Slashdot Mirror
4 Linux Distros Compared To Win XP, Mac OS X
Morf writes "The Australian Consumers? Association has evaluated Xandros, Linspire, Mandrake Discovery and SUSE personal and compared them to Mac OS X and Windows XP in its latest Computer CHOICE magazine. The article is very much focused on "mums and dads", and concludes Linux is just about ready for consumers, although installing new software could pose some problems for those who aren't really computer savvy. The report is available free for a short time."
Brought to you by the Puzzled Slashdot? Readers Group.
The report is available ... for a short time
Okay, which one of you hosers told them we were coming?
We have tested the following pieces of food:
1. a snickers
2. a jam of pure honey
3. an apple
4. a carrot
We found out that snickers is the best food because:
1. it comes in a nice wrapping
2. has many calories and can give you an energetic boost
3. its taste is supreme to others
Some people say you need vitamines, you should not spoil your teeth etc. But for an end-user what matters is the ease of use! And the snickers is the ultimate winner here.
Although an apple and a carrot keep quite close they have a long way to go.
best regards
michal
Here Here.
I installed Ubuntu on my gf's grandmother's laptop, a Toshiba Tecra A2. Setup was a breeze. It detected everything right down to the wireless eth card.
I also stuck a "My Documents" shortcut on the Desktop so the other Windows people woulnd't get lost and in addition made it boot straight into her profile with no password.
That was a few weeks ago, and I saw her the other day quite happily looking at photos of the grandkids and playing a mpeg clip with mplayer. Keep in mind she's 80 odd and has never used a computer before. She wanted to play some games also, so I stuck shortcuts on the desktop to Solitaire and minesweeper.
After using Ubuntu, my gf's dad now wants it on his computer because he says "Windows XP is too hard to use" and he "really likes it how everything makes sense on Ubuntu". Hmmm a logical desktop OS where everything Just Works(tm) is the exact reason I use Ubuntu on my desktop.
Is Ubuntu ready for the desktop? You bet your ass it is.
PS If anyone's interested you can read the blog entry here
"And then I visited Wikipedia
Linux needs to come a long way before installing software is as easy on Windows. On Windows I just need to plug in the network cable to get Netsky, Klez and a bunch of other software installed automagically. I don't need to click on anything.
Compare this to Linux, where installing software requires complex things such as clicking or even double-clicking an icon, which in turn requires learning to use a "mouse", a very counter-intuitive device, that you need to move while looking at something completely different, and when you reach the edge of the mouse mat, you need to carefully lift it and move it back to the center, such that the little arrow doesn't move, and then continue moving it where you already moved it once.
I noticed they commented on how some of the Linux distros couldn't resize the Windows partition down to do a dual boot. I've yet to see a version of Windows that allows me to size down my Linux partition and add a boot menu so I can easily choose which OS I want to run on startup.
Microsoft's website seems only to be able to tell me how to remove Linux (1, 2) and not have a Windows bootloader installed to allow me to run both. All the other Linux-related KB articles are to do with Virtual PC and SMB problems.
installing.
SSdtIGFzIGJvcmVkIGFzIHlvdSBhcmUK
I just don't get this "software is hard to install" crap. I use xandros and let me describe the process for those who don't.
There is an icon on the desktop, it says "get software"
You click on it and there is a list of hundreds of pieces of software. Each software has a description along side it. SOme have pictures too. Most are free, some you have to pay for.
When you want something you just click on install and it does, the icon shows up in your menu when you are done.
This is far easier then anything else including mac and windows. All the software that is compatible with your system is in one place. It's right at your desktop. 99% of it is free. It installs with one click.
None of this hunt the web sites, download something, unzip it, install it, click a licence agreement. Just click and install no problems with dependencies or anything.
How much easier could it possibly be?
evil is as evil does
... for 'Average Joe' to use. Seriously.. you type 'man' instead of 'help'? Ok mom.. now type ./configure
What?
DOT SLASH CONFIGURE.. no.. THE OTHER SLASH! GEEEZE!!!!
And my document It didn't save?
BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T MOUNT the DRIVE AS READ WRITE NTFS CAPTIVE! FOR FSCK'S SAKE GIVE ME THE KEYBOARD!
MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOve!
I really don't think that users being able to administer their systems should be considered a serious problem when considering linux on the desktop.
In recent months I've come to believe that Linux, and many other unix-like systems for that matter, are not only ready for the desktop and have been for some time, they're near perfect for it. The major catch (apart from that whole software compatability thing, perhaps) is that they're only perfect when someone who knows what they're doing is adminstrating the system.
I administer my own home linux system, and I like it that way absolutely, but I wouldn't reccommend it to any of my friends. Sure, I could get them set up and rurning, but every so often they'd want to change something and would need help.
At my university, we run a department network of NetBSD machines, and they're administered brilliantly to the point where new students who are used to Windows can get started in using them for many things without a lot of problems. The security's locked down to a reasonable extent so it's hard for any badly written software the seriously break any of the workstations, but if we want something changed then there's a responsive team of administrators who'll look at providing what's needed. Most importantly, the workstations are reliable and they're looked after by experts who know everything that's on them inside out. Just like my home machine, unixes very rarely break or collapse if they're administrated well.
My point is that Linux is very ready for the desktop, but people shouldn't be expected to administer their own systems. Luckily, though, Linux has several other very handy things going for it:
What surprises me is that nobody yet seems to have seriously jumped into a potentially great business opportunity of offering remote linux administrations for home users. Essentially it'd be linux by subscription, ironically enough.
I really do know lots of people who use Windows because they're afraid of everything else, and they only even try to administer it and understand the issues because they have no other option. Really they'd rather concentrate on actually doing things with their PC, and would often be happy to pay someone else to administer it if the price were reasonable.
The business would be in providing a remote service which, once a customer's home PC had been set up in an appropriately standard configuration, would offer the service of administering the PC remotely. For instance, if the customer wants new software, they phone up and ask for it. An admin logs in, installs the package, and sets up any appropriate configuration. Perhaps every so often, administrators come along and upgrade whatever software is installed, probably (usually) keeping the configurations within bounds that are known to work on a large scale. Perhaps they even provide conversion services for things like Word files, in cases when something like OpenOffice simply won't handle it properly.
On occasion
You, my friend, need to find a good technical writer.
It's called inverted pyramid writing and goes something like this:
You simply provide a sidebar nagivation in the summary page that takes you to the level you want.
The "dumb down" argument is nothing more than the desperate flailings of ego trying to still prove to the world that it is justified.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.