Slashdot Mirror


Linux Users Are Spoiled

Dozix007 writes "NewsForge carries an interesting article on how spoiled Linux users are. It sites examples such as the availability of wide ranging software packages that Microsoft can't hope to provide. Microsoft has to be careful about what kind of application software it ships with Windows. Microsoft reps sometimes point to Linux distributions and ask why they can get away with shipping stacks and stacks of applications without getting in trouble. The answer to that one, of course, is that the Linux distributions give you a choice. You aren't locked into one particular application. Most Linux distributions include several choices for most program classifications; even single-CD distros usually include several Web browsers and email clients."

20 of 753 comments (clear)

  1. Linux is about choice..... by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As far as i know, there is no legal agreement between manufacturers and distributions and software vendors that disallow a competitors application to be installed as well. I believe this is the entire problem with the wintel world. For example, dell cannot ship a dual boot system, nor can they ship firefox on the windows platform. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    --

    ----
    Go canucks, habs, and sens!
  2. Linux easier than Windows? Unpossible. by thre5her · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to be YAGZ (Yet Another Gentoo Zealot), but one thing I love about Portage (and this applies to RPM/apt-get based distros to some degree) is the easy availability of up-to-date packages in a single location. With Windows, it would take all of a day to browse around the Internet and update my programs; with Gentoo, a simple "emerge sync && emerge -UD world" keeps my system cutting-edge. Microsoft couldn't hope to match this ease, simply because of the relative lack of free/GPL'd apps for the Win32 platform.

  3. Microsoft thinks monoculture... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The key thing about Linux distributions is that there's more than one, and in fact if you're not happy with the Linux kernel you can go with BSD...

    In Windows-land, Microsoft makes the kernel, Microsoft makes the one and only window-manager, Microsoft selects which apps come in the one and only distro, and nearly all of them are Microsoft-made apps anyway.

    That's the difference. A Linux distro is the blending of the Linux kernel with a set of tools that use the kernel. And from the most basic use of a kernel, the shell, there's already several to choose from. There's several window-managers.

    It's okay to bundle when you're in a COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT... that's the one thing Microsoft seems to be forgetting.

  4. Different vendors in a distribution by Geheimagent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The programs packaged in a distribution are from different vendors, hence there's no monopoly here. Nobody would sue Microsoft if they would ship Apache and Mozilla with Windows.

  5. ahh, but... by endx7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the software distros ship weren't even developed by the distro in question.

    Most software Microsoft ships with windows was developed by Microsoft.

    It isn't RedHat OpenOffice or Debian binutils.

  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. Choice is good... by Noryungi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    But frankly, the most important choice in Linux, is, for me, the ability to do a:
    ./configure
    make
    make install
    Also important is the choice of not installing something like -- say -- X11. I mean, what is the point of a graphical interface on a headless server? Windows does not offer you that kind of flexibility.

    So it cuts both ways: installing and not installing. Choosing the best apps and environment for your needs is not something that Windows allows you to do.

    Whether you like them or not (or even use them or not), Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and Outlook Express are installed by default under Windows. Under Linux, it's up to you to decide what you want and don't want/need on your machine.
    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
  8. Isn't it the other way round? by clsc · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I mean, the windows users are the ones that are spoiled...

    - no difficult choices during setup (pre-configured PCs)
    - no need to read difficult manpages and other such stuff
    - most hardware just works out of the box
    - no need to choose between distros
    - no need to choose between multiple software packages that do the same job, just differently

    ...not intended as flamebait, it's just that (as seen from an ordinary PC user's perspective) the freedom implies choice, and choice means that you have to obtain knowledge, which implies costs (in terms of time) and perceived risk.

  9. This is quite true... by djcapelis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I cannot imagine the days when my system didn't automatically have a comprehensive package management system that could track and update everything. This is something that even only very few linux distributions have. BSDs have it in their ports system, gentoo has it, and debian has it.

    The simplicity of typing a few commands to automatically determine what is out of date and what can be updated and then proceeding to just do it is very very neat. Right now portage shows that I have 1604 seperate packages installed, tracking all these by hand and making sure each are at their latest version would be a nightmare.

    Even applying experimental patches is simple and happens automatically with various use flags. Of course that's a gentoo-specific feature, but the huge amount of flexibility that is inate just but having package management systems of any kind is huge.

    I shiver at the thought of installing something outside the package management system... how are you supposed to keep it up to date? How are you supposed to verify that it has it's dependencies? How are you supposed to make sure it can uninstall correctly?

    Package management has changed the way I select software.

    --
    I touch computers in naughty places
  10. Re:Spolied? by sloanster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    hat's a really stupid argument. At least be rational with irrational arguments. I mean sure, I really need 5 different Word clones, none of which successfully open a complete word document...

    Actually they are not "word clones" but word processors, and this may surprise you, but "opening a word doc" is not the ultimate goal of most people using one of these word processors. Different people have different needs, and so the choice is a good thing to have. As to the formatting problems in some complicated ms word docs opened with various word processors, guess what? even different versions of ms word can't open the same docs correctly. pot. kettle. black.

    I do find though, that openoffice handles all the ms office files I've received lately - and when I edit them and send them back, the peecee users are none the wiser, and it never enters their head that I wasn't also using ms office.

    If anything, Windows users are spoiled because they can click the install button and the program works.

    hmm, OK... linux programs also come with installers that are activated with a click... and your point was...?

  11. Re:lack of windows software by mishac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many or most of those programmes have Windows Versions. I myself use windows XP in combination with opensource software (Firefox, GIMP, etc) with no problems. Windows users are not required to use proprietary applications, when there are free (as in beer AND as in speech) options available.

  12. Re:lack of windows software by stratjakt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can use CVS, MySQL, Photoshop, Open Office, apache so forth and so on under windows.

    Worse comes to worse you can install cygwin or coLinux to run 'em.

    Open source does not mean linux.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  13. Re:Spoiled? Uh huh. by Noksagt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Spoiled by arcane command line syntax.

    What do you mean by this? Linux's CLI seems to ME to be leagues ahead of what windows offers. The shells in OS X seem to be about the same as a Linux shell. If you're rather saying you'd rather do GUI-only, I'd say that that is possible in several distributions.

    Spoiled by the absence of decent documentation.

    This I have to take real issue with. Most windows software, for example, comes with a minimal online help system and a ~10-page install/getting started guide. The proper "documentation" is often sold separately. Most mature linux apps ship with a similarly minimal electronic install guide & often have very extensive TeXInfo or Docbook manuals.

    A lot of Mac software also has good documentation, but many of the programs I use in OS X gathered most of their documentation from whatever *nix application they were ported from.

  14. Spare the rod, bring on the bullwhip by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Excuse me. I'm being punished.

    Ever tried to set up a 56k modem in linux? Don't go there.
    Get a printer working under CUPS? Faster to ask your neighbour to print it.
    Firewire support in Fedora. Don't get me started.

    Migration to Linux has never been easy. Sure the tools are advanced, but you regularly need 2+ years of a computing course just to begin to understand them. Not only that but most have (en)crypt(ic/ed) names like xmms,cups,esd and mdadm. And when you get right down to it, what the hell does hpjs DO anyway? The situation is made worse by that ONE guy on the messageboard who will always provide the genius solution of recompiling the kernel. I side with the majority here and say, I do not want to do that. All I want is for yum to work. Pity up2date dosen't, I actually knew what that stood for. (Sigh).

    Windows is like a flashy SUV. Looks great, illusion of safety,easy to drive, buts WILL tip over at a moments notice.
    Linux is like a Space Rocket. Yes it can get you home, hell it can get you into space. there's just a hell of a lot of buttons, and controls, and warnings and a NASA geek on the radio telling you to recompile the booster rocket software.

    Still, the good ship Linux, against all reason, marches on. :E

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  15. Apples and oranges by AstroByte · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I think people are missing the point here! Microsoft isn't a distributor, it's the originator.

    Linux distributors don't write the bulk of what they distribute, that's why it's called a Linux distribution. They bundle what's out there already. They're non-partisan -- a better widget appears on the radar and it'll go into the next release.

    Microsoft on the other hand writes the OS and everything in the release. They're partisan. They might want to ship you everything you ever need but's that uncompetitive and people obviously get upset.

  16. Re:lack of windows software by aristotle-dude · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If you look at the feature of Gimp, it is equivalent of Photoshop 5. But if you look at the interface or the workflow support, Gimp falls flat. It's crap son.

    Don't get me wrong, it's a great free program but Gimp is no replacement for Photoshop CS buy any stretch of the imagination.

    Windows users should look at Jasc's Paintshop Pro or Windows/OSX users should look at Photoshop elements for a cheaper alternative for light editing work.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  17. Microsoft has a choice too by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I don't see why Microsoft is so constrained about the software they can bundle.

    They would be perfectly within their rights to install Mozilla, Open Office, AbiWord, gcc and emacs, all of which run on Windows. I can't see how the antitrust authorities would have any problem with that.

    They have quite a lot of choices actually. Freshmeat's list of Windows programs has a couple thousand entries.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  18. Re:Today's word is narcissistic by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The article is lacking a certain degree of depth. But let's not go off the deep end ourselves.


    1. you can't install/run them easily


    Welcome to the modern Linux distribution. They come with an application providing a complete catalog of available software. Selecting the software tittle automagically selects all the needed libraries and support applications. Once you're done making your selections, it downloads everything, installs it, and voila... the app appears in your application menu (or you can always use the command-line to start it if you so desire).

    Third party application not available in your disto's listing? Most commercial Linux software runs much the same way Windows installers work. And they'll even make entries in your applications menu.

    Is Linux perfect on this? No. The more bleeding-edge you go... the further you stray from your distro's offerings... the better chance you're going to run in to problems. The same can be said to Windows equivilants. However, over the years of using Linux, I've found that these instances are fairly uncommon.

    If this isn't your experience, it may be your choice in Linux distribution.


    2. define a standard of usability among them all


    Ahhh yes. The standard interface. Ignored liberally in every environment that one has been defined. Even by the organizations who created them.

    Linux has these usability standards also. Quite a few applications are written under them. However, I find it hard to buy that the numerous apps that don't closely conform to these standards are causing that much of a roadblock to adoption... considering how Windows and MacOS users are able to deal with their own upstarts.


    3. coordinate thier appearance and setup


    Pick a distro and stick with it. Most handle things at the base level in the same manner. But if you want a nice GUI, go with a distro known to supply one.

    Sure - powerusers like to tweak their desktops. But a Linux neophyte will likely stick to whatever comes default. And that default tends to be very familiar to any other modern computing desktop.


    You don't like Word...fine, but guess what, there's no learning curve practically.If you can't figure out how to download a program and install it (a task infinatly more easy in windows) I don't care how long your desktop has been up.


    Bull. There's a good learning curve involved. Back when I did desktop support, I would constantly get questions (if not outright trouble tickets) from users asking various Word or Excel questions.

    Heck - just a few sentances ago, you were noting your sister is challenged with the concept of a right-click. Guess what. Simple interface... still a learning curve. So much for that infinately more easy environment Windows presents.

    What I find interesting is the number of issues Windows-centric critics toss at Linux while ignoring simular issues in their own platform of choice. If a user can't handle doing a task in Windows, it doesn't really matter if they can't do it in Linux either. In either case, this class of user is either going to follow instructions or (more likely) plead or pay for someone to do it for them.


    Security thru obscurity is a lousy thing to brag about.


    And having something so easy that it's easily compromised doesn't make much of a selling point either. Having said that - care to point out what about Linux is "security through obscurity"?
  19. This is NOT why I feel spoiled by evronm · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It sites examples such as the availability of wide ranging software packages that Microsoft can't hope to provide.

    Yes, Linux comes with a lot of software that Windows doesn't . However, you can easily download most of it (in fact, Cygwin makes this almost trivial).

    No, the reason I feel spoiled as a Linux user is that, in the past 9 years, I have not had a single virus, trojan or worm, and I've never needed software to deal with or prevent these.

    Further, in that time, I have never seen a pop-up window I didn't specifically request, and I haven't given a second thought to spyware or adware. These things just aren't part of my life, thanks to Linux (yeah, I know, non-IE using Mac users can make the same claim).

    I usually take this for granted, but every once in a while, I sit at somebody else's Windows machine and realize just how fortunate and yes, spoiled, I am.

  20. Re:Capitalism inherently creates monopolies by dvdeug · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't want monopolies, don't use capitalism.

    That's absurd. Everything has unwanted side-effects. You either tolerate them, or you introduce things to handle them. We've introduced laws against monopolies to handle the unwanted side-effect of monopolies in a capitalistic system. That's an entirely reasonable solution to get a system that works well enough.