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)
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
Then how come OSX is so freakin' easy for everyone to use? It only takes a few minutes.
Actually, I find OS X the most difficult to use at times probably because it's the most "different" for me.
Games.
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.
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.
Familiarity is by far the largest factor in ease of use.
Anything can start to feel comfortable given enough exposure. Why is popular music popular? Because they play it over and over and over. (People often confuse cause and effect in this one: it's usually popular because of the repetition, not the other way around.)
Use nothing but OS X for a year and everything else will seem awkward. Same goes for any other OS.
OSX is polished and has a singular top-down vision from Jobs and his unholy cult. There's no scattershot design by committee of blind idiots which is but ONE of the things hobbling Linux.
The biggest obstacle to Linux is that it is ruled, dominated, infested and infected with a "difficult is beautiful and better than easy or correct" mindset. There is active resistance to any sort of architectural framework promulgation beyond the kernel and even that is challenged by people second-guessing Linus. Never mind that easy to use GUI design is eschewed by Linux writers who seem to be inherently unable to grasp that what is easy for a techie geek is NOT the thing that the common end-users need or want.
The arrogany egocentric attitude of introvert geeks still rules: it should work the way I say and not the way those n00b lusers say. Microsoft doesn't work that way and look where they are today. Look where Linux is by comparison. EASE, not FREE or OPEN should be the buzzword of Linux.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
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
What you simply don't get is that with Linux most people write the software to use it themselves. Those people advocating Linux for Joe Sixpack are not the people writing the software. Those just write the software exactly the way they like it and that is good. If any change is necessary than it is the advocates who have to stop pretending Linux was written with the "normal" user in mind.
Linux is not Windows
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.
The fact that support for ACLs isn't as universally implemented in Linux as it is in Windows is flat out embarrasing.
Not if you compare them to the defaults they misconfigured in windows. Writeable \Windows\system ? Come-on! Those default ACLs are a complete utter fuck-up.
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
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.
"The only intuitive interface is the nipple. Everything else is learned".
I forgot who said that, but it was some UI designer a few people have heard of.
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.
Not difficult - just ridiculously unintuitive. Kind of like putting your front door lock on one of the side windows would be. What's wrong with the eject button being next to the thing it ejects, like on all other things in the entire world like DVD players, videos, toasters, ejector seats etc etc etc.
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
When I bought a mini 6 months or so ago I found that there were some things that I couldn't do straight off the bat - and it took some trips to Help or Google to figure it out. Strange, I thought, after having spent years with Windows and Linux (using/developing/admin).
It turns out that all my problems stemmed from the fact that I have got into the habbit of doing things in a convoluted fashion (be it due to horrible GUI design, conf files or whatever). The easiest, most obvious way often eludes me as I assume (subconsciously I guess) that it wont work.
I have had to retrain myself to try the most instictive way (or, at least, what my mum would try) first - and more often that not it works.
Couple this, with BSD underneath and its no suprise why so many people love it.
Just my 2p worth.
'Internet! Is that thing still around?' - Homer Simpson
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
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)
I whole heartedly agree, apart from on the laptops, where it is kinda right next to the drive itself.
...because Steve Jobs says so!
My girlfriend bought a Mac yesterday and to be honest the ejecting system completely stumped her.
GF: How do I eject the CD?!?!? There is no button?!?!?!
Me: Press the eject button on the keyboard?!?!?!
GF: Huh? Thats stupid...
a few minutes later
GF: Why does it complain everytime I unplug my iPod?
Me: You have to eject it first.
GF: Why?
Me (thinks): Shall I explain write behind caching or just tell her id...
Me: You have to do it in windows too... on a Mac you can drag it to the trash, or right click it and select eject, or highlight it and press Apple-e etc...
GF: Why can't I just press the button on the keyboard?
Me (thinks): Thats a good question that doesn't really have a none technical answer...
Me:
The way I see it, Apple sat a lot of very clever people down to figure out the most intuitive way of doing something completely unintuitive - unmounting media. None of them had a really good idea, so uncharactoristically for Apple they did all of them and gave you choice. People like choice about as much as they like taxes. They except them as a symbol of freedom whilst secretly hating them for the effort they force them to excert.
Unless you understand the caching mechanisms and the benefits they produce, its impossible to understand why you need them at all. I blame the floppy disk and DOS. Floppy disks were slow, but if you clicked on save, the minute you heard the clicking and whirring stop you knew the data was 'safe' and you knew where it was. People expect that from USB keys, CD-RW and firewire disks, and its very hard to explain why the new technology is harder to use, even if it is faster, stores more and improves system stability to someone who isn't technical.
Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
Easy compared to what? In my experience teaching across both KDE/Linux and OSX I see University students taking around a day to become very comfortable with KDE yet after a week teaching students new to OSX I am still getting fundamental useability questions, especially surrounding mouse/selection useage and the 'Finder'.
Currently I try and avoid teaching on OSX machines; student adaptation simply takes far too much class time. Once they do adapt however, they generally enjoy themselves, though there are always many that simply don't seem to grokk OSX at all.
Admittedly most of these users come from Windows.. which is
KDE appears to understand this very well.
More and more I'm of the opinion that OSX isn't an ephiphany or beacon of Useasbility, in the general sense, so much as a relatively successful marketing campaign telling us it is.
As one student asked, "I've lost my program, is this what the Finder is for"?
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
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.
How exactly is that a "problem of Linux"?
Am I (or is any Linux developer) supposed to give a crap whether you have a hard time with an OS they've built for their own use and pleasure? And no, I don't care if "attitudes like that are why Linux will never take over the desktop" -- I have no interest in what OS you or other people choose to run on your computers.
Please do enlighten us, though, as to what the "problems of Linux" are. I'm sure we'll find it amusing.
Fuck it
This doesn't make sense to me. I've used solaris, AIX, Windows 9x/NT4/2000/XPpro, various Linux distros, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and OS 10.1/.2/.3/.4. Linux pissed me off at first. (actually Linux still pisses me off for many reasons) If I had only used Linux for a day, I would be bitching at having a lost day. In fact I lost many days trying to get hardware and systems to work together(granted this was in the days of Slackware 2) (For the record I prefer BSD for many reasons. Including the ultimate license in Free-Beer and Free-Speech) My first mac was an iBook. I was leaving the country for an extended period and I needed a laptop that would just work for Office apps, email, and web browsing. I had to get used to a one button mouse when using the touch pad on the road, but if I was at home, I just plugged in my MS optical mouse and two buttons work fine. After about two weeks I got used to the one-button mouse. I have a friend that is a sales rep for Coke and I am a fan of Pepsi products. He once said, "Doesn't matter. Drink coke for a week and you'll prefer coke. Drink Pepsi for a week and you'll prefer Pepsi". I think the same thing applies with any computer system. Give it a couple weeks and then see. 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, especially since I was able to find package installers that did all that work for me. I had to edit the Apache conf file to enable php, but no matter what system I've installed apache on I've had to edit the conf file at least once. All of my custom BSD apps took minor, if any, changes in code to compile on OSX as well. I found the Dock extremely easy to use and the best part of OSX: Applications everyone else uses. I was able to buy MS Office (which was a charm to use on the Mac because it actually works), dreamweaver, Quickbooks pro, Quicken, Photoshop, illustrator, fireworks, Quark Xpress, Lightwave 3D, and a few Apple only applications like Final Cut Pro. I also have to admit I hated Word for mac (v.x) for the first 3 months I used it. Powerpoint on the other hand is a different story. PowerPoint just seems to work better on the Mac. Not only that but I have found OSX to be incredably stable. The system crashed to the point of restart 4 times in 3 years. Two of those times were while running OS 9 applications in the emulator (Quark). Most of the time, I just shut the lid and would open it and the system would spring back to life for weeks on end. I once had an uptime of over 100 days until my battery died on a long trans-atlantic flight. It is for those above reasons that people have really fallen for the OS X platform. A number of engineering depts I know have purchased PowerMacs with OSX, especially after the intro of the g5 processors, to replace DEC, SUN, and SGI workstations. Those workstations often cost USD 20,000+ when they were orginally purchased. Suddely $8,000 for a maxed out machine with 8GB of Ram is a bargin for those people. Saying I don't like _________ because I used it for one day and it was different isn't a good arguement. Its an argument, just not a good one. Saying I don't like Linux because no two distros are exactly the same and compiling binary programs for every platform is time-consuming and expensive is a real pain in the ass, not to mention Linux geeks tend to customize installs further adding to hassles with emails like "this won't work on my custom hacked 2.6 Kernal with a mixture of Fedora/Slackware/and Debain I cobbled together and 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.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Having RTFA, it would probably have given you much more knowledge on the topic than you previously had, right? Because it gave you sooo much insightful information that wasn't previously covered...
I sometimes wonder if it's possible to moderate articles "flamebait"... Because bashing windows without any objectivity to that rate is not considered editorial anymore in my book. It's easily made in 5 minutes (2 if you don't have any formatting), and will bring cash to your company by being sure posted on slashdot.
Next, since when does my grand mother needed to use a freaking command line to do any of her stuff? Granted, for server stuff, you need a command line on Windows, and that grounds (servers) is owned by Linux more and more (Unix-flavored OSes too).
Also, want to talk about games runned full rate? I don't know many power Unreal or Battlefield 2 players who use Transgaming...
call me troll, or overrated, but I really think I've made my point, and instead of just giving the traditional "ooooh aaaah" or "boooh", you should try to make a discussion.
Of Code And Men
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.
I've used solaris, AIX, Windows 9x/NT4/2000/XPpro, various Linux distros, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and OS 10.1/.2/.3/.4
Might I recommend you try the latest ParagraphOS.
Some oddities I'd like to point out:
.tgz, which I believe still (and intentionally) don't have dependency checking. So the MySQL rpm(s) wanted the things that mysql depends on (as it should), but those dependencies hadn't been installed in rpm format so it didn't think the dependencies were there.
1) I don't think Slackware was meant to be an "easy" distribution. Why did you select that particular distribution?
2) You installed rpms? In slackware? Of course you had problems. Slackware doesn't support rpm's natively. Slackware supports
3) I recall that the slackware devs were dropping gnome from the main distribution (or something along those lines). Even if they hadn't dropped gnome yet, I believe they're still planning to because they were having some trouble with gnome. So I would expect the gnome experience under slackware would be less than seamless.
I'm not pointing this out because I'm yet another GNU/Linux zealot. I'm pointing it out because I would've expected you to have these problems with the choices you made. I think it's very good to hear stories about people having trouble with Linux to show us that Linux isn't perfect in every way, because we can fix the weaknesses that we know about. Knowing about such issues also keep us grounded with the realities of Linux; however, I don't think your particular anecdote suggests much one way or the other.