“Linux has made major inroads on servers and in data centers running both open-source and proprietary applications on millions of computers worldwide. We’ve recently seen the rise of Linux on mobile devices. But the Linux desktop remains elusive. We know it’s out there, but it only now seems to be approaching the tipping point.”
maybe if people stopped proclaiming that linux is desktop ready, eat some humble pie and work on it, the year of desktop linux will actually happen through linux actually being desktop ready, instead of people saying it is all the time.
There is no proper migration path for linux, it is still hard to use, awareness is low because the focus is still too technical and the biggest developments for desktop linux have all come from comapny work (ubuntu, xgl, novell, redhat…)
Try not to squash their optimism just because you’re tired of hearing it, morale actually plays a major role in progress. If people keep aiming at improving Linux with the belief that it is or will be desktop ready you’re likely to see more improvement in that area than if they simply told themselves it was a server OS.
Besides that, desktop ready is very subjective. for me Linux is pretty close to there but it is progressing slowly in the areas that are most important to me. To each his own.
Shoot, wish I was around over the weekend so I could have participated a little earlier, but better late than never I spose.
How in the world did this first post get a 5 though? It’s way off.
maybe if people stopped proclaiming that linux is desktop ready, eat some humble pie and work on it, the year of desktop linux will actually happen through linux actually being desktop ready, instead of people saying it is all the time.
Seems to me this is already happening. Have you not noticed how far Desktop Linux has come in the past few years? And the developers aren’t just sitting around now. To give one example, perhaps you’ve heard of the upcoming KDE 4?
There is no proper migration path for linux
Migration from what to what? From Windows desktop machines? I’ve had no real problems migrating. But then it’s all going to depend on what your machines are used for as to whether or not you can migrate. Of course you may have a hard time running your proprietary Windows apps without them being ported over first. That goes without saying. At any rate, I’ve done it, so don’t say it’s impossible.
it is still hard to use
Not at all if things are set up for you.
the biggest developments for desktop linux have all come from comapny work (ubuntu, xgl, novell, redhat…)
While I welcome any contributions with open arms, I certainly wouldn’t say that corporations are the only contributors. A good deal of development has and still does come from academia. Both the kernel and GNU started out there. Also, from what I’ve seen, academia is also one of the places where desktop Linux has made the greatest inroads.
The reason I still stick with WindowsXP is because Linux doesn’t offer anything more that WindowsXP. There are free and open source applications for Windows so what reason do I have to switch?
If I didn’t have Windows then I would have a reason to look at a free alternative OS.
You’re asking for a reply along the lines of “virus and malware!”. Personally I’ve not had a virus in years. If I want to recommend a computer to my gran, I always say get a Mac. It’s secure and just works. Linux has a tre hard job beating that.
Indeed. I agree with you. I also tend to tell people “get a Mac”
Mac is easy (just works), secure, and stable.
That wasn’t my intention, you can get antivirus and antispyware for free so it’s not really a problem for me or my family. I look after their computers and I’ve taught them not to open anything if they aren’t sure.
Although I can understand why general users get infected, the adverts are really sneakily done.
Hmm, well, I tried to switch to linux. I realized the only software I mostly use is opensource and/or cross platform. GAIM, Openoffice, Firefox, GIMP, .net (mono), thunderbird, etc.
The problem was it didn’t quite work out on my hardware, problems with drivers on 64 bit. I’ve tried 32 bit and now i get grub error 21 if i boot to the linux hard drive.
Which distibution did you try and could you give your system specification? Mistake that several people commit is to give an unclear information hoping to get very good answers.
That was my problem, hardware didn’t work properly and I have no clue how to fix it.
Otherwise I liked it.
Did you ever try to find answers in forums? Mostly every distribution website comes with a support forum and there’s http://www.linuxquestions.org for problems. I never complained about linux. Linux it’s what it is: when you decide to install it you know you’ll have to find answers for yourself.
I believe Grub error 21 means it can’t find the partition you sent it to.
I’ve read things about setting the drive to LBA and that sort of thing in CMOS.
And I’ve also seen suggestions that they may be using the wrong disk.
You might wanna ask in a forum and provide your grub.conf and a brief description of your disk setup (which hard disk it’s on, what partition of that hard disk).
linuxquestions.org and justlinux.com are good places to start looking and asking if you can’t find help.
The reason I still stick with Linux is because WindowsXP doesn’t offer anything more than Linux. There are free and open source applications for Linux so what reason do I have to switch? If I didn’t have Linux then I would have a reason to look at a free alternative OS.
I will never switch to Linux unless Linux offers me better (performance + functionality)/price ratio. All the KDE and GNOME in Linux are Dog slow compared to XP UI.
Then i would want excellent development tools on Linux like SoftIce, Visual Studio, IDA Pro, Hex Workshop, Executable explorer (like PE explorer) on Linux.
I would also want all the cool software like Yahoo messenger, MSN messenger on Linux.
Honestly, Linux today doesn’t stand a chance. It has nothing on which it can boast to be a superior system. It is good on server but on desktop it sucks…
Then i would want excellent development tools on Linux like SoftIce, Visual Studio, IDA Pro, Hex Workshop, Executable explorer (like PE explorer) on Linux.
Right On
“All the KDE and GNOME in Linux are Dog slow compared to XP UI.”
That’s interesting, because I’ve found the difference in favor of KDE/Gnome depending on the distribution. The other thing I noticed is that people count the start time for Windows XP until the desktop appears, there’s still minutes of system tray programs starting, and counting that KDE/Gnome win hands down.
“Then i would want excellent development tools on Linux like SoftIce, Visual Studio, IDA Pro, Hex Workshop, Executable explorer (like PE explorer) on Linux. “
You obviously didn’t even bother to look.
Visual Studio -> KDevelop and/or Qt Designer
IDA Pro Windows -> IDA pro Linux http://www.datarescue.com/idabase/linux/
Hex Workshop -> KHexEdit
Executable Explorer -> Konqueror
And don’t try to tell me the equivalents I found aren’t as good, I looked up your apps, saw screenshots, and have even used some during CS courses.
“Yahoo messenger, MSN messenger on Linux”
Linux has Yahoo messenger last time I checked, you just have to download and install it yourself. The native clients are better though, the only real thing missing is webcam support although some may include that now. I’m not just talking about Gaim, but also Kopete.
“Honestly, Linux today doesn’t stand a chance. It has nothing on which it can boast to be a superior system. It is good on server but on desktop it sucks…”
Someone who makes as many mistakes as you when talking about Linux really shouldn’t go around belittleing it.
You are the reason desktop Linux is a failure. Rather than acknowledging the problems, you pretend they’re not there. Well good luck to you and your camp — you’re going to need it.
PS: You didn’t actually bother researching the alternatives too well. Here’s a hint … he wasn’t talking about Windows Explorer when he said “Executable Explorer”.
“You are the reason desktop Linux is a failure.”
This comming from the person who’s very nickname is flamebait. Puhlease.
” Here’s a hint … he wasn’t talking about Windows Explorer when he said “Executable Explorer””
One mistake, and by the way looking it up on the internet turned up something very similar to Windows Explorer, maybe you are the one who didn’t do their research. Go ahead, look it up. The first page I found with a screenshot showed what was little more than a Windows explorer like program with a few additional functionality which Konqueror already had.
You can’t hold me responsible if the parent poster didn’t give sufficient information to find the right product.
Oh my …
“Executable Explorer” is a development tool that lets you browse Windows executables and extract all sorts of information about them — function calls, data excerpts, DLLs used, etc.
Anyway, you completely missed the point about the earlier comment as well, so there’s no point in explaining it. You are much too shallow and narrow-minded. You are also one of many like you. Deny the problems all you like, but they’re not going to go away.
You do realize with whom you’re dealing here, uh?
I almost finished a review of Red Hat Fedora Core 3. I was almost about to submit it to OSNews. But then I realized, that it would be a waste of time. Nothing I put out, even incredibly constructive will even get anywhere through their thick heads.
Let the cultists be by themselves. I will get back to play WoW on XP.
Right on!
While the performance of Windows vs. Linux is certainly debatable, how is it Celerate missed the point?
CuriosityKills listed a number of applications that he claims don’t have Linux equivalents, when in fact they do. Now sure we could argue the finer points of Kdevelop vs. Visual Studio, Kopete vs. MSN Messenger, or objdump vs Executable Explorer, but to not realize that there are Linux alternatives for almost all but the most specialized software applications is just ignorant. And especially ignorant if we’re talking development tools.
“Equivalence” doesn’t just rest on whether they perform more or less the same function, but *how* they perform that function and what other features they provide to make your life easier.
I still have yet to see the equivalent of Visual Studio’s Edit-and-Continue feature in a Linux IDE, where you can pause your running code, *edit* it, and then continue executing, all while states/variables/etc. are retained.
But see, that’s the point. The applications under Linux do perform more or less the same functions. You can browse the web, check your email, talk to your friends on ICQ, etc, etc. And of course you can bring up a thousand different examples of how application x does this where as application y doesn’t. But all that matters very little if you look at the bigger picture and it turns out both applications allow you to perform the same basic tasks in a logical way. This is certainly the case when you compare most Windows applications with their Linux alternatives.
And while it’s really neither here nor there, as I stated above, I fail to see how your Visual Studio example would even be useful. In all my years of development I’ve never once found myself wanting to change the code right as it was executing. I’d rather have all my testing as automated as possible, so I can run the tests and have them spit out what I want to see or have it tell me to go back to the drawing board. This isn’t to say that no one has ever used that feature. It’s just an extremely poor example if you ask me.
In the big picture of things, polish is what can make or break two competing applications.
Most Linux apps lack polish.
“Most Linux apps lack polish.”
Whereas Windows systems/apps lack uptime, and they all belong to someone else (many of them in more ways than one).
“Own3d”. (Is that how they write it?) Or is it spelled “EULA”?
Hahaha. That’s not even worthy of a response.
Tool.
Equality rests on the result, so why doesn’t equivalence?
Equivalence E*quiv”a*lence, v. t.
To be equivalent or equal to; to counterbalance. [R.] –Sir
T. Browne.
[1913 Webster]
There is, and won’t be, a FOSS IDE of VS quality for two reasons:
1.) It’s Microsoft’s main product.
2.) Half the Free software developers loathe IDE’s.
Seriously, don’t hold your breathe for a FOSS IDE that competes with VS… And Eclipse is likely the closest, not kdevelop. Anjuta is even a far better IDE than kdevelop; its auto-complete actually works.
You obviously didn’t even bother to look.
Visual Studio -> KDevelop and/or Qt Designer
Now you’re beeing silly.
Executable Explorer -> Konqueror
<no comment>
Linux has Yahoo messenger last time I checked, you just have to download and install it yourself. The native clients are better though, the only real thing missing is webcam support although some may include that now. I’m not just talking about Gaim, but also Kopete.
So what you meant to say was that it has some IM clients but they lack features compared to the ones he named?
Someone who makes as many mistakes as you when talking about Linux really shouldn’t go around belittleing it.
That’s coming from a guy who compared a file manager with a hex/resource editor.
“You obviously didn’t even bother to look.
Visual Studio -> KDevelop and/or Qt Designer
Now you’re beeing silly.”
No, I’m quite serious. KDevelop and Qt designer are an excellent alternative to Visual Studio. You just don’t want to admit it because that would debunk the common troll saying that there’s no VS equivalent on Linux.
“So what you meant to say was that it has some IM clients but they lack features compared to the ones he named?”
Mountain out of a molehill here, but then that’s what makes you anti-linux trolls happy isn’t it. What I was saying is that it was missing one feature, and that may have been implemented since I last used the Linux IM software. That feature is web-cam support, and it’s trivial.
“Someone who makes as many mistakes as you when talking about Linux really shouldn’t go around belittleing it.
That’s coming from a guy who compared a file manager with a hex/resource editor.”
Oh please, that guy makes several mistakes about Linux, doesn’t know jack squat about the developer tools on it and goes on to say it doesn’t have any equivalents to what’s in Windows. I make one mistake and you think you have me where you want me all of a sudden, dream on.
You want someone to point the finger at for my mistaking Executable Explorer with a file manager, try the guy who made a web site with pictures of a file browser and claiming they were screenshots of “Executable Explorer”. If I haven’t see the program before how am I supposed to know when I’ve found real screenshots and a real description when every site I go to either doesn’t have screenshots, or shows the wrong screenshots.
No, I’m quite serious. KDevelop and Qt designer are an excellent alternative to Visual Studio. You just don’t want to admit it because that would debunk the common troll saying that there’s no VS equivalent on Linux.
Instead of discrediting the original poster, did you used them?
I have done development with both (C++ with Kdevelop, VB and a bit of C++ with VS). Ideologically, I prefer Kdevelop but it’s easy to understand why VS is one of the most popular IDE on Earth, if not THE most popular. From my personal experience, it’s more polished and nicer to work with. There are many rough edges with Kdevelop, like auto-completion and the documentation. The output from the compiler (gcc) is sometimes confusing, but the worse got to be GDB. In my opinion, the debugger coming with VS is just better… and that’s probably one of the most useful tool that a programmer need. Oh, and I hate vertical text! QT Designer isn’t bad, though.
It’s not bad, but I wouldn’t put it at the same level. Of course, your mileage may vary, but try avoiding to jump on the messenger.
“All the KDE and GNOME in Linux are Dog slow compared to XP UI.”
“That’s interesting, because I’ve found the difference in favor of KDE/Gnome depending on the distribution. The other thing I noticed is that people count the start time for Windows XP until the desktop appears, there’s still minutes of system tray programs starting, and counting that KDE/Gnome win hands down.”
Ok celerate, i have a hidden agenda against Linux and i lied. Are you happy?
Visual Studio -> KDevelop and/or Qt Designer
IDA Pro Windows -> IDA pro Linux http://www.datarescue.com/idabase/linux/
Hex Workshop -> KHexEdit
Executable Explorer -> Konqueror
You got to be kidding me if you compare Visual Studio to KDevelop. That is like comparing Linux to DOS. Sorry to burst your bubble, but KDevelop is nothing in terms of features or ease of use as compared to Visual Studio. Ofcourse i used KDevelop when i installed RH9 so it may have improved in recent times but mostly even hardcore Linux people praise Visual Studio and whine abount not a good IDE in linux.
IDA Pro on Linux – dude Linux version of IDA pro’s UI sucks ass. It is like living in DOS days. Sorry buddy, life has adavanced. Gone are the console based UI days…
Yahoo/MSN – Yahoo client on Linux sucks so bad. Gaim is ok but then again, nothign as compared to Yahoo on WIndows with all the winks and other nice stuff. Same for MSN.
PE explorer is an executable file explorer and not windows explorer. I want some tools like ELF explorer with a nice GUI on Linux.
You ignored SoftIce since you don’t have an equivalent single machine kernel debugger on Linux.
I will give you KHexEdit though because i have never used that.
Now please enlighten me, how i was wrong? You however my friend clearly seems to have strong Linux bias or you would not try to convince me to use substandard Linux tools when a better equivalent exist on Windows.
Edited 2006-01-16 09:32
You got to be kidding me if you compare Visual Studio to KDevelop. That is like comparing Linux to DOS. Sorry to burst your bubble, but KDevelop is nothing in terms of features or ease of use as compared to Visual Studio.
Have you actually used both ?
I’ve been working with visual studio for more than 6 years, and it always annoyed me more than it helped me.
I also use KDevelop at home. It is no less good than visual studio, really.
Care to detail what you find is missing in kdevelop compared to VS ?
Back when i tried KDevelop, it was missing many things. I don’t claim that i remember all but here are few which i think i had trouble with
1. It didn’t have code completion
2. It didn’t have edit and continue
3. I could use Visual studio to make forms for VB or VC but there were no option for multi-language coding in KDevelop.
4. I think i had some complains on debugging but i don’t remember that.
Other than that, just look and feel and integration seemed lacking from KDevelop. KDevelop looked like a wanna be Visual Studio Clone but far from it.
1. It didn’t have code completion
It does now.
It doesn’t work very well yet, but neither does Visual Studio’s.
2. It didn’t have edit and continue
I can’t remember a project where we actually ever used that. Actually, I think it was always disabled on every project I worked on.
I can’t help but think that it cannot be anything else than an horrible hack.
3. I could use Visual studio to make forms for VB or VC but there were no option for multi-language coding in KDevelop.
I never did multi-language apps using Qt, but it is certainly possible. Chances are that it is done differently than with windows forms, though (a friend of me told me that you have to create a form for each language)
Edited 2006-01-16 11:58
a friend of me told me that you have to create a form for each language
No, forms are completely language independent, they are stored in a simple XML format which is then used to generate language specific code.
You can generate code for all supported languages from the same form input file.
I’d have to agree with the “annoyed more than it helped” part. I used to use Visual Studio 6.0 a lot. It was just slightly horrible back then. Now, it’s just gotten weird. Its perhaps one of the most actively hostile user interfaces I’ve seen, second only to Matlab.
I wonder what kind of brain you have if you had a hard time figuring out how to use Visual Studio 6 even after a lot of use.
I think next time Microsoft should put a label on their software.
“Not meant for Morons and Rayiner”
He didn’t say that he had a hard time figuring out how to use it.
I don’t either.
It’s just that the interface is annoying and often counter-productive.
Here are a few examples from the top of my head:
Ever tried to exclude a bunch of files from building in a certain project configuration ?
Ever wanted to setup an identical custom build step for several files ?
Ever tried to clone some settings from a project to another ?
Ever tried to find out whether a particuler set of libraries are linked against a project ?
Ever tried to copy these to another project afterwards ?
Ever wanted to close every opened document except the one you’re working on ?
Ever tried to setup a breakpoint condition, then realize you don’t have the particular source from where you want to copy and paste a variable name opened, and had to close the breakpoint window because it’s modal ?
I will stop here. I think that the VS interface hinders a majority of the use cases that I have on a regular basis.
Edited 2006-01-16 13:49
It’s just that the interface is annoying and often counter-productive
And yet a lot of developers manage to use these tools without problem. Are they geniuses or what ?
Ever tried to exclude a bunch of files from building in a certain project configuration ?
Ever wanted to setup an identical custom build step for several files ?
Ever tried to clone some settings from a project to another ?
Ever heard of makefiles ?
Ever tried to find out whether a particuler set of libraries are linked against a project ?
Ever tried to copy these to another project afterwards ?
Ever heard of pkg-config, libtool, … ?
Ever wanted to close every opened document except the one you’re working on ?
No, are Windows and VS interface so unusable that you do ?
Ever tried to setup a breakpoint condition, then realize you don’t have the particular source from where you want to copy and paste a variable name opened, and had to close the breakpoint window because it’s modal ?
No, but I’m not a hardcore developer either. Though with FOSS, we have the source, so this is rarely a problem.
*sigh*
Sorry. I’m so carried away in the discussion that I forget to include the relevant context in my posts for anyone not following it from the post I answer to.
So, this list of complains were about visual .net.
/Happened to me twice now in the same thread
Actually the .sln and .vcproj files are XML files most of your problems with settings are already solved,. If you haven’t figured out a way to do it, then don’t blame the IDE.
Oh yeah, just go and hack the xml files. It’s ok to have a lacking GUI that forces you to hack text files on windows, it’s only on Linux that it sucks.
Actually why even bother with a GUI ? Just put everything in text files.
Even better, in XML files. After all XML is one of the most abused excuse for not providing any decent user interface, so why not abusing it some more ?
But oh no, don’t blame it on the IDE for being a piece of junk and failing to fulfill its main purpose properly.
[edit: I needed to make sure, but .sln aren’t even XML. Consistence is a hard concept to understand over at microsoft.
Also, just try to do any of the things I mentioned by editing the files… Now that’s top notch user experience.]
Edited 2006-01-16 17:58
You got to be kidding me if you compare Visual Studio to KDevelop. That is like comparing Linux to DOS. Sorry to burst your bubble, but KDevelop is nothing in terms of features or ease of use as compared to Visual Studio
Why, Kdevelop is easier to use ?
Which features do you find lacking in Kdevelop ? Cross-platform ? Cross toolkit ? Works with several different editors so you can choose the one you are faster with ? Free ? Libre ?
Does VS has any of these features BTW ?
Kdevelop allows you to develop a project on all OS that supports Qt, the best being KDE on Linux.
So it’s an equivalent to VS despite all your nitpicking. You did not even realise that even with your current level of nitpicking, you won’t accept sth as being equivalent as long as it is not VS itself exactly like on Windows. This just shows your strong bias, trolling, that you don’t know what an equivalent is.
Actually, what you want is worse, as shown below.
Ofcourse i used KDevelop when i installed RH9 so it may have improved in recent times but mostly even hardcore Linux people praise Visual Studio and whine abount not a good IDE in linux
Hardcore Linux people using Kdevelop don’t whine, they code, especially since Kdevelop (which is far better name than Visual Studio) is for developers like its name says. I don’t know where you took your Linux people, but I could say too that even Windows people whine about VS being not a good IDE.
Saying KDevelop “may have improved” since “RedHat 9” just shows that you don’t understand how fast FOSS is going, and that you are still years behind (RH9 is not especially new).
IDA Pro on Linux – dude Linux version of IDA pro’s UI sucks ass. It is like living in DOS days
And you bash Linux because the ISV does not produce a Linux version that is exactly like the Windows version ?!! Do you realize you are a troll ? All of that to dismiss the fact that the product is available on Linux too.
Yahoo/MSN – Yahoo client on Linux sucks so bad. Gaim is ok but then again, nothign as compared to Yahoo on WIndows with all the winks and other nice stuff. Same for MSN
Again, a bad case of : “ah yes it exists but is not good, even if it came from the very same ISV. Alternatives that are better are not good enough either”. Obviously, you are here to spread FUD and disparage every ISV provided software as long as it is released on Linux.
You have no credibility then, as the result will always be the same for you : it does not exist on Linux, it’s Linux’ fault and Linux is sh**.
PE explorer is an executable file explorer and not windows explorer. I want some tools like ELF explorer with a nice GUI on Linux
OMG I fell upon two without even searching. You are in complete denial. Especially since tools like that are not even really needed on Linux, as you have the source of nearly everything. Just google for visual ldd or sth, it’s not hard. Of course, you did not want to know, just to say sth (that you thought) bad about Linux.
You ignored SoftIce since you don’t have an equivalent single machine kernel debugger on Linux
Because the people working on the kernel say what they have is enough. They have a kernel debugger BTW.
Now please enlighten me, how i was wrong?
In everything, in the fact that you want to do things on Linux like on Windows, even when it’s stupid because there are better ways. To sum up : in the fact that you are a complete anti-Linux newbie.
Arguing with you hurts my IQ. But still here it goes:
I am not complaining about Linux, i am saying it doesn’t have better equivalent of software. You keep putting the blame on ISV or whoever you want. I was just saying that Linux doesn’t cater to my needs because it has sub-standard software most of the time.
I am a kernel debugger and i need softice, so Linux lost one customer.
If you compare Visual ldd to PE Explorer, then god help us all. Ldd is a dependency explorer and PE explorer is actually an executable file explorer which can show all its sections, resources etc. You can extract the information from executable and re-arrage sections etc. Visual ldd equivalent in windows is dependency walker.
Again, you have a Linux bias and you tried to convince me that even though Linux has substandard software, i should use it because after all Linux is GREAT and all the problems exist either in consumers or ISVs etc, right?
You develop Windows drivers? Well of course you don’t want to use a Linux box!
I am not complaining about Linux, i am saying it doesn’t have better equivalent of software. You keep putting the blame on ISV or whoever you want. I was just saying that Linux doesn’t cater to my needs because it has sub-standard software most of the time.
And I’ll say again, this is just ignorance. There are Linux alternatives, multiple alternatives much of the time, to almost all but the most specialized Windows applications. You can sit there all you want and argue that MSN Messenger is better than Kopete and so on and so forth, but the fact will still remain that there are quite viable alternatives with the same basic functionality. And I hate to break it to you, just because you’re used to one particular application doesn’t mean that every other alternative is automatically junk.
I am a kernel debugger and i need softice, so Linux lost one customer.
Unlike Windows kernels, the Linux kernel is open source, which makes something like softice rather unnecessary in a whole lot of situations. But that being said, there are kernel debugging tools available and more in development.
If you compare Visual ldd to PE Explorer, then god help us all. Ldd is a dependency explorer and PE explorer is actually an executable file explorer which can show all its sections, resources etc. You can extract the information from executable and re-arrage sections etc. Visual ldd equivalent in windows is dependency walker.
Ldd is most certainly an alternative, at least as far as using either goes to see what libraries an executable depends on. But before you fly off the handle again and tell me that’s all ldd does while PE Explorer does this this and this, you’d be forgetting the Unix philosophy of one tool for one job. So depending on your needs you could use anything from ldd, to objdump, to nm, to strip, to hexdump to hexedit, etc. You’re probably not aware of any of those tools however, so again, chalk this one up to ignorance.
Edited 2006-01-17 00:45
So now you had to resort to saying you are a kernel debugger (Windows kernel I suppose), and you are eager to say you talked about YOUR VERY NICHE needs.
And you dare talk about Linux for home desktop users ?
You made me lose my time, but I knew it from the start.
Normal desktop users don’t need your tools.
I won’t argue with you that visual-ldd is not PE Explorer, I’m sure it’s not, I just gave you hint to find what you were searching for, because obviously you won’t make any effort. You want me to believe that a normal desktop user on Windows will think : “I need an executable file explorer” and will magically think “PE Explorer”. Well, I know the shortcuts you people do every time you know.
Anyway, the problem is clearly identified, if you don’t believe it’s PE Explorer vendor’s fault that PE Explorer is not available on Linux (I assume you asked of course, I’m not saying you’re stupid), then I can’t do anything more for you.
You got to be kidding me if you compare Visual Studio to KDevelop. That is like c
true enough, that’s why you should be comparing it to eclipse.
I don’t know what version of Linux you are running; because every linux distro I’ve tried with KDE and Gnome are at least 1.5 times snappier than XP UI. And for even more speed go XFce if you need a desktop. (Personally I like FluxBox).
That’s just silly doing that, it doesn’t add anything to the discussion.
And I thought Linux was free?
To each their own.
My personnal reasons for using linux are that while windows works generally well, it is often infuriatingly slow and irresponsive for no good reason.
There is also that while there are a few big free software apps, most of the small mundane things you may want to do are available only as nagware applications (no, I’m not paying you 10$ for your ugly and poorly designed piece of crap, especially if I need it only for a one time job)
As for usability, there are just as many problems on windows as there are on linux (even though not the same one), and they are much more prone to annoy me on windows (might be because windows’ usability is overrated)
“nagware applications”
Nagware? On Linux?
Why on earth would you want to?
Name one.
Challenge – name one thing I would want to do as a normal user on a Linux desktop that I would have to use nagware for.
Edited 2006-01-16 10:30
There is a misunderstanding. I was talking about the reasons I dislike windows.
“There is a misunderstanding. I was talking about the reasons I dislike windows.”
So you were.
Sorry about that.
When you say Linux offers no more value than Windows XP, I think there’s one big thing you’re missing. Linux is open source. In particular a good portion of it, including the kernel is licensed under the GPL. Now maybe to you the availability of the source holds no value, but it’s quite valuable to a whole lot of us. For one, just knowing that my OS doesn’t harbor any spyware is reason enough for me. But in my eyes, it’s a beautiful thing that due to the nature of the GPL Linux is pretty much always guaranteed to be free(as in beer) in some form or another.
1: Make it as easy to use and configure as Mac OS X (even eaiser actually), because your largest target is the general user. Include instructions for connecting to the internet seamlessly.
2: Bundle a truckload of general purpose apps, games, office programs and links to third party programs.
3: Distribute it on install disks and free downloads so a person in Windows or Mac can easliy download, run the setup program to burn a cd/dvd, place it in a target PC and it will boot and install, erasing Windows in the process
There might have to be some sort of commercial venture with this in order to pay for the mass marketing.
Sort of what AOL does with all those coasters they distribute.
$10-20 a month from each user to run a secure operating system on a PC isn’t such a bad deal actually. Just have to keep away from getting intrusive and mind controlling like AOL is with advertising and all.
I know somebody right now that has a PC, is too cheap to buy a Mac, and is not a genius enough to keep Windows secure, that would love something like this.
Heck I would like to do it for him and make a few hundred in the process for 20 minutes worth of work.
I could line up tens of thousands in a matter of months, it would go global overnight like Firefox did.
It would need a auto-updater of course and a way to burn install disks so people can update the next PC they get.
some would argue Ubuntu is already all that…
It definitely needs more marketing.
Indeed. I believe Ubuntu to be THE Linux distro that even stands a chance to make inroads as a desktop OS.
Practically all the points you propose are already fulfilled by any recent decent desktop-oriented distro (Ubuntu, Suse).
The problem is:
Make it as easy to use and configure as Mac OS X (even eaiser actually)
To use, there’s still something rougher in the details, but normally people coming from Windows can use a Linux desktop almost seamlessly, with very minor head scratching. To configure is sometimes the problem (expecially on laptops). The main problem is: Linux doesn’t come preinstalled. When OEMs will begin to ship shiny, functional Linux boxes and to advertise them so to make them palatable and cool for the public, Linux will rise.
Linux doesn’t come preinstalled. When OEMs will begin to ship shiny, functional Linux boxes and to advertise them so to make them palatable and cool for the public, Linux will rise.
Linux desktop needs to be given away in massive amounts, in such a easy way that a novice could install it. Get to the users directly, like Firefox and AOL does, increase the Linux market share and then OEMs will have some confidence to look at that 800lb Gorilla directly in the eye. Everyone loves leverage.
Specifically, there isn’t a pervasive support structure for any help that people will need.
Almost everybody knows someone who can assist them with their windows problems.
Very few people know anyone who can assist them when they have questions running a Linux system.
Online help resources, regardless of how useful they are, won’t be good enough as normal desktop users don’t have a backup computer to access them when they have a serious problem.
To a certain degree this is a perception problem, if Linux users were immediately recognizable there would be a greater awareness of how many people were around to answer Linux questions.
Bingo. If the people I know are any indication, Windows isn’t ready for the desktop either. The only reason people get by is that they know people people who can help them with their Windows problems. I remember when we first got Windows (3.0), we didn’t know how to install programs. Believe it or not, “setup.exe” or “install.exe” is non-obvious for a first timer. One of our Windows-using friends told us how it worked. The fundamental thing that makes Linux hard for people to use is that its not Windows. People don’t realize how tied they are to their current way of doing things until they use a different system.
I remember the first time the CD-ROM on an iMac G5 (I’d never had occasion to use the CD drive on any previous iMac). Putting in the CD was easy enough (it was a slot loader), but getting it out was non-trivial. I couldn’t find the little button on the CD drive that I was used to having on every machine I’ve ever used. I thought maybe it was one of the touch-sensitive jobs, like you have on the iPod, so I literally spent several minutes pushing on random parts of the case (including the pulsing power LED), looking like a fool in the computer lab. After about 10 minutes, I remembered that Apple used to put the power button on the keyboard in older Mac desktops, so I searched the keyboard and finally found the eject button. I could make an argument about the iMac’s system being non-intuitive (the CD eject button should be near the CD drive itself), but that’s really not the point. What actually made it hard was that I wasn’t used to it. Linux, in many respects, is the same way.
Familiarity does add to the ease of use but Linux is non-intuitive in many cases. I am comparing Redhat 9 with XP because both came around the same time.
I installed RedHat on a machine and i selected Graphical login, but the damn thing wasn’t able to switch to graphics and i wasn’t able to get text mode to login so i had to reinstall the OS. I didn’t have internet access to find a solution because it was my primary machine. Finally i gave up. Somethings in Linux at that time were not ready.
Then with XP, i got everything i wanted. Speed was better than Linux and i got all the tools i wanted. I am now familiar with XP and i am not willing to waste my experience in favor of Linux because Linux is not adding any value to existing skills that i have.
Edited 2006-01-16 00:48
“Finally i gave up. Somethings in Linux at that time were not ready. “
And you based this decision on one distribution, which to make your situation more embarassing, was the one who’s very CEO said Linux wasn’t desktop ready.
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/11/04/2312225
Red Hat was never designed to be sold for use on desktop systems, if you wanted “desktop ready” you should have tried a distribution made for that, which there are several of.
Just a note that it seems strange to be talking about over 4 years ago w.r.t. OS releases in your posting. Windows XP was released on 25th October 2001, just 3 days after Red Hat 7.2 came out.
Zoom forward 4 years to now and you’ll see that all the free Red Hat releases are no longer supported (and barely updated – the Fedora Legacy project has Red Hat 7.3 and 9 on terminal life support [don’t ask me why they kept 7.3 going and stopped 8 – bizarre!], but don’t be surprised to see those put to rest soon too).
So you have to compare either a commercial RHEL release (currently version 4), a free clone (e.g. CentOS 4) or one of the Fedora Core releases (also currently version 4) against XP. Things have moved on a little bit with those releases and I do run them day-to-day myself, but Fedora Core requires quite a bit of techy tweaking to get it how I like it on the desktop (particularly multimedia support, adjust the GNOME desktop, cutting down services run, ATI or Nvidia 3D card support, NTFS support in the kernel and Java installation [gcj won’t cut it fully until Fedora Core 5]) and hence I probably wouldn’t recommend it to a complete Linux newbie.
Something like Linspire or Xandros might be more suitable for novice users coming over from Windows – I even found that OpenSuSE works quite nicely as a desktop OS if you’re not willing to spend any money. The key areas here:
* Auto-detect as much as possible – nothing worse that finding your networking, sound, printer etc. won’t work. Linux tends to be good in most areas now, except wireless networking. Offer up an ndiswrapper third-party solution if a native driver isn’t available for wireless.
* Re-iterating the previous point, if the distro has a “free-only” policy, make it easy to add non-free software from 3rd parties (e.g. video/audio codecs, wireless drivers, DVD playing software).
* Provide as much support for Windows applications, file formats and filing systems as possible. This would include a properly set up WINE, NTFS support, native Linux apps that can handle Windows file formats (Open Office and the like), conversion of popular application preferences over to native Linux apps (so not just the data needs to be brought over, but also the settings).
Don’t forget to allow conversion the other way as well, just in case users want to go back to Windows for a while and maybe return later.
* Include some good open source games, preferably including some good 3D ones in there. Surprisingly, although Fedora Core 4 comes with a few dozen games, not one of them is 3D at all! Even if this means including demos of a few of the best commercial Linux games, if there’s space on the DVD version of the distro, put them in.
* Include some good open source games, preferably including some good 3D ones in there. Surprisingly, although Fedora Core 4 comes with a few dozen games, not one of them is 3D at all! Even if this means including demos of a few of the best commercial Linux games, if there’s space on the DVD version of the distro, put them in.
Actually, TORCS is a 3D racing games, so is a 3D poll game. All of them are under GPL/LGPL or BSD licenses and available in Extras repository.
I know a lot of people who google for their windows troubles. Especially around wierd programs running in their task manager.
They’re more technical typically; but they’re still desktop users and they’re often the “computer guru” who’s helping the neighbours.
The problem with internet forums is that some of them have some very rude members, and worse, some have complete jerks running them (justlinux.com). A newb will come in and ask a question, badly format his title, get half a response from a nice guy, and then the thread is closed by a mod with a rude note about a bad title or a “you need to search before you post.”
However, there are also very nice helpful forums in which the mod will close the thread and link to the thread with the solution with a moderately polite note. Examples are ubuntu’s forums. And some forums are virtually a free-for-all but often lack enough knowledgable users, such as linuxquestions.org.
Also, many towns have LUG’s. However, these organizations expect participation in exchange for help. They don’t help people who just leach off the list after a certain point. And LUG meetings definitely aren’t for everyone.
The first step though is definitely getting those “guru’s” aware of other systems so they can help with their neighbours *nix related troubles. And that situation is probably improving. I imagine most of the people who are switching are like that.
So, if that’s true, there definitely is a critical point where you’ve got a kid on most blocks with a joy for Linux. You’ll say “fix my computer” he’ll say “ok, but I’m loading linux or you can pay me to fix your spyware problems.”
Of course, that’ll be the point where I’ll get things asking me to download .jar and .bin files so they can try and load crap on my Linux box.
We’ll know Windows has lost any form of dominance when you [only] see spyware written in java!
Cross platform spyware, oh joy.
Linux, by several accounts, has already approached or surpassed OS X on the desktop. Doesn’t that count? I think there is an impedence mismatch between the supporters and the detractors here. The detractors want to make “Linux beats Windows in market share” as the criterion for success of the Linux desktop. That’s clearly ridiculous. Especially when Apple has been working at it for the last two decades and is presently in the single digits. It’s like saying a new car company needs to beat Ford in 5 years to be considered a success.
Linux, by several accounts, has already approached or surpassed OS X on the desktop. Doesn’t that count?
It would have count if it weren’t completely made up.
Edited 2006-01-16 01:51
Why would you say its completely made up? Several sources have reported these numbers. It might not seem evident in your personal situation, but I must point out that its often easy to forget that many of the people using Linux on the desktop are in places like Latin America or Asia, places where Apple has an extremely small marketshare.
The detractors want to make “Linux beats Windows in market share” as the criterion for success of the Linux desktop.
Hmm, no. For desktop Linux to survive and prosper that’s exactly what has to happen.
It’s like saying a new car company needs to beat Ford in 5 years to be considered a success.
Remember that desktop Linux is not competing in an equal market here. If you could reasonably compete then fine, but the only way anything is going to happen is to plot the downfall of the giant and the supports that keep it standing.
…. in order for it to be ready for the desktop
1. Name recognition and image recognition
2. Marketing (sort of goes with #1)
3. Preinstalled on OEM
4. Seamless compatibility with all (or 99%) of windows files/formats
5. Ease of use (i.e. pass the grandmother test)
The grandmother test is a stupid one. A GNOME desktop is no more complicated to use than a Windows one. The Linux system might be more complicated to set-up/configure, but your grandmother doesn’t know how to set up/configure Windows either, does she?
The actual test you want to see Linux pass is the “Windows power user” test. See if someone who knows their way around Windows can figure out how to do things under Linux. Of course, the only way to do that would be to turn Linux into a Windows clone…
I agree, but I’d like to add that if you sat a grandmother in front of any computer and she hadn’t used the OS before she wouldn’t know the first thing to do. It wouldn’t matter whether she was seated in from of OS X, Windows or Linux.
And if the Grandmother test is really that accurate than I feel compelled to point out that windows couldn’t even stand up to the mother test in my household, nevermind the grandmother test. One of these days I’ll have to see how mom handles a Mac, but I’ll have to get one first.
“The actual test you want to see Linux pass is the “Windows power user” test.”
In my experience it’s hard to find a Windows power user who won’t intentionally play dumb on a Linux machine and then claim that it’s unintuitive or primitive. Most Windows power users have an unfailing loyalty to Microsoft, and going from being a power user to suddenly looking bewildered in front of a different OS only adds to the hostility they have towards Linux. Then of course there’s lazyness, Windows users can learn enough about Windows from their friends to climb the geekdom ladder for that OS, but when it comes to Linux they actually have to find some documentation before they learn (and that involves more work than having a friend show you how to use the OS).
Most Windows power users have an unfailing loyalty to Microsoft, and going from being a power user to suddenly looking bewildered in front of a different OS only adds to the hostility they have towards Linux.
That’s just false. I’ve never met people that cared about Microsoft the company. The general attitude seems to be that MS software is slow and buggy which isn’t very true either. On the other hand, the (loud ones from the) Linux crowd are heavily biased against MS and Windows. Not that I’ve met anyone in real life but OS sites like this seems to be crawling with them.
And the lazyness you talk about, yes people are lazy. If something requires reading man files it ain’t going to be used by “normal” people. Improve the application/OS instead of blaming people.
And the lazyness you talk about, yes people are lazy. If something requires reading man files it ain’t going to be used by “normal” people. Improve the application/OS instead of blaming people.
This line of argument is pointless without examples. What exactly requires reading manpages that doesn’t require prior knowledge or reading help files in Windows? This is the thing you seem to miss: improving the OS can’t help in many of these cases — the problem is that some of these things just require some learning, and in Windows people get that learning through experience and friends teaching them, things that aren’t available for Linux. It’s a social problem as much as a technical one.
Examples: in Ubuntu, configuring networking is quite easy. There is a network applet, listing all the connections (much like Mac OS X, btw). In Windows, people are used to a pseudo-object oriented setup of connections. If someone cannot figure out how to use the network applet, whose fault is it? Is the software overly complicated, or is the user just enable to take advantage of his existing Windows knowledge? Another example: in Ubuntu, you’re supposed to use Synaptic for adding and removing programs. Many new Linux users start out trying to download RPMs from the internet instead of using their package manager. Is the software flawed because it uses package management instead of installers, or is it just a mismatch between what users are used to and how things are done on Linux?
Linux has already captured it’s first potential market the IT folks. Now in order to go through its next stage of growth it needs to capture the next group of potential users that is gamers i.e. the non-profesional/ultra-savy power users. To do this you need the latest games running at speeds better than or equivlent to Windows, neither of which Linux currently acheives.
Now, after considering it, it would seem to me that the best solution is to offer game developers a comprohensive framework on which they can build there game engines, and of course it should just “happen” that this framework is cross-platform compatible. It should also include an install system and a simple framework so most of their code doesn’t need to be cross compiled but rather they only need an executable “stub” provided by the framework for each platform allowing them to distribute a cross platform compatible game without having to produce different versions. Oh and this framework should include comprehensive copy protection technologies, that way you have a big trump card in terms of cost and they can be assured that there game won’t be pirated on non-windows platforms.
Going after gamers is a no-go. Games are horrible applications to support, and the amount of profit to be made, for an OS vendor, in the gaming market is next to null. Who would switch to Linux for gaming, and run the constant risk of incompatibility with the latest game, just to get a few more FPS? If those few more FPS are even achievable is another question. Windows might not be a very fast OS, but its good at getting out of the way. Windows games are, in general, not OS limited, but hardware and driver limited. To make a game run faster in Linux than in Windows, you need to create hardware drivers that are better than ATI’s and NVIDIA’s own drivers. This is possible (IIRC: the R200 DRI drivers are now significantly faster on Quake III than fglrx on R200 hardware), but its a very difficult and thankless task, especially without hardware documentation.
The point isn’t to outdo windows, the point is to offer an alternative to Windows and let Linux outdo Windows with it’s other attributes i.e. better security. I know plenty of people for whom Linux offers everything they want except games, and when you are consistently multibooting into Windows for games, you might as well just install the various open source apps on Windows and go from there instead. I can’t see much room for anymore Linux growth in the home market if this hurdle isn’t overcome.
That’s the thing. The home market is the hardest nut to crack. There is no point going after the home market. There are lots of other “desktop” markets. It’s easier, and more profitable, to go after those. The home market will follow suit. If people are used to Linux in their offices, they’ll be more likely to try it at home.
See I disagree with that, the corporate world seldom leads in adoption of new technologies. Linux has been trying to break into the corporate world with limited success for years, it seems to have had far more success on home computers with IT people installing it for their own use.
ok, that is find. in the real world Microsoft will still rule the desktop market and later it will also rule other markets. dell,hp,voodoo pc,etc will contiune to sale desktop PCs with windows installed. software companies will contiune to produce popular titles for only windows and mac. And a bunch of people will contiune saying linux wiil one day be on on the desktop. MS will still be running the computer sector like it has always has been, because no company will want to adopt linux as a consumer product. the GPL forces the companies to give their trade secrets away.
GPL and corporatons don’t mix well.
Sorry but that is a load of crap, there are clauses in the GPL that deal with that. Bsically, if a company wants to base there product of GPL code then they should have to release there code. If they just want to use a GPL library then they don’t have to release there code.
As for game developers continuing to only develop for Windows, the point of creating a toolkit which makes it incredibly simple, to support multiple platforms is so that, that won’t happen. You mean if you look at Linux now the main sore point limiting home uptake is the lack of support for games. Gamers are market leaders, if you appeal to gamers the follow on would be massive. Vendors would naturally provide Linux along side Windows.
Limited success? One of the places Linux has made inroads it the corporate segment. Linux-related sales account for literally billions of dollars a year in revenues for IBM, HP, etc. HP was reporting $2.5bn in Linux sales back in 2003! Who do you think they’re selling all these Linux m achines to? Home users?
I think very few people realize just what big business Linux is today. You might not see it except on your geek friends’ computers, but it is everywhere, from your Tivo to the server that runs your bank.
Windows is just 900 times more everywhere than Linux. Recently my friend visited Antarctica and the software they use to manage the ships track etc uses Windows. Airport flight time monitors runs on Windows. Most banking software runs on Windows.
It is a pity that even though Linux is free, its success is so limited. People are willing to pay for windows than use free Linux and still some how linux users (aka Lusers) are proud. No harm in dreaming though Rayiner.
Edited 2006-01-16 10:49
Windows is just 900 times more everywhere than Linux. Recently my friend visited Antarctica and the software they use to manage the ships track etc uses Windows. Airport flight time monitors runs on Windows. Most banking software runs on Windows.
It is a pity that even though Linux is free, its success is so limited
But sure enough, Linux success is not due to FUDders like you.
Linux is already a success BTW, the problem here is ISV support so that desktop progress is faster.
Yeah it has had stunning succes on servers, but this entire discussion is about desktop systems, we’re Linux’s succes has been very limited.
Problem with today graphic card is their brute force nature. What about supporting alternative such as http://www.powervr.com/
to be run by MS, a company that knows what a desktop is all about. their os is on 90% of the systems. even redhat said use windows. google it
You are on the right track……….
Linux or others just need this…….
1. Make the same GAMES available (as Windows)
2. Autodesk (AutoCAD) and Adobe (all) get off there A** and Others to port the software.
3. Preinstall on OEM (this is very important…if Windows was not preinstall its user base would not be so big)
People only know Windows because its already there.
The OEMs have to change that, but the majority are to scared of Microsoft.
The OEMs have to change that, but the majority are to scared of Microsoft.
Why are they scared of something that makes them money?
Its not about making, its about losing money.
If Microsoft see the selling something else no more discount.
Seen it before and its documented.
I use both Win 70-60% and others 40-30%.
But who cares!
Desktop Linux is here for Business!
But for the Home (60-70%) IMHO.
Read my pre post for why.
The OEMs have to change that, but the majority are to scared of Microsoft.
How are they scared of MS ?
IF desktop linux were a goldmine then MS wouldn’t be able to do a damn thing about an OEM shipping it. Obviously Windows XP is worth more on an OEM box for the likes of Dell, HP etc. etc.
Truth of the matter is that there is not enough of a demand for linux on the desktop for most OEMs to bother pushing it.
Its not a conspiracy and its not the monopoly that stops it from happening. Its the demand, or lack of demand I should say.
“The OEMs have to change that, but the majority are to scared of Microsoft.”
OEM’s don’t want to offer support for desktop Linux. Support costs them money, and thats not the objective.
Dell tried offering desktop Red Hat and support once, and they lost untold millions over the deal. I wouldn’t claim they offer a Linux desktops again, but I can’t see them offering tech support for it.
Red Hat Desktop Linux was once offered in many big box stores. It failed horribly, and it will be tough to convince some of those same retailers to offer shelf space again.
None of this had anything to do with Microsoft.
White box makers are not scared of Microsoft, yet they don’t offer linux, why?
Because it’s a pain in the arse to setup on brand new hardware and existing linux drivers are watered down, lame alternatives to the fully featured, optimised windows drivers.
Nothing will change in the desktop linux world until hardware makers give it the same respect as windows!
That means having some way for the average joe to install a driver and not have to wait for his distro maker to offer it in some deb/rpm file.
“Because it’s a pain in the arse to setup on brand new hardware and existing linux drivers are watered down, lame alternatives to the fully featured, optimised windows drivers. ”
Sigh!
Not this rubbish AGAIN!!! This is JUST NOT TRUE.
I already told you:
The best at the moment seems to be PCLinuxOS. Ubuntu, KANOTIX or MEPIS are close. All four come on one CD, and install a complete system (yes, with all desktop applications) from scratch in about 15 minutes.
15 minutes is 15 minutes.
As per my snapshot (see down the bottom of the Synaptic window): http://members.dodo.com.au/~quiet1/install-azureus.jpg
1108 packages installed. In 15 minutes … a complete desktop system … all hardware working!!
Do try to keep up. There is no “pain in the arse” about it! This is miles easier and faster on Linux than trying to get a Windows system up from a blank hard disk to a complete installed desktop system.
http://members.dodo.com.au/~quiet1/snapshot39.jpg
… even the audio and a GUI hardware control panel.
Sigh!
Not this rubbish AGAIN!!! This is JUST NOT TRUE.
So tell me how to get dual monitors working under Ubuntu with my Nvidia 7800GTX as easy as I can in windows and tell me how I can get all the same functionality from it as I do from the windows drivers?
Tell me how I can get the TV card that came with my Asus P5WD2 Premium Motherboard to work under Ubuntu?
Tell me how to get the Wireless card on the same motherboard working, can I just download a driver off the net?
Tell me why my Epson GT 7000 USB scanner crashs Gnome under Ubuntu or requires me to be Root to use it? And this is not even new hardware.
Thought So!
Do try to keep up. There is no “pain in the arse” about it! This is miles easier and faster on Linux than trying to get a Windows system up from a blank hard disk to a complete installed desktop system.
I would agree if you have simple hardware and it is all recognised, but one glitch, and windows is done in an hour, Ubuntu on my system is still not 100% since Hoary was released!
Stop spreading crap about how great linux is, it’s good, but it’s not that good!
“Stop spreading crap about how great linux is, it’s good, but it’s not that good!”
Sigh!
There are a number of manufacturers that try to keep secrets with escoteric hardware devices, and indeed even hardware manufacturers that DO support Linux (such as NVIDIA) are a couple of versions behind the Windows drivers.
However, that said, even Windows does not come with drivers for “Nvidia 7800GTX with dual monitors”.
This thread is however about the possibility of Linux becoming popular and the desktop. So we are talking about the vast majority of machines out there. On those, Linux will install out-of-the-box on vastly more machines than Windows will install out-of-the-box on. Searching for drivers on CDROMS and downloading them from the net is far, far more common when trying to get Windows up that Linux.
I know – I have installed both on many machines many times.
Edited 2006-01-16 10:18
Dude, latest release of Redhat Linux doesn’t even properly install on Virtual PC. Even though Virtual PC emulates some old S3 graphics card, the Linux drivers are f–ked up.
What more can i say about the *GREAT* Linux…
“Dude, latest release of Redhat Linux doesn’t even properly install on Virtual PC.”
What on earth does the failings of Virtual PC (presumably a Windows program) have to do with Linux on the desktop?
Especially since RedHat isn’t really a Linux desktop distribution.
Linux is the worst OS. A confused mess of 100s of incompatible distribution with substandard UI, poor hardware support and crappy drivers.
Edited 2006-01-16 10:44
“I would agree if you have simple hardware and it is all recognised, but one glitch, and windows is done in an hour”
Windows is never done in a hour … not to the point where 1108 packages are installed.
You just can’t put enough separate install CDs or do enough downloads in an hour … it just isn’t physically possible.
I have done three PCLinuxOS installs on three different machines (including one laptop) in one evening with just one install CD!
Each one has ended up with literally hundreds of desktop applications installed and many hundreds more utilities – all at the cost of preparing (or obtaining) one CD. Perhaps I spent a whole dollar!
You just can’t do that with Windows and one dollar.
Edited 2006-01-16 10:26
The problems you badly try to show are what is discussed in the article.
So tell me how to get dual monitors working under Ubuntu with my Nvidia 7800GTX as easy as I can in windows and tell me how I can get all the same functionality from it as I do from the windows drivers?
Why ? NVidia should tell you this (and they do BTW).
Windows is unable to setup your dual monitors with this card, not even to put a decent resolution and color depth on it. With NVidia provided drivers, it works. Which means that’s NVidia which is providing you the functionalities, not Windows. NVidia actually explains you how to do that in their doc for Linux, I don’t know if their graphical tool does it as I don’t have a dual monitor setup.
So if it’s not available on Linux (it is though) or how hard it is to setup, is not a Linux failure, it’s a NVidia failure.
Tell me how I can get the TV card that came with my Asus P5WD2 Premium Motherboard to work under Ubuntu?
Tell me how to get the Wireless card on the same motherboard working, can I just download a driver off the net?
Same answer : Asus should tell you that. Of course, you missed the “Windows only supported” part about this board right ? Basically, you are asking the FOSS community (that did not make this board) to support it immediately, instead of asking Asus (which clearly says they won’t support anything but Windows). That’s nonsense. And this is what the article says. Asus won’t support its own motherboard, OK. Linux and FOSS community are working to make it work (even though anti-Linux Asus doesn’t deserve it), but it won’t be instant. The SATA chipsets on the board were not even recognised by Linux 6 months ago !! Adding the support was a oneliner, so Asus could have given the community all the specs to make it work before releasing it, but they won’t. The problem is still Asus there.
These are the things that slow Linux adoption on the desktop.
Tell me why my Epson GT 7000 USB scanner crashs Gnome under Ubuntu or requires me to be Root to use it? And this is not even new hardware
What ? The scanner is perfectly supported and works very well. You should rather tell me why you don’t use the tool in Ubuntu to send your configuration and what does not work or crash on each of your hardware. That’s where they will try to support you as your manufacturer failed you. And yes, you should try to send your manufactuirer a mail too, saying how bad their support is, and how FOSS community is far more helpful. Will you do that ? No ?
Thought So!
I would agree if you have simple hardware and it is all recognised, but one glitch, and windows is done in an hour, Ubuntu on my system is still not 100% since Hoary was released!
And this is entirely the fault of the manufacturers, but you did not notice.
Stop spreading crap about how great linux is, it’s good, but it’s not that good!
Stop spreading FUD about how bad Linux is.
Linux is not a miracle, it will not provide you with drivers for your hardware as soon as the manufacturer releases hardware.
And Linux won’t work magically especially when you don’t tell anyone that your driver does not work except on forums to spread FUD.
You’re right.
Windows dual monitor support is pathetic. Nvidia’s is great.
Xinerama may not be easy to setup, but it sure beats a joke in the break room and an incomplete implementation!
I don’t know about Nvidia, but ATI makes setting this up an easy part of their driver install. If you can read you can setup ATI’s dual monitors.
to ditch the GPL for a corporate driven license for one like Microsoft’s or Apple’s. a BSD,unix like, i386, based os has reached the the desktop before linux, the mac os X. Now the mac runs on intel cpus that should warm many intel fans hearts.
Edited 2006-01-16 05:46
desktop linux is a reality now but it requires a good amount of technical knowledge to make it replace all the most popular windows sofware. It can be done but requires tweeking, understanding of how to modify config files and a good handle on shell use. I kind of like it that desktop linux is reserved for techies it means it won’t become too windows xp like where it locks you out if you rearrange your hardware too much and little paper clips and assistant dog cartoons ask you if you need help searching for files. If it wasn’t for Linux I wouldn’t be able to do my home office work. Windows XP and updating all my office programs just became too expensive for me.
Edited 2006-01-16 00:47
Linux has the foundation, it just needs a lot of polish. It’s not that you can’t get your hardware working, it’s that it requires, for example, dropping down to the command line, or doing creative Googling. That can easily be fixed and I think distros and desktop environments are finally starting to tackle these issues. If KDE really goes ahead with things like RuDi and Solid, then many of the configuration and administration issues that plague non-leet users of Linux will begin to disappear.
There is one place where some serious work needs to be done and that is X and the graphics system in general. X should not be able to touch the hardware directly (leading to crashes and bugs). There needs to be a unified graphics and sound framework for Linux upon which X and the WMs/DEs run. There’s entirely too much duplication and incompatibilities in some of these areas (especially sound with OSS, alsa, arts, esd, etc). It should not require jumping through hoops to get DRI and 3d acceleration to work. If the hardware supports it, it should “just work” with X. I shouldn’t have to touch xorg.conf unless I want to do something special. It is not enough for distros to make their own bandaid tools that try to take care of this. The base X windows system needs to do all this.
“If we build it they will come” has been tried often enough but it doesn’t always succeed. Linux is a tough sell because what people are using already works well enough and they are familiar with it. In this situation, people need powerful reasons for the hassle of switching, even assuming the playing field is level which it isn’t. Where I live, Linux is almost impossible to buy at retail which rules it out for a substantial section of the market.
In addition, there are the brute facts of commerce. By and large, Linux has no money. That means no money for distribution infrastructure, sales and marketing, and no money in profits because desktop Linux is a product that can never be sold for very much. In addition, there is no ecosystem of third-party software to sell because it is either free or hasn’t been issued by the likes of Adobe. All this adds up to the kiss of death for any retailer with their head screwed on.
I use Linux as my daily desktop (SuSE) and have done for a long while, but I don’t pretend to know the answers to these questions. One, I suspect, is that Linux has yet to find its true popularizer or evangelist. He’ll need to be very rich and absolutely ruthless. He’ll need to offer the market a very, very powerful reason for switching to Linux and he’ll need to take in hand and, effectively, put back in their proper place the developers who as a caste still control Linux.
As long as Linux is the plaything of its developers, it will never become even remotely popular. I’m not trying to do down developers but they are not marketers, copy-writers, designers, politicians, economists, negotiators or salesmen. In an often-hated word, they are not businessmen. The problem is that they think they are. The results are plain for all to see in 1001 competing standards, rivalries and rows – and that’s leaving out the sheer immaturiy and arrogance that, for me anyway, completely rule out using some distros, notably Debian. I’m not going to use any distro that thinks it’s OK for its developers to treat many of its users like dolts.
I guess some would say such a popularizer already exists and so does the platform if you change Linux for *nix. It’s Steve Jobs and Apple.
Linux has yet to find its true popularizer or evangelist. He’ll need to be very rich and absolutely ruthless.
Mark Shuttleworth ?
Moleskine’s post is one of the most cogent and insightful I’ve ever seen on the subject – probably why it was largely ignored in this thread ;-). Well done.
In addition, there are the brute facts of commerce. By and large, Linux has no money. That means no money for distribution infrastructure, sales and marketing, and no money in profits because desktop Linux is a product that can never be sold for very much. In addition, there is no ecosystem of third-party software to sell because it is either free or hasn’t been issued by the likes of Adobe. All this adds up to the kiss of death for any retailer with their head screwed on.
By and large, this does describe the pure Linux companies like Redhat, Mandrake, and soon to be Novell – they are small fish. Where is IBM in all this though? They have far more revenue than Microsoft, and arguably just as much clout in the industry – why have they not done more for their pet OS? With OS2 finally dead and a chance to move back into the desktop market they blew it with 20 years ago, they’ve largely floundered. One reason might be that they struggled and ultimately gave up on getting linux running on their own desktops (http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/25/HNibmsilent_1.html).
Linux has yet to find its true popularizer or evangelist. He’ll need to be very rich and absolutely ruthless. He’ll need to offer the market a very, very powerful reason for switching to Linux and he’ll need to take in hand and, effectively, put back in their proper place the developers who as a caste still control Linux.
You are describing Bill Gates. And for the very reasons that this type of personality is required to make Linux work is the reason it will never work. The nature of the FOSS system and population is antithetical to control, and ultimately, that will keep it stillborn. Don’t get me wrong – over time, the endless one-off distros will collapse and eventually you will have only twentyish major distros. But that’s nineteen too many for most businesses to deal with. Most linux users are far too young to remember (or god forbid read) about the history of personal computing, and don’t know what a nightmare it was the user community to have dozens of incompatible systems to choose from.
As long as Linux is the plaything of its developers, it will never become even remotely popular.
And that’s it in a nutshell. Taking anything to an extreme is bad. IE 6.0 is an example of developers having no control over a product and callous managers calling the shots. The 1001 linux distros are the developer equivalent, where no one with any common sense is running the show.
It’s Steve Jobs and Apple.
The only place I disagree with the author. Jobs took 80% computer market share and turned it into 3%, for the past 20 years. A lot of this was due to him being certifiably insane.
But his manner of type A personality would have its advantages for a unified linux. The community would never accept it though. When linux stops being cool and a hobby OS, someone will invent something new and linux will be labeled a sellout (witness the average slashbot posting about Redhat). The teens will move on. Only then will linux be able to get down to business.
Edited 2006-01-16 04:02
Time and time again we hear about “when will Linux desktop be here?”, who are these people saying this because it’s been desktop ready for years. It’s down to the OEM’s and big retailers, god knows what deals they have with software companies to bundle there computer with. Linux desktop is here for them to use and has got absolutely NOTHING to do with how hard or easy Linux desktop is, since people struggle with Windows anyway all the time.
Tech support lines get jammed with the latest Windows virus or worm, people needing help with there scanner or printer, system BSOD what do I do?. People know Linux desktop is here and it’s up them and OEM’s to decide weather to use it, not Linux to make itself a clone of Windows and claim it’s desktop worthy.
There are great alternatives out there, GAIM is an awsome IM (I use aMSN on MacOS X though), KMail, KNode and Konqueror are all great replacements for the ‘low hanging fruit – and even KOffice, for me, is more than adequate for what I need to use in an office suite.
What is missing is the more higher hanging fruit, like the titles from the big names like Photoshop, Indesign, and so forth – there are people like me, waiting for these applications to get ported, and when they do, we’ll be there, with open arms, but until that time, we’re pretty much wedged between only two choices, either a Mac or PC.
Like I keep saying, it isn’t the setup or the configuration – thats the easiest of all the problem solving, what is lacking is the same large network of ISV’s willign to write applications for Linux or even Solaris/FreeBSD or some other UNIX out there.
(in my opinion, at any rate) its learning curve. Now, don’t get me wrong, I think Linux SHOULD be preinstalled on OEM machines, as it frequently is the perfect choice for the computer illiterate: it can be configured to work nicely, and stay that way. (Unlike Windows, which, in the hands of the same person, could easily become infested with spyware and adware. Though, granted, I’ve seen markedly less spyware since the advent of SP2. Of course, all the “non-spyware” nonsense such as software auto-updaters that many programs install (qttask.exe, anyone?) can contribute to slowdowns as well.) However, in order to get a Linux machine working nicely in the first place requires quite a bit of skill. For example, in Windows, applications can store universal preferences, such as a default browser, e-mail client, etc. in the registry. Generally, no such equivalent exists on current Linux desktops. (I know Gnome stores settings like this, but they’re only prevalent within the limited amount of applications designed to take advantage of them.)
Also, driver installation is far more difficult on Linux than Windows. For example, a driver for my Ethernet card (an oddball one) is available on the manufacturer’s website, both for Windows and Linux. On Windows, I simply double-click the file, install, and restart. Linux, on the other hand, requires me to recompile my kernel, or compile the driver as a module specifically for my kernel! In short, it’s a pain.
You highlight something very interesting. Linux gets a lot of flak for its hardware support, while OS X is touted as “just working” with hardware. In reality, there is little difference, technically, between the two in terms of hardware support. Both Linux and OS X depend primarily on first-party drivers. Linux is often criticized for not having stable kernel APIs, but few people note that OS X didn’t either until Tiger came out. People complain loudly when drivers break on new Linux versions, yet new OS X versions break kernel extensions all the time and nobody utters a peep. The difference here isn’t a technical one, but one of user expectations.
People expect Linux to be like Windows; people don’t expect OS X to be like Windows. New Linux users often go in thinking that Linux should support their hardware, while OS X users know that they have to buy hardware supported by their OS. I don’t know what can be done aboue this. There is no technical solution, since even if Linux had stable kernel APIs, the odds of vendors releasing high-quality binary drivers for alternative platforms is almost nil (something OS/2, BeOS, etc, should have proved by now).
I see the issue of desktop linux as a chicken and egg issue.
Remember the time when Windows 95 was just released? There were not a lot of application that are “for Windows 95”. However, when some popular applications were available for Windows 95, people start to use it, and as more people use it, more developers create applications on it, and thus more applications available and more people use it. The cycle continues.
When Windows 95 was released, it was different enough then Windows 3.1 that quite a lot of average Windows 3.1 users need to learn it from the ground up. Yet people manage to use it. Project this to GNOME and KDE, and I think they both are not that bad in usability, and I think people will manage to use it without much problems, just like people migrate from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95.
The point is that, if there are more important applications developed for Linux platform, more people will use it. I am not talking about alternative applications, but applications that are popular among average desktop users.
Just my 2 cents.
Except that when windows 95 was released, it was(relatively speaking) a finished product. Gnome and KDE are not (even Relatively speaking) a finished product.
When I clicked on a help button in windows 95, it gave me help on the problem at hand, when I do the same in Gnome, I get a 5 year old outdated help file on how to use Gnome and in a lot of cases, I get nothing!
Also, what hardware was supported under windows 95 was backed up by the hardware maker and Microsoft. In linux, this is not the case at all, so users are left scratching their heads thinking what do I do now?
>And don’t try to tell me the equivalents I found aren’t >as good, I looked up your apps, saw screenshots, and >have even used some during CS courses.
They aren’t equivalent. Just looking at screenshots and using them in a CS project is not enough.
What is?
Have you people really explored KDE or what?, because XP don’t even come close to what KDE has to offer. All them feature that make you go “wow” in Vista are in KDE and more. XP really is a little world compared to KDE, just try it and play with all the powerful features.
Over the past 18 months, we have seen growth in desktop Linux usage, spurred by new more user-friendly distros like Ubuntu and new versions of Firefox and OpenOffice. But the holy grail — business users — are still few and far between. At what point will ISVs port applications to Linux, and is there enough demand? –from TFA
First of despite the article’s title and the first few lines, this sentence right here makes it absolutely clear that this isn’t an article about the ‘Linux Desktop’ at all! It’s about businesses, and more importantly its about getting the attention of ISVs.
Its an attempt to circumvent the ‘chicken and the egg’ problem of brand name recognized, proprietory commercial software on Linux by reminding these ISVs that the number of users are growing. That the Linux Desktop is coming regardless if Adobe, Microsoft, Macromedia, Autocad, ect ever release a thing for it. Its a reminder that if these ISVs don’t release their products soon; the Linux Desktop will forge ahead and create its own… which will eventually cost them not only a presence on the Linux Desktop, but on the other two major Desktops as well!
Having used Firefox for awhile how likely are you or I to switch back to IE67 unless it becomes significantly more like Mozilla? Microsoft for all purposes ‘won’ the broswer wars, but because they refused to make a practical updated and working browser for Linux the *nix geeks began to push and push and wrote their own. After Microsoft decided to quit updating the MacOS version of their browser, Apple decided to build one off of KHTML. Now Mirosoft faces a complete loss of their browser market over the next few years as more and more people begin to use Firefox on Windows. Especially those on older versions of Windows that aren’t ready to upgrade yet… When these people move on to their next computer the first thing they’ll probably do is download Firefox and import all their bookmarks and favorite extensions.
People here mentioned OpenOffice… another ‘clone’ or work-alike application that has slowly begun to overtake marketshare in all the major Desktops and is costing Microsoft Money in the long run because they tried to starve the Linux Desktop of Office suites, first by not porting Office, then by quietly convincing Corel to abandon Linux with their WordPerfect. Notice that they haven’t repeated their earlier mistakes with the browser again with Office, MacOS Office stays right where it is… otherwise people might get serious about NeoOffice!
Then there’s gAIM, aMSN, ect from the days when IMers were left without an option in instant messaging clients. Now these clinets have begun to ‘steal’ marketshare away on the Windows platform as well. The same can be said about virtually every software package considered essential to the desktop. Look for Scribus, Sodipodi, Inkscape, Nvu, and Xara along with the new Gimp-Shop among others to be crossing over in the future. Its a bit more dificult to port mediaplayers and their GUIs apparently, but even games are becoming more crossplatform –I enjoyed my latest FrozenBubble session very much… on Windows XP!
Bottom Line: Time’s running out if you’re currently a big name in software to port your applications because the Linux and OpenSource advocates have absolutely no problems writing their own GNU ones… and when they do its only a matter of time before these GNU applications begin to nibble at your Windows monopolies. On the Other Hand unless the ported software is of really really suspect quality most of the time applications that are brought over by their ISV are rarely copied and rarely migrate…RealPlayer anyone?
–bornagainpenguin (who awaits the inevitable Linux desktop expansion)
Linux on the desktop can ONLY be a reality if software vendors can sell software for Linux. Right now there’s a constant threat of any and every application being cloned and distributed for free.
Linux users should understand that open source programmers aren’t all gods and that close source programmers are sometimes better. Some of the best talent don’t want to work for free so if you really want to attract them, start paying up for software.
Linux users should understand that open source programmers aren’t all gods and that close source programmers are sometimes better. Some of the best talent don’t want to work for free so if you really want to attract them, start paying up for software.
Well then you closed sourcecommercial proprietory programmer Gods need to tell your bosses to port the bread and butter applications to Linux and sell them to the crowsd of willing buyers! You Gods need to remember that the good is the enemy of the perfect — and that when faced between a choice of Perfect or Good Enough most people are going to go with the ‘good enough’ every time.
If you want to sell us software, sell us something that works crossplatform, doesn’t spit out proprietory data no one else can read, and doesn’t try to lock us in. Really, if your programs are all that great you wouldn’t need to lock us in because we’d be beating down the door for the privledge!
–bornagainpenguin
I had trouble with XP when I first used it. Being my first OS and first use of a PC, nothing was intuitive. I tried Linux out of curiosity. It’s no harder than any other OS. The “command line” argument is a red herring. For the average home user it is perfect. Photo touch up is very simple (digikam), ripping CD’s (Kaudiocreator, Sound Juicer), instant messaging, email, both are very easy. It just works. XP also just works and is preinstalled on PC’s that are purchased at retail level. So most people I know stay with it, and are happy with it. I happen to like Linux better. It will be a while before Linux has significant growth on the desktop, because Microsoft is so prevalent. But Linux is very user friendly and easy to use. It’s true that hardware compatability is an issue, I have seen it improve as the free software community continues to develope drivers, and also some venders are starting to provide Linux drivers for their hardware. If and when Linux is widely sold preinstalled on a PC, people will learn what a friendly OS it is. I have converted a few people to it, and it more than meets their needs. It usually started with an install on their “old computer” which they saved for their kids to use. The educational programs (gcompris,kdeedu) are enjoyed by young children, and many people are suprised at how good Open Office is (for WinXP & Linux). To each his own, but Linux is a very modern and friendly desktop.
Paul Sams
>There is no proper migration path for linux, it is still hard to use<
Well, I’ll be totally honest, I think Linux is as easy or easier then Windows once you are used to it.
It’s not so much that is harder, it is that is different, the average user never has to go to the command line anymore, and most people that do have to go to the command line are doing things that either can’t or typically aren’t done in Windows and are power users.
The logic of the Linux desktop is not worse then Windows, but it is different and it takes some getting used to but once somebody is used to it, it is as easy as windows and for many power users it is easier.
Anyway, keep in mind, I’m not promoting Linux, I could really care less if the world uses linux on the desktop, I want just enough people to use it that major software companies supply applications that run natively on Linux.
All that having been said, I have used Linux (and a little BSD) quite execlusively at home for a couple years and only use Windows a little bit at work…. I actually feel out of place in Windows, I can find my way around it ok, but sometimes it takes me a minute to figure stuff out because I am so unfamiliar with the desktop.
Point is, Linux is not harder (depending on the distro) but it is different… KDE tends to be more Windows like but with more options and Gnome tends to be kind of a cross between Windows and Mac.
I think with the upcoming kde4 (I’m a little partial to KDE but Gnome is advancing as well) combined with xorg 7.0+ and good nvidia drivers and hopefully better ATI drivers that the linux desktop will give Windows and Mac a run for it’s money on the desktop (just give me 8-10% and I’ll be very happy).
Edited 2006-01-16 03:54
And what are the reasons that people should switch …
1. If they’re tired of viruses and malware, and that is the only reason they’re interested in switching, they’d probably have an easier time figuring out how security on Windows works (really, it’s not that complicated – run anti-virus & firewall, don’t use Internet Explorer) than they would migrating to a new platform
2. Linux has a lot of free software. For some, this is a good enough reason. But what about those of us who have already invested in high-quality commercial apps that are (largely) better than the open source ones that Linux has to offer?
To me, if you’re not really into politics, than what is the carrot? Will I get my work done faster on Linux? And if so, how? The only benefits I ever hear about Linux are the Stallman-esque, socialistic ramblings about open source and free love. Either that, or they talk about a bunch of problems with Windows (mainly viruses) that I don’t have.
At the company I work at, those of us who actually use the in-house tools are constantly coming up with suggestions as to how the developers could improve them. But all upper management cares about is how much is it going to cost, and how much time will it save? Similarly, as a desktop/power user who is highly productive in my current enviroment, I want to know specifics about how Linux’s apps are better than the best that Windows has to fofer. You need to give something tangible that I can wrap my mind around.
For example, take the best audio editor that open source has to offer, and put it up against Adobe Audition … make a feature-for-feature breakdown and explain why the OSS alternative is better. But as I’ve pointed out many times before, the OSS crowd isn’t doing this. Why? Because they know that their apps won’t measure up. Of course, you’ll often hear stupid shit from them like “Hey, 90% of people don’t need all those features!” Well, I’m part of the other 10%, so deal with.
The only time will make comparisons is when the pendulum swings in their favor, such as comparing Firefox with Internet Explorer, all the while completely ignoring Opera. (Yeah, I know that there’s a version of Opera for Linux, but can I have Stephen Hawking read web pages to me as in the Windows version? For those of us with visual impairments, this really comes in handy.)
The OSS crowd really needs to be more impartial be open with people about the real strength and weaknesses about their OS of choice. Otherwise, they’ll just continue to blow smoke up people’s ass about how great it is, and then act surprised when those who listen to them and try to switch don’t find it as easy to use as the OSS zealots said it was. I mean, for the love of God .. TELL THEM it’s going to be difficult in the beginning but will get easier with time, instead of bullshitting them.
I believe a Layman Linux is around the corner because a company will build an abstraction layer, hiding the hard stuff, and will provide tested and re-dressed/renamed applications for all the most typical uses in such a way that it fares well against the best MS has to offer. Case in point, the new Google Cube Media Center PC or perhaps future improvements from linspire.com. This is much the same that Apple did when they hid the guts of BSD Unix.
Plus, as more and more features become run through the web browser, the desktop OS becomes less significant.
I think what is the difficult thing is improving the non-Layman Linux so that the power user who already knows Linux somewhat is satisfied because things are more logical. For instance, I think Windows does a much better job of managing fonts and daemons than Linux does.
Note: I’m now a *huge* Linux fan (3 year novice) and an ex-Microsoft fan. I now want nothing to do with Microsoft products if I could. So when I criticize the non-Layman Linux, I say so only to try to make things better than they already are.
I think a bigger issue that us Linux fans should be more concerned about is Business Desktop Linux, which should be much like Home Desktop Linux (Layman Linux), but have less features and can be locked down more. I think it’s an easier goal to shoot for, for now.
Wasnt WallMart selling linux pc real cheap. Turns out it wasn’t attractive at all. I think it was discontinued. So why would the OEMs follow suit.
Edited 2006-01-16 05:30
Free Products are great! But, we need iTunes or Windows Media Player to get DRM protected materials. Games! We need games. We can’t play old EverQuest on Linux box. We also need business apps; PhotShop, PowerPoint, Word/Excel, PageMaker, …. and so on. No, Gimp or OpenOffice can be good for casual use, but not enough for professional use. How many people dare to use Linux Desktop without theese Apps?
does notmatter which year it it is. many will ignore but i still feel it’s the only reason . I still blame the GPL. I think the GPL is what is holding linux back from advancing in the desktop. not many multibillion software companies would want to give the company’s inside secrets away the programs source code.
back to the community.
with windows the companies are able to develop programs for it withoutgiving the source code. Apple could of used linux but they decided to go with BSD,why,not to scare away companies. the mac os x has a bette chance at the desktop it’s unix like linux and now it runs on intel cpus. why go with linux when no major software companies will release there popular titles on linux. the desktop is run by corporations. GPL and corporations don’t mix well. sun does not even want to use it they devlop thier own.
Great…
Now discounting the MacOS X.xx which is an entirely different beast, please tell us which commercial applications have been released for *BSD only?
….
I thought so.
–bornagainpenguin
Don’t expect to see linux on the desktop anytime soon, as long it’s under the GPL.corporates control the destop like microsoft and others. apple decided to go with the BSD code,because the BSD license is less restricted then the GPL apple can do whatever they want with the BSD code which they did,apple develoed the mac os x a BSD based os that has hundreds of popular titles that are also found for windows. the only way linux will be on the
destop if microsoft, ibm or any other company controlled it and who would want a os that is more flawed than windows, a USCERT fact.
Hmm…What does your ‘reply’ have to do with my question?
You’ve ranted twice now about how the GPL is what keeps commercial products from being made for Linux and that BSD is a better license, each time without following up on your ‘point’ with anything– and this time it looks like you just cut-n-paste your previous post. Great, I can do that too!
Discounting the MacOS X.xx which is an entirely different beast, please tell us which commercial applications have been released for *BSD only?
…..
I thought so. Now unless you post with a few software packages that are only available to consumers through *BSD, (again discounting Apple’s proprietory blend of various *BSDs and the Mach kernel as no longer being *BSD) I’m going to ignore any future posts from you as a known Troll.
—bornagainpenguin
PS: Actually no I won’t. I’m going to offer you a clue-by-for and remind you that its *BSD that has a compatibility layer for commercial Linux applications, so there! Would you like to try a different argument? Maybe a sock-puppet?
ok, that is find. in the real world Microsoft will still rule the desktop market and later it will also rule other markets. dell,hp,voodoo pc,etc will contiune to sale desktop PCs with windows installed. software companies will contiune to produce popular titles for only windows and mac. And a bunch of people will like you will contiune saying linux wiil one day be on on the desktop. MS will still be running the computer sector like it has always has been, because no company will want to adopt linux as a consumer product. the GPL forces the companies to give their trade secrets away.
GPL and corporatons don’t mix well.
“ok, that is find. in the real world Microsoft will still rule the desktop market and later it will also rule other markets.”
Not the point. The point is only that in no way should people be concerned about installing and using Linux if they want to because some ignoramus on the internet is spreading false FUD about it.
“dell,hp,voodoo pc,etc will contiune to sale desktop PCs with windows installed.”
As long as Microsoft continues to charge PC retailers four times as much for Windows when the retailer offers multiple OSes compared with the charge for Windows if the retailer offers Windows exclusively, then your statement is doubtless true.
Only in America could a company get away with predatory priccing such as this though.
“because no company will want to adopt linux as a consumer product”
Say what? This statement is patently untrue.
“the GPL forces the companies to give their trade secrets away. ”
No, it does not. The GPL only means that a company cannot take code that is already GPL and make it proprietary.
The GPL is absolutely silent on code that is proprietary now. The GPL in no way even asks for a company to surrender its trade secrets.
Edited 2006-01-16 07:45
well i don’t see dell,voodoopc ,etc desktop PCs offering linux, do you? no. only windows, not even popular games tiltes exist. let me see education software like the kaplan sat,no. what good sofware is availavle for linux? none if any were then linux would be on 90% of the systems not windows. I’m sure if linux was that great no company would pass the option of making more revenue.
“well i don’t see dell,voodoopc ,etc desktop PCs offering linux, do you? no. only windows, not even popular games tiltes exist. let me see education software like the kaplan sat,no. what good sofware is availavle for linux? none if any were then linux would be on 90% of the systems not windows. I’m sure if linux was that great no company would pass the option of making more revenue.”
Now you are getting closer to the rub.
There is at least one major developer of desktop application software that refuses to sell software for Linux – Microsoft.
The reason for this is that Linux is a threat to Microsoft, and if people could run Microsoft applications (such as Microsoft Office) on Linux platforms then people would find it far more attractive to use Linux than is currently the case.
Microsoft does not do cross-platform interoperability. Not at all. Not a bit of it. They actively do the exact reverse – in order to try to make it necessary to run Windows to be compatible with other people who run Windows. It is Microsoft’s stated aim to have the whole desktop computing market to themselves.
Meanwhile those of us who value reliability, security, value-for-money and most of all interoperability are far better off not running any Microsoft products at all.
Everyone serves their own best interests by avoiding lock-in and not allowing Microsoft to gain a monopoly position. As soon as Microsoft do have an absolute monopoly (which is their stated aim) and there are NO viable options other than running Windows, then you can expect to suddenly have to pay many, many times more for your software than you do now – and you will have to pay for it year in year out over and over again.
ok, that is find. in the real world Microsoft will still rule the desktop market and later it will also rule other markets. dell,hp,voodoo pc,etc will contiune to sale desktop PCs with windows installed. software companies will contiune to produce popular titles for only windows and mac. And a bunch of people will contiune saying linux wiil one day be on on the desktop. MS will still be running the computer sector like it has always has been, because no company will want to adopt linux as a consumer product. the GPL forces the companies to give their trade secrets away.
GPL and corporatons don’t mix well.
Edited 2006-01-16 07:36
“I still blame the GPL. I think the GPL is what is holding linux back from advancing in the desktop. not many multibillion software companies would want to give the company’s inside secrets away the programs source code. back to the community. with windows the companies are able to develop programs for it withoutgiving the source code.”
This is just sooooooooo wrong I don’t know where to start.
I’ll try to keep it simple … the GPL does not prevent proprietary (or commercial) desktop applications. The “giving the source code back” part of the GPL applies only to MODIFICATIONS TO CODE WHICH IS ALREADY GPL.
If it applied as “happycamper” thinks it applied, then there would be no commercial programs for the Linux desktop … right???
So, as an exercise, I chose just one application area – Cad (Computer Aided Design). I did a google search for < CAD for Linux >.
This was the very top link:
http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html
About 23 commercial programs are listed. There are more commercial desktop CAD applications available for Linux than GPL or freeware ones.
There goes happycampers misunderstanding, blow right out of the water in just one link.
I would also want all the cool software like Yahoo messenger, MSN messenger on Linux.
You should research more before criticizing. Kopete supports both Yahoo! and MSN Messenger protocols (including webcam, as of version 3.5).
So what you meant to say was that it has some IM clients but they lack features compared to the ones he named?
Kopete is quite featureful, and allows monitoring multipe IM networks/identities at once, something that MSN Messengeer and Yahoo! IM lack.
Kopete rocks (especially version 3.5).
“Executable Explorer” is a development tool that lets you browse Windows executables and extract all sorts of information about them — function calls, data excerpts, DLLs used, etc.
I’m sorry, but why was this brought up as an example of an app that didn’t exist on Linux, then?
There are equivalent apps on Linux for Linux executables (ldd comes to mind), just because the poster didn’t know about them doesn’t make his criticism valid.
You are much too shallow and narrow-minded.
Back to personal insults, I see.
we have been listening to this song for years… The fact is that nobody really cares except the people who are already using Linux.
“The fact is that nobody really cares except the people who are already using Linux.”
This is possibly quite true … and a great shame.
As soon as Linux & Macintosh are dead and Microsoft Windows is the ONLY option for desktop software … then you can expect to suddenly have to pay through the nose for desktop software and even then only by subscription … you will have to pay over and over again.
Then all of a sudden the sheeple will probably care that there is only one option left in the desktop software market.
By then it will be far too late to care.
Linux in general is so technical and challenging once not configured by professionals. Alot of software that is not written for your favorite distro will be difficult to install if not impossible on your own, even if you read how to; Let’s have an example
Installing Azureus ( a bittorent client using java )
1. tar xvfs azureusPackage.gz.bz2
2. cd azureus
3. ./azureus
4. oops no java
5. Install java (sh java.bin then rpm -Uvh java.rpm)
6. Oops azureus didn’t recognize it
7. solution: open azureus file with kwirte and direct it the correct java location
8. start azureus again… still not working
9. Try developer other commands…still not working
My Friend Advise: Try another distro..OK..Great!..It works here!!!
But then I don’t want this distro, thus I will try to install another bittorrent client, again:
1. tar zxfs package.gz.tar
2. cd package
3. ./configure
4. oops no gcc installed no C++, no widgets,…
5. Install missing packages rpm -ivh *
6. ./configure OK
7. make (returned some errors)
8. make install (returned some errors)
9. Application needs permission ( OK will use chmod command)
10. Run the application..Ok It works, but this is not a good client like my favorite one….Try another one….
This is just one of the problems you may encounter with linux daily use especially if the distro that you like doesn’t give you the precompiled packages.
Yes, linux is rock solid OS, more immune light years to windows xp …But it’s difficult to configure for normal people unless:
1. All what a he/she needs is already configured
2. There is a certified linux techncian beside you to solve all you future software demands.
3. You use it in the enterprise and support is no issue.
4. You are the certified technician yourself
I love linux and I use it on daily basis and I love its challenge, but I failed to promote it for my friends maily because it needs good knowlege with Konsole and command line, which normal people lack. Even in windows if you tell a user to run “runas /user:administrator cmd” then in cmd.exe window type “sfc /scannow” to repair a corrupt system files he will gaze at me and drop his jaw.
linux for desktop is an excellent idea in the enterprise and businesses; but for home users it’s still a dream I wish…because linux is freedom!!!!
“Linux in general is so technical and challenging once not configured by professionals. Alot of software that is not written for your favorite distro will be difficult to install if not impossible on your own, even if you read how to; Let’s have an example
Installing Azureus ( a bittorent client using java )
1. tar xvfs azureusPackage.gz.bz2
2. cd azureus
3. ./azureus
4. oops no java
5. Install java (sh java.bin then rpm -Uvh java.rpm)
6. Oops azureus didn’t recognize it
7. solution: open azureus file with kwirte and direct it the correct java location
8. start azureus again… still not working
9. Try developer other commands…still not working”
Sheesh!
Why do you Windows fanbois always try this one on over and over again?
If you want an easy to use Linux desktop – then get a distribution which is designed as an easy-to-use Linux desktop.
The best at the moment seems to be PCLinuxOS. Ubuntu, KANOTIX or MEPIS are close. All four come on one CD, and install a complete system (yes, with all desktop applications) from scratch in about 15 minutes.
OK, suppose Azureus was not included.
In that case, it would be:
Configuration -> Packaging -> Synaptic Software Manager
(enter the root password)
Click on the “Search” toolbar Button
Type in “az”
Select the Azureus package to be installed.
Click “Apply”.
Done.
Here is a screenshot of me in the process of doing just this:
http://members.dodo.com.au/~quiet1/install-azureus.jpg
Edited 2006-01-16 09:08
“If you want an easy to use Linux desktop – then get a distribution which is designed as an easy-to-use Linux desktop. ”
I don’t want an easy to use linux distro. I want a distro that can give me high stability and the best possible hardware support plus being able to run my favorite applications.
From my experience I found that RHEL 4.2 is the most stable Linux distribution ever built, but its hardware support is the worst. Well, does your distribution play .mid or .midi files, I mean does it support you sound card sequencer? And does it run VMWare 5.5 + WXPSP2 without hanging or glitches like RHEL 4.2
“Here is a screenshot of me in the process of doing just this:
http://members.dodo.com.au/~quiet1/install-azureus.jpg“
Please, can you show me azureus in action, as installing a package is something and running it is something else; I am sorry for not being able to show you my linux desktop screenshot because it is 1920×1200, but I am not windows supporter and I run RHEL 4.2 currently and heavily testing Mandriva 2006 Power Pack which is a great OS too.
“I don’t want an easy to use linux distro.”
Then what are you doing on this thread, and then pretending that Linux is too hard to use for common desktop use?
If you want an easy-to-use Linux desktop, then get an easy-to-use Linux desktop.
If you don’t want an easy-to-use Linux desktop, then don’t bother people who do and try to frighten them off from trying it.
“Please, can you show me azureus in action”.
It wasn’t installed in my post before. It took me 3 minutes to download & install.
http://members.dodo.com.au/~quiet1/installed-azureus3.jpg“
As we speak, in case of Fedora Core, Azureus will be available on Extras repository with full support of GCJ. I think other distros already have it in their native packages.
“As we speak, in case of Fedora Core, Azureus will be available on Extras repository with full support of GCJ. I think other distros already have it in their native packages.”
If you want to participate in RedHat’s Linux development program for the server market, then Fedora Core might be for you.
If you want an easy-to-use Linux distro designed to be a desktop system, stay well clear of Fedora Core.
If you want an easy-to-use Linux desktop system. the PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu, KANOTIX, MEPIS, OpenSuSe or even Mandriva would all be far easier and far more suitable.
If you want an easy-to-use Linux desktop system. the PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu, KANOTIX, MEPIS, OpenSuSe or even Mandriva would all be far easier and far more suitable.
but way less useful then windows,because no popular software titles runs on linux. kinda forgot to mention the important part.
“because no popular software titles runs on linux”
Pfft.
You haven’t even tried it, obviously.
I have used both, installed both. I have tried my family members (all my machines are dual boot) – and all of them (who are by no means experts) are easily able to pick up and use Linux.
After all, it does come with a COMPLETE set of normal-use software titles out of the box, and every one of the is at least as functional and easy-to-use any any counterpart on the Windows side of the machines.
After all, it does come with a COMPLETE set of normal-use software titles out of the box, and every one of the is at least as functional and easy-to-use any any counterpart on the Windows side of the machines.
who are you trying to fool many websites
required the os to have WMP installed inorder to
watch video clips and movies like form movielink. try downloading music form itones and walmart.try playing the lastest hot video game. why use a limited usage os?
Depends on what you do. What qualifies as “popular software titles”? Trillian? Try to think outside your own little world. Linux runs everything from Matlab to Oracle. Lots of people use Linux every day to do real work and make real money. Desktop Linux is here, whether people like it or not. It might not be here in the same way some people hoped, providing an alternative to home users, but home users aren’t the only desktop market out there!
If you want to participate in RedHat’s Linux development program for the server market, then Fedora Core might be for you.
Fedora is more like a jack-trade. Not only it can be user for server but also for workstation development as demonstrated by studios such as Pixar.
My point was to indicate to the original poster he/she not need to install Azureus with tarball method on some distributions.
If you want an easy-to-use Linux distro designed to be a desktop system, stay well clear of Fedora Core.
Desktop is a bit subjective depending the need of users. Things are changing as there is a development of friendly frontend package manager, major facelift of apparence and soon the ability for users to include their own repositories to name a few. Soon that quote will no longer apply.
Bad example. Azureus is in the repositories for two of the most popular desktop Linux distros out there, Ubuntu and Mandriva. So installing it (or other BitTorrent clients such as BitTornado, KTorrent or the BitTorrent GUI) is simply a matter of starting up the Package Manager, selecting the app, clicking install and waiting a little.
I think your problem is that you’re considering RedHat to be a typical Desktop Linux distro. It isn’t. You’d be better served with Ubuntu or Mandriva.
“Bad example. Azureus is in the repositories for two of the most popular desktop Linux distros out there, Ubuntu and Mandriva.”
That’s Correct; But the problem of these two distros are stability and performance when comes to running big applications like VMWare with WXP. Besides Let me give you a good example here How simple is to configure VMWare for linux, how simple is to configure nvidia drivers to run.
nvidia installation that I have gone through:
1. Run: Konsole
2. su then password
3. /sbin/init 3 ( to stop xserver)
4. sh nvidia-package.run
5. nvidia installation problem (no gcc, no kernel source,no ..)
6. install missing packages from development container
7. rerun the previous steps
8. Let the application compile the drivers
9. Run “vi /etc/X11/xorg.conf”
10. make modifications to the file at sections of Monitor>VertRefresh and make it 60 then add “1920×1200” to modes and then make 24 bit your default color depth, then hit Esc then hit Shift+q then type “wq!” to save changes then go to next step
11. Run “startx”
12. I like the changes and now the monitor is very well configured
13. run ” reboot” or “/sbin/init 5”
14. Take aspirin and set down for the net configuration excercise.
I have to tell you that I don’t like many distros because of stability and performance; I regularly run the applet of ksystemguard to have a clue how the OS behave under normal and heavy conditions and let me tell you that much distros choke on P4 when you just copy 100 MB file over the network, while RHEL doesnt reach 30% CPU even when running VMWare+network copy + CDROM burning with Gear v5 + background download from the internet+ reading OSnews. I hope this clarified alot of doubt why I don’t want to use other distros, and I want my favorite app to run on my favorite OS.
Sure. As we know all too well, vmware is anything but stable and reliable under Linux.
But then there you go complaining about how hard it is to install vmware. Nevermind it’s probably a tool that’s mainly in use by OS developers. And lord knows OS developers running vmware under Linux have such a hard time doing anything, let alone running a shell script to install it.
Seriously though, as has been pointed out numerous times in this thread (but by all means, feel free to ignore it again), if the companies putting out applications like vmware, or kenrel modules like the nvidia graphics drivers, wanted to make things as easy as they are under Windows, well, they could.
Edited 2006-01-17 05:54
FYI, in Mandriva, I never had to do anything of that for all my users. It’s automagically installed at installation in the consumer versions (commercial ones).
I think all home desktop consumer versions of distros do that.
FYI again, the graphical tool installed on Linux with NVidia drivers does all the changes in conf file for you now. That’s what they claim, I did not test it.
Just so that you can finally understand that the problem you cite is still not on Linux, but on the ISV. But I don’t think you will ever understand, you seem to be pretty thick, you and your friend astroturfers and shills.
Mandriva is what I installed for all the people around me, and I never had any of the problems you talk about.
FYI, there’s a graphical tool to configure X on Mandriva, so your example if BS anyway. For Ubuntu I don’t know, it configured itself right from installation.
“how simple is to configure nvidia drivers to run. nvidia installation that I have gone through: ”
I keep telling you: If you want an easy-to-use Linux, then get an easy-to-use Linux.
Here is what **I** used for **MY** easy-to-use-on-the-desktop-and-easy-to-configure Linux:
http://members.dodo.com.au/~quiet1/snapshot39.jpg
No vi. No obscure config files. Not even nano.
Just a GUI control panel. Easy.
Easy enough that even Windows users should be right at home.
If you want to do it the hard way, go right ahead … be as masochistic as you want … but that argument doesn’t have anything to do with this thread.
You know what they say … the best thing about banging your head against a brick wall is that it is so great when you stop. So if you want to stop … just give up on RedHat for desktop systems and get yourself a real desktop Linux.
Edited 2006-01-17 10:36
The problem you describe is not with Linux, it is with RHEL, which – as we’ve previously established – is not a good “Desktop” distro. If you insist on using it, then you have to accept the hassles that come with it.
What versions of Mandriva and Ubuntu have you benchmarked with the described tasks? I’m curious, because I don’t have performance problems on either my Mandriva desktop or Kubuntu laptop – and installing nvidia/ATI drivers on either is a breeze (easier on the Kubuntu laptop – the fglrx driver is actually in the repositories).
That said, the procedure you describe is pretty straightforward. Someone could actually take your post as a HowTo. If you can describe something as succintly as this in a forum post, then in my book it’s not that complex. This is actually how the command line can be useful, btw: it’s much easier to give out instructions like that than describing how to use a GUI for a moderately complex task.
Again, though, you’re deliberately making your life more difficult by sticking to a distro that’s less user-friendly than others – and I really don’t believe that the performance issues aren’t solvable on other distros. Linux is Linux, after all.
Actually, you should add java and its libs to your path.
I would guess the first distro is RHEL or more likely CentOS. These aren’t the best choice for desktop distributions: Because they’re about 18 months behind on gtk (2.4.x). It’s not their focus anyway, they’re looking more for people doing work on their desktop and never installing unfree software
.
The second is probably Mandriva. gcc is on the cd, you can click it on.
“9. Application needs permission ( OK will use chmod command)”
Unlikely. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that happen to be honest. An exe installed without +x…
Anyway, a little knowledge never hurt anyone. “You have to eat bitter to taste sweet.”
. “Welcome to life, it often involves learning” is what you tell them.
Why do so many people want widespread use of Linux on the desktop?
I use Linux on all of my home computers, but I’d prefer most people didn’t use it. The more people who use Linux, the more it’ll get dumbed down. I prefer not to use an OS made for idiots.
“Why do so many people want widespread use of Linux on the desktop?”
It is very simple: because we do not want Windows to become a monopoly on the desktop.
The key point is to educate computer users, to allow them to think beyond one OS like Microsoft Windows.
If someone can do what you say, they will buy mac immediately.
It is kind of sad but Linux community should learn to accept customer complaints rather than denying them. As an example, all the people who complain about Linux have a lower average comment score and even the most stupid people who praise Linux have high comment score. This shows the intolerance to criticism in Linux community.
I don’t want to say this but Linux community is really like Islamic Jehadis. If you can’t convert people to Islam then kill them. If you can’t make people like Linux then mod down their opinion.
I can only see the demise of Linux with this attitude. Thank god we have Windows and MacOSX as our savior. Or we would have got stuck with these linux jehadis.
Pfft.
“I don’t want to say this but Linux community is really like Islamic Jehadis. If you can’t convert people to Islam then kill them.”
This is the modern equivalent of a Godwin’s Law post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law
… except that apparently now it is Islam.
Edited 2006-01-16 10:06
Just shows how little you know about computers, the time it takes you to type your crap here you can learn Linux. CAN YOU PEOPLE TYPE AND READ? or click like a monkey?. We all don’t buy the same car or the same video because it’s easier to use do we, no though not.
My mum (aged 52) puts you sad Windows users who say Linux is to hard to shame, she uses Slackware/GNOME, how does that make you feel?, useless thats what.
Just curious, did your mum ever slept with Stallman?
Edited 2006-01-16 10:43
Just curious, did your mum ever slept with Stallman?
–CrazyDude0
Errmmmm…right….? and Linux users are intolerant and abusive to people who boost Windows/MacOS?
As an example, all the people who complain about Linux have a lower average comment score and even the most stupid people who praise Linux have high comment score. This shows the intolerance to criticism in Linux community. –CrazyDude0
Actually maybe it has something to do with posts like the ones you just made? D’ya think? No, obliviously not!
–bornagainpenguin
Edited 2006-01-16 11:07
His post was abusive before my reply by calling windows user names or comparing people to monkeys. Just read his post first. But i know you belong to see no evil, hear no evil, linux army, so there you go mr penguin…
Another Linux vs. Windows thread!
Incidently I installed Ubuntu on Saturday, and for the first time in years it was the first Distro that found all my hardware(“win”Modem excepted, sigh), I know they’ve gone out of their way to make it nice and compty for Windows users, and I can get most of it to work, it’s a bit, well, bland as a OS isn’t it? Personly I prefer Gnome to KDE, but both are rather lacking in nice, ok, cool features comparired to Mac OS X. And although it lacks the windows hard-drive thrashing that it still sometimes does, it seems slow and unresponsive cf AmigaOS, and well, lacking in eligance…
But heck, a Distro that works*, maybe it IS ready for the desktop!
If I stick with it, before going back to Windows 2000, that does all that I can do with Linux but more, maybe I’ll try other Desktop Environments, or something.
*for me, your Milage my differ.
“Incidently I installed Ubuntu on Saturday, and for the first time in years it was the first Distro that found all my hardware(“win”Modem excepted, sigh), I know they’ve gone out of their way to make it nice and compty for Windows users, and I can get most of it to work, it’s a bit, well, bland as a OS isn’t it?”
Ubuntu is a bit plain and bare-bones out of the box.
I’d personally go for KDE 3.5 on PCLinuxOS and wait a bit and then install KDE 4 when it comes out – if I wanted a WoW factor AND an easy to use OS.
http://shots.osdir.com/index.php?distro=25
But even Ubuntu is very customisable.
http://www.lynucs.org/index.php?screen_id=2088127546438629176e60b&p…
http://shots.osdir.com/index.php?distro=398
and you can really make it look as snazzy as you want:
http://www.lynucs.org/?gdesklets
http://www.improvedsource.com/view.php/GUI/1/
Have fun!
Edited 2006-01-16 11:04
But heck, a Distro that works*, maybe it IS ready for the desktop!
I don’t think so. for one linux is already letting millions of users down, because apple itones does not run
in linux and millions of users like to download songs from
apple. linux will be ready for the desktop when it is able to run every currnet software program that is out there like apple’s itones.
” I don’t think so. for one linux is already letting millions of users down, because apple itones does not run in linux and millions of users like to download songs from apple. linux will be ready for the desktop when it is able to run every currnet software program that is out there like apple’s itones.”
Pfft.
Do a google for +ipod +linux
Result:
Results 1 – 10 of about 22,700,000 for ipod linux. (0.11 seconds)
Over 22 million hits.
http://neuron.com/~jason/ipod.html
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~geha/ipod/
http://pag.csail.mit.edu/~adonovan/hacks/ipod.html
Heck, even the ipod itself runs Linux:
http://ipodlinux.org/Main_Page
You are sooooooooo out of touch it just isn’t funny.
Edited 2006-01-16 11:20
the itunes program that is free to download from apple site does not run in linux. who mention the ipod.the ipod is not a desktop computer os.
“the itunes program that is free to download from apple site does not run in linux. who mention the ipod.the ipod is not a desktop computer os.”
Sheesh!
iTunes is the music program that comes with an iPod. The iPod comes with a Windows or a Macintosh version of iTunes.
Here is the iTunes home page:
http://www.apple.com/itunes/
See all down the left-hand side of the page? iPod.
The reaon why people run iTunes is because they have purchased an iPod and iTunes is the program that came with it.
If people have another way to transfer tunes to their iPod then they don’t need iTunes.
You silly person you for not figuring that out.
Are you naturally this stupid, or do you have to work at it?
many use itunes to download music and later burn onto a disc. I guess you are running out of reasons to defend linux since the isnsult have started, you make me laugh.HA,HA,HA,HA and aother HA.
“many use itunes to download music and later burn onto a disc”
One can do all that easily in Linux without iTunes.
You only need iTunes if you have both an iPod and a Macintosh or a Windows PC.
I’m sorry about the insults, but really you are a waste of time. This is about your tenth attempt on this one thread to come up with even one valid criticism of Linux, and each time you have easily been shown to be dead wrong. Still you persist (God knows why???) and my patience with you wears very thin.
I feel quite justified in having some doubt about the smarts of a poster who is dead wrong ten times in succession.
I have better things to do with my time than to correct your ignorance and errors which you appear to be posting merely to try to spread misinformed disinformation about Linux.
Edited 2006-01-16 12:10
itunes only runs on mac and windows. not on linux, so a user who is running only linux and does not own a ipod is not able to purchase music form apple. again linux is not usable on the desktop because many of the open soure programs lack alot of features that are avaliable in windows counterparts. let say user that like to download movies form movielink, will not be able too because like many websites the wmp is required and wmp is not avaliable for linux. so i guess you ran out of things to
say to defend it. i know it’s hard to defend it for a long time since there is not much to defend.
.
I guess you can’t realize you are thinking incorrectly because you are thinking incorrectly.
itunes only runs on mac and windows. not on linux, so a user who is running only linux and does not own a ipod is not able to purchase music form apple
Wrong. And what you say is BS. Apple developed ITunes for Windows. Before that, ITunes was available since a long time for Mac OS, and Windows users could not run ITunes. ITunes only runs on Windows because Apple supported it. You say “only runs on” to imply that this is Linux fault, but actually this is Apple’s fault. Now, like always, FOSS came up for the few functionalities available in Itunes that lacked on Linux (basically access to Music Store DRM encrypted songs).
Availability of this app won’t affect Linux on the desktop though, as there are alternatives that better integrate in the DEs available on Linux. If you’re anal about ITunes, it works under CrossOver Office, and surely even under Wine.
again linux is not usable on the desktop because many of the open soure programs lack alot of features that are avaliable in windows counterparts
And Windows is not usable on the desktop because lots of BASIC features still lack or are buggy in this OS ?
let say user that like to download movies form movielink, will not be able too because like many websites the wmp is required and wmp is not avaliable for linux
So because some sites on internet are badly developed, Linux is not ready for the desktop ?
What FUD is that ? Look stupid guy : this service is only available in the USA. So by your stupid example, Windows is not usable on the desktop on other coutries ?
You Windows shills are so stupid sometimes it’s amazing, you defy any logic to further your flawed argument.
so i guess you ran out of things to say to defend it. i know it’s hard to defend it for a long time since there is not much to defend.
I think he rather try to shut up Windows shills like you (as Windows power users won’t do it). There is nothing to defend in Linux desktops, just things to improve. Some FOSS devs can do, some ISV can do. ISV don’t do their work, so they face the threat of being irrelevant in the future, when FOSS has replacements or alternatives.
The article pointed this, that’s all there is to it. We know MS forces some of those ISV to not develop for Linux or any other OS. They’re scared of Linux on the desktop reaching the tipping point, you are scared too it seems.
itunes only runs on mac and windows.
Actually it runs on Linux with WINE.
so a user who is running only linux and does not own a ipod is not able to purchase music form apple.
So Apple loses music sales, what’s the problem?
You seem to say that it’s somehow Linux’ fault if Apple refuses to sell songs to Linux users…thing is, there are other places where you can buy music online, which do work with Linux. Or you can dual-boot just to buy songs (I know someone who does just that, boots in Windows, buys a bunch of songs, reboots in Linux and listens to them in Amarok, arguable the best music player available for ANY platform…)
let say user that like to download movies form movielink, will not be able too because like many websites the wmp is required and wmp is not avaliable for linux.
WMP runs fine under crossover, but that’s not necessary. Xine and Mplayer can use the Win32 codecs just fine and access wmf, asf and asx content just fine.
Oh, and since these apps can also play Realmedia and Quicktime, they are actually more useful than WMP is.
for one linux is already letting millions of users down, because apple itones does not run
in linux and millions of users like to download songs from
apple.
It isn’t.
You are always refering to the same problem in all your post, the problem explained in the article : support of ISV is lacking. Which is not a showtsopper for Linux, but slows adoption of Linux on the desktop. Your ITunes (not itones) example is very telling : there are already several integrated programs on Linux, for Gnome and KDE and other desktops, that can communicate with IPods, and do everything ITunes does, except encrypt the song preventing you to share it.
As always, you are reversing the problem because you have no point : Linux is not letting users down, Apple (the ISV) is letting Linux users down.
linux will be ready for the desktop when it is able to run every currnet software program that is out there like apple’s itones
Linux is already for the desktop, but your FUD sure enough won’t help it. Of course, I think everyone thinking correctly understand that no one can release Apple programs before Apple themselves.
It seems it never occured to you.
The problem ISV faces, is that FOSS will release the software if ISV don’t do it. The software will be good enough, as good, or better, and then, FOSS won’t care for the ISV apps anymore.
You are always refering to the same problem in all your post, the problem explained in the article : support of ISV is lacking. Which is not a showtsopper for Linux, but slows adoption of Linux on the desktop.
CrazyDude0 and happycamper don’t really have anything new to add to the mix; all they seem to be doing is cut-n-pasting their rants and refusing to actually read and respond to posts.
I was trying to talk with them myself earlier on in this thread and.. well… you can see where that got me!
The problem ISV faces, is that FOSS will release the software if ISV don’t do it. The software will be good enough, as good, or better, and then, FOSS won’t care for the ISV apps anymore.
I agree with your point about ISVs, I think I even said something similar in the thread earlier on. However what these ISVs need to understand is not that the ‘evil hackers will steal their programs’ because that isn’t true. What will happen is that opensource programmers will see a void or a need for a certain application because the ISVs refuse to port it to the Linux Desktop and will write their own. This will eventually become, through a process of software evolution, good enough that no one cares about the Brand Name ISV software.
In fact I’d say these days Firefox has as good if not better recognition than Internet Explorer, because more people are talking about it. Microsoft’s failure to port Internet Explorer to the Linux Desktop and their decision to abandon the MacOS X.xx Desktop will come back to haunt them as their hold on the browser market continues to fragment. Best of all for consumers (worst of all for ISVs) once an apllication becomes ‘good enough’ it usually begins to migrate back over to Windows where it eats away at the ISVs original market!
The only solution? ISVs port your apps to Linux and various *nix NOW! AFAIK the only apps that have not been cloned have been the ones ported by ISVs themselves before competition existed!
–bornagainpenguin
Then F*** em, it’s no skin of our nose, If they want the ordeal of virus’s, spyware, worms, WMF security threats then let them have it. Let them throw away there money on software companies that are just waiting to take there money. I don’t feel sorry for people at all anymore who go and buy a computer then take it back to be formated because of the Windows crap, happens every day and they pay for the computer, Windows, software and format. Who laughing now?, us Linux users are and have been for years.
LOL. You really made me laugh. You sound so frustrated that even by making a free OS people like Windows more.
People’s time has more value than Linux religion. They don’t want to use a below standard OS called Linux. Get a clue and go do some coding to improve it.
It’s too bad you have to choose an OS in the first place. In a in ideal world, you would be able to run two OSs in parallel (without slowing down either one, or crippling the functionality of either, as it happens with VMware).
A major block to the adoption of GNU/Linux is that a smooth transition is not possible. Switching always brings a bit of trauma. OTOH, if people could run Windows and Linux in parallel, they would have that smooth path that avoids trauma: they would start using only a few programs, and slowly they would use Linux more and more.
Edited 2006-01-16 11:47
“It’s too bad you have to choose an OS in the first place. In a in ideal world, you would be able to run two OSs in parallel (without slowing down either one, or crippling the functionality of either, as it happens with VMware).”
Either of these (partial) solutions may ease the transition for you a little:
Cygwin:
http://www.cygwin.com/
Co-operative Linux:
http://www.colinux.org/
It would be better if one could run Windows under Linux, but Sir Billy holds his cards too close to his chest to allow that.
There is always Xen:
http://www.xensource.com/
… but as far as I know it does almost everything EXCEPT Windows.
Edited 2006-01-16 12:12
One of the main reasons people bought IBM compatable PCs rather than the cheaper, better Amigas, STs etc was the fact that they used Windows/DOS at work, and needed to take work home with them.
It’s a bit chicken and egg, but if Linux suks-Seeds, maybe Office/work needs to be in place FIRST.
I agree. My computer at work dual boots Windows XP and Mandrake Linux. Every other computer runs Windows and MS Office. I like Linux, but can’t risk using OpenOffice or even StarOffice documents because conversion to MS Word format is not perfect if you use complex documents: you can’t take risks with important documents if you have to share them.
Even at home it’s annoying having to reboot (more if you have background apps so as P2P programs) to play your favorite games or use some device (otherwise you have to spend hours of your time getting them to work).
I know most problems come from software vendors and hardware manufacturers, but the problems are still there.
And it sounds as if your Office compatability problems come from Microsoft!
Of course. They keep key info hidden, so conversions are very difficult to be done accurately!
Below standard?, that is a below standard troll.
We all don’t live with the idea that Linux will take desktop share, I couldn’t give a fly f*** so if you don’t like Linux don’t use it.
People like what they are stuck with and they cannot get there stubben mind used to anything else. There is loads of better products out there that are much better than the branded ones. Your the mug for paying for a “below standard” OS.
No games ? No 100% windows files compatibility ? Differences on desktop usage ? Shell available for power users ? Oh !!! For these reasons I conclude that MacOS X also is not ready for desktop too !!
Linux suffers only because of “chicken-and-egg” effect. There are no linux “joe” users because there are no commercial software offer and official drivers for many hardware. And ISVs use this argument to don’t make these softwares and drivers.
MacOS X market share is lesser than linux considering the entire world but even with this fact you see more commercial software offer for Mac. Why ? Linux is not a business. Yes, there are some commercial linux distributions but linux is not unique.
Linux will never be desktop ready for that persons which prefer wait for a 100% perfect solution to migrate. I made my decision for linux on desktops some years ago and I say that linux is ready for desktop of people who make this happen.
“There are no linux “joe” users because there are no commercial software offer and official drivers for many hardware. And ISVs use this argument to don’t make these softwares and drivers.”
Strangely enough, this may backfire badly on the hardware companies/ISVs.
Already Linux installs completely successfully on most commonly-encountered hardware. Already there are entirely capable FOSS software equivalents for most commonly-used desktop applications – because the ISVs would not offer a port to Linux the FOSS authors therefore rolled their own.
When the tipping point comes and Joe user hears about Linux (probably via word of mouth) and no longer listens to the FUDsters and shills, then all of these ISVs and hold-out hardware vendors will suddenly find their market utterly decimated.
I hope so. Companies understand just one language: selling more and selling less. The point is when will desktop Linux users be enough to influence companies in such way.
All this talk about the GPL holding back Linux, If coporate companies wanted to build a desktop OS they would have when with a BSD OS with a more liberal license, something like what apple did. The truth is, no one is interested in adopting or building an alternative OS.
I’m not sure why, but I registered solely for the purpose of commenting on this discussion. First, some background:
* I am not a programmer. I don’t have the mentality or the patience for it.
* I have been a computer user (but not necessarily a power user) since 1993.
* I have used nothing but Linux on my home machine since 2003. (Dual-booted between it and Windows for a year prior to that.)
Okay, I first switched to Linux because Windows 98 (the version installed on the laptop I bought for way too much money a few years earlier) kept crashing and requiring a system reboot every time an application went down (MS and non-MS applications alike – and no, I did not routinely muck around with the registry). While I know that Windows may have become more stable since ’98, I could not afford or justify (still can’t) spending the several hundred dollars to upgrade. Nor could I afford or justify buying a new computer simply to have a newer version of Windows when the computer I had suited my needs at the time.So I decided to switch to Linux.
I started with Mandrake 8.0 and have tried several other distributions over time. While many bemoan the plethora of Linux distributions, I find this “weakness” to also be a strength. If one distribution does not meet your needs, you can try another, usually without having to pay hundreds of dollars each time you switch. If your version of Windows doesn’t work the way you want (as mine didn’t at the time of Windows 98), is there a true Windows alternative you can try without paying a lot of money? No. Hence my switch. (I couldn’t afford a Mac at the time and still can’t.)
When I finally could buy a new PC, I bought one with Linux already installed. By that time, I was used to Linux and saw no reason to switch back to Windows. While there are things that may be more difficult to do (or at least different) in Linux, many of them are not things I have to do more than once (if at all), and there are usually plenty of people to help. And, based on my own experience with the MS Knowledge Base at the Microsoft website, I have found the written support for Linux to usually be better explained. (Note that I said based on my own experience; I am not speaking for anyone else.)
I do not own an iPod or use iTunes, so the Linux capabilities (or lack thereof) is a non-starter for me. The argument that Linux users cannot view WMA files is wrong, based on my own experience. There are ways, and there are distributions with WMA codecs actually included (some of them are even legal in the legalistic U.S.). RealPlayer (regardless of your opinion about the product) also has a Linux version.
As for those who don’t care if Linux is ever seen as ready for the desktop by the masses, I think this attitude is not one Linux or Windows or Mac users can afford to have. Everyone who cares about the idea of maintaining choice (even if you choose not to exercise it) should care. Eliminating or reducing choice is only ever good for business (does anyone really believe that Microsoft is interested in doing thing for the greater good of people?); it is never good for consumers.
Again, this is only one user’s opinion. Notice that I managed to convey without insulting anyone else. I hope I might be treated in kind.
First off, one thing to keep in mind is that 5 years ago people would have argued the linux desktop would never happen because linux is complicated to install, configure, X needs manual script editing, hardware is flaky, doesn’t run on laptops, etc. etc. Now some of the best complaints we can come up with are that linux can’t play games or implement needless features in an IM client. No matter how you shake it, that is progress.
Second, the whole GPL thing scaring corporations is bogus and is merely an extension of the FUD that some Gnomers like to use against KDE. Considering it’s a given that linux is dominant in the server room, and is running heavy-iron proprietary apps like Oracle or DB2, not to mention the fact that virtually every network management and security application comes with a linux version, I think the whole GPL argument can be put to bed.
Third, once and for all, can we seperate home users from business users when talking about a desktop OS? They both have completely different requirements and priorities. The fact that you can’t run iTunes or play games is virtually irrelevant to business.
I will go out on a limb and say that linux will never become dominant, or even significant, as a home user desktop OS. Why? The home user desktop OS has plateau’d anyways and the paradigm is shifting. Sure, people will always have desktop PC’s in the near future but despite all the work Apple and Microsoft throw into their polished OSes, they really do nothing different today than five years ago. Sure, people play better games and maybe edit digital media, but for the most part people are web surfing, doing light document editing/bookkeeping and maybe storing and printing digital pictures.
Media networks are going to start playing a bigger part for consumers now, and I’m willing to bet that we’re eventually going to start seeing more of a utility/appliance based model for home applications. People can play games on PC’s but that doesn’t stop them from going out and buying game consoles. People can download or watch DVD’s on their PC’s, but they can just as easily rent movies on demand and watch them on TV. Rich client OS systems are going to stop being the cornerstone of home networks and will simply become a component of them. You’ll probably find linux becoming embedded in devices and appliances, providing specific functions, without users even realizing they’re using linux.
Besides, the ISV’s and vendors do not see a market for home user linux, and without that there’s no point in porting their apps over.
Businesses, on the other hand, are a much more likely candidate. Desktop computing will remain prevalent in businesses, but we’re already seeing applications and services liberated from the desktop and moving to the server. Desktop linux can be easily deployed, managed and locked down in enterprises with the proper tools and the proper planning, configuration and installation are simply not issues for corporate users, that’s something the IT department handles. And no, linux will not replace Windows. But the existence of linux alone questions the MS value proposition over the relevance of the desktop, which is now a commodity. Applications drive businesses, not the desktop OS. Sure, certain applications will always require Windows and will not likely be ported over anytime soon, but there is still much opportunity for linux desktops in light corporate work. Think thin client, simple document editing, web-based applications etc.
The linux desktop is here, you just need to quit thinking in terms of the convenional Microsoft model to see it. People that can’t aren’t yet ready for change. Nothing wrong with that.
I’m sorry, but I am getting so sick of these type of articles. Every time January rolls around for the last 5 years, there are always a string of articles speculating if this is truely the year of the Linux Desktop.
There are several problems with this.
1) If Linux does truely gain a serious desktop presence it will probably happen over the length of several years. This “year of the linux desktop” is a mythical being that does not exist.
2) Even if Linux does gain a serious presence there isn’t really an effective way to measure this. It’s not like the major consumer computer dealers ship OEM installations of Linux that you can use as a source for your numbers.
3) These articles seem to be written by non-linux users for the sake of having something to write about. They make claims that are based on opinion of just plain wrong:
the user interface is still immature compared to Mac OS or Windows.
Bull. Testing to see if they function according to the same presumptions is a poor measure of maturity.
One of the biggest desktop Linux inconveniences is the lack of support for existing proprietary applications from big vendors such as Adobe, Autodesk and Intuit.
What a dumbass. Linux supports these vendors just as well as any other platform. It is the venders who don’t offer support Linux. And they probably have good business based reasons for not doing so.
The same can be said for the lack of drivers for plug-and-play functionality related to Wi-Fi, PDAs and digital cameras.
So incorrect it’s not even funny. Sure there is hardware that doesn’t have support from linux, but digital cameras?? Apparently this writer doesn’t understand what a standard “USB mass storage device” is.
I guess I’m sick of these articles because the writers try to evaluate the value of Linux based on some gross generalizations, poor information, and incorrect assumptions. The truth is that if a user finds that Linux fills his or her needs, or the needs of their company then they will use it. Linux developers will develope what features they or their company needs. They scratch where they itch. End of story.
I use Linux because I like it. Not because it’s the “Year of the Linux Desktop”.
2.) Netcraft. Realistically, most people are online these days. Those who aren’t are a statistical anomoly.
3.) Definitely. This guy has no clue what he’s talking about:
Adobe: Gimp
Intuit: Moneydance, there’s another one but its name always eludes me; it’s a bigger one. GNUCash of course
. Most people I’ve talked to who used Quicken now hate Intuit with every fiber of their being.
Autodesk: Pro-E
He could name better things like iTMS and other music stores. Even desktop search would be harder to argue with!
“guess I’m sick of these articles because the writers try to evaluate the value of Linux based on some gross generalizations, poor information, and incorrect assumptions.”
Absolutely. These days I regret not having become a journalist, more specifically a “tech writer” because apparently you can throw together any nonsensical article and still get it published if not in an actual print magazine than for sure online. It’s the same old stuff every time, and it doesn’t matter what the topic is. Most of these writers don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.
I have attempted to use a number of distros over the past few years. I actually configured RH7 to work, got SUSE 9.2 up and running, installed Xandros 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, & got Ubuntu installed, so you can’t say I haven’t tried. I have been using computers since the old DOS days, and miss them sometimes. But, Linux is not DOS. The commands in DOS were not intuitive, but they could be figured out in a reasonable amount of time. Linux, depending upon the distro, presents a pretty face that loves DSL or other high-speed connections, and loves very mainstream components, although the love affair isn’t always going so well. I can get things configured, then attempt to add new programs….eegad. Yeah, APT-GET, YAST, Xandros Networks, RPM, aaaarrrrgggh. They all promise simplicity and point and click operation, none deliver. They hang up even on the repositories that the distro sets up. I don’t mind paying for a product that doesn’t get in my way. I don’t mind fighting with programs or configuration, if it seems that I am progressing, but I hate getting tagged over and over for things I could not possibly have foreseen. At least with XP I have a system that stays up all the time and doesn’t eat itself. Yes Linux CAN be stable, but not if I am at the keyboard. Maybe I am not very bright, but I really want to be able to do this. I have bought hardware, distros, and applied time, but I feel that I cannot get past the frustration. The file system doesn’t make any logical sense, applications cannot just run, installation maybe easy, but like with XP it takes some effort to make it yours, and I cannot seem to progress beyond newbie.
i think another thing that is throwing people is the expectation that for Linux to succeed on the home Desktop it must take the business Desktop first. I disagree. It may have worked that way fro Windows, but Linux is a different beast altogether and I think what you’ll see is more and more people will start learning on their own how to use Linux. Either from getting that free Ubuntu cd or maybe seeing a copy of Linspire OEM edition and giving that a try after the next system crash, maybe even from the local Linux Guru. I think that (because of the nature of the system and how its built) it started in the homes and garages of everyday people and it will win in the homes and garages of everyday people.
Businesses are just too slow to accept change. Look at how many people still use ScoCaldera in their businesses! How many businesses still have a few Win3.x or NT3.5x boxes around? I expect that we’ll see Mom and Dad using Linux waaaaay before the big corporates do. Meanwhile I’ll be enjoying myself listening to my LTunes and enjoying my LPhotos along with my TVTime as I surf the web with my ad-free Firefox Browser. ^o^
They can troll and astroturf (quite badly too, I might add) all they want; I know Linux works and anyone who actually tries a Current, Modern, HOME desktop version of Linux knows it too.
—bornagainpenguin
Ha,ha, ha, Linux needs the help of other programs only to a get a program like itunes and wmp to installed, how much time does the user has to waste doing that. i bet a long time. to do everything in linux takes alot of time. is like taking the long road just to end up at the same place. itunes,wmp macromedia
install in windows just with a few clicks. and who wants to use open source knock-offs of the popular programs. it’s like walking around in knock-offs clothing. not so long ago redhat even said use windows for the desktop because linux sucks at it, google it
Yeah, exactly. I mean, as we all know, Windows runs Linux binaries so easily.
As to who wants to use open source? Me. Definitely. I like to know what my programs are doing. I like to be able to fix my programs if the need arises, or at the very least hire someone who’s capable. I certainly don’t like my computer spying on me. And it’s definitely a bonus that I can rely on my programs to remain open for the rest of my lifetime.
Yep. Now that I think about it, you’re right. Who in their right mind would want to use some open source knock offs.
Edited 2006-01-17 05:51
i’m so damn smart I should start teaching at college. Linux will always come short on the desktop:
1.if a user wants to use napster,movielink,or sony’s connect to purchase mps they will not be able to with linux. because currently the desktop market is controlled by
controlled by MS.and those programs only run in windows, i’m aware of crossover ,but crossover is not free and it disables many features, not good
2 major pc makes like dell, HP,etc sale
desktop PC only with windows installed and they even recommend using windows. for the desktop even RedHat said the same thing not so long ago.
3. windows run all the lastest, hotest software that the whole world loves that is why windows is on 90% of the systems: tiltles likeMicrosoft Streets & Trips 2006 with GPS Locator; that lets a laptop to act like a GPS navigator Linux ,ha, can’t ,PrintMaster Platinum 16 I can keep going on mentioning more.
4. I ‘m aware linux has programs that lets users surf the net send email, and watch dvds,etc. but many of those programs lack featues like ogle the picture cannot be br zoom in
Linux will be ready for the desktop when the giants like dell,hp,gateway, etc. says it ‘s ready , probably never as long MS is around. ,
linux needs to meet the demands of all type of users like windows.
1. if a user wants to use napster,movielink,or sony’s connect
Napster:
http://www.team-mp3.com/mp3/napster_linux.htm
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/454.cfm
Movielink: DRM rubbish. US only, so who gives a toss?
Sony connect: DRM rubbish.
“those programs only run in windows”
Not correct for Napster, and not relevant for non-US citizens for movielink, and none of those three programs are in any way relevant to people who avoid DRM.
2. major pc makes like dell, HP,etc sale desktop PC only with windows installed
So? Again, this is a US only problem. I just buy my PCs without any OS. All I have to do is ask for one like that. Cheaper, too.
3. Linux ,ha, can’t
That is your misconception. Linux can – it is the authors of the programs who won’t provide it for Linux.
4. “programs lack featues like ogle the picture cannot be br zoom”
So use xine, VLC, mplayer, totem or kaffeine all of which can zoom. Sheesh!
“linux needs to meet the demands of all type of users like windows”
Hardly, and for three reasons:
1. No OS can meet all needs when many of those needs are contradictory (eg: there is a fundamental conflict between security and interactivity over the internet – you can have one or the other but never really both at the same time).
2. Windows is far too unstable, insecure, restricted (one does not “buy” Windows, one can only license it, and users are not the customer for Windows – OEMs are), and subject to obsolesence to meet the demands of many users.
3. “Linux” doesn’t need to do anything. People looking for a better way, a cheaper way and a more secure way will find Linux for themselves. People like happycamper who think that Windows is better – are hopeless cases anyway.
I don’t expect you to understand any of this.
Perhaps I can summarise by saying: there is STILL not one thing you have come up with for which there is not a better option on Linux (for the desktop users) compared with the way it is done on Windows.
Edited 2006-01-17 10:34
“major pc makes like dell, HP,etc sale desktop PC only with windows installed”
Are you sure about that?
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/hardware/soa/Dell_offers_open_source_P…
What I would do to buy a PC without Windows is order one on-line.
I would go to a site such as this one:
http://www.itwarehouse.com.au/warehouse/pcconfigurator_amdsa.htm
… and I would leave the second to last selection as it stands by default.
“No Operating Systems – Price $0.”
Easy.
Or maybe I would go here:
http://www.ipspty.com.au/build/s-2.htm
or here:
http://www.ieci.com.au/build/build.asp?Product_ID=978
Or, I could just go to the local (say IT warehouse) store and ask the salesman – “Can I please have a PC System with no Operating System installed? Thanks mate.”
It is not that hard to do at all.
Edited 2006-01-17 11:18
“major pc makes like dell, HP,etc sale desktop PC only with windows installed”
Try here:
http://www.nanosys1.com/sys-g7105.html
I’m sure there are lots of similar places, even in the repressed US.
windows is on 90% the systems of the world. that sentece alone should give anybody a clue how linux is doing on any market. linux is losing the battle why, easy, windows are on more desktops. simple as that
“windows is on 90% the systems of the world.”
Sad, isn’t it?
We are only 10% away from being a Windows only world – and if and when it becomes 100% Windows we will all be royally screwed.
Thank goodness there are that 10% of computer users who do have some idea of what they are doing.
(PS: the % of systems that run Linux is increasing, BTW, not decreasing).
Edited 2006-01-17 12:14
or sony’s connect to purchase mps they will not be able to with linux. because currently the desktop market is controlled by
controlled by MS.and those programs only run in windows,
–OSNews.com’s very own happycamper
/me giggles insanely.
/me falls over laughing
/me rolls on floor
/me dies laughing.
….
…
..w-w-w-ant…want…to…buy…SONY…
….BWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! ^o^
–bornagainpenguin
Edited 2006-01-17 13:32