To me, it’s a miracle how every tiny article on OSNews.com, or any other tech-site, ends up in people shouting all sorts of nonsense at each other like “Linux is gonna bring back Elvis”, “Windows shot president Kennedy”, “Linux kept the cold war cold” or “Bill Gates wants to buy the moon and charge people for looking at it”. Do these people really know what they are saying, or are they just going with the Open-Source flow? Update: Rebuttal article here.Editorial Notice: All opinions are those of the author and not necessarily those of osnews.com
General Note: Please forgive any grammar mistakes as the author is not a native english speaker.
Intro
I tend to think the latter. Not because I am not a Linux fan (I happily set up my Computer with Mandrake about two years ago, they are still merrily in love), but because I have not heard anything new in the past two years. It is always “my god, not another security hole in Windows 95/98/98SE/ME/2000/XP/Server 2003”, “Microsoft aggressively bought company X”, “Microsoft launches another way to protect their software” and “Microsoft software is too exspensive”. And Linux, on the other hand, is all bliss.
Well, I think Linux is not all “bliss”. Linux would be all “bliss” if we forget the slow boot-up/shutdown times, if we forget the lousy hardware support for, let’s say, Ati products (Ati being the number two in graphics cards!), if we forget the “geek” image of Linux, if we forget the fact that some distributions suddenly have to be paid for, if we forget that some distributions suddenly get discontinued, if we forget the crappy way software is installed (with the exception of apt-get, or so I’ve heard).
You can go the same way when it comes to Windows. Windows would be all hell if we forget the ease with which it is installed, if we forget the great hardware support, if we forget the uniform look of all the programs, if we forget InstallShield and look-a-likes, if we forget the clear structure (Program Files, My Documents etc, and of course this only goes for the not-so-technical end-user), if we forget Windows Update (still beats the Distribution-specific update tools, in my opinion).
If you confront Linux addicts with the disadvantages I just named, you always get the same reaction: “When Linux becomes (more) mainstream, those problems will disappear.” Well, I think you should turn that around: Linux will become (more) mainstream, when those problems are solved, or at least addressed. Your OS can be great when it comes to its inner workings, but it are the looks of the OS that really matter to the masses. Would Marylin Monroe have become as famous if she was not so darn pretty? I do not think so. I mean, consumers do not want to wait forever for their PC to boot (you can read a Donna Tart in the meantime… twice), they do not want twelve different applications for one task, they do not want to choose between six different Window Managers, even though all of them are quite good. I mean, do you line up six tv’s in your living room just because they look a bit different from each other? Again, I do not think so (imagine the remote-control interference…).
What Should We Do?
So, what should happen to Linux in order to gain more marketshare at the cost of Windows? Well, a lot has been said when it comes to this particular issue.
I think the major Distributions should all “join hands” to create one version of Linux, with one desktop, a uniform look, with one update system and so on. They can still develop their own Distributions (for the fans, I do not think my Computer and Mandrake will ever divorce). By creating a standard, you will make it more accessible for the masses. Just look at the dvd recording standards now: the number of standards are really stopping people from buying a dvd recorder. They are heavily influenced by articles stating the risk of buying one: “Your standard may be unsupported in a few years”.
It will be no problem if Linux XP (couldn’t resist the temptation ๐ , sorry) will cost something, they can spend the earned money on research. The newly developed applications can first be put in the Distributions, and, when the community is satisfied, they can be integrated into the next Linux version, Linux Longhorn (okay, this is getting silly). This way you get the best of both worlds: the knowledge, experience and diversity of the Open-Source world, combined with the easiness and clarity of standardized software. A very good example is, in my eyes, LindowsOS 4.0. I have used it for a couple of weeks now and I must say I am impressed. Despite critizism from the Open-Source commmunity (“It’s too Windows”, “It’s not free” and “They don’t supply source-code (which is a plain lie, by the way)”), I believe LindowsOS is kind of what that new standardized Linux should look like.
Of course that kind of takes away the essence of the Open-Source concept. Open-Source is all about letting everybody not only use the software, bu also letting everybody improve the software. This has led to a diversity in the available software. This is a good thing, if you are an expert willing to put time and effort into your OS, but if you are not, than Linux just isn’t for you, at this moment.
But, as always, this is just my opinion. So please, do not send any suicide penguins my way…
About the author:
You could say I’m an expert user, but I think that is a bit overrated. When I think of an expert, I think of someone with programming skills. And I’m already happy if I can succesfully edit my Lilo.conf or my XF86Config-4 file! I’m a bit more experienced in Windows, since I have been using MS-DOS/Windows since 1991 (that’s right, I was seven at the time!). In 2001 I bought my own computer and from that time the fun really started. I installed Mandrake, played around with BeOS, SkyOS, FreeBSD and so on. But Windows and Linux will always be my favourites.
The bootup is not slow and if it is your probably running services you don’t need.
Very well said. Too bad this editorial will be shot full of flames, no doubt. Or the Mac Lackys will immediately say something like, “Well that’s why I use a Mac…”
The bootup is not slow and if it is your probably running services you don’t need.
Okay…what’s your bootup time and what distro of Linux are you using?
Not that I believe this to be a big issue, since Linux is meant to be run for long stretches at a time.
>Okay…what’s your bootup time and what distro of Linux are you using?
I am using all sort of Linux distros. Boot time is between 45 seconds to 2 minutes. Depends what’s gets loaded. In a very clean distro, like Gentoo, I get boot times of only 20 seconds.
Then again, WindowsXP also loads in about 20 seconds, and BeOS in 8. ๐
Then again, WindowsXP also loads in about 20 seconds, and BeOS in 8. ๐
You forgot DOS in…ummm 1 :p
“The bootup is not slow and if it is your probably running services you don’t need.”
You’re right, but don’t forget I’m talking about “the masses” here. They nor have the skills to edit, nor the knowledge which services can be shut down.
Windows is not without its bad points.
For one, you bring up windows updating, windows update is a lot simpler to use than most Linux distro update programs, but the updates themselfs are known to break things, and having to click through an EULA every so often for an update sucks.
Linux will not unify its desktop as you suggested, one of the wonderful things about Linux is the choice, and a standard distro by Suse/SCO/others was created – United Linux.
Sorry if this comes off as a troll, I use both OS’s every day so i’m not saying one sucks and the others gonna save the world or anything.
PS. My slackware-9 setup boots to a gdm prompt in a comparable time it takes windows to get to its login prompt.
I guess bootup times depend on the distro you use. On my laptop, Slackware 9 is as fast as win2000 to boot.
You’re right, but don’t forget I’m talking about “the masses” here. They nor have the skills to edit, nor the knowledge which services can be shut down.
You are right, what about the masses that dont know how to turn off the messenger service on Windows 2K/XP and messages popup on their screens about they just won a million dollars?
Most distro’s have a gui which will allow them to select which services run on boot, and they generally have a good description of what the service is. (And others are plain obvious, a desktop box doesn’t generally need pcmcia drivers loading)
> WindowsXP also loads in about 20 seconds
Not 100% true. Yes… when you boot WinXP, you see the mouse curos very soon, but usually WinXP still loads some stuff. Of course, it depend on what apps load at start up. Until Windows is really useable, it takes another 20 seconds.
Not really. It really boots fast and is usable at the same time here.
The obligatory Mac/Apple flamebait topic to get people warmed up…
For yet another tepid and limp Linux/Windows “review”/”editorial” from someone with insignificant industry experience.
I guess it’s getting close to the end of the month and rent is due.
This article is not near perfection. It’s a bunch of flames deserved from both sides.
But the interesting point is that geeks gets concerned with the least interesting point which is boot time. Why not fight back the Windows Update comparison? Why not comment on GUI unification? C’mon, and when I read the first post I knew at some point someone would shout the default “but linux is supposed to have 10 years of uptime so slow boot time is no big deal”. Then, again, people lost their focus on the subject of the article: desktop linux. When you have to turn on the box to check an e-mail quickly, it’s a real pain to wait amanda or the ethernet to warm up.
Having too many incomplete choices is also the same as having none.
Today, we have this good choices: LindowsOS 4 rocks as a desktop enabled OS that is still thousands of miles away from the Windows XP ease of use. And maybe RedHat/SuSe + Ximian Desktop 2 is a good workstation OS. So, forget Gentoo, forget Slackware, forget Mandrake and let’s focus on those distros. There’s nothing good on having dozens of dozens of uninteresting distros that people assembled just to show up to friends “look, I wrapped up cool new distro”. duh.
Boot up time is very much a non-issue. In slackware w/ edited init script I could boot from lilo to X in under 15 seconds on a 233 MX Gateway laptop. Gentoo is almost this fast of a booter too.
This guy cites too many diffrent Linux distrobutions as a problem, but it seems to me his lack of trying different Linux distrobutions is the problem. There is no golden distrobution where you get an extremely fast desktop, good server, great hardware support, easy to use, install any program without thinking about, do everything without playing give and take distro. But if you understand what you need you can pick a distro that is very well suited to you. Which I think is very much diffrent from Windows and what you suggest which is pretty much one size fits all. I believe trying to make one distrobution fit everyone is a terrible way to try to create a good operating system, and it’s one of the reasons why I can’t stand to use Windows anymore.
As a side note could someone register “Linux XP” and “Linux Longhorn” as a trademark and not allow anyone to use them…ever?
that is so true, Linux will never become widely used until there is some co-operation between the various companies. The Open Source Desktop is so fractured that creating an application that will run on all distributions is a nightmare, installation isnt standardized and for every application seems to be different. The truth is until Linux comes together with a standard desktop environment, installation format and better hardware support for mainstream hardware it’s never going to take off.
“This guy cites too many diffrent Linux distrobutions as a problem, but it seems to me his lack of trying different Linux distrobutions is the problem.”
Mandrake 8.1-9.2 beta/Suse 8.2/Redhat 8.0 (downloading 9 right now)/LindowsOS 3.0-4.0/Lycoris DesktopLX build 75/Debian 3.0rc1 and some smaller ones.
I’ve tried some okay.
Compared to Windows 2000/XP it is veeeeerrrrrrrryyyyyy slllllooooooooowwwwww!
Also, XWindows is slower than frozen catsup.
How do you measure boot time. I think my PC takes a 10 – 15 seconds just to go through the POST.
I get boot times of only 20 seconds
That’s about the same amount of time it takes OpenOffice to start up.
I use linux because freedom is important to me. Even if Windows was better I would still prefer linux. I don’t want to be dependent of only one company and open sourcecode is a big
difference.
This is also the reason why I don’t use Mac OS X, Be OS, OS/2 or anything proprietary operating system.
I see articles like this and I think that many americans still not understand the “free” in “free software” concept…
I don’t care if MacOS X is more “sexy” or Windows GUI is more friendly. M$ is a predatory monopoly and I will not feed it. Even when I buy my hardware I don’t pay M$ taxes. I choose my chinese notebook because it came without operating system.
“I see articles like this and I think that many americans still not understand the “free” in “free software” concept…”
Hey man, I’m not American, I’m Dutch!
And I’m not dissing Linux/Open-Source… I said it just ain’t the right thing (at this moment) for the “masses”(like that word somehow
“Well, I think Linux is not all “bliss”. Linux would be all “bliss” if we forget the slow boot-up/shutdown times, if we forget the lousy hardware support for, let’s say, Ati products”
The “lousy” hardware support is in most cases directly the fault of the vendor. Especially in ATi and NVidia’s case. Both ATi and NVidia produce their own Linux drivers now. ATi’s Linux drivers are currently very subpar in my personal experience. ATi and NVidia also refuse to provide any real detailed hardware information regarding their newest series of products which makes it very hard to not have “lousy” support. You want to complain about lousy support? Go talk to the freaking LOUSY VENDORS.
Disgruntled ATi Owner
Thom sez:
I think the major Distributions should all “join hands” to create one version of Linux, with one desktop, a uniform look, with one update system and so on.
OK, how are you (or anyone else) gonna _make_ them do that? Like Linus says, trying to make Linux developers do anything is like herding cats.
I really don’t know what everyone is talking about regarding ATI drivers. I think ATI support is better than nVidia. I think most people fail to realize that there is an ATI DRM module built into both XFree and the kenrel.
What’s that you say? You have an All-In-Wonder?
GATOS
Check it out. In my opiniont gatos provides better tv support than ATI’s own drivers. (In windows XP with the latest drivers and MMC, there are a few channels I can’t get, but in linux w/ gatos drivers and xawtv, every channel comes in crystal clear.)
Try some opensource drivers.
Wow, my spelling was horrible. Please try to excuse those mistakes and figure out what I meant.
im not very linux savvy, as in i need a graphic environment and am pretty much unable to do serious stuff from a command-line. i tried 3 linux distros on my pc for the past 6 months, and i just dont get how linux can possibly be ready for ‘normal’ users (after all those articles saying linux is ready for the mainstream desktop). i, personally, came to hate kde and gnome: slow, vaguely unresponsive, weird crashes left and right. yes, u understand this is not rolled out by a 50k employee company like microsoft, and its fine that way, but considering my level, this means i dont have much other choice than sticking to windows, like it or not..
I’m really tempted to time my boot time (that requires a reboot, not happening soon, i can assure), i’m fairly certain it’ll beat my father’s XP Dell box. I have plenty of services running, and he’s treated his box like most normal users would, so in my mind it would be very fair. But of course the hardware makes a big difference. My scsi disks eat his [ultra cheap] ide disks for lunch speedwise.
I really dont mind linux boot times, what i dont like though, is the time it takes to get into GNOME and KDE. My GOD! It takes less than a second from the time i press ‘enter’ at XDM till i have my ion window manager loaded. But when I use my friends’ boxes and hvae to load one of the DEs, I _hate_ having to wait for them to load, over 15seconds is unacceptable, especially if it’s a 1ghz+ box with 512mb RAM.
Honestly, who really wants Linux for the masses? I mean why is it an OS has to be usable by people who don’t want to think a minute about how computing actually works.
Linux is great at what it does and keeps improving rapidly. But the idea of a dumbed down Linux is just crazy. I am sick of all this Linux needs to do this… nonsense. If you don’t like it don’t use it.
I am a Mac OS X and windows developer. I have installed Red Hat and FreeBSD for testing, but do not target them because of the small market. I hate windows. Apple proved that Unix can be made usable by the average user. I guess that is what Lindows is supposed to be, but it tries too hard to be like the Windows I hate. But it will be a Lindows type distribution that brings more of the Masses to Linux. As a programmer I prefer my Linux Machine over my windows one. But if I was to recommend an OS to a friend, it would be OS X or Windows not Linux. Linux/FreeBSD is just to complicated for the average user.
Most of my friends are techincally advanced, yet nearly all abandoned Linux very soon after installing it. Not because it was malfunctioning, just that it was not worth their effort. I do not know of anyone who uses it as a primary desktop system.
I disagree with the author about windows not being hell however. I view it as nearly as bad as Linux for management (but not for installing programs and running them) most useres end up replacing their Windows system every couple of years because the prices have gotten low enough that when the instabiltity gets critical thay just dispose of them and “upgrade.” Linux may confuse them, but when the computer is under $500, why not replace it when you have problems. If Mac and Linux users took that approach, they would each have 20% Market share.
Maybe Linux users tend to exaggerate its virtues, but I think a lot of us feel that we’re part of a movement that actually stands for something good. This undoubtly can lead to zealous behaviour.
I mean, how cool is it to brag about the greatness of Microsoft?
The article was very good and basicly dead on.
For boot times he’s right, I have never had any distro boot on any of my computers in less thena few minutes, nor have a seen it on any others. Using all sorts of hacks to get it booting fast doesn’t count, its the out of the box setup that does. And for differances in times between distros, one more reason for their to be one distro.
“I see articles like this and I think that many americans still not understand the “free” in “free software” concept… ”
What you miss is people know what you are talking about. But majority of people realize it simple doesn’t matter. And a few people who get bent out of shape about software being “free” doesn’t matter to the rest. Also if it is simple the miss understanding of the word free thats the FSF and GNU’s problem. It’s not the worlds fault those groups highjacked a word that is used for one thing and try to twist its meaning into something it doesn’t do well. Stick with open source for open source and free for as in no cost. Don’t use free to mean opensource.
I agree with the first statement, disagree with the second. Linux isn’t perfect, but it’s what it represents to me– free as in freedom– that is as important as what it can do. Windows is increasingly becoming tied to its maker, who wants to attach its bloodsuckers to our necks and pump us dry.
“Linux is gonna bring back Elvis”, “Windows shot president Kennedy”
Yes, both of these things warp the time-space continuum, and so they are incorrect. But nothing will persuade me that Bill Gates isn’t the devil of Hell, and that Microsoft isn’t the whore of Babylon.
Bugger. Are these editorials freely coming in from some forum somewhere or by e-mail? Cause I seriously want to make one too
What’s the point of all of this?
To create a computer terminal so easy the most retarded human being could easily use it without breaking it and, God forbid, without thinking?
We seem to be coding for the lowest common denominator instead of asking people to pick up a book and learn a little about computers, like how to use a mouse and type on a keyboard.
The keyboard just eludes some people. Is that because they can’t count to 104?
Personally I think we should make fun of anyone who can’t use Windows and help anyone who wants to learn *nix by pointing them to where the manual is. We didn’t have anyone there to hold our hands. Why does everyone else deserve this type of education? Because all of a sudden computers are relevant? Education is expensive! And this ain’t communism, folks.
Goes a bit further than what is said in my post “Linux for the masses” but I totally agree with you.
Micro$oft may have 50K programmers, but Linux has millions.
In any case, each computer sould be set up to do what it is indended to do, and in the best way. Many people still use NT4 because it works and is reliable. It does what they want it to do. When I have a new job for a computer to do, I consider whether an existing computer can handle it. If not, I look at Linux on yet another computer. Other people have gone ahead of me, and most problems are well solved many ways. Linux lets me choose what is best for my situation.
If there is only one choice, you have to make your situation fit the choice.
First thing, I’ve yet to see a post from Marcelo that doesn’t bash the US in some way
Secondly, Linux is fine if you have the time to spend with it. In fact most OS are fine if you have the time to spend with them. From what I can tell, most people that are new to linux think it blows because they have no idea how anything works. Further more when they try to learn they get overwhelmed because to do the one small think they want, they have to learn about 6 other big things first. The same thing happens in windows too, linux people are used to the whole configure once, run constantly. They aren’t used to having to constantly check for viruses, clean out outlook express spam, get rid of spyware – so it annoys the hell out of them. Then there is Apple… being an Apple user I can tell you, everyone hates us. If its not because of Steve, then its either, our hardware, our OS, a one button mouse, or the people in the Apple store wear khakis. Again its the same thing people don’t want to spend the time or the money to get used to something new. They want drop in replacements, that are “improvements”.
“I mean, how cool is it to brag about the greatness of Microsoft? ”
About as cool as bragging about the virtues of Linux: not at all cool. Aren’t you paying attention?
And what movement? Anybody who thinks Linux is a movement, is an idiot. A community, yes, a movement, no.
Does anybody really believe that something so mundane as an operating system is as important as Martin Luther King, Jr., or Poland’s Solidarity?
Shake the rocks out of your head.
They aren’t used to having to constantly check for viruses
Eh, most virus scanners will run in the back and scan/update by themselves if you wish. Don’t like the overhead of a virus scanner running in the background, then what’s the alternative? Linux running VMWare of Win4Lin? Ha!!
clean out outlook express spam
I wasn’t aware the spam was exclusive to Outlook Express? When the hell did this happen?
get rid of spyware
If you don’t want spyware on your machine, then don’t install any. How hard is that?
I use Linux, WindowsXP and MacOSX (used BeOS too). I don’t understand what’s so important about boot time, it’s true, at least for my pc (P4 2.8. SATA RAID0) that WinXP boots much faster than Linux (and MacOSX on my 600MHz iBook) but Linux boots fast enough 30s (after grub was loaded) to not be annoying, win takes about 5s after loading grub. As for hardware support, both WinXP (Home) and SuSE Linux 8.2. (Pro) required me to insert a floppy with the drivers for my SATA RAID controller at the start of the installation. Drivers for WinXP came with the controller, the Linux drivers had to be downloaded from the vendors (Promise) site. The same was the case with drivers for my ATI Radeon 9800Pro.
I currently use Libranet 2.8 / Sid (Debian Unstable). I agree with some of the problems you mention with Linux, but I strongly disagree with your solutions.
“lousy hardware support”
This is mainly a product of low market share. As more people use Linux, hardware support will improve. Linux distros could certainly improve things by using “standard” kernels or at least making sure their custom kernels don’t affect drivers. This will also get easier as the underlying pieces of Linux mature and change less. The Linux Standard Base should also help out here … eventually.
“distributions suddenly have to be paid for”
“some distributions suddenly get discontinued”
These are realities of using any software that is not dominant (read monopoly). I doubt SUSE or RedHat are going anywhere so you are probably safe with them. Also, Debian (or Debian based distros) is another “safe” choice here.
“the crappy way software is installed”
This is one of the worst Linux problems, IMHO. Though Debian’s system (apt) is really good for doing Windows Update type stuff, it is heavily dependent on the public repositories. This will never work for commercial proprietary software (such as games). Linux NEEDS a way of easily installing applications across distributions (both from CDs and over the net). Projects like autopackage may (or may not) be the answer to this.
“twelve different applications for one task”
This is a problem, but I think the distros are starting to address it. Some distros (RedHat starting with v8.0, Ximian XD2) have started choosing “best of breed” applications for individual tasks.
I think the idea of creating one standard desktop Linux distro is HORRIBLE. Currently both Gnome and KDE are improving BECAUSE of the competition, not in spite of it. Certain parts of distributions do need to be standardized for the purpose of making application installation easier (see LSB). Also, the major desktops are learning to play nicely together ala freedesktop.org. We aren’t there yet, but things are improving.
So, in summary… Is Linux ready for the Desktop (of the average PC user)? NO. Is Windows better than Linux on the desktop now (again average PC user)? YES Given this, the kneejerk reaction is to standardize Linux. However, if taken too far (one desktop) we are pretty much throwing out Linux’s advantages so that it can compete with Windows.
Finally, some constructive replies.
But anyway, standardizing Linux doesn’t mean “throwing away it’s advantages”. As I stated, the normal Distributions should still remain available.
Secondly, for hardware support, it’s kind of the same as I stated in the article: My opnion is that it’s not: more Linux users ===> more drivers, I think it is: more drivers ===> more Linux users. Simply put, that is.
If you care about good driver and application support, easy installation, and want a computer that never crashs or needs to be rebooted, use OS X. OS X is easier to use than Windows or Linux (and easier to fix) and doesn’t get screwed up. And you can do way more on OS X. Also Mac has a friendly community which don’t make fun of you when you need help – unlike the Linux community.
Linux is far from perfect. It just happens to get the job done for some people. Strange, it works best for people who read the manual(s) and think about what they are doing and what they want from their computer.
Windows has many strengths. It gets the job done for some people too. Strange, it works best for the same category of people. A monkey couldn’t accomplish more in Windows than in Linux. And if it would, would we care?
It is often said that Linux is the alternative. Maybe I’m just crazy, but I think people say that meaning ‘an alternative OS’, not ‘an alternative Windows’. Or do they mean the latter? Because if they do, they would be much better off buying Windows. OSes are not easy to clone.
That article was a load of crap, and I’m not just trying to be incidiary.
“Open-source flow?” Look, guy, a lot of us didn’t like Windows before Linux existed. We continued to not like it while Linux matured. And we still don’t like it. We’re not treating Poor Old bill unfairly, or acting like sheep. Windows-hater isn’t synonymous with Linux-Lover, nor is the reverse true.
“Linux XP?” Uh, yeah.
“Micro$oft may have 50K programmers, but Linux has millions. ”
And where do you take your numbers please ? Look at the kernel/OS contributors list. The *real* programmers who *really* give something to the Linux core. One or two hundreds. At most.
It’s not because an open-source software is used by millions, that actually that same number really give any advancement to the source. Dream on !
Quote from hmmm:
>What’s the point of all of this?
>To create a computer terminal so easy the most retarded human being >could easily use it without breaking it and, God forbid, without thinking?
>We seem to be coding for the lowest common denominator instead of >asking people to pick up a book and learn a little about computers, like how to use a mouse and type on a keyboard.
>The keyboard just eludes some people. Is that because they can’t >count to 104?
What’s wrong with having computers the average Joe can just walk up to and use or be taught to use with a relatively short training period?
I don’t disagree with people needing to learn how to use computers, but much of the problem with computers these days (not gonna pick on any single OS here) is that you have to spend more time getting them to work optimally (chasing driver conflicts, fighting viruses, etc.) than you do actually using them. I’m pretty good under the hood of a computer, but for my car, I gas it, change the oil, and take it in for regular tune-ups by a QUALIFIED SERVICE TECH. I don’t need to be a mechanic to successfully use my car to accomplish daily tasks. Why should you have to be as good with computers as I’m sure most of us on this list are just to use the damn things?
‘Course, if we fix that issue, then we might have to fund grief counseling for all the arrogant boobs who hang their self-esteem on in-depth knowledge of an computer OS (note that I’m not picking on any particular OS here)…
Someone please listen to this man. This is the “mainstream desktop” target and he is lodging a very legitimate complaint!
I’m definitely going to write a part two of some sort. I guess it seems not everybody quite got the essence here.
You seem to have aknowledged that if services were shutoff
then it would boot much faster, but say that joe sixpack
doesn’t know how to turn them off. Well in that case I guess joe six pack doesn’t know how to turn off, norton very bloated suite of tools, MSN, quicktime,media player, adobe, office and the 20 other programs he/she downloaded. because it requires thumbing though either the programs properties/msconfig/startup menu/registry, ect. in which case windows takes minutes b4 being useable. Be fair here please.
Which brings me to the next issue, you say windows is easy to find in the file system well personally I don’t think throwing everything in one folder is ‘well orginized’ I call it one folder as in ‘windows’ dir but inside that is a mess (system, system32, NT, etc)DLL’s and dependancys are scattered in windows dir or program folders,registry an advanced user would not have problems with this but an advanced user would also not have problems with reading how unix file system works. If you took 20-40 minutes http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.2/index.html#TOC
you’d see that it all makes sence and would immediatly know where to look for things.
And the last think I can remember you saying was package management, redhats new beta has yum installed in it. If you think its harder to type ‘yum install <program>’ then to open a browser,
search for your program,
download it,
click though its install sheild anwsering questions
then spend time doing it all over again when you want an update or ‘need’ an update. Then I say your standards are set a bit too high.
BTW don’t say okay ‘now’ they have yum but before they didn’t. well up2date had the ability to fetch new packages from the internet but you’re only limited to a few thousand apps (the ones that came on RH CD’s)Now the
app support should be much larger I expect.
Linux is by no means perfect, windows is better at alot of things like hardware support which you mentioned. This
is why I do not like these articals the authors are usually great on only one of the systems and get tons of things wrong. like “yeah but windows blue screens” (thats like a once a month thing if that on XP) or “X on linux is slow” (Try booting up fvwm it’ll load in 2 seconds.)
that pirating software isn’t for everyone.
It is illegal. Even if the “Law Enforcement” can’t go to your house and see what is on your computer.
Windows is all about software pirating.
When will people stop posting crap articles to make it sound like they actually have something to say. Use whatever OS you like, no matter what someone else says you will always go back to what you like best. I use Linux in the office for dev, Win XP and OS X home for dev. They all have their strengths and weaknesses but they all server a real purpose. So if you have something to bitch about, try and fix it if you otherwise just stay quiet and put up with it.
Personally I think we should make fun of anyone who can’t use Windows and help anyone who wants to learn *nix by pointing them to where the manual is.
So that’s the kind of thing you say to your Grandmother? You’re too retarded to use Windows? Get a life? I don’t really know if you get it or not, but technically savvy people are not the majority. In fact, you owe most of your happiness and well being to people with little to no computer experience that work at places that do not require them to use their computer in a complicated manner. So, the next time you try to get some sort of service rendered, make it clear to those who are helping you that you think that they’re retarded and that although they are willing to offer you services, such as making dealing with your car easier, or putting food on the shelf so that you don’t have to hunt it, that you feel that they should read the book and screw themselves when it comes to computers.
It’s amazing how many people think that we should all be free to see source code and yadda yadda but how few actually think that everyone should be free to enjoy the benefits of that.
> On my laptop, Slackware 9 is as fast as win2000 to boot.
You mean “as slow as win2000”, right?
Sorry, could not resist. ๐
Koki
Do people understand that an Operating System is just a tool. There are a bunch of different operating systems from AIX to Solaris to Windows XP to 2003 Server to FreeBSD to Shades of Linux to QNX.
Each OS has its strengths and weaknesses. A good IT person will choose the right OS for the job. No one OS can do every single job but they are all strong for certain things.
Do you want to program? Create a router? Play 3D games? Host a game server? Web server? File/print server? VPN? Firewall? Groupware? Run Databases? 100% uptime? Real Time OS? Embedded?
A good IT person or programmer will choose the right platform for the job. The backend database is DB2 running on AIX therefore we could easily use Linux and apache to make a web based front. Or the DB could be MS SQL and it would be easier to use IIS 6 with ASP.NET
Do we want to just setup a straight firewall? OpenBSD is about as secure as you are going to get right out of the box.
The point is, choose the right OS for the job given the rest of the circumstances. In your dream word you would be able to redesign the entire network using straight Cisco running only Linux. But get real. Often you are put into situations where you must choose the right OS to perform the most cost effective solution that yields the best results.
A good CompSci person will be able to understand most of the OSes and choose the right tool for the right job.
Tha’s the Linux advantage, you can customise it at maximun, Windows by the oter hand you need to buy more software to tune it up like Norton sysutils. Pointless to spend more money in a OS to make it faster when you already payed for it.
Forgive my rash and radical stance, but the masses can go to hell. In fact, the only reason I’m in support of Linux’ growing acclaim is for increased hardware support. Politics, economics and zealotry banter can go a blazes, for all I care. In fact, I’d hate for the masses to use Linux, I’d prefer large corporate entities deploying it in their work environment instead.
Blah, blah, blah, the masses don’t want to use the command line, the masses don’t want this, the masses don’t want that. What’s so hard in typing
install package
or
update system
at the command line? No, the masses would rather prefer…
And when did Linux become a slave to the masses? If the masses can’t spend the time, the effort and the sacrifices to ponder upon a new and different digital culture, then the masses don’t deserve to be blessed with Linux’ benefits.
And who are the masses? A bunch of opportunist looking for shortcuts in life? Give me a break. Heck if Linux was such a chore, then the masses can stick with Windows or MacOS. I don’t care! And then I hear Linux is not ready for the masses. Have you stopped to ponder and realize it’s the other way round.
I am pleased with Linux’ technical developments and I hope Linux/GNU and free software users continue to make their projects even better. Please do not be bothered by the so called masses. Superior coding, extensive testing, creative solutions, and implementing intuitive free software programs should be our fundamental priority. We should do this so that the general public acknowledge our superior works, not to please the masses or any one group of people. Stop whining and start acting.
Regards,
Mystilleef
“And then I hear Linux is not ready for the masses. Have you stopped to ponder and realize it’s the other way round.”
Let’s imagine a fictive person. This guy is really a pain in the ass. He is anti-social, pessimistic, but, he does want the people around him to like him. He simply doesn’t understand what should change.
What would you advice this guy? “Stay the way you are, everybody else should change!” Isn’t it more realistic that HE should change, and not the 5.999.999.999 other humans in the world?
Think about it.
I agree.
Too many ppl are trying to get everyone to run linux but
if that happened it would probably ruin it for those of us who like control.
Personally I think the future is linux/free OS’s and I kinda like being one of the few with that skillset. I don’t want an MCSE paycheck, I like my RHCE one.
———–
Side note, anyone who says linux is not ready for the desktop has NOT worked in tech support or had any friends with a computer. When I go over to fix someones PC, the bios is shot with errors, there are 60 icons on the desktop, and taskbar because they think removing them deletes the program. I have news for you, WINDOWS is not ready for the desktop either! Recently a client did a directX 9a windowsupdate and it completly ruined his box, all the data was gone I couldn’t even recover with a forensics disk. It has to be shipped to someone who specializes in this sort of thing.
Funny that the story below this one was “Bill Gates : 5% Of Windows Machines Crash More Than Twice A Day”
Where do these people come from, who say that the Linux desktop is a good desktop? It’s fine if you like xterms and xemacs (oddly enough, I do). It blows for anything else.
The freedom to run important apps trumps GNU freedom. If you can’t use your computer, you’re not free. The person holding a class over the internet or child learning about biology just doesn’t have time to learn how a commandline works. If you gave them hard-to-use GNU software, they’ll do nothing with it. They’ll feel stupid, worried and frustrated.
I don’t care about bootup times. XP is fast. Linux zealots argue numbers, because that’s all they can quantify. They can’t talk usability or needs.
Now, do I agree Linux distros need to enforce a single interface? Well, competition is fine, even if it produces results that take a long while; some distros will suck at UI, but others will soar above mediocrity. Teamwork isn’t the only way to get results.
If the masses can’t spend the time, the effort and the sacrifices to ponder upon a new and different digital culture, then the masses don’t deserve to be blessed with Linux’ benefits.
If you can’t spend the time to study medicine and prescribe elixirs for yourself, you don’t deserve to be blessed with health.
Don’t forget, your GNU future is hitched to the support of the masses. Otherwise you don’t get the nice driver support.
———————-
First thing, I’ve yet to see a post from Marcelo that doesn’t bash the US in some way
———————–
OK, excuse my mistake. The author of article is dutch and I think he is american.
Americans lives in “another world” and (generally) have money to spend buying top-line hardware and paying M$ taxes. For us, Apple hardware is very expensive, almost nobody here uses MacOS X and almost nobody paid for your Windows.
I have a brazilian friend living on USA and he says that americans generally buy PCs from Dell, Compaq, HP, etc and they come with a lot of bundled software. Very few buy hardware parts to mount your own computer. Here in Brazil and many countries, we mount our own PCs or we buy them from little shops. These PCs come with pirated copies of Windows, MS Office, etc.
OK, linux is for geeks but it is spreading like fire here and the rest of world. There are many reasons: freedom of USA, freedom os a single vendor, no license fees, nationalism, hardware recycling, etc. We are using it on many desktops even with all problems.
I still don’t understand why linux have not success in USA like outside of it…
Hey,
You know, without wanting to be read as rude, I’m beginning to get tired of this stuff. Every day there is a new flame war or polite skirmish about GNU/Linux versus Windows versus etc. It seems to me that everyone involved is viewing it all from their own habitual viewpoints (like ppl do).
When the initial comment (I’m sure sometimes intentionally controversial) appears, everyone slips into a kneejerk reactive mode. At best we might see a cautious defense of the family jewels… again and again and again (recursive?).
Being a moderately knowledgeable user of Windows, GNU/Linux (all sorts), BeOS (my greatest lost love) and… er, my Palm M515.. I enjoy reading OS News and follow it daily. I enjoy reading the frequent reviews and help stuff. I enjoy reading the political machinations of the computer industry, and whether the new version of Windows will have twin overhead cams. It’s all great stuff.
But these chronic and treatment resistant strains of OS intermittent-explosive disorder are really beginning to put me off bothering. I think maybe we need a seperate forum specially for ppl to argue about the ideology of their precious OSs. I grew out of it some time ago, although from time to time I would read such a site.
I think the phenomenum is akin to a sort of sociological study of computer OSs, or perhaps a tribal confrontation by proxy or something. Whatever the truth, I don’t think it fits neatly into my enjoyment of computers anymore. Don’t you guys ever get tired of repeating the same stuff all over?
Of course, like any self-respecting person I do abhor the MS Evil empire, and I dearly love the idea of the GNU/Linux ideology. But I really think the roots of these thoughts have little to do with computers and OSs. Its more akin to philosophy or morality or something that’s difficult to fit into bits and bytes.
And I guess it happens in all sorts of fields, like whether VHS or Betamax was best and isn’t it awful that the better technology lost out to marketing; and are Fords really better than Holdens, etc, etc.
And NO, I am not complaining about the original article. I am referring mainly to the string of responses. I gave up half way through in the promise that the subject would very quickly be left behind, that everything said would be repeated ad nauseum, and that nothing would be even remotely achieved by the wasted time and words.
Before any of you suggest it, yes, I will henceforth resist that vague urge to look at any responses to articles advocating one OS over another.
In fact, don’t even bother to respond to these words, because I probably don’t want to know about the flame war I am provoking in writing them. (Well, maybe a peek).
Good article. Look forward to more. Throw me a frickin’ bone here. (Pauses to think) Maybe I’m in the wrong place here… this IS the Fence Painting Techniques web site, isn’t it?
Mmmmm.
>Does anybody really believe that something so mundane as an >operating system is as important as Martin Luther King, Jr., >or Poland’s Solidarity?
>Shake the rocks out of your head.
I have never compared Linux to Martin Luther King, but English is not my native languaghe so maybe I don’t understand the subtleties of the word “movement”.
But I feel that Linux and any software that can change the stronghold that Microsoft has on the market is in some way revolutionary.
And just because you don’t share my views you don’t have to behave like an asshole.
Here we go.
I use my OS/2 computer as much as any computer. the only time I’ve had to reboot it in the 11 years (since the beta of OS/2 2.0) is when I installed a program or installed new hardware. I use it at least three times a week running things like Links golf for DOS as well as working on spreadsheets, documents, e-mail, faxing, a full purpose work horse that also happens to be the computer that stores most of my work files for this and other computers.
BeOS – I don’t use it as much but probably could. The interface is fast but is not as satisfying as my Jaguar Mac or OS/2. In the last four years it has never “needed” to be rebooted. I didn’t even have to reboot when I changed from dial-up to DSL to dial-up to DSL to cable-modem. All my other OSs HAD to reboot for this during that time.
Mac OS 9 1st generation iMac. Light work on it because it was slow even with OS 9. But it never crashed on me. The limiting factor on programs on this computer was lack of really good games that it could run due to hardware (CPU and memory) limitations.
iMac Janguar (10.2.6) but started with 10.1.5. It has never crashed on me and I do all the same work as on my OS/2 computer. Obvious with Mac versions of software. All is good and getting better.
Mandrake Linux/SuSE/Mandrake – None of these ended up being worth my time to get them fully up and running with all the software I do for work and play. I am a tech person so I know HOW to do it. I also don’t get behind a car and push it to the store either. That’s the experience I had with these. I’ve only got so many hours in the day to **** with things.
Lindows since 3.0 “just works”. And that is especially true with Lindows 4.0. The only software I don’t have for this is GPS software. Maybe not the newest games but I keep entertained and with OpenOffice it does all the work I need to do.
Windows 98 sucks. It takes four ’98 computers to do the same thing I can do with Mac OS X or OS/2. Pros. Runs faster than XP or 2000. Has it ever run more than 3 days without a crash? How about even one day when used for more than an hour? Don’t think so.
Windows 2000. Too many crashes. Not enough hardware compatibility.
Windows XP (I support over a hundred of these at work too) sucks less than 98 but is more filling. eXtra Propriatary makes everything cost too much compared other OSs and it is only getting worse. Never had it run for more than a week without crashing.
Well, your perspective is wrong…
Operating Systems do not support hardware, the hardware needs to support the OS.
Though in fact, these are the same things…
No ATi drivers in Linux is because ATi doesn’t make them… That’s not the fault of the Open Source community…
And by the way, what moron buys ATi… Even if ATi had Linux support, I’d still buy nVidia because they are working on FreeBSD support…
NOTE: That I do confirm the long boot times with Linux… Though when lots of software is installed (not only services, but all software), Windows tends to get slow. Linux has no such problem… It’s boot time fully depends on the services…
“Micro$oft may have 50K programmers, but Linux has millions. ”
Let’s just take one example of a large Linux application:
Xfree86, 13 core developers are listed.
The many eyes theory doesn’t work, has been proven not to work, and yet people continue regurgitating it. The simple fact that the majority of applications for Linux have their source open for viewing does _NOT_ magically mean that huge numbers of people are looking at it and checking it for errors.
Open source projects generally involve small core teams which hack on the code daily with occasional input from 3rd parties who:
a) Found something wrong, fixed it and actually sent in a patch (Most of the time once someone has fixed their personal copy they don’t bother sending the fix upstream)
b) Are poking around in the application source for amusements sake because the application exists in an area they are interested in.
The kernel might have a few hundred independents hacking away at it (Because it’s interesting work) and has some companies hacking away at it as well (Because they have a vested interest in it improving, and wish to influence the direction it takes) which is all well and good. What you aren’t taking into account is the multitude of packages around the place (Most of GNU is in this category) which have a few developers (And in a few cases just a single maintainer) hacking on them intermitently.
Are there more developers hacking on the Linux kernel than the Windows kernel? You’d have to take a survey, but my guess would be yes.
Are there more developers hacking on the Windows apps/libraries than the Linux core apps/libraries (Hint: Think of the GNU packages that are required to run a Linux machine)? IMO, yes.
One thing I can say with absolute certainty is that Linux does _NOT_ have anything approaching a million developers looking at the core system.
Yes, that’s how some people view it as, and I sorta do so also. As a tool. But it isn’t this way for everyone.
Is a car just a tool? Some people spend their lives around cars. If a car was just something to get from point A to point B, then we’d have no real need for Ferrari’s or Corvette’s.
Point being, some people take this stuff real serious, possibly because it’s what they like, or it’s what they’ve been working on for most of their lives. It’s exciting to them, and there is nothing wrong with that.
I am pretty sure if everyone believed that the OS is just a tool, the OS in general wouldn’t be as good or come in as many varieties as it does today.
Now on the millions of Linux developers vs. Microsoft developers… Are you kidding me? Seriously, Linux might have millions of programmers working from everything from the kernel to KDE screensavers. It seems you forgot all the programmers working for companies like Adobe, Macromedia, and programmers who work on freeware, even GPL’ed freeware just for Windows.
Microsoft would then have the same, if not more developers than Linux.
Hi,
I’ve been reading on this site for 2 weeks now. And I have to say this, you guys are retarded. Don’t want to be rude here. You flame wars are useless. It is all a matter of personal choice. You want to use Linux? Fine do it. You don’t like it? There’s plenty of choices out there.
Now for my personal opinion about all those flame wars. I’ve been using Windows for a long time. Now at home i mainly use various flavours of *nix. Gentoo Linux and OpenBSD mainly. Now for those that way that Linux doesnt boot up fast, as so many said, it all depends of which distro you use, and what services are loaded by default. I agree, it’s not everyone that can edit the config files with a text editor. But if you use RedHat for example, there’s a nice GUI app to do it.
I believe Windows as it’s good side too. If you’re a gamer for example, you kinda have no choice but to run Windows (don’t tell me about WineX because a lot of games don’t run well on it). Now if you’re more of an artist, chances are you have a Mac and run OSX.
I don’t see what’s the big fuss about it. You guys should start to respect others. If you give someone a PC, someone that never worked with one, if you have Linux with KDE, or Windows, he will have to learn anyway. a GUI is a GUI, it’s made to be easy.
In some instances *nix is a good choice, in others it’s Windows. It all depends of who’s going to use it, and for what purposes.
my 2 cents
I like the unified GUI idea as an option. Maybe a set of guidelines that all distro’s could abide by, maybe call it “KISS” mode. It has to be an option that can be enabled or disabled, I’d use it for clients and disable it for myself.
A KDE/Gnome/Etc desktop can easily be customized to make it ultra simple. Currently, ultra simple is the WIndows look the masses have been conditioned to since 1995.
I’ve setup “KISS Mode” for a few clients. Basically I give them a “My Computer” Icon by creating an icon on the desktop (actually a directory) that looks like a computer. Inside I create the removable drive links, I change home to look like a Hard Drive and I call it drive C:, if they have network connections then all the network directories are mapped in different colors, but they look like hard drives. This makes it very simple for the truly lazy. C: Drive is Silver = home, Drive N: is Red = network data drive, Drive P: is Green = public drive. The description I place in parenthesis P: (Public).
I create a menu entry of “Main Applications”, I put in what they will use. If they venture out of there, fine, but all the stuff they need is now super simple and familiar.
I write company specific “magical” scripts to make their life easier.
Windows Update isn’t perfect, either. I’ve hosed IE using it in the past. I’ve seen it hose other things after it was run. It can’t be truly automated either. it doesn’t always notice when you need an update. Lastly, I don’t like MS getting into my system. I’ve read the EULA’s MS provides and they are scary.
I use Mandrake, and urpmi like apt, depends on the mirrors. I keep up to date and add/remove mirrors once every couple of months. I use a script and ssh to send this new mirror list to all of my clients servers. It saves me so much time. The clients are all updated automatically every evening.
Boot time isn’t an issue, imho, unless you have to reboot often.
Windows requires more reboots, hence the concentrated effort to speed up boot time for XP (as compared to 2K). The problem I’ve found is with Heavy use ie; CAD, 3D Modeling, Image manipulation and plotting, Windows requires a reboot more than once a day.
I have deployed Linux/KDE on the desktop for several clients, in my organization, in my my home, at my in-laws, at my parents and at my friends. It does work very well as a desktop os. It is even better when tailored to a users needs.
Boot times are dependent on hardware.
Computer A has a 500 MHz Pentium 3, 64MB RAM, 66Mhz front side bus speed, and 5400 RPM hard drive.
Computer B has a 3Ghz Pentium 4, 256MB RAM, 400Mhz front side bus speed, and a 10000 RPM hard drive.
Will Windows XP boot up in the same amount of time on these two computers? Will Linux boot up in the same amount of time on these two computers? Does average joe user care about the hardware dependency when it comes to boot up time? No, he just blaims the OS.
Windows has just as many text editors as Linux does. The difference in the two is that you have to go fetch the different text editors for Windows where as most Linux distros install several for you. Even though you really don’t need to, you can go to places like Download.com and get many alternatives to any program Microsoft bundles with their OS. The argument that Linux has too much choice is bogus. How many ZIP programs are there for Windows? Media players? Web browsers? Tweak UI programs? The list can go on and on.
Just use the OS you like best on the platform you can afford.
Let’s stay legal here
Linux – $50
equivalent windows system
Windows – $200
(think this is too much ? linux has unlimited users)
Office – $250
(same argument as above)
Paint Shop Pro – $50
“Classics” game pack – $50
(not that any of these things even begin to compare to what’s in a normal distribution, but let’s ignore that)
3D design software – $500
Vector drawing software – $100
Database software – $100
(and access does not compare to stuff like mysql/postgresql)
Development environments – $500
(let’s ignore you that get 3 very good ones, not one, and linux IDE’s do not compare to ‘personal editions’)
Version management software – $2000
(the cheap versions)
If you paid less than $3750 for your software, it either does not even come close to a linux distribution, or you “stole” it. It’s that simple.
Also Mac has a friendly community which don’t make fun of you when you need help – unlike the Linux community.<br/><br/>
What linux community have you been to?
yeah the Gentoo community is so friendly and helpfull. This is one of the major reason I kept using linux. Because people are helpfull, and there’s a lot of online support. Compared to windows. Ever tried to find something on microsoft.com? even the techies sections (don’t remember the actual name) bites a lot. But that’s the problem of every major corporation webpages i guess. too much stuff to put on, bad web designers.
Ok those people who say you need to read the manual are stupid. I figured out Mac OS X and Windows without ever looking a a manual. I really never learned much from reading what i did of Windows manuals. First of all I download Linux off the internet so there really is no manual except for some documentation on the system. The Linux documentation isn’t even that great, it’s better than the Windows documentation but still not good enough.
Seriously Linux developers take a good look at Mac OS X first because it proved that you culd make an easy to use OS based on UNIX and did this in a few years time. In this respect Apple has BLAZED really fast ahead of any other OS, it’s the easiest to install apps on. What Linux needs is one group to make a UNIVERSAL INSTALLER for all Linux apps across all Distros and provide a way to install any app on this installer, if you wanna spend extra time compiling your apps then thats fine with me i just don’t wanna spend time doing stuff thats much easier to do on every other OS.
Seriously the author is right. No software company ever got anywhere saying if you buy our stuff now it will eventually get better, thats what Microsoft is doing essentially.
I like Linux but the fact that it takes me longer to set it up and it’s harder to do simple stuff like make a shortcut/alias to a app on the desktop deters me from using it more. I like how Mandrake Linux 9.1 has gotten – much easier than Red Hat. Those of you saying if you spend hours reading and tinking with it you’ll find this stuff out are being ignorant. It didn’t take me long to figure out the essentials on Mac OS X or Windows. Eventually i got into tweaking the components of the OS but Linux shouldn’t do that. MAKE THE ESSENTIALS OF EVERYDAY USE EASY then people will get into tweaking the components of the OS. Linux wants people to do this the other way around which is sad.
ok, one thing, install Gentoo Linux, the installer is REALLY easy. it goes like this “emerge packagename”. it calculates all dependant packages, fetches them all on webservers, compiles it all. Now, if you want to update your system you do it with only another command “emerge sync && emerge -u world”. This updates ALL of your system to the latest. Try to do that in windows.
as for a universal installer. it is already there. source code. which is also easy, one command “./configure && make && make install”. I mean, i figured this out in less than 10 minutes after i got my box running.
and don’t take me wrong, i’m not dissing windows. Windows has a lot of good too. Example, The Gimp for Linux is so far from Photoshop, it’s not even funny. Linux has a lot of work still, but it’s getting there without the billions of dollars that microsoft put into “research and development”.
Well Darius your right, spam does is not unique to Outlook Express, but show me an and actively used outlook express w/o third party software to block spam that doesn’t have some spam in its inbox. I think you’d be hard pressed to find one. While you can install other mail applications that have spam filtering, it would always be in addition to Outlook Express – unless there is some magic way of deleting that you know of?
As for spyware, if people knew not to install spyware then Brilliant wouldn’t have this great P2P network to server content over now would they?
Windows AV programs that run in the background as tonic processes don’t equate to linux running win4lin or vmware. I’d venture that most linux d00ds consider themselves above running windows, virutual or otherwise, whenever possible. So its not really a utility you run all the time – only when you need certain apps. I don’t think windows users consider AV programs to be as unneccessary to everyday usage, or they would be running them when they need too as well.
Most users don’t need version management software and development environments, most home users wouldn’t even know what they are. Also there’s a lot of opensource and freeware software available for Windows, including OpenOffice, GIMP and numerous games. Plus most PCs come with Windows and a bundle of software included for not much extra cash. For most people buying Windows and all the software they need is a lot less expensive than you make out.
For me the money saved by using Linux doesn’t even come close to making up for the days spent trying to get it working.
I mainly use Linux, but occasionally I have to use Windows.
My question is: If I have a damaged video file, whatever format, can someone show me to a player that can play the clip, the way that mplayer and xine in Linux can?
I have tried the Windows Media Player and bsPlayer and they just refuse to play the file, they are also much slower in playing regular files than mplayer and xine is so I would be very greatful if you could point me to a decent player.
Surely a multi-billion company can give me a great multi-mediaplayer so just tell me were it is, ok?
I have used LindowsOS 4.0 and although I liked it, it did take 3 minutes and 55 seconds to get into KDE.
“Honestly, who really wants Linux for the masses? I mean why is it an OS has to be usable by people who don’t want to think a minute about how computing actually works.
Linux is great at what it does and keeps improving rapidly. But the idea of a dumbed down Linux is just crazy. I am sick of all this Linux needs to do this… nonsense. If you don’t like it don’t use it.”
Finally something that makes sense! I don’t like Linux so I don’t use it. Simple as that. All I want to do is be able to read and reply to e-mail and to look for porn.
“We seem to be coding for the lowest common denominator instead of asking people to pick up a book and learn a little about computers, like how to use a mouse and type on a keyboard.”
Yea and I blame it on the people who invented GNOME and KDE. They spoilt it for the rest of us who could do it with the shell.
“And what movement? Anybody who thinks Linux is a movement, is an idiot. A community, yes, a movement, no.”
Here’s my 2 cents: Any Linux community which likes to bash at Microsoft is a movement.
“And when did Linux become a slave to the masses? If the masses can’t spend the time, the effort and the sacrifices to ponder upon a new and different digital culture, then the masses don’t deserve to be blessed with Linux’ benefits.”
Yeah! Screw Redhat and Lindows for making Linux a slave to the masses. It was so good before and now we are corporatized! Slept with the prostitutes of customer satisfaction!
as my other one got rightfully modded to oblivion. ๐
Anyone spending even a little time on osnews knows that there are quite a few ppl on both sides who fly off the handle.
ppl should work extra hard at not turning everything into a platform war.
As a user of many different systems, I enjoy reading info about macs, linux, freebsd and windows…..as I use those plat forms. I don’t enjoy seeing the flamers immediately coming out and bashing whatever platform happens to be the subject of the article.
I also enjoy reading the stuff about aix, solaris, beos, etc. I don’t use them, but it’s nice to be kept abrest of developments.
everyone have a good weekend.
Everything in windows is to restricted .It is easy to use but not flexible as Linux. Even its file format is to restrictive. This is not the case with linux. Even the desktop in Windows doesnt allows to change and Even if the freeware software for changing desktop is available, there is no gaurantee that it will work. OS should mean freedom.
Freedom to work without depending on the File Formats. I think these File formats in Windows have created a big hell especially the Office XP suite. You cannot use the .doc file without loading the Office XP. I think file format should be independent on what Application U Use
I say leave the masses to windows, because the masses have very different requirments from your average techo user. I’ll give and example to illustrate my point.
In Australia your average PC users buys a mid range $2000 PC from the computer corner store (Most people don’t trust the sub $1000 internet “starter” boxes and that sorta thing), he doesn’t need he kinda hardware included in the box, but he really likes the fact that when he gets it home he just plugs it in and turns it on…. there’s windows (A system he is probably already familar with because he has used it at school/work), it also has Office installed, it usually has an anti-virus program running in the background which it also came with, that’s it that will be his computer until either he decides to buy a new one in a few years time or he manages to destroy the installation in some way or another, if he does destroy the installation he usually can just take it back to the shop to have everything fixed.
At some stage he may also want to install a game/some other application in which case all he has to do is insert the CD and go through the install proccess or open the install on the disk which he just downloaded, either way it is a very simple procces.
Now what advantages would Linux offer this kinda computer user?
– Flexible configuration? Were talking about the kinda user who will not delete icons from his desktop because he thinks it uninstalls the program, he doesn’t care about how configurable it is. BTW. He will notice that Linux boots slower than windows though.
– Choice of which application to run? Why should he care if he can choose between multiple desktop environments, this kinda choice is more likely to confuse/annoy him than make him happy about the system.
– Applications such as apt-get? The average user is to petrified of the command line in windows to go near it, why would it be any different in linux?
– Price tag? Common this is the same sorta user who is willing to pay $2000 for a machine with a hardware speck he doesn’t really need, anyway more likely than not the PC corner store will still charge $2000 for the PC and just pocket the extra.
My point is, why is everyone worrying about how much appeall Linux has for the average user? Linux fells a niche for a group of technically savy users, who prefer it over Windows/Mac OSX, so why not leave it at that, Linux will cause my pain than happines for the average user.
Folks! There is a very good reason why Windows generally have a shorter boot time than Linux: reboot. It is imperative that users reboot their machine often thoughout the day to keep the machines running at their best.
btw. don’t flame me, I skipped a good portion of posts because they centred around freedom and other ideological BS.
Linux will not move forward until linux advocates and developers realise that the average user doesn’t give a flying continental about your so-called “freedoms”, a person uses a computer as a tool. Read and repeat.
The average user DOESN’T read these websites as they neither care or want to care about information technology, they have much more important things to be concerned about.
Linux’s problem is the communities inability to accept that there is a problem and actually address it. Here we are in 2003, 8-9 years ago I started using Linux and I was promised that “one day” the copy and paste issue will be resolved. Here we are 8 years later (btw, I have dumped Linux and bought an eMac) and the issue has not been addressed, why? because we have two bit programmers going, “no one is going to tell ME what to do”, and so, the ego ends up coming before actually solving the problem.
At the end of the day, sure, Linux will move forward on the server, however, unfortunately, until there is a unified front in the desktop “battle”, people will still see Linux is some obscure operating system sitting on the fringes of the IT world for geeks, hackers and people who have waaaaaay to much time on their hands.
In my opinion, Linux is far from being ready for anything else but niche geek markets. The Linux is ready for desktop is a marketing lie IMO, sorry.
I tried to switch to linux about once or twice a year in the last five years, I haven’t tried in 2003 though. I mainly tried redhat and mandrake distributions since they are supposed to be more friendly to end-users (although most of my friends would certainly not call me an end-user).
The first thing I noticed about Linux distros is that they are loaded with hundreds of useless junk applications, some of them are buggy, others only work with KDE, or Gnome, or do not work with my harware, or compete with each other etc. The first time I installed linux, I needed about one day to get a dial-up connexion running and my scanner never worked, when I succeeded in having my sound card running, it never produced the sound quality I had in windows, the same with all my peripherals (webcam, monitor, graphics card…). My conclusion was that you had to first choose linux and then the hardware, too bad I already have working machines and do not intend to buy new ones.
Then there is the file structure. I was an amiga fan for years, so for me both the windows and Linux file structures are baroque and esoteric, or, to put it simply, a bloody mess. It is less a problem in windows since normal users don’t have to use the command line, but with Linux, I always had to get *very* quickly hacking config files to get my hardware working more or less correctly or to install software…
Then there is the UI, I found both KDE and Gnome lacking of consistency to say the least, the icons are now very nice but eye-candy is not really my idea of a working UI. It is also very slow, I read somewhere that this is because of the design of XFree86 which was not created for the desktop but for client/server interactions, I don’t know but Linux UI never really felt “snappy” to me, windows XP UI is also very slow compared to win98.
But the one thing that annoys me most and makes me come back to Windows everytime is the software install/uninstall procedure. Sorry but I still have not understood what is the normal linux procedure to manage software. The one major thing missing is a clear and STANDARD installation/deinstallation procedure, last time I tried a Mandrake I never succeeded in replacing the outdated stock Mozilla version by a newer build for instance, some files are RPM others are TGZ, others are sources, when you compile them there are often problems with “dependencies”, which I guess are missing files somewhere in the cryptic structure or a missing parameter that I’ll have to set in one of the hundreds (thousands ?) of configuration files. When will there be a simple standard way to install a new software package ? like for instance dragging and dropping an icon in a folder, or clicking on an installer wich will popup a wizard…
I don’t particulary like Windows but it works fine and does the job and XP is as stable as 98 was unstable (which is probably the reason why I didn’t try Linux since I updated to XP). I’d like to have a solid alternative to MS, preferably open source, but I couldn’t find a single Linux feature that is really decisive to an end-user, most if not all end-user opensource software is available on all platforms, even windows. Installing software in Windows is clear and simple, uninstalling is just a click. I sorely miss the times I had an amiga, it was so simple and yet so powerful, now with Linux and Windows I have to choose between power and simplicity…
My 2004 computer may be a Mac finally, apparently their new OS is more in the spirit of my old amiga, powerful but targeted at human beings…
I’m using LFS (Linux From Scratch) and it boot at 8 to 10 seconds, very fast. Let people choose what the best for their daily work. If the problem is boot time, easy of use, consistency look and many other, IMHO it depends on the each user’s character.
I was using Windows. And many years gone by I found that Windows was not suit to my needs. I hate it because of BSOD, unstable, unrobust and many disanvantage. But I admin that that Windows has many support because the company who support Windows can make money from it.
“If you care about good driver and application support, easy installation, and want a computer that never crashs or needs to be rebooted, use OS X. ”
This is all fine for now. OSX meant a complete overhaul of all drivers. MS tried this with XP and maybe 2k but i’m not sure. They wanted signed drivers and so forth so old drivers would die off.
But currently OSX is the first gen of that OS. So every driver was ment for it and it only. When apple comes out with OS11 or OSXI or whatever they do, then the fun very well may begin. OSX drivers might cause issues in OSXI maybe there will be no OSXI drivers for something that had OSX drivers and people try to make it work. Then Apple will have the same problems as windows. Sure one can hope that the drivers would be transparent to such change but old drivers allmost never handle new OS’s very well. Or you have the windows situation were most work, but some don’t and you get issues. Or the driver just works a bit less with time. A win95 driver works with 98, 98se but gets shady with ME and doesn’t work with 2k or XP. Apple is only ok for now since the threw out everything from their old os and started over, now the crud can start to built for another decade and see how it’s doing then.
I totally agree… An operating system is nothing more than a tool to get a job done. you use whatever suits your needs the most and is available.
I run a few different operating systems here and they all do different jobs.
For me there’s no politics involved. I don’t care how “evil” Microsoft is or how holy and right Linux is, or how much quality goes into a Mac.
I just use what works… I don’t care where or who it comes from nor the politics behind it.
Similarly, Linux did NOT succeed because of any simularities with Windows.
In other words, there’s a market for something different. There are people who need what Linux provides and Windows doesn’t.
Let Linux succeed on its own merits. If you try to make it like Windows, it will fail. Stop trying to compete on MS’s turf. MS knows it can win there.
Make your own turf and do what you do best.
100’s of distro’s are great.
100’s of pizza places are great. I like all kinds of pizza and would NOT want them all to band together and create a common pizza because people can’t take the time to learn and try new things.
Silly, just plain silly.
Another pointless linux doesn’t run like windows article.
1) I happily run a linux desktop here without problems. (What am doing wrong??) ๐
2) Linux bootup time isn’t a factor since you don’t need to switch off or reboot your linux box. (It’s never been slow here BTW.)
3) If you can’t write your own device driver and the hardware manufactures don’t supply one – don’t blame linux. PS thanks to everyone who “freely” contributed code to support multiple hardware architectures and devices.
4) If you’re happy with windows then why do you need linux? Linux isn’t a windows clone no matter how you dress it up.
5) IMLTHO if you’re new to linux or have used it for a few years and find it problematic. Then it’s probably just YOU! <grin!>
Learn to use it and love it for what it is.
regards
rob
” if we forget the “geek” image of Linux, if we forget the fact that some distributions suddenly have to be paid for”
So, and So?
Windows XP does several interesting things to boot faster, that Windows 2000 does not do. (It’s probably safe to assume that Windows 2003 does these things too, but I couldn’t say 100% for sure.)
1. Instead of initializing all of it’s peripherals in series, it does XP does it in parallel and asynchronously.
2. Windows XP watches page faults and captures traces of what blocks get loaded from disk during bootup. In future boots, it uses that trace data to load those blocks before they are requested. It actually does this with regular programs, too.
Read more along those lines here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/12/xpkernel/default.asp…
Hey you guys, my liux boots in 5 secs and is now up
for 5 years without any reboot.
Does anybody really believe that something so mundane as an operating system is as important as Martin Luther King, Jr., or Poland’s Solidarity?
I really believe that having the choice to use software (i) other than that produced by a single source (who (in the most important case), on the one hand, has been found to have violated important laws and, on the other hand, is a large supplier to government) and (ii) the source code of which can be viewed and modified,* is, in the medium to long term, an important protection against certain governmental and other abuses of power.
*I know everyone always says “but most people don’t have skills or time to do so”, but what is important is not that a particular person can do so, but that others with the skills and time and same general interest to do so. Think about the role of rights organizations.
Linux probably isn’t ready for Joe Sixpack. I feel too many distros are bloated. But it’s about choice. Maybe somebody should come out with a simpler desktop. Maybe that’s what Lindows is doing. More power to them.
The problem with the word “better” is that it’s a relative term. Better than what? Better for what?
I personally hate Windows. I’ve lots of good reasons for that. I also support 50 Windows PCs at work. I keep myself sane by using Linux on my PC and some of the servers.
Yeah, let’s improve the use-ability. Let’s improve the installation procedures. Sure. Fine. But let’s not make it so easy that users stop needing geeks. I need the work.
There’s a thing here. What happens if Linux becomes easy to use? Is that a good thing? Not necessarily. To get it so that my grandmother can use it, means it has to be dumbed down. Made less powerful. Is that good?
Yeah, let’s fix the configuration problems. Let’s write some Tcl/Tk scripts to front end stuff.
But there’s no need to rush any of this. We are here for the long haul. Linux has all the time in the world to get better. Microsoft is the one who has to hurry.
So my point is – if you want a better, simpler desktop, feel free to work on it. If you want a better installation method, we’re all ears. That’s what it’s all about, isn’t it? Linux lets you improve things.
If you feel XP or W2K is better, hey, go to it. Personally, on my PC, XP runs like molasses compared with either the RedHat 6.1 or the Slackware 9.0 I also have installed on it. But your mileage may vary.
Linux isn’t about the desktop.
Linux is about freedom.
Anyone who thinks freedom to choose software isn’t important, isn’t thinking very hard.
Perspective, we need a little perspective. The entire airline reservation industry uses the most primitive interface to book seats. Yet airlines fly millions of people every day. No GUI needed. GUI would only get in the way.
But cut-and-paste would be nice. I get around it, but it would be nice. I’m not leaving vi for it anytime soon, but it would be nice.
Seth
“… freedom and other ideological BS.” ??????
Well, i don’ t know about you, but I value MY freedom very much…
That’s the one of main reasons why I use Linux.
others are that I LIKE it very much and I THINK that it is better.
I think it’s little bit unfair to compare linux with windows…. They are so different. Still i do it anyway ๐
I have been using linux as my main os about one year now. first, when i compared these two, i was thinking that: I can do this on windows, why i can’t do on linux.
now, when comparing, i think that: Hey I can do that on linux, why i can’t do that on windows… ๐
Main thing that i think that are missing in windows and which are in linux are Bash and KDE.
the crappy way software is installed (with the exception of apt-get, or so I’ve heard)
If you haven’t even tried the installation method that a lot of people think is the best, you have no business slagging off Linux installation methods.