiterate that applications aren’t the fault of the OS. Blaming the OS is like blaming a car for running a red light. It’s not the car, it’s the driver; it’s not the OS, it’s the individual developer in each case. Blanket condemnations are convenient for the lazy, but they’re just plain wrong.
Which also explains why most Internet-related apps aren’t available on Linux, yes?
By presenting a calim as a foregone conclusion, you seek to deceive. You’re a liar. I see no proof of your allegation. And your sneaky language tells me that you have none.
Who started the name calling? Most people would say Speed.[/i]
Prisons are full of convicts who blame their victims for what they did. But the facts said something different. Here, the facts say something different too. That’s nothing new about cheating and lying. Getting a bunch of people to tell a lie doesn’t make it true.
Also, Speed’s Razor says that you’re resorting to personal attacks because you have nothing useful to contribute.
I can’t blame you Speed. Just half a year ago, I was exactly like you. If fact, that had caused me to be almost banned at http://www.osopinion.com/ (though later on, I was banned because I had a arguement with the owner of the site, he doesn’t agree with my opinion, and he wouldn’t appreciate opinions that goes against his own).
So you go “baa baa” just like the other sheople. I recorded a show last night (“Only Human”) that was about people like you, people who would lie because of peer pressure. Maybe you were like me, and had your backbone removed. But today you’re an unprincipled liar, and the past doesn’t acquit you. Doing it for peer pressure is no excuse.
Don’t expect me to say that black is white and up is down just because a bunch of idiots want me to. I have no strings to be pulled. If you don’t like my integrity, fine. If you want to attack me over it, or because I’m right and you’re wrong, then don’t be so surprised that I fight back.
So far, there isn’t an easy way on Mandrake nor Red Hat to change screen resolutions. For most consumers, Linux comes from Red Hat, and many of the rest think that Mandrake is the only other one (Mandrake has the strong retail presence in USA).
Exactly what’s so hard about pressing a couple of buttons? Enough of these damn lies and FUD!
None of us are saying that Linux should not need any effort…
And yet you’re apologists for that same cause. There’s a word for that — “hypocrite”.
A quote from the first part of the article, 2nd paragraph -“Alas, the only way to change the screen from low-resolution 640×480 to a more useful 1024×768 was to run a program called Xconfigurer from the command prompt. Or I could simply reinstall the OS, which seemed like the easier way out. ” – Who’s lying?
The article’s author is lying because A.) no such program exists, and B.) even if it did exist, it wouldn’t be the “only way”, or even the preferred way. Anybody who claims that the author’s claim is truthful is also lying.
“wrong, most (95% at least) video cards have drivers in one form or another that come with windows.
That’s a straw man argument. You didn’t address my statement. The truth is that installation of video card drivers is remarkably similar with Windows and Linux distros. You also chose the wrong person to BS. I’ve installed Windows too many times to buy that 95% claim.”
I have never come across a single card that windows won’t have a viable driver for, but I’ve only tried mainstream cards. If your using a $10 card or a $1000 pro level card then I’m sure you’ve had to use a 3rd party driver. Those cards don’t make up that much of the market which is where I came up with 95%.
“Every Linux distro that I’ve bought came with nice printed manuals in book form. Does Windows? You are a liar, Genaldar.”
Every windows I bought came with a manual, its just not as overwhelming. btw how many people buy linux? very few so that nice thick book you get comes in real handy when you don’t get it huh? nice name calling btw
“Mandrake 8.1 installed around 10 terminals, including 4 foriegn language ones (btw wtf do I need the chinese terminal to make the internet control work?).
That’s a lie. The only way to install “10 terminals, including 4 foriegn language ones” in Mandrake is to manually intervene yourself. So blaming Mandrake for what must be your actions is extremely dishonest.”
Your right I did install them. But not by choice, all of the terminals were required by other programs I wanted, which is rediculous. It does point out how badly interdependent linux can be. btw the default install was 6 terminals.
“And if you really believe that the value of a product is solely a function of how many advertising dollars are spent on it, then you’re a fool.”
The original reason names came up is because someone said a lot of linux programs have names that don’t make sense. You fired back with excel and outlook saying no one can tell what those do by name. I was pointing out that because ms does advertise people who would use those programs know what they do, and because of that they can use them without first taking the time to figure out what they do, causing productivity to go up (if the product is only used occasionally if its a big name its easier to remember so you don’t have to try and remember its name on the occasions you need to use it).
“Who’s asking people to switch? Not me! Again you’re making a straw man argument. You’re creating a false dilemma. And you’re promoting the same old double standard that I’ve decried all along. I don’t see you screaming that Microsoft didn’t make MS-DOS “easy and compelling”! ”
Linux companies and many linux users (maybe not you in particular, but there has to be a large segment that does or there’d be no demand for articles like this) are always saying its better and everyone should switch (or some use that crappy ms is evil argument). I was simply saying that linux needs to give people a reason to switch. Ms didn’t have to make dos easy and compelling, being associated with ibm did that for them.
“That’s a lie. If you can’t remember two, they don’t exist. Linuxconf duplicates what the Mandrake Control Center does, so your “seperate” claim is BS. And since you wouldn’t use KDE and GNOME together, you have one to deal with at any given time. So the bottom line is 2 control panels. 2! That’s far from your “many” claim!”
If I can’t remember 2 I can’t remember 2, it doesn’t make it a lie (one of them dealt services the other with lilo). Yes I did use both gnome and kde so that still leaves 3, and linuxconf did do some things mandrake control didn’t (users is one of them).
“Since you don’t even know the name of the file, it’s safe to say that you’re just making this claim up. The lie comes when you say “have to”. It’s an old EvangeLista trick. Invent the most boneheaded way to do som simple task, then proclaim that is “proof” that something is “hard”. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy; the product of prejudice. If you want something to be difficult, you’ll find a way to make it that way. Just don’t pretend that you have an open mind on the matter.”
To install nvidia (largest 3d card manufacturer btw) 3d drivers you have to edit xconfig (and no I don’t remember the exact name because the 1 time I tried it it caused x to no longer work and kept linux from booting (since I had x launch by default)).
“Genaldar, I asked for a list of the alleged “alpha” software that you claimed was in Linux. You failed to produce any! You are a liar.”
I never said alpha, I said beta. You are a liar.
I have never come across a single card that windows won’t have a viable driver for, but I’ve only tried mainstream cards. If your using a $10 card or a $1000 pro level card then I’m sure you’ve had to use a 3rd party driver. Those cards don’t make up that much of the market which is where I came up with 95%.
All you’re doing is speculating. I don’t see any reason to believe your number. And my experience supervising the maintenance of thousands of PCs doesn’t jibe with your account.
how many people buy linux? very few so that nice thick book you get comes in real handy when you don’t get it huh?
Again you’re speculating. Coursey said that he had the boxed set, so your speculation is moot.
Your right I did install them. But not by choice, all of the terminals were required by other programs I wanted
Then it was by choice!
It does point out how badly interdependent linux can be.
Wrong. RPM != Linux. BTW, stop trying to change the subject.
I was pointing out that because ms does advertise people who would use those programs know what they do, and because of that they can use them without first taking the time to figure out what they do, causing productivity to go up (if the product is only used occasionally if its a big name its easier to remember so you don’t have to try and remember its name on the occasions you need to use it).
Good luck proving that claim! Not that it matters, since Microsoft’s advertising budget has no bearing on how good Linux is.
Linux companies and many linux users (maybe not you in particular, but there has to be a large segment that does or there’d be no demand for articles like this) are always saying its better and everyone should switch (or some use that crappy ms is evil argument).
Who are these mysterious individuals and companies that you don’t want to name? You’ll have to drop the cloak and dagger routine if you want me to evaluate this.
I was simply saying that linux needs to give people a reason to switch.
Well unless your name is Linus, it’s not your cross to bear. You have no right to attack people for not obeying you when you’re not their boss.
If I can’t remember 2 I can’t remember 2, it doesn’t make it a lie (one of them dealt services the other with lilo).
What makes it a lie is that a number that you can count on your fingers isn’t “many” by a wide margin.
To install nvidia (largest 3d card manufacturer btw) 3d drivers you have to edit xconfig (and no I don’t remember the exact name because the 1 time I tried it it caused x to no longer work and kept linux from booting (since I had x launch by default)).
You’re still spinning your wheels on that? Face it already, Coursey was wrong. He lied about an app that didn’t even exist. He lied when he claimed it was the “only way”. Just because you found one way to do it does not mean that you “have to” do it that way. From where I sit, it looks like you’re inventing worst-case scenarios to spin and FUD.
I never said alpha, I said beta. You are a liar.
You’re right, my bad. There were two people claiming alpha, but you weren’t one of them. I’m sorry that I falsely accused you.
Nevertheless, I see no evidence to support your beta claim.
That’s a false analogy. An OS can run indefinitely with nary an app insight. An accurate analogy is “an OS is like a car without passengers”.
I wouldn’t find Linux at all attractive if there wasn’t the applications I like. In fact, an OS is useless without apps.
I reiterate that applications aren’t the fault of the OS. Blaming the OS is like blaming a car for running a red light. It’s not the car, it’s the driver; it’s not the OS, it’s the individual developer in each case. Blanket condemnations are convenient for the lazy, but they’re just plain wrong.
Actually, it is partially Linux fault
– Does Linux have a IDE like those found in Windows and Mac OS? (this causes slower development; most of Windows apps are shareware written with VS)
– Does Linux have a standard API for graphical application development? (this is actually X11’s fault).
– Does all Linux distribution follow standards? Or does the developer needs to create binaries for each type of distribution?
– Does Linux have a market that is willing to pay for software (most pay-for software ran unsuccessful on Linux, while their free counterparts; better or worse in technical merits, becomes successful).
There is some blame to be place on Linux as a whole.
By presenting a calim as a foregone conclusion, you seek to deceive. You’re a liar. I see no proof of your allegation. And your sneaky language tells me that you have none.
Okay lets see;
– Does Linux have ICQ, AIM, MSN and Yahoo! IMs? Nope; though we have clones of it, or IMs that support it, most consumers would try to find official software.
– Does Linux have most of the P2P apps? Nope, it doesn’t. In fact, the only propreitary P2P app available for Linux, in a forever alpha mode, is AudioGalaxy; which has officially lost its user base due to a settlement.
– Does Linux have RealONE, WMP and Quicktime players; used for streaming video and sound content on the Internet? Nope (WMP wouldn’t make a Linux version, same with Quicktime, and Real users have to live with a aging RealPlayer).
– Does Linux have AOL? It is used by most Internet users (i’m talking about the browser).
There are so many more examples; but I really have no time to list them all.
Prisons are full of convicts who blame their victims for what they did. But the facts said something different. Here, the facts say something different too. That’s nothing new about cheating and lying. Getting a bunch of people to tell a lie doesn’t make it true.
In most other threads, you always start with the personal insults when you can’t back up your claim. This is one of the few threads where somebody beat you to it; “I don’t know what ur problem is, but i suggest that you start taking prozac or some other happy happy joy joy stuff, because you *REALLY* need it.”
Also, Speed’s Razor says that you’re resorting to personal attacks because you have nothing useful to contribute.
The thing I was replying to was an insult made by you. Which anyway, you started name calling.
So you go “baa baa” just like the other sheople. I recorded a show last night (“Only Human”) that was about people like you, people who would lie because of peer pressure. Maybe you were like me, and had your backbone removed. But today you’re an unprincipled liar, and the past doesn’t acquit you. Doing it for peer pressure is no excuse.
Yes, I was once a sheep. Why? I only read one side of the story, and only listen to opinions of those who have everything to gain with Microsoft gone. I’m no longer like that. I make my own opinions. In fact, when I change, there wasn’t anyone on that URL I gave that was having the same opinion as me; which effectively removes “peer preassure” from the list (most people at osOpinion aren’t Linux zealot and there for don’t have the same opinion as me, but they are anti-MS (which I’m not anymore), and pro-Mac (which I’m not anyway). I go straight to the facts, and skip through political propaganda.
Don’t expect me to say that black is white and up is down just because a bunch of idiots want me to. I have no strings to be pulled. If you don’t like my integrity, fine. If you want to attack me over it, or because I’m right and you’re wrong, then don’t be so surprised that I fight back.
Okay, for a person who calls others liars (even without prove, here’s some occasions where you have lied;
“Don’t blame because you were imprecise when you made a wild exaggeration! Wrong is wrong, and you were wrong. There is no requirement to enter chipset data. GPU maybe, but only if you want to specify a driver manually. You’d have to do the same thing in Windows, so what’s your point? ”
“I read the article, and even did a text search. The author makes no mention of “Xconfigurator”, so that’s not a valid excuse. The truth is that the author had a different, much nicer interface to configure X with, and you were promoting a fallacy.”
And many more if I searched.
Exactly what’s so hard about pressing a couple of buttons? Enough of these damn lies and FUD!
Actually, by default on Mandrake, the shortcuts to increase or decrease resolution is disabled. Plus, there is no mention in their 8.1 manual on how to change the resolution via shortcuts. On their man pages, which they don’t install by default, to get the shortcuts you need to edit some config files; in which the tutorial isn’t easily accessible; you need to do a search of “XFree86” and skimp through hundreds of different tutorials which some of them don’t apply on Mandrake. It is the same way on Red Hat (7.1) ; except for the manual, which I couldn’t read without falling asleep (which makes it hard for consumers to learn about Linux, no?).
So who’s lying?
And yet you’re apologists for that same cause. There’s a word for that — “hypocrite”.
You are confusing me with someone else. I’m saying that Linux requires more effort to learn than Windows nor Mac OS. (Besides, Windows changed the entire UI in Windows 95, and peoples, especially my brothers, moved from 3.1 to 95 fine. Though 95 was my first OS I actually use and not see; and at that time, I couldn’t be interested in computers).
The article’s author is lying because A.) no such program exists, and B.) even if it did exist, it wouldn’t be the “only way”, or even the preferred way. Anybody who claims that the author’s claim is truthful is also lying.
I can’t speak for 7.3; but in 7.1 there wasn’t any proper X graphical configuration tool that changes the resolution. There was one, but that was to change the graphical chipset, and to enable remote desktop, and so on. And yes, there is XConfigurator. XFree86 doesn’t have any new tutorials of it because settings vary from distribution to distribution.
Your right I did install them. But not by choice, all of the terminals were required by other programs I wanted, which is rediculous. It does point out how badly interdependent linux can be. btw the default install was 6 terminals.
It is actually the fault of Mandrake’s RPM support. Using things like Debian is far more better; but then they are not made for consumers anyway.
That’s a lie. If you can’t remember two, they don’t exist. Linuxconf duplicates what the Mandrake Control Center does, so your “seperate” claim is BS. And since you wouldn’t use KDE and GNOME together, you have one to deal with at any given time. So the bottom line is 2 control panels. 2! That’s far from your “many” claim!
Actually, that is a lie. Most of Linuxconf’s settings aren’t available via Mandrake Control Panel. And trust me, I have used both. And Linuxconf ends up installed on my default installation
To install nvidia (largest 3d card manufacturer btw) 3d drivers you have to edit xconfig (and no I don’t remember the exact name because the 1 time I tried it it caused x to no longer work and kept linux from booting (since I had x launch by default)).
You can now do so via RPM.
Again you’re speculating. Coursey said that he had the boxed set, so your speculation is moot.
If 7.1’s manual was any indicator; it would be enough to put yourself to sleep. And if he starts reading at the last half, as a consumer, you wouldn’t know if you are reading a violent horror romantic novel or a manual.
Then it was by choice!
It was needed by some apps; he never intended to use it.
Wrong. RPM != Linux. BTW, stop trying to change the subject.
RPM is the de facto standard. It is used in most desktops. In fact, only Lindows and Xandros don’t use RPM… but they aren’t released yet.
Good luck proving that claim! Not that it matters, since Microsoft’s advertising budget has no bearing on how good Linux is.
LOL, he didn’t say it had bearing on how good Linux was. Most software installed on Linux doesn’t come with names in which you could guess its function, like Konqueror, Galeon, Gabber and so on. Some of them do, like KWord, KSpread and so on. Some people don’t have time installing applications via the OS installation, and open it after installation to see what it does.
Who are these mysterious individuals and companies that you don’t want to name? You’ll have to drop the cloak and dagger routine if you want me to evaluate this.
99% of Slashdot Linux users, Red Hat, Mandrake, Lindows, ELX, Lycoris etc. You must be that blind not to see that.
Well unless your name is Linus, it’s not your cross to bear. You have no right to attack people for not obeying you when you’re not their boss.
Well, you are attacking the author for installing Linux from the users point of view, and giving a somewhat negative review. e never attack you, or me, or any other Linux users for using Linux. Remember, David Coursey gave the Mac a smaller shot in getting his interest, and David Coursey praised Macs more than Linux. Instead of blaming it on the author and most of the customers, why not examine the faults of Linux? Can you live with a OS that don’t fit everyones needs? I don’t mind Linux not fitting anyone’s needs, but it fills mine.
You’re still spinning your wheels on that? Face it already, Coursey was wrong. He lied about an app that didn’t even exist. He lied when he claimed it was the “only way”. Just because you found one way to do it does not mean that you “have to” do it that way. From where I sit, it looks like you’re inventing worst-case scenarios to spin and FUD.
Hmmm, they have RPMs of it ( http://speakeasy.rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/rawhide/1.0/i386/RedHat/RPMS… )…
And if you see the description; it was made by Red Hat. Hmmm, who’s the liar?
Nevertheless, I see no evidence to support your beta claim.
Approx 40% installed by default on Mandrake 8.2 haven’t reach 1.0. They include DrakConf (0.98), Window Maker, Enlightenment, Eterm, an experimental Xfree86 3.x with 3D acceleration and so on.