“Typing “Linux” into Google gives about 109 million results. Surprisingly, that’s five million more than searching for “Microsoft”. But are potential users of the alternative operating system to Windows being enticed into making a decision they may later regret? Some Windows users are increasingly disillusioned with their computers. The internet no longer feels safe, thanks to viruses, spyware, trojans, hackers and pop-ups targeting features (and failings) in Microsoft software. Going online these days using Internet Explorer is like walking into a minefield.” Read the article at Independent.
Is Linux too good to be true?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
The author decries the proprietary nature of Windows, but seems to blame SuSe Linux for not dealing gracefully with proprietary hardware and software.
I’m sympathetic with newbies who run into such problems, but there are reams of documentation about such things. If you’re uncertain about your computer, your necessary software, and don’t want to spend the time researching the alternative, then Linux (any flavor) will leave a poor taste in your mouthe.
Beyond that major critique, the article is pretty generic, but I’m glad to see the author sticking around at the end.
I think this is easily the general perspective of first time Linux users, overall.
Most folks aren’t techies, they want to sit down and use their PC, they couldn’t care less about what is installed on their computers as long as it “just works”.
I’m happy to manually compile code, edit configuration files, re-compile my kernel, etc., however, I’m a programmer, this stuff is a thrill to me, I’m happy as a clam to have a free OS as superb as Linux to offer me nearly infinite possibilities to geek-around with my system.
My neighbor hates his computer because he keeps getting infected w/ the latest viruses, worms, spyware, etc. His “computer is slow”, and it crashes sometimes. He bought a PC with Windows 2000 pre-installed.
But, he can plug in a printer and it “just works”. He can open a browser, go to any site he likes, and it “just works”.
If I told my neighbor I could give him a CD with the best operating system around for x86 hardware, at zero-cost, he’d no doubt be excited!
However, after installing and running Linux and noticing hardware problems (if any) and the lack of “just working” for each and every perhipheral and whatever else he connects to his PC, he’d probably tell me to just “make it work” again and then take my Linux and “go piss up a rope” (I know my neighbor well).
I hope the user-friendly newbie distros (Linspire, Xandros, etc.) get to a point where everything “just works” so more people of this persuasion are tempted to ditch Windows w/o regret and disappointment.
Meanwhile, leave the “raw power” distros (Gentoo, Slackware, Debian, etc.) to those who desire them – hopefully their philosiphies stay intact and they never get too sissified!
You mean it will leave a poor taste in your mouth if you don’t have a geek friend to help you! Let’s face it: grandma can’t reinstall Windows and go to manufactures’ sites to download & install drivers either.
If you have a geek friend to help you, then using Linux (note that I said using) can be just as easy as Windows. My parents are a good example: they’ve been using Linux for years to browse the web. They don’t do anything else. And it works great. This is effectively similar to buying a computer with Windows preinstalled: someone else already had it setup for you.
Incomplete hardware support is not Linux’s fault: it’s the direct result of not being the #1 operating system. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to write perfect drivers for all x86 hardware in existance, without the help of manufacturers.
Before you use the usual excuse like “but the consumer doesn’t care”, consider this. Your “criticism” towards Linux is similar to critisizing a poor man in Africa for being poor. Yeah that’s great but he can’t become rich simply because he isn’t rich already. What I’m saying that that kind of criticism is unfair.
Yeah, OK, the problem is still there, but continuing to critisize like that won’t help any of us. It only annoys people.
I more or less agree with you. I’m sympathetic to newbies without knowledgable friends, but there’s lots of documentation out there about what Linux distros can and cannot do. I think that alone should tell the enterprising newbie that there’s a potential for a lot of work ahead.
Its also true that these problems tend to go away with time. Every successive year, Linux makes huge strides in dealing with things gracefully.
Never was it designed as such.
Never was it marketed as such.
Never was it developed as such.
If the open source world just wanted to build a better Win32, it would have developed in an entirely different fashion.
If I want to run Windows I will run Windows.
I I do not, I want an ALTERNATIVE. Therefore I run linux.
Frankly people looking for a “safer” Windows should just try Win2k – its older and not as pretty but is far more dependable than XP.
I find the article misleading. He writes it in a way as if he’s suggesting that everybody will encounter the same problems as he did.
Flat screen monitor: I have one too. Philips 170S4. I bought it half a year ago. It works great on Linux.
Internet: My cable connection’s DHCP was autodetected and worked out-of-the-box. I could immediately surf the Internet without *any* configuration whatsoever.
Outlook replacement: I don’t know why SuSE didn’t install Evolution by default, but Evolution *is* a capable MS Outlook replacement. In fact, it is written be a MS Outlook replacement. Outlook (not Outlook Express) isn’t installed in WinXP by default either so don’t nickpick about Evolution not being installed by default.
Before anyone label me down as “Linux zealot” or whatever: I’m simply telling the truth (actually it proves that you’re a bigger zealot than me because you can’t take criticism). Just because something doesn’t work for you or him, doesn’t mean it doesn’t work for everybody. Stop trying to make Linux look like a hell, because it isn’t. Some are lucky and some aren’t, such are the NATURAL effects of not being the #1 OS. This is a chicken and egg problem.
And guess what – keep saying Linux will never succeed on the desktop won’t help any of us. Write letters to your hardware manufacturers and ask them to write drivers for Linux. That’s a hell lot more productive.
Sure Windows is easier. Also I have noticed some comments earlier about downloading drivers and the latter for Windows from third party web sites. If you have a copy of Windows XP all “official” drivers from any “partner” of Microsoft are available from Windows Update. There is no need to go to a driver site and get them. Just click “Include Windows Update in your Driver Search” and wallah it’s loaded.
About Linux. It’s too much power for an commercial user. I have a Gentoo Box and it’s insane what I can do with it. But I spend 99% of my time on my 6 Windows XP machines. Windows has been a really good operating system since they unified to the NT Codebase. I am smart enough not to go to any questionable site and I never give my email address out. Plus I am behind a hardware firewall and had never had any problems.
Did the author bother to check hardware compatibility lists? No. It is INCREDIBLY naive to expect any given piece of hardware to work with ANY OS without having drivers on hand. Chances are that a new install of Windows would have given the same experience.
Did the author bother to save/resave documents in an open format? No. File format compatibility is no fault of the operating system, it is a lack of foresight of the user to not save in open formats. The author could have been a Kword user in Linux moving to Windows and would have had the same problem.
Nothing amazing here. Moving to another platform has its own difficulty period. All gripes mentioned in the article apply here. Ignorance of the OS is at fault, not the system itself.
So someone who obviously isn’t a geek tries out linux. He likes it but has some problems. Now he writes an article about it and tells his readers that he likes it, that he is going to stick with it but that he had some problems.
And you guys attack a person like this? Note, though he doesn’t seem to know a lot about computers he is even right about what causes some of his problems (note, he is not blaming linux) and he does something too few people do, he does some research and solves his problems. And you guys are still not satisfied?
Three cheers to the author for switching to Linux, but I have to wonder if he considered windows-based alternatives to the applications (which seemed to be his biggest complaint). He could have downloaded any number of excellent open source or shareware/freeware replacements for his softwares that were the source of most of his problems. Firefox, Eudora, The BAT, Pegasus, the list goes on. And there are freeware and shareware AV programs.
About viruses, worms, etc .. I just don’t understand what’s so damn difficult about NOT running IE unless absolutely necessary, running a firewall, and not opening every email attachment that comes down the pipe. That and an anti-virus program will get rid of most/all your security issues.
I mean, if people can’t follow the above instructions, I’m sorry .. but they don’t have a prayer with Linux.
I wasn’t attacking the article. I was attacking the people HERE are OSnews (and those at Slashdot). The “Linux will never be ready for the desktop and it’s all Linux’s fault”-crowd.
well, if you are going to look at it that way, dos was a stripped down unix alternative for low end hardware, and windows was designed to be mac for the office space. if anything, desktop linux is just bringing us full circle…
I hate how clueless article writers will try one distro and then generalize all of Linux based on it. Whats worse is that, as ususal, the author used a distro thats great for a corporate rollout but a poor choice for a personal desktop. He really should have been trying Xandros or Lycoris. Saying that Linux uses UFS was the last straw. He might as well write an article about how he tried a pickup truck out as a family vehical and found that it wasn’t perfect for the job, and then mention that its built on a plastic chassis or some such non-sense.
These fact-phobic so-called “journalists” need to research an article properly or stay off the subject.
The best thing about using Linux for your desktop is that you can take a little nap while openoffice is opening. Perhaps it should be openingoffice since that what it spends most of the time doing.
This article has some issues that should be pointed out:
1) For real change, there is only one answer – Linux. It’s open source, generally free to use and share and is not controlled by a single company. Its penguin mascot is cute too.
Linux is not the only open source alternative, you also have several *BSD out there. Yes, I prefer both OSS Solutions to Windows
2) How about connecting to the internet? Plug in and go… nowhere. My modem is an internal “softmodem”, driven by Windows, and Linux wouldn’t play. Much browsing later (in Windows, of course) and I had the right Conexant driver software, written by helpful Canadian company Linuxant.
A’hhhh.. Its a Windows modem and the key word here is Windows. Yes, Linux supports a good deal of Win-modems however, it should be restated that these modems were designed for Windows. Would you buy parts for a Ford and try to use them in a Pontiac. For no US-Residents, these are 2 automotive manufactures.
3) As you work through this early stuff, there’s a nagging problem for Windows XP-ers. While Linux can (mostly) read your files, it cannot (yet) write them back into the Windows XP partition of your hard drive (which uses Microsoft’s NTFS format).
Not true. There are projects that will use Windows drivers for reading and writing to NTFS partitions.
http://freshmeat.net/projects/linuxntfs/?branch_id=19432&release_id…
http://www.jankratochvil.net/project/captive/
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/status.html
4) Things are still tricky for word-processing, spreadsheets and the like. If you’re a Microsoft Office user, OpenOffice provides no-frills basics. Diehard Corel WordPerfect fans will discover that OpenOffice won’t read their files without a hard-to-install add-on. I tried installing Kword (part of KDE Office) to find it opened WordPerfect documents with unacceptably ragged results. This left me no choice (other than Windows), but to write this feature using OpenOffice.
Yes, I give on this point. MS file formats are hard to replicate, since they are moving targets. I am refering too the fact that MS constantly changes file formats which leaves the incrediably hard work OSS programmer to playing catch up, reveres engineer file formats. However, the author of the article has not tried WINE? Run Word or Excel in emulation mode, tis a tad bit slower but it works.
5)Linux is unfinished business without the panache of Windows XP.
All I can say is that its the authors opinion and I disagree with it. There are other options that were not investigated by the author.
6) Here’s what I need to do next. Find a word processor that reads my WordPerfect files properly and offers a word count on selected text.
I am guessing that Word Perfect is not as high on the priorty list as Word. Just a guess/feeling. Most of the world uses Word (not an issue), and .doc formats (big issue, aka vendor lock-in).
7) Will I give up Windows altogether? Probably. The more I use Linux, the better I like it despite the challenges. It hasn’t crashed; it’s immune to Windows viruses; it won’t fall victim to spyware, worms or hackers; and it feels (and looks) refreshingly different. But best of all, Linux promises greater choice at less cost. Just give it time to climb more of the Windows mountain.
I applaude this statement. However there are some comments that should be addressed:
a)Hasnt crashed, I have never had that happen either (same for *bsd).
b) it won’t fall victim to spyware: It can, depends on where you download your sources/binarys. Same thing applies to windows, its just more common.
c)it’s immune to Windows viruses; True.
d) worms or hackers; There are some viri for Linux but I dont believe any have been seen out in the wild. Hackers exist on every platform. There are just less on Linux due to its popularity. I will say that bugs are fixed quicker on OSS platforms compared to commercial (in general and this is an opinion). I have seen various studies that say just the opposite. Pay anyone enough and you can have a study say anything you want it too.
e) and it feels (and looks) refreshingly different.
You are 100 percent correct:
http://www.plig.org/xwinman tons of window managers
And who says there are too few software packages for Linux:
http://www.linuxshop.ru/linuxbegin/win-lin-soft-en/table.shtml
Here are some great open source programs for Windows users:
http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/
Sometimes small steps easy a transition (provided that they are interested).
He is trying to rate something for which he has no understanding. Attributing sync rate issues to the kernel, and ufs as a linux filesystem…
I think if xorg adopted a method to auto-detect your monitor syncs we’d see 90% of “linux” complaints dissapear over night.
I can sort of understand that people don’t like digging for sync rates, I don’t think they are always written on the monitor (although they should be on the back, clearly written and bolded).
Another helpful thing would have been if people weren’t so cheap and had purchased real modems
. Ok, that’s half Dell (and others) faults for being cheap and not using real modems.
Typing “Linux” into Google gives about 109 million results. Surprisingly, that’s five million more than searching for “Microsoft”.
My results differed in favor of “Microsoft”. Besides, if you are going to compare then compare “Microsoft” to “RedHat”, “Novell”, “Suse”, or other distro name here. Otherwise compare “Windows” to “Linux”.
Linux is more secure, offers greater choice and already powers web servers around the world.
Sorry they left that to FreeBSD.
This article sounds like another all praise Linux or else story. Its been done many times, and same results each time. Nothing new here.
I hate how clueless article writers will try one distro and then generalize all of Linux based on it. Whats worse is that, as ususal, the author used a distro thats great for a corporate rollout but a poor choice for a personal desktop. He really should have been trying Xandros or Lycoris, blah .. blah blah …
So, what happens when a person has a negative experience with Xandros like I did? The problem with your logic is that no matter what distro a person uses, there’ll be distro zealots out there screaming ‘he should’ve used this distro. I will concede that as long as Linux has all the apps you need, if you try enough distros, you’ll eventually find one to your liking. However, with dozens and dozens of distros out there, you can’t reasonably expect someone new to Linux to try 8,000 distros until he finds the ‘right’ one. My point? Stop blaming it on the distro.
I agree with what everyone is saying. Normal people, meaning not geeks like us dont see a computer the same way we do. We look at it and see all the various hardware and software systems that make it up. My friends mother who knows nothing about computers other than email and some web pages thought the monitor was the computer. Most people see Windows as the computer, they dont understand the idea of an operating system or the fact that it is independant of the computer and can be changed to something like linux. So to have people understand that Suse or Redhat or Mandrake isnt the sum total of what linux really is asking a lot. And trying to explain these concepts to those that dont have the vocabulary just scares them and makes there heads hurt. People are right to say dont blame the distro and that works, but you also cant blame everyday computer users for not understand what a distro is and how many there are.
Also, basic computer users cant be expected to go surfing for tech documents and info on there problems. They wouldnt know where to start or what it all means when they find it.
The other thing i agree with is that if Linux comes preinstalled on a computer like windows does then it can compete head to head with windows because the user will never have to deal with installing it, as most dont when they order a windows computer. Overall alot of good stuff in the article and the posts. Later
But I loved this (now) quote:
“Going online these days using Internet Explorer is like walking into a minefield.”
So is anyone else out there who wants to tell us that the author is clueless?
In case you didn’t notice, the author being clueless is the whole frigging point of the article. Someone who is clueless when it comes to computers is writing an article about his experiences with linux and yes who would have thought it he is running into some problems but lo and behold he is able to solve them.
What is so hard to grasp about this concept?????????
So are there some more 1337 hax0rs out there who want to enlighten us about what is the case with winmodems??????
I was a little disappointed at how this article read. The Independent is a proper paper, so I assume the guy wot rote this is a proper journo. It reads just like a thousand other “my first linux…” articles by enthusiastic amateurs. Still, it’s fair enough.
So he ignores FreeBSD et al. Even your geek friend may stare blankly at you if you say you’re having trouble with your BSD install. So he focuses on problems unique to him, much like a travel writer bemoaning the view from his hotel room.
It’s not going to excite many people. An OS needs to come pre-installed if wants to be successful. And Linux isn’t an OS of course. This was an article about SuSE. And a book.
“I just don’t understand what’s so damn difficult about NOT running IE unless absolutely necessary, running a firewall, and not opening every email attachment that comes down the pipe. That and an anti-virus program will get rid of most/all your security issues.”
Are you saying you don’t have to download any patches from Microsoft to be secure? Because if not, gigabytes worth of patches are going out all over the Net all for nothing.
But more importantly, this being from the noob perspective, they’re going to wonder why they shouldn’t use the browser that’s bundled with Windows. They buy the computer, they get it home, they hook it up to the Net and they might just get a worm or some other malware BEFORE they can get the patches. It doesn’t say anywhere in the documentation to get the patches before you go online. I once got a worm while downloading MSN. If they’re not safe at the MSN site, where are they safe?
The firewall is turned off by default, so obviously it’s not important they’ll figure. Running as administrator must not make a differene either since they only allotted it a tiny space in the Windows XP pamphlet. And once you get all the patches, spyware removers and anti virus software, ya still have to keep up with those patches, don’t you? It’s like I’ve said before, maybe Windows can be made secure, but it takes quite a bit of effort and even than, you’re only secure until the next security hole is found. It’s the neverending game. Sorry, Windows has the marketshare, it’s the target for malware writers and it’s mostly the noobs who have to suffer. God forbid the malware people should ever find a hole before Microsoft does because then we’re really going to see the Net crashing to a halt.
Are you saying you don’t have to download any patches from Microsoft to be secure? Because if not, gigabytes worth of patches are going out all over the Net all for nothing.
Most of the patches that are out there are to cover some hole in IE or exploit something that a firewall wouldn’t let through, so no .. not really. Of course, it never hurts to be patched, but you only have to do that about once a month.
But more importantly, this being from the noob perspective, they’re going to wonder why they shouldn’t use the browser that’s bundled with Windows.
Well, that was my whole point. ‘Noobs’ apparently don’t understand what ‘do not use Internet Explorer’ means, and then you have people offering them Linux as an alternative? BAHAHAHAHA!!!!
You have no idea of the number of times peoples PCs get messed up with purple monkeys popping pu everything, or adds installing themselves…Its insane. That last bug in IE where a webpage could add itself to your start menu was the real KICKER. Before that, I ahd thought if you didn’t accept weird active X controls and didn’t open funny e-mails, you would be pretty safe.
Normally being a firefox user, I launched IE to some demo site of the bug, and lo and behold, it installed itself.
Nonetheless, having fixed other peoples PCs 1000 times, I’m pretty sure the situation would not be much better on linux in the long run. Most of these people don’t even want a password. They want things to auto-logon and never prompt them. If they’re trying to access a site and it asks them to allow it, their first reaction is yes, rather than no. The best thing for these people for now, is to just use firefox or mozilla. But sometimes they just don’t understand why site X won’t work…then they’re back to IE.
>>>>>>>>
So are there some more 1337 hax0rs out there who want to enlighten us about what is the case with winmodems??????
<<<<<<<<<
Sure since you asked, and since I worked at an internet provider prior, during, and after the release of winmodems, I’ll be more than happy to put it in layman’s terms.
a winmodem is the cheapest, crappiest piece of junk manufactures like Lucent, HFC, Connexiant, etc. sell in bulk to companies like Compaq, Hp, Dell, and many other vendors who offer “off the rack” computers. A winmodem lacks a harware chip found in other nomal modems, the windows OS itself emulates this “missing” hardware chip via it’s driver, hence the term winmodem.
Even in windows Winmodems sucks, you’ll typically get faster download rates disabling a winmodem’s 56k capabiilities and downloading at 33.6 . Still not convinced. We worked with lucent who made both the end user’s winmodems as well as our RAs gear (portmasters at the time) and it took almost half a year for Lucent to produce decent codes for their own portmasters which allowed their own lucent winmodems to connect at all!
Modems are dinosaurs anyway, shell out the extra 5 bucks a month and enjoy a high speed cable/dsl connection
“I can sort of understand that people don’t like digging for sync rates, I don’t think they are always written on the monitor (although they should be on the back, clearly written and bolded).”
Written on the back of the monitor?? what for? all that information is available via the DDC standard [ http://www.hwupgrade.com/monitor/index6.html ], if the X server doesn’t even make use of it and gives a “no screen found” error to the user, then perhaps linux isn’t quite ready for the desktop™ as you may think…
Easy to use. Easy to install. Easy to update. It just works. Even grandma can use it.
And, under the hood, a full blown BSD system for us geeks.
Sublime.
This a well written article, with some minor mistakes. Not only does MS-Windows not support UFS but most linux distros do not support UFS out of the box, usually you’ll have to recompile your kernel to be able to read UFS and if you’re the gutsy type you’ll compile the portion that will allow you to actually write to UFS partitions.
Still a good article, recommended for anyone looking to try out Open Sourced Operating Systems.
Easy to use. Easy to install. Easy to update. It just works. Even grandma can use it.
And, under the hood, a full blown BSD system for us geeks. >>>
shhhh.
You’ve proposed a sensible, easy solution for grandma. Slightly higher initial cost on hardware ($799 to walk in the door [though amazon.com did have a $760 special I saw last week]) but one that is quickly offset by not needing to put in hours of (unpaid) tech support.
In the mean time, I’m waiting for the comment that OS X is evil because it only runs on Apple harware.
Which of course completely overlooks the point that
(a) Grandma doesn’ give an fsck about the “liberation” of her computer and its OS any more than she cares about what kind of OS the ATM at the bank runs. (Probably QNX)
(b) It RUNS. Period. It’s harder to set up a VCR than it is to get an eMac out of the box and on to the internet.
I enjoy subjective & objective articles if only just to see what others think, but this reminds me of articles written around 1998 when linux was a fairly new concept to everyone except for linux geeks. Did he really not know until now that Linux doesn’t play well with winmodems, or that Linux does not write to NTFS? (Every forum will tell you to copy you Documents folder to a not NTFS partition. This is a perfect backup of your data and gives linux writing ability to it). Glad that he tried linux but a few short hours in any quality linux forum would solve just about every problem listed here and get him way out of “base camp”. Maybe try again with that in mind.
OS X is evil because it only runs on Apple harware.
There. I said it. Of course, I don’t mean it. I love Mac OS X.
one word:
Knoppix
Some Linux users are increasingly disillusioned with their computers. The internet no longer feels safe, thanks to worms, rootkits, hackers targeting features (and failings) in Linux software.
[…Story goes how Linux user tried to switch to Windows, misses powerful shells, GNOME vs. KDE debates. User is also very annoyed by constant Windows reminders that patches should be applied and antivirus must be installed. User also complains that MS Word 2000 can’t read his OpenOffice documents saved in XML…]
Will I give up Linux altogether? Probably. The more I use Windows, the better I like it despite the challenges. It hasn’t kernel panicked; it’s immune to Linux worms and viruses; it won’t fall victim to rootkits; and it feels (and looks) refreshingly different. But best of all, Windows promises greater choice in desktop PC hardware and software for paying customers.
.. are not downloadable because XP did not detect or install my broadcom gigabit ethernet card, or my WinModem. Linux did, no questions asked.
“” Typing “Linux” into Google gives about 109 million results. Surprisingly, that’s five million more than searching for “Microsoft”. “”
That’s one of the stupidest things I’ve ever read.
… and if you add all of the search results that are returned for every Linux distribution like Suse and Mandrake, there are almost 75 million more than Microsoft. By our estimation 91% of people use MS, while 25% use Apple, and almost 88% use Linux.
The issues the author mentions are real. It is foolish and self-defeating to ignore them. Zillions of MS format files exist. Zillions of MS users won’t read files unless Word created them. Not necessarily the best situation, but Linux won’t gain converts by ignoring these issues. People will endure viruses and spam in order to get their work done.
The article is really expaining why Linux needs to go beyond Windows in order to supplant it.
Now I feel comfortable in switching from Linux to Windows.
Why don’t Linux distributions have an NTFS read/write driver by default. I remember seeing that totally cool hack where they use NTFS.dll to read/write NTFS partitions.. wasn’t that stable enough?
You sure Linux can depend on Microsoft?
Me too…
Not.
I am not a developer, just a competent PC user, doing the regular desktop stuff (no games) plus academic writing and data analysis/statistics. For the reasons pointed out in the “Independent”, one year and a half ago I’ve switched to Devian Linux for good.
Besides the usual praise to Linux (stability, security, diversity in decent quality GUI choice), I would rather focus on what Linux gave me in terms of computing experience.
First, it’s the kind of modular computing that Windows didn’t even let me know about. The OS is modular, the GUI is modular, the applications and utilities, too. I found the concept of one small tool for one job very powerful and learning to use it was challenging but instructional.
Second, I’ve learned some good habits in using the PC and I’ve simply become more technically savvy. Bash scripting is cool, as is writing papers is Lyx or Texmacs doing bibliographical databases in Bibtex (versus Endnote), and doing statistics in R (versus SPSS). Windows just kept in me in the computing kindergarten for years.
Windows ignores Linux and its UFS filesystem altogether
1) Linux generally uses the Ext2FS or Ext3FS; UFS is used by BSD/Solaris. FSes such as XFS and ReiserFS are not supported by Windows.
2) Various, stable implementations of Ext2FS and Ext3FS drivers for Windows exist including some which support stable write support. A search on Freshmeat.net will give some insights about several of these implementations.
I’d like a replacement voice-dictation program too (if one exists).
E.g. “Festival”.
(Also mailed to The Independant.)
Why not supply one of the many EXT3 drivers for NT/XP to users?
And you guys attack a person like this? Note, though he doesn’t seem to know a lot about computers he is even right about what causes some of his problems (note, he is not blaming linux) and he does something too few people do, he does some research and solves his problems. And you guys are still not satisfied?
Oh, i am satisfied. I’m generally satisfied with The Independent because they tend to research instead of assuming too much. Sure, there are some minor details wrong but a lot are right and do show the author investigated aspects. One can’t reasonably demand a non-geek got all the fine details top-notch. The ones which are wrong are improvable by letting the author know. He might learn something from such feedback, especially if it is constructive, is backed up with sources, is factually correct.
The subjective parts are part of journalism and there’s nothing wrong with that. Live with it, or argue about it, as the standard people do: Russian Guy the Windows ideologist, Kady Mae the MacOSX idealogist, etc.
Why don’t Linux distributions have an NTFS read/write driver by default. I remember seeing that totally cool hack where they use NTFS.dll to read/write NTFS partitions.. wasn’t that stable enough?
You’re volunteering? The FAQ on the Linux-NTFS (linux-ntfs.sf.net) clearly states they got the needed documentation. What they don’t have is the huge time and developer man-power to implement the complex code. Having said that, there is basic write support in some extend; not complete though.
Why not supply one of the many EXT3 drivers for NT/XP to users?
You’re addressing the wrong people here. You need to talk to Microsoft, asking them to add a driver in their Windows products by default instead of a third party driver. Good luck…
Yes there are some cool hacks with respect to NTFS/DLL’s and Linux, making them playing all nice together. However there is one problem with the DLL and putting it with a linux distro.
!!!! IT BELONGS TO MICROSOFT !!!!!!!!
You only license your software, you do not own it. And yes your license can be rejected by Microsoft at anytime.
Sorry, the caps is ment for emphasis, not shouting. Most people believe that you actually own software. Sorry all. You pay to use the software, not own it.
Hey, I understand you’re angry after fiddling with config files and a command line all day, but chill out. The documentation is available here: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net . Since you’re probably worked up from having to use Linux daily, I won’t even request an apology.
I know it’s hard trying to think when your brain is clouded with copyright issues, but you don’t need to distribute NTFS.sys with the linux distro. Anyone who wants to read data from an NTFS partition already has a copy of NTFS.sys, it is sitting on his/her NTFS partition. As for asking Microsoft to ship an EXT3 driver with Windows, why should they? Is it really that hard to put the drivers on the Linux CD and add a little documentation called Accessing Your Linux Partition From Windows to the box?
Quote:
“Because documentation for NTFS is unavailable, you beeping moron.
And because we have better things to do than to figure out how you should go about getting your data out of the ugly mess that is windows. Hint, create a damn FAT32 partition or put a SAMBA/CIFS server on your network and move your files there.”
Yes. 100% correct and well said. When journalists learn to be ‘faithful’ reporters and indicate that Microsoft holds ransom to peoples data by deliberately using proprietary standards and obfuscating details to stop people from using anything else other than Microsoft Windows and other various products – it’s NOT Linux distributions fault – get it thru your thick heads. Blame Microsoft. Bitch to Microsoft. Bitch to the US DOJ that is obviously bribed by Microsoft (geek speak ‘owned’). Don’t bitch to us Linux users that get off our rear ends and bother to learn, instead of whining and carrying on.
I’ve said it before, and i’ll say it again, most people are TOO stupid to use a PC and should never be allowed near one. It’s half the reason why Microsoft became so big, and there’s so much crap around like spam etc…
Dave W Pastern
Linux is not an Operating System, people often forget that, and especially for newbies its important to know that more than software from kernel.org is running on their computer, I challenge those who disagree to run a linux only machine, try compiling linux, with linux, or refer the the components of a system correctly. This is a pet hate, mainly because FSF, and GNU have been around for a lot longer, and frankly aren’t getting the credit they deserve…
I’ve trolled enough now.
After ten minutes most people will realize what they’ve got themselves into. The worst case is several lost days before realization that Linux is totally different will set in; at that point a decision’s been made.
“it won’t fall victim to spyware, worms or hackers;”
What makes you so sure of that? Linux is safe for now because its not a worthwhile target for viruses and spyware (among other things). Give Linux a significant marketshare, and I could easily see it becoming a victom.
Why do people keep saying Linux is “different”? It’s not! Linux is “the same”, it’s Windows which is “different”.
Think about it.
If you are reading this….
I thought that was a really positive article, and although you did have a few problem, you did try to sort them yourself.
Have you tried using Abiword ? It has full support for opening and saving Wordperfect files. As had been said earlier, Evolution is an excellent replacement for Outlook.
However, this highlights another problem for Linux. You said you installed SuSe, so therefore you would be using Yast.. Did Yast not give the option to install Abiword and Evolution ? Or was the package description too vague ?
I think if a distro came with an install script and listed the packages with a description of what they would be replacing on a Windows machine, then Linux would be taken up faster than it is at the minute.
@ Darius
Yes, we can expect to tell people who barely know how to run Windows to use Linux instead. Install Linspire, Xandros or even Mandrake 10 on their machines, and it WILL just work out of the box. Even change the Mozilla/Opera/Konqueror/Epithany icon to look like IE and I doubt they could tell the difference… Apart from not getting any crap
As an OSX user I really like this kinds of subjects, just reading along and smiling!
Since you’re probably worked up from having to use Linux daily, I won’t even request an apology.
—
how about patents and the fact that MS cant read linux filesystems either?
The best thing about using Linux for your desktop is that you can take a little nap while openoffice is opening. Perhaps it should be openingoffice since that what it spends most of the time doing.
I have to mention that if you take the time to turn off the “Feature” that lets MS Office autoload into memory on boot, OpenOffice and MS Office have quite comparable load times, in my experience.
Yes, we can expect to tell people who barely know how to run Windows to use Linux instead. Install Linspire, Xandros or even Mandrake 10 on their machines, and it WILL just work out of the box. Even change the Mozilla/Opera/Konqueror/Epithany icon to look like IE and I doubt they could tell the difference… Apart from not getting any crap
I’m not even going to attempt this with my machine, because I’m running too much ‘specialized’ hardware, but let’s put your theory to the test with a friend of mine, who is just your average everyday user, and has the following hardware:
1. All in one Dell printer/scanner, plus a Cannon S600 printer (she uses both)
2. PDA – Dell Axim PocketPC (uses Outlook to sync contacts, notes, etc)
3. Kodak digital camera
4. Dell Jukebox 20GB mp3 player
5. Will soon have a pioneer A07 DVD burner
So you’re telling me that if she installs any one of the Linux distros you just mentioned, all of this crap is going to just work out of the box?
the article seems to have been OsNews’ed?
of course I am not arrogant enough to say Yes it will all work.
for a couple of reasons…..
1: Which Kodak digital camera ?????
2: Which Dell printer/scanner ????
3: I have no idea about that pda, so I can’t say if it will or not.
Dell jukebox mp3 player and the DVD burner…. yes for definate, they will work.
See, that raises another point,
If you tried a distro and stuff did not work, the best thing to do would be to ask the distro community about their experience with the hardware, not just give up on linux there and then.
And another thing… ask the forum on the website of the distro that you chose, do not ask questions on general sites like this one as you will only ever end up with an argument.
There will almost always be people willing to help in any way they can though… Like me. I always stick one of my email addresses in my posts in case anyone wants to contact me privately to find out things they need help with
Yes to all of the above, the printer is the only wildcard because you are not providing model numbers, but it should work.
Try MDK 10 Official or the upcoming 10.1 when it come sout.
99% of cameras use PPT or USB mode, both of which are well supported.
The Dell AximPocketPC will work with Linspire and probably other distributions. Linspire had an agreement with Dell to make this work.
And DVD-Burners and the jukebox are no problem at all.
Ultimately, you can keep coming up with excuses. When I started using Linux, I made a conscious decision to stick with it because I was looking at a long term value proposition. I sold my unsupported web cam and got one that worked. Everythign else worked out of the box.
I’d say that is a small price to pay for having such an incredible operating system at my finger tips, one that keeps getting better and better.
You keep making this too easy or you are a joker, I am not sure which one it is.
All GPL software is unencumbered by patents. Go read the GPL. So of course, Microsoft could implement XFS, et2/3, etc…
I think what’s stiking is that Linux is in the Independant. That’s significant to say the least.
I hope some of you guys offered him solutions to his issues, rather than just banging on here about what he should have done?
The good thing about Linux is when finally you manage to climb that hill, towards knowing how to fix or achieve pretty much anything. Unfortunately it is only when you are at the top of that hill that you understand it – and it is only then when using it in any practical daily sense (particularly as a Desktop) becomes viable. Unfortunately it is a very steep climb – and not one that the majority of computer users would be prepared to make.
Anyway as an aside, although I don’t so much mind the rest, Open Office still does suck. You could almost take a day trip somewhere while you wait for it to open. How is it possible with modern hardware on a highly optomised kernel, for something to open so slowly?
Don’t the developers know what a joke this has become?
I still use Office XP in Linux anyway.
GJ
I’m not the first to be saying this, but …
The average Wal-Mart shopper can take their new Windows machine and, after an hour of figuring out where all the wires go, turn it on.
They can’t, however:
– Get their internet connection set up
– Configure their e-mail
– Configure a printer/scanner/digital camera
– Switch to a different browser, because they don’t know there are alternatives
And guess what? They would have the same problems with a Linux box. In both cases, most people would need a tech friend/family member to come over and get things running for them.
We have to remember that we read and post to these forums be cause *we* are those tech friends and family members. My Dad does not hang out here. Hell, my boss (the Director of IT) still needs me to come to her house to set up wireless networking. It’s probably fair to say that less than ten percent of the computing population really (REALLY) knows what their doing. Everyone else is using AOL.
My 2 cents.
a lot of you here are complaining about the start up times of open office. and yes, the versions included with most distros is annoyingly slow.
Openoffice.org have recently been working on performance and the latest version v1.1.2, I think, is blazingly fast at start up compared to older versions.
I have been using Linux for 3 years now and i have been using windows since v.95 … All i can say is. Linux will never replace Windows. Because they; Winblows has already a strong foothold on the market. They have the most excellent strategy of implementing their OS on the market. They are Unified. Whereas Linuz community are fragmented. I love my Linuz box and my *nix box. But they will never be mainstream Winblows.
Just stop these comparisons.
“a lot of you here are complaining about the start up times of open office. and yes, the versions included with most distros is annoyingly slow.
Openoffice.org have recently been working on performance and the latest version v1.1.2, I think, is blazingly fast at start up compared to older versions.”
Well I guess ‘blazingly fast’ must be a relative term. If you call 30 seconds on a Pentium 3.2GH machine with 512M of Ran and a Radeon 9800XT video card blazingly fast, maybe you have become overly accustomed to life in the slow lane?
Thankfully there are alternatives, even if not all of them are free.
But anyway I don’t remember if 30 seconds is any faster than previous versions or not – I know it has always been an issue with OO from the beginning – but somehwo the developers seem not to notice it. (Even though it has become the butt of many jokes).
But there you are. Sometime MS does win out on some things.
GJ
yeah so i did notice when i tried to install my 3ware card in windows xp.
procedure (xp)
1 download drivers
2 make floppy
3 get a floppy-drive for computer
4 boot and install
procedure (linux)
1 insert cd and install
both could have more steps inserted for linux ex downloading and burning cd or buying
but those steps a requierd for windows to
are you sure you are using version 1.1.2 ???
I personally don’t think so, especially not when you say 30 seconds on a 3.2g processor.
and also, are you timing the windows version or the linux version ? I cannot comment on the windows version, but even on a low spec 1ghz machine it starts in less than 8 seconds for me.
MS only wins on speed of start up, simply because it uses hooks to preload before you even click the icon.
If you time your pc start up before installing office then again afterwards, you will then know why ms office APPEARS to start quicker.
ADD on them extra seconds that it adds on boot time
1. One of the primary goals of the upcoming 2.0 release of Openoffice is to make it start faster, so it is a concern to the developers.
2. If you are using Linux try oooqs, the openoffice quick starter, it helps a lot.
If you are using windows I think there is an option somewhere to preload openoffice. This should also help a lot.
Yes It was the lastest. It was Linux – and it still takes far too long.
GJ
Bullethead says that he spends 99% of time on Windows.
If you use GNU/Linux only 1% of your time then how you can say its not easier??
more info please ?
like what filesystem have you got the hard drive formatted under ?
which linux distro ?
what other processes are running ?
tell us things like that, and just maybe we might be able to get you running a tiny bit faster
“Well I guess ‘blazingly fast’ must be a relative term. If you call 30 seconds on a Pentium 3.2GH machine with 512M of Ran and a Radeon 9800XT video card blazingly fast, maybe you have become overly accustomed to life in the slow lane?”
17 secs on inferor hardware, Athlon 1.4 Ghz and 376 MB RAM. And this is a cold start. On a second start, it took 10 secs. Looks like there’s something wrong with your system.
*nix built originally as multi-user server os. windows as single-user desktop os. they are still dominant in their natural respective domains. on desktop, windows still has edge in terms of ease-of-use issues like built-in well-documented help files. *unix is still the better wrt security and stability. but the differences are getting smaller day after day. the race is to the middle of the battlefield.
> Looks like there’s something wrong with your system.
I agree.
Open Office 1.1.0 opens in 7 sec on my 500MHz, 440 MB RAM, box. There are two xemacs also running, with dozens of buffers open, and about 7 other open windows
“Well I guess ‘blazingly fast’ must be a relative term. If you call 30 seconds on a Pentium 3.2GH machine with 512M of Ran and a Radeon 9800XT video card blazingly fast, maybe you have become overly accustomed to life in the slow lane?”
If you knew how RAM and swap work, or if you considered to take that into account, you’d have stated how much RAM and how much swap (including the total #’s) were in usage before and after you started the program (in this case OO.o). Your research now proofs nothing except that its flawed.
I guarantee you, that i can get any software which requires the same memory usage as OO.o crawling on your system in an equal manner as OO.o. I’ll just get my RAM full, and my swap pretty much full too. Fun. Ahem.
Linux amd OSS have a lot of online documentation. This is mirrored and copied to countless sites. How many of these hits were duplicates?
Windows (as in the os) is probably mentioned more than MS. Together with all the different variants of Microsoft (MS, M$ etc.), the true count is much higher.
Besides, any discussion about Linux/OSS usually contains more flamewars about Windows, then normal discussions 🙂
MS Office does not “pre-load” on my machine, but still opens blazingly fast on my pIII 500 compared to OOo on Linuz. The mere fact that MS-office optimizes office files on start-up is a very good concept. IMHO MS-Office suite is Really the No.1 most superior suite on earth.
But MacOS X is too good to be true. This is why I think its just a figment of my imagination.
I have only used IE when a page I wanted to see needed it, so 99.9% of the time I use netscape. Now 99.9% of the time I surf with SuSE. I still have windows for games & others in my family.
The best thing about using Linux for your desktop is that you can take a little nap while openoffice is opening. Perhaps it should be openingoffice since that what it spends most of the time doing.
How old is your sys.? OpenOffice opens fast enough for me.
I think this is easily the general perspective of first time Linux users, overall.
Most folks aren’t techies, they want to sit down and use their PC, they couldn’t care less about what is installed on their computers as long as it “just works”.
I’m happy to manually compile code, edit configuration files, re-compile my kernel, etc., however, I’m a programmer, this stuff is a thrill to me, I’m happy as a clam to have a free OS as superb as Linux to offer me nearly infinite possibilities to geek-around with my system.
My neighbor hates his computer because he keeps getting infected w/ the latest viruses, worms, spyware, etc. His “computer is slow”, and it crashes sometimes. He bought a PC with Windows 2000 pre-installed.
But, he can plug in a printer and it “just works”. He can open a browser, go to any site he likes, and it “just works”.
If I told my neighbor I could give him a CD with the best operating system around for x86 hardware, at zero-cost, he’d no doubt be excited!
However, after installing and running Linux and noticing hardware problems (if any) and the lack of “just working” for each and every perhipheral and whatever else he connects to his PC, he’d probably tell me to just “make it work” again and then take my Linux and “go piss up a rope” (I know my neighbor well).
I hope the user-friendly newbie distros (Linspire, Xandros, etc.) get to a point where everything “just works” so more people of this persuasion are tempted to ditch Windows w/o regret and disappointment.
Meanwhile, leave the “raw power” distros (Gentoo, Slackware, Debian, etc.) to those who desire them – hopefully their philosiphies stay intact and they never get too sissified!
what you are talking about (handling peripherals windows-style) is in something called HAL. HAL should be integrated into gnome 2.8, which isnt that far away. (itll probably be in the next kde version too)
Hardware and software.
LInux absolutely can’t “compete” against–that is, replace–Windows. The problem with Linux is hardware drivers, and NO APPS. Please don’t tell me about all the little stuff available–email, browsers, etc. I tried them all. Some are good, or good enough. Linux has that stuff covered. I won’t other to write what Linux doesn’t have covered.
A user should NOT have to search the internet to get Linux running AFTER s’he has installed it a user should not have to go hunting down drivers and “fixes”.
The solution can ONLY come when sources OUTSIDE of the Linux “community” provide drivers–all major hardware makers, from Creative Labs to HP to Xerox …
The same is true for software. Major makers of major APPS, at risk of offending Chairman Gates, have to provide Linux versions of their major efforts. The Big Linux Push, operative word “push”, cannot come from within. The software makers will ultimately prosper–proprietary Linux APPS are fine with me–but most companies are too tied up with Wall Street and Windows/Gates to break free.
“I’ve said it before, and i’ll say it again, most people are TOO stupid to use a PC and should never be allowed near one. It’s half the reason why Microsoft became so big, and there’s so much crap around like spam etc…”
I’d say more than 95% of the problems in this world which are attributed to stupidity, are actually a result of laziness. I think people are far smarter than people who complain about stupidity think. It’s not that people *can’t*, it’s that they *won’t*, and various conditions in the present world enforce and encourage this kind of behavior. People want quick solutions (weight loss, investments in dot coms and bubble IPOs, Windows), rather than methodical, long term solutions. Even Windows could probably be made rather secure if some of the “simplifying” features were torn out.
People won’t read documentaion, and complain about “RTFM!” responses in support channels. There needs to be a countervailing current to de-legitimize this way of approaching things in life. Sometimes a complex thing can be made both simple and secure, but often it cannot. If people spend a weekend reading a manual, they may save 5 weekends worth of troubleshooting over the next decade. An initial investment in anything, has a tendency to pay off down the line.
It is unreasonable to expect that Windows users be able to just “turn on the machine and go,” wildly clicking on everything and anything that catches their fancy – *and be safe at the same time*. And *know how to fix common problems which will inevitably arise*.
In the sense that Linux is an alternative to, and not a clone or copy of Windows, I have no desire to see it become more like Windows, except in the cases where being more like Windows simplifies without sacrificing. I came to Linux because I was annoyed at Windows (Someone said in a comment in another article that “Linux was for people who hate Windows.” / “BSD is for people who love UNIX.”). In time though – and it didn’t take long, I became a lover of Linux, and I can name far more reasons now in favor of using Linux (or a BSD) than I can against using Windows.
Simplicity is seen as a virtue, even when it normally comes at the cost of power, capability, and security. Windows is simple. It can be made secure, by doing some “complicated” (by casual user standards) stuff – creating non-privileged user accounts, installing a firewall/router and configuring rational ingress/egress rules, and developing smart online behavior, turning off facilities which automatically launch things, or whatever.
I think the rule that ought to govern the design of anything ought to be, “Make it as simple as you can while preserving security, power, and configurability.” The last part of this seems to be lost on a lot of people who get paychecks for writing about “Linux on the desktop,” and how it’s supposedly “not ready.” Windows is ready for the desktop – it’s simple – and it’s a security mess, and Windows users are especially clueless when it comes to fixing problems. I have my own firewall logs and calls from family members, as well as time doing phone support for Windows, to prove it. Windows users like to not think too much about computers, and this attitude is *not a boon*, even to the most casual user, in the end.
There are definitely things in Linux that need improvement (printing comes to mind), and which can be simplified, but the idea that we ought to be making Linux like Windows – like Lindows does, running dumbly as root – strikes me as a rather unsavory proposition.
Do you have a box like I do with tons of cables in it, completely tangled in a hellish ganglion? To me, this ought to be the test, for whether someone is ready for Linux or not.
Hand them this huge knotted mass of wires and instruct them to untangle it. If they start randomly pulling wires on all sides of the ganglion wildly, they’re not ready for Linux. There is also a strong likelihood that they have computers full of spyware, viruses, and spam. There is no reason that anyone after, say, 2-3 years of using a computer, should regularly and chronically fall victim to these scourges.
Whereras, if they methodically follow each wire as it wraps through the knot, carefully snaking the wire through the knot, untangling it in an ordered fashion, then they are likely to become very productive Linux users – or at least safe Windows users.
This test can actually tell you volumes about the way a person approaches problems. In the United States in 2004, where I’m from, there are a hell of a lot of wild wire-pullers around. These are the same people who will click on any popup window randomly just to get it to go away – resulting in spyware and virus infections, etc.
People who carefully untangle knots, whether it be in their shoelaces, cable boxes or otherwise, will generally tell you that speaking in terms of aggregates, a “wild puller” will occasionally untangle a knot faster, but if you look at all of the knots you face in life and add up the time it took to unravel them, the methodical knot-untiers will save far more time. At the same time you develop a skill with knots, and get gradually better at doing this quicker and quicker. A “wild puller” won’t.
A methodical knot-untier with no computer experience whatsoever will, in the long run, be a more proficient, productive computer user than a wild knot-puller with years of experience.
This extends, I believe, to all things.
So absolutely – create tools to make things easier, without taking power away from the user. Nor should the tools fix things without telling the user how it fixed them. It should describe how it “untied the knot.”
Computer users of all kinds should be expected to learn the basics about the systems they use, because when they don’t, and they act thoughtlessly (and oh, they will), we all pay for this. Support costs go up, causing support quality to fall as less agents are hired. Worms, viruses spread. You get calls from your family and acquaintances at all hours to go fix tedious Windows problems.
This kind of thoughtlessness has been encouraged, and in the end it costs us all – users, developers, support personnel. There must be a way of countering this attitude. Perhaps it all comes down to refusing to help people who refuse to learn. “No, I won’t clean the spyware off of your system. But you can go online and learn how, and maybe learn how you got it on your system in the first place.”
“You will learn to untie a knot methodically. And this will take an expenditure of effort and time, which like money invested, will be an initial sacrifice for a greater return: In the end, you will save time and frustration.”
It seems important that we are willing to interactively help people develop this skill. “All roads start at http://www.google.com” is a good thing to say.