Slashdot Mirror
Making the 'Best' Desktop Linux System
NorhLoudspeaker writes "Michael C. Barnes gives DesktopLinux.com readers an in-depth analysis of the technologies that make open source a great alternative to proprietary operating systems. Examining the various components that constitute a complete system, Barnes provides practical advice and instruction on how to improve your desktop experience and productivity with freely available software. He reviews desktop environments, communications using voice-over-IP, common applications, and more."
The best Linux desktop system will take advantage of the flexibility of open source and combine the ability to use any number of options.
....and I'd say it provides useful arguements for converting people from Windows and Mac platforms to Linux...but sadly, most people I try to convert use the "but this does what I want already, and that's more work, and I don't really see the benefit" excuse. It seems that people tend to suffer with what they have, if it works at all, rather than put in a little effort and change something to be much better.
Then again, I've always been a lousy salesman, so it may just be me. *wink*
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure dome decree
Damn, but that is well written! I can't think of something better to set in front of a prospective Linux user. It is concise, easy to read, pleasant, and just detailed enough not to make the reader feel like an idiot. I have saved the whole thing to a word doc as well as a pdf to send to friends who are thinking about Linux.
http://www.busyweather.com/
I want a desktop that with a browser that supports all the major video streams, right out of the box. I don't want to install, tweak or jack with shit.
I think one of the most overlooked aspects in the article is configurations.
In theory, any desktop Linux distro would blow XP out of the water right now if it were configured properly out of the box. There are more apps, more features, a more stable backend, etc. But it never works out that way, because something always breaks, especially in the hardware area. If you effectively have two video cards and two sound cards(from integrated), as well as multiple input devices(mouse, tablet, trackball), something is going to go wrong. I've gotten used to fixing it but it's one of the things that makes the desktop the most challenging field to conquer.
I have used SuSE for several years, along with other distros - Red hat (gee, they cut us end users off though - sorry, no red hat), Gentoo, Slackware, etc...
SuSE is hands down the best distro out there for ease of install, ease of use.
shameless plug? You bet. Any truth behind it? Yes. Try it out. SuSE has some downloads available to try the SuSE 9.2 live cd right now....
have a great weekend,
dave
[but sadly, most people I try to convert use the "but this does what I want already, and that's more work, and I don't really see the benefit" excuse.]
Here in lies the greatest challenge of linux. The general user.
For me, I am a happy windows user. Now don't be mistaken I am not a windows zealot. I would happily chose Linux over windows anytime if not for its crippling weaknesses.
Linux is a great operating system but it suffers from what i would call a geek-mentality. Linux is a perfect operating system for geeks it is powerful robust and stable. But for a normal user it is hell. It is hard to configure, and learning to configure it takes ages to find out. The value saved by the free-ness of it is taken back by the amount of time needed to learn to use and configure it. It is hard to configure and can be very daunting.
Now I see many argue that this is the very essence of geeky-ness or whatever. They say that its power and configure-ability is why so many geeks love it. Thats allright for geeks and all, but to the average user they do not care about such things. Sure they would care about the basic things that can be configured (eg. themes et al) but on the most detailed things they would not want to even bother with them.
Until such time comes that Linux is ready for mainstream use. I would beg the linux people to not push linux into the mainstream. The reason is the same reason as why it is not good for U2 to have a unfinished version of their song spreading about on the internet. When people have tried it they get a first impression. They would get scared away by linux. If they try it at first they would get confused and be scared away. If ever you try to convince them again to try it they would remember their first experience and would not try it again. First impressions do count.
So I would like to ask the slashdot crowd. Linux is not ready for use with the general user yet. And until it is ready do not push it down the throat of the general public. It is bad for linux, it is bad for you(since linux would not get the acceptance you desire) and it is bad for them.
-
As a personal comment in regards to security, viruses et al., I would say that the amount of viruses, spywars, adwares depend on the market share of the operating system. The greater the market share the greater the amount of viruses, spywares etc. Though I could be wrong. The theory will come about when linux does gain a large market share and is ready for desktop use.
Personally, I think KDE is way better than XP as a desktop environment. And anything you don't like, you can configure. For instance:
Multiple desktops, Klipper, Select & Middle-click paste, and if you drag/drop a file, you get a very helpful tool-tip asking whether you want to copy, move, or link it, which is far better than the MS way of:
if (different disks){
copy, by default
}else{
move, by default
}
BUT if (shift){
do the opposite
}
Incidentally, there is nothing so dreadful about the Linux copy-paste system. Just get used to the fact that there are really 2 clipboards. It can sometimes be really useful to utilise this behaviour!
Also, once Linux is installed, no-one needs to ever use the Shell (my Aunt certainly doesn't!). But it's great that bash is still there - I for one find it can be extremely useful!
I think you summed up the issue nicely.
When changing a monitor resolution, Windows gives the user 15 seconds to decide that wether that res is good. If the user does not say 'yes', it reverts to the previous. There is no Ctrl-Alt-Plus (Which I for one never heard of...)
The difference between Linux and Windows on this is that Windows will use the device in a generic mode if it doesn't have the correct driver, Linux will not use it. Moreover, noone recompiles the Windows kernel, while I know people that do every 2 days on Linux. ("Yes, there's a patch for program X") A normal computer user does not 'compile' the 'kernel'. He simply doesn't understand that. Not would he trust it, if he knew what a 'kernel' is.
'The Geeks' often forget how the normal computer user thinks. He wants things to work right away, because if it goes wrong, he doesn't know why or how to fix it, if he understands what the error(-message) is. Like installing a TV: place it, plug power and cable in, push the button (one problem: configure the channels - usually done by the shop though) and it works.