Slashdot Mirror

Many MS users don't know what a driver is or where to find one, what do they do when their new printer doesn't come with linux-compatible drivers?

After plugging in the printer, I just open http://127.0.0.1:631/ in a webbrowser and if I couldn't find the model there, I just add a printer from the same series... Always worked for me!

He brings up a good point with the difficulties of providing tech support.

I'm sure including a piece of paper with the printer that says to choose model "X" from that list or whatever won't kill anyone.

will it recognize my canon pixma ip 1600 printer

According to some usenet posts, it's supported fine by CUPS

and pcmicia wireless card

My PCMCIA wireless cards (broadcom, atheros chipsets) all work fine under Linux, I did have to install one package (bcm43xx-firmware) for broadcom before it work though. Just 'apt-get install bcm43xx-firmware' (nothing else).

I cannot say if any of that would work under Debian stable. I haven't used stable in years.

Printing sucks, if you can even get it to work!

I always found it so easy to setup etc. Just had to visit http://127.0.0.1:631/

Video drivers is a total crap shoot.

The OSS better than the Windows ones. On Windows I can't even play Second life on my ATi mobility LY m6 graphics card. I can on Linux.

Software development has no central respository for documentation

Eh? Just install the -doc packages.

A gazillion distros fog the landscape each with it's own 'version' snapshot of a source code tree, PLUS 'their' changes.

I don't really see how that prevents you from downloading programming documentation packages.

Version problems -the first thing you have to do is figure out what your distro is 'based on' so you can update it then deal with all other incompatibilites with other apps version designed for different version.

Eh? I just do 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' (I can do this graphically too, just easier to explain when you give a simple command). Don't know what you're talking about. But it sounds like the distribution you were using was a total mess.

Security unknowns abound because hardly anybody is running any paticular version.

I know that some distributions like Debian patch older software versions against new security issues.

Development enviroments - C,C++ horrible.

You know. You can say "it's horrible, it's ugly, it's insecure", but you really need to give some examples, because I disagree with every one of your points.

Linux will NEVER NEVER be a major player in the desktop arena.!!!

It works as my desktop just fine. 'Average' people don't seem to have a problem using KDE 3.5 I've noticed (not seen with other DEs).

Sharing a printer.

I just use this webpage to configure anything printer related http://127.0.0.1:631/ ... Seemed simple enough.

The computer's operator, however, does not wish to take the time to learn the inner workings of Linux

To be honest, I don't really know the inner working of Kernel that much, or how many of the everyday applications I use exactly work internally.

he (I) can do simple things like install a new piece of hardware.

In most cases, I've found just plugging in the hardware is all I needed todo (touchpads, scanners, webcams etc.). The only thing I've found that did not auto configure itself, was the printers (which was very easy since all I had todo was open http://127.0.0.1:631/ in a webbrowser, and use the wizards from there).

The only thing in particular that I have ever had hardware problems with under Linux, was support of RAID controllers (they either worked or they didn't) -- But that is not off-the-shelf hardware at all. Even getting that working under windows, you need to hit some special key while windows setup is starting, provide the drivers on the disk (you would need a diskdrive) and so on.

Make Linux as simple to use as Windows -- in all respects -- and you'll have my ear.

In my opinion (as someone who uses Windows on daily tasks also), it is easier than Windows. As another post indicated, there is such a thing as a package manager. You would be amazed how many packages are in there. The only times I have ever needed to install something outside of it, was relatively easy too. Downloading installers off a website that usually come in a format your package manager recognizes or a compressed archive that has a graphical installer inside.

I don't want or need to know how an OS works.

This is pretty much why I started using Linux in the first place. I got so fedup of tweaking Windows XP, using a bunch of registry hacks, investigating why the file -> open/save dialogs were taking so long to open up. Investigating why opening network shares would cause explorer to freeze up (to the point where I started avoiding using it, because I couldn't stand waiting minutes for it to unfreeze).

An OS should be seamless, simply a conduit for running software and using hardware.

Agreed.

If I had to recommend a distribution of Linux to try, I'd mention Kubuntu Linux or Mandriva Linux currently.