Slashdot Mirror
Linux & Open Source Software, the Present
Mark writes to tell us that LinuxForums is running the second in a series of articles designed to reflect on "what Linux is, where it came from, where it's going, how to use it and why you should." With all of the recent talk about the perceived difficulties within the OSS community sometimes it is just good to take a look at our roots.
Take installation. Linux zealots are now saying "oh installing is so easy, just do apt-get install package or emerge package":
:-) The fact that this is not simple is not Linux's fault. Quake (like the old Loki ports of games) could ship with a nice installer, but maybe it doesn't. It could even ship with a nice shell script command line installer, but maybe it doesn't. I don't know because I don't play Quake.
With Fedora, you can also go to the web site, click on the RPM, type the root password when requested, and it will install it for you or at least tell you what packages you are missing. I prefer to use yum but for those who are afraid of the command line, there are other ways.
As for installation of the distro, Linux is far easier as a distro to install than Windows is. I hate having to come back every 15 minutes and answer a bunch of questions that really should have been asked up front. And don't get me started on product activation.
User: "How do I get Quake 3 to run in Linux?"
Zealot: "Oh that's easy! If you have Redhat, you have to download quake_3_rh_8_i686_010203_glibc.bin, then do chmod +x on the file. Then you have to su to root, make sure you type export LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.2.5 but ONLY if you have that latest libc6 installed.
You do realize you can do essentially all of this in the GUI. And if I have customers that need this done, I usually send them a shell script so that they don't have to worry about it.
In my experience and the experience of my non-techie parents, Linux is as easy to use as Windows, and because once it works, it just works, and because it is comparitively transparent, it is actually easier to learn once you get used to it (but we are not to say that familiarity is the standard of user-friendliness are we? Because if it is, then we should never try to do anything new).
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Not quite sure what to say. My mother (she got used to computers at work, ... she asked me many questions about how to
using a Wyse terminal and a set of mainframe apps) could never make any sense
of MacOS, OS/2, Windows or Linux
use any of them.
My mother-in-law gave me more calls about her previous Windows installations
(ranging from 95 to 2000) than she now does regarding Slackware 10.2 with
KDE, and needless to say there were no spy-ware removal or virus-cleaning
sessions since.
As far as I'm concerned it depends on the initial set-up, and that's the
case for all current OSes. If you are a geek, or know a geek very well,
you'll be fine. If you simply want to use something, and it's not pre-installed
to perfection (in other words, to how you'd like (it) to work) there's hassle.
Cheers
Sorry, I couldn't get past this line:
In contrast OSS new features arise either in response to features seen in proprietary software, or simply because a developer discovers how to do something cool and suggests that it be included.
Wow, what a great picture. OSS coders are either lazy, unimaginitive losers who copy MS, or freaks fascinated by new, shiny things.
What about features that appear because a developer needs them? You know, like how 90% of all successful OSS projects start?
I've made some (minor) contributions to OSS projects, and in no case was it because I was copying a closed source feature or because I "discovered how to do something cool". It's because I needed a feature that didn't exist, so I made it happen.