Slashdot Mirror
Five Reasons Not to Use Linux
UltimaGuy writes "Linux-watch has a humorous article about the top 5 reasons for not using Linux. It does provoke some thought aside from bringing a smile to our lips :)"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Sure, Windows is easier to use than Linux. But eventually you just get so frustrated that you have to take an angle-grinder to your computer, and it really takes a long time to get all the little bits of metal out of the carpet.
Reason number one: Linux is too complicated
.conf file on Linux crash your system? Maybe, maybe not, depends on what you're doing. But the likelihood that someone would have to do that editing is higher on Linux.
:) Maybe they have the sense of humor! :)
Linux *is* too complicated for a good many people but it doesn't have anything to do w/the system design or how it works. It's too complicated because it's different from what they use every day at work and at home.
Yes, it doesn't take that long to learn how to move around in the UI and find the alternative software that Linux runs. It's just different. People don't have enough time to eat, sleep, pay attention to their kids, or take their garbage cans in... They aren't going to have the time to install, adapt, and change the habits they learned using Windows for the past 15-20 years.
Compare that with Windows where, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit the Windows registry, where, as they like to tell you, one wrong move could destroy your system forever.
You know, I consider myself knowledgeable with computers. I run multiple OSs at home and have run many more over the course of my life. You know how many times I've edited the system registry since its inception? Less than 5. I really doubt that anyone *needs* to edit their registry ever.
You know how many times I've had to edit a configuration file on Linux? I just did it 12 times yesterday alone for two different programs. Will editing a
I love Linux. I use it on my servers, I use it on my desktops, and I use it on my entertainment center, where it powers my HDTV TiVo and my D-Link DSM-320 media player, which turns my network into a media library with terabytes of storage. Heck, I even run Linux on my Linksys WRT54G Wi-Fi access points, which hook the whole shebang together.
When was the last time you had to edit a configuration file with a text editor on your Tivo? I never have. When was the last time you had to fire up your WRT54G and wonder what all the fsck messages were? Never. Just because Linux is being used to power the device does not mean it wasn't designed to be user friendly. Most people don't surf the web and write research papers with a remote control or by hitting a recessed hard-reset button.
I realize that this was a tongue-in-cheek article and I realize that it was mildly humorous but I just really felt that it was just as bad as Microsoft claiming that Linux costs more. This bullshit where Linux users fault non-Linux users for not switching because of the lack of difficulty is just bullshit.
Linux isn't easy and it does have a learning curve. Most people just don't care to take the time to learn it.
I wonder if Microsoft just releases their "research" to give us stuff to make fun of
It's a pity we can't moderate stories as flamebait
See my formal response to Five reasons to NOT use Linux.
That server lasted just a few seconds...the Slashdot effect is slipping my friends!
It's too complicated because it's different from what they use every day at work and at home.
Then how come OSX is so freakin' easy for everyone to use? It only takes a few minutes.
Most slashdotters remind me of this guy.
More
The article was mildly amusing, but on the whole it seemed like a bit of a sarcastic rant. Not that I don't like those, but I expect more out of a Slashdot headline story.
Ignore Alien Orders
A reason not to use Linux: Choice.
Many distro's of Linux to choose from, so many applications to choose from...
Man, choosing is almost like thinking, it's hard!
Articles that repeat the same thoughts, with the same juvenile tone as this one, will be the one reason I will leave this site, for the simple reason that they attract the same people, with the same juvenile attitudes as the author of this article.
Gee, this article didn't even mention it (not that I can get to it, going off the reply on the blog linked below). Man pages. And info, come to that matter. How often does Google become the default man page. I suppose most would brand this a virtue.
Games.
1. OpenServer 6 Costs Less
2. SCO Has a Superior Kernel
3. OpenServer Has Better Security
4. SCO Has a Customer-Driven Roadmap
5. OpenServer 6 is Backward Compatible
6. SCO Allows You to Focus on Your Core Competency
7. SCO Owns and Warrantees its Products
8. SCO is Unifying its Code Base
9. SCO UNIX: Legendary Reliability
10. SCO Has an Award-Winning Support Team
Read TFL for buzzwordy drivel and meaningless tripe from Darryl himself. Didn't know he'd registered a website in his name to spout his n0nsense.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Also, when trying to discuss the benefits of alternative operating systems, it does not help the argument if you (by this, I mean the writer of the article) come off as being sarcastic and condescending.
My $.02 anyway.
"Teleporting Rodents with D-Cell Battery Displacement" theory -- IgnoramusMaximus (692000)
Ive tried several different linux distros on computers including my homebuilt Asus A7N8x-e deluxe AMD system and pentium 4 dell's at my lab. Ati 9600 level graphics on them.
None of them boot DSL properly. Mandrake Move no. Gentoo liveCD works, can install gentoo, but massive pains in getting the bootloader to work with drive due to the existance of SATA.
Your mileage will vary, until Linux gets better simpler support for hardware, especially with regards to X, ive yet to get X to run without having to abuse myself relearning conf files, don't even compare them to windows.
Seeing as the linked article is grinding to a crawl, here's the mirrordote 7ca3f011299d755/index.html
http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/384802a7fdfeda4a
Most Windows users have never even heard of it even though it's on their Start Menu, never mind the registry which requires you to type a COMMAND into the command line.
This guy is saying what? That he can ignore the blindingly obvious truths of why "Linux sucks" for a basic user by pulling the "it's free and this distro can boot without you touching it and that distro comes with programs installed"?
Don't think he's stroking the userbase hard enough.
You already have MacOS X :D
And there it is... I know it was an attempt at sarcasm, but until you can give me BF2, SWG, WoW, and HL2 without sacrificing a crap ton of performance (cedega I'm talking about you), I'll stick with Windows. Linux can power my webserver like no other, but I have no use for a linux desktop.
Here
Slashdotting!
Even with a quad proc dual core server and sixteen gigs of memory with gig-e you still can't resist the sheer might of the Slashdot effect. Linux wilts, Apache dies, the hard drive melts. I'm not sure if an IBM mainframe could withstand it.
I guess I will have to rtfa later...
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
I like Linux plenty, but I don't think it's quite there yet.
One thing the article steps around is the fact that many people like to use their computer for games. In that respect, the availability of Windows titles DOES dwarf Linux availability. So this, a sarcastic and biased rant about Linux being better than Windows, is headline news, whereas a story involving Opera turning 10 years old today and giving away its desktop browser licenses (happening NOW) is rejected by the /. mods.
Something Witty Goes Here
I don't see reasons 1 & 2 as being particularly far-fetched from the point of view of your average consumer - the usability experience still needs a lot of work before it's completely ready as a Windows replacement, and although the site is taking this point to extremes, there's still a germ of truth in there.
This may be all fine and dandy, however, what about the games? I, and I'm sure many others, don't own a computer just to sit and do work on it. Games. If you ask me, that's the single biggest thing holding Linux back from being installed on many more systems.
-gjr
http://www.linux-watch.com.nyud.net:8090/news/NS81 24627492.html
Would it be too much to ask the editors to supply coral cache links whenever they post a story? Or have they not heard of the slashdot effect?
I'm equally comfortable with both operating systems, yet my home computer is Windows! Here's why:
Every day I use: ssh, emacs, Photoshop, Eclipse and Firefox.
On Windows I can use: ssh, emacs, Photoshop, Eclipse and Firefox.
On Linux I can use: ssh, emacs, Eclipse, and Firefox.
how do you pronounce the name? leenix? luhnix? lienux? I just don't know.
</sarcasm>
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Coralized link so you might actually be able to read TFA.
.nyud.net:8090 to the first part of your URLs when submitting.
1 24627492.html
It's not that hard folks, just append
e.g: http://www.linux-watch.com.nyud.net:8090/news/NS8
3D Printing Tips and Tricks at Zheng3.com
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
Well, it may be relatively easy to install a given distribution from scratch on a fresh system. But heaven help you if you need to add a driver for a new printer that wasn't supported by the version of cups/gimp-print/foomatic that shipped with your distro. A quick trip to the source code outlet and a weekend's googling, debugging and cataloguing all the RPMs/DEBs that are now invalid and we're back in action? Pah.
Not to mention good old wireless networking. Thanks to the joys of wireless USB on linux, I'll have to rebuild linux-wlan-ng every time there's a security update to download for my otherwise stock kernel. Ditto nVidea drivers (excellent support, excellent performance. Shame that the kernel module interface is so primitive that I have to rebuild the nVidia module when the inevitable kernel update shows up).
Then there's GNOME: I'd love to try out the latest stable release, but I really don't see why I have to a) install a newer version of my chosen distribution to try it, or b) work my way through a horrid packaging effort to build it. And yes, I tried Garnome as well. Still not nearly as good as KDE for packaging source.
So many people write "linux is not ready for the desktop" articles, seemingly without even using it, or else using it like the advanced user they are. In particular with the first point, I've seen many users speaking of the necessity of using the command line when there is a perfectly good GUI way to do it - it's simply far more efficient to use the command line. Linux is at the stage where it is easier than windows more often than not.
I am trolling
....must be running linux at linux-world.net, eh ?
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator"-Adolf Hitler or George W Bush?
It just takes to long to install and find all the drivers.
Oh no, on major linux releases they are already included and you do not have to search for it, or change CDs ten time like with MS windows. At least with MS windows, w95 compatible drivers for your network card come along on a supplier CD.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
A Few Linux Administrators
...we use these words in a lifetime spent defeating software rivals. You use 'em as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a user who surfs and emails on the Internet that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I'd prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you format your C:\ drive and load Windows 3.11. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to.
with apologies to Jack Nicholson (as Bill Gates, on trial for releasing his Code Red "update" and destroying the Open Source Software movement)
You can't handle the truth!
Son, we live in a world that has data. And that data has to be guarded by men with servers. Who's gonna do it? You? Linus?
I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Open Source and you curse Microsoft. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: That Linux's death, while tragic, probably saves data. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves the Internet. You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at board meetings, you want me in that Server Farm. You need me in that NOC. We use words like Start, Update, Explorer
Did you release the code red?
I released the update your servers were begging for.
Did you release the code red!?
You're goddamn right I did!
Uva Uvam Vivendo Varia Fit
Unix sucked until Steve Jobs made it useful and user friendly. You should thank Steve Jobs for reviving Unix, not Linux. Linux is just too clunky for almost everybody to use. Mac has a 20 year legacy of usability and it's compatible with Microsoft products.
;-)
Just buy a mac
Talk about deluting yourself, reason #3 is pure horse shite.
where's the Maya/3DS/LW/Softimage alternative? It doesn't exist (dont be a bone head and suggest Blender here, its like comaring a 79' VW to a Ferrai).
where's the video editing solutions? We have one decent one, but all with haggid no-useable interfaces (seen from a non-linux-fanboiii perspective).
Where's the DVD authoring software(i know about dvd-author, and the v.0.0.1 guis being made for it. From a desktop users perspective these are 100% useless atm)? Heck, where's the LEGAL dvd player to watch your newly mastered holyday vid?
Where's the CAD/CAM software?
Where's the games?t
Lack of games.
harder to show cost/benefit analysis to bosses
real UNIX is cooler.
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
A Linux advocate who uses sarcasm. I never would have guessed.
I am Jack's sig. I reduce Jack's karma.
By being pre-installed on the majority of PCs, Windows does indeed appear to be free to the buyer, in that it's seen as part of the whole package and doesn't cost any time to install (time is money after all).
Linux would gain a significant boost on the desktop if more OEMs pre-installed it alongside same spec'd machines with Windows installed.
Then the price difference would become noticeable, and the cost in time needed to install it would also disappear.
Seems like more and more articles come direct from osnews.com
If you were a frequent reader of that site you would have seen this last night before the slashdot effect.
Plus they have much for technical news there.
I have had to edit the registry many many times. Normally it is to tweak something that Windows doesn't want me to tweak, or to remove programs that Windows won't let me remove. Or to eliminate spyware and crap that inherently collects on a Windows machine.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
MacOS X proves that Unix doesn't have to be painful. Until Lunix gets to Mac-like levels of user friendlyness, one can only assume that the Lunixists actually enjoy the spurious complexity of their toy OS.
It's bad for the economy!! Imagine buying a computer system and having it still usable for modern applications nearly a decade later. The various Linux distros allow for this. That cuts into profits for desktop and server sales. That's why Windows is the better choice. It pushes the hardware requirements up so quickly that you need to get new hardware every two to three years. This is good for the economy. Therefore Linux is UnAmerican.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
That's a difficult question. After 10 years of being a viable, usable operating system, one would have thought that Linux would have made more inroads and become more mainstream. I think that Microsoft's blackmailing of computer vendors has something to do with it, but there's no single factor.
Where I work, for example, we are forced to use XP on the desktop despite the fact that the main tools that most of the core team use are available for Linux (Java, Eclipse). Ok, some of the tools that the core team uses are unavailable on Linux, like Photoshop, Lightwave, 3DStudio Max, etc. But a lot of people could be switched over tomorrow. Why, then, are the free *nixes relegated to the server-side? There are also issues with lockout on the server side, though, with some properietry packages such as our VPN software only running on Windows, yet Linux has still managed to gain a significant portion of the server market despite these factors. So why not the desktop?I think a lot of it has to do with the mindset of the managers at companies - for the most part they are not willing to give new technologies the go-ahead, even if it makes sense financially. The only way to solve this is to either get more technically competent management into companies (yeah, right), or to find a way to break Microsoft's strangehold of OEM and desktop markets.
Liberal Ontarians and French Quebecers are draining Western Canada's wealth. Stop them now! Support Western separatism.
Hellllooo.... notepad.exe
I have never been a Mac person. I just don't get it. Then OS X came out, and all I heard was how awesome it was. More unixy? Sounds good. I went into an Apple store in a mall where they had all the cool, shiny goodness. I played with it for a while. Hated it. Frustrating. It didn't make any sense to me. A couple of years later, and I acquired a Mac at work as a test machine. My machine was down for a day for some new hardware, so I used the Mac. Horrible, unproductive day. To me, that intuitive interface is like trying to pound nails with a carrot. A bright, shiny, pretty carrot, but just a carrot.
I am not bashing it, I am just saying it isn't for me. And I hope that I am not the only one out there.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
between distros and releases. When you get a new distro or release, you have to figure out where the .conf files are, or if they've changed, what the new ones are. Plus if the .conf file is auto generated by a system management facility, you are pretty much guaranteed that not all options will be supported, leaving you with the somewhat dodgey prospect of editing a auto generated file.
They messed up on the following point
Reason number one: Linux is too complicated
Even with the KDE and GNOME graphical windowing interfaces, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit a configuration file.
Its actually very probable that you will have to visit ye ol'd shell to install anything, and installing anything under linux is a total bitch. I'm sorry, it hasn't gotten easier. Apt-get is nice when the package or the library is provided, if not, forget it. I don't know why every god-damn program under Windows seems to use InstallShield or InstallAnywhere, but none actully do under Linux (well InstallShield only works for Windows).
I had no problems installing and setting up Apache under Windows, no problems at all (literally next->next->next->.. and then just mod the config text file). I had a butt-load of trouble doing the same under Linux (dependency issues). I am obviously not a Linux guru, but I do consider myself tech-savy in general.
There is a problem when the same application is so much easier to install and setup on one platform than it is on the other.
I always wondered why linux apps don't come bundled with all the libraries they need. Is there some sort of downside to doing it this way?
I.. want.. to...like.. Linux.. but.. it..hates.. me.
We were promised a humorous article.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I suggest we actualize the name and give it a cutting-edge, proactive ring by calling it "/fx"
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
The article is trying to be facetious, but his first three points are actually dead-on.
1. Linux is too complicated.
He claims that you "occasionally" need to edit a configuration file in Linux, and implies that this is no more frequent than doing so in Windows.
Bullshit. Since I've installed XP, I've never had to edit a configuration file OR registry data. Ever. I can install pretty much any PC-compatible hardware on the market and have it running quickly. Why? Because parts vendors make damn sure their stuff works in Windows.
2. Linux is a pain to set up.
The author claims that modern Linux distros are easier to install than Windows. This may be true, but he neglects the fact that BOTH OS's are a pain to install for multiboot.
I decided to try out Linux, so I downloaded Ubuntu and ran the boot disk. Unfortunately, both my hard drives are NTFS, and Ubuntu doesn't know how to partition them. After half an hour looking around the net for a way to partition an NTFS drive without endangering the data on that drive, I gave up. No Linux for me, because I'm not willing to endanger all my system files or buy a new hard drive just to play around with another OS. "Insert disk and press Enter" my ass.
3. Linux doesn't have enough applications.
The author points out that there are a bunch of freeware programs for Linux. Of course, almost all the ones he lists have equal or better counterparts freely available for Windows. Is the argument that those Windows programs aren't packaged with the OS? Guess what, quite a few of them are, when you buy from a big vendor like Dell. And since you're gonna have to download or purchase your Linux distro anyway, it's not like you're saving install time by running Linux.
In any case, he's missing the real "killer app" for a lot of us nerds: games. Yeah, it's been said before, but that doesn't make it less true. I regularly run maybe three apps on my computer that AREN'T games, and those work about equally well for Linux or Windows.
Oh, and on top off all of that, the premise of the article is stupid. I don't need reasons NOT to run Linux. Linux doesn't come pre-installed on my computer; Windows does. I need reasons TO run Linux, and they better be damn good reasons to overrule my apathy. If I'm going to go through all the work of switching to a new OS and learning its foibles and features, there better be some real motivation for doing so.
Frankly, I ain't motivated yet.
Six months ago, when I (re-)installed my Kubuntu Warty workstation/server/firewall (dead HD), it was the last time I edited a .conf file. IIRC, I had to edit by hand the dnsmasq conffile and the FireHOL conffile. Since then, I installed a lot of software via kinaptic, it asked me some configuration questions and voila. Ah, it's been on ever since (except for this week, when the power went down in my building, and the UPS couldn't cope).
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
"Windows' actually makes up a large percentage of your PC's price?
Hmmm. Well, still, it's already on there, and it has everything you need."
That's actually a really good reason not to switch. Given that Windows is already installed, I've already paid for it, and I've got it configured to use restricted user accounts to reduce my exposure to malware (just like I would on Linux), why would I want to replace it?
One reason why I'm going to stop reading slashdot:
1. People continue to post articles like this that provide little or no useful information and waste my time.
This article is straight to the point and summarizes in a humorous way how many feel. Excellent article!
I don't think I agree with point 1 since using Linux is basically like dumpster diving.
So, do Linux users around here take particular delight in ambushing people trying to switch to Linux and having trouble? It's funny to see people post things like:
I had trouble using Linux and making it do X, Y, or Z.
To which 10 people respond with one of:
- You're a loser, I use Linux every day and it works fine.
- You must be using an old Linux
- You must be using distro X, it works fine in Y
etc, etc.
Perhaps you guys haven't realized that maybe people don't *know* these things? I mean, come on. "Feature A doesn't work in distro X, you should have used Y"? How the heck are people supposed to know that. And the sheer delight in the responses as if the person was a complete moron for not knowing that!
Yes, Windows has more than it's fair share of problems, but at least there's just one place to look for all the features. Is there a way for non-Linux people to discover all the pitfalls *before* they fall in them?
With friends like these...
Oooohhh - did you notice how strongly biased the article is against Windows? It's even outright lying:
"And, Microsoft also has Microsoft Office, which -- oh wait, you don't get that with the operating system, do you? You also don't get a Web page editor either, do you?"
Windows comes with full office and web editing capabilities for free: wordpad
Do you know how your car runs ? Do you care? When you switch cars, do you switch to a manual transmission just for shits and giggles even though you don't know jackshit about shifting gears (supposing you use an automatic)? I would think you would look for a car that's as simple as the previous one, but faster, cheaper - better! People view their computers as their do their cars - goods beyond their comprehension that they can USE.
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
As much as I like Linux, this article isn't that funny, bending the truth as much as microsoft has bent it the other way. If I want to read a funny jokey biased article I'll head over to Humorix. Check this one out http://humorix.org/articles/2005/05/openbsd/
:)
Instead of being on some Linux conquest that one is just there for laughs
Seriously, who needs another distibution with a weird name? Linux? Wha?
I'll stick with Debian.
Here's the obligatory BSD troll...err, post. Because if you want: - security: use OpenBSD! - portability: use NetBSD! - performance: use FreeBSD! Umm...and if you want all three, sorry.
(on all my machines)
1. Video editing, yes, there's software like kino and heroinewarrior, but those either don't open the filetypes I need to modify properly or they just eat ton of resources and just crash.
2. DVD mastering.
3. Hardware incompatibility. My DVB card just doesn't work. It has drivers in kernel, but SIGNAL LOST: Cannot get LOCK.
4. Games. I'm not that much of a gamer, but I still occasionally want to play something other than solitare or mahjongg without endless install run of cedega/wine/xwine to get the games to work.
5. File management. I'm too used to manage files using explorer. It just feels better to use, when moving folders around, renaming files etc. for some reason.
Linux is perfect for servers. I wouldn't dream (nightmares if I did) of running apache/mysql/fileserver on windows.
Another box works as my surf and email machine, no need to use internet explorer or outlook.
There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
Knoppix.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Am I the only one who thought the jokes in that article were utterly predictable, thoroughly overused/recycled, and just not all that funny in the first place? Seems very much like the author mailed that one in.
we have blender, lots of program for video editing, like cinepaint, lots of games too. like nexuiz.
But I really miss AutoCAD. And no - intellicad is not good enoungh, and is commercial.
PS: posting anonymous, because I've already moderated here.
I tend to use Linux for server side, Windows for the desktop simply because both myself and end users find KDE a little hard to get used to.
But sometimes Linux servers vex me. For example, my FreeBSD 5.4 server needs to proxy all it's command line FTP and wget things but for the life of me I cannot get a straight answer.
``Why aren't more people using Linux?
That's a difficult question. After 10 years of being a viable, usable operating system, one would have thought that Linux would have made more inroads and become more mainstream.''
It's not too difficult to see, really. Even if Linux really were a better operating system for everyone now using Windows, people would still not switch. Why? Well, the keyword is "switch". Switching costs effort, installing the new system, familiarizing yourself with it, figuring out what applications to use, etc. etc. etc. Why bother if you can get your work done on Windows?
The situation would be entirely different if people grew up with Linux. They would be familiar with how it works, what applications to use for what tasks, and so on. Linux would just be another operating system, instead of one you had to switch to.
That, and the lack of availability of certain software (various businesses need some specialized software that isn't available for Linux, and many games won't work on it) is why people aren't using Linux, even in settings where it would be superior.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
5) still have to meddle with .conf files. not good enough for normal users
4) slow. it used to be that one argument for linux and against windows is that linux is faster, but not anymore, it seems. on my old pc, winxp is clearly faster than linux (with kde/gnome) of any distro. response in graphical linux is not snappy enough.
3) fonts. either it's fat and anti-aliased or skinny and aliased. in other words, it's plain ugly compared to windows.
2) desktops (kde & gnome) and menus are still crude. as much as i hate windows, i find the xp interface is nicer than kde and gnome. their windows, toolbars and buttons are proportionately sized by default. you don't get dialog boxes shooting beyond the bottom of screen. and normal users tend not to know where to find what in the menus.
1) no equivalent _and_ compatible applications. especially outlook. i can overlook this outlook thingy, but many many people cannot.
Just a little editing on that list, either removing or changing but a single word per item:
1. OpenServer 6 Costs
2. SCO Has an Inferior Kernel
3. OpenServer Has Better Perjury
4. SCO Has a Customer Roadmap
5. OpenServer 6 is Backward
6. SCO Allows You to Focus on Your Navel
7. SCO Owns Products
8. SCO is Linux'ifying its Code Base
9. SCO UNIX: Formerly Legendary Reliability
10. SCO Has a Legal Support Team
Unlike many Linux (-related) software even Windows tries hard to remain backwards compatible. Strange that the author never seemed manage to come up with such a valid reason not to use Linux.
All of these people forget the basic issue of approaching things with "getting the right tool for the job" instead of "use linux to play my window games. why? linux r0x0rZ!1".
Get a clue.
I enjoy the appearance of a BSOD. It gives me a welcome break from my day, and reminds me to slow down a little.
``Take a look at Apache. A server widely acclaimed for its up-time, and yet you can't even change a single setting without restarting the server!'' /etc/init.d/apache reload
Reloads the configuration without taking the server down. Many Unix daemons do this when you send them a SIGHUP.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
why is this insightful?? obviously there are like 5+ responses pointing out he is wrong. i can point out wrong info all day if its going to get me +5, insightful.
hey! im the lord jesus christ! gimme your money if you want to go to heaven now.
You forgot 11: SCO Has no more customers. :P
This is snake oil.
Nope, we've been offering this service since 1997 and have never had a problem with it. Some of our customers are using over a gigabyte and even upwards of 20 gigs. As long as its used for email or website stuff, its ok. Disk space is cheap. Read our AUP.
These "articles" aren't helping linux - they aren't funny, they aren't informative, and they aren't going to sway any windows users to linux. It looks pathetic, and desperate. I am a linux user, but have a lot of family members and friends who use windows. You can be quite sure that they have never had to enter in to the registry to make system changes.
The fact is that anyone with a bit of knowledge can probably bring down their windows system, or their linux system. Its quite easy to delete or change important system files by thinking you know more than you do. An old systems guru, when I was just starting out in the world of IT but it to me this this: "It is ok to have no knowledge, and ti is ok to have a lot of knowledge. You can walk on either side of that road and be safe. If you walk down the middle of the road though, you will probably be hit by a truck." Is very true. Newbies generally won't destroy systems.. linux/windows/whatever... they just can't figure out how.
I'm not sure why CmdrTaco says that the article provokes some thought, as the article is shouting the same thing some of the lesser informed linux zealots have been for years.
You have an application that you have to run that is only available for not-Linux. No, Office doesn't count, but there are a lot of things that do.
I've done the Linux advocacy thing before, and whittled down a number of less-than-stellar objections. But when I hear "I need to run 3dsmax for my 3d modelling job" or "I want to play game [X] (or a wide number of new games)" then I stop. Well, for that need, Windows isn't "best" so much as "the only option".
The funny part is how these people are aware of and irritated by the limitations of Windows and are often otherwise willing to consider a switch. Ah, the joys of the OS monopoly!
The enemies of Democracy are
``Suppose I install Gnome as default and want to install KDE and use that as the default. How easy is that? Well, every time I try, I have to search through several configuration files with 100s of lines to find the one that specifies the default GUI, and then it often doesn't even work.''
.xinitrc. Changing window managers is one line. If you use a graphical login manager like gdm or kdm, and a well-engineered distro like Debian, you just install your KDE or GNOME, and it will show up in the menu; you don't have to edit any configuration files by hand!
Clearly, you're doing something wrong. I start my window manager from my
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
here's a more feasible list for you guys:
1. Only nerds use Linux
2. Nerds don't get women
3. If you can't get a woman you might as well be a unic
4. ???
5. Linux isn't Unics!
*dodges tomato* thank you! thank you!
www.omglolh4x.com
Is now a server timeout. please use one of the major caches when linking.. for those of us who were the 500,000,000th to click =)
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
1. Linux is too complicated
/. about a million times, but as you don't seem to be aware of it:
/.
"Suppose I install Gnome as default and want to install KDE and use that as the default. How easy is that? Well, every time I try, I have to search through several configuration files with 100s of lines to find the one that specifies the default GUI, and then it often doesn't even work."
Ehm, install it and choose KDE as the default session the next time you see a login screen. Not really hard.
2. Linux is too complicated
"How many patches must you apply to SuSE right after install for all the security fixes? Dozens. Windows? Dozens. Hmmm... Seems about even there. To be safe, you ought to be behind a firewall in either case. I've never found a recent Linux distro that didn't have patches ready to install as soon as I finished installing to OS."
Jesus...
For starters having to download security updates doesn't really have that much to do with what the guy you are answering wrote and with ease of setting an OS up.
Second, this has been discussed right here on
Comparing Suse, which comes with thousands of programs with Windows, which comes with barely anything and then pointing out that you also have to download updates for Suse is pretty dumb, as you compare Apples and Oranges here.
3. Linux doesn't have enough applications
"Let's compare apples to apples here. Windows is an OS, not a set of applications."
Why now and not before?
"You Linux fanatics get on Microsoft for bundling apps with their OS"
Small correction, most of the time it's not us Linux fantics, whoever this may be, but law enforcement agencies that get on MS for abusing their monopoly.
"Windows as an OS isn't inferior just because your open source app doesn't run on it. If you are so big on choices and freedom, why don't you write your app to run on both? "
Well, everyone is free to choose to take the source code and port it to windows and as you pointed out yourself, many people port or devlop open source software for Windows. So what exactly is your point here?
"Finally, the price you pay for Microsoft Office is worth the money, if your time is worth anything."
Ouch, sounds like the latest MS marketing blurb and no, though my time is worth a lot, MS Office certainly isn't worth the money for me, sorry kiddo.
4. Linux isn't secure
"And frankly, applying patches in Windows is easier than in Linux. Linux is pretty easy, but Windows is still ahead, I'd say. Argue all you want. But a properly configured Windows box will successfully apply patches to itself better than a Linux one will. At least for me. And if you disagree, just know that most users don't know how to configure Linux like you do, and so your opinion doesn't matter to 98% of the computer users out there."
Jesus...
Press on the little update notification on your panel and have _all_ your apps updated. Now that's incredibly hard, you are right.
About your other drivel. You are aware of sudo and acls, aren't you?
And you are aware that you can share folders on modern linux distros by simply clicking, just like you described for windows?
5. Linux is more expensive
"For the common user who just wants to be productive, and just wants their computer to work the way they want, Windows is faster, and faster means cheaper!"
Please show me the study that a) supports your conclusion b) finally shows me who this common user is
To sum it up, your blog entry is probably one of the dumbest things I read recently. Not one good point, only senseless drivel.
But the worst thing is that a tongue in cheek article, that sets out to debunk some myths about linux let you into a francy that drove you to write your stupid blog post and the proudly anounce it on
Relax kid, nobody's going to take your Windows away from you, even if some prefer an other OS.
``True, if you buy SuSE Linux on DVD at the store, you can drop it in and have it all set up for you. Windows XP brags about the same convenience and ease. How many patches must you apply to SuSE right after install for all the security fixes? Dozens. Windows? Dozens. Hmmm... Seems about even there.''
I certainly wouldn't claim that you need more or fewer patches on Windows or Linux. But here are two things to consider:
1. New releases of most Linux distros appear more frequently than Windows versions. This means that, if you buy the latest version of distro X on CD or DVD, it will be less out of date, thus less chance of vulnerabilities that have exploits in the wild.
2. The update system in, for example, Ubuntu, updates _all_ software on your system. Not just the software by one vendor (like Windows Update), not even just the software in the main Ubuntu repository, but any software you installed from an apt repository (which, given that almost any software that works on Ubuntu is available as a Debian package, should be all software on your system).
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
1) Inconsistant copy/paste behavior between apps.
Self explanitory really.
2) Horrible audio support
(Every card I've used on windows has done multi-open fine, but none do it on linux. at best I can get two DSP interfaces on one card which means hard configuring apps. Don't get me started on surround sound.)
3) Major lack of applications/stuck with bad ports or buggy emulation
(Port of AIM completely lacks features, and no third party client supports direct ims with the same content types as the official client. eg, no animated gifs, bitmaps, or just inserting a file-- No official yahoo client, stuck with third party clients that dont do webcams. No IDE comparible to visual studio, or debuggers/disassemblers that can compare to whats common on windows (IDA, w32dsm, olly, softice), etc.
4) More of an extension on #3, but lack of games.
I don't care how many different toolkits you can put on tetris, its never going to compare to a game like HL or WOW
5) No reason TO switch
Really, this is the reason why I started dual booting and ended up never bothering to boot out of windows. Theres nothing I can do in linux that can't be done in windows. Task wise, all I do is chat, game, browse the web, program, listen to music/watch movies, aquire them, and general remote administrative stuff.
On linux: firefox, mplayer, openssh, gaim
On windows: firefox, mplayer, putty, winaim.
That point goes even further-- Anything worth running is worth someone porting to windows, off the top of my head: The entire cygwin project (which includes about as much stuff as your standard distro), firefox, mplayer, gaim, nmap, netcat, ettercap, etherreal, vim, and im probably missing a few.
--Sorry for the bad formatting, HTML inside a tiny slashdot comment box is a pain to write.
Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
These topics get so so boring very quickly, is this really the most constructive writing that a self proclaimed technology boffin could come up with in his spare time? Really, grow up.
I use Linux (Debian) and Windows (XP) both at home and at work, mainly because I support employees using both OSs. I think we all know the pros and cons of using both Windows and Linux by now and the reasons behind Windows maintaining the market share etc etc etc etc, can't we just move on?
Bah, Linux is too hard for beginners, Windows is too unstable for server use, KDE is prettier, Windows is better for multimedia....
WHATEVER, use whichever suits you and your needs, it's all your choice, why spend every waking hour moaning about the shortfalls of the OS that you DON'T use?
Linux is great in certain fields
Windows is great in certain fields
Personally, I am a fan of Linux for a very simple reason. That is the ease with which errors are detected and their reasons shown.
In the 7 or 8 seperate systems I have owned in the last 5 years, every one of them has at some point run Windows. Most have run Linux. Inevitably they all have random crashes or errors.
However, in Windows I'm stuck asking "What the hell happened?" and rebooting. Usually the error is completely random and even if I check the logs and search for a fix online, I come up empty-handed.
In Linux I always find an answer to my error. It can range from "bad hardware" to "buggy program" to "you just suck at configuring", but I do not get any unexplained errors.
Still though, I do make sacrifices for Linux. It is harder to use in many ways. There is certainly a learning curve. It is an O/S for the power user, not the common user...yet.
One point you make that is dead wrong in my experience is when you say, "And frankly, applying patches in Windows is easier than in Linux." Now this may be true if you're actually manually applying kernel patches and recompiling the kernel or something, but actually if you're just talking about normal (binary) system updates, one of the big reliefs for me about switching to Linux was that updates are so much less painful.
If you have a system that uses the apt package manager, then updating your system is as simple as typing 'apt-get update; apt-get upgrade;' at the command line. Or if you don't like that, you can use several of the graphical tools (like synaptic) where it's just a matter of two or three clicks. On the distro I use, Ubuntu, there's actually an applet that periodically checks for updates and allows you to install them with a few clicks. In short, it's quite similar to Windows. Certainly, it's no more difficult.
Where the advantage comes in is that every damn update in Windows comes with its own EULA. Sure, you could randomly accept legal obligations without trying to figure out what you're agreeing to (though you still have to sit around and click "I agree"), but if you're actually trying to be responsible, it's a real pain. In Linux, updates to the OS, and most of the applications, are covered by the same license, the GPL, and you aren't confronted with a new EULA to accept every time you want to do an update. What a relief! In addition, the updates in Windows would often request a reboot, which never happens in Linux. Even if I update the kernel, I know I can keep using the system (with the old kernel) until I feel like rebooting.
If you're using a modern package management system, then updating in Linux is no more difficult than in Windows. In addition, there are a lot of things about the updates in Windows that may actually make the Linux process a lot easier.
"You call it a new way of thinking; I call it regression to ignorance!" -- Operation Ivy
linux has no gaming capability.. HAHA!
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
That article was absolutely hilarious, that guy should be a comedian . What a F'in GEEK.
I teach a class at work (Data Structures and Algorthyms or how to code). The other day, I put one of my students on my Linux box. He put in a USB drive and then spent 2 minutes getting upset. The drive was on the desktop marked in clear letters "SanDisk USB Drive" with only 4 icons on the entire desktop. Yet, it never dawned on him to click on it.
It amazed me that some things are very difficult for people due to it being ingrained.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Who is posting these crap stories, this was over at OSNews days ago. It's nothing but a troll article. It doesn't even encourage healthy debate.
Was SuSe, I had only been using Windows for less than a year and had "heard of this linux alternative", I wanted to see what the hubbub was about. Coming from stricktly Windows, when I installed Linux I was surprised at how much easier it was to get on there than a normal 98SE install. Mine did most things for me, from configuring the drive to formatting and partitioning without having to guess. My first few 98Se installs were nightmares. Still give me cold sweats to this day.
I decided to go with KDE, though I had no idea what it was other than "some gui". Had I known then what I know now KDE would have gotten das boot. What a resource whore.
Well sometime passed and I have reinstalled the distro on the machine once since the initial install. And that was from user error. I had purchased a new larger harddrive and was very inexperienced and couldn't figure out how to install a new piece of hardware without a total reinstall. Sure taught me to RTFM. So for me, gaming aside, Windows 98SE installs in the early days --- 3 per month, my first linux distro installs to this day --- 2.
My personal experience with both os's and derivatives leave me with one conclusion, both OS's have their uses, Windows mainly for those who would rather be controlled by their computer, and those who would rather control their computer.
I still use Windows for stuff, gaming, video editing, audio mixing, but for tough stuff, security, networking I use linux.
Thank you to anyone who reads this that has worked on any OSS project, and especially the Kernel itself. It's nice to have more than 2 OS choices.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
``For the common user who just wants to be productive, and just wants their computer to work the way they want, Windows is faster, and faster means cheaper!''
With all the knowledge you need to have to keep your Windows system safe, I don't agree with you here.
You need to run updates. These updates have been known to break things (XP SP2 anyone?). This has never happened to me on Debian (not speaking for other distros here).
You need to run scans for viruses and spyware. The scanners you use need to be updated. They aren't updated through Windows Update, so it has to be done separately. Ok, maybe it happens automatically. Maybe Linux systems will have to be scanned, too, eventually. However, you have been talking about the reality _now_ in your blog. The reality is that _now_, people lose productivity because the virus and spyware scans they need to do. Scanners ask questions that need to be answered. Do you want to quarantine SYSTEM32\WEUTNTH.SYS? I don't know...what's that do? What is "quarantine"? I'm just an average user.
You have to know not to use MSIE. You have to know not to use MSO(E). You have to know to disable ActiveX. You have to know not to always use your computer as Administrator, not to have it automagically log you in, and a whole lot of other conveniences. On most Linux distros, things are usable without being insecure.
I don't know. If you want to play with the software that people send you, if you can't be bothered to learn to use clones of MSIE, MSO(E), and MS Office, if you can't stand if your icons are in different places or your desktop has different colors, or if you have to play the latset Windows games, than Linux is not for you. Otherwise, you would probably do yourself a favor if you used it.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Should be modded up: 5=informative!!!
click here to browse the list of their officially supported titles That's just the "a" section.. change the letter at the end of that url to "B" to see the rest.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
OKAY, I missed the fact that the GFX applications I've pointed out where available for Linux. Sorry.
What I meant with the post is, that i think its pretty arrogant to make fun of the fact that some people are arguing that software is missing.
And while I stand corrected on the 3D packages, I still stand by the rest of the post.
Ok, so I can get a $5000 professional editing solution to edit my home vids, that wasn't exactly what I mean. I was thinking something like Apple's Ilife or the Ulead software. Likewise with the authoring applications.
Anyways, to sum it up. We do miss software on linux, we miss alot of the stuff most hobbiest users make their stuff with and it IS a "problem" if we ever want to reach a broad audience on the desktop.
The problem is, when u mention it, you get reactions like this.
Because servers running Linux evidently get Slashdotted pretty easily ...
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
I fail to see what OSX has to do with a discussion on Linux.
OS X is a good role model for good user interface designs. Every now and then you'll notice that many linux desktops will use aspects of OS X. I think Linux should strive for OS X ease of use and stability and security.
Linux has the security down pretty much. A little too good though... I had downloaded the Unreal Tournament 2k4 to my desktop and not only did Ubuntu warn me about running it, but would not let me run it until I actually set the properties of the file to execute. Rarw!
On OS X, it would warn me and maybe ask me for my password to install as admin, but on Ubuntu I'm lucky if I open an executable script and it doesn't open a text editor (I fixed that, but it wasn't like that out of box).
Secondly, I found that to get UT2k4 to run I had to run root console and then install.
And to install Flash on an out of the box Ubuntu install on Firefox? It wasn't a problem for me since it only took 10 minutes of looking on Ubuntu's forums (which I will say are pretty extensive in getting information on how to do this), but I couldn't just open Firefox and install missing plugin like on OS X or Winxp. I had to actually edit my repository list and then run "sudo apt-get install flashplayer-mozilla" from command line...
I can do that without any problem, but I don't really want to have to research 10-20 minutes on how to get something to run every time I need to install an app.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Is reading their EULA.
When you install Windows, you are presented with their EULA and asked to accept it. But their is a problem. Most people can't, completely anyway, because it is encrypted with legalese.
So, I wondered, why would such an important, legal-binding license agreement that's intended to be read, understood, accepted or rejected by John Q. Public be written so only a lawyer could understand it? I mean not all of Microsoft's customers are lawyers are they? I know I'm not. In fact I don't think most people even know a lawyer whom they could ask to come over and decrypt the ELUA for them while they wait to install the OS. It's not very user friendly to the consumer - Microsoft's customers.
I have read unencrypted software EULAs before so I know it can be done. In fact, legalese encryption is a good measure, IMHO, of whether or not someone is trying to hide something which can't really be a good thing for a consumer product which is arguably becoming a commodity these days under any circumstances.
"Windows;Linux;Mac...Whatever, we're all equally edible"
.conf files for simple. Sure beats some strange "intuitive" gui with bugs in the UI that stores your settings somewhere like "the hive", which isn't all that editable should it get corrupted.
It depends ultimately on what you are looking for. I'm not a big "ease of use" user because I've found that Microsoft has introduced "training wheels" along with "ease of use". It has gotten harder and harder to remove the former. But then again, I am a hardcore computer geek.
I look for:
(1) Free as in freedom
(2) Hackable (as in code is available -- Legally)
(3) Controllable. That means simple. Can't beat
(4) A system that doesn't treat me like I'm a stupid user (see Clippy).
(5) I resent not having a choice. Nothing like getting a version of windows with a new computer when I don't want it and I can't get my money back for it.
(6) I don't like giving money to a convicted monopolist -- regardless of how well connected (or slippery) he may be. In fact, a slippery convicted monopolist WON'T get any more of my money until he starts behaving. It's called voting with my wallet.
Yeah--with slight hacking, it supports full tables and anything else in the RTF specification. BTW, this article was also posted on OSnews, although they didn't like the article NEARLY as much as us.
This is just a failed attempt at sarcasm and being clever, designed to cover up basic rhetoric. Everything he says in the article has been discussed to death before, and it's all about things that change depending on who you are (complexity, ease of use, security, cost, etc).
If you look at any flame war on Slashdot about Linux/Windows, you find the following is usually true.
Windows users generally mention the same things I mentioned above, though they usually do it in a less cohesive way. I think that's part of the problem really. Some people on both sides state their opinions in a childish way, which makes everyone sound dumb.
Getting bac
-William Brendel
The open source groupware offerings for Linux are horrible. That's why I suggest MS Small Business Server to small business when consulting. If there is open source groupware out there that competes with Exchange on shared calendars, contacts, tasks, etc PLEASE let me know. Some requirements:
must be accessible from MS Outlook (via plugin or standard method).
must be relatively inexpensive (MS Small Business Server was only $300 or so and came with exchange server and 5 outlook licenses).
Again if there's a legitimate open source groupware system for linux that's come up in the last few years PLEASE let me know.
--David
One thing that would help Linux would be losing the fetish for bizarre abbreviations and childish names. Seriously, YaST? yum? GIMP? It all sounds like self-indulgient gibberish very quickly.
'Less than 5. I really doubt that anyone *needs* to edit their registry ever.'
.bashrc and .cvsrc, in the case of .bashrc all I had to do was uncomment one line.
Let me guess, you just format the HDD and reinstall windows instead.
Here's a couple of unavoidable reasons to edit the registry that most if not all people will come accross:
1. On Windows 95 (and probably 98) the size of the registry was limited and apps where a bit crap at using it, the result was you'd run out of registry space and nothing would install properly!! The answer was a manual registry edit.
2. Ahh Drivers!, drivers leave their mucky fingerprints all over the registry it used to be the case (Windows 2000) and possibly may still be that the only way to properly remove any knowledge about a driver from windows was to edit the registry and remove all the crap. Infact it's probably a good idea to do that every time you upgrade a driver or remove something from the system.
3. Remove all the overhead junk that windows uses (like a shadow under the mouse etc...)
Now you may be lucky and have fluked a system where all the drivers allways work and you never had to reinstall anything and you may like Windows eye candy just the way it is but the majority of people seem to have problems that usually result in reinstalling windows when a simple registry edit would do.
BTW, Their are losts of tools for editing most configuration files (some are more of the 'pro' / config file wrapper type) It's a very rare occasion that I have anything that requires editing that isn't accessable by some configuration tool other than vim (webmin's fairly complete) but I usually chose to edit with vim because then I know what's been changed and how to fix it if it becomes a problem.
The only two files I have had to edit by hand were
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
mod article down, overrated
Linux users have a vested interest, I think, in popularizing the use of linux on desktops. Obtaining greater compatibility with the rest of the world would be reason enough for that. We wouldn't want those occasional web pages that only work in MSIE to become the rule of the net rather than the exception. I have some questions that, I hope, would prompt thinking users to help popularize Linux.
Average Joe Computeruser walks into a store and sees a desktop system with XP for $X and a hardware identical machine next to it, running Linux, for $(X-L). What value of L would induce him to purchase that one instead of the XP machine? How would the choice of user interface affect the value of L? How does the value of X affect the value of L? Who would provide the user support?
Is there a way the Linux community could persuade the vendor or OEM to market the machines this way?
I'm not providing many answers but I hope the questions prompt some thought.
I've noticed a lot of stories on slashhdot have been first reported from digg.com. Is it too hard to report on stories that aren't covered elsewhere?
I'm sure you were happier back then.
...don't use Linux. Use FreeBSD! :-b
It does have gaming capability... if you're interested in FPS games that you'll probably drop after two weeks.
From the site:
The Sims 2
Playability: 1
Popularity: 4
As compared to...
Doom 3
Playability: 5
Popularity: 3
So, basically, Linux's gaming viability depends on what you play. And unfortunately, Linux isn't viable for me.
Whoa there tiger... no need to over do it!
All I ever needed was the edit command from the command prompt. Quite possibly the first multi-tabbed text editor around. (I say "quite possibly" because I really have no idea)
That was the best text editor I've ever used before I started working with TextPad.
Hmmm witty sig or funny sig? Maybe elitest techy sig!
I'm glad the parent was modded funny.
Wordpad is like a crippled version of vi. And I hate vi.
since you have your sources.list editted, if you ever need to find anything else and install it real quick just try apt-cache search whatever_you_are_wanting and then apt-get install it
Sorry if this is comes across as vitriolic. I take offense when people take jabs at the editors' apparent lack of effort/competence. I'm sure being an editor isn't nearly as easy as than the trolls would have you believe.
that that is is that that is not is not
I could not find a download site on the 'Net for it, so I went to a local shop to get a copy, which actually cost you money. When I stuck in the CDROM and whatever I clicked on, nothing happened. Well, as it turned out, you actually have to make some weird sorta room for it on the harddisk, since it cannot be installed from an ordinary RPM.
After an hour I managed to install it, but first of all, it was all so different from RedHat, and secondly there where hardly any software for it. All it had was a simple pixeldrawing program, a webbrowser and very plain text editor.
I may be stupid, but I just stick with what I know. I know that there may be smarter choices, but my computer came with the system and that is all I need.
:-) = I am happy
:^) = I am happy with my big nose
C:\> = I am happy with my OS
Itm was some UNIX guy.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Im not just being pedantic here but it really annoys me that people make comments such as "linux is not ready for the desktop" . Linux is simply the core ,the kernel at the heart of a complete GNU/Linux Operating system distribution.
I would much rather read comments a s to why KDE or GNOME are not ready for the desktop - or perhaps even certain distributions are not ready or suitable. I personally disagree as i use Linux with KDE every day without difficulty - as do my retired parents.
If there are faults with the filemanager in Desktop X then why is this the fault of Linux ? There seems to be a general lack of understanding about these things. Also people often complain about lack of driver support in certain areas. Once again this is not because linux "is not ready" it is because Manufacturers rarely supply linux versions of their drivers.
There is no evidence to suggest that the linux kernel is not suitable for certain pieces of hardware. Suppose a new version of windows was to come out but driver support is thin on the ground . Does this mean that windows is "not ready for the desktop?" Of course not !
Just how long will these arguments continue before they are tired and pointless?
Because the hardware vendors support Windows, not Linux.
I just upgraded my system to an AMD64 and Windows took 2 hours to install(hung during the install) while Ubuntu took 20 mins. And when Ubuntu booted everything worked, video, sound, networking. Under Windows I had to install drivers to get that working.
Windows actually has less built in hardware support than Linux does. The difference though is that all hardware ships with Windows drivers. This will not change until the hardware vendors start to ship Linux drivers with their hardware.
"As long as the Linux guru community responds to honest feedback on the problems of their precious OS with such vile hatred and criticism, converts are going to be put out and go back to "friendly Windows."
/., what is?
Now if this isn't a time tested argument here on
1. Write something stupid and false
2. Get called on it
3. Start to whine that with all those evil people around Linux will never be a success.
4. Profit
It's really getting boring.
But in a way your reaction is also hilarious, as you are the guy who reacted to a tongue in cheek artilce about Linux not being so bad after all with a lengthy blog entry full of factual inacuracies, unfounded assumptions and name calling.
That you of all people should now complain about "vile hatred and criticism" without even noticing the irony is incredible.
that that is is that that is not is not
Reason number one: Linux is too complicated
True. Sadly. Ditto with win32 progs, though. Settings hidden in the registry? System directory? Program files? User directory? Are they not even in a plain-text format?
Both OSs have graphical programs and wizards/druids to make it so you don't HAVE to worry.
You can virtualize & change some options through .htaccess & similar files. But the paradigm of when changes should take effect is often-argued. Mac users can argue that win32 is dumb because changes don't take effect when you select them--you have to hit an "apply" & even then it doesn't always take.
Like this? Admittedly: it is for a legacy version. It didn't sell well. Partly because it isn't that great of a book. Partly because few serious people use IIS. That said, there are plenty of other other IIS books for more recent versions. Last time I checked, third party documentation is not a bad thing. You don't have to use any of it. Lord knows I haven't use a book to get apache running on OS X, win32, FreeBSD, or Linux.
Easy. I personally run 'startx' & so know to change a line in my .xinitrc. (Mine is setup so I can type 'startx gnome' or 'startx kde' or 'startx fluxbox; or whatever. If I just type 'startx', it will start my default wm.)
Others would prefer to use one of the many graphical login managers. xdm, gdm, kdm, and qingy all support an easy switch.
Reason number two: Linux is a pain to set up
There are no official Windows "distributions" that are one-click installs. Nor are there official LiveCDs. Linux installers do come on LiveCDs that give you a full environment during a one-click install.
Some Linux distros allow net installs, which means ZERO patches (all software is up-to-date). Also, how many RESTARTS do those updates mean in Windows. At minimum 1. Usually more. I usually have ~3 just to get current. I've had more than that.
Reason number three: Linux doesn't have enough applications
To be fair, what they do and don't bundle is only motivated by what they can sell--not the good of the user. Why bundle a browser & no Office Suite? Simply because people are willing to pay for MS Office & not IE. Also, MS is free to include a lot of free/open source software with windows. Or to bundle in more 3rd party software. They'd get a lot fewer complaints than they do now (because now they are pushing their own products off on people strictly for more revenue).
And this was the point of the original article: win32 users fear the switch, not knowing there are equivalents.
A lot of apps aren't nati
Typical UI designer speak, they obviously failed to QA half the population.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
I've edited the registry, and haven't found it too hard. The controls are somewhat friendly, i can navigate in it and find out what's there.
.conf. It's menu.lst or something. Easy to set up? Gimme a break.
/S. I've been using MS-DOS for more than 15 years, moving to Linux is restarting everything from scratch. Is that really NECESSARY?
.conf beasts in the wild, but we're Windows people, we need a little help in here, and I don't just mean a nifty graphical interface.
On the contrary, if I *HAVE* to edit a conf file in Linux, it's mostly because i'm stuck in the commandline. So, what do I use to edit? emacs? vi? nano?
All these 3 programs have one thing in common: They're NOT windows-users friendly! In windows using the "primitive" notepad, All I have to do is press shift and move the cursor around. I go to the menu, Edit... cut (or just press ctrl-x), and then I paste (ctrl-v) around the area i want to edit.
In Linux, I have to RELEARN all the shortcuts to edit a text file.
Second: Linux *IS* a pain to set up.
The article says:
"After all, with modern Linuxes like Xandros Desktop or SimplyMEPIS, you need to put in a CD or DVD, press the enter button, give your computer a name, and enter a password for the administrator account."
Yes, but I didn't have those two distros, I used Ubuntu and had a lot of problems trying to set up the PPPoE protocol so I could simply *update* my software (and don't even get me into CoLinux, I still haven't been able to use the Gnome desktop wth it. There are so many settings I have to meddle with, and I have to edit the conf files using this "nano" program.
Alright, let's forget about coLinux for a while. The freaking GRUB didn't tell me how to specify that I wanted to boot Windows by default, not Linux. There isn't a button that says "boot this by default from now on". No, I have to boot into Linux, edit a conf file, no wait, it's not even a
Reason number three: Linux doesn't have enough applications
I've TRIED to set up XMMS. It always crashes. Now how the heck am I gonna play my MP3's? The default player app (NOT xmms) doesn't even handle mp3's! I not only want enough applications, I could do with ONE applications that WORKS.
Reason number 4: Linux isn't secure
I'd remove that from the list, but I'd apprecieate it if you guys told me how to configure a firewall in Linux. Yes, I'm a n00b. As the grand majority of mere mortals are. Oh,yeah. "RTFM" is taboo, and I'm sick tired of having to scroll thru pages of pages of manpages.
Reason number 5: Linux is more expensive
Who cares? With reasons 1-3 I've tried to avoid Linux, I want things that "just work". Give me a distro that emulates the windows control panel, notepad and has a decent media player app that doesn't crash or hang when I try to play an mp3.
And to the detriment of Linux zealots, the "easy to install" distros are the works of people who DID admit Linux is hard to install. It's the zealots or RTFM uber-geek sysadmins who just tried to ignore the problem. They didn't move A FINGER to try to solve the problem. After all, what problem?
Well, after years of saying the Gimp was NOT user friendly, FINALLY we get a usability group working on it.
Until linux fans start admitting that Linux isn't perfect, or not as user-friendly as it SHOULD be, we will HAVE to be stuck with Windows.
The author of the article seemed to think that all the people who don't want to use (or don't still feel comfortable using) Linux, are Microsoft-fooled sheeps. Well I'm not. I _DO_ want Linux, after all I have tried to install various distros on my machine, just to find them too hard to stay - this is why I keep coming back to windows.
For starters, why isn't there a shell that emulates the windows CMD? As useful greps / finds / pipe chains are, they can't match the simplicity of a DIR
Unix Tarzans may be accustomed to swinging in command line ropes and fighting against
Because it works. It also has better hardware and software support than Linux does.
The price of Windows gets rolled into PC purchases, so people don't really feel the hit of buying Windows. And Linux doesn't have the alt-hip-cool factor that makes people go out and buy Apple.
Can anyone give me any reason why I should abandon Windows at all? I am a regular Windows user and I don't feel insecure using Windows.
All you Linux geeks may give me a reason or two before I even consider doing it.
Full Tilt
It does provoke some thought aside from bringing a smile to our lips :)"
And THAT, my boys, is PRECISELY the problem. You smile at these issues as if they weren't really issues (cause you're so smart). You attribute Linux's lack of popularity with the masses to some MS conspiracy when the conspiracy, if there is any at all, is right at home with you. You imagine problems with Windows that don't exist; and you ignore problems with Linux that stare you in the face every day. You are so happy with yourselves for being so so clever to make Linux work and decry others who seem to have issues.
The first issue is: I don't want to "make" Linux work. I just want it to work. Understand the difference? I don't live for Linux; I live for the end product. I, and millions of people, do not give a rat's ass about Linux as an OS. It's a command-line interface that's a lot harder to use than MS-DOS. So what if you can stick an autoexec.bat in there to run up some copy-cat Windows-like, but not quite interface. And you want me to replace Windows with THAT?!? You have GOT to be kidding! I don't have time to learn Linux and all the cute little "verstaile" things you can do with it. I just want to use a word processor, a photo editor, and a spreadsheet. I just want to get on the Net and surf around, get my email and send it out. I want to share some files, buy some stuff online, and basically create product. That's all. End of story.
Second issue: Security. Oh, woe is me! Windows is so full of holes! Bad, bad, bad! Oh, really? Norton has zapped every virus which attempted to show up here. Spyware is down to a near zero--all with two easily-installed (I mean, like, Click->Done) programs. And Linux? Well, first there was this cool bomb that gave the idiot root, then the password file was cracked, then the box was used in a DDoS attack, and on, and on, and on, and on--even with guys (not me!) who had so much experience with Linux that their first distro was on a 5-1/4" floppy. To claim Windows is full of holes may very well be true, but to claim Linux is the alternative? You must be kidding!
Oh, and MS has inferior products--just so sucky as to be unbelievable. Right! You compare Office with what? Open Office? (SNORT!) You ever do tables in Open Office? You ever do an index? You ever do a full-length book? No wonder. I wouldn't trust it with something valuable either. Hey, I still like Lotus better than Excel (Well, I've got it memorized is the only reason), but the fact is that I can trust MS products to do more or less what they say they will do. No config files. Boot and shoot. I'm done. It works. If it won't do some 3D rendering weirdo application, fine. I don't care. My millions of co-workers don't care either. Pixar can do what they want. I watch their movies, not make them.
And Linux is "faster," right? Then why do I boot up and wait ten minutes for a $ when it has to load innumerable drivers (that I had to specify), read innumerable batch files from host.conf to whatever (that I had to edit), and then wind up with what?? A "$"? You must be kidding! (Oh, yeah. I forgot: Autoexec.bat: "Run a Windows-like copy-cat interface." How innovative!
Linux is "less expensive," right? It's a good thing you guys aren't in charge of real-world budgets. Let's just say: It ain't the cost of the distro, folks. It's keeping it running. That's expensive, and you guys all seem to think you deserve top dollar. You seem to think "If you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow." You know what? You're right. You keep the more esoteric parts of Linux close to your chest, just obscure enough so no one else QUITE knows what's going on, then you're "needed." That's exactly right, and that's why you are going away. And my goal is to get rid of the last couple of Linux boxes I've got left so I don't have to deal with you any more. Then you can go collect unemployment for awhile and tell everyone else how smart you are. Two more to go, and one of them gets replaced next week
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
No fair, you stole my joke! But I was going to say Notepad, which everone knows would be much funnier.
Seriously though, they did leave out two very important points in Windows favor.
1. Games. Yes, PC gamers much prefer the selection of Windows games over the selection of Linux games. It's not that Linux doesn't have a few gems, just that I had to use the word 'few' in this sentence.
2. With Windows, you get to have the exact same warts as all of your friends and family. a) misery loves company and b) there's a much better chance your brother in law is going to be able to help you with a Windows issue than a Linux issue. Market share alone will fix this problem just as market share alone caused it, but until then the social networking of Windows users helping other Windows users with should not be underestimated.
TW
P.S. I know there's this whole internet thing with lots of friendly people just waiting to help you with your Linux issues. Grandma will not use it. She will ask her husband, then her son, then every other family member until someone can help. If none of those people use Linux, she'll be out of luck. If some of those people use Mac or Windows, they'll try to convert her to a "better" OS.
X.org is a fantastic reason to not use linux. I have a Dell 2001FP. A nice, very modern 20' TFT. When I do a fresh install of X.org on gentoo and run x -configure it happily looks up the plug and play settings of my monitor, determines all the numbers for horizontal and vertical sync, THEN THROWS THEM OUT, and tells me I have to configure it manually. I have to repeat that whole ordeal of manually specifying my plug and play settings every single time I plug a new monitor into my computer. Oh yah. It can't find my mouse unless I tell it where to look, Or my keyboard. Windows has never had any problem figuring out where the keyboard and mouse are, and only rarely has trouble figuring out the resoulutions my monitor can run. Furthermore I don't have to tell it "yes, you can run at 640x480, 800x600 1024x768 etc etc etc." It just WORKS. /linux is only free if your time is worthless.
True, but Microsoft invests large amounts of time, effort and money into UI research, usability testing etc. You may find Windows "clunky and inelegant", but it seems reasonable to suppose that the GUI design reflects what all that testing and research has taught them. Maybe it's you that's out of step.
Do KDE, Gnome etc. have the benefit of the same research base? Are they subjected to the same scale of testing that Microsoft can afford to carry out? I don't know, but I'd be surprised if they are.
You know... the only part of my blog I retract is the Apache written by the guy who wrote the standard. The rest of it was perfectly correct and enlightened... from a relatively new Linux user's point of view. And that's exactly my point. You dismiss everything I say as "wrong", and avoid facing the facts that other users see it differently than you do.
Ironically enough, choice is exactly the reason I still don't have Linux installed on my home PC, despite having intended to dual boot it from the day it was born three years ago.
I'm an experienced techie, and in most respects a geek. I use Firefox and OpenOffice. But every time I look at Linux, from an outsider's point of view, I have no idea which distros would make a good starting point, no idea whether my hardware will work reliably, no idea which packages I'd want to install, and so on. And it's not because I haven't looked, either; I've spent days browsing the web, reading guides to the distros, supported hardware lists, and all that. But since half of them contradicted the other half, and I have no idea which are giving me rumours and hear'say and which are giving me up-to-date information, they're not much help.
Perhaps I should just bite the bullet and install one of them, and see how I do. But that's not in my nature. I use this machine for serious work as well as playing around, and I'm naturally averse to installing anything when I don't know enough about it in advance to be comfortable controlling it.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
If you have a system that uses the apt package manager
You've kind of contradicted yourself right there. In fact, it's the word "if" that kind of makes your argument against yourself. Windows patch management by default fetches updates from the server all by itself and only asks you for confirmation to install them. Once you have to start asking "What is it I'm running?" you're already too complicated.
And that's even before we get to "as simple as typing 'apt-get update; apt-get upgrade;' at the command line", a statement I find simply hilarious. Only a Linux user would consider typing a 30-character arbitrary mantra "simple".
I shouldn't even have read into this thread; I knew it was just going to be flamebait and I've let myself get sucked into it. I'm really not trying to defend any of the accusations that you're leveling against Windows, which are all true and much worse besides. But I'd like for you to listen to yourself before making statements like "updating in Linux is no more difficult than in Windows". Your conception of "difficult" is very, very different from mine.
I hired a secretary two months ago (part time). I run a patent agency and use Macs only, so my new secretary had to learn to work with it. After one month, she wasn't a happy gal, having to learn all this new stuff (mostly on her own as she works at home, and I should mention that she also had to learn a lot of new things like Skype not specifically related to the Mac).
During the last month, however, she started making remarks about all kinds of details, how smart Apple was to do a particular like they did, and that she was thinking too hard on how to accomplish things, where in fact they were pretty easy.
I believe she's happy with the Mac now, but: no pain, no gain.
Bert
Linux gave us years of whining, configing, and trouble and finally gave us a desktop that's comparable to Windows in ease of use. All I had to do to get that from Windows was write them a check. Much easier. It's not the OS I'm shunning--it's the mode and the speed with which the system that created it delivers goods: poorly and years late.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
"The rest of it was perfectly correct and enlightened"
/., am I not?)
No it wasn't. Read the comments instead of just feeling sorry for yourself.
Examples:
- Apache reloading the config file without restarting.
- IIS actually restarts, contrary to your claim.
- You don't have to sift through thousands of config files to change to KDE, you just have to chose KDE in the graphical login manager.
- Sudo is available, and su gets loged.
Just to name a few.
"You dismiss everything I say as "wrong", and avoid facing the facts that other users see it differently than you do."
I'm really having a hard time understanding this sentence.
Do you want to tell me that I avoid facing the facts (what facts, btw.), or do you want to tell me that I avoid facing the fact that others have a different opinion.
If the first should be the case, there unfortunately aren't a whole lot of facts you provide, if the latter should be the case, believe me, I'm aware of the fact that people have different opinions (hell, I'm posting on
Finally, trying to get serious, why don't you take a more levelheaded approach to this matter? This is not a religious war, though you seem to have mistaken it for one, this is only about operating systems.
Now you are more familiar with one of them and naturally feel more comfortable using it. That's fine, no problem here, but please accept that others might feel differently.
Because when X crashes, it tells you that it crashed and instead of stagnating and just sitting there line explorer.exe does, it tells you what happened without giving you useless memory addresses and it then fixes the problem and immediately restarts X as it was before it crashed.
Because Linux is based on the solid, modular and multiuser-multitasking UNIX with the Open Source/Free Software aspect allowing you to view, edit, add, delete, or redistribute source code, something that is strictly forbidden with the Windows OS.
Because Linux is free as in freedom and free as in cost meaning that you as the user, not corporate suits, have all of the rights, nor do you (usually) have to pay money to get the Linux OS, and if you do it is significantly cheaper and a much more reliable than it's Winblows counterpart.
Because Linux is based on UNIX and therefore is secure. UNIX actually manages resources, something that windows pretends to do. How many times have you had a virus in Windows whose process "could not be terminated"? Linux allows you to kill anything that needs to be killed, because it's modular. It doesn't have the dependancy issues that Windows has.
Because Linux modularity doesn't depend on DLLs. NO DLL HELL!!!
Because backward-compatibility is all but guarenteed. Try comparing that with Winblows. The next API is completely new, so don't count on any apps you currently use working with Vista.
Because Tux is so much more lovable than some stupid curvy window pane. And because Linux is such a better name than "XP" or "Vista" (Microshaft loves the curvy windows logo and fag names like "Vista". Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!).
Because Linux Torvalds knows what the fuck a computer should do and how to make that work, whereas Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer know about how to make a monopoly with crappy software so that the user is forced to upgrade every two years...wait, vista is coming out FOUR FUCKING YEARS after XP, at the earliest!!!
Resist the dark path. It is much sexier to be a 'root' than a 'computer administrator'. (To the macheads out there, you are roots as well; OS X is based on UNIX. :-D)
Because Windows is inherently weak. Don't buy the bullshit that Microshaft puts out about "it's only weak because so many people use it." Though that can account for some of the viruses, the real reason that Windows is so vulnerable is that it is vulnerable. There are two variables: strength and ubiquity. Windows has low strength and high ubiquity. Those combine to form a bad operating system that is inherently subject to viruses, etc.
Because no one should rope you into using their browser integrated with OS.
Whoever wrote this article really doesn't understand the whole humour thing. This was more of a point-flame thing than anything. Jokes in this regard are meant to leave you hanging.
Take the old joke 'What's strong enough for a man, but made for a woman? The back of my hand.' This guys version would be 'I hit women.'
With Fink and Darwin Ports, I can get most of "Linux" software on a Mac. I can't wait for WINE for OSX86. 3 major OSes on one desktop... yum!
And if the mother has trouble with the coaxing, there are consultants who will help. Yes, breastfeeding consultants. My co-worker's wife's health plan explicitly provides coverage for that.
I wonder how someone gets into that line of work...
...mostly because it's true. I've found installing Linux to be a bit easier than installing Windows, especially provided you know what the hell you are doing.
A lot of the questions the installer will tend to ask you (this is, of course, all dependant on your distro) might be a little daunting for the average user. They tend to soil themselves at the first sign of "jargon," which of course means any word not in the average sixth-grade-reading-level vocabulary. Acronyms tend to scare them away too. This is why many people consider Windows to be "easier" to install...there may be more steps, it may be more of a pain in the ass, but they dumb it down enough that the average user doesn't realize it's a pain in the ass.
No, installing Linux is easy. Using Linux, however, can be a real pain in the ass.
(shameless plug)
For those of you who have struggled to make your favorite OS recognize some old, dated, or esoteric piece of hardware picked up from your latest dumpster dive, I bring you the status bar to end ALL status bars:
http://geocities.com/she_died/#bootSplash
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
You know, there's a lot of truth in that. The Mac, and the entire Apple experience, is intuitive for a certain kind of person. Artists, fashion mavens, leftists, and other creative personalities can sit in front of a PowerBook and just "get it," but accountants and everyday pencil-pushers don't have a prayer. Squares should stick to Linux and Windows. Macs are for different thinkers.
y .jpgj pgp gq .jpgj pgq .jpgm .jpgy .jpg. jpgd .jpgk .jpgg .jpga .jpgv .jpgd .jpgk .jpg
g boothsized0hs.jpg
Evidence?
http://img371.imageshack.us/img371/7792/img08079i
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/3600/img10156rv.
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/2539/soho0uj.j
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/5614/img66606p
http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/6756/img64271jj.
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/5082/bleeder0w
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/1672/img85083c
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/7234/img82642a
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/787/img60047ow
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/4819/img58719t
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/9681/img46882w
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/8519/img45081g
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3102/img39464t
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/7783/img07414p
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/5816/img07328r
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/5096/img07309m
Versus:
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3118/ms1by.jpg
http://img270.imageshack.us/img270/7789/linuxnylu
Oh, I'm sorry, that is a non-sarcastic reason to not use Linux.
Configuring X Windows, and no, not just in Linux, is the biggest pain in the ass and the biggest problem I have *always*. Whoever wrote the script should be punched in the face, hard.
I need to stop putting OSnews and Slashdot on my Google homepage...for the last few days it's been, here it is on OSnews, then here it is on Slashdot...
I have my new PHP project....combine the feeds, check for dupes, and create a single feed.
Anyone up for getting in on it?
Make America grate again!
I think you've misunderstood me (perhaps intentionally so), so let me restate what I've said a bit. When I said, "If you have a system that uses the apt package manager" I was trying to be very specific, but essentially I think this goes for any modern package manager. This means, basically, if you're running any modern Linux OS designed for the desktop. I'm trying to be clear that I'm not talking about ancient Linux OSs or ones that are designed for more technical tasts, just as updating Windows 3.0 or WinCE might not be easy for an end user. What I'm saying is likely true for almost any Linux OS geared toward desktop use and specifically novices, so your objection about the user having to know what he is running is irrelevent.
If you had read the entirity of what I wrote about updating, you would have noticed that while I mentioned how to do it at the command line, you can also just click on an applet sitting on your desktop, just like in Windows. A few clicks and the update is complete. I think these can also be set to go automatically, though I haven't used that feature (never did in Windows either).
The bottom line: If you have a modern Linux OS tageted toward Desktop users (the sort a newbie would buy in the store or be recommended by friends), then the process of doing an update is almost exactly the same as it is in Windows, and because of other factors I mentioned is actually easier.
"You call it a new way of thinking; I call it regression to ignorance!" -- Operation Ivy
Only reason I am stuck with Windows. I don't want to have to reboot into Windows every time I want to just load up a game for 15 mins. I know Winex and the transgaming group has come a long way, but it still isn't close enough for me.
Fact is that this article was obviously meant to be somewhat comical, some things within Linux definitely limit its adoption by mainstream computer users. BTW - I'm a Windows Admin @ work, and a Debian fan/user @ home, So please don't bash me for having an opinion of why the average everyday wal-mart/kmart/sears shopper doesn't rush right out and buy Suse/RedHat/Xandros/Madriva, when Windows works "out of the box", not to mention they've already paid for windows, why pay for another OS.
./install.pl then answer questions about my kernel-headers, and where my C compiler is installed, then make sure I have ... yea. Try installing VMWare from the tgz. My wife can figure that out. With me sitting there "maybe". * Thank you whomever came up with apt. I love you guys.
/etc is not the same as /var which definitely does not hold the same stuff as /usr. Oh and don't forget that not all applications will be in /usr/bin, but some are in /root and others are in /usr/sbin. Let's not forget that you need to put the plugins in the programs /usr/bin/xxxx/plugins directory... or wait is that in /home/bill/xxxx/plugins? Do you want /fries/french or /fries/curly or maybe you want /home/fries/plugins/var/french. ./go/get/a/consortium/and/standardize/then/you/wil l/have/more/users.sh -install -directory /usr/bin/thanks/for/listening.
First off, let's talk about those wonderful programs that Linux has (thankfully).
Windows uses Media Player. No plugins (generally required) for DVD's or most-not-all media. Linux uses Xmms, Kaffeine, or a myriad of others, all of which require plugins for some thing as simple as playing a DVD. Yea. I want to go through plugin hell just to play Blackhawk Down. No thanks. Insert Disc, press play works just fine for me.
More to the point of this though is that many of the programs that are available for Linux either are named in such a way that you would never guess what it does (D&D characters is not a naming convention for computer apps), or they are so poorly marketed that you can't tell what they are for. People respond to nice shiny websites ( http://ww2.nero.com/ that show precisely what the product does, complete with screenshots, and descriptions. SourceForge is a godsend, but let's be honest, that website wasn't designed to showcase your product. If I can't google it, and get a quality webpage showing your software and what it does, I generally won't bother trying to figure it out. I don't have the time to fiddle with crap. I need to see it, determine if it meets my needs and either download it or move on. If the download points me to sourceforge, thats cool, but your mainpage shouldn't be sourceforge.
Linux does not suffer from a lack of applications. If anything it suffers from too many applications that all do the same thing only someone wanted a purple button instead of a grey one and wrote a whole new interface/application to get it.
Application installation. Sure. Let me tar -xjvf that, then switch directories, and
Moving on. Setup. Yes Xandros is a breeze to install. It also costs money of you want to do anything with Active Directory. Many distro's are free but at what cost? Let's see, I have to recompile the kernel (yea, my wife will do that), if I want to suspend my laptop. I have to download kernel-headers (yea my wife knows what those are) to install mad-wifi to get my wireless to work. Let's not mention all the hoops you have to go through to get the configuration working properly. Oh and don't forget you need to modprobe some items before and after you suspend or else the machine simply won't resume properly. Along with all this though... try installing VMWare on Xandros (OC 3.02). It's almost funny. (BTW - Xandros People. Nice job guys. Seriously, keep up the good work.)
All in All, everyone should be capable of using Linux. Its all very simple. Assuming you know that
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
http://virtuawin.sourceforge.net/
Shame the article is down..but as a new user to linux i really don't know much of whats under the hood. I've been slowly working with linux for a while (red had, gentoo, ubuntu, debian) and consistantly run into the same problems. 1.) Difficulty in managing users (gui and otherwise) 2.) Difficulty finding "X" software and then figuring out what it does. 3.) Installing the software through the GUI Compared to windows these are monumental tasks. The point and click method doesn't work in the environment as easily as it does with windows. Where as since 9x to the present day you can take a windows install and "click" around all day and possiably accomplish something. True you can break windows pretty bad doing this but what the hey reboot and 40 mins later i get to start all over again. heh I'm slowling working my way through an AMD64 install of gentoo learning the curve as the pitches come but man is it teeth pullingly painful. I feel the biggest hurdle that i've encountered is installing software. I understand that gentoo uses the portage system which seems great! Its really easy to maintain stuff that i've installed aready but i still have to use a terminal. Where as compared to windows i can just find a list of what is installed with purdy pictures. Wish i had more time to clearly think this topic through but gotta head to class :( . i hope someday i'll be able to run a full blown linux system :) damn windows!
let me translate :
1. OpenServer 6 will soon be free when we fold
2. we took our kernel from someone smarter
3. no one bothers to write hacks for an OS this rare
4. SCO drives over their customers
5. OpenServer 6 is backward
6. SCO management makes yours look competent
7. no one but SCO would want to claim credit for our stuff
8. SCO is down to one user
9. SCO is reliably entertaining
10. your SCO machine will be getting even more personal support when we declare bankruptcy and you are your own support
It's hard to explain why the "new way" is harder to use but still better because it is harder to use and that makes is worse. If you tell me the new way is better for obscure technical reasons, but by the way, you have to do backflips or it won't work, then the new way can go fuck itself.
Is it so hard to have both a cached disk and one you can eject whenever you want? The computer could maybe let you know when you pulled the plug that not everything had finished and could finish if you plug it back in for a sec right now, or maybe you'd just prefer to wait for some other time to plug it back in. Isn't this what journaled fs's are for? Atomic transactions? It's certainly within the realm of possibility, and you should wish it existed for your GF's sake and for all other people who don't have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! ... er, I mean, have neither the time nor the inclination to babysit the
computer.
If you really need a disk that cannot be ejected until the computer is ready, then design one that way. Mounted cdroms don't eject when you press the button (they should unmount themeselves and eject, but that's beside the point); they only eject when the computer releases them.
Another example: Is it so hard to have a computer that doesn't require a "shut down"? Put a battery in there if you need a little time for housekeeping before the power gets cut.
If you ever have to say "it's better, but oh it's worse, but it's really still better", then you're doing something wrong. It really is worse.
Now, sure, there are times you can't have your cake and eat it too. But the examples above are not such times. Also, the road to perfection may be long and arduous, but one shouldn't accept defeat, and one certainly must not turn a blind eye to imperfections merely because it's the "new way".
Why is it when I think of ms windows users, I have a picture of a person who can't even type, clicking away at links on their browser?
These "Zombies" don't have any idea at all of what they are doing, where they are going, and what going to happen.
So easy to put a little effort in understanding what you are looking at through the monitor.
You internet Zombies, will never be able to have a real OS like Linux, unless you change your ways!
People from both sides should really stop bitching. I just dont understand Nix v. Win is really a pointless arguement. Nix will never be Win and vice versa. Both of these OS's have audiences that they cater to, and MOST of the time the people in those audiences DONT want to switch because
They are comfortable with their choice and usability of their OS!!!
No matter what Nix evolves into it will NEVER have the usability of windows because its the customizeability that makes it what it is. The geeks/nerds who do everything they do with nix like it for that reason. Its their envorinment and they are used to it.. the wouldnt switch for anything
No matter what Win evolves into it will NEVER have the secuirty or the openess of NIX. People are comfortable with its standardization of software i.e. that they can operate with little to no effort. Minus the OS patches/fixes it really is idiot proof as far as usability goes. Usually plugging in a pen drive into your nix distro doesnt work etc...
They are two totally different worlds used for two totally different purposes, bt two totally different groups of people (usually)... STOP compareing them. You are wasting your breath and your time.
Yeah... but Microsoft is already having to de-bundle several things that are considered "basic functionality" of a platform now (a way to play music/video, a way to surf the web, etc). You think the cries of "monopoly" are bad now... just let them try to bundle MSOffice with it.
This is one advantage of Linux distributions... they can bundle all they want and not get in trouble for it.
vim is god.
It seems /. and osnews.org have found a good way to
keep the audience entertained.
Linux itself is a reaction to draconian software pricing.
Anyway, Western society tells people they must experience rather than think. We've become an entertainment culture rather than a productive one.
MS has been coddling windows users for 20 years, and doing it in such a way that the user simply can't be insulted by it: they're too busy being intimidated. Apple users generally aren't clueless, and they're not treated that way. The people who use Linux are those who have sought it out (frustration), been exposed to it for practical means, or think of and use a computer as a tool. The key words there are think, use, and tool: the basis of human civilization.
We wouldn't be where we are now if our ancestors had just sat around laughing at the other jungle animals and staring up at the stars. We'd still be doing that now.
Oh shit, we are. Except that our big, unused brains that give us the skill of language allow us to refer to these activities as "reality TV" and "Dukes of Hazzard on the silver screen".
When people re-learn how to think for themselves, Linux usage will rise. That's just one change for the better.
Nipplux -- Nipple Linux - The truly intuitive linux "flavor"!
i'm just as much against M$ as the next guy. been using linux for over 10 years now as my only OS. but i will say this: Red Hat and Fedora had to drop mp3 support because of legal issues. i had to install a bunch of crap to get rhytmbox to support the mp3 format.
nature loves variety::society hates it get your variety at http://www.monkeypantz.net
I haven't had any problems playing MP3s on the Linux boxes I use that I actually allow sound on. I try not to use RedHat and/or Fedora, though unless there is no other choice.
(I'll probably make you mad here, but using "M$" detracts from your post as does the lack of capital letters beginning sentences.)
I have neither the time nor the extreme technical knowledge of the details involved with writing drivers for all the hardware I buy for my computers.
I want something that works the way it says it will on the box, not something that I have to scour the web for in vain hopes someone else already wrote the drivers for it, or dig into the details trying to piecemeal my own together to get it to do what it says on the box.
Simply checking HP's website for my all-in-one wireless networked printer/scanner/copy/fax yields Windows and Mac drivers. None for Linux.
Granted, most of the functionality (copy/scan/fax) can be done with the built-in web interface for my printer, but I like to actually print from the computer once in a while, and that requires drivers on my computers.
Not to mention fully manufacturer-supported drivers for video cards, TV-tuners, etc. (yes, I know there's some things in Linux that will do this, but it's not as easy as in Windows -- plug in the hardware, start windows, when it finds the hardware, put the CD in and hit 'install')
Which brings me to another point. I love the flexibility that Linux and such allow, but sometimes I want to listen to a music CD (not mp3, not ogg). In Windows, I can put the disc in the drive, and it brings up Windows Media Player and starts playing. Done. Half the time I've installed Linux, I don't even have sound. The rest of the time, I keep forgetting how to mount/unmout CD's so I can get to the content on them. Let alone figure out which one of the pre-installed media players actually works.
Yes, I am a nerd, but I am one who is very distracted by real life as well. I don't always have time to rebuild drivers and kernels and reconfigure everything every time I buy a new piece of hardware to plug into my computers. I like things that work they way they say they will on the box the first time I try.
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" -Rush
Well, I never could get Linux to install et run the way i want it, ie:
;-)
- with all my data files, and ONLY my data files, in one place for easy backups
- with some kind of remote desktop access
- with my wifi cards
- on my AMD boards (nforce, Sis...), with sound, network, graphics
Something always goes wrong. I've read HOWTOs, asked for explanations... i don't want someone to do it for me, I want to know how to do it like I do in Windows. I can't. I don't think i'm especially dumb.
I can install a pretty clean, secure, optimized Windows PC in 3 hours (w/ office, updates..). I've tried FIVE times installing Linux, giving it 6-10 hours each time... no dice. Initial install goes VERY quickly, compared with Windows's multiple procedures + patches, but then something fails (LAN, Wifi, VGA, Sound, VNC...) and it's Linux Hell again...
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Hope the slashdot community can handle MY opinion.
1. Configuration - it's a hassle and requires too much effort. i'm not lazy, i just don't care.
2. Support - doesn't support as much software as windows and what it does have is usually just a stripped down copy. most important to me, games... I like to play a lot more then quake and tux racer.
3. GUI - granted, many steps have been taken to improve most distributions of linux's GUI but in my opinion it is still far superior to windows. linux is still largely command prompt based and requires too much to learn for simple actions.
4. 2nd rate OS - i don't want a product that comes in second. i buy and support quality and in my opinion quality might only be just that, an opinion. but windows is number one despite what linux users want to believe. i'm not saying windows doesn't have problems but it's perfect for what i want to do and with the number of people using windows being what it is, apparently the majority of society feels the same way. i'm not looking to run an efficient virus free server that's hack proof. i own a few home computers and windows is the best candidate for the job. period.
5. Hordes of pro-linux zealots - turned off by the majority of linux users being narrow minded, one sided nerds, I don't want to be categorized as one or be seen consorting with one.
Watch my karma drop at record speed.
fact: microsoft > linux
Yes, there tools for editing this type of media using Linux, but the reality is, I have to have the best possible software for doing this work. I can't say to clients, "Well, the font looks kinda sucky because I used Linux. But don't let that worry you - pretty soon everyone will be using Linux, and you won't notice anymore!"
Adobe makes some pretty good software, but even that is still not good enough. I will always need it to be better. In order to compete in the marketplace, I have to be using the best possible tools. This is the reality in the world of the application layer.
If Adobe and their ilk would start to seriously support Linux, I would probably switch.
If I wanted to listen to Linux Fanboys there's a lot easier ways.
I admit Linux is superior, but let's admit that there's differences and it's not 100 percent superior to Microsoft.
This article reminds me of the idiots who thought sarcasm was the way for the macintosh to beat the PC, guess what? They lost and this type of article doesn't help any, if anything it makes the linux users sound petty and childish and of course while it names a few things, it's technically incorrect on many of the assumptions it makes.
Yes Linux is cheaper, and less known bugs as well as safer from viruses, but there really IS less software for it, especially from the big development houses and most flavors are complicated, those flavors that are simplified don't hold any number of the market place to really make them the standard.
I just wish both sides of this arguement grew up and realized that there's never going to be harmony, just enjoy what you choose.
There is not just one Linux. Sure, there's not one Windows either.
Two Windows' on store shelves already confuses people. Now, imagine every variant of Linux in front of a user. The list of available applications with many distributions is also daunting.
I think there were at least four distros listed in that writeup. Explain that, or compilation of an application, to my mother. We'll get there eventually, but claiming that we're already there might be a bit premature.
The average person is just not intelligent enough to use something that a 1st grader couldn't use fluently with in 25 minutes.
20% of people in the US don't know that the Earth revolves around the Sun?!?!?! How on earth could they understand a power-user OS?
-PMP-
What the fuck does UT2k4 need root access for?
Hell if I know?! I just wanted to play the game. I dropped the compressed file on my desktop from the Atari website. Dragged the file into my console and ran it. I kept getting errors about can't find Data_path. I looked at the script for the game startup and everything looked fine. I made sure that it had execute rights and made sure the paths were right. But most people on forums (and the ones I did find were in German) pointed to where it wanted to be installed.
So as a guess, I opened up root console and then dragged it in and reinstalled in the desired default direcotry (not home directory) and it all of sudden started working.
I know it's not supposed to work like that from extremely small knowledge of linux you aren't supposed to install as root if you can help it, but... The thing is I'm willing to learn better ways more than most people, but I'm pointing out that if you were to use me as a litmus test for someone starting out then there has got to be a better way of getting things installed... Or at least more intuitive.
Maybe I've just gotten too used to doanloading files and then just double clicking on the file I downloaded and expecting them to run on Windows and Apple OS. Doesn't mean I'll stop trying Linux... I just find a few of it's quirks annoying.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Who the flying frosted fuck modded you Insightful five times? Sorry, you fail.
...there where hardly any software for it. All it had was a simple pixeldrawing program, a webbrowser and very plain text editor.
./configure (if it runs into depency problems simply recurse through these steps again), make, make install. But then again if you didn't install GCC or some other compiler when you first installed Linux... well, you're fucked. Reinstall the whole system and don't forget GCC this time.
When I stuck in the CDROM and whatever I clicked on, nothing happened.
What, you mean the initial blue install screen? Yeah, the mouse doesn't work there. Instead you have to use that silly "keyboard" thing. Of course, ignore the fact that Linux also requires you to hit enter a few times before you can use the mouse -- well, so long as you don't have a serial mouse. Those don't work with modern Linux distros -- except for that distro over there.
Well, as it turned out, you actually have to make some weird sorta room for it on the harddisk, since it cannot be installed from an ordinary RPM.
What the fuck is this supposed to be? I can't even tell what this is supposed to be ripping on. RPMs don't take any room on your hard drive? News to me. Are you trying to make a shot at partitioning? What the hell is this?
As opposed to Linux which has everything installed from the start. That is, if you can figure out how to run it. Oooh, right, open a terminal, type "/usr/bin/xinetd restart" if you're on RedHat. Or type "/usr/sbin/xinetd restart" on Suse. Or "/etc/bin/xinetd restart" on Gentoo. Err-- but that's only if you have it installed. Do you have it installed? You can find out by typing "dpkg -xinetd" on RedHat. Or "apt ?xinetd" on Gentoo. Or "ejfao xinetd" on Suse. And if it gives you ErrorX you're missing some depencencies. And those depencies can be obtained from XXXXXX.org. Or dpkg. Or apt-get. And if you can't find an RPM for your distro, you have to compile it from source. If you can get the source, that is. And once you've (maybe) obtained the source, simply run
IT'S SO FUCKING EASY, EVEN A THIRD GRADER COULD DO IT!
But I'll get modded troll for this.
Why is everyone here so hellbent on selling their OS of choice to everyone else? Why do fanboys of 'blank' OS (or OS 'blank') feel the need to impose it onto everyone they see? I like Cherry Coke and Milkyway Midnights. But i see no point in proclaiming the goodness, or arguing with somone over it. I'm not trying to start a flame war, i have just always been curious about this.
Linux has not caught on in the *desktop* space. Linux has made good headway in the server space. As people advocating Linux on the desktop, you have to objectively questions the reasons for that.
After all, rational people would rather not have to pay Microsoft or Apple for software that provides an equal amount of service. If a free operating system cannot compete with commercial counterparts that cost infinitely more ($100/$0 = infinity), then you need question why.
There are outliers, but people on *average*, behave rationally - after all, rational behavor is what all of economics is predicated on.
If a business owner or even a family using a computer could cut costs and not lose anything, then why wouldn't they?
Microsoft asserts its monopoly power to force computer vendors into pre-installing windows onto most PCs. One can also claim that Apple has the same issue in that all of their computers come installed with an Apple operating system.
Since PC vendors operate on very thin margins, one would assume that cutting out the cost of the OS would be a tremendous competitive advantage for a prospective PC vendor. If Dell, IBM, HP etc... all need to pay the "Microsoft tax", a competitor should be able to undercut them by offering "equivalent" Linux based machines. However, this has not been a successful strategy.
If Linux can provide an adequate substitution for Windows, then Microsoft really doesn't have any more monopoly pricing power. Therefore, another rational strategy is for a large computer vendor such as Dell to completely drop Microsoft. After all, if Linux can provide the same amount of service that Windows can, why wouldn't Michael Dell just give the finger to Microsoft and drop them completely? If would save them literally *billions* of dollars. In fact, there is a tremendous economic incentive for computer vendors to drop Microsoft. Yet they do not comply. Why?
Perhaps the *assumption* that Linux provides an equal amount of service compared to Windows needs to be re-examined. In fact, by proof of existence, users would rather pay $100 (or whatever Windows costs these days) NOT to use Linux (or BSD or any other free OS). They are acting rationally. If they weren't, some keen business person would be able to *game* that differential and make money (Like the almost non-existent linux-computer vendors).
So the question remains. Why?
And don't say that people are "stupid". They aren't. They behave rationally on average. People choosing servers for example, tend to use Linux without batting an eye.
It's just a huge anti-MS flame with no point at all. Hell, it's not even funny..
.conf files (not to mention finding them..) isn't a trivial task for the ordinary user who's used to having everything sorted out nicely in a tabbed-and-framed-gui and prefers it that way (and usually for a good reason too).
:-/ ), I'll be keeping my Windows around, thank you.
*Linux is too complicated*
I have not once managed to successfully install a linux distro, or even a complicated application, without using the terminal for a few hours. Editing
*Linux is a pain to set up*
Be it linux's fault or not, it has a lot less drivers, and a lot more inconsistencies. Setting up my DSL at home took me several hours (in which I switched back to my windows each time to access the internet, which was set-up almost automagically).
Not to mention dependency hell.. Ouch!
*Linux doesn't have enough applications*
Until I can use my photoshop on linux and play all my games there (just StarCraft or UO would do..
*Linux isn't secure*
Can't really be so sure. It's a matter for a serious study.
Anyway, I'm sure the average Joe will *find* a way to get his linux compromised. Nothing is fool proof.
Note: My Win2k machine hasn't seen a trojan or a spyware in months now, and I don't even use an anti-virus and hardly scan for spyware..!
*Linux is more expensive*
True or not, it's not a ridiculus claim.
For a serious company, the cost of software is nothing compared to a loss of clients which could be caused by inadequate software.
Whether linux is more adequate for a business than windows or not is a matter for serious study, and shouldn't be just dismissed as obvious by some "humorous" "blogger".
Just trying to keep things unbiased...
|| Geshem ||
look vi will always be better than emacs, just deal with it!
Not right on every point, but on most of them. Tears AArnott's lies to pieces.
"Drink coke for a week and you'll prefer coke. Drink Pepsi for a week and you'll prefer Pepsi".
...blast you /. mods for making the parent "insightful", aluring me with that "scent"! Yes, I read it from top to bottom. Yes, it was painful. Yes, I got through it...
...you moderator bitches...
Skip English class for a week and you'll miss lectures. Go to English class for a week and hopefully they will discuss paragraphs...
Not really a solution for every game or everyone. I bought a transgaming account for WoW because a friend of mine said it worked great. I had problems with my system though and when I tried to get support never received a single response to emails or on the forums.
Linux still has a long way to go before it is ready for hardcore gaming. It would be great if all games used OpenGL but they don't. Hopefully it will be addressed in the years to come because the ONLy reason I still use windows is for gaming.
======== In the future, everything will be artificial. ========
Maybe a good deal of NEW accidents woudl be caused as the ignorant are given souped-up hot rods.
In cars as in computers education would be key to a demographical change. If people were TAUGHT
(I mean REALLY taught. My mandatory classes amounted to little over "Push power Button. Wait for bootup. Use Office". Then again I live in Canada..if you're actively being taught and still don't care I don't know how to help)
how computer works they might care - but they're not, and spoon-fed Microsoft from birth.
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
You did know you can ctrl-click the one mouse button you have to emulate a right click?
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Although I enjoyed and agreed with the article, they glossed over Plug-n-Play. That IMO, more than anything, is what keeps Windows ahead of Linux in usage. Plug in a USB device and it works. Plug in a device, and pop in the CD when prompted. I have had more problems with USB devices on Linux -- even USB storage -- that it is a major detractor to widespread acceptance. I do like the selection of Linux apps (for the types that I use) though.
Have Keyboard, Will Travel
I'd rather not use an operating system which does not support half the applications I use on a daily basis on Windows. Until these things get ported, I will remain a Windows user. Also, linux ati drivers just aren't as good as Windows ones. Linux needs to be more uniform to standards. Not this driverset works with redhat, this one with slackware. Or this application package only runs on mandrake. And what the hell is with custom applications per window manager? It's just down right annoying.
This reminds me of all the relatives calling me for Microsoft support. Just because I'm known to be "good with computers".
But I now tell them I'm very sorry, that I just run Linux now, and I almost forgot how Windows is, that I'm not updated about the last marvels from Microsoft... and give them Microsoft helpdesk number.
nbody2002:If you can read this you may be addicted to the internet
Well if nobody in her family uses linux, then who the hell installed it in her computer? The Gnomes?
Well... maaaaybe the Gnomes, but who else?
Knome said:
"Now you are more familiar with one of them and naturally feel more comfortable using it. That's fine, no problem here, but please accept that others might feel differently."
Exactly. technical details of his post aside, he's right. Windows is easier to use. They don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on research to make their UI intuitive for sh*ts'n'giggles.
Open your mind, stop assuming your right, take steps to unify linux and make it easier to use, please.
If you're hearing rhetoric about Linux, open source, or Mac and everyone's bashing Microsoft, you've found Slashdot.
"Linux *is* too complicated for a good many people but it doesn't have anything to do w/the system design or how it works. It's too complicated because it's different from what they use every day at work and at home."
.conf file on Linux crash your system? Maybe, maybe not, depends on what you're doing. But the likelihood that someone would have to do that editing is higher on Linux."
It's really not all that different. Windows - - Point and click. KDE - - Point and click.
"Yes, it doesn't take that long to learn how to move around in the UI and find the alternative software that Linux runs. It's just different. People don't have enough time to eat, sleep, pay attention to their kids, or take their garbage cans in... They aren't going to have the time to install, adapt, and change the habits they learned using Windows for the past 15-20 years."
Right.... So no one should/will ever change. Just stay with Microsoft forever... I'm sure Microsoft is relieved that they no longer have to worry about losing their desktop monopoly.
"You know, I consider myself knowledgeable with computers. I run multiple OSs at home and have run many more over the course of my life. You know how many times I've edited the system registry since its inception? Less than 5. I really doubt that anyone *needs* to edit their registry ever."
Really? You have. So probably other people will need to also. It's just that they won't be able to do it. Kind of the author's point don't you think?
"You know how many times I've had to edit a configuration file on Linux? I just did it 12 times yesterday alone for two different programs. Will editing a
I don't know what _you_ were doing but I don't ever need to edit config files for my Suse desktop.
"I realize that this was a tongue-in-cheek article and I realize that it was mildly humorous but I just really felt that it was just as bad as Microsoft claiming that Linux costs more. This bullshit where Linux users fault non-Linux users for not switching because of the lack of difficulty is just bullshit."
No, this was humor. It was poking fun and Microsoft FUD. Microsoft always claims that Linux is oh so hard. The Microsoft FUD is the bullshit, not this article.
"Linux isn't easy and it does have a learning curve. Most people just don't care to take the time to learn it."
Well I agree with half that statement. Most people are apathetic and don't care what they run as long as it works. And of course Linux has a learning curve. The point of the article is that that curve is no greater than the one to learn Windows. We don't come out of the womb knowing either operating system you know.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
I have since tried Windows some more, and I think it is fine if you get a bit used to it. My friend at school uses it a lot. He says it can do all different kind of things, but you have to buy some more stuff or get it from an FTP server in zero days.
I am not so skilled at the things you mentioned, but I will try it out and see what it can do for me. My system is a RedHat, which I bought with the software on. What I find hard about Windows is that you have to install it yourself.
My cousine helps me with the computer. Sometimes he needs to become "rude" on the computer to make it work. Is it why you are rude too?
:-) = I am happy
:^) = I am happy with my big nose
C:\> = I am happy with my OS
for those reasons is why I prefer developing for *BSD or OSX because I know where the dependancies will be on a standard installation is a much better argument.
Except that you have to cope with four different versions of OS X at various patchlevels. And, unlike Linux, OS X lacks the consistent package management, dependency management, and updating to cope with that automatically.
Developers of OS X somehow make it work most of the time, but they do so by including lots of dependencies in their packages (hence, you get really fat applications) and using very little cross-application integration. And many OS X applications just deal with it by saying "only works on Tiger" or "doesn't work on Tiger".
Why I like OSX is because all my Unix goodies I was used to under BSD, Apache/MySQL/PHP/Perl, were all extremely easy to install,
Unfortunately, it's hit or miss. Maybe all the UNIX goodies you needed were extremely easy to install, but a lot of UNIX goodies are not. Fink and OpenDarwin are both flaky, outdated, and incomplete compared to Linux distributions. Manual installation of software from source is hampered by problems like the fact that Apple has a proprietary window system and weird versions of gcc.
Altogether, I have found OS X to be a mixed bag. It's a pretty good system if it happens to do what you need, but its functionality is far more limited than that of a Linux or BSD system. The direction Apple is taking--more flaky features and less UNIX compatibility--is also worrisome. Still, while OS X and Linux each have their pros and cons, there are almost no reasons to use Windows compared to either of them.
/me takes a chair and popcorn and watches Just Some Guy's mom doing an OS switch instead of an upgrade.
.. better grab a beer keg to go along with the popcorn as it's not only a painful show, but a darn long one too.
With all this porting of gigabytes of accumulated personal data, proprietory-formatted binary files and registry settings
3.243F6A8885A308D313
"Explain to me why, why in this case, Linux, in its greatest magnificient userfriendliness, doesn't surpass Windows usage when it comes to pops and moms computer?"
because mom and pops PCs don't come home from shop preloaded with Linux?
I don't feel like it...
http://compaq.homeip.net/slashdot/winvlin/
Transgaming is good if you are a Linux user who wants to play Windows games that you would otherwise be completely unable to play. I've used it myself to do that, and am probably going to soon in order to play WoW. Since I'm never going to use Windows again, some level of Windows gaming support is better than zero. Yet suggesting that it would allow someone who is primarily interested in playing games for Windows to ditch Windows is unjustified.
Even the officially supported games have many problems that Windows users don't have to suffer. Bugs, crashing, performance divits, non-working features even in "officially supported" games like WoW and Counterstrike. Even if it does work more or less flawlessly on one release, that is no guarantee that it will work on the next (in fact WoW is apparently just such a case).
And that's still ignoring that there are probably thousands of games that aren't even in the transgaming database, or are there but have no playability rating and don't work at all if you try. You are at best limited to a small sampling of the total number of games available for Windows .
Cedega is a fine way for a Linux user to expand the number of games they can play. It does not in any way allow a Windows gamer to ditch Windows.
The enemies of Democracy are
Stuff that matters.
Great submissiion, Taco. I don't think ANY of these points have been rehashed 500 times on slashdot. Really great.
Not a chance. Coke tastes too bitter for me to ever drink that $#!+. Pepsi is sweeter. I actually liked the "New Coke" when it was out since it was even sweeter yet. Too bad it didn't last.
Dude, go back and actually read the replies.
The rest of it was perfectly correct and enlightened... from a relatively new Linux user's point of view.
Whoa! So, in your blog, you aren't clear that you a new Linux user, then you spew a littany of incorrect "facts" about Linux, as if you're in the know.
Do I detect dishonesty? (This is reason number 1 that you felt the flaims of Slashdot).
I, for one, use and admin both OS'es extensively and have done so for many years. I'm not new user in either environment. My current full-time job is an IIS admin (mostly) and as an Apache admin, as well.
I have about 13 years of Linux (released September of 1991) and more (I don't remember how many) of Windows. I have used, admin'ed, developed for, etc., Windows 1.0 through 2003 -- virtually every release.
I'm not a new user to either environment, as most on Slahdot are not, as well. Most of us are equally comfortable in either environment and we *know* the problems with both Windows and Linux.
I've already posted replies twice, but let me just point you to some IIS admin items that you conveniently left out (these are all separate from IIS and are required to admin IIS -- look them up, if you're not sure about them):
web.config
machine.config
COM+
mmc
iisreset
net stop iisadmin / net start w3svc
(permissions and security)
SSL -- code signing, not just plain SSL on IIS
Research your "facts," first, before posting on Slashdot, or we will have to moderate you out of existence.
Having incorrect "facts" is the second reason you got no respect.
In addition, your rant rambled all over the place from Desktop OS (where Windows shines, sort of) to Server OS (where Linux shines). This is not an apples-to-apples comparison!
This is the other reason you got no respect on Slashdot.
Now, I have tried to confine my responses to IIS v Apache and security/permissions. The desktop is something I'm not tackling, here.
You didn't earn respect -- you just trolled.
FYI - don't post editorial as if it's journalism!
1. If you're the kind with "gigabytes of accumulated person data", then you're probably savvy enough to migrate without help.
2. If you're like everyone else, then moving to Linux is probably no more difficult than upgrading to a new computer (which is how probably 95% of the population gets a new version of Windows). Do you really think that Jane Grandma will have less trouble getting digital photos of the grandkids from her Gateway 2000 to her new Dell running Windows than she would to a Linux system or a Mac?
There are also people who will help you switch to other operating systems if you really need the assistance.
As for my own real-life mom? She was a DEC hacker back when RMS had a soul patch and a student ID. I'm not too worried about her coping skills.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
This is precisely why I avoided Macs 10 years ago, given the choice between using a Mac or Windows 3.1 on campus computers. Too often I'd see a student come up to an admin to get their floppy ejected (we had to store our e-mails on these, as web-based e-mail did not exist.) The admin would have to pry it out with a paper clip since the OS crashed, and there was no physical eject button on the floppy drive.
So now this problem still exists after all these years?
Tacit knowledge.
(been waiting to use that word in real life for almost 12 years now. Thank god I went to graduate school to learn it. LOL)
Ok, your posts are way more funny than the article itself :D.
nbody2002:If you can read this you may be addicted to the internet
Just copy winfile.exe, winfile.hlp. and glossary.hlp from a Windows NT 4.0 box (but don't copy them from Windows 3.x/9x as long file names are not supported, among other things!) NT's winfile will continue to function under XP (and 2K, where it was first removed.)
I thought I'd weigh in. I've used extensively linux, OS X, and Windows, and I've had to teach people all three.
Windows will get slow, bogged down, spyware ridden, and crash prone, but if there is one thing I've found, it's that people can pick it up fairly quickly and keep their computer running for long periods of time. Not running well mind you, but you need no technical knowledge for the most part to just have the thing do your email, web browsing, etc.
OS X, once you learn it, imo is fast, powerful, and does some amazing things. On the other hand, I've never thought it was terribly user friendly. Granted, you will never need to touch the terminal, but getting someone up and running on the basics of OS X takes a lot longer then explaining to them the very basics of Windows. However, I appreciate that much of the power and many of the unix preferences are still there, just buried where the "typical" user is unlikely to find them.
And now, Linux. Linux is a power trip to me. You have every option available to you, you rarely have to dig for those options, and they're not explained or simplified... they're just there. Even when everything goes right and you don't need to use the shell at all, the sheer number of preferences, options and unfamiliar terms are just overwelming for new users. Plus, the OS's dutiful following of your commands is just overwelming to anyone I've tried to teach it to. If you tell the driver to switch to a resolution the driver can't do, it'll do it and you'll be at a shell prompt next time you reboot. The OS just expects the user to be competant and know what they're doing. I consider that to be the greatest strength and weakness of Linux.
Anyway, those are my 2 cents. Having worked with all three and taught people all three, I can say that despite what any fanboy says, each has it's strength and abilities, and not one of them is "superior in all ways" to the others.
All he said was you have to install it and download the patches. Well even with XP you need to install it, setup accounts, find all of your drivers install those. Many times you have to do that first because I have seen XP not see ethernet cards and it has no builtin drivers for wireless cards. Then you can download and install the windows XP patches which you need to do a couple of times because the patches need patches need patches... Now you have just an OS you still need to install all your apps like Office IMing apps a real browser and e-mail client and anything else you want to use. Now lets look on Linux all you need to do in the simple distros is pop in the CD install setup acconts, update the system and your good to go.
Linux was created by programmers, for programmers. If the average Joe expects to just plug in and go like some super-sysadmin, hes wrong.... The great thing about Linux is that its so configurable and open to custimization. Control over what your doing creates stability, if you do it right.
So anyone that says, " Well Windoze is sooo much easier than Linux, I don't have to use that funny console thing at all!!" Thats fine with me, To each his own.
(and by the way, MacOSX, Windows, BSD, Linux, and all the other modersn OS's are all equally easy to use. How hard is it for the average users (not the sysadmins) to point and click?)
I hate to be captain obvious, but Linux lacks money. Let's be honest here. It takes money to buy marketing. Microsoft makes their money off of a simple, yet time tested, concept of spending money to make money. They have the money to spend because they charge for the product. Then they spent money on different marketing plans and start to build recognition. That recognition in turn made them more money because consumers like to buy what they see a lot. It just kinda snowballs from there. I'm sure it was much more complicated and what not, but fact remains that every company trying to put a product out there gets an immediate product interest off of saying they run on Windows. Linux is a great product. But it is not standardized, marketed, or optically inspiring to the extend of Windows. I personally feel good about having an Operating System I can use that pretty much I am the ony one who knows how to use it of all the people around me. I like to tell people that nothing on the internet is truely free. Except Linux.
Apart from security, Windows has a fairly large group of open source software; most of the time, a Linux/Posix/Unix app will get ported to Windows. People forget that, but Open Source != Linux.
Personally, I use a great deal of open source software under Windows that covers all my needs: Open Office for Office apps, Firefox/Thunderbird/NVU for internet, Eclipse for Java, Devcpp for C++, putty for SSH, etc.
The only reason Linux is great is because it is a fine server O/S. For desktop, it's hardly needed (although it functions OK, most of the time).
Hate to break it to you too, but have you ever bothered to check either OS, out of the box with the ShieldsUP test on grc.com? Windows 95 only has port 139 open by default. Windows NT will have that plus 135, and possibly another. Heck, Windows for Workgroups 3.11 has NO ports open. With every release of Windows, even more ports are open by default.
Without getting into incredible detail, you have to do more patching with the newer versions of Windows. When Sasser hit us at work (No, I'm not the admin), all the XP boxes were infected. The NT boxes didn't even burp. I'm still waiting for my Windows for Workgroups 3.11 to box to get hit with a worm....
*cues Final Jeopardy theme song*
No.6
Linux has THE LARGEST number of asshole users in the community.. this is just fact.. whenever you talk to a nuxer you meet a person who believes their OS is infallable and without fault to an extreme degree that will refuse to listen to reason even if you bludgeon them to death with evidence.. people like that just piss me off.. hence.. I'll stick to QNX!
I totally agree windows is crap.. but I do NOT agree that linux is all that.. cuz it aint!
Its actually so small you can't see it without an electron microscope .. I have one and here's what it says
1. OpenServer 6 Costs Less
(Than a space mission)
2. SCO Has a Superior Kernel
(to DOS)
3. OpenServer Has Better Security
(than windows 9x)
4. SCO Has a Customer-Driven Roadmap
(the customer in question is drunk)
5. OpenServer 6 is Backward Compatible
(OpenServer 6 is backward , and compatible with itself )
6. SCO Allows You to Focus on Your Core Competency
(As we can't)
7. SCO Owns and Warrantees its Products
(That should read war rants about )
8. SCO is Unifying its Code Base
(Getting rid of all the GPL code we put in by um accident)
9. SCO UNIX: Legendary Reliability
(Yes its a legend)
10. SCO Has an Award-Winning Support Team
(We awarded them ourselves)
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Reason number one: Linux is too complicated
This is true. Although I can install a distro without the use of a GUI, most people can't even get step one to install the OS. I just spent a few minutes trying to explain to someone how to get sound working on his machine. It's a bit different than telling him where to click. Yes, all jokes aside, but the help isn't there for true noobs. It becomes a matter of, how to ask for help.
Reason number two: Linux is a pain to set up
Again, I'm speaking for the true noobs. Getting a new device to be recognized is not as easy as 1,2,3. They could probably find out the answer themselves, but it's a whole new world. Completely different from what they're used to (windows). The transition just isn't there, so it's difficult where to look for the answers, or even how to phrase it in google.
Reason number three: Linux doesn't have enough applications
A thousand applications don't mean squat, if they all don't do what I want to do. If I want to burn a CD, I want it easy enough for a newb to do it. There's a few out there, I admit, but how would someone new know where to start looking.
Reason number 4: Linux isn't secure
I have no comments here. Most newb desktops don't really care for security. As long as it doesn't screw up their itunes playlist, and their dvd player.
Reason number 5: Linux is more expensive
No comment here, most newbs will drop money for the newest ghz wonder. But in terms of actual value, time is lost. Quite honestly, most people are looking for an appliance not a computer. They want that sucker to work straight out of the box, like a telephone.
Depends on what you need to do. For the server Linux is great but you have to be completely blind to think it makes a superior desktop.
Try doing the following things on your Linux Desktop:
>> Have a non-techie connect to Wifi consistantly
>> Author DVD video with menus using a nice GUI interface (I'm talking mom and her DV camera for under $100)
>> Make backup copies of a DVD in less than 8 clicks of a mouse
>> Play a newer game
>> Use the latest and greatest media codecs
>> Go to CompUSA and buy virutally any piece of cool hardware/software and come home and get it working in less than 15 minutes
Don't get me wrong I love Linux I use it on Servers all the time. I was depressed for a week when i finally gave it up on the desktop. But you are seriously a second class citizen if you are a Linux desktop user. Face the facts people.
If so, when ?
I don't know if I'm unique, but that was the very first time I ever used a graphical desktop, and I got it right the first time.
Even though I am a Linux Zealot (TM), I do honestly admit that Linux is not for everyone in one respect: if all you do with a computer is play games and websurf - that is, if the machine is nothing to you but an entertainment device, you might as well stick with Windows. Do the absolute bare minimum to keep it going, keep the disk handy, and get good at typing "format c:\" at the DOS prompt and re-installing it, you'll be able to handle most of the problems that you have. *ducking fireball*
If, however, your computer usage involves any practicality - that is, if you do work on a computer, not only is Linux (or, in some cases, MacIntosh for graphics/multimedia work) a better choice, it simply makes everything else a laughable toy by comparison. *side-stepping flame-plume*
We now return you to the distro-flamewar already in progress *running from napalm shower*.
the "install missing plugin" feature should work under linux with the newest versions
The admin would have to pry it out with a paper clip since the OS crashed, and there was no physical eject button on the floppy drive.
That doesn't make sense --- why not just reboot the machine, and eject once the OS is up again?
So now this problem still exists after all these years?
No, because OS X uses things like memory protection and is far more robust than OS 9. My Mac has not crashed in over six months of use.
I work at an ISP. I do a lot of phone support. 80% of that goes something like this (only this is very abbreviated, pretending that the users understand the questions and the answers aren't dragged out of them):
/-r-e-n-e-w ...
..."
Me (M): Which version of Windows are you using?
Customer (C): XP
M: Click on run and choose start
M: A small window should open.
M: Now type c-m-d, and press Enter.
M: A black box should open.
M: Now type i-p-c-o-n-f-i-g and press Enter.
M: A bunch of text should appear.
M: There should be a line that says "IP Address".
M: Please read me that number.
C: 1-6-9-.
M: Ok. That's good enough.
M: Now type i-p-c-o-n-f-i-g space
C: It's not doing anything.
M: Press Enter.
C: It's not doing anything.
M: We need to wait for a minute.
C: Ok. It did something.
M: Did it print the IP Address again?
C: No.
M: What does it say?
C: "A network cable is unplugged"
This discussion takes 30 minutes of repeating things several times.
Believe it or not, this process is much easier than saying "Click Start; Choose Control Panel; double-click on Network Connections;
Of course, the netwrok cable isn't usually unplugged. Somethimes they can't dhcp. Sometimes they renew and everything is fine. Sometimes their Winsock is broken. It varies. But the starting point is usually to go to the command line to figure out what is wrong.
Except if he mentioned installing drivers in XP, he would have had to have mentioned the many missing drivers in Linux, and the difficulty of installing proprietary drivers, and the hassle of writing to your hardware manufacturers to inform them you've returned their products and will not purchase their products in the future unless they become supported natively in Linux on your platform. And then going and finding compatable hardware, and trying to find the command in your distro to rescan hardware. But hey, Linux is still for everyone.
I saw this coming, but you still made me
spew my Cubalibre on my keyboard.
shame a real waste of good rum.
Thanks
Gunillablue
What is your time worth to you? To me, $40 is less than 2 hours of working. Even at $5 an hour thats a full day's work. If you spend more time than that setting up your linux box, explaining it to family, trying to get your favorite games working, your late-model video and sound cards, you lose.
Now, if you are doing it for the love or the joy, ok, have fun. But for me it's a simple economic decision. I'll take Windows for the OEM price, thanks. Time is money, and I'd rather enjoy time with my family / research / productive work. An operating is the means to an end, not the end.
-everphilski-
Yes I have an Account, don't remember it.
Every mac post I see
"says it just works out of the box", Sound familiar
like microrust, were do want to go today, we'll take you there.
(Not a mac flame) hard to believe I know.
The reason I like linux is it makes me think when
I want to do something like think outside of the box. Yes it's a be_atch but it's my be_atch (clue stick)
PS: I like to think for myself
PPS:I don't want others thinking for me.
Apple Anonymous user
Linux is very far from being the OS of the average John Doe, it does not matter how many more moronic comments this guy makes.
about the registry: this probably depends on the user; quite a lot people probably never see it, but I don't know a single (windows) power user who doesn't tweak the registry (with regedit!); I have used it on most windows systems I ever touched and I know very little about recent windows versions.
/etc/inittab and remove the original (or fill with ascii junk)
;-)
about config files: I have to admit I like them, but nonetheless I agree it makes it harder for new (linux) users. But there is *nothing* you can do to *any* conf file that will make your system crash; the main difference is that rebooting won't fix anything (maybe even make it worse).
1) you have to restart the daemon reading the conf file before anything happens...
2) even as the ~almighty~ root, the chance of crashing the kernel by misconfiguring a daemon are quite slim; some would consider this behaviour to be a *bug* (and probably fix it)
If you want to try one of the possibly 'bad' scenarios:
1) have a tested rescue cd/secondary install
2) in a running system: backup
3) "init q" to force init to reread the inittab
I actually have no idea what will happen (to the existing session); rebooting will fail, but you might have a chance to recover without a reboot; otherwise repairing your system is left as an exercise
That was the all-time best reply to a troll! Thanks! Made me laugh!
Market share alone would also fix the first issue.
Well, mabey not perfect. Gentoo. With a graphical installer. And default choices. Stage 3 defaults (fast install.) Prebuilt binaries for a default install. You want to hack, you can compile. You don't want to compile, don't hack. Call "emerge" "install". Choose everything. At the start of the installation, have 2 radio buttons: Standard and Expert. Standard does the above. Expert does a normal gentoo install. Put a nice warning in big red letters if you choose expert. People want to be able to choose, but they don't want to make the choice. Give them the ability to choose KDE or Gnome or XFCE, but don't MAKE them choose. Choose for them and let them change the default choice. You get all the great things of choosing, combined with the candy-coating of having your system dictated to you in a way that will probably work with the least amount of effort. Maximal choices with maximal standards, THAT should be the goal for Linux. That leads to ease of use.
Not a sentence!
You never heard of vi, huh?
I've seen a lot of things, but I've never been a witness.
I have been purely running Linux at work for about the last year - previous to that it was a bit of a mix or XP and Linux. I recently got myself a shiny new machine at home and I opted to have Windows XP Home installed for games and the girlfriend and dual-boot into Linux for development work. :0)
After using Linux for so long, Windows REALLY PISSES ME OFF. I can now see why Microsoft believe why security and usability don't go together, but only on Windows (On Linux its not a problem, IMHO)!
I run Windows from a non-administrator account, as is sensible and good for security reasons. The problems are as follows:
1) when I download a program and want to install it, I download it as non-admin user to my downloads directory. I then open said directory in Explorer, right-click, select Run As... , select Admin, provide password, seems to run fine until I get an error saying that Admin cannot read a file, blah , blah, blah. Bit strange, as it could read the installer to run the file....
So, while still logged on as a regular user, I copy the file (file X.exe now called Copy of X.exe), right-click, select Run As..., select Admin, and this time it works!! For the love of all that is holy what is going on here?!?!?!
2) On XP home there is a weird file permissions mechanism unlike on XP pro. For some reason, when logged on as Administrator, I cannot modify another users files. This is fact. You can Google for this, as I am too lazy to provide a link. For the love of all that is holy what is going on here?!?!?!
3) what the fuck is fast user switching all about? It's crap and it's slow. When I try to access admin functions from a non-admin account can't I be prompted for a password for the Admin user?!! Why can't I run the control panel using Run As... in a non-admin account??? There is no obvious way to do it. I have to keep "Fast" user switching all the fecking time.
4) When having logged on as Admin, then switched to a non-admin account via "Fast" user swithing without logging off Admin user, the non-admin user still gets application windows popping up from the Admin login! (MSN Messenger being the prime culprit). Bit of a security problem you would think.
Anyway, I look forward to hearing like-minded criticism, solutions, suggestions, where to buy good stress toys and such.
Thanks for reading
1) Either you treat Linux as a public desktop operating system, which means that you have customers who are the desktop users and you are their developer (the fact that you work for free is your own damn problem)... OR you treat Linux as your own personal hobby operating system, which means that you answer only to yourself.
2) Either advocate the adoption of Linux and, in exchange, offer your services to your new customers (the fact that you work for free is your own damn problem)... OR stop advertising Linux for people who are not developers themselves and concentrate on making software for only yourself and your fellow developers to tinker with.
3) Either claim that Linux is at least as user-friendly as Windows and listen and address your customers' feedback (the fact that you work for free is your own damn problem)... OR make things only work as easy as you yourself would prefer and offer no user support for products you've developed
UNIX: A computer user is defined as a programmer. WINDOWS: A computer user is defined as a consumer.
Disclosure: I have been using GNU/Linux almost exclusively for 5 years on my home systems. I have over 15 years experience with UNIX and Windows.
While there are a number of useful, well written programs for GNU/Linux, but by far the majority are, at best, half-finished and poorly documented. The term amaturish comes to mind, but that should not be a surprise, as many of these projects are just hobbies or items the programmers wanted and decided to make available to the public. Development comes to a crawl once it is working well enough for the developer, even if it has a few bugs. Then, there is dependency hell. Often, the best way to make sure software you want will run on your system is to download and compile the source.
Most of the development of the actual kernel appears geared more to servers than desktop user machines.
I just installed SuSE Linux 9.2 on my dual P3 server and a new Toshiba A85 laptop dual booting with WinXP Home. Things started well.
But, on the laptop built in wireless network card is not supported, so I had to install and set up ndiswrapper.
Then, I found out that the firewall rules on the server kept me from using NAT, routing out to the internet, using DHCP, or using SAMBA and every attempt to use the config tools failed to fix it. I ended up manually adjusting the iptables to allow my laptop to connect to my server and route out to the internet.
Then, the laptop stopped updating resolv.conf and the routing table when the wirless interface is started. I still haven't worked this one out. The interface comes up, dhcpcd gets all the info and sets the correct IP, but does not set update resolve.conf or a default route. Of course, when I manually set up the interface it works. When I manually run dhcpcd it works. But, the wifi does not work correctly on boot or when runing ifup or ifdown. Currently, I am working my way through the configuration scripts trying to find what is wrong.
I have also noticed that both GNOME and KDE both bear a strong resemblence to Windows. They may be prettied up and have a few different features, but the look and feel is windowrific all the way. Personally, I prefer WindowMaker.
While GNU/Linux may be ready for some home users, the majority is better off sticking with Windows. Small businesses are the ones who would vastly benefit from using GNU/Linux, the problem is convincing them to adopt it. The issues with hardware compatiblity and the availablity of quality software for small businesses are major stumbling blocks to adoption.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
UT2k4 certainly does NOT need root access - not for installing and not for running. I didn't give it root access (why would I? Have Epic given me any reason to trust them with root access on my machine?), and it installed just fine.
/usr/local/games/ut2004 though, so maybe that's where the grand parent had a problem? Although I would expect it to install just fine in $HOME, I believe the installer even suggested doing so.
I did install it in
And no, you don't need to give the installer root access to do that. You only need to set the user doing the install as owner of the ut2004 directory. Big difference in security.
If you just wanted something up and working quickly then you shouldn't have used slackware. Its package management system deliberately doesn't have dependencies, so its up to the user to determine for themselves what other packages a package requires. The time taken to determine dependencies for something like X and GNOME would be massive and not trivial for mysql either. Not to mention that you downloaded RPMs off the MySQL website which probably weren't even meant for that distro - especially since it doesn't even use RPM packages!
At this point I have wasted most of my free weekend futzing around. I decide to install onto Windows Server 2003 just to "git 'r done" before Monday. The mysql graphical install goes without a hitch, enter my port and root password info in to the nice dialogs, and the service starts right up. Same with the apache install. Same with the Perl install.
If you really had used lots if different Linux distros consistently for years you'd have known that installing mysql, apache and perl on a modern Linux distro (such as Ubuntu/Debian, Mandriva, Fedora/RHEL and others) is as simple as:
$PKGMANAGEMENTPROGRAM mysql apache perl
where $PKGMANAGEMENTPROGRAM is one of apt-get, urpmi, yum etc.
This would automatically resolve and install dependencies and install those programs in a working state. You would even have saved a few minutes extra versus Win 2003 on the time it would take you to navigate to each of those program's web site, download and install through the install wizards on that system. You could then have spent your 2 hours on bugzilla config and been done - free to enjoy your weekend.
If you chose the wrong distro for your task then its not a fault with Linux but a problem between your chair and your keyboard.
Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
Will you ever stop just denying that it's real?
I guess people who are familiar with Linux probably found the article intensely humorous, despite its obvious deficiencies. As someone who recently tried to set up gentoo, I couldn't read on.
Are we REALLY still in the days where a non-graphical front end still hides behind everything? Must we seriously edit text files using nano or vi or something other unbearable piece of sh*t to configure our systems? At least Window's 'cmd' is an obvious fake - it's just there as an alternative way to launch programs, not that Windows ever had a proper shell in the first place...
I'm not going to start on this debate, but seriously, stuff like this just isn't funny to someone trying to learn or worse - migrate.
Has anybody had a sensible thing to add to this my OS vs your OS thing in the last 20 years? Certainly not on slashdot.
Aaron.
It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
Exactly. technical details of his post aside, he's right. Windows is easier to use. They don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on research to make their UI intuitive for sh*ts'n'giggles.
Please tell me where I can get this easy to use Windows. I would be very happy to know, because I am getting close to "fixing" this XP thing with a sledgehammer, because it's so frustrating to use. Nothing is easy in XP, everything is hidden in the most unintuitive place they could find.
Please, I want to have an easy to use Windows too.
He is right on with most of this, I dont know any one who actually bought all those third-aprty security app's he mentioned, but it is a fair point.
Linux is not quite ready for my mom. When it is, then we have arrived.
I look forward to the day. (SuSe is almost there)
Peace. Love. Linux.
Jason
The first time I sat down in front of a Mac, really way back, probably System 1 or something, I wanted to eject a floppy. The very first thing I tried was dragging the floppy to the trash and lo and behold! The floppy ejected.
I don't know if I'm unique, but that was the very first time I ever used a graphical desktop, and I got it right the first time.
You're unlikely to be unique, but you may well be unusual.
It's a long, long time since the first time I used a Mac II-LE, in a lab at my university, where there was a technician on hand to help us out.
"How do I eject this floppy?"
"Just drag it to the wastebasket"
"Are you sure? It won't delete everything?"
"Of course"
"Really?"
"Yes, really"
"Well, alright then"
There's NO WAY I would have tried that without being told, and repeatedly reassured. At some primal level I was still scared it would delete everything off the disk, right up until Apple changed it so the icon became an eject symbol when you begin dragging a mount icon.