Slashdot Mirror
Linus on SCO, and the Desktop Being 10 Years Away
An anonymous reader writes "In this interview from last week's Linux.conf.au in Australia, Linus Torvalds talks about how the SCO lawsuit 'riled' him and led him to spend a week writing an application to archive his email, and how he think Linux will take 5 to 10 years to become mainstream on the desktop."
Linux Desktop right now is a mess. Seriously, KDE, Gnome etc you name it, none are stable enough to use as a everyday desktop. He got this one right.
Linux on the desktop is a long long way off from being as easy to use for beginners as windows is. I think we need to just grit our teeth, clench our buttocks, swallow our pride and set out to emulate windows's simplicity.
I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
mainstream desktop linux is only 10 years away.
It was worth it to him. Me, I use Zoe; but then I also use an operating system someone else wrote. I'm not going to gainsay what Linus does with his time - I don't have an entire industry built around what I decided to do as a hobby.
I don't know about you folks, but for me, when it comes to Desktop Linux, the journey really is much more rewarding and interesting than the destination.
I guess, to some degree that is because I started using Linux as my main desktop close to five years ago, but also because I am aware that profound social changes take time.
I think the key to the desktop is preloaded machines by big-vendor being available at retail stores. Only when the vendors have a stake in the success of Linux will they make sure that the peripherals state on the box that "it runs on Linux".
Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
Linus would probably be at home among these losers. If Linux wants to go mainstream, they need to get some seriously hot chicks to use it.
His email could be archived in 3 clicks if he used Outlook Express.
There seems to be a lot of different interpretations of Linus' views of the future of Linux floating around. There was a recent post on /. entitled "Linus says 2004 is the year of the Linux Desktop" or something like that. That seems to be a bit of a conflict with this article.
Can someone clarify his view for me? I don't follow Linux very closely, but am genuinely curious what Linus' real thoughts on the future of Linux for the desktop are.
Having a bookmark to Google does not make you an expert on everything.
Letter To Iran
I've never seen a lawsuit up this close and personal before
This is what the "lucky" 300 must also be thinking. I don't think they will be spending their time writing an e-mail indexing program.
Linus is the only person I've ever heard of taking a lawsuit as an opportunity to write some new code. The world needs more Linuses!!!
Did you not read the article?
He did it to enable him to access the relevant e-mails when it reaches court, proving he wrote certain things.
I use Zoe
Lucky you! Most of us geeks don't have girlfriends to archive our mail for us!
...it's not organised in the commercial conference kind of sense. But that just means it's a lot more relaxed, the people just talk about technology, they don't try to sell stuff. And these days in the US it's unheard of, you can't make money with this kind of conference, so I go to the Australian one and I go to one in Canada (Ottowa Linux Symposium). So even Linus admits that the Linux "project" is moving away from its earlier, non-commercial roots. I wonder what effects the increasing commercialisation of Linux will have, through businesses like Red Hat trying to make a profit and so on. Hopefully it won't be all bad, but I'm worried that Linux will just turn into another Microsoft (obviously with open source, but still)...
The Welkin: Online Music Reviews
Lack of games. The odd FPS game crops up, but dual booting isnt an option for mot point and click users.
Gosh.. who the hell is gonna use computers 10 years from now?!
The interesting thing about his comments about desktop Linux are that he's making them at all. He used to have a position of "Linus is what it is, I don't care where it goes, it's just fun to watch." He's not doing that so much now that it appears to be actually getting the places people imagined it would go 5-10 years ago. To make a specific claim, even one as flexible as that, is out of character for him and shows that he's starting to become interested in seeing his work succeed commercially (other than in the areas he works on directly).
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Damn, he can do whatever the fuck he wants. Stop bitching. I doubt you even contribute code to the kernel yourself. Dick.
In the unlilely event that Linus or someone who could get his ear does read this.
Linus, I have been archiving my email with offlineIMap for years and it has been reliable and efficient, but I wonder whether you would share with us the little app that you concocted.
Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
It's as old as the hills to say it but once games manufacturers increase the availability of linux native games (WINE is not a long term solution) then you will see Linux fully integrating into the desktop/home market.
A side note to add that Klaus Knopper's Knoppix may be the catalyst that brings desktop Linux to the masses.
Worst
Well like he says he is the sort of man that doesn't bother with backups and lets the world replicate his software, so why don't sco just look at the linux-kernel mailing list? Rus
CPanel + Root from $35/mo - 10% off with discount code SLASHDOT
That was 'literaly' the most boring article I have ever read on Linus.
Still Control Panel > User Accounts. Or Ctrl-Alt-Delete > Change Password if you prefer. Windows usability sucks, but don't make shit up.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Damn, and I thought it was this year
~To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation. -Yann Martel
That was "literally" a great interview. I spent, "literally", 5 minutes reading it. And "literally", I spent another 1 minute determining just "literally" how many times he used the word "literally" in the interview.
The number is, "literally", 7.
They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
can't even spell the name of the capital of Canada!
O T T A W A!
Eh.
Q: Do you think that's good, seeing Linux being used in little devices, Xboxes and all sorts of places it wasn't meant to be?
A: One of the must fun things was I bought my wife one of those electronic picture frames... I didn't even know it - I just decided I wanted to buy it because we'd just bought a better camera, and we had some good pictures of the kids. So I went out and bought it, and only when I was uploading my pictures, the night before Mother's Day, I was uploading them and looked at the technical specifications and found out it ran Linux!
That's much more fun than big machines.
Witness the true age of information technology...
Alot depends on how secure m$ "secure computing" model is. If they do what theyre bragging about and allow pages of memory to go unchecked even by the OS itself i think u have the beginnings of the recipe for a super virus.
The next version of windows and how they move to get it mainstream (new standards, no forward compatibility for older windows, whatever) will be a big factor in how the desktop 'game' plays out...
Linux is developing for desktop with Lindows OS , its M$ turn, we need to wait for their move.
How many computers are too many?
Task bar, start menu, etc. etc. And Windows 2000 supports translucent windows. In Windows, you can use Control Panel. But in Linux, GUI OS configuration panel crashes often. When will Linux stop chasing after Windows and implement something totally new for its desktop or overall OS design which MS wants to adapt like TCP/IP in BSD? After Windows 2000, only security is what MS wanted from outside, and it's successfully taking in Windows XP SP2 and Windows Server 2003. But how about Linux camp? Do they still have something attractive for Windows camp?
Looking Longhorn, I wonder what Linux developers are thinking. They have no uber control power like Microsoft HQ, therefore it's hard for them to make some grand design framework like WinFX/Avalon etc. at once. Though Linus predicts it as 5 - 10 years, I think until some driving force like UserLinux takes off as strong entity Linux desktop will never take off.
"Linus had once noted that he had never been in a dunk tank before, and noted that, without that experience, his life was not complete. He need wait no longer; at Linux.Conf.Au the lucky high bidder got to put Linus into the tank. Here's the photos:"
http://lwn.net/Articles/66665/
for some people 'archive' doesn't mean 'zip up into a binary format nothing else understands'
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I hope it's open source. Maybe Linus will release it? I'm drowning under ten years of archives, spanning email clients from Eudora-Mac v1.0 to Thunderbird and almost everything in between. I'd love to have a cool program that could organizde my scatterred archives ...
Don't blame me - I voted for Howard Dean. http://dean2004.blogspot.com
For those of you who want to post clever comments, see here ... ^_^
My other UID is 1337
Linus is very coherent. He often says that the kernel isn't being developed as a competitor to Microsoft's own thing. That's why his typically relaxed, hackerish timetable is very extended, while most agree that _now_ is the time for the Linux desktop to emerge.
That's why Redhat, IBM, SuSEa re investing in companies like Ximian who focus on the desktop dark-side of Linux.
Longhorn won't be out till 2005 if I'm correct and many users are very insatisfied with Windows XP, from Sobig/Blaster outbreaks dragging down productivity levels to random annoyances like messenger popups and a full suite of internet blockers/virus stoppers/software firewalls needed to surf the web.
Users are keeping an eye open for alternatives, that's why Linux desktop development needs to become desirable, marketable, usable and thus a replacement for the Windows desktop.
Hack your mind out of its sandbox.
Linux on the desktop will happen when businesses can switch all their machines to linux and not miss anything. When Jim-Bob and Betty-Sue are forced to use, and are taught how to use, linux at work they won't be afraid of it at home.
I think everybody understands the lack of an exchange type collaboration server hurts business adoption, but it's not the only thing keeping people from switching.
My business wants to go linux, but we can't. We use an ERP system called Macola. It makes heavy use of VBA and soon will support only MS SQL Server. There is nothing we can do short of writing our own manufacturing and accounting packages.
Before you point me at compiere, let me inform you that I've done research into that. I'm not a big fan of the lead developer. He's dragging his feet on database independence (when few people want real independence, they just want an open database supported) because he wants to get paid for it. Many people have brought forth suggestions and were willing to get started only to get no response from him. Development companies were willing to put people on it and they get no feedback as to the status of the project. So still the whole system is tied to oracle and there's no feedback at all as to when that might change. For the lead developer of an open source project he is VERY stingy with the information. Let's not ignore the fact that there is no current manufacturing module. There are, however, 3 separate development projects that aren't working with each other because of petty pride issues. The lead dev does nothing to stop the pettyness. So fuck compiere. I'll check up on it next year. I don't expect it to be usable then either at the pace it's moving. You have no idea how many people hit their forum gung-ho ready to start working only to leave again after getting no answers to their questions.
There is nothing else out there that is as close to production ready as compiere. There are erp systems that run on linux, but those are for the big boys. My company is very small, the cost of buying those erp systems would be more than the savings switching to linux would create.
I've been thinking of attacking my city with a strategically placed advertising campaign, using posters on transit and in high-traffic areas, but still haven't come up with what I'd most like to say on a poster. Anyone know of any effort to make large posters touting Linux, that someone could buy a handful of? The typical home computer user, who isn't a geek and just uses their computer for email and web, is an excellent candidate for an easy-to-install distro that 'just works', and doesn't expose them to virii, but this same person wouldn't be the type to stay on top of software news like you'd hear on /. or CNN tech.
Didn't Linus say that he pretty much thought it would be a battle between Windows and Linux in 2005 and MacOS wouldn't be around ?
Looks like he was pretty far off. Then again Jobs did pull out a lot of white rabbits these last couple of years. I'm certainly not going back to Linux on the desktop any time soon. Not saying it isn't usable - au contraire - I'd rather use it than Windows because of my needs, but OS X just does everything so much better as long as you have enough juice for it.
I am not saying that SunOS or IRIX are superior, just that the upgrades come at a more manageable pace, and tend not to break our code base when upgrading compilers. I think the reason Linus thinks five to ten years before really conquering the desktop is based on two things. By then LINUX should have slowed down in its development and will be a beast you can run two to three years before upgrading. Secondly, Windows will probably sink under the weight of it is haphazard code base, which is guided not by what is best for users and cleanest in design, but what makes sense commercially to support and lock-in their other products in as covert way as possible to keep from running afoul of the antitrust laws.
Looking forward to the day though!
Letter To Iran
Alright thats enough ! I live in Canada's Capital Ottawa... And I am getting tired of people calling it Ottowa !!!!!!! grrr ! Do you see me saying Wachingtin or Nu iork...
Agreed! I'm gonna sound like a fanboy here, but it really gets my rocks off every time I read an interview of him. He really is a cool guy. Very down to earth, and an exceptional visionary!
Now, THAT is an ubertroll. I commend you. Now please mod the parent down!.
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
Uuh.. Linus is the one in the middle, holding the bag...
Hey, maybe he had a job to do and existing tools weren't adequate. Or maybe he didn't know about them. Or (likely) it was just something cool to do. In any case, its always refreshing to read a Linus interview; he's got his head on straight and doesn't get full of himself. It puts things into the "real world" perspective. I like the part about how he bought a digital picture frame for his kids pics and found out later that it was running Linux!
C|N>K
See this post from the same discussion. Makes joke. Gets a little whoring (not much on a Funny) then immediately trolls with this post. Ah, yes. The trolls don't even try any more.
Linus has obviously fallen in love with two words. "Literally" and "Desktop". Is he spending his time writing word processors or something?
thats:
;)
O T T A W 'eh
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Look at it another way.. he spends all his prime hours at work every day coding and looking over kernel patches, and he likes coding enough to still go home and write an email archiving program when he could be watching TV and drinking beer (not to mention the "time off" taken by wife, kids, etc...).
Sounds kind of different when you look at it that way, no?
What is missing is applications (especially games) and to a lesser extent drivers.
The 3d-modelling niche is a very good example on how fast Linux can take over a market when the apps are there.
In the next years, expect other niches to go to Linux, the next being non-US government desktops. When Munich migrates and ports their apps, it gets easier, cheaper and faster for other cities with similar application-needs to follow.
The only problem is that such migrations take a lot of time, that's why it is taking a decade (and it already started).
There seems to be a lot of the "waaa Linux is always copying Windows" type of comment on these articles. Yeah, copying Windows is lame. Lots of folks suggest "coming up with some new idea to wow everyone" - well, I haven't seen one worth pursuing yet.
In the meantime, I think we would to well to try and dupe MacOSX - I hereby command all you Slashdot junkies to band together and create a Linux distro inspired by Knoppix, or better yet MEPIS, that duplicates the look of OSX. Many Windows users are closet Macophiles, but they're trapped in their hardware and software configuration. Give them an OSX-y Linux with OpenOffice.org and they'll drop Windows like the bad habit that it is.
While we're at it, make the installer automagically import all their emails, favorites and My Documents directory. OK ready, set GO!
KDE 3.2 will be out soon. Its the best KDE so far. If you have tried the betas you will agree with me.
It has been extensively reviewed for usabillity problems and now even baby joe can use it. Want to use your digital camera? Just plug it in, click the icon that automagically appears on the desktop and there are your photos. Want to burn a cd? K3b is your freind! Want to work on your documents? OpenOffice! Want to watch videos? Kaffine! Surf the web? Konqueror, now with Apple enchancements!
Other killer apps include sodipodi, gimp, synaptic, kroupware, kpdf, peacock, sound-jucier, Kate, Quanta, Kmymoney, Karbon, inkscape, rosegarden, scribus, frozen bubbles and much more. You will find that there is NO lack of applications for Linux. And there is always Wine/Crossover office for that one app thats not ported yet.
KDE 3.2 is the tipping point. If this isnt "ready", then nothing ever will be!
It's spelt
T O R O N T O
Ottawa is just like Canberra -- it's the political centre, but not the capital city Sydney.
Uuh.. Linus is the one in the middle, holding the bag...
Well I wouldn't know what Linus looks like since I use a better OS than Linux, but if it's true then it proves my point that he's a sad loser who could never get a girl like Ceren.
And it is cross-platform and web-enabled.
Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
Q. Okay, here's the difficult question. What do you think about this SCO business right now? A. Right now I'm actually fairly calm, because they haven't made any huge outrageous claims in the past 12 days or so, so they've been quiet for a while It's been a whole 12 days! They must be up to something!
A great book on the subject is the classic Positioning . For a guy like me who has a background in software development, it was a real eye opener. Highly recommended, even though it's a little out of date (1975).
wouldn't that be Linii? ;)
note: yeah, i know.
It would be a help to actually read the damn article. What Linux actually talked about was "they've subpoenaed me for a lot of emails, and I spent literally a week writing a tool to index all my emails, so that when they give a better criteria for me, what they really want, I can actually produce it."
No mention of archive or an archive type app there....
Gnome is the worst of all.
I've done more than my share of teaching total newbies how to use Windows. There's nothing intrinsically logical or sensible about the Windows desktop (95, 2K, XP), Windows' naming schemes, etc. It's extraordinarily difficult for an adult newbie to pick up. -- We tend to think of Windows as "easier-to-use" simply, I think, because of familiarity. Ditto with the Mac interface -- it's easy to use once you've learned how to use it. Come to Mac from a pure Windows or pure newbie background and there's still a learning curve.
Frankly, I don't think there will ever be a desktop that is "simple to use" from a newbie standpoint (at least until the computers can engage in an intelligent dialogue with the user and actually figure out what the user wants to do).
Consequently, I don't think any great re-imaging of the Linux (or any other) desktop is particularly required. Rather, I think the greater value will be in continuing to support a diversity of desktops with some focusing on new-user needs as much as others focus on the needs of sophisticated users.
After wading through four levels of menus on a default KDE install, I wish I had the skills to do some interface design myself. Grin.
"When I grow up, I'll be stable."
I know this is totally OT, so it's posted without the karma bonus, but your sig made me go google the term, litigious bastards. We were talking about just that less than two weeks ago, about everyone linking the term with sco.com, and wondering if we could googleflood the reference to sco.
Holy shit, it worked! Nothing but pages with sco links, and lots of slashdot references! Page after page!
Just wanted to update that issue, since you had the sig going. Now back to the normal SCO bashing....
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Observe how Ceren has a fat ass hidden away in baggy pants. That's all there is remarkable about that picture.
I'm a FreeBSD user but I can't stand idiot fanboys like you. I hope to God you lot got fixed to some other OS so I wouldn't have to feel embarrased every time I visit a FreeBSD forum. *sigh*
It would be tolerable if Ceren was good-looking. Now it's not even funny.
I hope Linux makes it before 5 to 10 years. But before that happens there has to be a major change in the OS's Interface ! KDE is getting nicer yes but not that much better in terms of simplicity, for example changing resolution can be a complicated task in most distributions, X doesn't revert to VESA mode when the driver fails, the names for the utilities are complicated for nothing, konqueror? Kcalc? If you compare to an other OS such as Windows or MacOS X, they all use simple names for simple applications such as notepad, calculator etc... RPM's don't self-install when clicked on just look at Windows ! Look at the way Windows manages drivers from the user perspective. Why is it that we still have to type ./configure;make;make install ? There's a lot of things that have to be worked out before Linux evolves into a mainstream or even the mainstream OS. Linux isn't evolving that much recently on the other hand Microsoft is taking all the good idea and putting them in their OS.
Who will create the PC equivalent of MacOS X?
Apple will. In fact they most likely already have.
But they won't sell it to you any time soon. Possibly never.
They just need it as a hedge against any Really Bad Things happening to their PowerPC supply chain.
This Like That - fun with words!
It's CAPITAL for Pete's sake!!! Aaaaaaaa!!!!!
These people are deliberately putting spelling mistakes in a spelling-related thread! They've discovered my weakness! I'm done for.
I'm sorry if I haven't offended anyone
Damn... I come here especially to make that joke and find TWO people have got there before me. Oh to be original... :(
Microsoft has dominated the desktop for over a decade. Unless something drastic and unexpected happens, it will take a minimum of five years from now for it to lose dominance. Having said that, I do think that 2004 is a watershed year for Linux and for Microsoft. Years from now, we will look back and identify 2004 as the year where the tides bagan to change.
Why do I feel this way? Very few companies in very few industries ever achieve the dominance that Microsoft has in the computing industry. Competition always keeps the underdogs going for the golden ring, and profits like Microsoft enjoys have other companies salivating. History shows us that very few companies can hold onto such an amazing lead over the competition.
Linux and other "free" operating systems hold a unique advantage over Microsoft's offerings. They are free. Microsoft can not afford to compete on price alone. Every day that goes by, the gap between Microsoft's offerings and Linux's offerings narrows the gap in quality. With Novell and IBM in the fray, that gap is sure to close even further. At some point, Linux's offerings will become the most logical choice for everyone. Microsoft's grip will sliip and they will slide. It won't be fast, they will lose by percentage points.
At least this is what I hope. I have no crysal ball. They have quite a war chest and they have a lot of lawyers. Maybe one of these hair-brained lawsuits from the likes of SCO will work. I don't know, and I sure hope not.
Linus is probably right but I hope that it is 5 years and not 10.
First, with Microsoft EOL'ing support and bugfixes this year for NT4 and 98/SE, I see many users and organizations casting about for alternatives. IIR, about 25% of the Internet-connected users are still using 98/NT. With XP being expensive and probably requiring new HW as well, they will be forced to consider Something New(tm). This may mean looking at OS X - since they need new hardware anyway. Or, more likely, they may consider "trying" Linux on their current equipment - especially if they have a friend, or know someone, who can install in for them for cheap or free.
Second, and this ties in with the first, public schools and many businesses are really starting to feel the financial crunch of constant HW/Software/License upgrade. Many public schools (like ours) cannot lease equipment due to board policies against "incumbering subsequent administrations" (or some such nonsense) meaning that new equipment is cash out of pocket and old equipment, which can no longer be used/supported, is surplussed at a total loss. Businesses, as well, face the fact that upgrading older equipment in order to run the new OS from the Beast, simply to be able to have 10 more unused features added to Word, is stupid and wastefull.
When you sit back and think about it, for most schools and businesses, 95% of computer use is for what? Email, Internet access, basic word processing/spreadsheets/"powerpoint" and maybe some IM or connectivity to a "mainframe" for financials, records, etc. which generally means some sort of TN5250/whatever emulation. ALL of this can be done with Linux as the desktop - with the added bonus(?) of increased productivity due to end users not being as able to install Webshots, Kazaa, Trojan-loaderPro, or VirusOfTheHour 6.0. This means work can be done.
But there is still a huge hurdle. Most companies and schools don't necessarily have the technical know-how or confidence to roll out Linux on the desktop. I think this is a pretty big hurdle, but not a showstopper. First, I see a lot more advertising from big players ("no one ever got fired for recommending IBM") on prime-time TV for Linux. Second, I see that Sam's Club is selling a $300.00 Linux box with Linux pre-installed and (in our store) an entire row of monitors demoing it sitting next to the XP boxes selling for hundred$ more. This is bringing Linux into the conciousness of the public (although as geeks we seem wonder how anyone could have missed it for so long :-)
Let me speak from personal experience for a second. Last week we had an engineer from a software vendor show up to install an expensive, high-end HW/SW solution. Unfortunately, it runs on windows only, so we had to buy several Win2k3 Servers and have their engineer set it up for us (lot's of custom tweaks, lots of $$$). I asked him if there were any plans for porting it to Linux, especially considering that he recommended checking with their company first before applying any MS patches to these bexes as some of them have broken their software in the past (eek!). He turned and looked at me and said that over 80% of the places he's been to have asked the same question. So they've begun porting. It should be available next year sometime. Score one for the good guys.
Along those same lines, I took him around to some of our installations to test the new system on our workstations. Wanting to start with the possibility of having the greatest success, I sook him to one of our "newer" labs. His first comment was "You're using Dell GX110's still? Those are, like 4 years old!". I didn't bother to tell him that, as Systems Administrator, I'm still waiting for my GX110. In fact, we still have IBM 340 workstations deployed. Those are 6 or 7 years old.
We are facing a huge budget crunch. Because of this, we are being forced to do a close eval of possible ways to cut costs and squeeze the most out of our current investments. Af
"terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
This proves you have no idea what you are talking about. What configuration tool? For what desktop? You couldn't possibley suggest that every GUI configuration tool in Linux crashes often. WPrefs has never crashed on me.
Time makes more converts than reason
Linus Torvalds Interview
"I'd love to have an easy to use system that I could handle without much difficulty while still having the power of Unix at hand should I want it.
This is not Linux."
But it IS Linux. I know this will come as a shock to Apple fans, but OS X isn't the be all end all of Unix desktops. I like many Linux users don't want a pc equiv of OS X. OS X does many things right, but it also does a lot wrong. OS X for x86 would be a real threat to Microsoft and would no doubt get more users using a semi-Unix but it's not what I'm looking for.
The only thing missing from Mandrake, Red Hat etc is real support from software and hardware makers. Documented hardware IS truly plug and play. Getting software installed/uninstalled IS moron proof provided that its packaged correctly. Like you said installation is easy as pie.
Imagine a distro running the 2.6 kernel with full oem hardware support, KDE 3.2, and the support of all the big software ISV's. At this point you have an OS that is easily as good as OS X and XP. So your right that we are indeed waiting, but not for OS X to come to the PC. We are in fact just waiting for Hardware and Software OEM's to fully support Linux. Maybe that won't ever happen, but if it does then you can rest assured that there will be no reason to pine for OS X on the PC.
The way I see it you have 3 options. 1) Buy an expensive Mac, thus putting yourself under the thumb of Apple and in a situation which is NOT an improvement over running XP. 2) Wait for OS X to come to the PC. 3) Wait for hardware and software makers to get off their asses and finally support Linux. It has been a long road, but I'm sticking with number 3. Number 1 is not and never will be an appealing option to me and most others.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Never design a UI for me then. I use [Alt]-[Tab] to switch between windows, [Alt]-[F1] through [Alt]-[F6] to switch between virtual desktops (or [Alt]-1 through [Alt]-4 when using MSVDM on my WinXP laptop), and [Ctrl]-A-<number> to switch between panes in my screen session. About the only thing I don't multiples are my vim sessions -- I no long split things vertically. (Although I used to, with splitvt .)
I live on hot keys to hop around my highly multiplexed desktop!
And this, perhaps, is why I'll never design a UI for others.... :-)
--JoeProgram Intellivision!
I think it's accurate to say that most people on this planet, with the exception of Canadians, some Americans, and tourists to Canada, don't even know Ottawa exists.
Good point. But just out of curiousity, Why does Ottawa exist? It's way off in the middle of, well, somewhere.
Why isn't the capital of Canada in a city that is more accessable? Why isn't Toronto or Montreal the capital of Canada? Was Ottawa chosen because it's both on the border between the French and English-speaking nations of Canada -and- because it's far from the American border should they have decided to invade (a real consideration for the primary English North American colony two hundred years ago)?
Did the Canadian colonial government anticipate that most of the growth of Canada would be along the Montreal-Ottawa axis rather than along the St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes?
In any event it's not too important. Few Americans are aware of Canada at all. Just the skiers and the marijuana community. Probably less than one in a hundred Americans are even aware that about one third of the Canadians don't speak English or would know what language they do speak. Ask them and they will say 'Eskimo' or 'Spanish'. Hell, I grew up in Massachusetts without being aware that there was a completely different world only two hundred miles away. I studied French in high school only because it was the only foreign language that could remotely be considered 'cool' and then found that I was the only only one in a caravan of drunken frat brothers that didn't freak out and run back home within a day of crossing the Vermont-Quebec border and finding themselves in an Alice-In-Wonderland situation that is Quebec for Americans that don't have any idea of how different things are once you start driving North from Boston and just keep going.
Anyway I like Quebec and Canada. I'm always preparing for my next trip there by listening to the French language audio with English subtitles (or vice-versa) with every new DVD that I get.
Thank you for reading my rambles,
It ain't no rumor, folks. And all but one or two corporate desktop applications have already been, or are being ported to Linux native right now, along with best of breed 3rd party apps creates a completely functioning desktop invironment that kicks the assbone royally. The goal is to migrate to 100% Linux or dual boot with M$ by sometime in 2005. 325,000+/- desktops on Linux and IBM customers following our lead. Hehehe. I've seen the desktop in action and The Future(tm) is here and the desktop IS Linux. Get used to it Microsofties.
Too lazy to create a sig...
You know, back in the early nineties he wasted a lot of time writing a silly new operating system kernel when there were plenty of "adequate" OS's around that he could have used.
If he wants to write his own e-mail *indexing* app (not archiving), it's up to him. The fact that he has the patience to do this kind of thing and I don't is why we have Linux and not jeremypnux.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
I have strong opinions, I offer them freely and often. I like seeing the occasional +5, but I wouldn't say I troll for them. That TAWNN thinks I had some Machiavellian two prong plan to acquire points I think says more about TAWNN's world view than about me.
Letter To Iran
Check out the Art Section of gnome.org. There are a half-dozen GTK themes there that mimic the look of OSX even down to the brushed-metal look of iTunes.
Somebody mod this piece of shit down so I don't have to look at it anymore.
I think with the lower end of Linus's statement (5 years), the use (and awareness) of Linux will become much more noticeable. I've noticed recently that the SCO lawsuit has made some waves in UK papers, where previously you'd be hard pushed to find a mention of Linux whenever a computer-related article is published (Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft!). Possibly something to do with the fact that the big name of IBM is involved, but surely this is a good thing - getting the Linux name actually recognised!
My roommate was working tech support in the summer, and when blaster hit he definitely started noticing angry people saying stuff like "Windows is bullshit!", who had probably never thought about it that way before (i.e. previously they just blamed computers in general, or themselves). People are starting to blame Microsoft for their failures. And that can only lead to them looking for another option.
Dear Darl-
thanks for taking time away from your noble legal battle against the forces of darkness to educate us poor idiots on what America really means...and all this time, I thought this country was based on a few scraps of paper called 'The Constitution'...silly me!
Here is an idea for your local LUG.
Nothing to do on a weekend?
Head down to a mall and set up a user interface test. Call the mall first and ask if they will donate an area to the activity. Take machines down and set up tables.
Ask passers by to take a survey. Give them a task to complete. After they try it, have them fill out a survey about the experience. Collect the surveys on a website so open source developers can access the info.
Sound like a good idea?
Rise up in the cafeteria and STAB them with your plastic forks!
It would be simple.
Put all the apps that they would use for work in a folder on their desktop.
Also, have all those apps open when they first log in.
When they log out, save all the information about those apps so they will appear EXACTLY THE SAME when the user logs in again.
Then, have the items that the user is ALLOWED to change in a different folder. Like backgrounds and themes and sounds and junk like that.
Everything else is locked down.
The user info is saved to a server so any machine that the user logs into will have the exact same desktop as the last machine.
This is VERY hard with Windows (unless you're running a Citrix desktop). But it should be very easy with Linux (all apps served from the servers).
I important part is getting them connected to the apps they need, seemlessly and reliably. Every time, every machine.
All the end user should NEED to know about the computer is how to turn it on and where the blinken lights are that show that it IS turned on.
Everything else should be covered by training on the applications that the company uses.
And they said I was out of context for talking about spelling mistakes.
http://segusoland.sourceforge.net
I don't. The GUI design is at best inconsistant - they may be trying to play catch up now - but a lot of what is happening is based on behaviour that was thrown together years ago and can't / won't be fixed. I don't actually believe they test usability with their focus groups - they probably concentrate on what eye-candy looks best.
A perfect example of how non-user friendly Windows is the way your keyboard focus gets stolen. I touch type - I don't spend a lot of time looking at the screen - i end up get very, very irritated because some window/dialog has decided to open and steal the keyboard focus - at best, my keystrokes end up in a black hole, at worst - they're invoking some action that I don't want to do.
The Amiga got this right 15 years ago - the programmer guidelines stated that you don't steal focus - Microsoft would do well to re-think a lot of their GUI guidelines (or at least follow their existing ones - they tend not to do that for their own apps anyways).
I actually belive that that is an excellent question, and I'll be happy to provide the answer:
Because 90% of all computer users are used to Windows
(The rest of the following rant is essentially a repost, so I apologize if you have already read it.)
You can feel that it shouldn't be like that, and you can make hundreds of snide and clever remarks to the effect that Windows users are too stupid to recognize their own best interests, but you can't change the facts: at least 90% of the people who are using a computer today are using Windows.
It is not every day that a court of law makes an official market survey and releases it freely on the net, in line with the finest traditions of the Open Source movement. Yet it seems that the very people who really believe the most in the benefits of free and open information, are remarkably reluctant to use it when it's available. Think what you will in private, but please please listen to judge Jackson: if Linux is going to have any impact at all in the desktop market, it is Windows users that will have to be converted.
There are a number of good reasons to make the switch to Open Source --- open file formats, control over future license costs, etc., etc. --- but if it means that you have to spend six months cursing all the little things that are different, so that you can't focus on what you're supposed to be doing because you have to relearn all your automatic reflexes, how many people will decide that it's worth the effort?
A lawyer might perhaps consider switching from MS Word to StarOffice simply to make sure that all the files that he creates today can be opened and read on another computer ten years from now, when the case has finally reached the Supreme Court or whatever. But how may chargeable hours is he prepared to let it cost him in the first six months?
It somehow seems that a lot of the people who develop Open Source applications take a special pride in inventing amusing little pitfalls for the Windows user who might be prepared to switch camps. In StarOffice, the keyboard combination to insert a non-breaking space is "Ctrl-Space", rather than Word's "Ctrl-Shift-Space". Please, somebody, why? Of course this is something that one can relearn if one has to, but what's the point of it? The first time a would-be convert, who has been using non-breaking spaces in Word, tries to insert one in a text in StarOffice, it won't work. Whether he decides that non-breaking spaces are not available and that the product does not fulfill his needs, or interrupts what he was originally trying to achieve and starts exploring the help system to find out what it is that he has to do, he will not feel more favorably disposed towards Open Source programs for having tried one. And so unnecessarily.
I could recite any number of examples: if you type "Ctrl-A Ctrl-Return" to mark all posts in a newsgroup as read, Mozilla will instead choose to open a couple of hundred windows (one for each post in the newsgroup), which will cause the system to freeze, so that it has to be rebooted. Excellent marketing ploy.
To change some settings in Mozilla you should of course look under "Edit" in the menu system, and not under "Tools" like in all other programs in the Windows world. Brilliant. How could you possibly fail when you make it so convenient for the user?
And please, don't come and say "RTFM" now. Why the **** should someone who has been using a computer for years have to consult the FM (provided there actually is one, of course, but that's a separate issue in its own right) to perform a so completely trivial standard task as the ones mentioned here?
And please don't come and say "but you can change that if you spend a couple of days learning how to reconfigure the program from the bottom up" either. Pe
Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
Your method doesn't work if he uses the word "literally" twice in the same line.
-- Repeat with me: "There is no right to profits".
The JDS from Sun is a linux desktop. Home use will follow business as people want to use the same at home and work. All the toys will follow.
As languages go, the command line variant is fairly inadequate, but the GUI is not the answer. It is simply not possible to provide *all* possible functionality for a complex piece of software in a unified GUI, a set of predetermined grunts. For people who just need limited functionality (like email/browsing the web), grunts are ok, but for people who take (general-purpose) computing seriously, it's a logical impossibility that grunt-based GUIs are the answer. The reality of getting stuff done is too complex to be enumerated in a set of menu items, you would need to be able to string things together. A command line does this, a run-off-the-mill GUI doesn't.
Funnily enough, most people don't realize this, not even when they need something their set of grunts does not provide. As the GUI paradigm makes sure that noone is aware of the greater functionality of language based communication, the user will simply succumb and live with his inability to get serious work done.
I've recently switched over to Suse 9 from windows because I was tired of the way my 1Ghz processor was always maxed out no matter what version of windows i was using. Windows hogs resources like the US hoards nuclear weapons. The biggest problem i've found with linux in as much as usability is installs. The average user knows nothing about programming and therefore compiling source. I dont have a problem with having to make source files, what i have a problem with is dependancies not adding up. I was trying to install logjam, a client that allows me to post to my blog, but to install that I needed to install gtk+ toolkit, which required half a dozen other dependencies, which in turn required several more dependancies, one of which(Xft) I couldnt find despite about 20 hrs of internet search time. I finally had to give up on ever getting logjam installed because i couldn't find Xft. until this problem is rectified, you wont be seeing grandma and grandpa using linux
I'll bookmark that comment and laugh mightily when in 5 years time the person who modded that down is modding my comments down from ABrowse on their computer's Syllable desktop.
"I'm always preparing for my next trip there by listening to the French language audio with English subtitles"
:-)
In which case you're not preparing for the Real Thing. French audio tracks on DVDs are usually performed by French actors, or French-speaking actors with no or little accent.
Quebec accent is as different from European French pronunciation as American can be from English (note: I live in Britain). I have actually seen a Quebec movie in which I could simply not understand anything the actors said, even though they were using standard French words - I knew because of the subtitles they had to put on the screen !
If you want to make yourself familiar with Quebec accent, get Quebec movies. Hint: you might want to check your favourite sources of Adult-oriented videos for BrunoB or Christine Young
(I once saw a movie with Christine young, and I found it really hot... until I switched the audio on ! Now imagine the Empire state building suddenly turning into an overcooked spaghetti in exactly two seconds...)
Thomas Miconi
N/T
Little Brother, watching the watchers
Think about what would happen if you gave the average desktop user, not technical user now but simply someone who wants to use a word processor, send and receive email and browse the web, a computer with a blank hard drive and a windows OS cd. If windows did not come pre-installed would it be the desktop of choice for average users?
I have friends and relatives who would never have used Linux if not for someone to help them through the install process but after setting up the basics they find it every bit as easy to use as a Windows OS. I honestly believe that if Linux pre-instralls were as available as Windows, we would see a much higher rate of adoption on the desktop.
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
Linus Torvalds Q&A
Kate Mackenzie
JANUARY 16, 2004
LINUX creator Linus Torvalds spoke to Australian IT during his visit to Adelaide this week for Linux.conf.au, his second after attending last year's conference in Perth.
So what made you come to Australia two years in a row?
It's summer here, and it's winter in California, but literally there are only two conferences I go to anymore, because I like the technical ones, and the Australian one, as far I can tell.. it's not organised in the commercial conference kind of sense, but that just means it's a lot more relaxed, the people just talk about tech they don't try to sell stuff, and these days in the US it's unheard of, you can't make money with this kind of conf, so I go to the Australiani one and I go to one in Canada (Ottowa Linux Symposium).
What do you get out of meeting up with people in real life that you don't get from communicating with them on the net?
I actually meet up with different people, mostly it's getting a sense for what people are saying and thinking.
And, I talk to developers here, but not so much - more of the time, I just talk to people who are writing code. The kind of people who come to conferences like this, they tend to be technical people, they tend to be somewhat involved with development, but they're not so much the people I work with all the time.
It means that it's fun. I'm making a bold prediction that we'll go out for beer every night - it's partly socialising, but also getting a better view of what people are thinking about, what people are worried about.
Has anything struck you so far?
So far no, there haven't been any huge issues which is always nice. But on the other hand, the huge issues - when people start fighting, screaming, that can be interesting - that's how you see where there's real problems - people standing on other side of the rooms and not being very polite... that hasn't happened yet, but the week is young.
Anything you're particuarly looking forward to? I'm mainly following the desktop stuff, so the GNOME meetings...
I remember you saying at last year's Linux.conf.au that you were quite focused on the desktop. How do you think it's gone in the past year?
What's kind of interesting is... literally in a year or so, it's been to concentrate almost entirely on server space and things like telephony, where you have big companies setting up rooms.
Within the last year, even six months, there are big copanies now interested in literally not just selling desktop Linux, but also using desktop Linux internally. I mean it's going to take, literally five to 10 years before "normal users" start seeing Linux desktop, but in the technical space it's doing pretty well, especially in companies that can support it already.
Okay, here's the difficult question. What do you think about this SCO business right now?
Right now I'm actually fairly calm, because they haven't made any huge outrageous claims in the past 12 days or so, so they've been quiet for a while. It hasn't been that bothersome, but every once in a while, when they make some new claim, it really riles me - I mean they've literally claimed copyright on files I can prove I wrote personally, and that's very irritating.
But at the same time, the fact that their claims, when you step back, are so clearly bogus and not worth worrying about, is - that makes me worry a lot less. They're clearly scraping the barrel and coming up empty handed.
So it's irritating but I can live with it. I'm just hoping it's going to finally come to a head soon, because it's just dragging on - it's been dragging on for something like eight months, and it's getting pretty tiresome.
It doesn't seem to be having much negative impact though on the use of Linux, that must be encouraging?
I don't see any customers anyway, but apparently... customers aren't reacting very much, especially not much anymore. But it has for example forced me to - they've subpoe
I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
Linux will be ready for the desktop when you do not have to do a single thing in CLI.
I don't want to detract from your point, but I think there's an inconsistency in your analogy.
Realistically they often do happen on a large scale. Mountain ranges creep up at minescule rates of centimetres per decade, and then once in a hundred years there's an avalanche. Tectonic plate movement is barely detectable until suddenly the pressure releases and there's a massive earthquake. Pressure builds up underground for thousands of years until suddenly there's a volcanic eruption in the South Pacific that's recorded in ancient China. Life develops over millions of years until it's suddenly mostly wiped out from an asteroid strike.
In summmary, the geologic world often changes through events that are quite dramatic. They just don't happen very often so we're rarely used to them.
So what! Is the point to have a nice functional OS that you enjoy using, or is it to beat Windows? If the only point is to beat out Windows, then I think 90% of you are not going to be happy once we have the desktop that will do it. Really, who cares how many people use your OS or whether you crush Windows or not! It does not fucking matter, make Linux work right for the target audience, ie dyed in the wool geeks and all will be right with the world. Forget Windows users. Do you really want them anyway? Oh yeah, I personally believe that an outright theft of the BeOS GUI is the right choice if you want to emulate someone, not MS. Barring that, steal the good ideas from OSX. Get off the Windows trip already, it is of no concern unless you are just want to have the most popular OS.
Sorry - bite me.
Linux has come a long way - but do you think anyone has thought about a tiny bit of effort for a new install? How about a few hints on
how to setup net access
how to setup a printer
how to configure email
I am still waiting for the day I see a single useful icon on the desktop which tells me anything.
I've installed about 10 versions of Linux over the last 3 years - and although I continue to be impressed, we as a community miss the absolute basics.
Please wake up and smell the coffee - a few SIMPLE things would make the world of difference.
AC
PS Don't make Linux like Windows XP - i'd prefer you don't immitate a kiddie's toy. IMO, Windows 2000 was MUCH better.
You'll find it is EXACTLY the same as the one in Windows 3.1 -- down to the fileselector that does not support UNC paths.
The sad part is you could spend all the resources and money you want to develop linux, but it's not going to mean much until you get OEM's to make even basic linux drivers for their proprietary crap.
A friend of mine got one of those i855 graphics card ultra-small laptops with 1280x768 resolution. Well, there is no way to get XFree to support it, since Intel (a company with a decent Linux driver trackrecord) will not make a Linux driver for that mode and will not release the specs for it.
It's a chicken and egg problem. No company will make drivers until you got a decent base of users, but no common joe will run linux unless they have drivers.
I work in a large company where many users could be quite capable of using, many even administering their own Linux desktop. Why I believe we however are at least 5 years from a Linux desktop has very little to do with its features, contrary to what previous discussion has mostly thought of. Bluntly:
- CIOs like big global cost-savings deals
- the cheap outsourcing deals won't support but one platform (guess which)
- IT managers like the "black-box for you - control for them" -model of that platform
- Thanks to viruses etc, new security requirements and the resulting increases in desktop integrity controls are changing state-of-the-art corporate desktop more and more towards a TV-like appliance (this is the future they want: you touch the wrong file, let alone install something, and it results in that a security appliance cheksums your platform, turns your connection off, and e-mails to your boss that a policy breach has been observed in your desktop). Even if you got such a Linux desktop you might not like that, either.
- Any global big-corporate change takes a long time to push through. So even if they decided to go Linux today, we would have it only after 1-2 years with lackluster support even then, in a optimistic case.
So I think even 5 years is optimistic.
I think you are 100% right. I would like to add something though.
Every time i read the weekly discussion about how ready is linux for the desktop i can't help wondering why WINE almost never comes up in the discussion.
It is apparent to me that other than a nice and easy desktop (which is almost there), and seamless installation and hardware management (almost there as well) in the end what every OS has to do is TO RUN SOME APPS.
Since as you pointed out very well the user won't change the application he is using unless he's constrained to do so, then in order to take over the desktop, linux simply HAS TO RUN WINDOWS APPS !!
(Of course then they will be ported natively later, once linux has gained its place on the desktop)
Another thing, i can almost already read some reply along the lines: "if you use win32 programs you are better off using windows", now, i think these people fail to realize how important would be getting linux on the desktop market before DRM locks down everybody for good. Some chances simply don't come twice.
We learn from history that we learn nothing from history - Tom Veneziano
I definitely agree here. Windows is one of the less-usable desktops out there, which is simply popular because of the barrier to learning and using alternatives. Many people I encounter assume that it's easy to use because it's graphical and because it comes from Microsoft. Many others absolutely despise Windows and they hate Microsoft, but they're trapped because they don't know how to switch to alternatives.
Realistically, switching to an alternative is a lot of effort both because of the applications lock-in, and because you can't really use something else until you've absolutely decided to nuke the current OS on your PC, which is freaky for most people.
There seems to be confusion between usability and learnability. Windows is for one reason or another easier to learn, but once learned the usability is awful. A variety of other desktops are at least as "usable" as Windows, and in many cases more usable. The problem is a combination of the learning curve, and the motivation to learn something new. What good does it do someone to learn an alternative desktop when nearly every desktop computer they're likely to encounter currently runs Windows.
Personally I use WindowMaker over linux and I like it much more than MS Windows. I'm more tech-headed than an average person, but that's much more to do with the learnability factor than the usability factor.
One of my favourite differences is that I can make it much less modeless, so applications aren't continuously grabbing the focus at seemingly random times when I'm in the middle of typing or doing other things. That's something that makes Windows truly awful to use, and it's analygous to the whole Windows "me! me! me!" weak-apps-make-less-money philosophy. eg:
The whole Windows philosophy is about marketing and watching applications you install fight it out with one another for your approval and attention. There's nothing to do with application harmony, and every time they do this, Windows becomes more annoying and frustrating to use.
If Windows is more learnable, that certainly doesn't make it the least bit more usable.
When a form in Windows wants focus, it should follow the guidelines, and blink in the taskbar. There, no focus stolen.
Of course, if you invoke a form, and you don't know it, perhaps you should pay attention to what's happening on the screen, instead of blindingly assume that you type perfection.
...in 5 to 10 years.
Linux as kernel is almost ready for good desktop. The one and only obstacle is X-window!
The most revealing quote for me had to be the part where Linus talked about how he was looking forward to attending Gnome conferences.
I thought that the KDE zealots loved to talk about how "Linus uses KDE"? Judging by this comment, not any more...
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
Users need a central, glossy penguin logo website, where approved hardware (pc's motherboards, video cards, sound cards, etc) are listed and unapproved hardware is blacklisted (until drivers are ready). Kind of a Consumer Reports version of Linux supported hardware, where to be listed the hardware has to be fully supported with drivers and proven to install without any bullshit.
By this I mean a very high standard of compatibility. Naturally, people are going to install whatever and that's fine, but to qualify for the hardware logo website, standards of ease have to be met fully.
Device approval needs to be in a heirarchial format, starting with the motherboard. For example, Radeon xxx isn't approved by itself, but Radeon xxx is approved for install into an Asus xxx motherboard, with Kingston xxx memory, with a Creative xxx soundcard, etc.
Yes, such a site would approve a very narrow set of compatible hardware, but that's ok, the idea would be to give a simple place for newbie users who don't want to hassle it to go to choose products that everyone knows will work without a fight.
Most of us (of course) would ignore it and have fun hacking away at insane hardware combinations, because we like that, but if we're talking about the general user population, they couldn't care less which motherboard or soundcard or whatever they have, they just want it to work without the hassle.
Then, get hardware review sites like tomshardware and anandtech to find combinations that work really well together, and to promote the site. Try to get consumer reports to feature it in an article. Then it's up to the hardware makers to support maybe not all of the stuff they make, but at least some of it.
Just drag the font files into the Fonts folder. Works like a champ.
Hell, there are no rules here. We're trying to accomplish something. - Thomas Edison
There is no 3D hardware drivers available for the Linux kernel or for XFree86 that performs within a marginal distance from windows/MacOS 3D hardware (except pre-beta quality nVidia drivers). - idsoftware FPS games + UT/UT2k3 is NOT by any means remotely close to any significant fraction of FPS games. Even id based games aren't ported to linux.
This has got to be a troll. I mean come on, some games run better natively on Linux than Windows. RTCW Enemy Territory runs better on Linux than on my Win98SE partition. I have used both NVidia and ATI proprietary drivers. Both are now at a high standard and 3D performance is awesome.
Just check out Yahoo online multiplayer card games, or any other online gaming community similar. You won't find it to work on Linux's web brosers.
You won't find many Windows-based webgames working on numerous other platforms either Mr Troll. Just because some one-eyed ignoramus codes something to only work on Windows-based browsers or only for IE, it doesn't valid your argument.
A major issue is and will continue to be supporting not only the user's existing hardware which is where ease of installation comes in, but also the ability to plug in a new accessory and have it just work.
This requires both open hardware and an (almost) invisible way to download/install any additional drivers.
Before this becomes a reality we need the general PC press to consider linux compatibility whenever they review new hardware.
Nope, if I gave that impression it's only because I express myself badly.
What I am arguing is that we should learn from the people who created the first computers, and decided to stick with the familiar qwerty keyboard.
The qwerty keyboard was originally designed to make it difficult to type too fast, because that could cause the mechanical parts inside the typewriter to jam (at least according to the urban myth :) ). Since there is obviously no risk that this would happen in a computer, why didn't they change the keyboard layout to something better when they introduced the personal computer? Because they wanted to gain acceptance among people who had years of experience using typewriters professionally, and didn't want to alienate and annoy them by introducing more differences than necessary.
For all I know, it is quite possible that alternative keyboard layouts like Dvorak are considerably better that qwerty --- for typing. But for marketing a new superior technology that had other more important benefits to offer, they would have sucked severely.
Now, let us consider Emacs' key bindings from the perspective of an experienced Word user... :-)
Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
When was the last time you saw a newbie sit down in front of a Windows XP system running Office XP or 2003? It's *not* easy to use; it's just that lots of people are used to using it.
Consider also the changes that went on between NT 4, Windows 2000 and XP, which were the last 3 versions of Microsoft's corporate desktop. Despite the fact that the 3 are *wildly* different in appearance and use, you didn't have zillions of end-users undergoing extensive training to move between the versions; they somehow managed to do it virtually unaided. If you compare the differences between NT 4 and XP on the UI front, the move from e.g. XP to e.g. KDE suddenly doesn't look that huge.
Linux on the desktop is now at the point where it's waiting on an evangelist - someone or some company that's prepared to say "I'm gonna make this ready for prime time". Apple managed to take BSD and produce a fantastic desktop user experience within a couple of years; sure, they had the background of many years R&D with earlier versions of Mac OS, but they're one company who just said "We're doing it now". There's absolutely no reason why it won't happen on Linux, other than nobody's sufficiently motivated to do it yet.
The other burning issue is applications. OpenOffice is here now, and is perfectly sufficient in terms of capability. Even MS is saying it's comparable to Office 97 from a capability viewpoint, and there's an awful lot of users who manage to survive on Office 97 to this day. Given that the vast majority of corporate Office users take pre-built MS Office templates and insert their own text - that's *all* they use Office for! - it seems that there's a compelling argument that a much simplified version of OpenOffice would gain corporate acceptance.
Imagine a version of OpenOffice that didn't include options for e.g. creating footnotes, changing page numbering, selecting 173 different fonts, changing paper formats, etc., but greatly simplified the following tasks:
- selecting a document template
- selecting styles within that template
- saving, printing and emailing documents
- simplifying the UI as much as possible
- (a few others that I've forgotten due to a very late night...)
Such a version would remove the possibility of end-users doing things they weren't supposed to do within MS Office (a BIG problem for many corporates), and should remove concerns about migration and being "too difficult to use". Provided it preserved OOo's document compatibility with MS Office, I figure it would be a winner on corporate desktops.
The (very few) users who create document templates could do so under the "full version" of OOo, but (the many) users whose job it is to simply use those templates could use the "simple version" to do their job. I think that would be a compelling reason for corporates to switch to Linux desktops, and could be achievable this year if someone chose to implement it.
they need to get some seriously hot chicks
Not for nothing, but she isn't even attractive. At all. I guess if I were completely starved for female affection, or drunk, I might give her a shot in the mouth, but otherwise, I prefer women I can look at without feeling an overwhelming urge to run away.
Frankly all the possible combinations that ACLs provide only serve to add unneeded complexity to the matter. The judicious use of groups and unix permissions, which, IMO are much simpler to grok that the ACLs, results in a system that is easier for the administator to understand. And thus the system is more likely to be correctly configured, with proper security. Yeah ACLs are "more powerful", and if you want them Linux will support them (in ext3 and jfs or xfs iirc). It's better to have "simple" permissions done correctly, than to have your "fine grained ACLs" configured wrong. It's really an application of KISS and the 80/20 rule. Frankly, I'm not entirely convinced that ACLs really provide anything that groups can't. ACL's make the easy moderately difficult, and the difficult moderately difficult. Where as standard unix permissions and groups make the easy easy, and the difficult difficult. Yeah, you can add all the fine grained stuff you want, but the need for that is the exception rather than the rule. So why compliate the simple stuff, just to make the diffcult stuff only moderately easier?
----- Question authority, but not ours. Hate the man, but we're not him.
Linux Mandrake has been fine for desktop use. I used Mozilla for mail & web (just like I did on Windows). Over that 2 year time, the support for MS Office file formats just got better and better. Now Open Office is a complete replacement and Mozilla 1.6 supports NTLM authentication.
I also never had any problems with email virii because I wasn't using stupid Outlook.
The Mandrake Update feature worked better than Windows Update at the time.
When people say Linux isn't ready for the desktop, they mean on home user PCs for first time owners!
KDE/Qt programmers are very able programmers.. Just look at the Qt API's for example, remarkable piece of work (It does seem as though Trolltech obfuscates their Qt source code intentionally, perhaps as a semi-abuse of the GPL).
Also look at Gtk+/Gtk--, strong naming conventions, high uniformity and consistency.
Hell, in those regards both Qt and Gtk+ are better than the Linux kernel.
KDE is very very usable. In my oppinion, much moreso than current Windows, though I don't know OS X in order to compare to that.
I agree with you in general. I had hoped my post would be moderated funny, but insightful is good enough, if completely inappropriate :)
IANAUIE (I am not a user interface expert), but...
I don't agree that the same concepts should be used *everywhere*, but any parts with similar function *AND* look should have substantially similar *feel*. If they look different enough, then the user will be comfortable with them feeling different. Obviously there should be a good reason for them looking different even though they have the same function. As an example a document viewer and a document editor, both share the function of showing the document to the user and allowing him/her to navigate, but the editor looks very different (lots of gadget buttons), so it is okay to have a different feel in some respects. Having said that, I don't think this should extend to having middle-click (dragscroll) behave differently between viewer and editor, but might extend to middle-click (paste/autoscroll) and double-click behaviour.
As for configuring video and sound cards, I do not think that this should be of major concern, since a user should only be configuring these if they are advanced users - though I do agree they should appear in the same listing of tasks. The related concept is that of resolution, colour depth, volume, recording channel. Resolution and colour depth are properties of the display and should be associated to the display in some fashion, volume is a property of the speakers and should be associated with the speakers in some way. These are both properties of the console, so should be grouped together along with keyboard and mouse properties. The recording channel, however, is different - this is a property of the task at hand, and should be apparent in the application.
I wonder though, what to do with muting and mixing individual channels. I think this is a task related concept, rather than device related, though there are reasonable device related uses (such as selective muting to determine which speakers you have attached to which channel). Perhaps a configure audio output task is the appropriate place for that - it isn't just an immediate preference setting.
Both Computerworld and THe Register reported that the Munich Linux project is in serious do-do and is likely to be scrapped.
Scr*w gramma. Learning is bad. All learning is all bad. The GUI needs to be hardwired to the human reptile brain ... that's the same for us all, excepting a microscopic number of drooling byteboyz.
Considering that the vast majority of "desktops" would be for specialized systems, such as POS terminals, TiVo screens, cell phones and PDA's, Linux desktop is already as easy or easier to use then Windows.
I usually use Windows, BTW. And I find nothing complicated with KDE desktop.
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
But...
At my medium-sized company, our IT department is always understaffed. Our titles mean little and we end up wearing many hats. My official title is Database Admin (MS SQL Server), but since I'm a former field support tech, I end up helping our techs troubleshoot problems they can't (won't?) resolve. We run Windows 2000 and XP on all of our desktops (except mine, of course). Our techs are pretty much MS only, because they have never bothered to learn Linux. Same for my boss, the Director.
I've been pushing Linux since we were a two-man show (the Director and me!). My boss has always been interested in Linux, but he can't seem to gather the courage to leave his Windows comfort zone.
Our field support techs just think I'm a crazy zealot for pushing Linux, and I think they actually see Linux as a threat to their existance, since they are not willing to put in the time to learn it. I think they waste a ridiculous amount of time rebuilding rotted Windows installs, running MS update-reboot-reboot, removing spyware/malware, cleaning viruses, etc, etc.
When I try to explain to them that Linux would make their life easier, they just look at me like I'm nuts.
We have actually managed to get some Linux in the door on our backend servers, running www, DNS, and mail, but because I'm the only Linux guy, support of those servers generally falls on me. Our Network Admin has some BSD experience from his former ISP job, so he helps out some in this area, but I still end up doing a lot of it. Fortunately the Linux servers are very reliable, and don't require huge amounts of attention.
I'd love see all of our desktop installs replaced with Linux, but at the same time, in our current situation, I am the only one who would know anything about supporting them. I have enough on my plate already, and I can't really encourage Linux on the desktop without help.
Recently, after the MS-Blaster fiasco, I started a pilot project with one of our users running a Linux desktop, with our Director's blessing. Our company is actually in a better position for migration than many, because we run our mission critical Windows-only apps on Citrix metaframe servers. It has proved to be favorable, but going forward with complete rollout means a) Forcing our techs to learn Linux (unlikely), or b) Firing our techs and hiring Linux techs (not going to happen).
At this point all I can hope for is to push for a requirement that all future techs that we hire have Linux experience. At the rate we are growing, it will probably take 10 years before we have enough Linux expertise in-house to support a company-wide Linux rollout, so Linus is probably right on the money.
At the end of the day I'm looking at my computer, it's a linux box. It's my desktop, I don't care how many users are using it, if my grandma can use it, etc. The point is I use it and it's user friendly enough for me.
Someone who doesn't know how to use punctuation properly is in no position to criticise another's spelling. Seven and eight exclamation marks is too many to end a sentence with, only one full stop is usually used at the end of a sentence instead of three, and "that's" is spelt with an apostrophe.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
Look, we're already asking people to take a big, scary relearning step here, right? No matter what you do, Linux will be at leas *somewhat* different, and so they'll need to learn *something. I say it's infinitelky superior to do the Linux desktop the good way, the right way, and emphatically *not* the Windows way right from the start! Sure, the amount people have to learn will be more at first. but then it will be over.
If we emulate Windows, and people learn the Almost-Windows that Linux has become, and THEN we switch to something better, then it's more work and scarier for the users. They have to learn AGAIN.
If instead we force them to learn more now, then they don't have to go through it again.
And if you suggest emulating Windows and then enever switching to someonething better, I'll punch you.
I want my Cowboyneal
And on the other hand, you can tell he feels some relieve now from the development in recent weeks (e.g. him being able to completely disprove within some 30 minutes every concrete claim SCO has made so far).
And those of us that feel as Linux supporters have been through a similar process, although in a much smaller scale. Why else did we keep moderating boring anti-SCO flamebaits as insightful, despite we had seem then a dozens of times already? We, too, took this a bit too personally.
Anyway, I think this is all much more interesting than yet another Linux-on-the-Desktop-prediction. (I don't see why Linus' opinion on that matter should carry more weight on this than that of a random SuSE or Mandrake sales person.)
But it has for example forced me to - they've subpoenaed me for a lot of emails, and I spent literally a week writing a tool to index all my emails, so that when they give a better criteria for me, what they really want, I can actually produce it.
Of course it would take a kernel hacker a week to write a tool to index emails. He probably wrote it from scratch in ANSI C with dependencies only on stdio.h and string.h. I can just see him spending the first day writing a module to do fast pattern matching across character buffers. Don't get excited Linus worshippers: I'm half kidding. Half.
Imagine, someone searching through all these threads to find posts from me just so s/he can post about me.
I've never had a stalker before.
I will love him and cuddle him and name him George.
If you'd like to help improve KDE, you don't necessarily have to be a developer.
The best and easiest way is to find something you don't like and then file a "wishlist" bug report. It doesn't take very long, and provided you search for an existing report first, and make your request polite and concise, you're definitely contributing. You can also get involved in discussions via the mailing lists or the forums.
Of course this is not limited to KDE, either - most projects have some sort of bug reporting facility, and if all else fails you can email the developer.
I think we need to just grit our teeth, clench our buttocks [...]
Wouldn't that be "clinch our teeth" and... Err. Never mind.
Truth is, with the level of PR that certain buttocks clinchers (pronounced "Darl") have provided Linux, lately, I can imagine Linux adoption will only be further accelerated.
Frankly, I hope SCO keeps the clinching and gritting up for a long, long time. There's no such thing as bad PR.
In fact, I hope Microsoft jumps in and starts ranting away about... Oh, that's right: Done.
Linus Torvalds Q&A
Kate Mackenzie
JANUARY 16, 2004 LINUX creator Linus Torvalds spoke to Australian IT during his visit to Adelaide this week for Linux.conf.au, his second after attending last year's conference in Perth.
What made you come to Australia two years in a row?
It's summer here, and it's winter in California (laughs). But literally, there are only two conferences I go to anymore, because I like the technical ones, and the Australian one, as far I can tell.. it's not organised in the commercial conference kind of sense. But that just means it's a lot more relaxed, the people just talk about technology, they don't try to sell stuff. And these days in the US it's unheard of, you can't make money with this kind of conference, so I go to the Australian one and I go to one in Canada (Ottawa Linux Symposium).
What do you get out of meeting up with people in real life that you don't get from communicating with them on the net?
I actually meet up with different people, mostly it's getting a sense for what people are saying and thinking.
And, I talk to developers here, but not so much - more of the time, I just talk to people who are writing code. The kind of people who come to conferences like this, they tend to be technical people, they tend to be somewhat involved with development, but they're not so much the people I work with all the time.
It means that it's fun. I'm making a bold prediction that we'll go out for beer every night - it's partly socialising, but also getting a better view of what people are thinking about, what people are worried about.
Has anything struck you so far?
So far no, there haven't been any huge issues which is always nice. But on the other hand, the huge issues - when people start fighting, screaming, that can be interesting - that's how you see where there's real problems - people standing on other side of the rooms and not being very polite... that hasn't happened yet, but the week is young.
Anything you're particuarly looking forward to?
I'm mainly following the desktop stuff, so the GNOME meetings...
I remember you saying at last year's Linux.conf.au that you were quite focused on the desktop. How do you feel it's gone in the past year?
What's kind of interesting is... literally in a year or so, it's been concentrated almost entirely on server space and things like telephony, where you have big companies setting things up.
Within the last year, even six months, there are big companies now interested in literally not just selling desktop Linux, but also using desktop Linux internally.
I mean it's going to take, literally five to 10 years before "normal users" start seeing Linux desktop, but in the technical space it's doing pretty well, especially in companies that can support it already.
Okay, here's the difficult question. What do you think about this SCO business right now?
Right now I'm actually fairly calm, because they haven't made any huge outrageous claims in the past 12 days or so, so they've been quiet for a while. It hasn't been that bothersome, but every once in a while, when they make some new claim, it really riles me - I mean they've literally claimed copyright on files I can prove I wrote personally, and that's very irritating.
But at the same time, the fact that their claims, when you step back, are so clearly bogus and not worth worrying about, is - that makes me worry a lot less. They're clearly scraping the barrel and coming up empty handed.
So it's irritating but I can live with it. I'm just hoping it's going to finally come to a head soon, because it's just dragging on - it's been dragging on for something like eight months, and it's getting pretty tiresome.
It doesn't seem to be having much negative impact though on the use of Linux - that must be encouraging?
I don't see any customers anyway, but apparently... custome
... cause they're used to it. It's ok to provide something similar to windows to ease the transition to linux but people that get started now (that is, the Future) may want something simpler and better. Coming from a classic mac os background i found the easiest systems to be: 1 Mac osx (no need to read any manual, of course) 2 Debian linux with gnome 2 (configuration needs some time and patience, then everything's downhill... until next major kernel update?) 3 Win2000 (system options are scattered in the most unlikely places, the whole idea of a window containing other windows for each application is not practical, starts having problem if you install 1/20 of the stuff you can put in the other systems, multibooting is mor difficult, gotta deal with pompous documentation and terminology for the simplest tasks...)
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
I got into developing for Windows by way of DOS, and my interest is in acquiring lab measurements from A/D converters and displaying results in real time or near real time. What I am doing is a tiny, tiny niche, but the PC accomodated many of these tiny niches to add up to a big whole.
DOS and PC's were definitely the way to go -- they were the PDP-11's of the 80's and 90's -- you had A/D cards for the PC bus available from several manufacturers, and as far as drivers, what drivers? Here are the I/O ports that control the card, and hey, with Turbo Pascal or with Quick Basic, you could poke and peek those ports and you were in business.
The switch to Windows was a natural progression, although DOS is much better for real time of any sort because you have control over all of the interrupts. His Billness made a big, big push to bring the DOS game development community over to Windows with WinG followed by DirectX. A real time lab data display program is kind of like a video game, and some of the obscure Windows and later DirectX calls meant to support certain types of games (ScrollWindowEx(), IDirectDraw::WaitForVerticalBlank()) helped a lot for what I was doing. As for the A/D converter I/O ports, those became a thing of the past because any A/D card company wanting to serve the Windows market provided Windows drivers.
So in going from DOS to Windows, one went to a higher level of abstraction, trading I/O ports for some hardware manufacturer's drivers, trading direct writing to the VGA frame buffer for GDI and DirectX. But the abstractions provided by Windows were far from easy to use, and a great deal of effort went into understanding them, working around the bugs in them, and burrowing into the Windows API to wring out performance.
So I am interested in programming for Linux. A/D and graphics is also handled by abstractions here, a lot of these abstractions are different from what I am used to, and the abstractions are a patchwork (Qt, GTK, STL -- I am in buzzword mode because I haven't used any of these, but I get the sense there is a lot of figuring out in terms of what to even invest development effort in).
So I am thinking, I could bet on Linux as the Next Best Thing and learn API's at the level that I know Windows API's, or I could, hey, go to another level of abstraction and go for something like Java, Python with wxPython plus C++ modules for speed tuning, or perhaps something else. Just as going from DOS to Windows left ports and frame buffers behind, I am thinking that the next step is to leave OS-specific abstractions behind, whether they are Windows API's or Linux API's.
My point is this: WINE is pointed to as a non-solution to Linux ascendency as all the interesting apps will still also run under WIndows. Isn't platform independent (as with Java or wxWindows or wxPython) also a non-solution? If I am to write for Linux and use Linux APIs to build more powerful programs than what the lowest-common denominator platform-independent stuff is capable, what are the Linux equivalents to ScrollWindowEx() and IDirectDraw:WaitForVerticalBlank()? Or does Linux even have such calls as they are only part of Windows as part of an MS initiative to pry game developers from Windows? What API goodies does Linux have to pry game developers from Windows?
I don't know if I should tell you this but you can upgrade at least the del machines (GX110 with bios A05) to 1.3 gHz tualatin machines for next to nothing. I supect you can also upgrade the IBM 300GL's as well - but it will depend on if they can run the FSB at 100 mHz.
However - even if the FSB can't run at 100mHz, it still might make sense because you may be able to underclock the memory and CPUs and that will still give you a very credible 1gHz performance on those old boxen.
At least the IBM PC 300PL are upgradeable in the following models: 6584-90U 6862-24A 6862-52U 6862-C3A 6862-V1U 6892
The MOST SIGNIFICANT issue is going to be the amount of ram. I suspect MOST of your machines are running 64MB ram. This is not going to be enough if you wish to run say a KDE desktop. Perhaps another desktop manager is in order. I've heard FVM is pretty good and lighter weight.
I KNOW these upgrades make sense because I already did it. I upgraded an old 1998 celeron 433 based system to 1.3gHz and it is wonderful... it fully performs in the league of a 1.7gHz P4 and burns much much less power (like 23 watts for the CPU instead of what? over 60 watts for the P4 with the newest P4's burning over 150 watts)
Now - I use to have 128MB ram on the 433. It now sports 384mb ram and with KDE and Debian - I never find it thrashing. At 128 it did thrash sometimes.
So at a minimum I suspect you will be adding a 128MB stick of ram and a new CPU into each of those old boxen - the cost should be in around $100-$125 per machine and it will take you about 15 minutes per. (I'd got for a 256MB stick if you can)
So... that is a pretty good deal for even the cheapest outfits.
And the reason maybe I shouldn't tell you all this good news is that a machine configured this way actually has enuf horsepower to run the Microsoft XP bloatware!!!!
Just say NO.
I mean it's going to take, literally five to 10 years before "normal users" start seeing Linux desktop, but in the technical space it's doing pretty well, especially in companies that can support it already. Five or ten years? I L.T. feels this is the time frame, I'm worried.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Likely this is flame bait... But this is a true story
Longhorn will be out in 2006.
I asked a support question at a Microsoft User group. I was told to wait utill Longhorn before the problem is resolved. I said, "Great so the fix to my current problem is to wait three years." I was corrected and told to wait four by an employee of MS.
This is why I like Open source more and more and MS less and less.
(This was late 2003)
True usability is defined (for me) as a machine that I can use.
True usability is defined (for my grandma) as a machine that my grandma can use.
Whether the two are, or should be, the same or not are the interesting questions.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
" is it he's just doing something really strange that he's not even aware of? People do really strange things, and they think they're normal people, but they're not! (Laughs)."
People need to quote this to newbies on the newsgroups who complain when something weird happens that no one - even the gurus - can solve!
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
If Linux can't make a sizable dent in the desktop market within 5 years it will be too late, and Linux will be relagated to the server room for the remainder of its days. And those days will be few because the WinBSD will make an excellent server, too.
For example, I just learned that one company, who has been using Novell and was excited about SUSE, has backed off, not because of SCO, and now says that it may be 5 to 10 years, if ever, before they switch to Linux. A WinBSD will trash any plans to shift to Linux.
When switching to any new system the advantages become apparent only slowly. The disadvantages on the other hand are instantly apparent. If you want to find out what is wrong with a country don't ask a native inhabitant - ask a recent immigrant.
There are things about linux that someone switching from windows finds annoying, but to a linux user they don't seem like problems and might seem trivial or even silly. If you want to encourage people to switch to linux however, you have to understand their point of view.
For example the directory structure in linux is just plain awful. All those three letter abbreviated names - usr lib var etc - etc - WTF is all that about! And whose bright idea was it to reuse the same names over and over /etc/etc - etc! It isn't `usr' friendly - at all! If you are new to linux you tend to find it just about impossible to find anything at first!
The first thing a windows user wants to do is rename all those stupid directories to something comprehensible - and why not? In windows you can do it. You can change directory names to just about anything you like and with a little bit of tweaking in the registry perhaps, it'll run just fine. You can even install windows in the C:\bloatware directory if that is what runs your motor. It'll work.
These are the kinds of issues that stop people from switching.
even baby joe can use it.
I don't know about that. However, it's been pretty clearly established that, five or six years ago, a tech hobbyist could use Linux as his sole desktop. He might have to use care in purchasing hardware, and he might have to deal with LaTeX instead of a word processor. He might have to re-request documents in a different format. He might spend an awfully long time getting things up and running. However, Linux was usable alone.
KDE and GNOME and other projects steadily got easier to use and were cleaned up. Windows compatibility improved. Companies slowly started to throw their weight behind Linux.
Two or three years ago, I'd say that a power user could reasonably start using Linux. There were still some annoying issues. Antialiasing wasn't in use, and many folks noticed this, if they were accustomed to Windows-style antialiasing. Sound drivers at the time were usually OSS/Free, so distributions used software sound servers to do sound mixing, which frequently resulted in poor-quality-resampled sound that broke up. XFree86 3.3 was still around, and 3D support in 3.3 was pretty bad. You still had to use the command line for a reasonable number of things (probably looking online for someone having the same problem), though folks were working hard on frontends.
Today, I think that a power user can comfortably run Linux, without any of the old drawbacks. 3d support is generally roughly on par with Windows. Audio is much better -- most distributions use ALSA and take advantage of hardware mixing, though more unusual features like hardware reverb generally aren't supported. Things like support for cheapo printers and reliable Windows filesharing support are in place. Most Windows productivity programs have an acceptably usable equivalent, and while document compatibility still isn't perfect (OpenOffice isn't identical with MS Office), it's good enough for most people to comfortably get work done without making an annoyance of themselves. Things are *not* equivalent to Windows. While most unusual hardware can be made to work one way or another (for example, I have a SmartHome USB X10 controller that can be made to work under 2.4 by compiling and installing modules myself...though 2.6 support is not in), it's still not flawless. The typical Linux distribution has gained weight -- GNOME and KDE are both quite heavyweight. Games are just not there -- this may not be an issue for the business desktop, but it's a huge deal for the home desktop. Binary software distribution (and no matter how nice it would be for everything to be open source, it just isn't going to happen) is a phenomenal pain in the ass, even in the presence of the LSB. I have Loki games, games that I purchased perhaps two years ago, that already do not run on current distributions. There is no existing technical solution, short of using Java bytecode and taking the performance hit that doing so entails.
I find that XP Home's multiuser workstation environment is much more accessable to a typical home user. Jane can log on, then she can switch to Bob, then he can log off and Jane can continue using her software. While I have run multiple X servers before on my box, I don't believe that there are any major distros that support such a setup nicely out of the box, and I remember running into all sorts of interesting bugs at the time -- run OpenGL software or something, and freezes started coming up.
Two of the major players in the Linux productivity world are OpenOffice and Mozilla, requred for MS Office and IE equivalence. Both of these use oddball widget sets. They are usable, and generally operate roughly like other applications on the system do. However, they are still disconcerting to the user. I *know* when something is using Athena or XUL or whatever OpenOffice uses, and I adapt my behavior accordingly. It's still confusing, unintuitive, and looks unprofessional to someone just trying to do work, however. By comparison, the Qt-Gtk differences are much mor
May we never see th
try :
opening a slow website in IE.
go to another window (eg notepad) - type away.
When page loads / fails to load - boink! IE takes the focus and comes to the foreground, helpfully informing you that the page has loaded / failed to load.
Most Irritating Design Feature EVER.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
But I really doubt that Linux will ever conquer the desktop until it decides to pick an interface and stick with it. Admittedly I've used Linux only a select few times. However I have established boxes running RedHat, YellowDog, Lycoris and Mandrake just to see how far this OS had come along. Outside of my particular issues with each subsequent install and overlooking the technical glitches (Mandrake would not recognize my particular keyboard and mouse until I configured it to do so - a feat quite difficult without the benefit of a keyboard or mouse), it was still clear that Linux was maturing quite nicely.
What I, as a novice Linux user, was most put off about was the overabundance of different user interfaces across the board. Nothing was consistent; settings/programs/utilities were oddly named (K-this, K-that) haphazardly organized (sometimes even within the same flavor) and the entire experience was largely confusing for a Linux newbie like myself. And I hate to say it, but outside of the disorder I was really under-whelmed by the look of the desktops across the board. Each interface felt foreign, dated and clunky, outside of Lycros which felt familiar, dated and clunky (being essentially stolen from Windows XP). Then again I've been a Mac user for the last ten years so perhaps I'm just afraid of change.
Regardless, in my opinion for Linux to make any real inroads with average users like myself they've got to standardize on a single interface. Too many different looks confuse those of us who actually use the GUI and stand as a huge roadblock to adoption for those who can barely transition from one version of Windows to the next in six year increments.
-- Don Carcharo
Seriously?
I'm using XP here, I fired IE up, set it towards cryptome.org (been a while since I was there, and it's a fairly big page), it would and did take a while to load.
So while the status bar says "connecting to" I change focus to Notepad (which I had started up before hand), typing away. And know what? IE doesn't take focus, it doesn't even blink in the damn taskbar.
Me thinks you have a bad setup, or have messed with something you should not.
Hear, hear (though Clippy is some way down my list, after "Don't hide all the damn menus" and other such irritations).
You're spot on about the keyboard usability, though. I had high hopes when I downloaded OpenOffice.org 1.1.0 the other day, with all the comments about work they'd done on customising the UI. I was very disappointed to see that you still can't assign a keyboard shortcut to apply a style or insert an arbitrary character. That vastly reduces the usefulness of both features, IMHO, and is a major usability advantage for Microsoft's offering.
There are a few places Word is really weak in usability: automatic numbering, for example. Unfortunately, OpenOffice.org has yet to get that one right either (in fact, if anything, it's worse in that particular case). If you're going to play "Copy Microsoft" for the UI, you really need to do it better if you want your application to succeed in the wider community...
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Y'see, software is such that an altruistic few can supply basically the whole world. Physical goods ain't like that, so 'free' can't spread to them in any significant amount.
Tim
In all my experience teaching computer basics (mostly to teachers, actually) the one thing that blows them away is filing. My wife, with 15 years experience with desktop computers, still can't save files anywhere but on the desktop! It's not that it is hard...it's that it makes no sense compared to the real world, where "filing" something means putting it up on the frig with a magnet. Her desktop is like the frig, only there are 100 items sitting there sometimes.
I don't see a solution here, but I know that UI experts have always had issues with file systems in the OS. Probably a relational approach is better, something like M$ proposed database-based file system. Then hide all the details, including directory structure, from the end user (assuming that is what they are doing...) Use context searches to find things when you need them (works at least as well as my wife's digging through all the similarly named files on her desktop.)
Yeah I know, heresy. "Sounds like another Mac user." Whatever.
=^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
I was at LCA, and saw a few interesting presentations on GNOME. Here's the revelation:
...
THEY'RE RE-CREATING WINDOWS.
No, really, they are. That's not necessarily bad, but it is a bit scary. Look:
GConf == Registry
Nautilus == Explorer shell
Bonobo == DCOM
GStreamer == Direct Show
DBus == (something they do now)
Much of the same duplications are being done for KDE, too. Re-inventing, re-inventing, re-inventing.
Furthermore, they're doing it worse. Or at least more slowly. Nautilus is SLOW. GNOME is much slower on equivalent hardware than Windows XP is.
I'm fine with re-implementing something that is the rigth answer. I'm not convinced all of these are, and I'm *know* we're not as fast or stable as XP in the GUI.
I want to see Linux and free/open software succeed. I really really do. I don't particularly LIKE OS/X, but it is a better experience than GNOME is, still.
I once more suggest that either the KDE team or the GNOME team concede to the other. Stop duplicating or triplicating efforts. We're still pretty far behind, and it doesn't seem to me that we're catching up (except on the simplest of desktop tasks).
I'm glad to see the creator of Linux is realistic rather than ranting and raving about Linux. I too believe Linux is far from being ready for the desktop. As a server OS, Linux is wonderful if configured and maintained properly.
Right now Linux is at the beginning of its desktop life much like Windows 1.0 was so long ago. I predict Linux will mature quicker than Windows has due to many factors; open source contributors and assistance from corporations such as IBM, SUN, and Novell are the factors I see.
Part of the Linux/Unix fascination is a transformative mindset that confuses cryptic complexity with power and ease-of-use with restricted utility.
I find this terribly ironic, as I have frequently seen the similar sentence "Part of the reason people still use Windows is that they confuse restricted utility with ease-of-use.
More to the point, GUIs really only differ from CLIs in one major way -- they provide a list of your options at any given point, from which you select one. They are very similar to menu-based text interfaces, abeit with a higher resolution display and some differences of mechanics. CLIs expect you to already know the command used to select your option. As a result, CLIs are only particularly useful once you become familiar with a program. They're fine for people that use a computer like a third lung, because those people have enough familiarity with the interface to know what to hit. CLIs have a number of benefits over GUIs (keyboards have a higher data throughput than mice, CLIs require less processor power, CLIs require less bandwidth for remote use, CLI programs are generally easily scriptable and interfaceable), so for folks familiar with a given program, a CLI is generally worthwhile. For a lightweight computer user, a GUI's advantage of listing all options at any given time simply makes them far, far more efficient, and keyboard shortcuts provide a small measure of the CLI's power that can easily be adopted piecemeal into their working routine.
Current Linux GUIs are generally not completely equivalent to their Windows GUIs because they require the user to map an arbitrary command to what they want to do, yet again (as pointed out in another email, "evolution" means email). However, they are more and more closely approximating this. Plus, the work involved in doing this is comparatively minor relative to writing the masses of software that make up a Linux system. Linux really is 80% of the way to being an acceptable Joe User desktop system.
May we never see th
Okay, the idea - the guiding philosophy - behind any UI should be to "get stuff done". One feature that I'd love to see implemented in a GUI - across the board - is "User Modes". Something along the lines of - on the desktop somewhere - a pull down menu with the options "Beginner / Novice / Intermediate / Experienced / Advanced". Beginner mode is designed with the first time / technophobic user in mind. Big buttons, fewer options, cute puppy dogs and paperclips, lots of hand holding. The stuff that drives most of the rest of us mad (the Office paperclip, for example) is handy for first time users. Novice mode is designed for users who use their computers for basic tasks, but get confused when things go out of the ordinary. More options and less hand-holding than beginner, but most of the decisions are still made on their behalf by the OS or programs. Intermediate mode for your average, middle of the road tech literate user. They know how to do what they need, and find the hand-holding annoying. They happily know what to they need to do until something breaks. The aim is to make sure it doesn't. Intermediate users probably don't need to see an xterm window, and running one should even be an option for people in beginner / novice mode. Experienced users are power users. They know their way around a GUI and are computer confident, but don't necessarily know the inner workings. More options, most decisions made for themselves. Finally, advanced mode. "Advanced" in this case is a codeword for geek. All those cool features you think you'd like, but would either be useless to your average or beginner user? Or would confuse them? Cram 'em in here. * * * * * These settings would apply to all apps. Especially with beginners and novices, consistancy is important. If they need settings or features, the options are up the user mode tree, and thus someone more experienced than them would do the configuring.
http://amishthrasher.blogspot.com/
Quote:"[...] all users are different, and there are too (damn) many of them (grumble grumble)."
;>
I daresay, that Skynet must have been set upon the goal of the perfect GUI all along, no? Difficult puzzles require innovative solutions.
Can someone explain to me why we need to get linux running on every desktop in the world exactly??
.doc files, for instance, are not easily readable on non-MS products. MS has significant incentive to deliberately attempt to introduce incompatibility.
.doc files. Since Microsoft is The Institution and tries to isolate itself from other efforts, hackers frequently have to put up with Microsoft's products, even if they do not want to use them.
To say it step-by-step:
1) Hackers like Linux more than Windows. It's a nice, powerful OS.
2) Microsoft sells Windows. It wants people to buy copies of Windows. One major weapon in its arsenal is compatibility --
3) Hackers are not islands. They must interact with other people. Sometimes this means getting DSL service. Sometimes this means having to use a computer specified by an employer. Sometimes this means being able to read
4) Hackers, frusterated with Microsoft, happily work on Linux and other Microsoft-alternative efforts.
Linux having a 30% market share or more would have major benefits (well, and probably drawbacks as well):
* Hardware compatibility. Someone has to write drivers and test and support hardware. It's expensive, so usually this sort of thing is subsidized by lots of people. If many non-hackers are using Linux, then hackers will get hardware support subsidized by non-hackers. This is a Good Thing for them.
* Games. There needs to be a lot of folks willing to buy a game before a company will port, test, and support it on Linux. It's expensive, so usually this sort of thing is subsidized by lots of people. If many non-hackers are using Linux, then hackers will get games subsidized by non-hackers. This is a Good Thing for them.
* Enabling People. Hackers are human too, and they feel good when they let people do something more. It's rather like the digital artist that introduces a conventional photographer to Photoshop. When the photographer's eyes light up and he realizes what he can do, and his ability to produce value increases, the artist feels good, and has helped society. Linux has a number of capabilities that Windows does not, and introducing folks to them would help society.
* DRM. Lots of hackers are not thrilled with the concept of DRM. Establishing a less monopolistic platform rapidly makes it much more difficult for anyone to get everyone using DRM.
* Environment. I'd love to never have to use a Windows box again. However, I run into them. The more people using Linux, the more folks paying people to work on and develop things for Linux, and the less one has to support Windows machines.
* Elimination of proprietary protocols and formats. Only one person directly wins if a proprietary protocol or format is in place -- the vendor of the software using it. Consumers lose, and competitors lose. Linux, having a large collection of entrenched open source and open specification software packages, has a good amount of inertia to not having closed formats.
Now, I grant that there will probably be drawbacks to a dominant Linux. Whatever the dominant easy-to-use distro is, it will likely have security failings, may force people to use a GUI to configure things, and may have a vendor doing all kinds of licensing deals for exclusives (like Microsoft's AOL icon on the desktop). Trojans and viruses will likely be more common for Linux. Politics will become more involved with Linux, just as it did with the Internet (imagine the same thing happening to the FSF that did with ICANN -- being taken over by less-than-nice corporate interests. Ick.) There will be many packages ported, and some of the existing Linux software that appeals to hackers -- small, CLI programs that can easily be combined -- will lose relevance as folks use ported, large, potentially buggy software packages like MS Office. There will probably be more strict backwards compatibility constraints, and cruft will more easily bu
May we never see th
He could remember the keys to press, but for the icons and GUI he must refer to the picture instructions I printed out. That means changing his glasses every 10 seconds.
So your father is retarded AND legally blind? Ouch.
For lessons in how to take over the world you can't go past Bill Gates. Embrace - Extend - Extinguish OK. Apply this to the linux desktop?
Embrace: - Linux with a windows `personality'. Technically easy enough to do. The trick is avoiding the continual temptation to `do things better'. If the difference between Linux and Windows to the user is like the difference between Coke and Pepsi then switching is not a problem and people WILL switch purely because linux is free.
Extend: - Do it better than windows. Piece of cake! yes?
Extinguish: - "Sorry, this software will not install because your windows operating system sucks". GAME OVER.
The biggest problem is people being too eager to extend (naturally the fun part!) without embracing first. The linux system that will beat windows isn't have to be all that flash. It just has to be a problem free `windows substitute'. People are probably less likely to switch to a flash system because the learning curve is too steep.
What really sucks, is when you are doing something really important like playing a game of speed chess online, when that ^*(%&! Windows Update dialog pops up and steals the focus, effectively losing the game for you. Arrrgh!
As far as usability testing goes, I just finished working on a project for the last year or so that had all kinds of usability and focus group done for it. The result was probably the most unusable UI I have ever had the shame to be associated with. I started getting tunnel carpal when trying to test my components, because the main framework of the app was done without any keyboard shortcuts at all. There were about five different artifices for doing the same thing (buttons, tabs, tabs in tabs, expanding "button menus", etc.) without any clear reason why one method was used in one case and another elsewhere.
I think the problem is when you hire a lot of expensive "usability expert" consultants, they feel some obligation to produce something nifty and different (rather than, for example, just telling you to do common sense things like provide standard menus (File, Edit, View, Help) and common keyboard shortcuts, etc. Then, in a complimentary fashion, those who have shelled out the huges bucks for the experts would be foolish to disregard their suggestions (that would be a waste of money, right? Wrong! That is the definition of a sunk cost.).
Had the thing been designed cleanly and simply, using well-established standards, it would be easier to program and easier to use.
I'm using Mandrake 9.2 with 2.6.0. I've used past versions. Overall, I find myself now using Linux far more than the XP I've been dual booting with. It seems more responsive, and faster than xp. While it has its quirks, XP has as many or more. Also, loading up Linux was a lot faster; while I spent hours recently wrestling with XP's copy protection and activation features while trying to copy a partition, eventually losing data and reloading XP, which, imho, has happened over and over again with Microsoft's crippled products, so I had time to note how much worse XP's installation was compared to mandrakes.
I've also had time to appreciate how much better Linux is in virtually everyway including shell scripting. It only took me a few minutes to figure out how to pop up graphic dialog boxes in KDE from a shell script. I've yet to figure out how to do that from a batch file on XP, and Linux promises no limit on real work I can accomplish, (maybe wget next to fetch data from the web and process it?)
Futhermore, konquerer and mozilla both look much better on the newer versions I'm using. And kmail filtering is much better than outlooks.
All in all, I like mandrake as a desktop better than windows. The only thing lacking is the drivers - my canon printer i470d, and scanner aren't supported. When I upgrade, I'm only going to buy linux supported hardware.
I agree. I hate when I am at work and I've just logged in to the users computer, I am prompted for a password to connect to a drive or a special service., and then I am typing typing my special admin password notepad or something pops up and my password is typed into that window ( not hidden, in front of the user ), and I have to backspace and remember to change my password immediately afterwards.
Pain in the arse. I tell you.
I can't afford a sig!
Dang, you just gave away that fact that you don't know anything about computing. If you had said Perl or Java, it would have had the opposite effect.
I belive there are issues with the Nforce2 NIC's and Linux, specifically drivers. Nvidia released binary-only's, but because they are not GPL they aren't on most distro's
There is a GPL driver for it in progress though.
Point is this is not a GUI issue, it is hardware support issue.
(Mandrake 9.2 is pretty good though)
Any digital camera that will work as a mountable hard drive works off the shelf under Linux. Including my HP that I bought a couple of days ago.
It's not a matter of the OS supporting anything, really. It's a matter of 3rd parties producing products that support standards. Like the USB hard drive standard. To me, that's how I buy peripherals these days. Not "does Linux support it" or "does Windows support it", but "does it use a common, open standard like USB?"
So goes my digital camera, keychain drive, mp3 player, etc, etc, etc.
Can someone write, and can some consumer want, an OS-specific application that makes some things easier for them (like file transfer)? Sure. So long as it's not as idiotic as the software Canon used to package with their cameras (insert ZoomBrowser shudders here.. why oh why didn't I just teach Dad what "My Computer" was??), more power to em. And so long as they don't REQUIRE that software, everyone's happy.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
What it basically always comes down to is generating enough excitement and instilling this excitement for people (users, geeks, and just complete 'newbies') to actually change their ways.
People don't buy cars because it gets you from A to B. People buy cars because it offers so much more - comfort, air-conditioning, airbags, ABS, traction-control, etc.
True connoisseurs (and people with money) buy cars because they were built with passion - Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc, are all built with passion.
People buy ideas: What they perceive to be safer, more luxurious, bells and whistles - more bang for their buck. One of the key aspects of marketing is not knowing what your customers want - but selling them the idea that they have the power to make it do what they want - AND MORE. People watch infomercials and are not sold on the actual product at first, but at the AND THAT'S NOT ALL bit that usually gets repeated a hundred times. This is something that Microsoft does brilliantly, they don't sell an Office Suite - they sell the most convenient, easy to use word processor, spreadsheet, etc. AND THAT'S NOT ALL...
The key to Linux success on the desktop is taking it up a notch - getting people (users, geeks, etc...) exited about the idea. To say people won't change what they are used to is not completely accurate - people will change, when they are made excited to... Example: When Windows XP was scheduled for release, Microsoft went on a massive marketing campaign blowing every possible horn about XP (how much better it is, how much more secure it is, the fact that is based on the 'stable' NT build, the faster it is, the more user friendly it is, the more 'multimedia' able it is - and most importantly: How cosmetically pleasing it is). To a Linux user, this is obvious hogwash - but to a windows 98 user, this was the next best thing. The advent of digital cameras built into mobile phones has meant that there has been a surge in digital photography. Microsoft excites users at the prospect of EASILY working with these images, effectively sharing them, printing them, etc. I attended a Microsoft sponsored expo in South Africa back in 2000. What was really interesting was to see the MS South Africa CEO walk up and talk EXCITEDLY about Microsoft being able to do everything you want - in as few steps as possible. Want to take pictures off your digital camera? Simply plug the camera into your USB device and windows will take care of the rest. Want to view video clips, play music CDs, watch DVDs? Simply plug it in and windows will take care of the rest.
The masses are now unfortunately well educated in the day to day uses of Windows. Cloning the Windows desktop is not the solution, people don't want to drive a VW in a Mercedes chassis. Building more desktops is also not the solution. Choices are there. Developers need to figure out how to make the desktop able to do things automatically - without invoking user input. I think it is important that developers do not hype the complexities and massive abilities of Linux based desktops - but rather, like Microsoft - hype the simplicities thereof. The key to a Linux-based desktop success lies in getting people excited about how simple, easy, userfriendly and efficient it is.
how flawed is your society? flawedsociety.myfreelancejobs.com
Bells and whistles are irrelevant. I need usage patterns to be the same.
1. Linux does not have a clipboard. E.g. you can't: open a doc in a viewer, mark and copy some text, close a viewer, paste the text to an editor.
2. I can't close a window just by moving mouse cursor to the upper right corner of a desktop and left-clicking. Linux forces me to aim to the close button accurately.
3. Win-key (lets just call it the Flag Key if touching anything labeled "Win" is a taboo in Linuxland ;-) ) doesn't show a "Start" menu.
KDE stuff is not enough for me. So GNOME stuff should offer an optional Windows L&F as well.
Here's what I see being the real show-stoppers for desktop Linux adaptation:
1. Reliance on the CLI: Yes, in a perfect world, everyone would be comfortable with using the CLI to accomplish tasks from installing a driver to reading email to whatever. REALITY, however, is different. The vast majority of Win32 and MacOS users NEVER touch the CLI. No one wants to be bothered with it. The Linux elite's insistance that everything be centered around CLI apps and whatnot is going to prevent Linux uptake. Yes, we should all learn it before diving into Linux, but think about it this way; Apple, with it's BSD powered OSX, does NOT require it's users to know a damned thing about the command line in order to use their OS. It simply works well without it. Of course, power users can get at it and run as many shell scripts as they wish to, but those that don't know about command line stuff are not forced to learn it.
2. Installing new hardware in your PC should not be harder than plugging it in and installing a driver. In all of the years I've been using Linux, I've rarely ever been able to simply install a new card and not have to install something other than a driver. There have been too many times where I have to fish out my install CD's or search the net for some obscure dependancy package, or worse, have the dep already installed, but the driver's installation script not detect it properly. I've pulled out my hair trying to get my little USB webcam (Cool-I-Cam Stylus 1000) to work with GPhoto/Gphoto2 only to give up after weeks of trying (it took less than 5 minutes to get it up and running under Windows 2000). My IOGear USB2 card STILL doesn't work with Linux (the driver is included with Win2000 SP4 and is also available as a tiny download from the IOGear site). Stuff like this annoys the hell out of me. Honestly, I shouldn't have to deal with it and neither should anyone trying to use Linux for the first time. Until hardware installation is fixed, desktop linux will never happen.
3. Apps. I cannot stress how important having GOOD applications is to the average user. Star/Open Office is good, I'll admit that and it's an excellent start in the direction that things should be heading. However, there's simply not enough applications of this caliber. There are no pro-quality audio applications, no Macromedia authoring apps, games are hard to come by IF they're ported to Linux, and nothing that's truely like EZ CD Creator or Nero for CD burning. Until commercial applications start coming over to Linux, we're not going to see many people moving to Linux.
Think of it this way; The Amiga is/was one of the greatest machines ever built and it had the BEST OS of it's day. It's lack of applications (and lack of marketing push) killed it's desktop uptake. In 1990, I knew more people that had inferior PC's than had Amigas and the sole reason was that the apps they needed were not available for the Amiga. Same for the Atari ST, Same for the BeBox. Apps drive adoption, not just the GUI.
4. Elitism. Linux elitism is rampant. If I ask a question in an IRC channel on how to do something in windows, I get a dozen good responses. If I ask a question in #linux on Efnet or a similar channel, I get a bunch of "did you read the man pages?" "RTFM", "Linux is obviously to difficult for you, go back to Windows" or similar responses. Oddly, I don't encounter the level of elitism when looking for help with any other flavor of unix or MacOS (The guys in #SGI/Efnet were particularly helpful when I had a problem reinstalling Irix on my Indy). The attitude that a lot of Linux users display towards newbies will turn off just about anyone to Linux. Kill the attitude, learn some manners, and lend a hand.
Now, before I get flamed, I must let you know that I AM well versed in Linux. I'm currently working as a Unix admin, overseeing a mission-critical, money making production server farm for a Fortune 1000 company. I make my living using Linux, but cannot see having my wife use it for her business (She's a mortgage broker)
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
Keep it like it is, just add a better GUI user space to the top, 'consumer space' which is easy to use and basically idiot proof which can use existing GUI projects. That way you can keep the powerful reatures while letting any fool turn on his box and download and install and do whatever without being mystified by the command line. The only other barrier is a lack of consumer applications.
You could download Tweak UI and make it impossible for applications to steal focus by checking a single box in the General, Focus options page.
Here's a reason why I see the linux desktop catching on:
Educational institutions have from hundreds to thousands of computers.
Many of these computers are getting a bit older. Maybe they have windows 98.
Many programs now will not run on 98.
Upgrading to XP for several thousand machines is expensive
Upgrading hardware of several thousand machines to run XP is worse
There is a decent array of educational software for linux. There's also good productivity/office software
It's cheap, if not free.
What kids learn on in school may very well help drive future market afterwards. Just as now people buy windows because it's used by a large portion of other people
Linux desktop market increases....
Along this train of thought, anyone know of a listing of Linux equivilents for programs. Like Office software (OpenOffice), Audio (XMMS), etc. What do you know is good?
This is another thing that bothers me about Linux; most older apps simply do not work on newer distributions. I have a few disks of little "cool" apps from my Windows 3.11 days (circa '94 and 95) that still work with WindowsXP. Hell, I even have DOS apps that still work with XP. The same cannot be said for Linux. It's very true that there are some apps that were built for Dos/3.11/win95 that don't work with XP, but those numbers are NOTHING compared to the numbers of older apps that refuse to run on newer Linux distros. Backwards compatibility is probably going to be the biggest hurdle Linux will have.
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
When I started using a GUI, the close icon for a window was in the top left hand corner and the iconise (Minimise in Microsoft terminology) was in the top right hand corner So I could quickly iconise a window without fearing that I'd accidentally close the window instead.
Now with GNOME & KDE slavishly following Microsoft, the close icon is on the top right hand side and is one of 3, so I need to be more careful which of the icons I click.
Now the original X Windows system had the scroll bar for terminals on the left hand side, which is different from the Acorn and Microsoft GUI's. This I find more convenient, than having the scroll bar on the right hand side - so I'd like the option to globally switch all scrollbars to the left, so other people can still have their's on the right. Now I can switch my terminal windows that way, but not Mozilla, nor my Java, nor my other windows.
I don't want my desktop to look like a clone of one Microsoft's GUI's. If I desperately wanted to be a Microsoft true believer, I would have bought Microsoft, and not installed Linux.
-Nivag
Are there not man pages for a reason? Really, configuring each program is not that hard. If you used XML it'd introduce a new level of complexity not needed, making bloated .config files that just take up more room. Plus, then all those programs would need to implement libxml and such. And I bet parsing XML is a bit slower (at least) then just parsing these easy .config files.
.config files (or at least modify them). No, XML is not a good idea here. Even standardization sucks because it forces all us programmers to try to follow some stupid rules in order to get our programs to work instead of designing it in our own working way. Sounds alot like MS actually!
And, they wouldn't want to segregate all of us that use 'vi' to make these
--- "To iterate is human, to recurse divine." -- Robert Heller
I forgot to say that the first GUI I used was on an Apple Lisa in a computer shop, this came out before the first Apple Macintosh. The second GUI machine I used was the wonderful Acorn Archimedes.
The first GUI I saw in a magazine was an article on the Xerox Star computer in Scientific American, this predated the Apple Lisa.
Putting the close window icon on the right hand side seems to be a Microsoft "inovation".
There are other issues - some platforms have their own floating point formats (S/390 a.k.a. z-Series, VAX, etc.) and if you have to deal with legacy systems, that can be an issue. Intel platforms have 80bit as well as 64bit floating point, although IA64 tends to be optimised for 64bit ops. There are other gotchas too.
It's a minefield :-)
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
Linus is the only person I've ever heard of taking a lawsuit as an opportunity to write some new code. The world needs more Linuses!!!
UGH! For the *last* time, people, it's "one Linus, two Lini"!
[grin]
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
A truly well-informed reply to a highly overrated piece of flamebait.
I'd pretty much resigned myself to knocking together a little permissioning applet as a front-end to CACLS for my g/f, but it'd be nice not to have that chore if there's an alternative.
Regards Luke
#include witty_one_liner.h
Whoo-Hoo! Linux can now be used as a locked-in word processing station. Why not just buy a used type writer? Last night I bought a bargain basement PC with XP. It was under $300, 2.6 GHz, CD-RW, DVD, 80 Gig HD, 256 MB Ram, etc. The first thing installed, besides the printer, was 3 different photo editing software suites. 2 installed without a hitch, the 3rd had problems reading the CD. I then installed a CD to HD emulator free from download.com and scanned the 3rd photo editor CD. It then installed without a hitch. While I was doing all this I was watching previews for movies and watching them in the most clear and amazing playback I've ever seen. The point is three fold. First, most people don't think about the cost of the OS when buying a computer. They have a budget and that more than anything colors their choice. Apple would be MS if they didn't sell their machines for so much money. Second, most people don't care what OS they are using, it's the applications that they own or that are available. Switching to Linux for most people will mean throwing away not only the MS license they might have paid when they bought their computer, but also any software they currently own. For a casual user this could be hundreds of dollars. For a power user (gamer) this could be thousands. Third, people want shiny string and will expect the shiny string to be pre-configured. I use Linux, so I know that it can be configured to do all these things. However, I also know the pain of trying to change something like screen resolution or the name of the computer. Finally, I am glad to see that corporations are using Linux in meaningful ways, such as in an embedded devices. If a company sells 1000 devices and doesn't have to pay microsoft (or WindRiver or whoever) $50 dollars than that is an extra $50,000 dollars of profit. That's fantastic. However, for a home user, $50 dollars is a small price to keep their existing software and hardware not to mention the shiny string.
... with support on a Redhat system it appears wise to pay for Enterprise Linux that will be supported for at least 5 years (http://www.redhat.com/software/rhelorfedora/). If you want to avoid a regular upgrade cycle with Redhat then you have to be prepared to pay (which seems fair to me since backporting costs increasingly more as time goes by). Whether five years is enough is another question altogether though...
No, you were off-topic by sucking my mom's big black dick.
In all seriousness, I've never heard the phrase "convection microwave" before. What does it mean? Is that just a fancy-sounding term for a regular microwave oven? They all work by convection don't they?
I'd rather be lucky than good.
a working desktop is not so much to make everything "dumbed down". Keeping the good stuff would be enough for most purposes. I don t really care if distributed components API x y or z is in use, but I do get very disapointed if I see that rpms were supported by midnight commander and then, all of a sudden, notwithstanding the cute rpm icon, nautilus tells me he sucked .1 GB of core but knows not what to do with the rpm.
The kind of work that has to be done for desktop is just different. Going from the E to gnome, to whatever doesn t justify going back in usability.
So, linux runs on embedded... where is the GUI that goes with ? I believe I can t do anything with woody on a 486, and I would rather bet on geos or slackware 1.2
show me progress, not excuses.
The rise of the Linux Desktop is not just technically difficult. It is politically difficult.
I suggested a few months back that the OSDL use the command line command "linux" to start a default windows GUI so that the computer illiterate (my relatives) might have a method to "fix" their computers if they ever found themselves at the Linux command line.
The OSDL response, "Linus is only interested in writing software for the Linux kernel now. Try contacting the guys at Gnome."
Linus himself is the one who is willing delay 10 years before developing a user friendly desktop. So until then, I'll throw my support behind Apple.
The 286 I bought the day the Challenger blew up is still running. What do you mean "So old". Electronics has at least a 15 year life expectancy.
I told you how you can turn those machines into fully modren machines that can serve the needs of your people for years to come - and what do you respond with?
You want to turn gut them!!!
Well - if your desktop that you are running on these "DUMB TERMINALS" is reasonable then you need the RAM and CPU in them or you will simply not get decent performance.
Frankly - I think you are pointed in the wrong direction. When I say this I am being generous. You are lucky I am not your boss.
I have tried to use desktop linux before. Where I got hung up with it was trying to get an 802.11b card that would work with my laptop and get me onto my home network. I finally gave up when I went to compile the driver for the card and I was missing some header file.
Desktop Linux as it sits today is fine. Its that unusual problem that takes a guru to solve that is going to hold the average person or organization back.
The thing that is wonderful about IBM moving to Linux is that they are going to come up with solutions to my problem and the million other little problems that people get into all the time. Someone at IBM will take the info from the help desk and write some really awesome easy to read Linux troubleshooting guide. More drivers will get written as hardware vendors decide that they want to sell things to IBM. If something works with Linux, it will say so on the box. Wine will get better and Windows software will run as well on Linux as classic MacOS software runs on MacOS X.
The sheer number of non-technical people, or semi-technical people that will have to deal with Linux on a day to day basis at IBM will surface these issues and they will get solved.
Once that happens, its gave over for Microsoft unless they can figure out some rabbit to pull out of the hat to give people a compelling reason to stick with Windows. Frankly, I think that's unlikely. Microsoft has been notoriously bad at entering new markets and making money in them. Things like MSN, XBox, and other divisions are big money loosers for them. They are relying on Windows and Office which are the two things most vulnerable to Open Source.
Ironically, I think that Apple will continue to do OK as long as they keep innovating and delivering solutions that are easier to use, sexier, and on the cutting edge, people who are Mac customers will stick with them. In other words, there is a market for quality, but only room enough for one player at the bottom to compete on price - and its hard to compete with free.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
"Task bar, start menu, etc. etc."
You do realize these aren't microsoft ideas?
They didn't come from windows. Windows took them from elsewhere. They are also common elements in every remotely successful (as in it's possible to google it and get 100+ results) desktop ever made. Windows is one of those, certainly not the first, and certainly not the last.
"implement something totally new for its desktop or overall OS design which MS wants to adapt"
This may come as a shock to you, but wait for it... Linux does not exist to give microsoft free stuff to improve it's OS. It exists to be used, some of those who work on it do so in hopes it WILL REPLACE microsoft technologies. But pretty much none of them have dreams of microsoft employing it's "embrace and extend" philosophy on their technology.
Microsoft is already stealing wherever it can from open source applications. IP from BSD you mentioned, although they certainly did a lousy job with it based on the instability of IP in windows that causes big problems in XP where you can't remove IP and the reset pretty well never works out. You mention XP SP2, where microsoft adds some stuff that is already in linux and calls it security, it's a step, a small one but a step. And again XP SP2 where microsoft steals some concepts from open source browsers and throws in popup blocking for starters.
Microsoft has recently restructured their development model for their kernel based on studies of open source development techniques (although their adaptation won't work, it's missing a couple vital elements, that's another subject).
Microsoft is conducting survey's out there desperately trying to figure what they can do that they can live with to head off this giant that has 100's of thousands of free manhours put into it every 24/hr period, where there are nonstop shifts because developers are scattered throughout the globe. Microsoft has massive amounts of money it's true, but even microsoft doesn't have enough to employ the over 2million developers globally working on open source.
They can't compete, everything they implement that is worthwhile gets implemented in open source by the time they update it with something else... but at the same none of existing popular open source projects slow done, the open source pool just absorbs this additional development without any apparent scattering of resources because the user base continues to grow and with it the developer base.
Is big business what you respect? Then respect this, EVERY major hardware manufacturer (by major I mean companies that talk billions not millions) is backing linux. Individually they can't beat microsoft, IBM is the only one that could even consider it, but together they make Microsoft's budget look like chump change.
I don't see Microsoft making significant strides in security, they'll never be secure with their current development model. And they won't change it to any of the open source models that work. Their very monopoly makes Microsoft deployments inheriently less secure even if the software itself were the most secure out there (and it's not, it actually ranks toward the bottom of the pool, something on par with BobOS).
Linux on the other hand is making leaps and bounds in the gui. It's rapidly moving forward in terms of software compatibility. Most WINDOWS programs and games run on Linux now! ZERO linux binaries run on windows outside an emulator.
In terms of usablity there are yet more leaps and bounds. The kernel has been improved in ways that make for an ultra snappy gui. Techniques for parallel loading of processes are already out there to speed up boot times and the kernel load is already extremely quick.
New filesystems like Rieser4 prove atomic IO that means no corrupt half writes and adds uber stability. Something you can setup for your grandmother who always powers the system off and know things won't break horribly after a week of this like windows filesystems.
Work is under
Li.T. used "literally" SEVEN times
in that interview, literally!
why?
Internal fans to provide air movement around cooking food. Don't ask me why, bagels don't seem to toast any different.
So this (the fans) is a feature some microwaves have and some don't? Also, why would you toast a bagel in a microwave? Wouldn't it just get all soggy/ chewy rather than toasted?
I'd rather be lucky than good.
UGH! For the *last* time, people, it's "one Linus, two Lini"!
No, I'm afraid not.
Writers searching for a fancy plural in Linus decided incorrectly that the Latin word "linus," which means humble philosophy/math, should be pluralized in "lini," ignoring the existance of "lini" elsewhere as the plural of the Latin word "linum" which means flax or linen. While "linus" is a 2nd declension noun ending in -us, there doesn't seem to be any recorded use of its plural. Furthermore, it's a neuter, which is somewhat rare, but none of few the other 2nd declension neuter words (e.g. pelagus, the sea, or vulgus, the crowd) can be found with a plural ending. That's because these are all mass nouns, not count nouns.
Some people argue that it should be pluralized with an -ora ending like a 3rd declension neuters' plurals as for tempus or corpus, but there is little merit for the argument. There is even less merit for "linii" which is just silly because there is no "linius" to derive this from.
Therefore, as the noun is a modern English and Finnish loanword from the ancient Latin which has taken on new meaning, it is most appropriate to pluralize it in modern English as "Linuses."
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
No, this one is worse.
Start visual studio.NET, set a breakpoint, let progeram run for two hours, until it hits the breakpoint.
While waiting, open up IE and surf around. A page fails to load. Press F5 to reload the page. Just in that moment, the program hits the breakpoint, steals focus, grabs the F5 (Continue), and goes back to the background.
The program is now past the breakpoint. Stop program, start again, and wait two hours for it to hit the breakpoint.
I think the desktop is today.
I was in home depot the other day and on their computers they were runing icewm on linux.
this made my day - I hope it continues
That is IT's job, btw, to minimize the amount of work necessary to support users. They sometimes have a hard time balancing usability and functionality issues, but, in the case of XP vs W2K, the differences are minimal enough from an end-user perspective that they are usually ignored in favor of support issues.
If you're speaking from your own business experience with XP, your IT folks *were* right. XP *was* a complete pile of shit until the first service pack came out, something like 1.5 years later. Since then, it's been usable and the improved security of IE6 has shone in comparison to W2K. There are still drawbacks, though. IE6 is still slower than IE5.5, for instance.
It really is a sort of voodoo-science to accurately predict when a company should migrate. Taking into effect what other companies are doing, how well each OS is supported, stability, performance, and security concerns and ending up with something that is *better* than what you had before is a bitch when you have to upgrade *hundreds* of applications and libraries all at once as opposed to piecemeal.
And it's only going to get worse for Windows users as Microsoft continues it's tradition of adding hasty, poorly-designed features to NT in order to attract new users and simultaneously re-enginnering others to correct hasty, poor designs of the past.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
People from Phoenix write differently? Oh shit, I'm from Phoenix, can you read this?
"I'm just hoping it's going to finally come to a head soon, because it's just dragging on - it's been dragging on for something like eight months, and it's getting pretty tiresome."
Actually something like this could go for a very long time. 10 years wouldn't be unthinkable.
Keeping on topic, AIM is a major violator of the "focus stealing" issue, even with TweakUI installed. An existing IM window will blink in the taskbar as it should, but if a new IM comes in while I'm typing, its window will appear topmost and steal the focus. I've accidentally sent passwords, bits of code, and god-only-knows what else via AIM over the years. On the flipside, I've learned other peoples' passwords this way as well, so I guess it's not all bad...
Sorry, but I just couldn't resist... ;-)