Slashdot Mirror
Linux Desktop Ready, Says Mainstream Media
DeathElk writes, "The Sydney Morning Herald recently featured an article espousing the virtues of desktop Linux. From the article: 'Linux is shedding its hard-core techie image in a bid to woo ordinary human beings seeking an easy-to-use operating system that can be downloaded for free.' Is this a step forward for widespread GNU/Linux desktop adoption? Too bad the article doesn't mention the large range of live CD/DVD distributions available for try-before-you-fly, or the range of Windows applications tested and working under Wine." Also, the article is slightly unclear on the concept of open source, defining it as an arrangement "where the source code can be modified upon the request of users or other developers."
I dunno if I'd call the Sydney Morning Herald the "mainstream media." I mean, it is Australia we're talking about here... : p
This guy's the limit!
The mainstream media is never confused with the meaning of open source.
Lies.
"If you don't have eyes you shouldn't have wings" -- Carl Pilkington
Finally!
What about the geeks who use Linux because it's not mainstream? What will they use now? Dragonfly?
-uso.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
If the Mainstream Media says Linux is desktop ready, then desktop ready it must be!
After all, the Mainstream Media is well known for its expertise in IT and its reliability as a source of proven facts and sober analysis!
Hrm.
Actually, now that I think about it, I do believe this is proof positive that Linux is absolutely not desktop ready.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
"Linux Desktop Ready, Says Mainstream Media"
"World is Ending! says People in General." A lone man on a streetcorner was quoted....
If the user isn't the administrator, then I could, but for the average every-day user?
I'm more tech savvy than most and I still find Linux to be a pain in the ass when installing applications and setting up stuff. The problem is while most distros share a general code base, a lot is slightly different enough to make compiling/installing apps a royalpain, and the documentation is often less than stellar.
Having recently put a lot of effort in getting Gentoo, Ubuntu, KUbuntu, and before that spending several years with Red Had machines, I cannot see giving normal users Linux machines.
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
WineX is now Cedega? why was i not informed?
and wow, it looks like it's doing much better than it did when i tried it.
the lack of games was the main reason i moved back to windows after using linux as a desktop for 2 years.
How exactly does one Australian newspaper with a circulation of 365,000 (Wikipedia) count as the mainstream media?
it's ready alright, but for whom?
Sent from my desktop computer
I used to play with Red Hat in 2003, and I found it just a little too hard for everyday use to keep using, so I went back to Windows/OSX
A few weeks ago, I started playing with Ubuntu, and I gotta say, there is no reason why it can't replace windows on the desktop. If Dell will start installing it on systems (thus knocking $100 buck off the price of a machine), then it can make some serious in-roads, and knock Windows back.
I don't know if it's ready for a corporate enviroment, though. Although I don't like MS, their combo of Exchange, AD, and DC is pretty powerful.
I'm sure that there are members of the "mainstream media" who also think that the age of consent to sex should be lowered to 8 and that sex with chickens is OK.
Are we to give credence to the same "mainstream media" that blames video games for murder (a large number of them, infact)? or that claim that the internet is robbing our children of their very souls?
...just not laptop ready.
The lengths I had to go to get my laptop working with Ubuntu were staggering.
Personally I don't think it's ready for mainstream as there are still loads of things that should be automatically installed by default (OpenOffice, FireFox, Email client).
Oh, I might as well plug my FAQ for installing Ubuntu on a Toshiba M70. It might work elsewhere too...
Summation 2
FTA, Ubuntu's marketing slogan - "Linux for human beings"
I feel like pluto, according to Ubuntu, I'm no longer human...
I've been playing with Linux since I discovered Suse 6.1. I love the concept, but the execution has been flawed. People have enough trouble with maintaining Windows PCs, much less having to delve into command line shells to get things done.
I've tried virtually every distro out there (and some that don't exist any more) and what I've found is the only one that matches the ease of use of Windows and BeOS is.....
Linspire (also working as freespire)
Funny, from the man everyone loves to hate (and I admit, his bragging has been pretty outlandish) comes the only linux distro to get it right.
I used BeOS as my prime OS for several years, so I'm no stranger to command lines, bash shells and working with obscure items, but Linux, as a concept, has a long way to go.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
when exactly was this quote taken? what is he talking about, am i missing something?
granted, i havent used Ubutuntu, but i used Red Hat, SuSE, and Fedora as a desktop for a few years, and all were very easy to install and use.
IMHO, linux has been ready for the desktop for years, but the world just isnt ready for linux.
as it is going to do with the new Vista, then I think that it will be a huge boon to open source. The biggest thing is if hardware vendors adopt selling open source OSes with their products. So far its been relegated for the most part to servers and hasn't widely been adopted, so that is what will hold the keys to open source adaption by the general public in the long term.
I think I am going to go Open Office soon on my home computers, so that should remove me from having to pay the rediculous fees for the next generation of online MS Office applications.
Justin - Don't be afraid of my blog, it won't bite.
Oh, and I do believe that the story is a dupe. I'm quite sure I saw this "This is the year of the Linux desktop" for the last 5 years or so. I'd like it to be true but I'm not convinced.
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
It's written on a newspaper AND on a webpage... that means it's 100% real. I, for one, welcome our new penguin overlords.
I got sick of answering my moms problems with viruses and spyware on her windows machine that I finally switched her to Ubuntu. It detected her scanner, her digital cammera and everything right off the bat. She's 65 and she says she hasn't had a single problem with her computer and that it works great!! She h0onestly says it's the best system she has ever had and ever more impressive, I didn't have time to train her on anything and she has pisked it all up wonderfully on her own. She understands Open Office and doesn't notice the difference between that and wrod.
;)
Honestly, for everyone but gamers, Linux meets their needs. For graphics developers, Macs meet their needs
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Well IMHO Linux is ready for wide scale deployment when the IT people deploy it. IT and Support people will do IT and Support work, and users will carry on with their normal work and computer cluelessness (if applicable). Business as usual.
Too bad the article doesn't mention the large range of live CD/DVD distributions available for try-before-you-fly, or the range of Windows applications tested and working under Wine."
I would say, TOO GOOD that they didn't do it. I am sure that any user having the slightest curiosity of ditching windows will be overwhelmed after looking at more than 500 (or lets say 40 "main") linux distributions.
Or sure tell them how "tested and working" are those Windows applications under "Wine", so that when after they install their preffered linux distro and say, "okay now how do I install my 'tested and working' Winamp on Linux" their head will explode searching at zillions of forums/faqs/howtos/irc/etc.
The *only * way a WinApp-in-Wine would work is as google did it with picasa (i.e. the company will have to make something) or that a Linux company like Linsipre added such applications to their Click'n'Run service (of course they would have to buy licenses to each of the software they will sell). I like this idea a lot.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Wow, Linux in the antipods, who would have thought?
Have you read my journal today?
1. The check is in the mail
2. I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you.
3. I won't cum in your mouth.
4. Linux is ready for the desktop.
The Aussie paper saw that "Bruce" was a staunch proponent of OSS, and figured if it's good enough for Bruce, it's good enough for everyone!
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
These are the same people who tell us that election rigging
never occurs, and that 9/11 was perpetrated by a handful of Muslim bogeymen.
http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/911.html
That I can also easily install? Knoppix works while the cd is in and the people at the friendly forum told me I shouldn't try to install it. The Ubuntu Dapper Drake cd won't boot up so that's out. I have an old dell I'm trying to use only for browsing the web so it doesn't need much, just a browser, preferably firefox, and the wireless stuff to work (which knoppix does till I installed it on the hard drive).
Or 2007. Or 2008.
Are you adequate?
You can use terminal services for any of those difficult to replace applications, open office has been good enough for 90%+ of users, the web, mail services are frankly better, more scalable and reliable, the hardest bit historically has been calendaring/scheduling, easily solved with a decent web groupware system.
Deleted
However not all popular applications are available out of the box, especially when it comes to graphics and gaming. Although users can choose from an enormous range of applications for the OS, such as image-editing program The GIMP, or Cedega for running PC games on top of Linux, these must be sourced and downloaded individually.
Last time I checked (which was Edgy Knot 2), The GIMP was still installed by default in Ubuntu.
No DRM
No Viruses
No Spyware
No Malware
It's cheaper
It's Free
I've been using Linux now for over 5 years and I honestly don't think I could go back to using Windows at home. The need for virus checkers, etc. just leaves me feeling paranoid. So what that I can't play many games on it, I have a PS2 for that...
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
When I can play games on Linux with all my funky graphics and sound card options and controllers working right out the box like I can on Windows, then I'll make the switch. Last time I installed Linux, about a year ago, I had to spend a day finding drivers, had problems with the display and half my peripherals didn't work. Much as I don't like M$, I don't get those kind of problems when installing Windows XP. It takes 30 minutes, 1 install of SP2, a couple of drivers installs and a reboot and I'm back to normal. One point to make about Linux and enterprise and use in business. Linux doesn't ghost very well, which is a problem as far as I am concerned.
And I just spent 2 weeks to get my Ati drivers to work correctly.. And how I did get them to work, you dont want to know.
So, desktop ready they say...
But it seems that they say a lot of things in Australia.
This is a caption from Online individual tax file number (TFN) registration page of Australian government.
"Your browser must be either:
* Microsoft Internet Explorer version 5.5 or later, or
* Netscape Navigator/Communicator version 6.0 or later.
Please note that Mozilla is only able to be used if certain system requirements are met. However, Mozilla is an open source application and the chance of it being supported is unlikely."
I won't believe it until Dan Rather reports it at his new job. I heard Mary Mapes is also working there now so we can be absolutely 100% sure the story is factual.
...does it have the latest version of "Microsoft Drm?" Because I'm not buying it if it doesn't manage my digital rights.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
I know I got a hearty chuckle out of this one.
This post makes me want to subscribe to slashdot just so I can cancel my subscription to protest against whoever posts this shit.
I am so tired of two sets of articles: those discussing whether Linux is "ready" for the desktop, and those that say that "NOW is the time when there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop."
On the first set of articles: Linux is already "ready" for the desktop. I use it on my desktop already, and it does everything I need it to do. It is for me a superior choice.
On the second set of articles, what they usually mean is that upon some event, there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop in rich, developed countries. "some event" varies and is typically purported to be 1) the coming of a new Windows version, such as Vista, which will be expensive and have high hardware requirements; 2) some big vendor preinstalling Linux, or 3) some big Windows security flaw, or 4) some other pain in the ass thing that MS is newly implementing, such as more DRM or copy restriction.
Well I've got news: it's highly unlikely we will ever see "widespread adoption" of Linux on desktops in rich developed countries. People in these countries can afford Windows, and switching is a big pain. Windows is crappy, but not crappy enough to switch away. It would be amazing if we even saw adoption rates that paralleled the adoption rates of Firefox in parts of Europe, but I think even that is unlikely. Note that I'm not saying anything about developing countries, where the dynamics--economic and political--may be quite different.
I'm tired of these articles because I don't understand why they're relevant. It's much more likely that we would see massive adoption of the Mac than of Linux. But we don't see articles crowing about that. Macheads are secure in their superiority complex; they don't see a need to sit around and predict when Mac world domination will happen. They don't worry that the Mac is irrelevant, no matter how small its market share is. Macheads are happy because their machines do what they want them to do. As a Linux user, I feel the same way. My machine does what I want it to do. My platform is not irrelevant--huge companies like Adobe, IBM, and Intel realize its importance even on the desktop. I do not care that roughly ninety percent of people use Windows, and I do not care about world domination.
Unfortunately it's often pro-Linux people (rather than just random press idiots) who promote this world domination crap. We need to realize that we've got a great platform, it works for us, and it's continuing to improve and work for even more people. The world domination and "ready for desktop" talk is tiresome and it just makes us look stupid.
Penny - plain text accounting
Linux is a series of tubes!
*cough* lindow *cough* it won't work people use windows at work, and inturn will use windows at home. why do you think apple is give macs to schools? they want kids to get used to using a mac before they get used to using a PC so that thier first choice is a mac. it's kinda like how everyone loves thier first car no matter how crappy it is!
Are there any reliable numbers about linux adoption on the desktop ? the most recent i've seen are from 2004 and place linux at under 3% of the desktop market (the numbers from w3.org don't count because they are biased towards web developers).
that would be interesting, but i've not seen any institute interested in analysing the desktop OS trends.
I've only been using it on the desktop for 6 years, and now it's finally ready!
Why is it that many people who claim to support standards have such atrocious spelling and grammar?
I agree with the author on his conclusion, but I would add this. The amount of setup I ususally have to do to a linux system to get it what I call "fully working" (i.e. totem works with WMA, playes DVDs, flash, quicktime etc) is a large investment of time and would be a very steep learning curve for people who have never done it before.
link to artical: http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB11472713661 0348924-Et3a0yO82d_xJdMWN_y8xKXLl7c_20060521.html? mod=blogs
Next statement from the press:
LINUX NOT YET READY FOR DESKTOP. Early adopters of the new linux desktop we dissapointed when they couldn't find the "Start" button, Media Player, or Explorer. Said one user "I couldn't even find Word. What kind of computer doesn't have Word?"
This will appear on the same page as a full-color microsoft VISTA add.
Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
Also, a nitpick - GNU/Linux isn't ready for the naive user, but X/Mozilla/OpenOffice/Linux might be. Compilers and command-line tools with extra-long option names and EMACS are all fine things, but they're for somebody who's willing to RTFM, not for the couch-potato consumer.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I have installed Ubuntu onto about 6 PC's now. Each time I hand it over to the person & never get another call back. My worst case was with a Compaq desktop (PII 500 IIRC), I couldn't get the integrated soundcard to work. When I looked it up, seems it's a proprietary chip & not even WinME supported it. Oh well, in went the $5 Soundblaster & off went the PC. For people who only want to do simple Web browsing, E-mail, and word processing, Ubuntu should be the prefered OS, much lighter than Windows, better security, and it works well on old, cheap hardware. Let's face it, a P IV 3K+ chip is great, but it really only takes a pII 500 to run 90+% of the web - excluding of course video in WM formats. Email could be done just as well on a P I as a P IV, once you cut out all the bloat in Email programs.
Next, as far as administrating the box goes, how many people really do any administration beyond clicking the install updates now button? 90% of the people I know do auto updates for Windows & when something goes wrong they show up at my door & cry. From what I hear from other people who are techs, it's about the same everywhere. People don't know how to 'administer' a computer, and they don't want to know. Ubuntu & Fedora use yum, Debien uses apt, between the 2 I don't think I have had to manually compile a program for any generic use. Last one I compiled was the BRL-CAD system I wanted to play with. Not exactly something that's high enough demand to get packaged for a repository. I've had to install & configure autocad on systems also - it wasn't any harder to do the compile.
Last note, what documentation have you been reading in the proprietary software world that's much better? The booklet that came with the HP I was working on this week was a font of usefull information telling me that everything is golden out of the box & call this number if it wasn't. Supposedly there's documentation in MS software, but I've never found it to be usefull if it wasn't just pointing me to which menu selection to use to do something - Excel seems to be the exception there, but it didn't start as a MS product IIRC.
Dell actually has it in their best interest NOT to put Linux on their desktop, and it also won't knock money off the price tag. In fact it would probably RAISE the prices. Let's look at this, shall we?
With only one OS installed, they only have to deal with one support contract. If they start installing Linux they'll need to contract out support for every flavor they install. But what flavor would they install? FreeBSD? Redhat? Debian? If they choose one it will alienate the others ("I don't want a Fedora computer, I want a Ubuntu computer!"). If they HAD to install a distro my money is on Linspire. Why? Because they're one of the few companies that have the marketing team aimed at selling pre-installed Linspire computers, not just software in a box. Ma and Pas Desktop User don't buy an OS, they buy a computer with an OS installed... Like a Dell.
Dell buys Windows for pennies on the dollar ($20 or less per copy). So by switching to a Linux distro the consumer would only save a few of those dollars. HOWEVER, that also means that AOL, REAL, Earthlink, Corel, some crappy DVD player, and other companies could not put their software on your brand new PC. They pay Dell a lot of money to have those things pre-installed and displayed on "your" desktop. Without those subsidies bringing down the cost, you end up spending more for buying a computer with a "free" operating system.
So while Linux is getting to the point where Grandma can surf the web and email recipes back and forth, it's still going to be a hard sell for a MAJOR manufacturer to pre-install it for the public on a consistent basis.
Hasn't Linux been touted as desktop ready annually since about 1999?
Each year, I will admit, it gets closer and closer due to the hard work and efforts of the Gnome and KDE teams, but it still has a way to go.
(at least in the sense some people would like them to be).
... for me (a computer dilletante, to put it mildly) there's no question that Linux is nicer to deal with. Much less frequently, but I've certainly over the years seen a number of "crashes" (sometimes less spectacular than on Windows, but if the system becomes unrecoverably unresponsive, well, that's a crash) on Linux systems, too, and depending on your chosen distro, there's usually a great many more interface inconsistencies to choose from than with Windows :) But those are drowned out by the obvious benefits:
... why on earth? It's great, and helpful, and instructive, that there are so many different ways people have chosen to combine the Linux kernel with all the other bits that can make a day-to-day computing environment. This is true not just in that there are different complete distributions (hundreds of 'em, maybe thousands by now), but in the case of individual software projects that run on free operating systems, too. KDE v. Gnome? Even if that *were* the only "competition," it would be a good thing; improvements are constantly introduced in each of those environments because of ideas introduced in the other. But the borrowing and idea-generation goes on also with other desktops, because someone has the terrible idea that their priorities are worth spending chunks of their life energy to achieve, and others end up agreeing in whole or in part.
It's just that some OSes have landed there anyhow, because the telepathic, user-conforming, natural-language, all-seeing, all-knowing, vibrating-massage OS is not here yet.
OSes churn, because conventional wisdom shifts re: the "best" way to do certain tasks, because meme spreading makes some approaches to controlling bits on a screen seem more intuitive than others (people who first saw the GUI-based Apples in the early 80s can relate), because the advance of hardware makes it imperative to accomodate new devices or relative strengths of the various pieces that make up a personal computer, etc. OSes would probably look different if RAM cost one tenth (or ten times!) what it does now, or if optical drives were 10 times faster. A Live CD (or booting from flash) could be the "normal" / "obvious" way for computers to hold their OS.
There are flaws in Windows (crashes, user-interface failures and inconsistencies), and I don't much like the aesthetics of most Windows systems I've seen. I'm not expert enough (nor interested in spending the time to become expert enough) to get rid of some of the annoyances that even facially non-malicious Windows software likes to impose.
For instance: At the moment, I have an old laptop running Windows XP; I installed a newish, tiny Konika-Minolta laser printer's driver on it, but rather than simply now being able to print, I get two large pop-up messages about the printer's status every time I boot that laptop. I've gone through every menu option I can find to try to disable this annoyance (yeah, I know whether the printer's connected right now or 1000 miles away; thanks), no luck so far. Similarly, I know that my father's Windows machine starts up quite a few programs that he's not specifically asked for every time he boots it up; much Windows software is this way -- arrogant, presumptuous, intrusive -- and people just seem to put up with it, for the most part. By the way, your Virus Protection from McAfee is out of date, can we sell you more?
Linux-based systems aren't perfect, but
1) competition -- some people like to complain about the proliferation of distros, but
2) Tons of great free software. Debian users have had the longest sustained crowing in software history, perhaps, because of the thought that went into Debian package management. Nowadays, there's a surplus of good package managers and control systems, though, and the users of just about any Linux system can grab new free software (with a net connection) with greater ease than the conventional Windows approach of driver
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
It's completly true.. Install Ubuntu, wine + Windows Solitaire (aah, the irony..), and most office workers wouldn't know the difference..
Linux has been ready for the desktop for a few years. I'm using it on desktops and laptops with no issues. MS Windows on the other hand, has so many security issues, I have no dea when that will be ready for general use, probably never.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
CrossOver Office also runs games. I got Half Life 2 running on CrossOver 6.0 Beta 1 for OS.X. After not bothering with Wine and related products in general for over 3 years and it is safe to say they Wine team and their semi-proprietary spinoffs have made progress. Apart from some graphical glitches CrossOver is a lot more stable than I expected a beta product to be and quite fast. Since it is more mature than the OS.X version the Linux version of CrossOver should be superior, but for Linux, Cedega should be better yet since they are the game specialists. Unfortunately they do not seem to be planning to release an end user version of Cedega for OS.X. Instead they have gone with a portability engine named 'Cider' aimed at game manufacturers.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
It sucks, because in fact I've been there too. I've done the epic 6-hour ndiswrapper install, and numerous other problematic things, and remember them vividly
Too vividly. In the heat of battle I forget that I've probably installed and least 50 pieces of software on each of the 10 or so flavors of Linux I've tried. Making about 500 packages, of which maybe 20 (4%) have required more than the 1 minute to run the system package manager's install command, or the configure/make/make install from source.
I just think it averages out to a fairly-even proposition versus alternatives you have to pay for.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
For the doubters I have these two links that I've just discovered today (no affiliation with the company):
Linux has software. Screenhots of lots of apps from email to word processing to games. Some of the screenshots are somewhat ugly (because of the theme's they've used), but it's quite an impressive list.
Linux allows for cheap PCs. 75 USD gets you a desktop PC with the distro of your choice pre-installed. The machines are refurbished and not top of the line, but they come with warranty, and Linux doesn't need top of the line hardware anyway (depending on the software you run, of course).
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
As long as they don't improve the driver support(Wirless Card, USB Phone, DVD+/-*) it won't be my desktop PC.
I'd say that the problem with linux is not that it's not "laptop-ready", but that it's not "toy-ready."
It's the annoying little things, like the built-in cardreaders (the usb ones for desktops work fine, but I've rarely seen a laptop one work), some wireless chipsets (getting better... but despite having supposed kernel support I still haven't gotten my broadcomm chipset to work without ndiswrapper), hotkeys, and various other little things that don't quite work in linux.
On the other hand, there are lots of really cool things that only work in linux, or work better in linux, but those tend to be outside of the main area of interest for the general public.
That being said, I've seen vast improvement in the area of compatability with various hardware in 'nix. In the last few years I've seen more webcams, capture cards, and other of the 'fun but not essential' hardware come out with linux drivers that work (if not always work wonderfully)... and I'm hoping that such things will have more support in the future.
"How do I install software on this?"
"./configure, make, make install"
"Hmm okay it gave me an error during the configure"
"Well duh you're missing a library, go install that"
"How do I install the library?"
"./configure, make, make install"
*blink* *blink*
Sorry, but no. I upgraded to FC4 to FC5 and my soundcard stopped working.
And configuring a Linksys wireless card on my Dell laptop is still beyond me. I know what I'm doing, but haven't been able to debug this. It doesn't get much more vanilla than Dell + Linksys.
If this stuff doesn't just work, then Linux is just not ready for the average
desktop.
Try one of them. They pay to have the "additional stuff" you need installed by default. Most of the other big distros just don't want to pay for the MP3 playback, plus it is patent encumbered and non free voodoo like that. 1% with them is non free, but it comes ready to rock, I think 1% is a fair enough compromise given the importance of such things as MP3 playback "out of the box".
I couldn't even get a wireless mouse working after fighting an entire day on Ubuntu...
What about the geeks who use Linux because it's not mainstream?
I don't know anyone like that, do you? Most of the people I know want their friends, family and neighbors to get away from non free software. Communications and record keeping are the major uses of computers and both of those things are difficult under the perpetually changing "standards" of non free software. Converting everyone to free and relatively constant standards is in everyone but Bill Gates' best interest and all but a few Windoze users know it. People use Linux because it's free and an easy way to run GNU and other software that does what they want it to do.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
As I read this I was reminded of my own experience with DOS 5.0 and my 386/25. Back before the days of the Internet the only resource I had was the DOS 5.0 manual (which actually documented all of the information that I needed to know). My dad used the computer for Lotus123 and WordPerfect, I used it to play games. Every game I wanted to play needed a different bootdisk with a subtly tweaked version of Autoexec.bat and Config.sys to load the right drivers and free up enough of the 640k to play the game right.
Linux today reminds me of DOS fifteen plus years ago. Sure, they have a GUI, but it's a lot like Windows 3.11... just some graphics that are sitting ontop of a command shell that you still do most of your real work in. When something breaks you don't fix it through the GUI, you drop down to the command line and go to work (a la the recent Ubuntu fiasco).
I honestly believe that there is a certain point in life when it's fun to figure out how a computer works. For me, that period of time was the late 1980s and early 1990s. The OS I was using was DOS. I didn't mind having to hack stuff together because I didn't know any better. For kids today, that OS might be Linux and to a certain extent I encourage that, because by using Linux, you're closer to the core of the computer. You're still manually loading drivers and compiling modules and mounting file systems.
From my perspective though, that crap is for the kids with too much time on their hands. I want my operating system to work like I expect it to, and yes... I will "deal" with viruses and malware and all of that crap because I know enough about how computers work to not have to sweat it. But there is no way in hell I'm going to take three steps backwards and wait for Linux to catchup with what Microsoft already has. I like my Active Directory and Group Policy and Automatic Updates and .msi installers and Ghost and RDP and all of the stuff that allows me to easily manage thousands of desktops across disperate, geographically disconnected locations. I like the fact that I can lay down Exchange, then open up my Samsung i730, type in a URL, click "use SSL" and have a secure, wireless connection to my enterprise messaging system.
sounds like a vmware problem
He said "the last time I tried to install it on real hardware", so it was likely not a Vmware issue.
---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
So where are you going to get your facts now? For years, most specialized media has been saying that free software is ready for mass use. The rise of OSX showed that "consumer" grade Unix was not only possible but wildly better than existing alternatives. The adoption of free software by IBM and many of their large clients should have been a clue to you as well. Millions of others have been using free software exclusively for years without the "support" of large companies. All of this has been reflected in software and computer magazines outside of the Wintel rags and the mainstream press is finally noticing. You will have to go directly to Microsoft and further from reality to find the opinions you like.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
There is a third option, you know: I could get my information from humorless internet asshats.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
I run Kubuntu. I want to run Skype on Kubuntu.
.asoundrc file, but I'm a busy guy, so I just reboot without the thing plugged in -- and then I boot up bzflag and my sound is gone. Something has dropped an .asoundrc file in my home directory. Moving it and bzflag's config file aside were the only way I could get bzflag sound back.
I have a cheap two-plug headset. I plug it in. Doesn't work. The mike doesn't work at all, not with skype, not with arecord. Looking around, the best advice I can find is from my motherboard manual -- apparently I have to change the sound hardware on my PC to run in "2-channel" mode before the mike will work. Can't find any way in ALSA to do that -- if ALSA is even the right place to make that configuration. There's a lot of sound-ish things running on my box: alsa, alsa-oss, artsd, alsamixer, kmix, the xine multimedia engine that amarok uses...
I'm in a hurry to get Skype working on Kubuntu, and my two-plug headset's really uncomfortable anyway, so I pick up a Logitech USB headset. It works awesomely; I can select the new device on Skype and it sounds great with their echo service. Except I leave it plugged in when I next reboot, and the order of the sound devices gets switched. The headset is now device 1 -- the default device, and the onboard sound is device 2. I want to only use the headset for Skype, but everything wants to play through it, and I can't find options in Amarok or Kaffeine to point their Xine engines at device 2. I think there's some way to fix this with an
Given an hour or so, I'm sure I can fix this, but hours are precious. All this hardware--even the crappy cheapie two-eighth-inch-plug headset--worked great when I booted into Windows. Zero hassle.
I love tinkering with linux, and I've learned tons by messing with it, and it's getting closer to Grandma's desk every day. Still, I'd never give it to anyone who wasn't an enthusiast, or who wasn't backed by an ace IT department. That last 5% of polish is still missing.
- I can buy a computer from a mainstream manufacturer with Linux pre-installed (yes there are some manufacturers preloading Linux now).
- I don't have to worry about whether the piece of hardware I just bought at the local electronics store has drivers available.
- When I plug in that piece of hardware, it prompts me to install the driver (if not already installed) and it just installs without a lot of intervention on my part.
- I can attach my mp3 player (especially an IPod) and sync with the files stored on my hard drive.
- My bluetooth cell phone will sync easily with my PIM programs.
- There are many software programs written for it (games, office programs, etc.) that I can purchase (or download) almost anywhere.
- I can configure my Linux desktop without having to edit a text file in some obscure location that varies by the distribution.
- Only developers use the commands ".configure" and "make".
In otherwords, most consumers do not have the time to figure out how to make their computer work, they expect it just will work. Linux has improved greatly in the last few years, but it still has a long way to go. The hardware issue is probably the single biggest problem with Linux today. Under Windows, anything I buy just works immediately, under Linux it probably works, but only after quite a bit of tweaking.1. The check is in the mail 2. I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you. 3. I won't cum in your mouth. 4. Linux is ready for the desktop.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
--- "When I buy *any* software product that requires separate drivers, the Windows 98, ME, 2000 and XP drivers are included on a CD in the box with a simple install program. If I have the card but no install CD, most of the time I can go to the manufacturer's site and download it. I don't have search the web and hope there is an open source driver because the manufacturer refuses to create their own driver."
I mentioned that when I tried to run XP on REAL HARDWARE, it needed a driver for IDE (CDROM) *and* network. Of course I had a CD for the motherboard. How was I to use it? Using VMware, I am able to use the OS I bought... (simulated standard hardware which XP likes).
--- "Dare I even mention the amount of effort involved in trying to get the drivers created by ATI (the manufacturer) to install and operate properly on their supported hardware? There are multiple HOWTOs on the Ubuntu forums each with at least 15 pages of replies from people who are experiencing problems and this driver was supplied by the manufacturer and comes with an install program! In Windows, I simply install the driver, reboot and I'm ready to select the screen resolution. No confusing xorg.conf files or "sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg" with pages of options to select from."
I find this interesting. Why don't you follow the ATI instructions (download the kit, and install)? You may do "init 3" first, and follow up with "init 5" at the end -- and I believe that's covered in the instructions as well. I don't know Ubuntu, but FC5 has a menu to change resolutions. (PS. a lot of the Linux group devs I know at ATI use Ubuntu, so I imagine that it isn't a big problem).
--- "Just another addition to the list. On my home machine I installed a TV card. When I didn't like the included program I purchased Beyond TV (just one of many available alternatives). In 30 minutes I had it installed and was watching live TV and set up to record my favorite programs. It was almost easier than installing a VCR."
You win with this. I had to load a basic Fedora Core 5 installation, then enable "atrpms" repo (and install the gpg key), then type "yum install mythtv-suite". It took around an hour to download and install. I then disabled "atrpms", enabled "livna" and "freshrpms", and typed "yum install kmod-nvidia" and "yum install ivtv". Followed by an hour of final configuration (auto login, TV out configuration, etc.). And, no, I don't expect mere mortals to figure this out.
--- "On Linux, I spent hours downloading for Myth TV and its prerequisite packages before it finally compiled. Once it compiled and installed, I had to page through many different undocumented options before I was able to download TV listings and start the backend server. Finally I started the front-end and it proceeded to lock up my system. Since there is no FAQ on how to fix this issue, I'm going to have to spend time trying to figure it out. Do you really think the average consumer would still be attempting to get Myth TV to work? Most would have stopped after they couldn't download a pre-compiled version with a simple install program. Yes I tried the Ubuntu packages, they are broken, not to mention a couple of versions downlevel."
Yes, MythTV is a bear. Worth it in the end, but certainly not an easy thing to set up (see my description above of Myth with FC5). Building from source? Possible, but I seriously recommend against it unless you have some programming knowledge. The "downlevel" version is probably what you want (really, and if they are broken, its probably time to look at another distro).
YMMV
Ratboy
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Honestly, I'm just so sick and tired of these stupid Ubuntu ads... and by the way, if GNOME really cared about human interface stuff, they'd leave the stupid yes/no buttons alone and not insist on switching them (or even better, just quit, since KDE's far better anyway).
http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/23168/
What about NIS and NIS+? "tar" and "dd", X Windows?
All technologies that Linux implements "out of the box". They come from a Unix backgroup, and PREDATE the Microsoft "equivalents". Coming from a Unix and Solaris background, I find Microsoft frustrating.
The only reason I can see for this behaviour is that MS is trying to induce lock-in. Which is good -- I hold Microsoft shares. Not so good trying to integrate into heterogenous environments, though.
YMMV
Ratboy.
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Piers Anthony's August blog/newsletter is worth a read. He isn't the most technical person and I thought it was interesting to read someone of his skill level comparing a handful of Linux distros.
"I can be self-referential if I want to," said Tom, swiftly.
They could use the HURD. (Sorry to slip some text in here after saying I wouldn't, but Slashdot appears not to accept REALLY SHORT comments.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Yes Linux is close to being ready for the Desktop... The GUI features are equal to that of Windows... However until Linux can provide the ability to run games straight from the distro download instead of paying x$ a month for cedega which still only works part of the time... Also support for MP3's without having to figure out how and where to download the files and install them properly... but they have gotten better with MP3 support I know linspire comes with it but you have to pay and im not sure about suse, but for the average Joe they aren't going to take time to find the documentation to get mp3... Outside those two issues then linux would be perfect for the desktop... Then if they could get in bed with Dell or HP or another PC maker then Linux could start really chipping away and Windows dominance...
Don't get me wrong. I love Linux for my servers, but try to install a wireless card or a scanner and then see if it's ready. Linux is a fantastic OS, but until the community gets more backing from some major manufacturers, I don't think it's quite ready for anything beyond a barebones desktop with little or no peripherals.
i never have any beef compiling stuff.
So where are you going to get your facts now? For years, most specialized media has been saying that free software is ready for mass use.
By "most specialised media" you do, of course, mean "Slashdot".
The rise of OSX showed that "consumer" grade Unix was not only possible but wildly better than existing alternatives.
Isn't OSX mostly non-free software, and therefore evil under your black-and-white way of looking at things?
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
I could get my information from humorless internet asshats.
Talking to yourself again? That's better than "get the facts".
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
* I got lost in setting permissions on the filesystem. It is so different. And yes, I did try to find out. There should at least be some easy-to-find help on how to do it.
* Next I downloaded a program I wanted installed. Downloading goes okay of course. But how does one install a downloaded program? I tried to logical things like doubleclicking, rightclicking. It does not work. Plllease. Do you expect me to go to some forum and ask there how to install an executable?
So what can I do with the box with Linux installed? Yes, I can surf, e-mail, do office things, get lost in GIMP. Nothing that I can not do on my Windows box.
What I would need is not a Linux that automatically thinks for me. I can think for myself. I can do with Windows what I want. I need a Linux that at least has a basic explanantion built in for Windows users who want a bit more then just surfing and emailing.
And then I expect trouble with digital photography. Everyone is going to have a digital camera, and everyone gets a CD with a Windows program that nicely helps to read the photos and to organize them. But of course that is only a Windows program. And for a OSX. But not for Linux. And even if that is successfull, would I need to work with GIMP to process the photos? No, thank you. And what about my Minidisk? Will I be able to connect it to Linux?
I am going to buy a new computer this year, and maybe, maybe it's going to be a double boot. I am sure I will need Windows. The installation of Linux depends on my progress on getting used with the Linux box which I still have. I haven't looked at it for weeks.
Flame me if you want, but I think that for a Windows user, Linux means a new long learning traject with no guarantee that it will ever be as usefull as using Windows.
I have to cringe when someone wants to go back to Windows...
/knoppix folder to a hard drive partition and go from there with the msdos menu/loadlin setup. The menu runs off Windows 98 dos, and gives lots of choices, such as booting into KDE, or Fluxbox and others. I default to IceWM, and pick up a restoration tarball so things like Thunderbird mail settings, dial-up settings are ready to go with no cheatcode to enter by hand. One machine does not have a CDROM drive, so using the CD (livecd) is not an option. Used a "backpack" cdrom drive to get that set up.
Do you really want to do online banking using Windows?
We're trying to make linux easy-to-use for the ordinary person that mainly wants to surf the web.
Today that means making on-line purchases, and next up is visiting your credit card website, make a payment, or go to your bank's website, and see if those checks cleared.
I have a lot of people tell me they are happy doing that with OSX, they can afford Apple machines and they are easy to use. Still a hard drive installation, however.
I tried Ubuntu, did not like it for a couple of reasons. 1. Would not run on older PC's, and 2. Asks too many questions at bootup.
I have a livecd linux, see the screenshots in signature, below. Having had my say about security, I went out on a limb and put Mozilla Firefox 2.0b2 in the CD yesterday, mainly because they finally fixed the tab close (X) so it's on the tab and not down on the right end. Opera has gotten this right for a while now, Firefox needed to do that, almost all websites look correct in Firefox, not all in Opera 9. (a shame).
What follows, however is not for the average user, but does result in a neat setup for a secure livecd linux:
I get around the need to enter "knoppix cheatcodes" at bootup by using loadlin and a MSDOS batch file with all the necessary cheatcodes for a particular box provided in the loadlin command line. So, I don't run it as a livecd on any particular box that I will be using all the time, I copy the
None of that is "part of the CD", it has to be custom-configured using files on a floppy, and using the CD to get some of the required components. If one has a CDROM drive, however, using the livecd is easiest and gives immediate results, all the other procedures are on the to-do list for someone booting up the machine every day.
I do target older Windows 98 machines, however, for my livecd linux. 128 MB of RAM is fine, processor speed 266 mhz will do nicely. I run on a 200 MMX every day, plenty fast enough to handle Firefox 2.0b2.
The 2.4 kernel does the trick, I'm based on Knoppix 3.4.
My blog is here, Getting Started Guide is here.
-- Rapidweather
Rapidweather's Linux Screenshots.
My favorite flavor.
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Linux has a long way to go. It is a good OS but there's still the attitude of "you suck because you won't compile your own kernel" attitude. It is still a big turn off for the vast majority of computer uers.
It is a solid OS. It can be customized for a solid and attractive interface. I used it for years. I loved the OS but hated the tremendous amount of time spent just keeping it straight and up to date along with dealing with the zealots that essentially attack people for asking questions. I would regularly read forums and see people attacked from far and wide.
The software just isn't there. Some is, but there's alot that isn't up to speed. Not only that many of those same free (as in beer) are available under Windows as well. I found most productivity applications quite acceptable although somewhat disorganized and counter-intuitive. Not all mind you but a good bit of it.
Gaming is still horrific even with the Transmedia product.
Online updating with yast, apt-get, and such is still too hit and miss--the repository manager decides what to put there and when so you can be left holding the bag if your distro and the repository doesn't contain the correct version.
I loved some of the software that is Linux only and I appreciate the efforts but to mislead so many about how good it is on the desktop. Combined with installation of end-user programs, the lack of refinement in much of the software, the problems with updates over the web, the dependency issues that still persist to this day, as well as the legal issues surrounding issues like DVD decoding, etc., I can't really see them writing articles that provide blanket statements such as Linux is ready for the desktop.
I think the thing that bothered me most was when simple people trying to install and use the products were harshly criticized for just asking questions. If you have ever read the "RTFM" responses you'll know what I mean.
Better end-user package installation that doesn't rely on the web to get dependencies resolved and when the support is there for those who just want to use linux instead of compliling and modifying every little aspect to their liking are treated with respect then linux will be ready for the desktop.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Along with their readers' experience of computing. Think about it, saying "you can get the code that builds the program, and change it if you want" is going to mean nothing to the general public, other than that all Linux users are computer geeks because they all understand the source code. However, saying "where the source code can be modified upon the request of users or other developers" makes more sense to a member of the public, since it means they can get features added without being able to program, they just have to ask someone who CAN program (such as the developers) and explain their idea, or report their bug. That is a true advantage to non-techie end users who don't get very far into Microsoft HQ with their sketches of the "next big thing" for Microsoft Office, because all they need to do is join a mailing list, send an email, enter a chat room, edit a Wiki, etc. and their ideas will at least be considered by Open Source projects.
I think the writers of this article are trying to convey the community nature of Free Software compared to the "Microsoft knows what you want" subservience of proprietary software, but without scaring or alienating the readers into thinking that 'getting involved' requires at least a Computer Science degree.
Anyway, at least it doesn't just focus on GNU/Linux systems as a cost-free version of Microsoft Windows (thus encouraging the likes of http://www.xpde.com/ )
And I thought Devorak was a classical music composer best known for "The Slavonic Dances."
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
I'm an owner of a small service-based business that has nothing to do with MS Windows, Linux, Apple, or anything IT related. I consider myself rather tech-savvy, and have setup our own network: A Dell server running MS SBS 2003, and a handful of Dell workstations running Windows XP. When I was researching computers, operating systems, and the like, only ONE THING kept me from choosing a Linux setup over Windows...
NO QUICKBOOKS!
Not something that 'is almost, kinda like QuickBooks'...
Not some opensource pre-beta crap that I have to figure out on my own...
Not run an almost sunsetted version of QuickBooks on top of an emulation layer...
No, I'm sorry, but as a small business owner who uses an accountant that prefers QuickBooks (and most that I know, do), I can only settle for the original QuickBooks. Damn you, Intuit, where's the Linux version?
In my small business owner, end-user eyes, Linux desktop will be mainstream when there is a Linux version of Quickbooks.
Once you've got Linux installed properly, you *don't* need to ass-about with it. Unlike dos. Linux is not really any different to Windows with respect to the graphical shell sitting on top of a command line environment, except that in Windows ME/NT+ they've removed your access to the underlying shell unless you either boot in recovery mode or fire up a dos box.
I note that you bring up the recent Ubuntu X problem. Shit happens. If that happened (or, for example, you got a bad video driver that borked graphical mode - this has happened to me before) in Windows and you didn't have the recovery console installed, you're fucked. Break out the windows CD and either reinstall over the top or hope the automatic repair works. At least you've *got* the command line option in Ubuntu to fix it as standard.
Use a distro from the past couple of years and this is not the case. Nvidia drivers in ubuntu are a couple of package manager clicks away. Easier than Windows even (unless you really want to use the outdated drivers on your CD?).
As to your comments about the enterprise services Windows provides, well lets just say that out of Active Directory, group policy, Automatic updates, msi installers, ghost and RDP, there is not one technology listed there that isn't relatively simple to implement in a Linux/BSD environment if you're not a Microsoft admin who refuses to learn.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Erm, replace "bad video driver" with "bad driver" or "registry corruption"...
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
I have been using it the past 2 years and let me tell you even my n()()b sis likes it way better than windows.
Connection reset by host - Bandwidth Limit Exceeded! Ouch...
As far as I can tell, you've more or less identified where Ubuntu is going. Not some 'me too' distro, but one with a clear focus on being simple, commercially supportable and rock solid. I migrated from Slackware on floppies (yes, I am that old ;-) to RH to SuSE. Barring the new Novell Desktop which I haven't tried yet I found Ubuntu the easiest to knock up a system for office staff.
As a matter of fact, it's now my preferred desktop. It's really only Visio that I can't yet replace (and by that I mean the 2000 version, MS has pretty much butchered usability in the 2003 version).
Quite simply, it rocks, and those supporting desktops know what it means if you can also boot cold off a live CD and access the system.
Insert
It. Was. A. Joke.
One of the easy, obvious, throwaway jokes that are so common on Slashdot.
Why do you insist on trying to turn it into some kind of zero-sum moral superiority game, that you must win at all costs?
Do you really have to be my enemy over a simple, cliched joke?
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
I had told you that the CD wasn't recognized after XP booted. Drivers were needed for Network, CD *and* USB. The only device left was floppy. If I didn't have a floppy -- I would have had a VERY SECURE computer.
No, I didn't use a floppy when setting up my last RAID array. And I don't generally use it -- but it was the only possibility (short of booting Linux, pre-partitioning the disk, loading the drivers, and then rebooting the XP CD; but life is too short).
In general, I *do* live in the "dark ages" of computing. Even though I develop "cutting edge software", if I make it work on one of my main squeeze machines, its going to make the end user really happy (eg. I did some USB printer performance work -- and used a 400Mhz PII as the primary benchmark machine).
Note Linux is not different because it tries to be -- that would be Windows (NIS vs ?, NFS vs SMB, X vs RDP). Trying to achieve the "lock-in" so beloved by Microsoft shareholders (myself included).
YMMV
Ratboy.
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
I just got done setting up Ubuntu and have been playing around with it. Hopefully by the time Linux has an sort of momentum to threaten the entrenched Microsoft enterprise environment I'll be living in Colorado teaching martial arts instead of hacking away at a computer. Yet just incase, it never hurts to keep my skills up to date.
If that happened (or, for example, you got a bad video driver that borked graphical mode - this has happened to me before) in Windows and you didn't have the recovery console installed, you're fucked.
Unless of course you just hit F8 and choose boot VGA mode. =) You should choose an example that doesn't have an easy workaround... like when you get a BSOD because your SCSI driver doesn't like the latest BIOS flash.
Once you've got Linux installed properly, you *don't* need to ass-about with it. Unlike dos.
Once you have ANY OS installed properly you don't need to ass-about with it, PERIOD. I have hundreds of users spread across dozens of clients whose workstations I never even see until it's time to upgrade something. Then on the other hand, there are a few users I see all the time because of something like "the Exchange server mysteriously decided to wreck one of their contact records... despite hundreds of other users who contact records are just fine." Ie. the user is full of shit and it's easier to blame the "stupid computer" than it is to blame themselves. In fact, by far the biggest whiners on any network I've dealt with are the Mac users in various design departments with their stupid font problems and InDesign file corruption problems and 500MB print jobs.