Slashdot Mirror
Linux *Won't* Fail on the Desktop?
HanzoSan sent in a story claiming that Linux will Succeed on the desktop, and not
just the server market where it already has had much success.
I think that the latest version of KDE has demonstrated
that it can compete, but with the increasing
dependance on file formats that have no support on
Linux, it's going to be awfully difficult. That
said, Linux has been my desktop for many moons,
and I don't plan on changing it (Maybe
If Apple released TiBook's with 3 mouse buttons I'd
at least have an option ;)
I installed Yeloow Dog Linux on one of the iMacs in our Dev lab (first Linux install ever), and man, was I impressed. Hundreds and hundreds of apps came with, and as a lifelong Win/Mac user, I felt comfortable right away. Since that experience, I have stopped bitching about Linux useability. Thanks, Linux! (sparkle from teeth)
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
Until some universal file formats are agress by all the compaines out there , then it will no take over. But when your document can be opened in an os , on any word processer... well that will be the end of ms won't it.....
Cruise TT
I support disseminating Linux as freely as AOL does its CDs.
Perhaps that might be a good idea. The big advantage of free software is the fact that this could be done. You can't beat the price. However, people do not have the same awareness of Linux as they do AOL.
How about an ad-campaign a la IBM Infrastructure commercials to explain Linux in plain English? Without awareness, few would be likely to pick up the CD.
I'm not afraid of falling, it's the sudden stop at the end that frightens me.
...one of two things has to happen. The average user must become more computer savvy, including being able to deal with a command line and wanting to understand to some degree what the OS is doing.
The other thing is Linux will have to become more like a the black box that other OSes are. Everything is hidden and little to no knowledge of what is going on is required.
It is unfortunate but if you look at other technologies, similar things have occurred. For example, look at the automobile. The complexity of them has gotten to the point that the average driver has little idea of the inner workings and they don't really want to know anyway. I realize this is a bad analogy but hoepfully it makes some sense.
"It's comin' back around again..." -RATM
I guess that depends on whose desktop you're referring to. Linux is already popular on geek desktops. Getting Linux on the desktops of your average Joe (or Jane) is entirely different.
I would be mightily impressed if a distribution of Linux was released that my mother could use easily.
Succeeding on the desktop is more than just KDE or even nice applications. It requires substantial hardware support. People don't want to be severly limited in the type of printers, scanners, video cards, sound cards, etc. they use and they will expect them to work exactly the same as under their current system. The cost saving of using Linux is wiped out if you have to spend more to get a supported printer or if you have to spend an extra half hour figuring out how to change the resolution of your screen. Linux is still a little ways from that point so widespread desktop use is unlikely to happen any time soon.
"But other than that, What is being offered? "
The opportunity to not be tied to endless EULAs, support contracts, pricey upgrades. To create an environment how *you* want it, not how someone else thinks you want it.
I'd rather be incompatible between versions *for free* thank you.
I don't think you understand, people buy laptop computers to be mobile. If you are forced to use a external mouse then that makes the computer much harder to use "anywhere".
(Maybe If Apple released TiBook's with 3 mouse buttons I'd at least have an option ;)
Aaaaaargh! With OS X you can use a 5 button mouse if you'd like! Just go and buy one! Can we please let this rest already!
Pooty tweet
I dunno which of Linux/Windows is better, so I run Cygwin in Win4Lin.
...hangs on a few things:
StarOffice/OpenOffice: they need to iron out the last few bugs and market it, for crying out loud! Not just for Linux, but on Windows as well, so that they can wean the business sector off of MSOffice.
Games: despite what many "serious" computer users will say, the PC industry was built on gaming, and gaming is what keeps pushing the hardware improvement cycle. Serious Linux players such as IBM and HP should give substantial (if discreet) grants to efforts such as Transgaming's WineX so we come out with a complete DirectX API for Linux.
Marketing: the different Linux players, big and small, should pool some of their resources to create a "flavorless" marketing organization who promotes the Desktop use of Linux (without specifying a distro in particular). The goal is to challenge common misconceptions about Linux: that it is hard to use, that there are no apps, that it is not graphical, etc., in a series of cool, professional looking ads in print and televised media.
Aim for the Business Desktop first: more people will consider switching at home if they've been "coerced" into using Linux at the office first, only to realize that it was as easy to use as Windows, and a lot more stable.
Don't install so many apps by default in common distros: personally, I don't mind it, but Windows users might be overwhelmed by the choice. Let them choose their browser, e-mail client, office suite, etc. during installation, or with a post-installation "setup" program.
I do believe that Linux has a very good chance of becoming more widespread on the desktop...the fact that it can't be bought off by Microsoft is a big plus! But I'm not kidding myself: the Linux revolution might have better chance of taking place abroad first (Europe, Africa, Asia) - and given America's (and, by extension, Canada's) annoying record of always doing everything different than the rest of the world, it could still take some time here...
Reminder: find a new sig
I especially like this suggestion which the author suggests as a paradigm shift: "Let's completely modularize each tool function (such as layout, fonts, kerning, textures, linking, math and tables) and make each a separate interactive GUI tool. Like an erector set, applications could be constructed for specific needs. And like hammers, saws, wrenches and screwdrivers in the physical realm, such tools are easier to utilize than large factories (or contemporary application programs)."
This is the classic call to arms of Unix, way back when. "Build a tool that does one job, and does that job well." And then make the tools work together. Unix was originally built for programmers, but there is no reason to believe that "ordinary users" cannot benefit from that philosophy as well.
I say, go back to first principles, and we all win. It worked for hardware in the 1980's with the advent of RISC technology. Software too has become too bloated.
From what I've seen of people who post on Slashdot, most of them use Windows anyway...
Linux wannabies
Admittedly, if a corp says uses this, you have to use it.
It'd make a good poll.
How many people are using Linux **right now** as they view this page.
Get your own free personal location tracker
I don't think RMS is going to like that one.. :)
Seriously though, I think there's one major issue which the article writer has forgotten: fear.
Many (most) IT directors think that 'No-one ever got fired for choosing Microsoft'. If they go with Linux and it's a failure, it could well be their neck on the line; if they choose a Microsoft option and it's a failure, well everyone already knew Microsoft were crap, but what choice did we have?
The only way this can be combated is with slow erosion of the Microsoft market - it used to be that "no-one ever got fired for choosing IBM", so it's certainally possible to topple the Microsoft monopoly - it just isn't going to happen overnight.
Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
I to have been using linux at my desktop for many years now, and liking it very much.
However, when compared to windows, everything appears to be very slow. Launching of windows, getting visual feedback, it's all a bit snappier on windows, on the same pc. I think most people that come from a windows world trying linux+KDE or something will be disappointed with the speed of operation.
Maybe in a couple of years, with processors in the 100GHz range this won't matter anymore (although a new layer will be added by then to slow things down even more) but for now I see a lot of hurdles to overcome
no sig error.
I know that everyone is always saying this, but there are a few things that "linux" needs to do to gain the average user's desktop.
I use SuSE 7.3, and love it, but there are a few things that were somewhat difficult for me to figure out, and I can't imagine what the non-techie user would do about these things.
-printing: it is currently a shade less than a nightmare to configure printing in linux. I believe this varies wildly depending on what printer you are using. One false move, and your printer starts printing a million pages of gibberish.
-Internet connectivity: I think the biggest hurdle for this one is the evil WinModem. Also, some ISP's just plain don't have a clue how to help users set up connections using linux.
Some other ideas:
-I have no idea how this one might be implemented, but some sort of "sanctioned" place for technical support for users would be good. I think one central place would give users some comfort instead of being told that they need to find their technical support on newsgroups.
-We can always use more support from hardware manufacturers. This seems to be getting better and better all the time!
-Lastly, the ubiquitous Games! We need more!
barnisinko
Ok, well, what's the difference between using a multiple button selection device on a laptop and using modifier keys to do the same thing? You're still essentially pressing keys to mimic a multi-button mouse. My left pinky finger has become quite adept at modifying mouse commands on my iBook. I don't miss my one button or multi-button mouse at all while using my laptop.
Pooty tweet
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That's why one of the settlement conditions offered by the 9 holdout states is so important: MS would be compelled to auction off licenses to develop Office for other OS's.
If IBM, Sun, maybe Corel or Redhat were to bid on it, MS couldn't complain that it got a raw deal (although they will anyway), and Office will be ported to Linux.
As a bonus, it will be pried open so that maybe MS will have some incentive to fix it. I'd switch OS's just to get the pagination to work!
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
But most people just don't care. They're perfectly happy to be running Office 97 on Windows 98 with a picture of their grandkid as the wallpaper. Sure it crashes once in a while, but that's normal (in their point of view), right? If they switch OSs, they have to relearn the most fundamental ideas about how they use their system. Why should they bother?
---
Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Slashdot editors censor dissenters.
I thought everyone knew... The killer app is here!
...Marketing
I know flames will fly, and not a lot of people believe in it, but that's what MS has a big advantage in. People watch TV. People see MS ads. People might occasionally see an apple ad. People only see IBM's Linux Server ad (and the common person has no clue what its about).
Also, maybe having some local demo's in malls. Just to let people play with it, like they do in bestbuy, etc...
See what its like so you don't need to be afraid...
If someone made a good commerical ad and had demos in public places that showed how pretty it is, how inexpensive it is (people will need to buy it for the support), and how there aren't licenses and most everything is free, then you'd have a "general layman interest."
That "general layman interest" is a catalyst Linux needs. Its powerful. That's when people "try" things. Isn't that all we're asking for? Just "try" it??
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
>In a nutshell, the Linux community must develop both
.rpm format; but apt-get handles dependencies more gracefully. Perhaps what we need is a synthesis of the two, which would use the .rpm file format and apt-get's syntax. Instead of having a centralized package depot like apt, or many randomly distributed files like rpm, you strike a balance: maintain a server that lists current URLs for packages, which would be hosted on the project's page instead of centrally. Typing "rpm-get install Snicklefritz1.3" would check the central database for current URLs of the RPM and its dependency BruberMIPS0.9.5, download them from two different sites and install them. (Note: the "spell" system in Sorcery GNU/Linux works kind of like this, only it downloads source and auto-compiles instead of downloading pre-built packages.)
>a quality GUI system for configuring hardware and a
>standardized system for installing and removing
>software. Developers must be persuaded to provide
>Linux drivers, especially for "Winmodems," and to
>port their software products to Linux.
Agreed on the need for a GUI "system properties" type hardware configurator. KDE's hardware configuration leaves something to be desired. (Specifically, it doesn't offer much in the way of actual configuration options. If you want to do any non-trivial fiddling with your hardware, you might as well go straight to a console, 'cause you're going to need it anyway.)
As for installing and removing software, it would be good to have a more-or-less universal software management system. The two current contenders are RPM and Debian's apt-get, of course. Both have advantages and disadvantages -- for example, it's more common to find fresh builds of programs in
In addition to persuading companies to release Linux drivers for their hardware, we also need to convince them to open-source the drivers. I seem to recall ATI already did this. There is even less reason than usual to make your driver proprietary; after all, the driver is useless without the hardware to match. People would still have to buy the product in order to get use out of the driver, and in the meantime students could study the driver code to learn about low-level hardware interaction. And stuff. (nVidia, are you listening?)
Linux is on my desktop, and it hasn't failed me yet!
When you can give the user a "launch the installer, ask a couple simple questions, watch it install the files, and put icons wherever the user wants" installation system then you will have a better chance at the desktop. Even better if the uninstall is just as easy.
I mean, what the Hell are dependancies to the Winbox user? And why should they care? Apt-get is close, but not enough.
Eyecandy is all well and good, but if they can't install programs easily then it's not going to work.
What do people need?
Porn. Get the various streaming media formats supported on Linux. Get the various video formats supported. Get the various "features" of broken web-browsers supported in Linux browsers. Once all the features of porn sites are easily accessible using Linux, then success will come.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I recently helped a fellow CS grad student install Linux on his laptop. KDE looks pretty, Netscape 6 runs great, and emacs handles all the text editing he needs. But frankly, I find it hard to advocate Linux to replace his Windows partition entirely.
It's really the distribution taken as a whole that counts. This includes drivers, program setup, configuration, etc.
We ran into some stupidity when installing Linux. When the computer goes into suspend mode and then wakes up, XFree86 would hang. In order to play games, he has to kill off aRTs daemon to get reasonable performance; and if he kills it off, he'll have no sound in KDE. When configured for DHCP and the laptop is disconnected from network, system start up would take a long time (older Windows also have this problem, but not 2000 and XP). There are a few more problems like these, and they really look silly to my friend who has been a long time Windows user.
I told him a Linux system is a pain to set up the way you want it, but after it's set up it'll rarely choke on you. This has generally been my experience running Linux every day. Fortunately we had most things working and he's happily dual-booting between Linux and Windows.
One of the killer things about my OS X Powerbook is how I can plug my digital camera or FireWire cd burner and it not only has a driver, it already knows what to do with the device. With my camera, it automatically asks me if I want to transfer all the pictures off the camera.
I've never bothered hooking it up to my Linux box. I'm sure nothing would happen.
Where Apple goes, often most of the industry follows. Jobs' "Digital Hub" strategy is dead on once you've seen it in action. It makes a computer really useful for the home user.
For the business, I am increasingly in doubt. Microsoft file formats are so common it's futile to try to use Linux in the office. If the free office suites do the job, fine. But I think the only place Linux will succeed are in custom installations (like the Burlington Coat Factory point of sales units) or where cost is essential (like the city using Linux for offices in the Florida Keys).
For the business user on the go, Linux won't make it unless there is a desktop with the kind of commercial development behind it like Apple's or Microsoft's. The level of integration and consistency of interface needed is far, far away in the Linux world.
Installing SuSE 7.3, Red Hat 7.2, Mandrake 8.1, Lycoris DesktopLX or Caldera 3.1 is as easy as installing Windows
I've at least seen the others, but has anyone used this Lycoris distro? How does it stack up?
--saint
As an oldtime user of Linux I DO have the advantage of being at home on it. I've used Linux as my desktop for seven years. (Mostly KDE.)
The interesting thing is that I throw people on it without any training to see what happens.
F.ex. an eleven year old girl sat down and logged in (I gave her the password) and configured it just the way she liked it.
She installs software and plays games, does research online and writes school reports without ANY help from me. She's not trained on computers either, just not afraid.
I've thrown grownups on it too, and as long as they are not afraid of trying, they think it looks great and is easy to work with.
So I don't know that it's not ready, except for thoses who don't understand or are against change. I agree that it is not quite where windows is at, after all these years, but don't throw it away either. Many offices could readily change and have the tools they need using Linux, and gain the stability and speed we come to love.
It just does not cover ALL desktop needs.
Here, write your own script.
;)
$FREE_OS *Won't* Fail on the $OS_APP_TYPE ?
Posted by $EVIL_EDITOR on $DATE
from the $LAME_BYLINE dept.
$KARMA_GRUBBING_USER sent in a story claiming that $FREE_OS will Succeed on the $OS_APP_TYPE, and not just the $OTHER_OS_APP_TYPE where it has already had much success. I think that the latest version of $WINDOW_SYSTEM has demonstrated that it can compete, but with the increasing dependance on $PROPRIETARY_STANDARD that have no support on $FREE_OS, it's going to be awfully difficult. That said, $FREE_OS has been on my $OS_APP_TYPE for $LENGTH_OF_TIME, and I don't plan on changing it. (Maybe if $ALTERNATIVE_COMPUTER_MANUFACTURER released $COMPUTER_TYPE with $FEATURE I'd at least have an option
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Yes, because when I buy an IBM/HP/Gateway/Dell/etc/etc/etc/etc I never replace the mouse that came with it because it's such a perfect mouse in every way.
If that were the case, there wouldn't be such a huge market for different mice. Yes Mac ships with a crappy mouse. So do all other computers. Get over it, get off your lazy ass and buy a $10 fucking mouse.
"I can't consider buying a Mac because it doesn't have a good mouse" "goatse.cx" "I'd love to see a beowulf cluster of" "Cowboy Neal option". PLEASE RETIRE THESE MEANINGLESS ANACHRONISMS!
(rant mode off)
this is getting old and so are you
blog
Mozilla has a 'quirks' mode which does just that. Unless you declare strict html in your dtd, Moz will default to this mode.
I just finished a couple of weeks trying to be primarily a Linux client on our company network (I was using Mandrake 8.1 -- a Great release). I am now installing windoz 2000. Why? Not that I don't like linux, I've put it on multiple laptops, I have a server I run at home and I like to do my perl/cgi development on linux. No, it is because of these reasons:
...
... Next time I'd just ignore the warnings and install everything as root.
... Linux is neat ... Linux is stable ...
1. No NOTES client. We use LN for e-mail and many DBs. Tried VMWARE desktop 3.0 -- too slow, frequent lock-ups (which require the blue checking HD deal -- and take time). Also didn't like the smaller screen (tried the full screen mode and this locked up both the VM and linux twice). Tried hitting LN through a browser (works, but doesn't have a fraction of the features and ease on the client).
2. Limited support for Netware. Only way to map to a network drive was to use the console to do ipx_configure and ncpmount -- it works and I can put it in my start-up script, but not easy for the average user
3. Never did get the network printer working. Tried HardDrake MANY times with MANY settings and never once had anything exit the printer. Even worse -- no messages at all about where my test pages might have gone (even an obscure queue not found message might have helped in my trouble shooting).
4. Getting sound working was a trial. After buying a new sound card and disabling the MB on-board sound, I still needed to purchase the OSS driver to get it working, but don't play around with the controls or you will have what sounds like a 78 piled high with dust. And volume is all over the map Xmms needs my volume WAY UP, but the Mandrake boot song WAY LOW - forget and you are blasted out.
5. Not being root all the time is the mantra - and yet everything I tried to do seemed to want me that way. SU all day long. No SU editor - I guess you need to evoke a graphical based editor from a console where you've logging as SU. Maybe I'm an idiot
Enough rant
And yet it is still too complex for my average windows type user. So even though I feel like a turn-coat -- I am back to W2000 (actually NT4 has been a pretty good and bullet-proof OS for me over the last couple years) and a dual boot Drake 8.1 for development.
OK we have KDE and Gnome and a great moltitude of window managers and desktop apps.
I think the real problem remains X(Free): it's too heavy and it doesn't provide any form of widget directly.
Maybe I am wrong but what we need is a linux kernel with a decent, fast, reliable and self-contained GUI (please don't forget the "classic" tty shell such as bash).
What we get today is a GUI with tons of layers (CORBA, DCOP, QT, GTK, and so on...) that reduce the performances and create a lot of problems during compiling because the incredible number of libs dependencies.
If someone needs X, well, he could use it in "rootless" mode on the GUI as already happen in Mac OS X.
A simple installer should complete this visionary desktop-oriented distribuition of Linux.
when it will be able to run most Windows applications and use Windows drivers. Discuss.
Get *over* the fact that Macs only have one button! That's the *silliest* reason I've heard *not* to buy one. The OS supports multiple buttons - hook up a USB mouse, away you go... left click, right click, middle-click, scroll, go *wild*.
Sure, I understand missing the extra mouse buttons on the TiBook, especially when running Linux. I know, I have one. *But*, you'll note on Apple's keyboard layout that the Apple key and a secondary Enter key are located on either side of the keyboard. Simply remap them as mousebuttons in YellowDog or your Linux of choice. They're within easy reach when your hand is on the trackpad and work quite well.
Unless you're running X I suppose, but trust me, outside of Gimp or remote X logins, there's very little reason to run X.
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
Don't get me wrong. I don't hate Linux. Its a daily part of my life...as a server OS that maximizes my old i386 hardware. I won't be using MacOS X Server either. The PPC hardware is too nice to stuff in a closet. It begs to be used by human hands.
I think its time for hard core Linux zealots to really examine what a beauty MacOS X is. Pop over to CompUSA or an Apple Store, shove the crowd in front of the new iMac to the side, click on the Terminal icon and see what a pure UNIX experience is really like. After that, I think your fear of Steve Jobs and his magical black turtleneck will go away.
Note to CmdrTaco: If I hear another mouse button joke and Mac from you, I am going to hand Ms. Fent an original iMac hockey puck mouse so she can beat you into submission. The PowerBook G4 has USB, take some of that dowry and buy one.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Dominance on the Desktop is largely a function of what people are used to in a user interface.
A strange thing happened in the last three years of running Linux on my desktop. I have become so used to it, that it becomes a real pain in the ass for me to use non-X desktops. This is because Windows, the most common desktop out there, doesn't use the middle button for pasting text highlighted in one window into another window.
I didn't realize how much of a convenience this is until I started using Windows for about ten minutes (printing up resumes in a Kinko's. If you must know, my printer is kaput, hardware problem. :() All the sudden it wasn't N steps, it was N+4 steps to copy and paste text, and I found that my productivity was slower than it could have been.
On the other hand, my two former roommates (when and if they borrow my computer) always start surfing the web by opening a Netscape session. This is true even when I have a Galeon session open and displaying a web page in that very same part of the desktop. (see footnote 1). This never fails. It's as predictable as a pendulum in a grandfather clock.
This suggests a strategy for taking over the Desktop market. Fortunately, it's one that Ximian and KDE seem to already have in mind: emulate the functionality of Windows and/or Mac as much as possible, to make new users happy. Or sorta happy. Granted, GNOME and KDE aren't as lightweight and geeky as, say, WindowMaker, but they're free and close enough to Windows and Mac so that Windows and Mac users (in many cases) can make the switch to Linux and not feel totally useless.
(Footnote 1: I know what you're thinking: "Dude, you left yourself logged on. *Smack*." Yep, I leave myself logged on to my own Linux box for days on end. In any other setting besides the privacy of my own home, this would be a problem.)
Finding God in a Dog
The article, IMHO, was excellent, and its call for a standard system of installing & uninstalling software is right on (We need the equiv. of InstallShield for linux apps).
However, for Linux to really make an inroads, it needs something which is usually very overlooked: Windows NT Authentication!!
I know this is a big request, and it probably constitutes breaking the DMCA since its a closed, proprietary system, but its the truth. I can name over 50 people right now who would never use windows, except that they have to because their corporate intranets run on IIS, and they can't access them under Linux.
Until Konqueror or Mozilla can understand WinNT Authentication, Linux won't be able to be effectively used in a mixed environment where Windows is the server (lots of large companies use this configuration; Mine sure does.) Just my $0.02.
It is the problem.
I work with (and for!) a lot of people who use and like Windows. I was also part of a test group at our company that switched from Outlook / MS Office to Netscape 6.2 email / StarOffice, and I have several juicy tidbits regarding this that fit in well with this article.
I just got finished setting up three computers with Windows XP Home from Dell. Computers really are a commodity now -- the Dells were gorgeous, easy to open, and functioned perfectly for a cost of $588 each (shipped!) Google "Dell refurbished" for other good deals. But I digress.
I set my mother and my dad's secretary up with the new computers (two at the office and one at my parents' house.) Keep in mind that Windows XP is about as far from Windows 98 (which is what they had) as you can get while still being Windows, and Office XP is somewhat different from Office 2000.
With two clicks I had set up a system whereby they could connect the secretary's 56k modem (my parents live/work in the middle of nowhere) to the Internet and have everyone else's computer connect through hers. I then set up remote disconnect -- where it shows the icon in your system tray and you can connect and disconnect the modem from any computer in the office. Windows XP comes with a nifty disk that you can put into any Windows computer (besides Windows 2000) and set up the connection sharing.
With another few clicks I had set up the Files and Settings Transfer Wizard, which uses Ethernet or a serial cable to connect to the other computer and download settings (fonts, favorites, etc.) I even backed up other programs and had them transferred automatically.
When my mom plugs in a digital camera, a wizard pops up and shows her all the pictures on the camera. She can then copy them to a disk or to the hard drive. She can print 4x6s, 3x5s, or wallet prints from the OS. Burning files to a CD is as easy as selecting the files, dragging them to the CD drive, and clicking Write To CD. Yes, folks, Windows XP may have a whole host of Big Brother issues (most of which I turned off upon installation), but it sure is easier to use. The whole experience reminded me of the Macintosh.
Compare this with installing Linux. Even setting up Linux to see NTFS drives is a pain, let alone transferrring files and settings (since that is most likely what you are going to want to do upon installation.) I've used Mandrake pretty extensively, and even it has some weird problems (like asking which version of XFree86 you want to use, and not automatically detecting the monitor and setting a reasonable resolution.) It took me hours to figure out how to get Mandrake to change to a lower resolution (Ctrl + -). There is little documentation. And this is on Mandrake 8.1.
There is just a lot of stuff on Linux that is poorly documented and/or buggy, and that carries over to the Windows versions of open-source software in a lot of cases. Netscape 6.2 (which I am using on a daily basis) is easily one of the worst email clients I have ever used. It won't let you switch on-the-fly between text and HTML mode. Attachments randomly refuse to open. At least it's stable, which is more than I can say for any version of Staroffice (5.2 or 6.0 beta.) Save a file as Excel format? Crash. Open a large file? Crash. Apply special formatting? Crash. I'm running Windows 2000, so no, this has nothing to do with Microsoft. A favorite quote of a co-worker also on this project is "Yeah, I use StarOffice to open documents, but if I want to get any real work done, I just use Excel."
It's not there, and after seeing Windows XP (which, BTW, has no activation bull if you buy it preinstalled), I'm not convinced that it ever will be. I will happily use Linux on the server, but I consider Windows an excellent client OS.
See my post history / journal if you want more info.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
Knowing the /. conventional wisdom on this subject, I'll probably get branded as a troll. But here's my take: So long as there is the degree of fragmentation in the Linux world as currently exists, a mass migration to Linux via the desktop is highly unlikely. Why? Because people don't want to have to chose between two desktop managers, between ten different word processors, between x different flavors of y.
This is not an indictment against freedom to choose! But it's been my observation that most people (especially the tech-unsavvy) don't want to have to choose if at all possible. They want one desktop, one word processor, one of y.
For Linux to break the M$ stronghold, distros will need to provide two things: (1) A "simple" install which provides the typical user with the minimum (ideal: zero) number of installation options, and (2) an "expert" install option for those of us who want to tweak our systems to the nth degree and not use an install process aimed at the LCD of the population.
Distro vendors themselves will need to agree on what a "simple" install is comprised of...and use the same components. Otherwise, we're back to square one on the fragmentation issue. Developers can make this process easier by putting aside their petty disagreements and pooling their energies to make production-quality software a reality, rather than the endless stream of beta-version software that never seems to quite make the jump to release-quality.
I'm so sick of hearing about how Linux isn't ready for the desktop. 'Digitial hub'? 'Integrated office suite'? By those standards, Windows was never ready for the desktop either! If we follow MS's own argument, their world-dominant desktop OS wasn't and never has been ready!
Microsoft should face up to their own arguments and realize that they've never really been ready for the desktop. Anybody who remembers all the days of fighting with emm386.sys parameters in their config.sys will agree with me here. Those problems lasted will into Windows '95 (which didn't come out until almost 1996) and the office suite didn't really get shoved in until Office '97.
MacOS had an 'integrated office suite' in 1986, maybe even before. They even had Hypercard as an 'application development platform' analogous to the Web with its Java applets and servlets. They had the Apple Desktop Bus before USB was even vaporware. They've been a full decade ahead of the curve and MS has been playing catchup.
By the MS Marketing Machine's own reasoning, we should all use Macs, they've been 'ready for the desktop' better and longer than either Windows or Linux.
Or maybe everyone should get a clue and just use what freaking works for them. I've been running Linux almost exclusively since 1994. It was ready for me eight years ago. It's total BS that MS keeps re-defining what it means to be 'ready for the desktop' and sheey idiocy that the entire industry forgets its own history and eats it all up in a crass feeding frenzy.
I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Developers don't have a way of providing a universal device driver that will work under any release of a kernel. Heck, a device driver for 2.4.10 won't easily work in 2.4.17! Exactly how is a device manufacturer going to release a driver (either open source or binary) that an end user can *easily* install? As it is right now, device manufacturers who support Linux have to do so with little added expense. Mostly because most of the people using Linux are technically adept enough to get their devices drivers working. But if Linux gets more popular on the desktop, the cost to device manufacturers of supporting Linux is going to dramatically increase as end users aren't able to install their device driver by themselves. I think this is going to be a limiting factor on Linux's popularity.
Until a device manufacturer can easily install their device driver in to just about any running linux kernel, I don't see them jumping on board to provide linux drivers. Until that happens, I don't see linux making much headway on the desktop.
I don't like this. I run debian on every computer I own. I'd really like to see Linux become popular on the desktop, but I think it has to overcome many hurdles. One of which is easily allowing device manufacturers to install their drivers.
$.02.
Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
(My diary entry from kuro5hin)
I've always been a Windows user. (Not a lover, just a user.) I never really had the chance to move into Linux. The one time I had successfully installed it, I jacked it up by trying to update it and screwing up all of the dependencies. (I eventually couldn't even boot anymore, and didn't feel like going through everything again.)
So I've used Windows almost consistently, from way back when Win3.1 was around. I've used Win95 -> Win98 -> Win2000. I've also used WinXP at work, and refuse to install it at home, because 1) it's mostly eye-candy (read: bloatware) and (most importantly) 2) it calls home. (No FUD, No third-party quotes; I've seen it myself.)
Regarding calling home, many XP-lovers vehemently deny this. Here's what I know and don't know: I do know that almost all MS products call home. I installed Tiny Personal Firewall at work and caught screensavers trying to connect to Microsoft, now why the hell would a --screensaver-- need to connect home. (Conspiracy Theory) Maybe because if the screensaver is on, you're probably not at you're computer, and therefore it's prime time to install new software, send back large amounts of data, or whatever. (/Conpiracy Theory)
I don't know what data they're sending back; however since at the time I ran almost all pirated software (including office2k, development tools, other stuff) I'm not/wasn't willing to take that risk. Furthermore, XP is a lot slower. It offers many "GUI-enhancing" features to make the interface look nicer (read: run slower). Switching to classic-mode pretty much gives you a little slower Win2000 with a few cool features (below) and a lot of privacy issues. So is worth the switch? Let's see.
The cool features of WinXP:
1) Logging in to another account while keeping one account logged in. Great, great feature. I hated having to turn off WinAmp just so I can get Administrator rights. However, since Win2000 has the "Run As" service to run programs with different permissions, and since only one program (Exact Audio Copy) wouldn't run correctly through "Run As", I could still drop into Admin mode, and burn CDs, install programs, etc, while basically still in Normal User mode.
2) Window grouping. Cool feature but not worth privacy issues.
3) System tray hiding. Cool feature, but again, not worth the privacy issues.
I know there were other nice features, but again, nothing so revolutionary that I even considered going to XP.
Anyways, so that's why I never went to XP. (I'm not going to even debate WinME, as that is just complete shit.)
Win2000 I will stand by. It's a relatively solid OS. Even when I pulled a running hard drive out of the drive, it didn't crash. It's also fast, and it's mostly a power system. Not that much eye-candy, but still a nice, clean interface. I'm not going to go too much into the good things about Win2000 since most of you already know them.
Why I switched:
The quick answer: I got trojan'ed. I don't know how they got in, I considered myself as having a pretty secure system, but they got in, and there was no way I could remove it. Oh well, shit happens. Since I had to format anyways, I decided to try out Linux. I d/l'ed and burned Mandrake 8.1 and Debuan 2.2r5, and tried installing both mutliple times. Debain I never really got working. (I could boot into it, but couldn't get the network up, and didn't have much time, so just to stuck to Mandrake.) Anyways, Mandraek has a very easy installation procedure (comparable to Windows). It detected most (all?) of my hardware correctly and set up my network without a hitch. It took me a while to get everything I wanted to work correctly, but after a few days I had it:
Things I wanted:
1) Network access, obvious
2) Good browser, email client, newsreader, IRC client, and AIM client
3) MP3 Player, and MP3 database tool (I have over 50 gigs of mp3s)
4) Movie player that supports Divx, MPG, and ASF as a minimum
5) Office software to read Microsoft docs
6) Other things so I could do my homework (Devlopment tools and editors).
I got everything except the movie player up immediately (Emacs, Mozilla/Galeon, Evolution, Pan, XChat, Gaim, Freeamp, and Gnumeric)
For the movie player, I tried a bunch of different tools (avifile, xmps, etc) but couldn't get them working very well. MPlayer requires self-compiling (due to compile-time optimizations) so I decided to go ahead and try that. MPlayer requires GCC 2.75 to compile, since 2.76 is buggy. Of course, Mandrake ships with 2.76. So I had to find old distros, and `rpm --force' install them over the newer files, along with changes some links so the correct tools were called. Anyways, after a lot bitching and moaning, I finally got it to compile. And in all honesty, MPlayer kicks some serious ass. (mplayerhq.hu) It supports about 20 or 30 different codecs, along with reading Win32 dlls. It's very fast and very clean. Highly recommend using that. (Additional features I found very cool were (all possible while in the middle of a video) 1) changing hue/contrast/brightness, 2) resyncing audio !!! 3) full keyboard controls and all sorts of other stuff. ) MPlayer is absolutely a bad ass product!
Anyways so now I finally had everything I really needed. I played with it for a while, and realized why I have absolutely no reason to go back to Windows. Let me explain:
What I like: (++ specifies features I -really- like.)
1) Everything is completely, really FREE.
2) Absolutely love being able to have true multiple logins. (Ctrl-Alt-Fx and login)
3) True console mode, with no X; True console emulation in X.
4) Multiple desktops, rolling up windows, Gnome applets.
5) Completely customizable X interface. (As in I'm not tied down to a single fancy interface: I use sawfish with Gnome, though Blackbox also rules)
6) Software:
Sawfish (++Setting your own key bindings.)
Galeon (++Tabbed windows)
Evolution
Gaim (++multiple protocols, plugins)
Biff (I'm using kaw_applet though)
ncftp
++++++MPlayer
FreeAmp (++internal database, exactly how I want it)
Gnumeric
Shell scripting
Things I don't like:
1) It doesn't think my video card supports 1280x1024 in 32-bit mode. Utter bullshit.
2) One of my cdroms isn't in great shape, and it sometimes locks when I try to read a cd. (Actually a I don't know if it really locks, but it goes into kernel panic, and then sits still for about a minute, when I hit reset out of impatience.)
3) There is no program as good as Dreamweaver. Bluefish is nice, but Dreamweaver was truly amazing.
Everything Windows has that I like I ahve found on Linux, for free (usually GPL'ed) and without ads. That's pretty f*cking cool. For the first time in my life, my computer is running on truly legit software. I also like that. Most importantly, the minute I started using Sawfish, and noticed the custom keybinding support, I absolutley fell in love with X. When I got Gnome also working alongside Sawfish, it became a truly cool system.
Windows isn't bad, and I actually like Win2000. However, in order to change the interface, you need to loada utility on top of the Win2000 interface (ie: WindowBlinds) which really slows the computer down. Here I can just change the interface, or even run just a pure X interface if I want absolutely very little memory usage.
Windows definitely has an edge when it comes to ease of installation and the learning curve, expecially since most people are already familiar with Windows. However, for anyone who wants a little more control, a litte more power or customization, Linux is definitely the OS of choice, especially now that almost all software exists on both OS's.
Linux will take the desktop, it's just a matter of time. Remember to some companies, an operating system that can't run every little stupid-flash-game.exe is actually a good thing. The business desktop is different than the home desktop, they should be adressed differently. With a very specific set of goals per company/deparment it is a feasible target for many NOW. That is where great Linux desktop numbers will really begin.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
That's it. What'll it take to get companies like mine to roll out Linux instead of Windows? Well, surely the cost of Linux is a lot more attractive than the idea of rolling out new Windows machines (W2K here, mostly). I'm a Linux user. I love it, especially on the server (and we have a number of Linux servers now at my company).
But our company has an investment made in infrastructure that it can't just throw away. One example - as much as I don't like it, we have Exchange handle email. Not just email, but more importantly, the calendar functionality, which lets us book meetings, meeting rooms and equipment (ie one of the projectors). We can exchange meeting requests/responses. We can look at each other's calendars to see who's available when, or where somebody is at any given time. In a larger company, this is very important because we can't keep tabs on everybody all the time.
So far there's been plenty of email clients available for Linux. There's been plenty of programs that can do calendars. But it's besides the point:
If a company like mine goes to Linux, they will have to have the ability to phase that change in, and thus retain compatibility with the existing tools and services that we use. Those who switch to Linux need to be able to share their data with the folks that stay with Windows, and vice-versa.
StarOffice gives us everything we need in terms of processing Word documents and Excel spreadsheets reasonably well. But until there's a compatible alternative to Outlook (all of it) that can connect to Exchange and handle the calendar functionality, you won't be able to convince anyone here to change over. As much as I love Linux, I can't switch my desktop machine over because I, like most everybody else in my company, rely on Outlook, as evil as that is.
Give me the opportunity and I'll switch - I've already switched a number of our servers to Linux, including all servers which run the application I develop. Give me a decent Linux alternative to Outlook, and I'm certain I could convert most of the company to Linux for their desktops.
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
actually the apps are there. they just need fine tuning.
the number one important thing that linux needs is a decent installer. Loki gave us one in their final death throwes.. it's awesome. and the like of KDE,gnome and EVERY app should drop what they are doing and start adapting it to their app.
To hell with making some minor bugfixes this week, get an installer on your app that even a lobotimized monkey can use.... that's the loki installer.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
(Heh, my parents have a picture of their grandkid as the wallpaper.)
The home market isn't all that relevant. It's the enterprise desktop that's the real prize, because it has a much shorter sell-cycle, because you get lock-down without a lock-down by moving to a *nix desktop, and because it's only necessary to train to specific work-related tasks, not how to install driver X or game Y or cutesy-apps Z.
Windows applications and Windows drivers can stay in Windows and watch their market dissapear if Linux achieves desktop goals. Windows application emulation is an ugly path that only supports the proven monopolist.
Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
I don't think it's realistic to target grandparents at this point. Business suffering under the constant threat of the BSA, hundreds of thousands of dollars a years in license costs, viruses / worms that shut down their networks IS a good target market. Government is another. Do YOU really want a large chunk of YOUR tax dollars going to line Bill G's pockets?
If we took only 1% of the money that governments / business spend on MS licenses and used that to fund open source software, we could offer a viable replacement to MS in 1 year.
when Earth is hit by a major asteroid, or something.
All those tools need to agree on a very exact format specs or else the user cannot use the tools together.
;) While there is still plenty of room for the toolbox, its use is largely confined to professionals and enthusiasts that require a high degree of specialization.
All those tools need to operate in roughly the same way or else the user will have to learn a lot more.
All those tool developers need to remember that 99% of their market is for that subset of features that the dedicated application needs. Thus, adding much more will bloat it with complexity and size that simply does not reward the user.
All those tool developers all need to setup their applications with the majority of the users tasks in mind so they don't force the users to do more work than is necessary.
All those tool developers should provide a certain amount of interoperability besides just file formating and such. e.g., How does the user perform an "undo" after one tool has been applied?
All those tools need to agree to collaborate on support problems rather than pointing fingers at other tools.
The point is that creating seperate tools in this fashion is simply not appropriate for most applications. The organization and development costs for this "tool" methodology to make it appropriate for the end users totally exceeds the costs to produce a superior application under the "traditional" unified application framework. The analogy that I'd make, in response to the "tool box" analogy, is what tool do most users, that actually use tools, actually carry with them? A leatherman (and maybe a limited toolbox at home). The toolbox is too bulky and ackward in most situations where a leatherman (or like tool) is totally appropriate.
What you are doing is laughing at the Swiss Army knife that is MS and kin that tries to be everything to all people and assuming that the toolbox is the best solution because the swiss army knife is almost useless. Well it's not impossible to devise a better unified tool than both for most users. Its name is the Leatherman
Since a 3 button trackpad module should be available from any number of OEMs, what's keeping a 3rd party from just retrofitting them? At the price of a TiBook, an extra $60 shouldn't matter.
And also Solaris and IRIX and HP-UX and AIX. Do I need to define "success" for you?
This article actually brought a smile to my face...
"Quite a few distributions of the Linux desktop are close to becoming products that can successfully compete against Microsoft Windows."
Translation: It's still not there yet.
"Each system can be installed without harming Windows."
Indeed, that's the first step. The second step is to automatically transfer / map "My Documents", "Favorites", "Fonts", etc. I haven't yet seen a distribution that will willingly copy over files from Windows, but Windows XP will willingly copy files and settings from any other Windows computer via Ethernet. Linux needs this to have a successful dual-boot audience, and it would be nice for system upgrades as well.
"With closed-source systems, users are stuck with programs and upgrades they cannot change."
Who says? I regularly contribute my feedback and bugs to everyone from Microsoft to MySQL to Trillian. I pay for the products, and I send in every bug report / feature request I find. In most cases, I don't want to program it myself anyway. If many people request a feature, it will be there. And often the programmers come up with a more intuitive way to impement it than I would have. I'm okay with this, and so are the majority of users.
"The Microsoft approach limits a user to available software. With Linux, a user can grow."
This makes no sense. There are development tools aplenty for both Windows and Linux. If your company uses Windows, chances are high that someone, somewhere, has an MSDN subscription and has the suite of Microsoft's visual development tools that they would be willing to let you borrow. Of course, you can also use third-party development tools (some of which are free) for both OSes.
This article should never have made it to ZDNet. Sometimes I wonder whether ZDNet scans article submissions for "Linux" and just posts those, knowing it will generate heated debate. Ths article is really flamebait -- it says nothing new, and it makes both sides come up in arms. Too bad. *sigh*
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
Linux will fail on the desktop.
Linux will succeed on the desktop.
CowboyNeal on the desktop.
pronoblem
.psd
.qxd
.ai
.fla
.ind
.fh9
.pm7
.dir
Pooty tweet
Get the various streaming media formats supported on Linux. Get the various video formats supported. Get the various "features" of broken web-browsers supported in Linux browsers. Once all the features of porn sites are easily accessible using Linux, then success will come.
If what you say is true, then these guys are visionaries.
Quote: "The goal of the Pornzilla project is to make Mozilla into a great porn browser."
Note that the project has "Members" (apparently they're not trying to be funny here) as well as a "throbber" feature (whatever that is, I don't really want to know).
The wonders of Open Source...
"There are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare." - Blair Houghton
Isn't anyone but me getting very sick and tired of this subject? Whether or not you are totally into linux or couldn't care less, I don't possibly see what yet another "Linux will roxx your world" article will do for us.
Please use your energy better by doing something to this goal everyone is shouting about. Start a business, make software, write documention, whatever. That can make a difference, claiming that Bill is the new satan won't make anyone a favor.
When I think about it, this looks more and more like a religious cult (like christianity et al) where "the one true road" is all that matters. Come on people, stop and think, get your priorities straight!
That said, I want to express how impressed I am with KDE. The finest piece of free software that I have ever seen. They have their priorities straight, they know what they want, and they know how to make a product. Impressive!
Note to self: download latest Mozilla build and try this out.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I work in the IT dept. of an insurance company. We are all MS apps here, and one of the reasons is that you can get the parts of Ofice to talk to each other and work together to the point where sometimes it doesn't matter which app is really running the show - the functionaliy is there wherever you are. I have developed an MSword app that runs a very complex back end procedure on a SQLserver database and then does some fancy printing with the results. I haven't seen the latest version of Star Office but I hope it or someone on Linux can provide an equivalent level of integration, tying together the datahandling capabilities of spreadsheets and databases with end-user functions like printing. Remember, the IT department has a lot of input in choosing these desktops and at this point the availability of integration like that is a real factor.
First of all, I'm a geek - not an uber geek, but a geek nontheless (Software developer). Now, tell me - why should I use Linux?
Okay, I can think of one reason - so that Bill Gates won't take over the world. I have never been an anti-Microsoft person like all of my CS peers in college, but I'm starting to think that maybe he wouldn't be the best world leader if his desire to rule the world is realized.
Aside from that though, is there anything that Linux can give me that is better than Windows XP? Can Linux stand on its own merits?
I really want to have a reason to install it and use it, but I've never been able to get my PC to dual-boot with Windows without a floppy. LILO couldn't handle the size of my hard drive last I checked (though I think that might've been remedied). Here's your chance - convert me!
The Red Pill
The "throbber" is the little picture that animates when a page is loading, IIRC. Upper right corner of the browser window in Netscape 4.x and the last version of Mozilla I used.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
The leading distros are improving in leaps and bounds for making Linux easy to install. There's still a few things that I think are lacking after the install but we are starting to see improvements in this area thanks to Ximian's Red Carpet and Red Hat's Up2Date.
I'd personally like to see a facility to make it easy to install something you might have missed during the original install. For example, Joe user installs Linux and when its all over and done with he wishes he could connect to a file share on his Windows box. He remembers seeing something about Windows connectivity during his install but doesn't know how to get back to that dialog or what the package was even called. His choice is to either reinstall or go to a newsgroup and ask for help, which leads me to my main point.
I think the linux community needs to lighten up when it comes to "newbies". Linux users should think of themselves as evangelists and when a new user asks a question not be so quick to flame them for not reading the HOWTO before coming to them with such a trivial question. If you go to your local church and ask an elder or a member of the clergy a question about somthing that has you confused do they jump up your ass for not reading the bible first for the answers? No, they are happy to see that you are interested and they try hard to help you. Why can't we be the same when someone approaches us with a question about Linux, no matter how trivial it may be? I'm not saying we should be there to answer all their questions, but in the process of answering their first questions we might want to show them where to find the answers so the next time they can help themselves. We just need to be more tactful when educating new users.
The distributions are doing a good job, the developers are doing a good job, now it is time for the users to do a good job. If Linux is to succeed on the desktop it is up to the users to give it a good image.
'Same speed C but faster'
Because, you see, that was a rethorical question.
Every month there is a new article telling us how Linux will prevail... Been going on since at least 1997.
Who actually cares anymore?
This is what I did. I setup a Windows box that acts as a document converter. Incomming emails are scanned for .doc's by procmail which sends off the word doc to the windows machine. A VB script takes that file, opens it in word, and causes word to save it as RTF. The rtf is sent back to procmail which adds it back as a second attachement. So now each email has both the original .doc file, and an rtf version (you want to keep the doc file for various reasons (sometimes you lose info.)
I also setup drop-box directories for employees to put old word docs and a vb script generates an RTF version.
You can do the same with other "common" proprietary file formats. We also have a few windows boxes setup that can be accessed via VNC to run various legacy / proprietary apps (I thought about writting a proxy that finds the next "free" machine automatically."
While this doesn't totally eliminate windows, it cuts it way down. The document converter alone eliminates 95% of the reason to use Windows.
For people with a larger need for Windows, VMWare can be useful.
First, I feel vindicated because of the flames I have recieved in the last few weeks concerning Linux on the Desktop. For all of you who flamed me all I have say is "See I'm not the only one who thinks so!"
Second, I wonder if it might not be profitable for one of the big OEM houses, such as Dell, IBM or HP, to pull with Linux, what Apple did with BSD. Which is to build a clean stripped version of Linux and then drop in a proprietary X Windows replacement. I won't go into why they wouldn't do this (Wrath of Microsoft) or shouldn't do it (profitablility, Wrath of FSF), but are there any good reasons to do it? Other questions to consider; Could they get NVidia or ATI to help them write video drivers? Could they get Mozilla or Star/Open Office ported? How hard would it be to develope or port things like a DvD player, MP3/CD player, Video player, DvD/CD burning software? Would they need to make it availble across thier entire line, or just one system type, where hardware could be tightly controled? Food for thought.
"Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
-Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development
I believe that Linux does have a promising future as a common desktop operating system. The problem is that everyone uses MS products as a benchmark for usability and functionality. Is linux difficult to use? When comparing it to the defacto standard that MS has established over the years, indeed Linux is confusing and difficult to use.
As an experiment I recently gave my mother, who has _never_ used a computer, a new Dell system with Redhat 7.2 installed. I taught her how to use it and gave her a few books to help her along the way. Results, she is now a productive and happy user of Linux.
See, to her MS or Linux makes no difference. She would have to learn either but since she didnt have years of bias towards MS products both OS are completely interchangeable to her. She can surf the Internet, use word processing, and play music, and the price was right!
Linux has come a long way and is getting better everyday. Maybe LUGs should proactively promote and manage Linux machines in schools with kids who don't have the bias yet, and establish Linux as the defacto standard.
Just a thought.
That is so full of crap it's not even funny. Microsoft Office is currently the defacto standard because they've strong-armed corporate stiffs into using their product. They shift their API every few months so that competitors can't make their competing products stable.
Whenever Microsoft changes versions, a flood of corporate numbskulls switch to the latest-greatest version. This encourages their employees to upgrade, otherwise they are "not compatible". Then all their friends start getting uncompatible attachments. I have heard "I have this document that I can't read but I have Microsoft Word." more times than I care to count in my past 6 years as a help-desk tech.
Imitation is a very small part of why people use MS Office. Microsoft's dirty tricks is far more culpable.
--Yekrats
Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
it's the sound of ten zillion intel owners saying: "who cares how cool and functional OS X is -- I can not run it on my PC." The viability of Linux in both the server room and the desktop is markatable because for the most part it is hardware agnostic.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
As it stands now, it is incredibly easy to copy and install any Microsoft application on the desktop, with or without licensing. Products Keys are traded and generated without compunction, and are bandied about in web-sites, on the Usenet, between friends, stolen from work and so forth and so on. Further, the BSA estimates that 1 on 4 OS installations on new machines are pirated. So it is easy to copy and install any Microsoft application for free, up to and including Windows XP. Quite many home users have no software other than the included OS and apps installed by the vendor that are legal. Think: how many folks go and buy full-blown Office licenses for their homes? I'll wager my Linux server that it is far less than 50%.
That's what is competing against Linux on the desktop: freely available no cost Microsoft OS's and applications.
That makes the killer app for Linux desktop success as simple as pie: real licensing from Microsoft that requires real product activation. When it happens, Linux is suddenly very viable as a competitor -- people will be REQUIRED for their versions of Windows XP-Pro-Gold-2004 and Microsoft Word 2004, etc. et al.
The people behind Linux on the desktop don't understand what the masses need and want. The Linux desktop looks the part but doesn't have the consistency and intuitiveness of Mac or Windows desktops. It may never have, the openness to do things your way of Linux is also its downfall. There is no interface standard for Linux like Mac and Windows. The masses NEED/REQIRE consistency. Everything has to have a place and be there. GUI app's caught on because learn one Mac app you now know the basics of all Mac app's. The apps are as important as the desktop they are inseparable.
Just a bit of info about Lycoris: It's Desktop/LX distribution used to be Redmond Linux. In January, the company became Lycoris and the website took on a more Apple/iMac-ish look to appeal to new users. Redmond Linux started out with the intention of cutting a distro down to the simplest and most useful components for the new user, and Desktop/LX is actually the first update to the Redmond Linux package. Support for GUI MP3 ripping is "coming soon".
I haven't used it, but I might purchase a copy (I still use Windows) once a version comes out with a 2.6.x core.
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
As far as performance goes, Gnome/GTK/Corba/X is downright snappy on my aging Athlon 700. I have to turn down the graphics in Tribes 2 but it's plenty fast for Quake 3 or Unreal Tournament.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
KDE 2.2.1, open a Konqueror window, Window->Show Terminal. Been there for a while, since KDE 2.0.1 I think. (Unless you meant something different by "integration", which you probably did, since that's a really slippery word and you should've defined it better.) Never used it much since I always have a konsole open anyway.
I've never seen the ability to launch a command line shell set to the directory you're currently viewing in the file manager.
Shoot, that's in there too: Open a Konqueror window and choose Tools->Open Terminal (Ctrl-T). Been there since KDE 1.1.2 IIRC, and probably since before then. KDE 1.1.2 came out sometime in 1999.
If you could have a window that was half-command line, half-file manager, such that when you changed directories in one half, it would change directories in the other?
That is the default behavior for the command lines you launch with the "show terminal/Ctrl-T" command in Konqeror, and probably has been there since 2.0.1. You can turn it off by clicking on the "link" icon below the terminal window scrollbar.
Everything you mentioned is available, it either seems so obvious or so "why would anyone want that?" that no one bothers to mention it. Oh yeah, it would also confuse the newbies. HTH anyway.
Give a monkey a brain and he'll swear he's the center of the universe.
I sit on a Mandrake 8.1/Win2k dual box. I must say you don't have the faintest idea of what your are saying...
I changed from Windows to Linux on the desktop for a number of reasons, Windows instability NOT being one of them. My personal reasons are mainly the need for flexibility, the joys of having free access to most code I use. Beyond that I have a host of professional reasons for using Linux.
But the Windows side of my box is extremely stable. I has hundreds of applications, from legacy DOS little programs to Office 2K. I have everything I have on Linux, including a running Web server, MySql, Zope, PHP, Java etc.
As an annedoct, the only program that managed to bring Windows 2000 to a hard halt was StarOffice 6.0 beta.
Drivers. Apps. Games.
I had to change my desktop theme because people refused to believe that I wasn't running OS X.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
... gain on the desktop then every Linux user that has children should teach all there children to use Linux and only Linux, Micro$oft should not enter these children's lives while they are at home. Your children should have there own Linux box and if they break it they should be taught that they should try to fix it first before they come to you for help, that breaking it is part of the learning experience and that it is ok to break it. When your children ask you for help with there Linux box you should not hold there hand and do the task at hand for them you should set by there side and guild them only when they are severally lost. If every Linux user did this I believe that we could get Linux into the 'Mainstream' because our children would be the ones running the networks of tomorrow, writing the programs of tomorrow, and running the companies of tomorrow and Linux is what they would be familiar with not M$. One of the other things that we would have to do is convince our local public schools that they should teach Linux in the classroom, I know my local public schools do in a limited fashion already, and my local Community College does to.
This reminds me of my first PC.
My Dad gave it to me. I don't know the exact year, but it was still a pretty current 286, with VGA graphics, two floppy drives, 50 spacious megs of hard drive, and a printer. All mine to do with as I pleased, on one condition.
I wasn't allowed to ask him how to run it, or call him when I broke it. If something happened to it, I had to fix it myself.
It turned out to be a great learning experience. I got me a couple DOS manuals and learned the ins and outs of setting up a menu based DOS machine.
I have a three year old, and I'll be giving her a computer in a few years. It'll have Linux on it, and I hope she learns as much as I did.
-- When a fool hears of the Tao, he will laugh out loud.
AppleTi PowerBook - $2299
Wireless trackball with 10 buttons and a scrollwheel - $124
Taco stopping his trolling on the topic of Apple mice - Priceless.
As someone comming from the KDE side of the fence, I would say we have a -LOT- to learn about red-carpet. Though it's not perfect, it's what an installer should be. Simple, direct and online.
My guess is a huge percentage of the post-install boxes are on the internet. I know the kde group believes that the responsibility is for the distro's to resolve those issues, but I disagree. I have a redhat 7.1 box that just doesn't need upgrading, because I have switched it over to Ximian Gnome desktop. Thats right, there is nothing really different about that older version of redhat than running on a ximian desktop on top of Mandrake 8.1. It's great, my box is always current and I don't need to play the bi-yearly distro knuckle-shuffle.
I get to choose the distro I am most comfortable with , and red-carpet keeps me up on the security updates, software updates , etc. It's just plain and simple nice.
I don't think I will be upgrading my home / primary workstation to Mandrake 8.2 because Ximian works fine. I am also tired of chasing down RPMS and playing the dep game.... Ximian has just got it right on that one, and it's all in the packaging and distribution.
IMHO KDE is superior in technical ways, but I am now using Gnome because of the superiour distribution and packaging and the warm feeling of knowing I am getting updates on a weekly basis.
The performance isn't the best but it has been common practice with "evaluation" distros to install Linux in a flat file that lives on the Windows filesystem. If worst comes to worst and the user doesn't like it, then the directory can be dragged to the trash and that is the end of that. The distro could include a prominent desktop link that explains in plain English the pros and pitfalls of a full dedicated partition install.
Better compatibility with existing MS products. I'd like to be able to login to an existing MS domain (w2k or NT) map drives via login script...etc.
I'd also like to login to Novell servers....map drives etc.
I'd also like the ability to slowly replace my NT/2000 servers with linux machines...that means being able to add a linux server to a windows domain and replicate active directory-and/or-NT user lists.
I don't want to maintain seperate Unix and Windows user lists.
I'd like to see a comprehensive directory service for Linux that is compatible with windows.
All this would make it easy for me to gradually replace windows in my organization.
C'mon OS community....you can do this!
-ted
Once again the naysayers flock to the scene of the battle, claiming that if "my mom/dad can't do it then Linux isn't ready for the desktop." Two points:
- if your mom or dad can't do it you must have stupidly given them the wrong distribution. Toss out Slackware and give them a set of SuSe 7.3 CDs instead.
- if your mom and dad can't master something as simple as SuSe it really doesn't matter that much. Soon they'll no longer be making decisions more important than "do I need to buy a new package of Depends?", as the next generation seizes the market place from their stale Boomer fingers.
Kids, I've found out, have no more difficulties using Linux than they do Windows - in fact, they generally prefer Linux because they can do more with it. These kids, who grew up with computers and have an intuitive grasp of the machines that older generations lack, will soon be the primary labor pool for every non-geriatric corporation in America.
So if Mom or Dad can't handle anything but Windows, let them have their Windows. In a few years they'll cycle out of the job market and then what they think or don't think about computers won't matter in the slightest.
The opinions that *really* count aren't those of the old and soon-to-be-warehoused; the opinions that matter most are those who're teenagers right now. And those kids, when it comes to computers, aren't clueless idiots like their parents before them.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
As for photoshop/gimp, don't even start.
You also conveniently forgot about drivers. How many graphic cards have 3D hardware acceleration under Linux? What about Winmodems?
That's what I have been saying for years. Most of the Window$ freaks that I talk to and try to say that Linux is a viable alternative not only because of open source vs. closed source, but because of price -- usually have not paid any more for their Windows software than I have my Linux software. (Back when I used Windows, I paid for everything -- and the cost just was way to much to keep up with $100 OS, $200 Office, $50-$250 for each piece of software and each "upgrade"...errr...bugfix....So that was an easy justification to take a few less features and save much money going with Linux.)
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
The title of the article and the contents seem to be unrelated. The title says, "Linux will prevail," then goes on to says:
"Unfortunately, many computer users are unaware of the extent to which they are "jerked around" by companies that sell a license restricting the freedom to use their software."
Well, it would seem that Linux doesn't stand much of a chance if people continue to remain unaware of that issue. He's not suggesting here that they are becoming more aware or ways that they can be made more aware, he's simply stating a set back to the cause. So hardly a proof that Linux will prevail. Next he says:
"Recent announcements by Sun Microsystems, regarding its expanded support for the open-source community and its decision to provide its own Linux distribution, are welcome news. "
Excellent! So all of the Solaris desktop users may move to Linux. I'm sure we welcome all 3 of them to our happy community. Next he goes on to list hurdles that Linux needs to overcome but doesn't provide any evidence that they ARE being overcome which is somewhat important if he's trying to proove his title. So then he moves on to say:
"No one would buy a car with a welded-shut hood, yet we continue to buy software that way. The Microsoft approach limits a user to available software. With Linux, a user can grow. If a tool is missing or awkward, someone can get under the hood and fix the problem. "
The funny thing is that increasingly, especially amongst the more expensive cars, it is becoming impossible to do any real work on them yourself. Sure, you can change the oil and other fluids but beyond that many cars are impossible for the average person to do work on. Finally, he says:
"
Two paths are before us. One leads to increasing proprietary control, protectionist measures and legal threats, while the other leads to open source, freedom and accelerated innovation. I, of course, choose the latter because it is "win-win." Vital innovation, new markets and vastly improved customer service win the vote readily over the purveyors of proprietary hoarding. "
To summarize, he seems to be concluding that Linux will prevail despite some hurdles because it would be really good if it did and really bad if it didn't. Wow, that's all the evidence I needed, kudos to linux, your victory is well in hand!
This is really a poorly written article and is little more than another puff piece about how Linux is the right choice, and windows is the wrong choice. It shows no new insights on the chances of Linux surviving and only points out the same issues to be dealt with that only about a billion other articles have pointed out.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Maybe I'm just having exceptionally poor experiences - but why is it I see so many people claiming they set up a Linux box with KDE and it works so well? I've been using Linux for years, on multiple systems, and several different distros - and still, I feel almost lucky if I can use KDE for a complete session without having at least one ugly glitch or problem.
.WAV sound files to start playing with a "click" or "pop" for example, or just the way X handles color palettes when you aren't in high-color mode), the environment still feels "rough around the edges" to most people.
Most often, I run into lingering processes when I leave X. (I know I'm not the only one, because I just read a complaint on the LTSP project mailing list where a sysadmin complained that he can't serve up KDE to his users on their production LTSP server anymore. He says the processes that get stuck and don't die when users exit/log-out keep piling up over time until they eventually make the server unstable.)
My other common headache is with the browsers. Whether I choose Netscape, Galleon, Mozilla or Konqueror, it doesn't seem to really matter. Eventually, any of them is guaranteed to blow up or freeze up something. I realize this isn't directly KDE's fault, but can't it at least offer a little more ability to kill a problem app without wreaking havoc on the rest of my session?
When you combine all of this with what I'd simply describe as "look and feel" issues (tendencies for
That's not a "hack". How the hell do you think those OTHER menu items get there? The process is completely documented. Anyone can add any menu item they want to explorer. This is the "customizability" that Linux people blag on about so often. Believe it or not, yes, Windows is EXTREMELY customizable as well.
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
The framebuffer is just waiting for you to develop for it. Can't you hear it calling out to you? Maybe you should help a project like GTKFB, or maybe it might be intersting to port QT to the framebuffer. I'd love to see either mature. I'd pontificate a bit about what I don't like about X and even how eliminating X wouldn't eliminate DCOP at least (haven't done much with CORBA), but I use Ion as a window manager (it's rather cool to log in in under a second), and I have a midterm in ten minutes.
Join the Slashcott! Stay away entirely Feb 10 thru Feb 17! Close all tabs to prevent autorefresh!
Do you want to shell out for EVERYBODY to get the next version of Word shortly after the first (early adopter) person does? Don't forget, .doc incompatibilities come between versions, too. Sure, you can set the new Word to save by default in the old .doc, but that's essentially the same as setting it for .rtf, isn't it?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
depending on the distro, installing linux is often easier and less painless than on windows - here are some examples that would make a newbie throw his machine out with windows:
moving the ethernet card from the top bay to the bottom makes windows want to try and reinstall it! browsing to windows or windows\system trick doesn't work, it insists on the drivers yet again, and after a reboot, guess what?? no go, because there are now two similar adapters in the network control panel (this is 98SE, btw), each with differing tcp/ip properties. Easily fixed for me, hours of frustration for the avarage user.
When the "windows" magic breaks, there is no easy config file to alter, as is the case with linux, it's a matter of uninstalling, rebooting, reinstalling - fail, uninstall DEEPER, like tcp/ip itselt vs just the adapter, reinstall etc. This is a cycle of shit, excuse my english.
Or how about when a program installs and near the end of the install, asks you if you want to reboot to finish - windows crashes during the reboot and guess what??? the app is half installed and requires registry pecking to fix. If windows were a person, that person would have cancer yet be asked to run marathons - too undependable even for it's own operation.
Or here's another one - unplug an external mouse from a laptop with limited resources, reboot expecting to use the keyboard mouse. Windows rearranges irq's, and spits out messages about PCI bridges and the like - all stuff that would make the avarage secretary scream - and finds the keyboard mouse (did it forget it, lol???), but asks for the drivers. The solution here is simply to keep hitting next with nothing selected. But the masses would surely call their IT department on this, probably after trying for an hour to find the drivers...oh, and an normaly, this has to happen twice - assuming windows can manage to shut the machine down properly - upon reboot it does the same thing.
I guess the point is that in reality, i really don't think that windows is any closer to being as easy to operate as a tv or vcr than linux is, and, let me honestly say, if something does go fubar, it's much easier to have the user change a config file and change without rebooting, than the endless change, reboot, try again cycle, let alone mess with that God damn registry...
My 2 cents of truth from the frontlines of support,
I don't believe people are _that_ afraid to try an OSS office suite. Maybe a little intimidated, but not truely scared.
I think the real resistance, the real fear, will show up when you try to get people to give up Quicken or MS Money in favor of some OSS replacement.
IMHO, people will be much more worried about looseing their banking info, check book ballances, account numbers, payment histories, and other financial information... By comparision to worrying about formating of a frigging .doc vs. a .rtf, which do YOU think they will worry about more?
Don't count? Why not? They're programs that people use all the time. I and many others use Quark XPress, Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, PageMaker, InDesign, Premiere, AfterEffects, LiveMotion, Macromedia Freehand, Director and Flash all day every day. So, since the Linux crowd has yet to develop programs that can handle these formats, they don't count?
Burning karma at a phenomenal rate today!
Pooty tweet
...should have been a better title for the article.
The article focused upon Office as much as it did with Linux, with good reason, as they carry equal weight in the context of usefulness in the business world.
From the article:
Microsoft Office is currently the de facto standard for office programs, because competitors have done more to imitate it than to develop an improved solution.
This is bunk. Pure bunk. Regardless of what people, including myself, think of MS, the Office suite is an extremely useful tool, and is very well integrated.
That is why Office is sitting atop the productivity pig-pile.
I will not argue that Office is becoming overly feature-laden (bloated), it certainly is.
The reason why companies make Office clones is because Office is what people are accustomed to.
If I were to build a radio, I certainly wouldn't make it look like anything other than a radio.
For God's sake, it is a Productivity Tool . Therefore, it has to provide maximum utility with minimal obscurity/interference.
What do you do your windows for, do you never install
any hardware, software.
Most everything "desktopish".
Web browsing, gaming, graphics, music, MIDI, etc.
I install lots of software, and have devices ranging from radio and phone programmers, to video capture, to a MIDI keyboard.
Haven't had a BSOD yet, and everything works rather nicely.
How many minutes
have been on it, how many years before
Started using freenix around 1995, with FreeBSD[1],
mostly for fun and because it was radically different from what I knew at the time.
Started using linux in '98, mostly because it had better hardware support than BSD at the time.
Used linux almost exclusively (kept Win98 for Quake) from '98 to late '99.
Put up with apps (can you say "Netscape"?) crashing, and bringing down X.
Put up with crappy video drivers bringing down my system.
Put up with the inconsistency and overall poor GUI design.
Put up with it because it was still far, far better than Win 9x or NT.
Then Win2k came out, and I started using it (and liking(!) it) at work.
So, I've logged several hundred hours of serious usage, over the span of 6 or so years.
I know linux.
And what have you used Linux for.
Aside from the desktop usage above, I've built countless servers[1], doing everything from HTTP to Quake.
I currently have OpenBSD[1] and Windows on my laptop, Windows on my "workstation" and FreeBSD[1] on my FTP/Samba server.
I'll reiterate my last 50 flamebait comments:
Linux doesn't suck. X does.
Unfortunately, X, with all it's "baggage"[2], is the only choice for linux GUIs.
So, until there's a decent X replacement, that fixes the stuff that annoys me, or until I buy a new Mac[3], I'll have Win on my desktops, and freenix on my servers.
There's my resume, you asked.
C-X C-S
[1] BSD, yes, but IMO, the experience still applies.
[2] As in the kind your girlfriend has, not the kind you bring onto an airplane.
[3] I cannot describe how much I love OSX.
Even WITH a reason you're not going to see people switching. I swear, my mother thought it was a violation of her warrantee to upgrade from Windows 95 to Windows 98. I had to remind her that she had a one year warrantee and that the computer was about 3 years old at that point. "Oh yeah." Says she. "But why do I need to change?"
/dev/hdc6. Forgettaboutit.
I'm a geek, I like to think I'm a good geek, but I can't even bring myself to think about recommending Linux to someone who doesn't know what they're doing, or at least have someone who does living with them. It's hard enough to explain that when scandisk pops up they're supposed to leave it alone and let it do what it wants and just say "ok" to everything. But try explaining to them how to e2fsck
I've seen a quote floating around on here. Something along the lines of Unix being user-friendly but selective about who it makes friends with. I think it's going to be that way with Linux for a little more time.
-Sara
Think of your computer being like your car. Sure, there are some drivers who want to take it a step further. They might tweak their engines, swap out components, etc. all in order to make their cars the best they can be. However, most people are happy with their car the way it is. When you buy a car, everything is there for you. Most drivers don't want or need to know about the innerworkings of a car, let alone what to do when something fails.
We can apply this to OS's by comparing the OS to your transmission. I know ABSOLUTELY nothing about cars. That's why the transmission in my car is fine with me. If something goes wrong, I take it to the shop. If it completely dies on me, I buy a new car. I don't have the expertise - nor do I want to learn how - to rebuild my transmission. The average computer user doesn't want to worry about their OS. It's just supposed to be there and work. Installing a new OS is like rebuilding a transmission, and the average end user doesn't want to do it.
That is why Linux cannot succeed on the desktop until several events happen. 1) Linux must be installed at the OEM level. Computer have to come with it preinstalled. 2) The GUI has to be completely object oriented, easy to use, and easy to configure. News flash: XFree86 is NONE OF THE ABOVE. Look at how Apple took BSD to the masses. They didn't try and build an interface for X Windows. They built one ON TOP of BSD. That's what Linux must do. We can't rely on X Windows because it has too many shortcomings. 3) Applications 4) Unique features and enhancements not found on any other platform. As it stands right now, very little is innovative within the Linux community. Sure, the way things are done might be innovative. But, it all boils down to the Linux community trying to duplicate the things that Microsoft and Apple have already done. If Linux is truly to succeed, there needs to be some reason for users to switch.
Have you made the code (procmail & VB script) available for this? It might help a LOT of other people...
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
Gnome probably isn't mentioned in this context because it wont't be the driving force behind "taking over the desktop". That's because Gnome "just doesn't get it" with regards to catering to converted Windows users.
For example, God intended that Alt+F4 should close a window. Last I tried Gnome, it switches me to desktop 4. I can't think of any argument why some arbitrary key mappings would be any better or worse than those in Windows. Given that 95% of today's GUI users are used to one system, why not ship it the Windows way by default.
If you have multiple machines accessing your "few windows boxes" to run Office, then you must pay for a license of Office for each machine.
.doc. I don't know if t his would violate the license agreement or not. Regardless, could you post your code for others to see and use?
Office is not licensed per user, it is licensed per machine. A single workstation that has 20 people walking up to it and using Office needs only one license.
A desktop machine that has 20 people accessing it via VNC or any other means needs 20 licenses.
There is no Concurrent Licensing of Office.
You are in violation of your End User License Agreement.
Despite how reasonable, practicle, and "fair" you idea seems, it is illegal. Not for any technical or moral reasons, but because of a silly EULA.
All that said, I like your idea of a drop-box directory to convert
Thank you.
I don't know, but from where I sit, after some necessary adjustments (eg, telling Nautilus it sucks as a "everything and the kitchen sink too" and should restrain itself to file management), both KDE and GNOME are doing almost fine. Most of my complaints refer to specific applications (Evolution taking forever to open a reply-to window, Red-Carpet grabbing all CPU time, Mozilla entering a "repaint window" that will return next Monday, thank you).
I think your main complaints are being adressed. The recent video drivers are good, I never had an X crash in this box. And I really like the GUI design of KDE and almost like the GNOME one.
What about those of us who do use it, and find it usable for some tasks but completely broken from a basic User Interaction perspective?
;-)
Those of you should write up a (preferably well-researched) paper/rant which explains what the broken pieces are, and even (*gasp*) suggests possible solutions... You may even get modded up
The critics of Linux -- the ones who predict it will fail in various venues, including the desktop -- lack vision and the ability to forecast trends. The entire phenomenon reminds me of my various U.S. compatriots who keep pointing at AMD's domestic U.S. market numbers and talking about these as if they were representative. They aren't, of course: AMD is a big phenomenon in Germany and Japan both, and they really matter.
But back to Linux. What's going on here?
In the United States, and large segments of the First World, the operating systems market is locked up by the major tier one vendors. Linux is a player here, and it's admirable that it's been able to get as much penetration as it has, given the power of the competing commercial interests. But this misses the bigger picture.
There is a rest of the world. In that rest of the world -- the Third World -- major tier one vendor operating systems are too expensive any price. So what happens? The various third world, economically disadvantaged, or simply price-sensitive countries select for a readily available alternative. It becomes part of their infrastructure. They become vested in it.
Then what?
The world is not a static place. It's in motion. These various other countries are developing nations. Some of the third world countries will move out of the third world. China, currently price sensitive, currently has the second largest GNP of any nation on Earth. Soon, they'll be the world's dominant economic player.
As these various players move forward, they'll move Linux. It's inevitable.
Linux critics really lack vision. The world's not going where they think it's going. The U.S. and even the current first world are hardly the only players in the game.
C//
I then imported the same RTF into Word 97 and it looked fine. I re-saved it as .doc and loaded it back into OpenOffice and it still looked fine.
She now sends all documents as .doc.
Bottom Line: If you need to transfer Russian text from Word to OpenOffice, .doc works and .rtf doesn't. Conclusion is that .doc is so ubiquitous that coders put more effort into .doc converters than RTF ones and that Word probably produces querky RTF in the first place.
I submitted this story twice only to get it rejected. Over at News.com there's an article about Walmart stepping out ahead and offering PC's WITHOUT an OS! This will not only drop the cost of the PC but will alert consumers that yes, they ARE paying for the OS and yes, it DOES matter that linux is free.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
The original, undoctored article is available at the LWP site.
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
I was really pulling for Linux for a while, but then OSX came out, and now I think that Apple is leading the charge of *nix on the desktop.
Flame away. I can take it. But as eccentric as he is, Steve Jobs (and Apple) has once again seen the future and saved us from it.
Mmmmmm... Bold, yet refreshing!
It is sad to see so many people making excuses for Linux (note: any reference to Linux == desktop) and telling people what features they *really need* and what ones they don't. The unfortunate fact is that Windows (& Mac) are far superior to anything Linux has to offer.
t -you-could-get-it-to-work-without-too-many-problem s "solutions" to things that should *just work*.
Remember that most people do not care about the licensing issues other than free as in no money.
Now to get rid of the anti M$ feelings lets say Kde has all of Window's features etc, and Gnome has all of Linux's (remember were just talking desktop). Could any of you really step back and look at the two objectively and honestly say that Gnome was anywhere near Kde ? Even in the same ballpark? Are they even playing the same sport?
Linux has a loong way to go to be anything more than a niche desktop product. There are so many simple little things that it still can't do. For example, I was doing some work on a default Red Hat 7.2 install in KDE. I was browsing with Konqueror and went to copy a url that was in the text to paste it to another Konqueror window. Well it no workie. Now I know that if I run Mozilla it would have worked, but the problem is I shouldn't have to know that. It should *just work*. There are a lot of well-if-you-would-just-use-xprogram-or-run-yscrip
If Office XP ran on Linux *today*, Linux would gain some serious ground but it would still be quite a way behind. I truly wish that were not the case, but it is.
/pulls out a stick and some marshmallows.
Maybe this was your point, but I can't even get pagination to work under the same OS. Just when you have the pages properly, then change printers and blamo --- everything's screwed up again. Have somebody open your file on a different computer (but same printer), then blamo -- pagination is screwed up again.
Having good pagination in any MS-Office ap is akin to an unstable critical point in an ODE/PDE.
The funny thing is, that with LaTeX and GnuPlot/Matlab, I've NEVER had to worry about pagination. Occasionally I would make the margins narrower in order to make my advisor happy, but that's it. In my current job, I waste ~30 minutes per day on formatting related issues. Sure I've learned how to quickly fix formatting mistakes and reprint, but I rather waste those braincells on arbitrage pricing theory (the content of the reports) or drugs (just kidding).
Bringing irony to the Slash-masses
I believe he's not.
I'll leave away the technicality that the EULA states that the program can be installed on one machine, and on a single machine it is installed, so that's fine.
The point you're missing and which seems rather important is that VNC does _NOT_ virtualize the screen under windows; it's not Metaframe (or Terminal Service like it's most commonly called these days). VNC server (on windows, on Unix it's another story) just "snapshots" the screen and sends it to the client, and "remotizes" mouse pointer and keyboard. So there's no concurrent usage, and your whole argument collapses, even if it were valid in the first place.
This post should most likely be moderated at -1 Redundant.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
From time to time it appears people think they're one and the same, but for linux, they're not. I think Linux should focus on taking the business desktop, for several reasons. The problems with the home desktop are:
1. Free vs. free. Let's face it, that's the way it is for most home users. Either that or it's a sunk cost from when they purchased their machine, and people don't mind violating copyright. Unlike companies BSA is unlikely to pay a visit to them too.
2. Rapidly changing interface, particularly in the graphics area (DirectX, OpenGL). The interface for business application changes far less often.
3. More legacy applications. Companies generally have more legacy data, which can be converted. Recreating the API for running the apps is considerable more complex and buggy.
4. Faster application turn-over. Most business applications are continous developments, while games are released, then left for a sequel. By the time Linux game comes out everybody's waiting for the sequel, while people would be interested in Linux Officepack 2 even if Windows Officepack 3 is out.
5. Fewer competent users. Having a bunch of Linux admins who work full-time with Linux is better than a bunch of home users, even with many powerusers. Of course they are there to work and not do Linux development, but qualified people identifying, analysing and working around problems (one way or the other) still helps more than "I click and it doesn't work".
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
He asked for it, right? Don't buy into reverse psychology.
Intel transfer the difficult from Hadware to software, for get more power, programmer need more technology. -- chinaitn
I love feeding trolls.
.doc files to be converted to .rtf files.
Read his post and mine again. You will see I am talking about his use of VNC to display Office on different user machines.
I am not referring to his use of a script and email, nor his use of a folder to drop
You are the poster who needs to read more carefully.
Hallelujah! I think the GIMP, Killustrator and the other projects are great and show a lot of promise for actually becoming professional level apps in the future. I hope the momentum doesn't fizzle out. I can't use them for the professional work I currently do, but I like playing around with them and watching their progress. And they're definitely making progress. However, until end user usability and consistency is addressed, these apps won't be ready for prime time use by professional creatives.
Personally, I would love to see a computing world where people using differing file formats and applications can share documents freely and easily. I would love to be able to give someone my Photoshop file that I created on a mac, hand it over to a web guru running Linux and have him/her be able to see my layers, effects, etc. and be able to tweak it as necessary in whatever app he/she is using. Maybe he/she wouldn't be able to modify it with the same toolset that PS6 has, but it would be neat if he/she could at least work with the file format.
While we're talking about it, world peace might be pretty cool too.
Pooty tweet
I love Unix. For what I do it's an excellent tool. I'm just trying to say that Unix isn't going to have any kind of success on the desktop. Unless it does Windows, of course.
Maybe start with making cut and paste work between applications? I mean, I know it's only 18 years since this became commonplace, but come on!
second society
compatibility?? i have a housemate that changed from WindowsME to XP and most of his drivers had to be updated, and that caused loads of problems on our network...
right now.. actually people need Linux to be quite simpler.. and more user friendly..it seems that everyone is afraid of using it, thinking that it is too complicated to use..
thats what people told me when i wanted to start using linux..(about 4-5 months ago)..when i asked about a linux partition question.. my answers were "you shouldn't be using linux if you cant partition" "you shouldn't be using linux if youre a beginner"... its a good thing that i didn't listen to them, with the help of the linux community, IRC chats and stuff.. now i can move myself around...and i love linux...thanks...
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggg.
(Beats head repeatedly against desk)
HTML is not a "page-design" language."
CSS, OTOH, does provide for specifying the positioning, style, etc. of printed documents
CSS is part of HTML. From the W3C definition of CSS (in the abstract): "a simple style sheet mechanism that allows authors and readers to attach style (e.g. fonts, colors and spacing) to HTML documents."
Here's the CSS clarifier for printed media. With absolute positioning, HTML/CSS basically becomes nearly as powerful as Adobe's PageMaker (except publishing ability).
Recently, Mozilla's printing has improved to a level that actually makes this possible. All of my work processing is now done in a text editor with CSS and HTML. When I need to give a data copy to somebody, due to IE and NS4 still being used (they don't render CSS perfectly), I will print to Adobe's Acrobat PDFWriter in Mozilla and hand that person a PDF.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
staroffice will for one, there are others aswel.
man
No manual entry for
Linux won. Windows users are constantly dealing with trojan spyware, viruses, increasing licensing costs, mysterious popup ads in the middle of a racing game, applications that think they own the whole system, etc.
Those are the complaints i'm hearing from friends who are casual home users. It's ironic that their reason for using windows is that it's alleged to be user friendly. I just shrug and think "glad it's not me".
If Linux ever achieves a 25% share of the desktop market, it too will probably be afflicted with some of windows' problems... So forget i said anything... keep using windows and wearing the bullseye on YOUR back.
Plus, it's cheap. Try the demo and then buy it.
I'm surprised that I've been reading through here and nothing has been said about Apple's old OpenDoc technology. They created it with the idea that each piece of software would be modular and you could create your own custom application from the modules you have installed.
Obviously, OpenDoc never really took off. It was pretty slow, even on the fastest machines at the time, and it used a lot of RAM. I thought the concept was good though. It would be cool if it could be tried again today, when speed probably wouldn't be an issue, and see what comes of it.
Apple still has their developer documentation on OpenDoc here.
Tag all posts with browser/OS info - embarrass them into using Linux. With all the traffic /. gets, it would be a major boost for open source.
I'd certanly get off my ass & fix the things that keep me booting W98, & submit more/better bug reports for the things I can't fix.
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
My g/f and her 2 children are happily chugging along on an old P233 with Windowmaker and ROX and couldn't be happier. YAWMPPP makes dialing their ISP cake. They have mozilla for browsing, sylpheed for mail, everybuddy for chat, and all the gnome games for the kids. It just works.
/etc/skel sets up a very nice, easy to understand desktop using windowmaker and rox. It also has a 'change your password' script that runs on first login.
This is how it is meant to be. Doing similar things in windoze is a NIGHTMARE. I tried doing security properly on my win2000 machine at work and gave up...BY DEFAULT NOTHING WORKS WHEN YOU AREN'T A FRIGGIN' ADMINISTRATOR. The problem is that most windoze software was never written with a multi-user system in mind. Pretty much any worthwhile software for linux (even RTCW and Quake3, and UT!!!) was.
Agreeing with the other guy, and being fairly proficient with VB and macro viruses (I read and sometimes unobfuscate the code), I quickly got to work...
Working with Word 2000, they pretty much allow anything to be scripted, including MOST of the options. There's actually an Options object, which is accessable from the Application object. It consists of 160 some odd properties which can turn on a number of options, but I CANNOT change the default Save option. Oh yes, it's there in the Diaglog box, and I can change the default Open format to RTF from the Options object, but I CANNOT change the default Save option.
There are 20 some options dedicated alone to "Format As You Type", how often auto save kicks in, Grid Distance, Hebrew Mode, INS Key For Paste, RTF in Clipboard, etc.
But there is no option for changing the default save to RTF.
Seems to me Microsoft doesn't want an easy way to give IT administrators an easy way to change the default save option for hundreds of machines.
Steve
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
Nnnnnoooooooo... that would be insane since Linux is a kernel, and a loosely knit bunch of distributions based around that kernel. For Linux to fail, open source would have to fail, and with it Xfree86, window managers, etc... The only way "Linux on the desktop" will fail is if all of humanity suddenly stops using computers either because of some Butlerian jihad or possibly a giant asteroid...
Luck favors the prepared, darling.
Because it would be better than Windows, then. It would do everything Windows can, and much more. Plus, it's free.
just don't claim that it will be unsuccessful because it won't run windows apps.
Why shouldn't I claim that, if it's true?
"I like linux" and "Linux is/will be a success" are two very different propositions. Neither one implies anything about the other.
Can it run MS Office?
No, but...
Thanks, not interested.
Anyone remember when the UNIX file listing utility "ls" was separated from the columnization utility "mc", so that you wrote "ls | mc" for a multi-column file listing? Now that was modular. And how long did that last?
"You might want to check out a recent version of Linux... you do realize that they can mount windows partitions with ease. Why both (sic) copying them over?"
They can mount FAT32 partitions, but not NTFS partitions, automatically. Support for writing to NTFS partitions is incomplete and unstable, so copying the data over is necessitated.
NTFS is the standard partition type with both Windows 2000 and Windows XP. This is the direction that Microsoft is heading. If Linux can't even write to those partitions, it's going to be a hard sell for a dual-boot situation.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
I see this "the PC industry was built on games" line frequently, and with all due respect I think it's dubious at best. If you measure the personal computer revolution using applications as roadmarks.
The "Windows PC" is largely carrying on the CP/M heritage. Games only sell machines to hardcore enthusiasts. For the majority of computer buyers, a range of applications sell the machine and games are just icing on the cake. (Games arguably sell video cards for PCs.)
The Linux gaming world is likely to always be like the Mac gaming world. It's there, but people clearly aren't going to the platform to play games that they can also play on Windows. They're going to be going to the platform for something they need to do and that, objectively or subjectively, is better on that platform.
The enthusiasts will come to Linux already (they already are, and most of them are on Slashdot). To get regular users as Linux desktop users for its own sake, appeal to their sense of need with something that done more elegantly, effectively or more easily on Linux than it is on other platforms. That's why Linux is doing well on the server side--and it's a major component of all things Macintosh.
...doesn't hold water in my opinion. The "hood" really isn't welded shut in Windows. If that were true, then I wouldn't be able to upgrade Windows OS components, install new programs, write new software for Windows use, etc. Indeed, the only thing Microsoft doesn't give you that open source/free software does is the source code. To go back to the automotive analogy, if users drove "Linux cars", then those cars would ship with their design/manufacturing specifications for use by consumers.
The whole phenomenon of open intellectual property within an industry is, to my knowledge, unique to software. Automotive companies don't do it, chemical companies don't do it, etc.
I applaud the open source/free software movements for this uniqueness, but I don't think we should take it for granted, or even expect it by default. It's truly a unique thing.
Appreciate it.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
In installing files in linux. RPMs suck, Tars suck. Until Windows files install like mac IE you download it, and some script auto installs it,its just going to be too complicated.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
The thing we have to do is stop reinventing the wheel over and over again. Every, how many ICQ programs do we need? How many browsers do we need?
We should have it setup so your programs can be plugged into other programs. You make a browser and i can plug your browser into my program, plug kwords word proccess for email, plug icq button and gaim button into it etc.
Windows has Components, Linux has bonobo which obviously isnt doing a good job, also we need some kinda built in repository for code.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Sims wouldnt be the most popular game.
Linux would have thousands of gamers out of the millions of users (currently it doesnt judging from the failure of Loki and and the subscribers of transgaming) Theres only a few thousand Linux gamers.
Most Windows gamers play games like mech warrior, solitar, the sims and flight simulator.
These are casual users. 80 percent of computer users play games. Which means people buy computers to play games.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
For most people, X isnt needed for the Desktop.
However X works. For a desktop OS, X isnt really the best setup, for a network system X is great.
My opinion would be build something superior to X, make it backward compatible with all of the important stuff, and you'll be all set.
However i dont see you or anyone else funding the Berlin project, i dont see any of you trying to donate, I dont see berlin trying to accept Donations transgaming style. Maybe if they accepted Donations like transgaming we all could pay 5 bucks a month to have berlin be upgraded.
QT is nice, GTK is nice, the problem isnt the power its the fact that its too hard to use. We need to bring it all together, maybe Mono will do this but if it doesnt, we need to make some kinda standard.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
The point about the corporate desktop is exactly right. Larger corporations will have a small number of standard builds which are rolled out onto large numbers of desktops and laptops. My company makes money out of "desktop refreshes", where a large number of either new or existing machines are brought into the workshop, and a defined image is written onto the disks of 1000's of machines. With this sort of exercise, once the image is defined the users aren't expected to change their desktops - indeed, after this sort of mass rollout the desktops are usually locked down to a) prevent the users breaking them, and b) prevent the users from installing unlicensed software with all the potential corporate liability issues involved.
To date we haven't been asked to do any large GNU/Linux based desktop rollouts, but it would be eminently sensible if we were. And in the process of such a large rollout, the licence costs of all the software included in the defined builds for 1000's of desktops is obvious and evident. This is where GNU/Linux on the desktop will really take off.
Dunstan
The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
It will win big time desktop share because of:
... yup a **browser**.
.NET and over the web.
... since you can install the same desktop and a free OS at home and on your laptop well ... you get the picture.
... the main reason Linux will *WIN* on the desktop: *LACK OF APPLICATIONS*
- low cost (all the following features are free the cost extra on Windows)
- easy to use in "thin client" setups, VNC, terminals, etc. Admin all GUI desktops on one or two servers ("on" not "from")
- ease of preventing users from installing applications. Save data to partitions mounted "no-exec", wipe and restore $HOME on each login, etc.
- XFS, ext3, KDE, mozilla, VNC, X (yup X is going to be the killer app it was never allowed to be - yes it *will*). Mark my words and when you are shokced to discover at a future place of work that you have a legacy Windows desktop running *inside X* or that a suite of custom applications your employer purchases comes with a "remote viewer" (aka X).
- lack of applications (this is a *GOOD* thing) You don't want users downloading and installing the latest Windows vid player, virii or whatever else.
Office apps are dinosaurs soon to die. Who sits around writing long documents with MS-Word these days? Do companies mandate that everyone install their own copy of Excl because spreadsheets are better than Web apps or do you fill out your expense reports using
And even if those old fashioned type docs are used where do they end up? On the Web. The browser is the OS these days - even Microsoft wants everything to run on
Plus things like 100-200 day uptimes on servers with 400 users doing GUI logins from 96 X-terminals help to push the use of of Linux on the "desktop" (only, *where is* the desktop?).
Things like a Sun server with 64 CPUs a GiG of RAM surrounded by el cheapo Linux diskless workstations will become very normal in gov't a business
And once again
... it was one of the primary success factors for Windows 3.1
Yeah, that's also a good way to do it...though it's not really useful for Windows.
Reminder: find a new sig
First off, I've used SuSE 7.3 (got the CD's right here, actually), and RedHat 7.2. I can say that they are pretty, but that alone does not a desktop distro make.
First off, neither one installed without a hitch. I can't figure out why. I don't have a wierd hardware configuration, and my components are not faulty (it all works fine in WinXP). Yet both RedHat and SuSE choked on the install every single time I tried. Eventually I was able to get SuSE to install, but I'm still very much less than impressed. The disto is completely broken, and it appears to be destroying its filesystem. Ever since the 2.4.x kernel, I've had nothing but trouble with Linux, though the 2.2.x distros (RH 5.xx - 6.xx) worked wonderfully, even if they were ugly.
WinXP, on the other hand, installed quite gracefully, and its about as stable as one can expect of the Windows platform. I haven't seen a BSOD once, though heavy media use tends to pull down the machine (still).
As far as Linux has come, I'm growing more disappointed with it. I never had a systemwide Linux crash until the 2.4 series. Whats the deal? I shouldn't have to retrograde for better performance/stability!
I, for one, am getting pretty irritated with Linux these days. Maybe its my hardware, maybe its not, all I know is that (gasp!) windows is more usable and stable as far as I can tell. A shame, but thats life.
My question is: How does OSX measure up in this regard? Is it terribly prone to systemwide crashes and other inconvieniences? I'm considering getting a TiBook, and wonder if its much of an improvement over the offerings of MS and Linus.
What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
a 13 year old kid to click "agree" when it comes time to agree to the eula. And don't read it. Then you are not bound by it, since a 13 year old is not qualified to represent you, nor are they bound by any EULA themselves.
MS is still trying to use a technical trick to force people to agree to a more restrictive license after they have already purchased a product. Use a technical trick to get out of it.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
Let's completely modularize each tool function (such as layout, fonts, kerning, textures, linking, math and tables) and make each a separate interactive GUI tool.
Ummm, isn't that Visual Basic? Oh yeah, it is! You know, people can develop programs on a proprietary systems, even using a Microsoft product. I do, and so do some of my friends.
People can make programs to do a specific task to suit their needs, or they can just do their work in a program that does too much and get it done in half the time without having to worry about building a new program every time they need something done.
What is the problem with a program having too many features? Would you not rather have too many than not enough?
Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
Yes and no. The discussion veered to what happens when you become the extended family's resident Tech Support department. This can as easily happen with Windows as with Linux (actually, it is more likely to happen with Windows, since it is more common and it breaks more frequently...)
As for VNC vs. SSH, I did remember one advantage of using VNC (to access a Windows machine, anyway), is that the person at the other end gets to see the cursor moving to the appropriate places (Control panels, etc.) and thus learns a thing or two about their machine (if they're paying any attention, that is). For Linux, though, you need to use a different program, which you can get here. I haven't personally tried it on Linux, but I've been told it works really well.
Reminder: find a new sig
MPlayer is the very opposite of closed source - they ONLY distribute source. Why do people have it in for what is clearly the most full featured, fastest video file format player on Linux? (Not commenting on its DVD playback capabilities as I prefer to watch DVD on my TELEVISION like any normal person would.)
They click the mouse with their index finger; and the next finger over is reserved for when people tell them they should be using Windows.
Read the Open Source Definition sometime, specifically criteria 2. Mplayer isn't Open Source, and has never been
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.