Slashdot Mirror

I guess it's meta-news, the state of the Linux desktop in 2016... I found this piece from 2008 named The writers who cried YOTLD thats starts like this:

If you have followed tech news closely at all within the last ten years, you've probably heard the phrase year of the Linux desktop before. This is the year that Linux makes a breakthrough with home users, and suddenly Microsoft's dominant market share comes toppling down. I believe people have been proclaiming various years as the year of the Linux desktop since as early as 1998 (possibly even earlier).

The Steam client for Linux is now over three years old and market share is at 0.91% and falling, expand OS version line for the details. And AMD has been working on open source drivers for eight and a half years now. At this pace I'm mostly just wondering where it'll be when Win7 sunsets in 2020 and whether I really want to struggle with a 1% market share desktop again. When I ditched it for Win7 back in 2010 I expected it'd take a few more years in the oven, now I'm not sure even a decade will do. But at least I can put the menu on the bottom, unless that's removed again in the next "reinvention" of the desktop.

Is 'Ken Starks' for real? For instance, the Austin School board has no knowledge of a Karen or any incident involving a pupil and a Linux CD. See slashdot of Dec 2008. See also this blog from Dec 2008. And also The Register of Dec 2008.

There's not just Mint. You could first try Xubuntu. It's got a better interface than plain Ubuntu and does not (yet) have any of the spyware issues. You can upgrade to xubuntu sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop and then clean off all that is not Xubuntu. Xubuntu gives you XFCE. There is also the KDE route with Kubuntu. That is also missing the spyware, for now.

Or, you know, you could select "Gnome Classic" when logging in?

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/classicgnome

"How to return to classic Gnome in Ubuntu":

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/classicgnome

I had not experienced those bugs with thunar. I use it quite often because it loads much faster than nautilus, which i keep around just in case. I use thunar mostly with local files and removable media, haven't tried much its gvfs abilities.

Note also i trimmed some fat by using this psychocats apt-get remove line as a guide to remove many packages, it might have helped. Maybe just installing ubuntu minimal (at boot press f4 to choose "command-line system") and then just sudo apt-get install xfce4 afterwards could be better.

If you want to keep the Ubuntu distro with a good UI all you need to do is install KDE

Despite still not being up to its best 3.5.9 shape, KDE 4 is much better than that unity abomination Ubuntu is trying to impose.

I found Ubuntu Linux to be very difficult to learn, mainly because every time you need to fix something (example: change to supervisor mode to install flash), it involves opening the CLI.

Once agian, you are full of it. Command line mode is not needed for installing flash.

What options does Linux have for the above case where we need to fine tune network and computer policies on thousands of PCs?

If the hardware is the same then it's easy to set up one PC the way all the others are going to be then cloning the disk. The same used to be doable for Windows as well, Norton Ghost cloned disks, but now that MS has gotten strict with activation and spyware I don't know if people can do it now. A quick google for linux remote administration tools show that remote admin can be done.

Not a sarcastic question as I am not very Linux savvy.

Neither am I, that's why I find Google helpful. I'm about to install Ubuntu 10.04, Lucid, on my MacBook Pro and I've been using Google to map out a strategy to make it a smooth process. Sure, as some say Ubuntu is easy to install however I will be dualbooting and will use the same user files and datastores in both OSes. I'll need to calibrate my monitors, I'll have two of them. I also want to use KDE in Ubuntu and switch between Gnome and KDE.

Falcon

I'm now running Jaunty, and have been for probably the last four months, since the video card in my FreeBSD box died.

I give Jaunty credit for not pissing me off to the extent where I've been actively motivated to get rid of it, but that is about the most positive thing I can say for it. Pretty much all Ubuntu is good for is either listening to mp3s, maybe doing some scripting after making my own build of vim, and vegetating in front of Firefox. It's got even better since I wrote my own xsession and got back under Ratpoison.

If I try and do literally anything else however, frustration is usually the result. Multimedia editing in particular is virtually impossible in Linux, although that is not Shuttleworth's fault. The Ubuntu community also are not people who a sane individual would want to go anywhere near, but then again, that is also standard for Linux.

I have also always considered Debian to be one of the primary sources of emotional pain in my life, and it still underpins Ubuntu. Even doing something as fundamental as changing my $PATH is a source of frustration; I cannot find out where it is set. It is predictable that Debian's developers feel that /etc/profile is not good enough for them.

If you want to use Ubuntu, and you know what you are doing, follow the instructions here in order to avoid GNOME, ubuntu-desktop, pulseaudio, and associated eldritch horrors. Ubuntu's binary packaging is generally extremely dubious, but then again, FreeBSD is the only system where I've ever felt entirely comfortable installing pre-built binaries; quality binary packaging apparently does not exist for Linux at all.

I can't install the language patch (click on it in Opera, garbage on my screen. right click and save as, now I have it saved but how to install it??)

Um, double-click it? I assume it's a .deb file that you've downloaded, anyway, because if it's something else, then it is not what you need.

Though why not install it through the package manager in the first place? Applications -> Ubuntu Software Center, then use the built-in search to find what you want.

Here is a more detailed treatment of Ubuntu software installation options, though most likely the Software Center will cover all your practical needs.

I can't use bittorrent

If you're using the most recent Ubuntu, you should have a BitTorrent client installed out of the box. It's called "Transmission", look it up in Applications -> Networking.

an't install wine because I don't know how to install a package handler because of the above problem

Again, you do it through the package manager.

Ah, you mean if there were something like this in it, it would be absolutely brilliant?

Oh, wait, that's been in it for years.

I don't know about specific issues with drop down boxes. I haven't experienced that either. But usually when people complain about fonts on linux they're complaining about stuff like this:

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/images/flashintrepid02.png

In many cases on that page letters are actually touching each other. I think they're using the Microsoft Web fonts there, though, and I usually avoid having those on for that reason: they kern badly in Linux. But even in the address bar in that picture, the periods and slashes don't kern well. Look at how the e in Player is rendered in the largest headline. The center bar is too high. This isn't 6 pt or anything, I can't see any excuse why it would be that way. The text on the bottom looks like a ransom note.

I have often read that there are actual bugs with the Microsoft fonts, but they seem to render fine on Macs. Also, there are a lot of things you can tweak with X and certainly my fonts don't look that bad (Arch Linux + KDE + DejaVu Sans).

Then again, my inclination is towards Mac-style font rendering. Long-time Windows users seem to hate it (although I am one, but I don't). Some of it is subjective, but I consider the examples above to be pretty objective. My general rule is that the font at small sizes should resemble the same font at large sizes. This doesn't always mean that it is the same, in terms of pixel ratios. Usually there are some optical illusions at work.

I got Ubuntu 8.01 ... I think that's the one.

You probably mean 8.10, which, by the way, stands for October 2008.

I was so frustrated with trying to get Ubuntu to just "run" that I was at my wits end. Problems with my monitor and graphics card.

Known problem: some hardware won't work as easily, or won't work at all. Unfortunately, it is impossible to create an operating system that runs on any random hardware, however rare, or new, or special it may be. I always buy my hardware with Linux compatibility in mind, but I can see that this is not necessarily an option for the casual user.

When I finally got it "working," I had no clue how to install programs. After calling a friend who is a Linux person, I got most of my rough spots smoothed out. But, without some outside help, it was hell. An issue I NEVER run into with Windows XP.

Interesting. I just typed "ubuntu installing programs" into Google (this was the first set of search terms that came to my mind) and the first result I got was this site, which contains a nice picture tour of Ubuntu software installation.

By the end, I really liked the package manager, but my (and my wife's) gaming habits and my use of Photoshop and Illustrator pulled me back to Windows. It was just way to (sic) different for someone without some help.An introduction video would have helped.

Indeed, an introductory video would help, but as your experiences and those of the TFA's author show, there would have to be a version of it aimed specifically at Windows power users. The problem is obviously not the package manager in itself, but the fact that Windows power users approach the system with a particular, technical mindset, which happens not too match linux at all. As a result, great frustration and confusion ensue.

Ironically, naive users often have a much easier time migrating, because, for them, the system just looks a bit different. The power user, on the other hand, is suddenly confronted with an entirely different beast, and he feels frustrated when he notices that his entire bad of tricks, learned over years, doesn't work any more. I wouldn't blame Ubuntu for this problem, but I agree that doing something to make it easier for expert users to migrate would be a good idea.

Reading this page is required material for people switching to Ubuntu.

I often see this kind of comment which either implies or explicitly states that linux has no problems with malware and needs no firewall.

How can this be? Are we to believe that the developers of linux had some magical insight unavailable to the windows developers which means that once software is installed it is prevented from doing anything which the user wouldn't want it to? Are we to believe that a linux machine doesn't respond to ping or doesn't have open ports or bugs in software which can cause it to be made to do unexpected things?

Really, this is not a troll.. Yah, I know, it kinda sounds like one.. It's just me wondering if all this apparent fanboyism is really just ppl who close their eyes and pretend to not see problems or if there really are no problems.

I would like to know. I'm thinking of switching over but feel uneasy without fifteen layers of firewall/antivirus/anti-spyware protection...

Since you sound sincere, I'll respond. Linux is generally more secure due to better default settings, no integrated browser in the os, better policing of code, more frequent updates, smaller marketshare, and system variation.

Ubuntu, for example installs with no open ports and gives you a user account that requires you to type in your password to do anything major (Vista now has these features). With a smaller marketshare, it's not as attractive to write a virus or malware since Windows is a much larger and easier target. With no 'patch day', there isn't a window of opportunity that an exploit can be planned for (say right after patch day... then you have a whole month available). Without an integrated browser in the OS- drive-by (simply visiting a page) infections aren't possible. Viruses and malware can't rely on the same apps to always be there (IE, Outlook/Outlook Express, MS Office). This page has a good write-up on some of the issues: http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/security

That is not to say that Linux doesn't have security problems, it just has less of them.

If you want to do a test run, burn or order a free copy of an Ubuntu CD http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu (or another Linux distro with a Live CD option) and try it out (boot off the disk). It will run slower off of the CD but you can try it out without making any permanent changes to your PC. Or if you want to install, you could also make a dual boot setup. Try it for a while. If for some reason you have a problem, switch back.

So you had VNC running but couldn't install Flash, hmmm... Something is wrong there.

Besides, where is tar and whatnot in installing flash: http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/flash ?
No terminals whatsoever.

I understand that you use Windows, but don't try to flush problems on Ubuntu that don't exist.

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-users/2007-September/000472.html says that the difference between gksudo and sudo is that gksudo doesn't require invoking a terminal first. I.e. you can run the graphical application directly rather than inside a shell.

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/graphicalsudo also points out that sudo often preserves the original users environment. As a result, running it with an application with a configuration file (very common for GUI apps) can cause the configuration file to end up owned by root (particularly if you run it under sudo before running it as a normal user).

The only things package managers are "innovating" are workarounds for the self-created problem of dependency hell - and all it takes is one missing dependency, or one broken package, for the whole house of cards to come tumbling down.

This will not happen until the Linux Kernel has native support for an install mechanism where by I can double click on a single file and have it install a whole program including notifying and automatically installing programs it is dependent upon.

To get rid of KDE after you've supplementally installed it. you can't just get rid of the kubuntu-desktop item in Synaptic/apt-get. Instead, you have to paste the following command on the command line:

sudo apt-get remove adept adept-batch adept-common adept-installer adept-manager adept-notifier adept-updater akregator amarok amarok-xine apport-qt ark arts debtags digikam dolphin enscript fftw3 foomatic-db-gutenprint gdebi-kde gnupg-agent gpgsm gtk-qt-engine gwenview hplip-gui hwdb-client-kde ijsgutenprint k3b kaddressbook kaffeine kaffeine-xine kamera karm katapult kate kbstate kcontrol kcron kde-guidance kde-guidance-powermanager kde-icons-mono kde-style-polyester kde-systemsettings kdeadmin-kfile-plugins kdebase-bin kdebase-data kdebase-kio-plugins kdebluetooth kdegraphics-kfile-plugins kdelibs-data kdelibs4c2a kdemultimedia-kfile-plugins kdemultimedia-kio-plugins kdenetwork-filesharing kdenetwork-kfile-plugins kdepasswd kdepim-kio-plugins kdepim-kresources kdepim-wizards kdeprint kdesktop kdesudo kdm kdnssd keep kfind kghostview khelpcenter kicker kio-apt kio-locate kio-umountwrapper kipi-plugins klipper kmag kmail kmailcvt kmenuedit kmilo kmix kmousetool kmplayer-base kmplayer-konq-plugins knetworkconf knotes konq-plugins konqueror konqueror-nsplugins konsole kontact konversation kooka kopete korganizer kpdf kpf kppp krdc krfb kscreensaver ksmserver ksnapshot ksplash ksplash-engine-moodin ksvg ksysguard ksysguardd ksystemlog ktorrent kubuntu-artwork-usplash kubuntu-default-settings kubuntu-desktop kubuntu-docs kubuntu-konqueror-shortcuts kvkbd kwalletmanager kwin kwin-style-crystal language-selector-qt libakode2 libarts1-akode libarts1c2a libartsc0 libaudio2 libavahi-qt3-1 libclucene0 libcluceneindex0 libdbus-qt-1-1c2 libept0 libexiv2-0 libflac++6 libgmp3c2 libgpgme11 libid3tag0 libifp4 libijs-0.35 libimlib2 libjpeg-progs libk3b2 libkbluetooth0 libkcal2b libkcddb1 libkdcraw1 libkdepim1a libkexiv2-1 libkipi0 libkleopatra1 libkmime2 libkonq4 libkpimexchange1 libkpimidentities1 libksba8 libkscan1 libksieve0 libktnef1 liblua50 liblualib50 libmimelib1c2a libmodplug0c2 libmpcdec3 libmysqlclient15off libnjb5 libofa0 libopenexr2c2a libopenobex1 libpoppler-qt2 libpq5 libpth20 libpulse0 libpythonize0 libqt-perl libqt3-mt libqt4-core libqt4-gui librsync1 libruby1.8 libsamplerate0 libsearchclient0 libskim0 libsmokeqt1 libstreamanalyzer0 libstreams0 libstrigihtmlgui0 libtunepimp5 libungif4g libxapian15 libxcb-shape0 libxcb-shm0 libxcb-xv0 libxcb1 libxine1 libxvmc1 mysql-common network-manager-kde networkstatus openoffice.org-kde openoffice.org-style-crystal perl-suid pinentry-qt poster psutils pykdeextensions python-kde3 python-qt3 python-qt4 python-qt4-dbus python-sip4 python2.5-dev qca-tls rdiff-backup restricted-manager-kde ruby ruby1.8 scim-qtimm skim software-properties-kde speedcrunch strigi-applet strigi-daemon && sudo apt-get install ubuntu-desktop

That will get you back to your pure GNOME install. YOu may have to reinstall some optional software you already installed after doing that. More information here.

The information given by the other posters should be enough to get you going. However note that if you run into problems, the Ubuntu Forums are remarkably fast and helpful, especially for "first time user" type questions.

You might also want to take a look at this tutorial, which has nice screenshots showing the steps you'll go through (it hasn't yet been updated for 8.04, but it should be very similar to what you'll see with the current installer). It explains in particular how to set up a dual-boot, so that you can keep using Windows while trying out Ubuntu.

Good luck, and have fun!

First result for "installing programs ubuntu" - http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/installingsoftware Right at the top, it links "aunt tillie" users to the GUI version. http://www.monkeyblog.org/ubuntu/installing/ Synaptic involves _LESS_ interaction than ANY windows installer i've ever seen, AND is more descriptive. It's just "different". Different does not mean unfriendly. Aside from that. I honestly don't see how "apt-get install program" is master hacker like or complex in any way. It fills the "journeyman" void for me. Closer to "master hacker" is downloading the .deb and using dpkg, i would consider that relatively complex. The users that consider apt-get confusing, are the ones that will blank face any step-by-step guide for anything. For those people, synaptic and the GUI exist.

Just picked that figure from somewhere where the sun doesn't shine? Please back it up with a reference. Or is it that you would like it to be around that figure?

Many people have moved to linux over the last year or two and think that it is something new. It isn't. The problems that they (and perhaps you) encountered have been discussed many, many times before. (E.g. http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm, http://www.psychocats.net/essays/winuxinstall, http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxwindowscompa rison) Linux will not suit everybody, just as a 4x4 or a Rolls Royce will not suit everybody. There is no point in trying to pretend otherwise. If people did a little research before trying Linux and then discovering that it is different, they would be a lot less disappointed when they find that it is not what they are used to. People are not born with an inherent knowledge of Windows but they have been exposed to it for many years. They have learnt how it works over time and by experience. So why are they surprised when they encounter something new and cannot master it in 10 minutes?

I haven't got an attitude about Linux. Can you please provide one authoritative source which states that Linux is trying to become as big as Windows? Please don't just give me someone's personal viewpoint, I want something that clearly states that the objective of the Linux community is to beat Microsoft in the market place. Most of those who support Linux by writing code don't give a toss about Microsoft. Those who want to use it because it is better than Windows have already made up their mind. The 99% of people that I think you are referring to are those who have come to Linux recently, find it is free, and would like it to become the new Windows so that there is yet more free software written for it. I have no objection to this viewpoint but I do not think it is representative of the Linux community that I have been part of since 1998.

As many others have pointed out. Installing Linux can be difficult but it is easier than installing Windows on top of Linux and keeping both installations working. But if you want something that is point and click just like Windows, then stick to Windows. I think that your problem is that you are not as skillful at using Linux as you are at using Windows, and you attribute this to something wrong with Linux. Many of us would disagree with you. For those that make the effort to learn Linux (and anything rewarding requires some degree of effort on the part of the individual) then there are rewards aplenty. But please don't change Linux to make it like Windows - many of us don't want it to be like Windows, thank you.

Just picked that figure from somewhere where the sun doesn't shine? Please back it up with a reference. Or is it that you would like it to be around that figure?

Many people have moved to linux over the last year or two and think that it is something new. It isn't. The problems that they (and perhaps you) encountered have been discussed many, many times before. (E.g. http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm, http://www.psychocats.net/essays/winuxinstall, http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxwindowscompa rison) Linux will not suit everybody, just as a 4x4 or a Rolls Royce will not suit everybody. There is no point in trying to pretend otherwise. If people did a little research before trying Linux and then discovering that it is different, they would be a lot less disappointed when they find that it is not what they are used to. People are not born with an inherent knowledge of Windows but they have been exposed to it for many years. They have learnt how it works over time and by experience. So why are they surprised when they encounter something new and cannot master it in 10 minutes?

I haven't got an attitude about Linux. Can you please provide one authoritative source which states that Linux is trying to become as big as Windows? Please don't just give me someone's personal viewpoint, I want something that clearly states that the objective of the Linux community is to beat Microsoft in the market place. Most of those who support Linux by writing code don't give a toss about Microsoft. Those who want to use it because it is better than Windows have already made up their mind. The 99% of people that I think you are referring to are those who have come to Linux recently, find it is free, and would like it to become the new Windows so that there is yet more free software written for it. I have no objection to this viewpoint but I do not think it is representative of the Linux community that I have been part of since 1998.

As many others have pointed out. Installing Linux can be difficult but it is easier than installing Windows on top of Linux and keeping both installations working. But if you want something that is point and click just like Windows, then stick to Windows. I think that your problem is that you are not as skillful at using Linux as you are at using Windows, and you attribute this to something wrong with Linux. Many of us would disagree with you. For those that make the effort to learn Linux (and anything rewarding requires some degree of effort on the part of the individual) then there are rewards aplenty. But please don't change Linux to make it like Windows - many of us don't want it to be like Windows, thank you.

Well it's pretty obvious - either that or you don't know how to read.

Check it out:

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/installingdappere dgy

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/2340/w2u260tf.p ng

First option:

Resize IDE MASTER Partition #1 and used freed space

Here's another:

http://www.ubufied.com/2006/11/01/ubuntu-610-insta llation-with-screenshots/

Says the same thing.

So obviously, you are making this up. Even the windows based installer offers you the option to resize and use freed space.

Installing any OS is for geeks. Non-geeks use the pre-installed OS or get someone else to install for them. You can buy PCs with Ubuntu installed.

I agree the Ubuntu partition tool is not very good. However, it is a one-off problem. Do a bit of Googling and its solved, and you do not have to think about it again.

If you want to give it another try read:

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/partitioning
http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/ubuntu-help/59797 -confusing-partition-tables.html
http://users.bigpond.net.au/hermanzone/p2.htm
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=179902

and a lot more

BTW, Mandriva and Mepis are also pretty good for non-geek users. All have live-CDs you can try out.

apt-get install wine
What's the problem?

I don't want another step. I want one step. I get it with aptitude.

http://psychocats.net/essays/gamingperspective You got owned. Games don't do shit.

Well here's an overview of security on Ubuntu, although I haven't been able to find a straightforward answer to your question: http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/security . I do know that the graphical interface seems to handle sudo/gksudo privileges separately from the terminal. So, if in the terminal I type "sudo mv somefile /bin/", I type the root password and can be sudo for 15 minutes in the terminal, but if I then go to open up a program like, say, Synaptic (package manager), I'm prompted again.

The question is, during the "sudo window", what can and can't be done by a malicious program? Things might be handled quite differently than logging in as root or they might not be.

I used this script to install Firefox 2 on Dapper. It automatically downloads the latest version, installs it, integrates it with plugins installed through apt-get, and updates symbolic links. Works like a charm.

Hmm, I like the sentence "not ready for the desktop". What exactly do you mean?
  - That "since I can't get all my windows hardware to work, it's complete crap"?
  - That "I've got no native windows network neighbourhood, but only a so-so compatibility-layer"?
  - "All my favourite windows applications won't work under Linux"?

For almost all of arguments the arguments that usually comes up regaring Linux readiness for the desktop, the same arguments applies to MacOSX. Heck, it's even the same core technologies driving MacOSX, and noone ever argues that the Mac isn't ready for the desktop?

(argument stolen from http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth)

This is worth reading too. http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/security#firewall antivirus

This fits pretty well into the conclusion of http://www.psychocats.net/essays/linuxdesktopmyth. If you've got the time, please read the article.

Personally I were delighted to discover http://www.system76.com/ and is looking forward for a Swedish reseller. :)

Linux is about choice, and ideas about a unified distro run contrary to what it's all about.

Here's a good essay on why this is: http://www.psychocats.net/essays/unifiedlinux.php