Linux is very ready for the desktop, says Tom Adelstein, consultant and member of the Open Government Interoperability Project.
Linux Desktop Underrated
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Is there a link to this somewhere?
“Linux is very ready for the desktop, says Tom Adelstein, consultant and member of the Open Government Interoperability Project.”
well what else would you expect him to say
Was just going to post that same thing.
I mean, it’s nice and all that Tom thinks Linux is ready for desktop usage, but it’s hardly worth a news item in itself!
Quality Control people…
Cool… article… Nope, can’t even fake it this time.
As a supporter of linux on the desktop, I find the posting of a one sentence statement, with no further information to be rather troubling.
This is the main page equivilent of all the trolls that respond to this statement by saying “no it isn’t.”
I assume there is a link thats supposed to be in there somewhere?
Is there an article, or is this just random guy off the street saying that linux is ready for the desktop?
>Cool… article… Nope, can’t even fake it this time.
Stop being so weird, people. There was an HTML error and instead of HREF was HERF and so the link was not appearing. It is now fixed.
The link is hidden in the html code
http://consultingtimes.com/desktoplinux.html
http://consultingtimes.com/desktoplinux.html
I guess the link was supposed to be on the word “says”.
Got another article here for ya:
“I think Linux could be nearing the point of being ready for the mainstream PC user. Its a question of gaining followers and software developers.”
>”The information you read and people present about Linux, Windows and Mac lacks substance.”
That statement covers this article well.
This is a horrible article… truly, honestly, a terrible effort.
Some samples, to save anyone who hasn’t clicked..
“Anyone in the broad IT field knows that Sun’s engineering surpasses everyone else’s. Sun put that same quality into their Java Desktop that one has come to expect from anything Sun. The user gets the benefits of Sun’s cumulative talents. Expect an incredible desktop from Scott McNealy’s band of merry engineers.”
*pardon me while I laugh myself silly*
ok, are you done laughing? here’s another gem:
“We also have Windows Services for UNIX version 3.0 which Microsoft says provides a full range of cross-platform services for integrating Windows into existing UNIX-based environments. Microsoft dedicates an entire homepage to this product offering.”
wow, an entire homepage dedicated to one product offering? What a sidesplitter!
Okay, let’s say I wanna get into Linux… I a newbie…
Where do I start?
Which distro do I use?
Is my hardware compatible?
How about my scsi scanner? my printers?
Where do I get apps?
While I would love to believe Linux is truely ready for my desktop, I have serious reservations. I am comfortable with the MacOS and Windows mentality and I am a graphic designer. I don’t want to compile or drop to the command line for ANYTHING. I prefer to use GUI ’cause I am a visual person.
Seriously, I am considering putting Linux on an ol’P150 as an experiment… one friend suggested VectorLinux… I will NOT put it on my P2/400 (Win98 and maybe Win2000), nor will I put it on my Macs!
but I don’t know enough to refute his conclusions. The problem is that a “Desktop Environment” means different things depending on what you do. I love Linux and use it everyday but I don’t think it is the equal of the Mac or Windows XP as yet for the progressive Home User.
By that, I mean someone who doesn’t want to delve into the nitty-gritty of his machine but does like to have lots of shiny toys that he can plug into his PC and have it work without any trouble.
Having worked for several Internet and telecom companies, I can say with full confidence that Linux is more than ready for the average corporate environment.
The progress that Linux has made in the last few years is astounding. Microsoft may thrive on competition but they’ll be burning the midnight oil forever trying to outswim the Penguin.
I think that Linux may have finally reached critical mass – that is, it has enough mindshare that it can make inroads into ANY market where one could conceivably use a CPU.
The guy makes a good point about funding. What you want is about 10 or 15 more good hackers getting paid and working on this thing 60 hours a week. Just because you throw some source code out there doesn’t mean it’s going to be quality or needed things are going to get done. I wonder how many people get paid to work on Gnome/GTK+ full time.
He raves over the Java Desktop. How is this so much better than a stock Gnome 2.4 or even Ximian? It was my understanding that Java Desktop was just marketspeak and Sun shipping a jvm with the distro.
I didn’t read every distro review, but I didn’t see anything about KDE.
You’re not going to get a good “visual” experience if you throw linux on a p150. Yeah, you can run fluxbox or some of the other lightweight window managers but I don’t think that is what you’re going to want. A modern Gnome or KDE is going to run dog-slow on that type of system.
If you just want to try things, why don’t you try a live-cd. Basically it runs a distro off a cd so you don’t have to install anything. You can try Knoppix(for KDE) and I believe Morphix is the Gnome one. Of you could always use something like partition magic to dual-boot, but that might be beyond your expertise or willingess to fuss around with stuff.
Good luck.
I think the author should have said something about Mandrake! Some people find it as being one of the best desktop distros.
“I don’t want to compile or drop to the command line for ANYTHING. I prefer to use GUI ’cause I am a visual person.”
Well, you probably wouldn’t want to install my favorite (Debian), but I bet you would like using it once it is set up. My wife and my five-year-old daughter use my Debian box (under their own accounts, of course), and they never have to touch the command line. It depends on what you mean by “ANYTHING” – if you absolutely refuse to type any commands, then no, you won’t be able to take care of a lot of system configuration and administration tasks, although much of this is stuff that you can’t touch on Windows either.
I agree that Knoppix would be a great way to try Linux on your faster machine without risking screwing it up – KDE runs fine on my PII/400 with 256 MB RAM
“Anyone in the broad IT field knows that Sun’s engineering surpasses everyone else’s. Sun put that same quality into their Java Desktop that one has come to expect from anything Sun. The user gets the benefits of Sun’s cumulative talents. Expect an incredible desktop from Scott McNealy’s band of merry engineers.”
*pardon me while I laugh myself silly*
I tend to agree with this one. Sun’s Engineering is unsurpassed. They’ve owned the Proprietary Unix market for years with Solaris, and they gave birth to Java (from which Microsoft created .NET, a glorified Java).
Sun has some of the best computer engineering in the world. Its problem is that that’s all it has. It has no marketing department to speak of. Its management is terrible. Just look at their stance on Linux! “Yes we support it…no we don’t support it. We support it, but we DON’T want you to use it. Use our Java Linux Desktop! But don’t use Linux.” It’s like a split personality!
If Sun would just pull themselves together and have a little direction, they could take the market by storm.
I was going to suggest Knoppix so you don’t have to install anything, but I see somebody else has beaten me to it.
Instead, I’ll suggest the Knoppix-like offering from Texstar, PCLinuxOS:
http://www.pclinuxonline.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic…
It’s based on Mandrake, so you know it’s good! 🙂
Thanks guys… I’m really not afraid to drop to command lines et al… but I rather not. It’s ‘possible’ for me to do a dual or tri-boot with my P2/400 system. I just wanna get in the mix and see if Linux is truely ready from start to finish. I know i’m a Mac zealot, and I believe I have great reasons to be, but I am NOT afraid of checkin’ out things. Now, the sad fact is Linux maybe ready for the desktop if you don’t have to install or maintain it… but hey, if we can get those right… there ya be
I work (by day) at a manufacturer where we use CAD/CAM for design and Macs are just not an option. *nix machines are frowned on except for our MML server (manufacturing materials list). I would like to put on the record that I’d LOVE to see our CAD guys running Linux )PCBoards, Metal & Wood) and me runnin’ a beautiful G5 running OS X. But that ain’t gonna happen…
wish me luck
Jb
Libranet is a Debian based Distro but is much more
user friendly . The default window manager icewm is a perfect for a 150 mhz cpu. It will befamiliar to users of w95 or 98.
Costs $, but has first rate support and money back guarantee.
Also consider Knoppix,and Xandros.
Xandros latest version 2.0 is coming real soon .
You might want to wait for it.
look promising. Few Questions:
– What X11 version are they using: xfree or their own?
– What components of this deskop are written in Java?
– Free to download version planned?
Well according to China, Linux is ready for the desktop, but only a million or two for now.
Sure Linux is ready for the desktop for techies, but thats about it. Some of the apps still aren’t very stable and compatibility is an issue for me. Make it easy to manage, install stuff, and give it active directory support, and I’ll be the first to switch. (I tried it but my job was 10 times harder than it was in Windows). Now as a server, I think linux is great. Oh and I love KDE, it rocks. heh.
ready for the desktop… yeah right!
because installing and removing software is so easy, printing is so straight forward that choice of Gimp Print, Cups, LPD, LPR is so easy to understand, configuring hardware is a breeze and using the command line is just childs play. Anyone who doesn’t think so should just damn well go away and get spoonfed by OSX or XP :>
Actually, setting up a printer is done almost automatically with modern distros. And the cool thing about CUPS is that your printer is network-ready, which makes printing from any other Linux machine on the network a breeze. It also works very well with Samba on our mixed Windows-Linux home LAN (Samba3 performance truly rocks, btw).
Ok this is why Linux is not ready yet. Suppose I tell one of my friends to try Linux. They’ll ask what distro to use and then there is a ton of tradeoffs.
Then it’s question after question: What UI do you use? Why can’t I use this application in this UI ? Why do i have to edit some text files through a terminal? Why aren’t I able to install all programs through the UI instead of shell scripts?
Linux just isn’t intuitive enough for the masses to be able to use it effectively. The difference between Mac OS X, Windows XP and Linux is that Mac OS X & Windows XP have intuitive means of installing and configuring everything. Both OS X & XP could use some improvements but neither require you to get down and drag yourself through text configs and figuring out how to install everything. Then there is hardware compatibility in which no Linux distro seems to work decently with whatever hardware I throw at it cheap & expensive.
I’m wondering people here don’t get bored discussing same things over and over again, the time could be used to help to make one of the systems better
Most people want the software to do the work not to do the work for the software.
Linux is over hyped. I would reccommend it on servers, for poor people, people who want to waste theire time or the paranoid but I would never reccommend it on any desktop of a entertainment system or for usual desktop users. Most people want ability to use wizards to perform some tasks so they don’t have to read big manuals before doing a simple task, OSS people just don’t get it, most people just want things to work for them.
Yes super geeks you can waste your time on all you want but most people don’t have time for playing games like this.
I would reccommend linux for old or simple people who don’t know maintainance and use the computers only for surfing the internet, writig e-mails and letters. If they would do any more then most likely Windows or OSX would serve them better.
I really have to wonder whether some of the Linux naysayers have actually tried recent Linux distributions. Sure, there are some rough edges, Windows has some rough edges too.
In particular, can we please stop with this “you have to use the command line to do everything” myth. It’s no longer true. The few tasks that can only be done from the command line are administrator or server-level tasks that home users wouldn’t need to be doing anyway.
Why can’t I use this application in this UI
Gnome apps can be run within KDE and vice versa with no problems. So what exactly are you referring to here?
that linus himself said that linux will not be ready for the desktop until 2006? that’s a lot of time in IT land. interesting, that by that time longhorn should be out, and let’s see how linux stacks up against that, whatever linux is at that point which of course would have to include the apps. personally, i think that by 2006 it’ll be exactly as it is now: the best os will be by apple, the most dominant will be microsoft’s and linux will be just about almost there just you wait a tiny bit longer again, and again, and again. seriously, i think linux will be usable for the average person by then, but does that mean it’ll be the best os at the time? hmmm…
not for everyone. Yeah the eye candy and ease of use is there (sometimes
) with most distros, a lot of distros even have gui package managers to keep things organized. But I would say the lack of native “big name” software. Yes gimp and staroffice / openoffice.org are great alternatives and work awesome, most people don’t want to go outside of their bubble of knowledge and learn new skills. (I do hell desk support, I realized how lazy the average user is when it comes to them doing something on their own) 
Of course you can run photoshop and ms office through wine, wine is such a pain to get working correctly in some cases that it wouldn’t be an option for a lot. Especially the level of support from adobe and microsoft if you are running their software through an emulater and encounter problems.
I use bsd at home and it works for me, used linux for a few years and it works like a champ, just posting from average joe’s point of view
In particular, can we please stop with this “you have to use the command line to do everything” myth. It’s no longer true. The few tasks that can only be done from the command line are administrator or server-level tasks that home users wouldn’t need to be doing anyway.
I would have to agree 95%, but you forgot about kernel errors such as the famous “kernel panic” error, I couldn’t fix mine with a gui
Which is more important, user friendliness or having greater control over your OS? Will you let Bill control it from a thousand miles away just so it gets simpler, or would you rather do it yourself? Let Microsoft protect you with Palladium or protect yourself? Will you put up with quirks in exchange for free software? Would you rather pay big bucks for convenience?
You had to configure your sound card for every game. Sometimes you needed a boot disk and you had to edit config.sys because files was too low. Some programs required ems and some had problems with it.
In win95 I had one game that ceased to work when I updated Internet explorer (Creatures) and I had to install a patch.
All environments have problems. A system is ready if you can do your work. The problems is if the person is lazy or incompetent (and yes, my scanners doesnt´s work in Linux but I was able to resolve some problems the same way i was able to resolve problems in Windows).
It’s good to see articles, like this, that shut naysayers up.
As he said, some administrator tasks still require the command line, and those tend to be tasks an average user won’t do (or even know about). How many ‘average’ users are ever going to run into a kernel panic, especially once they can get Linux pre-installed? How many users of office desktops will ever have to worry about that? I’d guess not many.
It looks like most of the posted messages containing issues with UI and CLI falls under a corner case.
For example: I would have to agree 95%, but you forgot about kernel errors such as the famous “kernel panic” error, I couldn’t fix mine with a gui
The only time a normal user encounters a corner case which basically considered a remote fault only means the user has technical knowledge of the environment. It means the user is not an average user.
What is an average user? A user who doesn’t know how to setup an app from disk. Another is one who only launch applications from the standard menu.
Any user who goes beyond the definition “normal” is not considered average and may have to be handled differently by Customer Service.
A plea to every site out there that posts these X “ready for the desktop” articles. Please stop, or at least stop posting anything using the term. There is no ‘the’ desktop. Nothing talking about a single desktop perfectly suited to every user on the planet can be of any more relevance than a discussion about whether unicorns and dragons should be placed on an endarngered species list. Both are based on such an absurd concept as to make anything written on the subject pointless.
after the 16th or so mention of Sun. I mean come on.
One thing not really hit upon in this thread is the influence of gaming on the desktop. The average person is not going to dual boot Windows/Linux just for games. They might as well stick with Windows 100% of the time. And why are these huge GHz Intel processors screaming off the shelves? Games. Nobody needs a 2.8 GHz processor for writing e-mail. An incredibly significant portion of the desktop market is attributed to gaming.
I truly believe that Microsoft is in a better position to gain server-side marketshare than Linux is to gain desktop marketshare. Linux developers just aren’t “on the same page” enough to make a concerted effort to compete with Microsoft on the desktop, and Microsoft has such a huge head-start.
Sun provides at least some hope in that they are a well-respected company that can narrow down a vision and use their resources to make some inroads. But even still, they have a long road ahead of them if they wish to truly pursue the “home” desktop market (which, IMO, actually drives the majority of the overall desktop market). So far Sun has only shown interest in the enterprise level, but if the Java 3D Gaming technology takes off, they might have something to talk about.
With regards to Sun’s schizophrenia over Linux: consider that Linux poses a threat (taking away low-end server market share, competing with Solaris, bringing Intel into competition with SPARC, etc.), but at the same time poses an opportunity (selling their own low-end Linux systems), and it’s easy to see why it’s a tough decision for them to make. It’s truly a gamble. They’re betting on the future, based on circumstances they can’t either foresee or control. My personal opinion is that they’re hopping on the Linux bandwagon now and getting their Solaris up to spec on Intel, then will begin pushing Solaris on x86 systems and desktops. If they do want to aim for the desktop, they really need to be in control of the OS.
In many ways, Linux is over-hyped. Its greatest achievement is (cheaply) bringing UNIX technology together with Intel technology. Those two things together present a very powerful combination. But is there really much in Linux itself that is new, or innovative, or worthy of its own praise? C’mon, UNIX and Intel deserve most of the credit for the Linux wave.
This is all JMO of course. I’ve been known to be wrong many times. All I’m saying is that, at this moment, I don’t see a concerted vision to bring Linux up to spec for the desktop. Look, I’m a CS major. I’m a software engineer by day. I develop and compile software programs all day long. I work on UNIX and Windows machines. I used to have RH5.2 and it was a fun toy, but also a very aggravating toy. When I got my new computer, I installed Win2k and RH8 as a dual boot. I played with RH8 most of the time early on… now the only time I boot into RH is the 1% of cases when I fail to select “Windows” when GRUB loads up (and I’m too lazy to go in and set Windows to my default in the GRUB config). I’m sick of Linux for now… it’s too much of a PITA, even for a computer geek like me. Windows has everything I want and need, and it was affordably priced. I’m not running a server. What do I need Linux for???
John
Linus says maybe 2006, IBM and RedHat say that Linux is not ready for the desktop right now.
Then you have a lot of people saying that Linux is ready for the desktop now, but I have never read an account from an average Joe deploying Linux. its usually from people with some type of IT or computer support background. That in itself says a lot about how much Linux is ready for the desktop.
some say it isnt ready. That depends on the person like what desktop means for them. Linux wont make a killing if it does succeed in the desktop market but that could change over time. Especially if more work places switch to linux. Personally I though this article was ok, wasnt the greatest thing ever and I would disagree on some of his reviews of distros.
And yes people would Dual Boot just for games. lol. Why because I think half of the gamers probably use Linux. Gamers at least when I think of gamers, they are early adopters of technology, especially if something seems worth it. Most at around the age 14-30. That seems like the group that would be most senstitive to technological advances versus the old people, or very young children still watching sesame street. Its always been the teenager or interested adult that has tried new things and they have been brought up with having to know computers. Of course you could call them nerds but whatever, the gamers of today know how to use linux.
Also Mr. fellow CS. Major “affordably priced” probably only applies to you since your in college and you get discounts. Come on Windows XP is expensive for the average joe, though prices are cheaper. Lets see… Win XP Pro is around 300$ now a days. and then what another 300$ for OFFICE >_< . What a rip off. Suse 9.0 or Mandrake 9.2 does a better job with the software bundled together for what, less than 100$. Course you used red hat, I dont know they didnt seem to be too desktop freindly to me and there is a saying if I remember it correctly. “if you use red hat you learn red hat, if you use slack you learn linux” , though i do have red hat experience. I had 5.2 on my old packard bell. I’ve used 7.3 and 9 on servers, but again its not desktop freindly.
As for me. I am also CS Major. I find that Linux is a better desktop than windows. Course everyones entitled to their opinion but , Linux supports x86 and ppc. Both are where most home user are (apples and dells probably). Linux has Gnome and KDE. Almost all major distros come with some form of office application whethere OpenOffice or Star Office. Xine plays just about any type of media i need. Avis, and mpegs mainly (ive never liked WMV seeing as their latest version format isnt even supported on macs, as far as I know). you got xmms as the normal mp3 player. Gaim for AIM, Kmail – evolution – or Mozilla mail as your mail app. Almost all come with at least mozilla and konquerer. automatic printer setup is on most distros now a days. Support for old hardware with light distros like vector linux. I really dont see why not. The only thing stopping Linux as a desktop is of course MS Monopoly. Everyone uses MS, so everyone needs it at least those that love that one piece of software thats only on windows. I heard Dreamweaver works with crossover now so there kills one excuse.
“…Then you have a lot of people saying that Linux is ready for the desktop now, but I have never read an account from an average Joe deploying Linux. its usually from people with some type of IT or computer support background. That in itself says a lot about how much Linux is ready for the desktop.”
Hold that thought.
B. Smith
I totally agree when you say:
“All environments have problems. A system is ready if you can do your work. The problems is if the person is lazy or incompetent (and yes, my scanners doesnt´s work in Linux but I was able to resolve some problems the same way i was able to resolve problems in Windows).”
Most windows users think that every OS looks, feels and works like windows, and if it doesn’t, it isn’t ready they think. And I don’t think it has so much with incompetence, but pure lazyness. I’ve heard it many times when I’ve asked people who really are good with computers and coding why they don’t take a look at linux, and the answer is usually:
“No, I’m not interested in learning a new OS and getting used to a new system and a new set of programs.”
“What you want is about 10 or 15 more good hackers getting paid and working on this thing 60 hours a week.”
To produce GPL’ed software? Who would pay? And why?
OSDL (=IBM,HP,…) pays Torvalds and Morton to manage and improve the kernel. I suppose because of expected pay offs despite the work being given away.
What else is there? The desktop. An office suite as good as Office. But for that I think it makes more economical sense with non-GPL’ed software – as for example what SoftMaker is doing.
I seriously disagree with his dismissal of SuSE. I Use SuSE 9 & it is *FAR* better than he decribes it… intelligence background indeed!
The Java Desktop provides the best user experience of any on the market. I prefer it to Mac OS X Panther and Microsoft’s XP. When users begin to experiment with Sun’s desktop, I expect the WOW effect to take place.
I never understood the “suffer through it becasue I think its better and for a good cause” mentalitly. People have different uses for comuputers and i can see where if for example you are developing for Linux where it would not be a big deal to do a complete switch to Linux. However back in the real world of IT most users including myself as (a UNIX SA) deal with life by using the best tools for the job. I personally work with 3 differnt platforms(including sparc solaris) Daily. My Windows XP box mainly for spreadsheets, email and Visio for architecture layouts and a G4 powerbook as my portable Unix workstation among other things. Fact is i chose these these tools not becasue i thought i would look cool and unique at work, but becasue they are the most effective tools for the job and make me a more productive worker. So when somebody spouts on about how linux is ready for the desktop I shake my head and wonder what planet this person is from. I think linux is a good start and it may be great for the town of Munich, but it is still not even close to the best desktop offerings on the market today.
To find areas where Linux is Lacking and can be improved. Unfortunatley so far in this one there are only a couple of points and they can only be solved by linux having a greater market share. Perhaps you could give me some good technical pointers as to why Linux is not ready for the desktop? And by the way there are many desktops.
Because Redhat jumped out of the “Desktop” scene I though it would be a good time for several other players to move in. I have noticed userland linux is already in the works. I would like to do my own but it would more likley be totally experimental and end up being nothing like linux anyway.
Thats why I am looking for valid criticism. Invalid criticism is pointless.
Half of the individuals on these threads who critize linux blindly, sharply and falsely have probably never used Linux for more than a week. What is further exasperating is the superficiality of their arguments.
For example, an individual above mentioned he didn’t think he was as productive on Linux as he was on Mac OSX or XP. But he never stated why. Is it the absense of tools? Is it instability? Is it viruses? Or is it just pure bigotry?
While I would like to see big corporations like Novell, SUN, Red Hat, IBM, SGI, contribute to the open source movement, I am hesitant about Linux’ move to acquire more market share.
Linux is first and foremost a community and revolutionary digital culture, before it is a tool and commercial endeavour.
For a *free* operating system that is comparable to Solaris, Microsoft Windows, MacOSX, IRIX, HPUX, OS/2, {fill in your commercial operating system}, Linux is indeed underrated. Especially given the fact that it is better than any of the above mentioned proprietary commercial offerings based solely on price/performance ratios.
Is Linux ready for the desktop? No! Linux is ready, only when you are ready. Many people are not ready. And I prefer they adjust at their own pace. Unfortunately, our commercial partners disagree, and the bigots continue to wail.
Well put John. I agree with everything you said.
> And yes people would Dual Boot just for games. lol. Why because I think half of the gamers probably use Linux. Gamers at least when I think of gamers, they are early adopters of technology, especially if something seems worth it. Most at around the age 14-30. That seems like the group that would be most senstitive to technological advances versus the old people, or very young children still watching sesame street.
I agree, but is Linux a technological advance? Technically, it is, but it you look at it from a game players point of view, it is not. In windows, pop in the cd, click, click, click… and the game is running. On Linux, in the best case, this is the same. On the average case, it is a little more in depth. Game players are not usually computer geeks.
> Its always been the teenager or interested adult that has tried new things and they have been brought up with having to know computers. Of course you could call them nerds but whatever, the gamers of today know how to use linux.
Knowing computers or knowing Windows?
> Also Mr. fellow CS. Major “affordably priced” probably only applies to you since your in college and you get discounts.
I JUST graduated as a CS major, so I understand the student needs.
> Come on Windows XP is expensive for the average joe, though prices are cheaper. Lets see… Win XP Pro is around 300$ now a days. and then what another 300$ for OFFICE >_< . What a rip off.
Hehehe… I got XP free from my school who is part of the Acedemic Alliance with Microsoft. I got Visual Studio .Net free too
If a student can’t afford Office, get OO.o for Windows.
> Suse 9.0 or Mandrake 9.2 does a better job with the software bundled together for what, less than 100$.
They come with more stuff, but most of it that is useful can be obtained free for Windows too.
> Course you used red hat, I dont know they didnt seem to be too desktop freindly to me and there is a saying if I remember it correctly. “if you use red hat you learn red hat, if you use slack you learn linux” , though i do have red hat experience. I had 5.2 on my old packard bell. I’ve used 7.3 and 9 on servers, but again its not desktop freindly.
I use Gentoo… so I am a bad example.
> As for me. I am also CS Major. I find that Linux is a better desktop than windows. Course everyones entitled to their opinion but , Linux supports x86 and ppc. Both are where most home user are (apples and dells probably).
Both Apple and Dell come with their own OS. So OS price really is not an issue since you pay it anyway. It is the home-made PC’s with no OS where the price advantage is, but you can not do that with PPC.
> Linux has Gnome and KDE. Almost all major distros come with some form of office application whethere OpenOffice or Star Office. Xine plays just about any type of media i need. Avis, and mpegs mainly (ive never liked WMV seeing as their latest version format isnt even supported on macs, as far as I know). you got xmms as the normal mp3 player. Gaim for AIM, Kmail – evolution – or Mozilla mail as your mail app. Almost all come with at least mozilla and konquerer. automatic printer setup is on most distros now a days.
Up to here, nothing differenciates Windows and Linux, except Gnome and KDE.
> Support for old hardware with light distros like vector linux. I really dont see why not. The only thing stopping Linux as a desktop is of course MS Monopoly.
Easy of use. In Windows, hardware and software just works. No messing around, no compiling from source if no distro-specific package exists, no reasearching hardware to see if it is even supported.
> Everyone uses MS, so everyone needs it at least those that love that one piece of software thats only on windows. I heard Dreamweaver works with crossover now so there kills one excuse.
This is true, but not Linux’s biggest disadvantage. Who cares how Linux is just as good as Windows. How is it BETTER?
This is true, but not Linux’s biggest disadvantage. Who cares how Linux is just as good as Windows. How is it BETTER?
1) Viruses
2) Stability
3) Cheaper
4) Vendor lock in
5) Ewil licenses
6) DRM
7) Freedom and choice
8) Portability
9) Scalability (I don’t need to purchase a new OS to run a server)
10) It’s just better.
11). Supports and encourages open standards rather than proprietary ones.
Help me out folks I now I’m missing more.
Ok this is why Linux is not ready yet. Suppose I tell one of my friends to try Linux. They’ll ask what distro to use
Easy. Just set them up with either the distro you use, or one you know reasonably well. Since you don’t seem to use or know one in particular, I’ll recommend Mandrake. It’s a real distro, and is quite newbie-friendly.
Then it’s question after question: What UI do you use?
I suppose you mean which Desktop Environment? Again, the choice for newbies is easy: Gnome or KDE. Your distro should install both, so he can try either and stick with the one he prefers. Or, the distro will choose for him (i.e. Lindows, which doesn’t include Gnome though you can install it later).
Rule of thumb: Mac people seem to prefer Gnome, Windows people seem to prefer KDE.
Why can’t I use this application in this UI ?
Well, that’s not a question they would ask since you CAN use a Gnome app with KDE, and vice-versa, as long as the libraries for both are installed (which most distros will do by default).
Why do i have to edit some text files through a terminal?
You don’t. You haven’t tried Linux in a while, have you.
Why aren’t I able to install all programs through the UI instead of shell scripts?
Again, you seem not to know much about recent Linux distro. Mandrake has a graphical installer program. There are also command-line program that do the same (note: “CLI commands” doesn’t equal “shell scripts”). Other distros have similar tool, and if you have a distro with Ximian Gnome it comes with the excellent Red Carpet installer.
Both OS X & XP could use some improvements but neither require you to get down and drag yourself through text configs and figuring out how to install everything.
Neither does Linux. As a regular user, you don’t need to deal with text configs at all – and since most apps are included, you barely have to install any software. If you need to, you can use the graphical installers provided with the distro.
Then there is hardware compatibility in which no Linux distro seems to work decently with whatever hardware I throw at it cheap & expensive.
Again, you haven’t tried Linux in a while. Most hardware is recognized and configured during installation. There are still some exceptions – but that’s what they are, exceptions. So your statement is quite misleading: there have been tremendous advances in Linux hardware compatibility, so that it does not represent much of a problem except for some specific pieces of hardware.
I recommend you try one of the distros that came out this year and see for yourself.
(BTW, on the power-user side of things, text configuration files are much more intuitive than going through the Windows Registry).
Most people want ability to use wizards to perform some tasks so they don’t have to read big manuals before doing a simple task
Linux distros have had wizards for a while, now. I know in Mandrake you can use them to configure a lot of things.
i have tried enough linux ditro’s and finally ordered my ibook with G4
I guess thats the only way get Unix on my notebook…
i just wonder why noone else tries to release a ‘sole desktop’ distro… kernel sole compiled for desktop performance less server-centric, well lets so no server-centric? And not just with few tweak on KDE, but a compelete rewritten KDE just to boost its performance on linux, not for bsds etc.. i can read the source codes but i’m sure they r all written in general(for all unixes), and i’m sure that really reduces the speed and performance for so many reasons. And i’m just curious, most distros are not commercial at all, why are they so coward to give tries for something new.. why no distro complied for new X servers? Why there isnt a single distro with a unique DE? is it of a too bald step for them? or they are planning to millions from linux already, NO PAIN NO GAIN..
Have a nice day all ,
Great writing by Tom Adelstien, clear, confident, but not shrill. His opinion on SuSe came as a mild shock as just ysdy I cracked the 38$ box of SuSe9 UPS delivered.
I haven’t installed it yet, but in reading the manual–which is trulty praise worthy–I found myself put off. Adelstein might be right about SuSe, I feared. (He said he wants a refund for his). There was too much Linux-speak. I thought SuSe was known for getting around it, but I found i would have to deal with command-line style file names and arcane hierarchies (which Windows or Mac has eliminated). I was also going to have to set up both a root and user for login.
Argue if you want, possible reader, but I don’t want that. Divorce is hard enough to go thru–migration out of Windows into Linux–and I need it to at least seem as if I decided to stick with yet another version of Windows. I want the desktop to be organizable the way my Windows ME is (when WinMe is working, that is).
I find myself on the fence. I want to extract Bill Gates from my life, completely, but Adelstein’s article soured my confidence in what I thought was the best way to do that, namely SuSe 9. I hesitate to install it now.
Nobody seems to get this. The average user DOESN’T install OSes. That’s it. No matter how easy it is. They buy a system with a pre-configured OS and let go. If that OS were the Penguin OS, then the average user would use it and get used to it. Even to vi, maybe.
A completely different question would be, whether their life would become a nightmare or not. No OS is perfect, I dislike UNIX in general and the Penguin OS in particular, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t some uses of a computer, even a ‘desktop’, where I think a UNIX in general and maybe even the Penguin OS is the most agreeable solution.
The question that needs to be answered and is never put clear is: can the OS be easily and soundly set up so that the odds of people wrecking it incidentally are low? Then that OS is ‘desktop ready’.
The Penguin OS isn’t; the BSDs are a little better.
The Windows OS is. OS/2 is. BeOS is. You can wreck those but it is unlikely you will. Macs unfortunately I don’t use.
It has nothing to do with usability; that’s important, but not the crux. Also, making it look and feel like Windows isn’t good. Windows is ugly enough as it stands.
“Nobody seems to get this. The average user DOESN’T install OSes. That’s it. No matter how easy it is. They buy a system with a pre-configured OS and let go.”
Reeeeeally?
A lot of people confuse the average Joe with their parents or grandmother that uses a PC as is, and that’s it.
In fact a VERY LARGE percentage of average users (meaning: not technical ones, no programmers, no sysadms) DOES install (and re-install) their OS. He also regularly installs programs, makes changes to his workspace, etc. Some even install and configure simple hardware such as PCI cards.
A lot of this staff is not easy on Linux yet.
And no, the average user DOES NOT “only need email, web browsing and mp3 playing”. People use their computers for a lot of different tasks. There are thousands of niche programs that average joe use. For example red eye correction software for photos, DJing programs, DVD ripping, DTP, etc. A lot of this functionality is limited or does not exist in Linux yet or in a limited form.
No matter how good a Linux OS is, at this stage, except for a handful of sales with installed Linux, it’s only going to be installed on an existing system with Windows (it’s unlikely those who buy Mac to begin with will want Linux). Therefore Linux installation is part of the Linux OS, period. At this stage, in fact, there is no distinction between “Linux” and “installing Linux”.
Coexistence with Windows is also crucial, altho, as I mention in above post, I will eventually want a divorce from Gates as soon as possible.
No, the average user doesn’t install OSes (notice the plural). The average user may go through the process of (re)installing the OS they bought/got their computer with. That’s about the same difference as between writing software and a spreadsheet macro. The issue has nothing to do with easiness but with context. There is next to no context where an average user will install an OS if they already have one running.
In fact a VERY LARGE percentage of average users (meaning: not technical ones, no programmers, no sysadms) DOES install (and re-install) their OS.
One of the lesser-known advantages of Linux over Windows (including Windows XP) is that the user is less likely to have to re-install the OS due to “Windows decay”, the general decrease in performance of Windows OSes over time. Ever since I’ve installed Linux on my PC, three years ago, I have never re-installed it. I’ve upgraded it four times (from Mandrake 8.1 to 8.2 to 9.0 to 9.1 to 9.2), but I havent had to re-install it.
Meanwhile, I’ve had to reinstall Win2K on my parents’ computer once on each (they have two), and reinstall Win98 on my gf’s computer, as well as on a friend’s computer (twice!).
WinXP also suffers from this, but in that case it seems linked to the many security upgrades from Microsoft. People have done tests where they install WinXP on two identical machines and patch one of them with all the latest upgrades. They noticed a marked decrease in performance in the patched box…
To me, that is one of Linux’s selling points: no more OS decay. Of course, YMMV.
Its good enough for a desktop in some departments of the biz world, people need to think what does your average person use a computer for, word processing, internet, maybe little music. in regaurds to that yes it is ready. on large scale where it needs to use applications that arent supported then no its not, linux i would say is ready but the software support isent.
Well hey, I didn’t get any student discounts for purchasing Windows (as I had graduated long before that), but even still I paid $150 for Win2k Pro OEM. That’s not bad, considering it’s one of the most important components of a system (and it pretty much gives me the opportunity to do anything I would ever need to do). Now I refused to purchase Microsoft Office since I figured I could use SO or OO or something, but I just learned that Microsoft has an agreement with my employer that allows me to get the whole suite (everything) for $20. That ain’t bad. :o)
But again, most people just buy computers with all that stuff packaged in there, so they don’t feel the pinch. And… unless they plan on building a server (which is prohibited by many high-speed internet providers)… there’s not much reason to switch.
JMO,
J
“Anyone in the broad IT field knows that Sun’s engineering surpasses everyone else’s. Sun put that same quality into their Java Desktop that one has come to expect from anything Sun. The user gets the benefits of Sun’s cumulative talents. Expect an incredible desktop from Scott McNealy’s band of merry engineers.”
*pardon me while I laugh myself silly*
I tend to agree with this one. Sun’s Engineering is unsurpassed. They’ve owned the Proprietary Unix market for years with Solaris, and they gave birth to Java (from which Microsoft created .NET, a glorified Java).
Well, SUN is one of the last “old-school” companies, along with SGI. The rest are more concerned with hyping and creating demand rather than saying, “hey, there is a demand here, why don’t we make the best [product] rather than trying to create something that is cheap”.
In the 20 years SUN has been around there have been only two issues that have cropped up, an USIII bug and an issue with an USII 440Mhz chip which *some* people complained about only to later find that these whiners were using un-certified memory. Those who used SUN certified memory suffered from no problems.
Sun has some of the best computer engineering in the world. Its problem is that that’s all it has. It has no marketing department to speak of. Its management is terrible. Just look at their stance on Linux! “Yes we support it…no we don’t support it. We support it, but we DON’T want you to use it. Use our Java Linux Desktop! But don’t use Linux.” It’s like a split personality!
IMHO, they shouldn’t even offer Linux on the server unless they’re going to through their full weight behind it. The fact of the matter is that they’ve preached Linux on the desktop, Solaris on the server. How is that a split personality?
There was a grey area about how much they support Linux/x86, they’ve now cleared it up, Linux on desktop and Solaris x86/SPARC on the server. How is that so hard for you to understand?
If Sun would just pull themselves together and have a little direction, they could take the market by storm.
SUN is in a good position. Give me 2 years and I could *easily* turn the company around to turning $400million profits without any loss in product quality. The problem is a lack of focus and direction, which causes miss spending right throughout the organisation.