Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu Linux for Non-Geeks

Ravi writes "It is a fact that GNU/Linux has grown from a hackers operating system to be a viable alternative to any commercial proprietary operating system. And the plethora of books on Linux that are being published underlines the popularity of this OS. There are hundreds of flavors of Linux distributions — some of them more popular than the others. Ubuntu Linux is one such distribution which has caught the fancy of many Linux enthusiasts and which enjoys the number one position in the popularity rating chart." Read the rest of Ravi's review. Ubuntu Linux for non-geeks author Rickford Grant pages 360 publisher No Starch Press rating 9 reviewer Ravi ISBN 1-59327-118-2 summary A very good book targeted at newbies for installing and configuring Ubuntu Linux

I recently came across a very nice book titled "Ubuntu Linux for non-geeks" authored by Rickford Grant and published by No Starch Press. What attracted me to this book was the obvious title which makes no bones about the fact that this book is targeted at non-geeks.

The book is divided into 18 chapters and 3 appendices spanning over 300 pages. The author starts the narration by imparting a good understanding of the history of Linux and the relationship between Ubuntu and Linux. In this chapter, the author clears a few doubts arising in a lay person's mind about Linux such as the difference between a distribution and an OS, the hardware requirements for running Ubuntu and so on.

In the past, I have seen Linux books using well over 50 pages just to explain the installation process but Ubuntu is famed for its simple 6 step installation. The next chapter is a very short one which gives a good illustrated explanation of the steps needed to boot Ubuntu using the latest version of Ubuntu live CD (included with the book) and install the OS on the hard disk.

The third chapter explores many common features of the Gnome desktop which is the default desktop in Ubuntu. Here the readers are introduced to different aspects of the desktop from the panels, the menus, the applets to the steps for customizing.

One thing I really like about this book is the obvious way in which each task is split into separate chapters. For example, you have a chapter explaining the file and disk management , a chapter which explains how to set up the network and log on to the internet, another for setting up your printer and scanner, still another explaining different ways of downloading and installing software and so on.

I especially liked the 8th chapter titled "Getting to know the Linux terminal and command line", where the author introduces the shell and a number of command line tools to the readers. What I found really interesting was that at the end of the chapter, the author walks you through installing and configuring so you get to try out all the commands introduced earlier.

In the 11th chapter, the author explains how to make the fonts on the Ubuntu machine look prettier and the steps needed to install different kinds of additional fonts such as Microsoft true type fonts.

Ubuntu Linux bundles with it a rich set of applications which more than meets the need of an average home user. The 13th and 14th chapter introduces some of the most popular ones such as office suites, image viewers and so on.

The next three chapters deal exclusively in setting up and configuring audio and video in Ubuntu. Considering that some of the audio/video formats are patented, it is not possible to include support for them by default in Linux. Rather, it is up to the user to get these proprietary audio and video formats to work in Linux. And through these chapters, the author explains all that needs to be done to get all audio and video formats to work in Ubuntu.

The appendix also contain a section where the author gives a list of web resources where one can find more information related to Linux — more specifically Ubuntu Linux.

This very nice book on Ubuntu Linux is clearly targeted at the neophytes who wish to take their first steps in installing and using Ubuntu. The author explains in a step-by-step manner the solutions to the problems that one might face in installing, configuring and using Ubuntu Linux.

If you are a person who has installed and used Linux in the past, this book probably doesn't cover anything new to you. Having said that, it could be an ideal gift for your grandparents, parents or even friends who wish to learn to setup and use Linux. Another positive aspect of the book which attracted me was that the narration was surprisingly devoid of any slang. One of the common mistakes that authors make when writing a book targeted at newbies is treating them like idiots and introducing a lot of slang in the narration, but Rickford Grant has stayed clear of this and his language is clear and lucid.

Ravi Kumar is a Linux enthusiast who likes to share his thoughts on all things related to GNU/Linux through his blog All about Linux.

You can purchase Ubuntu Linux for non-geeks from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page

245 comments

  1. I switched from gentoo by Artie_Effim · · Score: 2, Informative

    After 2-3 years as a die hard gentoo user, I just wanted simple and easy home administration. ubuntu is just that.

    1. Re:I switched from gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have Ubuntu on one box. I find it's nice too. But I also see it as a OSX wannabe. The Ubuntu team needs to remember that it is still Linux and don't hide good "geek" features just because they want it to dumb it down.

    2. Re:I switched from gentoo by mabba18 · · Score: 1

      I think that you totally miss the point of Ubuntu.

      --
      The third most important thing I have learned in life: Squeeze anything hard enough and it eventually makes a noise.
    3. Re:I switched from gentoo by endemoniada · · Score: 1

      There should always be a compromise. That said, it doesn't mean they should remove all the geekier features entirely.

      The practice of always having an 'advanced' tab seems healthy to me. That way, there's a basic interface for those that don't need to tweak much, and a more advanced interface for those that really like to tweak.

      The first thing that pops into my head is the new Gnome Screensaver dialog. Frankly, it sucks. Why even bother with that many screensavers, if there isn't any way to set them up the way you want them? You want a slideshow? Too bad, you can't choose what pictures to show. You get dizzy from the speed of those stars and planets? Too bad, change screensaver because the Gnome people think you're too dumb to understand how to alter the speed yourself.

      I'm all for simple... But there are times when you need advanced too!

      --
      Blog -
    4. Re:I switched from gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's what the command line is for :P

    5. Re:I switched from gentoo by BecomingLumberg · · Score: 1

      I agree with you - there are a few things oversimplified in Ubuntu ['s version of GNOME]. That said, I still love it, and don't get too bothered at the lack of advanced options. I left KDE because there were too many ways to do whatever I wanted. i.e. - setting up the kicker... there were at least three different menu paths i coudl follow to pull up different applications (all loaded at first boot) that could change some, but not all of its options. some programs could change options that others could not, no programs could change them all. It got so maddening I decided to try Ubuntu... and I haven't gone back.

      --
      If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.-TJ
    6. Re:I switched from gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't used GNOME or Ubuntu in a while, but I thought simplifying things was the direction GNOME was going in anyway, so is this something GNOME was doing anyway and it is in Ubuntu because it uses GNOME, or is this something Ubuntu has done which isn't in GNOME?

  2. Ubuntu's new slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Ubuntu--because it's ok to be a noob.

    1. Re:Ubuntu's new slogan by IHateAllofYou · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd have mod'ed that up if you hadn't posted AC and I had some points. Its important that there be an easy starting point just to keep it moving forward.

      Maybe out of 1000 people trying Ubuntu only 340 move on to something more advanced like Slackware and maybe out of that 340 only 50 or even just 5 contribute something to an open source project it's still new blood and fresh meat which is never bad for creativity.

      I'm sure this will get mod'ed redundant too. Such is life.

  3. XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by Speare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, mod me how you feel instead of responding, I like that.

    I would have to say that XFree86 and Apache, as well as components listed under Perl Artistic and BSD licenses, have as much to do with the usability and adoption of Linux as a platform. Why is GNU singled out for more attention than the other amazing personal contributions of self-motivated non-commercialized developers? Just because RMS' ego outscales his last decade of coding efforts doesn't mean that he should automatically be ignored, but neither does it mean his face should be on the proverbial wheaties box at the exclusion of the rest of the team.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by knightmad · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why is GNU singled out for more attention than the other amazing personal contributions of self-motivated non-commercialized developers? OK, I'll bite. Maybe because the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC), the GNU Binary Utilities (binutils), the bash shell, the GNU C library (glibc), and the GNU Core Utilities (coreutils) play a very important role in the operational system, as important (althought also as replaceable) as the Linux kernel? If that is not enough reason, well, I don't know what would be.

    2. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by knightmad · · Score: 1

      As I mentioned, everything is replaceable, including the kernel :)

      In the event of a distro effectively replacing all GNU stuff with Intel/BSD/whatever, will it still be called plain Linux as it is now? With nothing to differentiate it from (GNU/)Linux? Wouldnt we have to choose between "Debian Linux 12 with BSD userland.iso" and "Debian Linux 12 with GNU userland.iso" Or, for short, "Debian GNU/Linux" and "Debian BSD/Linux". Or, maybe, Debian (BSD|GNU)/(Linux|Hurd). Who knows? :) (Cue the "maybe we will be playing DNF on it too, with open source ATI/NVIDIA drivers provided by the factory" remarks ;))

      Btw, I'm playing the devil advocate here, because I don't care how it is called, as long as it is free as in speech. To quote Shakespeare's Romeo:

      "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet"

      The only thing I wanna show is that despite of it being worthless, RMS have a point there.

    3. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by everphilski · · Score: 0, Redundant

      As I mentioned, everything is replaceable, including the kernel

      Then it wouldn't be called "Linux", making the argument null and void.

      RMS doesn't have a point. He's all talk and no action. What has he done in the past 10 years but preach to a bunch of geeks? Contrast that to Torvalds, or Alan Cox, or open source developers at IBM, or BSD developers... these are the people driving the open source and even free software movement. RMS's head is so big he hasn't seen anything past his neck in ages.

    4. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Well, it depends on what you define as an 'important role'. For example, X11 is also as important as glibc, gcc, or binutils, especially for a desktop OS like Ubuntu.

      OTOH, just as important to the user experience in Ubuntu as a desktop OS is the GNOME desktop (notice I said Ubuntu, not Kubuntu), and GNOME actually is part of the GNU project. (I've had people argue with me on this point -- if you don't believe me, hear it from the horse's mouth.)

      On the gripping hand, Ubuntu and GNOME use quite a bit of other non-GNU software to aid in the user experience: Python, for instance. Much of the packaging system (apt-get, synaptic, etc.) comes from the Debian project, of course, which is not part of the GNU project.

      IMHO, the best thing you can say about an operating system such as Ubuntu is that it consists of a motley collection of open source tools offered under a variety of different licenses and is packaged in a nice way that smooths over integration issues, adds polish and shine, and provides the out-of-the-box experience.

    5. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by Al+Dimond · · Score: 1

      The reason that lots of people call "it" GNU/Linux is that GNU is the name of the project to create a Free Unix-like OS. It doesn't really matter what licenses are used or whose projects are the biggest or most important, GNU was The Project that drove The System. That said, once you create your own project with its own goals you can call it whatever you want. Debian says, "Debian GNU/Linux," specifying themselves as a distributor of the GNU operating system with Linux as its kernel. Gentoo says, "Gentoo Linux," an operating system based on Linux. Ubuntu says, "Ubuntu." An operating system.

      How people use the names often reflects their priorities and views. Debian defers significantly to GNU as a source of mission and values, and reflects that in its name by stating that they're packaging the GNU operating system. Gentoo either calls itself an OS based on Linux or a packaging of the "Linux OS" (I don't know which, I don't think the community would speak with a unified voice, and I doubt there was much consternation about self-definition when coming up with the name), framing it as continuing the work of Linus, in the spirit of the Linux kernel. Ubuntu is just Ubuntu because its goals and values are quite different from those of GNU, Linux or many of the other projects it borrows from. Ubuntu might someday drop GNU, Linux, X11 or GNOME for better alternatives and it would still be Ubuntu, its central mission would stay the same. Kubuntu, on the other hand, defines itself by its use of Ubuntu and KDE; both Ubuntu and KDE themselves are parts of its mission.

    6. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Then it wouldn't be called "Linux", making the argument null and void.

      And if you remove all the GNU parts then it wouldn't be called GNU. How does that make what argument void?
    7. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by kras · · Score: 1

      my sincere greeting to the guys and gals to make it possible. sharing knowledge is where it all starts. hope it goes on. carpe diem,

      --
      memento mori
    8. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by Attrition_cp · · Score: 1

      I don't have any mod points, but that was an excellent description. Thank you.

      --
      Touched By His Noodley Appendage.
    9. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

      Don't feed the trolls.

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    10. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by Johan+Palmqvist · · Score: 1

      So far we already have Debian GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/Hurd, Debian GNU/NetBSD, Debian GNU/kFreeBSD and maybe the beginning of Debian GNU/w32.

      http://www.debian.org/ports/
      http://debian-cygwin.sourceforge.net/

    11. Re:XOrg/Apache/Perl/BSD/GNU/Linux by oohal · · Score: 1
      neither does it mean his face should be on the proverbial wheaties box at the exclusion of the rest of the team.

      I always figured having RMS' head on a box would scare people off.

      -oohal

  4. Excellent by Rendo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Ubuntu, and Linux community needs more pro-active members like the author of this book. God knows how many people have bought those "For dummies" books, but calling them non-geeks as opposed to dummies would make a user more willing to buy the book, and hopefully try Ubuntu. The more mainstream media attention that Ubuntu gets, the better it will become and we'll see more and more users adopting it. Good work.

    1. Re:Excellent by jwsd · · Score: 1

      A non-geek will buy an OS book, read it, and then decide to try the OS? And this is your preferred marketing plan for Ubuntu? You must be a geek yourself.

    2. Re:Excellent by spir0 · · Score: 1

      Yeh, I don't know if that's such a big problem. I've been using computers for about 23 years and I own about half a dozen For Dummies books. My thirst for knowledge in clear concise language outweighs any perceived insult in the title. Would calling people "non-geeks" as opposed to dummies really make that big a difference in sales?

      I guess the way I look at it is this way: I'm a geek, so a book for non-geeks wouldn't interest me, even if it's on a topic I know nothing about. However, a For Dummies book is more appealing because I'm a geek, but I'm a dummy on the topic I'm buying the book about. However, with the help of the book, I intend on adding the knowledge gleaned to my geekiness, thus making me even geekier.

      It's entirely possible they're aiming at different markets.

      --
      The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
    3. Re:Excellent by bblboy54 · · Score: 1

      I like the niche targets... For example Christian Ubuntu. When you target a certain audience, it makes people more comfortable with something new. The thinking is "hey, these people do the same thing we do so it must actually work".

  5. Non-geeks? by Klaidas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, Ubuntu never seemed to be designed for geeks (I'm using it for about 8 months now) - it's one of the friendliest distros for beginners (as much as I've tested different distros)
    But well, a book might be a good idea - making Ubuntu even more user friendly.

    1. Re:Non-geeks? by Sqwubbsy · · Score: 1

      Want friendly? Try MEPIS. MP3 codecs out of the box and the same repos as Ubuntu.
      It's the best kept (non) secret out there.

    2. Re:Non-geeks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who but a geek would test distros?

    3. Re:Non-geeks? by broeken · · Score: 1

      Thanks for making me blow Pepsi out of my nostrils... ...I followed the parent link and click on "See a Video" and I got this... HTTP Error 500 - Internal server error. Internet Information Services (IIS) Ain't that a crackup?

    4. Re:Non-geeks? by Lillesvin · · Score: 1

      I guess you can sniff up that Pepsi again. The video is hosted on another domain, namely phptr.com...

      --
      "Live free or don't."
    5. Re:Non-geeks? by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      I'm not a geek either though some say I am. I'm not as proficient as many here are.

      Well, Ubuntu never seemed to be designed for geeks (I'm using it for about 8 months now) - it's one of the friendliest distros for beginners (as much as I've tested different distros)

      I'd say the same thing about Linspire. I recently got a pc with it on and though I haven't really used it yet it looks easy to use. Using CNR, Click n Run, it's also easy to install software. I have one problem with it. When I got it I got a broadband router as well and while I have access to the net on both of my pcs and ran the Windows Home Networking wizzard, my old pc runs Windows ME, I haven't been able to network the two pcs. The old pc doesn't show the new one in My Network and while the new one shows the old one I can't access it. I keep getting a userid and password dialogue box even when I enter the right uid and pw, I've spent several hours on the net and trying to get networking to work. So in the next day or two if I can't get it working I'll have to pay someone to them networked properly.

      But well, a book might be a good idea - making Ubuntu even more user friendly.

      I agree bigtime!!! I'm ordering a book for Linspire and I'm thinking of multibooting with Ubuntu and/or another Linux Distro, if so I'll get a book for it.

      Falcon
    6. Re:Non-geeks? by Skrynesaver · · Score: 1
      Setting up codecs etc is handy enough, just visit easy ubuntu and there you are.

      Terms and conditions apply, you may not use this linnk if you live in a country with fscked software patenting laws

      --
      "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
    7. Re:Non-geeks? by n74jw · · Score: 1

      I do not really go in for the term "geek". I am an IT professional and a tech enthusiast, but I do not consider myself a geek. Geek is a derogatory term. Surely all football fans are not "jocks", nor stupid. Ubuntu is a great distro, mainly through it's tremendous community support. Microsoft - Take notice...

  6. "for Non-Geeks" by blindd0t · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been waiting to say this for a long time:

    My mother uses Ubuntu (6.06 Desktop) and she is not computer savvy at all!

    1. Re:"for Non-Geeks" by Virtuall · · Score: 1

      Add my mother, my neighbor, my 11yo sister and a couple of classmates. None have used linux before and none have any problems with Ubuntu. When I say it I mean it: Ubuntu is 10 times user frendlier than Windows.

    2. Re:"for Non-Geeks" by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      I'll be honest in that I've only used Red Hat, Fedora Core, Novell Linux Desktop and SLES 9, so I've never tried Ubuntu. I've noticed each distro getting better, but from what I could tell, the user friendliness of a distro came from either Gnome or KDE, not from the distro itself. So I am left wondering, how is Ubuntu with Gnome 2.14 any easier than Fedora Core with Gnome 2.14?

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    3. Re:"for Non-Geeks" by doodlebumm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Application/device integration, installation, selection all make a big difference. The interface level of the system through Gnome or KDE is similar for most distros. But, take it a step further to make the use of the applications easier and you have the winning combination. If you make it so that the average person can set up their system because the device support is really there and works without having to install special drivers, then you make the initial experience better. I recently installed Ubuntu on several systems, some new hardware and some old. It handled (almost) everything in all the boxes. I have loaded the live Knoppix 5 as well as the live Ubuntu 6 on the same hardware. The Ubuntu beat in terms of hardware support, including better SCSI and SATA RAID support. The only thing that I found lacking in the Ubuntu release was the ability to easily write to an NTFS partition from the live CD. Otherwise the everything from the installation to the hardware support to the application support, everything, was better on Ubuntu. My 12 year old daughter loves Ubuntu more then Windows (I gave her the choice, and guess which one she picked?).

      I always had issues with the Fedora releases. There was always something that was broken that made me mad. It isn't production quality, it is their "test bed" platform, so things will be broken. I'd rather have Ubuntu that is stable and easy than Fedora that is buggy and has only slightly better application support (read this as "more commercial-type applications," not more applications in general).

      I used to use SUSE though version 10, but I had hardware issues. The newer releases may be better, but I am totally satisfied with the hardware support of Ubuntu. I have some obscure "windows" hardware that now even works with Ubuntu Dapper.

      At work I have a windows system as my desktop. But, to make me feel more at home I have Ubuntu Dapper running in VMware player. I'd still rather use a Linux distro than windows any day.

    4. Re:"for Non-Geeks" by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 0

      maybe thats because she uses ubuntu

  7. Non-geeks will never finish it by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    What attracted me to this book was the obvious title which makes no bones about the fact that this book is targeted at non-geeks.
    The book is divided into 18 chapters and 3 appendices spanning over 300 pages.


    I've seen similar 300 page books to teach windows to non-geeks. I'm sure there are people who feel lost and buy the book thinking they'll learn. I have serious doubts that many actually make it through the book. They'll make it through the first chapter and, at best, pull it out occasionally to search for some answer (and probably not find it).

    A lot of people have moments when they feel ambitious and decide they will learn linux. How many of the non-geeks actually do, though? Of those that do, I doubt it's from books like these but actually from geek friends walking them through it.
    1. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by tclark · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For a typical non-geek, "learning Linux" is a lousy idea. So is "learning Windows". That's because they don't want to use an operating system. They want to send email, work with their digital pictures, write a novel, or whatever. Non-geeks need to learn how to do the tasks that interest them, and that is how geeks should present this information to them.

    2. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by CoolCat23 · · Score: 1

      Coming soon : "Windows Vista for non-housewives"... If even the best-intended, noob-oriented, linux-related book cannot help but still use "geek" in its title, how do you expect the common man to think of linux as anything other than a niche, tech-savvy, quasi-underground operating system ? People won't use Linux because it's "non-geek". They will use it because it performs better on their everyday tasks ! Book authors should use "brighter", more appealing, everyday-task-oriented titles like "Linux for office work", "A media center in your livingroom with Linux !", "Surf the Internet securely with Linux"...

    3. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by AusIV · · Score: 1
      Typically when I pick up books on how to do such-and-such, I'm not daunted by the book being 300+ pages. I also don't sit down and read it all at once.

      I use how-to book as references. I use the index to find what I want to do, then I skip to that section. I probably won't read every page of the book, and if I do, it certainly won't be in order.

      Also, how do you define learning linux? Personally, I have a pretty good grasp of how the operating system works. My girlfriend has no idea how the operating system works, but she can still use my computer to get online, use an instant messenger, write a paper with OpenOffice.org, almost anything she does regularly on her Windows computer. There's a huge difference between being able to use an operating system and knowing how it works, and "learning Linux" is a vague statement.

    4. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "How to chat, send mail, IM, and access your adult material on linux."

      Best seller for linux.

    5. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by shitdrummer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Very true. Users also love a pretty gui. I took a copy of Mandriva One 2007 with XGL to work yesterday and had 5 people take copies of the CD to play with at home. None of those people had ever played with linux before but were impressed enough with the 3d gui effects to give it a go. I'm not a regular linux user but I've been playing around with distro's for a few years, usually with a dual boot to Windows. I enjoy playing under the hood, so to speak, but am very much a beginner. Ubuntu was the first distro I played with that I thought I may be able to use full time. Now I'm thinking that about Mandriva 2007. All in all, the community is moving in the right direction and I love it. Shitdrummer.

    6. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by value_added · · Score: 1

      For a typical non-geek, "learning Linux" is a lousy idea. So is "learning Windows". That's because they don't want to use an operating system. They want to send email, work with their digital pictures, write a novel, or whatever.

      I have to question whether "learning Windows" means very much past familiarity with the GUI, basic system startup, and the registry. That said, it's inevitable that anyone using a computer (with the possible exception of Mac users) will come up against the reality that knowing how to send email or work with digital pictures isn't enough, and that he or she responsible for the care and feeding of their operating system. And given that they probably use a computer at home, at work, and at play, it strikes me as a bit bizarre not to invest the time to learn something of the technology they'll be face to face with it for the rest of their lives. The alternatives are pretending otherwise, or paying someone else to play the admin role in each of the cases.

      So should people buy this book? Microsoft is notorious for reinventing itself every few years, so I'd suggest that any amount of time learning anything about any *nix-based system is a good investment. The knowledge will hold them in good stead for years to come, and at every step they'll have the opportunity to build on it.

    7. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      That's because they don't want to use an operating system. They want to send email, work with their digital pictures, write a novel, or whatever.

      Well, perhaps I'm not a geek, but I am a professional programer with 7.5 years commercial experience and hobbiest experience going back about 22 years (to the tender age of 10), and *I* don't want to use the OS either. I want it to sit there, managing my hardware and processes, etc, and staying out of my way while I get on with what I want to do.

      Don't get me wrong, I used (and played with) Linux for a few years; I've upgraded kernels, switched from libc5 to glibc2 by hand, installed gcc, etc from source, hacked around with the kernel, etc. I just can't be bothered with it any more. More power to those that can and do enjoy that sort of thing, it's just not for me any more (at the moment?).

    8. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by tclark · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, but it sounds like you (and me) sometimes play different roles when we sit down at a computer. For example, here are the roles I commonly play:

      1. User: Right now I'm hanging out using my browser, and the OS doesn't really matter. I could even use Windows and it wouldn't matter too much.

      2. Hobbyist: I like to mess around with computers, so I use an OS that gives me opportunities to mess around in interesting ways.

      3. Programmer: I care about the OS a bit, since some of the code I write may be OS-specific. I have to be aware of details of the target OS.

      4. Sysadmin: I care about the OS a lot, since I'm wallowing in it like a pig in shit.

      Non-geeks only deal with case #1. As geeks we may know about issues that will make one OS or another better suited to non-geeks needs. But non-geeks aren't aware of this and don't care. That's just the way it is. My mom doesn't care about the details of her car's engine, she just wants to drive to the store. And she approaches her computer in a similar way.

    9. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by Stanza · · Score: 1
      For a typical non-geek, "learning Linux" is a lousy idea. So is "learning Windows". That's because they don't want to use an operating system. They want to send email, work with their digital pictures, write a novel, or whatever. Non-geeks need to learn how to do the tasks that interest them, and that is how geeks should present this information to them.


      Let's look at the example of "work with their digital pictures". To take pictures, one must learn to use a camera. Sad but true. Then one must learn to transfer pictures to the computer. Then they need to know how to use the computer ("learning Linux" or "learning Windows") to do such tasks as copying, organizing, or else those pix will not easily worked with. They need to know how to use the operating system at hand, as well as the application that allows them to "work with their digital pictures" (whether that program be Photoshop or ImageMagick).


      I guess what I am trying to say is that these poor unfortunate "non-geeks" do need to learn to use an operating system to be able to do these "non-geek" tasks. You could simply type a novel at your computer, but if you do not understand the concept of "files", or saving your files, or why saving once in a while just in case is a good idea, you will have many frustrations, just as if you took a camera out and didn't understand what this dial on it that said "f/#" was. True, many cameras these days are trying to simplify it so you don't need to know what "f/#" is, but many operating systems are trying to simplify it so you don't need to know how to use 'RUN "*" 8, 1' to get a program running.


      I guess my gripe is that, to use a computer effectively, you have to learn to use a computer, much like you need to learn to drive a car in order to be able use a car effectively. Trying to say "they need to learn things to let them focus on writing a novel" is understandable, but if they don't understand how to manage their files, they will be frustrated. It's like those who want to study physics but "calculus is too hard". If you don't learn the math of physics you will be limited to saying things like "things heavier than air fall when you drop them".

    10. Re:Non-geeks will never finish it by tclark · · Score: 1

      Your car example is interesting, since most adults I know are able to drive cars. Very few of them know much else about cars. You can be a pretty successful driver without knowing much about cars.

      I have a nice 35mm camera on which all of the controls are manual, so you have to know a bit about photography to use it. I also have simple digital camera. My son has been able to use it since he was 5.

      I used to teach a college course in basic HTML. The students were all able to use computers pretty successfully before they started the class. They browsed the web, used email, and wrote papers on the computer. But almost none of them knew what a file was before taking the class. They sure as hell didn't know what an operating system was.

      My point is that, for many people, operating systems exist at a low level where they just don't notice them - much like the transmissions in their cars.

  8. Update on the link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking of "willing to buy the book", Slashdot links to B & N here, but Amazon has it cheaper (look at the "Used and new..." 3rd party sellers), and I'm sure there are other sites that are also cheaper. Why does Slashdot keep linking to B & N all the time? Even if their reviews make a book seem great, the relatively high prices they link to aren't very attractive.

    1. Re:Update on the link by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 1

      Feeding bandwidth to a horde of internerds is not cheap. Damming revenue streams is not something you do when you have them available.

  9. Ubuntu is for geeks too by digitalderbs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a great distro for both the non-technical and technical -- geek and non-geek. I had used Debian unstable for 4 years before switching to Ubuntu (64- and 32-bit versions) 6 months ago. All of the lovely configurability and software tools (like aptitude, apt-build and so on) from Debian are available.

    The reasons I made the switch were because (1) I wanted to see what all the fuss was about, and (2) I wanted a more frequent "stable" release cycle for my desktop system. However, I continue to use Debian stable for any servers and simulation clusters that I manage.

    1. Re:Ubuntu is for geeks too by SumoRoti · · Score: 0

      I did the same thing. I used Debian for 10 years and I booted unstable version during the last 5 years. So I started to switch to ubuntu 1 year ago and I enjoy this OS. I still love Debian which is still inside the package system and some of dev tools but I prefer Ubuntu for the dynamism even if there was some problems on some not-so-much-test packages but it's still safer than a unstable debian. It's truly a polyvalent distro. As you said, digitalderbs, debian is still useful (and even better) for servers deployment (i think it's because FAI).

    2. Re:Ubuntu is for geeks too by Cheapy · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be "non-geek and geek"?

      --
      Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
  10. Maybe they can make an easier distribution by StressGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    called Noobuntu?

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
    1. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by MotorMachineMercenar · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      "Maybe they can make an easier distribution called Noobuntu?"

      While the parent is supposed to be (and admittedly succeeds at being) funny, this kind of condascending attitude by lunix zealots is one of the major reasons why Linux and its incarnations will still take years (if ever) to really reach a point where anyone can use it. User friendliness, ease of use, painless installation, smooth UI and user experience are all things that still seem to be curse words for most Linux users and especially the developers. Documentation and user support is lacking or non-existent. Although it appears that there's been quite some progress in recent time and most of the hardcore zealots have started to accept that it might be actually a Good Thing to have more people using Linux.

      --
      "We have an A-Bomb...what more do you want, mermaids?" --I.I. Rabi, speaking in defense of Robert Oppenheimer
    2. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "...painless installation..."

      I take you haven't install Ubuntu lately? It Couldn't be easier. Easier than Windows and miles faster (esp if you need to format a new hard drive). I have installed both many times.

    3. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      It already exists: http://www.edubuntu.org/ ;)

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    4. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by mick88 · · Score: 2, Funny

      or, maybe more properly, Gnubuntu?

      --
      I created this account just so I could comment on this story
    5. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by ZiakII · · Score: 1, Redundant

      "...painless installation..."

      I take you haven't install Ubuntu lately? It Couldn't be easier. Easier than Windows and miles faster (esp if you need to format a new hard drive). I have installed both many times.


      Yes because having my monitor not work at instatlion, having to get .mp3 working, having to install my video card drivers, and getting my sound work all from terminal is painless....

    6. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Warg!+The+Orcs!! · · Score: 1

      I agree completely (-1 Redundant...)
      I would like to use Linux and have a spare laptop with Mandriva installed on it but guess what....it never gets switched on. The reason is that I do not have the drivers necessary to make my hardware and peripherals work. I know that there are 'geek' methods for getting by this but I am no programmer and do not have the time to learn how to write my own printer or WLAN card drivers.
      I read a good article on Linux a couple of years ago where the author, a Linux user himself, bemoaned the state of Linux development and developers wondering why they spent so much time on making pretty GUIs and no time on drivers and installers. If I can connect to the 'net and print stuff out without having to 'configure' anything or use the command line then I'll use Linux but until then I'll stick with XP

      --
      Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.
    7. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by megaditto · · Score: 1

      well, your argument is valid, though it's not quite as hard to get started as you claim.

      Even for a very esoteric hardware, chances are good that someone somewhere has gone though the trouble of hacking it all together, and posted the detailed howto. In most cases, there will be a straightforward patch or even a binary install disk image you can download...

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    8. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by mr_shifty · · Score: 2, Informative

      Considering that I have to do that and more any time I install XP on my laptop (which, ironically enough, has one of those little metal plates on it that says "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP"), I honestly can't tell if you're referring to Windows or Linux in this post.

      By comparison, even Slackware recognizes all my hardware out of the box on that same machine, and that's not even a "user friendly" distro like Ubuntu.

      --
      And the circle of life continues to spin, occasionally wobbling on its axis thanks to the weighty presence of dumb.
    9. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Obyron · · Score: 1

      It Couldn't be easier.

      Unless you want to do something totally and completely out there, like using a ridiculously common Linksys wireless card (WPC54Gv2) on a laptop. Of course, it's a simple fix that any non-geek could do. All I had to do was download a third party utility to translate the Linksys driver into modules that Linux could understand and insert them into the kernel...

      Come on. I really like Ubuntu, and I think it's taking Linux in the right direction for the desktop market, but easier than Windows? When the GNU/Linux crowd stops kidding themselves about Windows actually being that hard to install, we'll get a lot farther. The big problem with Linux is installs has always been, and continues to be, driver compatibility/availability, sometimes even for common hardware.

      Big time manufacturers preload the operating system. If you -really- want Linux to take a major leap into the desktop market you have to get major companies to start putting them in retail stores, or (for "order only" companies) have a major marketing push to sell Linux. The fact that this hasn't happened yet means that guys in suits who make marketing decisions (read: the people who matter, no matter how crass it may sound) think it's not ready. Right or wrong, that's just the way it is.

      --
      --Obyron
    10. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by MotorMachineMercenar · · Score: 1

      I've never installed Ubuntu (it came installed on my loaner laptop). But the fact is, getting the simplest, most basic things to work on Ubuntu took quite a while, and I'm very computer (well, Windoze) literate. Flash was a major pain and required for most people's websurfing (pandora.com for me). And installing fully working codecs for various "entertainment" video purposes was even more of a pain as there's no ffdshow filters which have all-in-one.

      I still don't fully understand why there's a need for both Synaptics and add/remove programs as both could be integrated into one.

      Now I'm quite comfortable with Ubuntu (a month of use). But I will go back to XP whether I like it or not as there's no Photoshop CS (GIMP doesn't have 16-bit support (FOR HOW MANY FRICKING _YEARS_ NOW?) and lacks some advanced essential (to me) photo editing tools and libraries of pro actions/filters) or iTunes for my music and iPod connection (smart playlists is the #1 reason why I use and miss iTunes). These two issues are big enough for me and although I'd be quite happy to stay with Ubuntu I doubt I will. I just don't see the need for a dual-boot system as I can do everything without hassles in XP.

      --
      "We have an A-Bomb...what more do you want, mermaids?" --I.I. Rabi, speaking in defense of Robert Oppenheimer
    11. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by labratuk · · Score: 1
      While the parent is supposed to be (and admittedly succeeds at being) funny, this kind of condascending attitude by lunix zealots is one of the major reasons why Linux and its incarnations will still take years (if ever) to really reach a point where anyone can use it.

      Linux will never be ready for the desktop while random people are able to make clueless unfounded remarks saying "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" on web forums.
      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    12. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by jdbartlett · · Score: 1

      The problem with your suggestion is that it involves getting major companies to do something they don't have to.

      Unfortunately, the best advice we can offer in the meantime is to buy a supported wireless device.

      I do sympathize with your situation: I have a PCMCIA Netgear wireless card that Ubuntu doesn't recognize. The wireless card in my desktop machine is also Netgear, but is recognized using Madwifi.

    13. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Nutria · · Score: 1
      this kind of condascending attitude by lunix zealots is one of the major reasons why Linux and its incarnations will still take years (if ever) to really reach a point where anyone can use it.

      As opposed to MS Windows? I had to upgrade (from Win2K) to XP when the company got me a modern laptop. Man, it stinks.

      Win2k was Gibraltar. I could stay connected to work thru the (Cisco v4.6) VPN for 3 weeks with without even noticing. Outlook '97 and 2002 were also solid, if not spectacular. (Especially since the old laptop was ao slow.)

      Win XP is a Louisiana barrier island. It hasn't stayed connected to the VPN more than 2 days without it going into la-la land. This is on top of Outlook 2003 intermittently turning memory hog and causing me to have to reboot the machine.

      If MS didn't have a defacto monopoly on factory-installed operating systems, no one in his right mind, and very few crazies, would use it.

      User friendliness, ease of use, painless installation, smooth UI and user experience are all things that still seem to be curse words for most Linux users and especially the developers.

      Where have you been the past 4 years?

      Documentation and user support is lacking or non-existent.

      As opposed to the ream of printed documentation that comes with Windows, Office, etc, etc?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    14. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by hullabalucination · · Score: 1

      Unless you want to do something totally and completely out there, like using a ridiculously common Linksys wireless card (WPC54Gv2) on a laptop.

      Hey, I'll trade you a native Linux WPC54Gv2 driver (pre-compiled and packaged for your distro) if you'll send me a Windows XP x64 driver for a Belkin F5D8010. How long has x64 been out? Close to 2 years? Apparently Belkin feels the Windows world isn't ready for the experience of 64-bit wireless computing. And apparently, that feeling extends to just about every other wireless OEM, according to what I'm reading over at PlanetAMD64.com. You've never read a sadder collection of laments than a forum full of hapless Athlon 64 users looking for Windows drivers. Fortunately, for my Linux box there's the NDISwrapper kludge, although I'd really prefer a native Linux driver.

      * * * * *

      It is a good idea to 'shop around' before you settle on a doctor. Ask about the condition of his Mercedes. Ask about the competence of his mechanic. Don't be shy! After all, you're paying for it.
      --Dave Barry

    15. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Chimera512 · · Score: 1

      exactly my problem. not painless, I've never gotten 6.10 to work with my video card to the point where I could boot into GDM and i spent a lot more time messing with it then most people i knew were willing to. I wanted to make it work but here I am, typing on a Windows XP box.

    16. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by kevlarman · · Score: 2, Informative

      edgy eft is not stable yet, and not meant for most users. you should be installing dapper (well, i suppose that you can install edgy in less than a month when it becomes the current stable version)

      --
      A mouse is a device used to point to the xterm you want to type in
    17. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by kevlarman · · Score: 1
      I still don't fully understand why there's a need for both Synaptics and add/remove programs as both could be integrated into one.
      they are the same program (hit the advanced button in add/remove), one was was made to look like the add/remove from windows for users who are completely scared of one button being in a different place, the other offers a few more features (to be honest i don't really know much about how they differ, i've been using aptitude since i installed ubuntu).
      --
      A mouse is a device used to point to the xterm you want to type in
    18. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Well, I've got some very thick tomes that came with an early version of Office; hell, I've got a pretty thick book that came with MS-DOS. It's all online now, but let's face it - Word '97 really isn't much different than Word 'now when all you're doing is typing stuff and occasionally changing the font, which is more than what 99% of its users need. If you need help for that, you've got a problem (on any OS - this isn't some Linux elitism). While I hate how all of the Office help is done online now, it's still accessable with relative ease by hitting F1 or merely typing into the one thing I can't remove from my toolbar - there's no issue of trawling through forums and often trying to interpret bizarre acronyms or terminal to-dos.

      I agree - using Windows would be a very poor choice if there were good alternatives. OS X is a fine alternative for the majority of users; Linux, specifically Ubuntu, may be okay for some. But for the gamers out there (and there are quite a few last I heard), their choice of OS is pretty damn limited. Sure, a few odd games have ports for one of the two, but most of the current mainstream games are Windows-only.

      Having recently dabbled with current versions of Linux, I'll comment on ease-of-use, too. Installation wasn't especially painful (beyond trying to download some fairly hefty files on a wacky connection), though the bits about partitioning were mind-boggling to me. Well, with Ubuntu anyways - Mandriva played hell with my monitor, by deciding to set the thing to a nonexistant resolution and then deciding that it wouldn't bother with the "If you can read this, click OK; otherwise reverting in 15 seconds" dialog box it promised. Ubuntu's first boot desktop didn't feel too special, and things felt a bit awkward - granted, I've been using Windows almost my whole life, and OS X for the last six months or so which has been a welcome change... anyways, a new OS always feels odd at first. But OS X, at least, had things were I'd expected, which wasn't really the case with Ubuntu. I didn't give it much time in all fairness, but when I've got one perfectly good alternative and another decent one that I'm forced to hang on to, I can't see a whole lot of logic in spending more time than I need to just on principle.

      Don't get me wrong - if I was willing to put in a bit of time (probably not too much), I'm sure I could have become pretty competent soon enough. If it had come preinstalled, I probably would have put in the time. It's certainly getting closer, but it's not there yet. In many cases, it's not their fault - many manufacturers aren't going to want to bother creating linux drivers, especially if it means that they need to GPL them. But their fault or not, those are still, relatively speaking, rather basic problems that *must* be overcome before it becomes anywhere near mainstream. Get a Dell selling for $100 less (or whatever Dell pays for their XP licenses) that works properly out of the box with Ubuntu installed, and we'll have some seroius progress. Price determines most, but convenience still is a big factor.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    19. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      You don't have to use the terminal. Just type "codec" into the search on Synaptic and download everything that comes up. Ubuntuguide.org just goes with "here, copy and paste this, and you're done".

      You want better driver support for Linux?Complain to the hardware companies that you'd really like to use their product, but it unfortunately doesn't have a Linux driver available, so you'll just have to go with their competition's product which does have Linux support until they stop ignoring you.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    20. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      has one of those little metal plates on it that says "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP"
      I like to peel those off and stick them on public loos.

    21. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by vogon+jeltz · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I'm pretty much a Linux only user. But this must be a new all time low as far as /. moderators are concerned. Moderating the parent Flamebait for his comment is nothing but ridiculous and chilidsh. His comment is reasonably well tempered and I actually agree to some of his points.
      So puhleease ....

    22. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Nutria · · Score: 1
      Well, I've got some very thick tomes that came with an early version of Office; hell, I've got a pretty thick book that came with MS-DOS.

      Exactly. Early versions.

      let's face it - Word '97 really isn't much different than Word 'now when all you're doing is typing stuff and occasionally changing the font, which is more than what 99% of its users need.

      Agree. Word 97 & Excel 97 are still adequate to my uses. Outlook 2003 is better, though, because of filtering. It's a step back from Outlook 2002, though, in some respects.

      for the gamers out there (and there are quite a few last I heard), their choice of OS is pretty damn limited.

      Circular, self-reinforcing argument.

      Only Windows gets preinstalled, so that's what the game companys write to. Since all the games are written for Windows, gamers want to stay on Windows.

      though the bits about partitioning were mind-boggling to me.

      Geez, I must be old, since I remember using MS-DOS 2.x FDISK. And reading about it in the excellent manual! No wonder fdisk doesn't boggle my mind.

      I'm sure I could have become pretty competent soon enough.

      My wife did, with very few problems. GNOME + Evolution + OpenOffice + Mozilla, and now Firefox & Thunderbird.

      You're not saying a girl is smarter than you, are you? ;)

      many manufacturers aren't going to want to bother creating linux drivers, especially if it means that they need to GPL them

      All they need to do is supply the documentation, and someone else will do it for them.

      Or, they could do what NVIDIA does, and create a GPL stub that interfaces with the closed-source driver. That's what my machine is running now.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    23. Re:Maybe they can make an easier distribution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's tons of comments like yours all over slashdot(at least the first part) and it's all so called windows power users having to learn that the software installation works differently from windows. The packages are in other places, there are other tools, other habits, etc. This simply has no place in a "Linux is/isn't ready for the desktop" type of discussion, because it centers around the basic fact that it will act and look different than windows.

      BTW, an installer for the flash plugin is available from multiverse: flash plugin package page.

  11. Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by pnot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The book that I need, and I haven't yet found, is a beginner's Ubuntu guide which doesn't focus on installation, and instead devotes most or all of its space to basic use of the desktop and common applications (Nautilus, Firefox, OOo Writer, etc.).

    I suspect my situation is not unique: I install Ubuntu for parents and other non-techies; no matter how good the book, they're not going to be able to install it themselves. Then I bugger off and leave them with it. What they need is a straightforward and thorough user guide for basic use of the system. (And I mean basic: things like "you can move windows by dragging the title bar", and "if your mouse has a scroll wheel, you can use it to scroll through a window").

    Any recommendations?

    1. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try Beginning Ubuntu Linux http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10 086. It does cover installation, but also GIMP, OpenOffice, basic shell scripting, bluetooth, etc.

    2. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by tolan-b · · Score: 3, Informative

      So you didn't read the review of *this* book then?

      "In the past, I have seen Linux books using well over 50 pages just to explain the installation process but Ubuntu is famed for its simple 6 step installation. *The next chapter is a very short* one which gives a good illustrated explanation of the steps needed to boot Ubuntu using the latest version of Ubuntu live CD (included with the book) and install the OS on the hard disk. "

    3. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      Linux information is so big that it should have its own encyclopedia made for it, a public but moderated by experts & gurus wiki would be great...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    4. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you mean like this?

    5. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by pnot · · Score: 1
      So you didn't read the review of *this* book then?

      Of course I did. But perhaps I was insufficiently clear in my question: to my mind, the term "installation" encompasses all the initial setup and configuration required to get a fully functioning system. From the review:

      ... a good illustrated explanation of the steps needed to boot Ubuntu using the latest version of Ubuntu... and install the OS on the hard disk... a chapter which explains how to set up the network and log on to the internet, another for setting up your printer and scanner, still another explaining different ways of downloading and installing software... how to make the fonts on the Ubuntu machine look prettier and the steps needed to install different kinds of additional fonts such as Microsoft true type fonts... next three chapters deal exclusively in setting up and configuring audio and video in Ubuntu...

      From this, and the table of contents here, it seems that over half the book is devoted to installation and configuration. Well and good if that's what you're after, but if someone's already installed and configured Ubuntu for you then it's superfluous. Since a lot of Linux newbies have the installation done by a techie friend, I'm surprised that there seems to be no book which just assumed the system is up and running and devotes more space to some of the real newbie stuff, like how scrollbars work and what the different mouse buttons do.
    6. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by pnot · · Score: 1

      Try Beginning Ubuntu Linux

      Thank you, I'll check it out.

    7. Re:Ubuntu books that don't focus on installation? by tolan-b · · Score: 1

      I understand now.

      Sorry if my post came across with default "you're an idiot" tone so common on here, it starts to become a habit :)

  12. Ubuntu Linux is ALREADY for Non-Geeks by vistic · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I tried using Ubuntu and just ended up hating the default install, and the themes, and the package manager. In the end I switched back to using YellowDogLinux and FreeBSD.

    Now I don't see what the big deal about Ubuntu is.

    I suppose the install is prettier since you load it up as a LiveCD and then run the installer program, but in the end you end up with less, imho. And the installer just runs more sluggish.

    1. Re:Ubuntu Linux is ALREADY for Non-Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally agree.

    2. Re:Ubuntu Linux is ALREADY for Non-Geeks by It'sYerMam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You said it in the title. Ubuntu linux is for non-geeks; that's the big deal. Linux has always possessed a geeky userbase and geek connotations. Ubuntu is project that successfully provides a reason for linux to shed that mantle. I, personally, prefer debian for non-release updates (ubuntu-backports notwithstanding) but that doesn't mean I don't recognise what Ubuntu does.

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
  13. Huh? by Chaffar · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    If you need help to install Ubuntu then you shouldn't be in front of a PC :P Honestly, I believe that Ubuntu's online resources, wikis and forum, are extremely well maintained, which makes the book a little bit useless. I guess he's catering to those people who just can't do anything without having a hard book next to them to explain everything with pretty pictures. 1- download ISO. 2- Reboot from CD, and click on install 3- Run Automatix. The next time somebody tells you that they use Windows because it's easier to install, slap them with some humanity towards others :D

    1. Re:Huh? by Ticklemonster · · Score: 1

      Slap them with humanity! I love it. I agree with your installation instructions. Very concise.

      --
      Karma: Bad is the liberal way of saying this guy won't drink the kool aid here on slash dot. I wear my Karma with pride
    2. Re:Huh? by zurtle · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'm going to be dumb enough to respond to your lame flamebait.

      I guess you haven't installed an operating system before while being the owner of a sole computer on dialup. Some people just don't have internet access during the installation process.

      --
      Couldn't stand the weather
    3. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe one of your steps could be to burn the CD.. I'm no expert though.

    4. Re:Huh? by suv4x4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you need help to install Ubuntu then you shouldn't be in front of a PC :P
      Honestly, I believe that Ubuntu's online resources, wikis and forum, are extremely well maintained, which makes the book a little bit useless. I guess he's catering to those people who just can't do anything without having a hard book next to them to explain everything with pretty pictures.
      1- download ISO. 2- Reboot from CD, and click on install 3- Run Automatix. The next time somebody tells you that they use Windows because it's easier to install, slap them with some humanity towards others :D


      Well, I have a good news for you: you're not alone in thinking this. In fact most techies and linux users are firm believers that if you can't install, for example, Ubuntu alone, or do XYZ alone, you should never approach a computer.

      I have also bad news for you: attitude like yours is one of the major reasons Linux is just about nowhere in desktop adoption right now.
    5. Re:Huh? by rekka · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced. It failed to boot on my IBM laptop (Fedora was fine 1st time) and an old desktop of mine. Strangely, I never had this problem with 5.10. What's going wrong, I wonder?

    6. Re:Huh? by xoyoboxoyobo · · Score: 1

      1. That's already difficult for some people. Once they got an Ubuntu cd in their grubby little hands, then yes, it's astonishingly easy (when I installed I sat there for 5 minutes trying to figure out what I had to do next bwahahaha) Replace 1. with "sign up on ubuntu to get mailed a free install cd" and you're in business

    7. Re:Huh? by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      Who says you need web access during install?You can order the install cd from shipit and not even pay shipping. Set up your internet after it's installed.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    8. Re:Huh? by bigpat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have also bad news for you: attitude like yours is one of the major reasons Linux is just about nowhere in desktop adoption right now.

      No this is a myth. That the geek elitist attitude has anything to do with linux adoption misses the mark by a wide margin. That linux adoption even has anything to do with how easy or difficult to install misses the mark also. The fact that you have to install it at all is the issue. It is simple, if Dell, HP and/or Gateway offered Linux preinstalled on their consumer desktops right now, then Linux would have a much wider adoption as long as the expense was the same or less than Windows.

    9. Re:Huh? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I have also bad news for you: attitude like yours is one of the major reasons Linux is just about nowhere in desktop adoption right now.

      No, Linux is nowhere because it doesn't come preinstalled, and it doesn't run all the apps that they hear about even though it probably has equal replacements. Despite the cynicism, I think there's two fairly valid points - installing Ubuntu isn't going to get much easier, and it's certainly a lot easier than installing Windows. I don't think it's because people are stupid in any way, I think it's just not something people do. People stay with the defaults (or at least what's an option). If Ubuntu came by default in a dual-boot with Windows, you'd see real market penetration. As it is, people really have to go out of their way to replace Windows with Ubuntu, and by that I don't mean clicks of the mouse but mentally to be motivated to do it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It is simple, if Dell, HP and/or Gateway offered Linux preinstalled on their consumer desktops right now, then Linux would have a much wider adoption as long as the expense was the same or less than Windows."

      Have you checked? They do now. So that they don't at all is a myth. The elitist attitude among many seasoned-linux goers, or more importantly people who have gotten comfortable using linux and now want to don their own snobby hats in forums, don't embrace the linuxally-challenged. Its still alive and well on slashdot.

    11. Re:Huh? by zurtle · · Score: 1
      I think you need to re-read the thread: you have taken my comment out of context. The point of parent was that all the documentation is on the internet. While my point is that you cannot access this documentation while you're installing. And, bright spark, what happens if you need help installing your modem? If you didn't have the foresight to preserve your Windows installation and internet connection (if you had one in the first place) then you're pretty screwed.

      Read before you post!

      --
      Couldn't stand the weather
    12. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can buy a dell for $350 with windows, or $750 with linux. That's hardly a motivator to get linux, is it?

      Linux gurus are often pompous jerks, so are win2000 admins. Neither group has any effect on sales.

    13. Re:Huh? by westlake · · Score: 1
      If you need help to install Ubuntu then you shouldn't be in front of a PC :P
      The next time somebody tells you that they use Windows because it's easier to install, slap them with some humanity towards others :D

      How many people do you suppose have ever installed Windows from scratch?

      ---or OSX, or any other operating system, for that matter. The OEM system install has been the gold standard for end users for over twenty-five years.

      I'd take the odds that in a non-Geek game of Trivial Pursuit "Lt. Ubuntu" is "the black woman who worked the radios on the old Star Trek series."

    14. Re:Huh? by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      I have also bad news for you: attitude like yours is one of the major reasons Linux is just about nowhere in desktop adoption right now.

      You have GOT to be kidding. 2006 is THE year that Linux takes over the desktop. As it has been for the past five years.

      Oh, wait...
       

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    15. Re:Huh? by Fatalis · · Score: 0

      This is why I would prefer someone writing a book on how to search for and find meaningful information in the web, and, as a bonus, how not to act like an all-round idiot when asking for support. It would amount to a whole lot more than rewriting documentation actually available online to book format. I say this because it's harder to look up information in a paper book and what you learn reading normally will most likely be lost in the short term memory anyway.

      --
      Deus est fatalis
    16. Re:Huh? by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

      Linux gurus are often pompous jerks, so are win2000 admins. Neither group has any effect on sales.

      The difference is that Linux users translate their attitude in Linux as a community product, while Win2000 admins can't do it even if they wanted (Microsoft would never produce a product with totally up-side-down commands, like vim for ex.)

    17. Re:Huh? by waferhead · · Score: 1

      Zurtle said:
      "...I guess you haven't installed an operating system before while being the owner of a sole computer on dialup. Some people just don't have internet access during the installation process."

      That's something of a feature.

      Imagine what would happen to Windows installs if the machine had to be exposed during install.

      The only "safe" Win install involves pulling down all the updates with a Knoppix disc, putting them on a USB key or such, and then typing "knx2hd".

    18. Re:Huh? by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      Oooohhhh, I see. Sorry, I forgot about the problems of modems and Linux. Ethernet is usually very well-supported, so "I can't set up my internet" didn't occur to me as a possible problem. I forgot a lot of people still use dial-up. I was just thinking of like the parts where you install mp3 support and the extra repositories and all that.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    19. Re:Huh? by p0ss · · Score: 2, Interesting
      1- download ISO. 2- Reboot from CD, and click on install 3- Run Automatix.

      For a moment, i shall pretend i am my grandmother and you have just uttered this sentance to me.

      i think she would have understood 4 words. and they are: from, on and run.

      but she wants to check her email, look at gootube, play music and movies and use amsn.
      do you really think we should discriminate against her because she doesn't speak our language?
    20. Re:Huh? by Lorkki · · Score: 1

      I beg to differ: how you market an operating system can also have a significant impact. Lack of pre-installation is only one issue, and with lack of real use experiences the perceived difficulty can be very important. Simply the notion that Linux and other Unix-like operating systems seem to be favored by technically-apt elitist geeks can make them seem less easily approachable than they really are.

      It's not that people with such attitudes are just hurting the reputation of free operating systems though, they should have no business talking to users at all. There's people who do much of their jobs with computers but probably couldn't even correctly name the part of their software setup called "Windows". Guess what? It's not their area of expertise. They have every right not to be interested.

    21. Re:Huh? by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 1

      This weekend I tried to put Ubuntu on a computer with a 3com 905B ethernet. It didn't detect it properly even though the card is a decade old. Maybe because it's not PnP? And to make things worse, even the CD from shipit right away needs about 30MB or more of critcal or important updates. On dialup that level of downloading is not really possible for experimentation purposes. At least on Windows I knew how to download the update files from the Windows Update catalogue. I'm not sure there's an Ubuntu equivalent.

    22. Re:Huh? by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly sure that .deb's of anything in the repositories can be downloaded from Ubuntu's site from any computer, then the files moved and installed. When I didn't have a router, that's how I installed files on my Ubuntu computer (family would've complained like no other if I disconnected their computer).

      Perhaps it is *because* it's a decade old, not "even though". It seems like more recent things have better support while "legacy" items are being ignored (possibly on the basis of "who still has one of *those* lying around?")

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    23. Re:Huh? by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Have you checked? They do now. So that they don't at all is a myth.

      I think you missed the part where I said "consumer desktops" and "as long as the expense was the same or less than Windows."

      Sure if you know you want linux you can get a computer from them with red hat preinstalled. But only after you look around and only on workstations for business. They do offer so called open source consumer dimension desktop models for consumers, but they are not preinstalled with Linux, but rather come with a CD that has Free DOS on it. So, I think my point is valid one. People "chose" Windows because that has been the only real choice in consumer desktop computers, at least until Apple's resurgence. Dell is willing to give people all sorts of choices to customize far more technical details of their computer's configuration, so I don't think you can make a complexity argument.

      Well, I don't expect technological leadership from Dell in this area, unless Microsoft pisses them off over licensing. Much more likely adoption will come from smaller players. But it has been very hard to compete with Dell on price at least n the consumer side. Though not impossible if you look at the sales rankings for some of the Linspire based computers sold through Amazon. Seems that at least some people are seeing past Windows for home computing.

  14. Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by od05 · · Score: 1
    After testing it out on the live CD on my PowerBook I attempted an install of Ubuntu on an HP Pavilion 6740c, it hangs up and freezes at random both on an install and running it off the CD. Windows 98 still runs fine on it. It's a 500 mhz celeron with 384 megs of ram, but Ubuntu doesn't like it for some reason.

    Maybe this book offers some sort of insight on why Ubuntu won't run on that computer. I'd read it just to find out.

    1. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Vicious+Blayd · · Score: 2, Informative

      For lower-end computers, it's recommended that you use the plain install CD. The LiveCD uses quite a bit of RAM, and installing from it uses even more. (Also, if you want it to run smoother on an older box, I'd recommend checking out the Xubuntu variant.)

    2. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ubuntu can behave very erratically if you are low on memory, but 384 is good enough to install.

      Try creating a linux swap partition on the harddisk, that can help if you are running out of memory.

      Also run the memtest on the ubuntu cd and check if you memory has errors.

    3. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are three different live CD's.
      1. For your Apple Macintosh
      2. For your PC
      3. For your x64 PC

      Check the disc type

    4. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try typing acpi=off noapic at the boot prompt.

    5. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GUI install would freeze on me as well. This was on a year old Dell laptop with a gig and a half of memory. Eventually I tried the TUI install and it worked fine.

      Ironically, I wound up enjoying the Gentoo install more since I knew exactly what was going on.

    6. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 2, Informative

      How much RAM does the LiveCD actually need? last month our LUG installed Ubuntu 6.current on a P3-700 with 256mb RAM, and it did okay -- 6.x loads the live CD by default (or at least some significant portion of it), THEN gives you the install option.

      The main problem we had was that it got stuck at 640x480 video; apparently didn't recognise or had no driver for the middle-aged Intel onboard video chip.

      I had U5 here, then put U6 on the same machine, and noticed it was significantly faster than U5 -- maybe because U6 seems to load less needless junk.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    7. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by niclas_b · · Score: 1

      If this is a memory issue, It can be useful to know that Ubuntu takes advantage of any swap-partitions it finds on the harddrive. I had to install Ubuntu on ann old pc, and even the live CD( not the Live DVD) didn't boot. I created a swap partition on the disk and it worked like a charm.

    8. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      recommended minimum is 256 mb, but i think the live cd will run on 192. I believe it would be horrificly slow though. The Breezy text mode installer required 192 megs otherwise it hung halfway through (why didnt they have a dialog that told you you didnt have enough RAM?) but i believe the text mode installer on the "alternative" dapper cd will run on 128mbs.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    9. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by grand_it · · Score: 1

      You should try Xubuntu, a lighter distro based on Xfce Desktop environment. Memory requirements are 128 MB of Ram, and that 500 MHz Celeron should suffice.

    10. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Ah, thanks. Does make me wonder about the wisdom of having the LiveCD load by default -- tho a good way to do it would be to make it require no more than the minimum for Ubuntu as installed on the HD. Likely if it doesn't load anything but the really needful parts (no server stuff, etc.) it could be trimmed down a lot. Perhaps that's what the "alternative" CD does??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    11. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      the alternative CD just uses the text-mode "Curses" installer program that debian uses. Its a bit crude looking and possibly daunting to noobs but it is less resource intensive. There is no "live" OS on the alternative CD, you just get to install it from scratch. This was also the installer that Breezy used, except it needed 192MBs for some reason, which was annoying as breezy only needed 128mbs to run. This was fixed in Dapper i believe, but i've only ever upgraded to dapper, so i don't know what he installation process is like.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    12. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I've never gotten Debian to install (or at best it would go thru the motions, then hang partway along, or install but refuse to load the desktop). But I do remember other "primitive" textmode installers, common in the pre-2000 disties. As you say they're fine if someone at least has DOS background or similar clues, but when the average GUI-raised user sees such a thing, they think their computer is sick!

      I did like the U6 application installer, that more or less emulates WinXP's Add/Remove programs thingee. Very easy to see what you're going to do. No need to know about apt get -xj6 -23i -packagename -dependency -???!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      you really dont need to know about that stuff for day to day use. just remember for admin commands you have to put "sudo" at the beginning, so all it is is "sudo apt-get install " all the dependancies are dealt with automatically.

      clicking on "advanced" in the package manager gui launches "synaptic" which is the debian package manager, which gives you gui access to everything the apt-get command does (and its all searchable). the command line to be honest is a really useful shortcut in most cases. ie if you ask someone on a forum how to install minesweeper, they can say, "yeah, type sudo apt-get install minesweeper" instead of giving you long winded directions on where to click through to get to the gui installer etc.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    14. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Good examples of how IF you know what you're doing, the commandline is really a shortcut. But if you don't, and don't know where to ask (which is a real problem for most casual users of any OS) -- the CLI is worse than useless, and they need something that will lead 'em along the right path.

      You and I would think to google/forum-hunt, but average folk have no idea any such help is available. Or as noted before, they don't have the time, inclination, or background -- they need it to Just Work.

      Thanks for the tip about sudo; that's the first time I've *ever* seen it explained, tho folks throw the word around a lot!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    15. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      no probs - the sudo command just lets you execute something as the root (or "administrator" in windows) user. the root user account in ubuntu does exist, but the password is randomised so you cant log in as root (trust me this is a very good thing). the Sudo service has a list of users who are allowed to pass it commands, and you only have to know your own password authenticate yourself to sudo, and therefore execute root commands.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    16. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Ah! [light bulb] Good explanation.

      Yes, I can see how for the average person being handed Ubuntu, simply not having access to the root account at all may well be the wise approach. After all the whole idea with Ubuntu is that it's for real humans[tm], not sysadmins. :)

      OTOH, one of my annoyances with Mandrake 7.something (which I mostly like) was that every time I wanted to twiddle some config item, it made me log in as root. For *each* item on a very long list. Would have made more sense to get the root login when I started up the config util, and make it stick for the duration, then log out when I closed the config.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    17. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      there is a timeout on sudo - so if you keep typing sudo commands within a minute(ish) of each other it wont ask you for a password over and over again. but then if you stop for a minute or two, it then would ask for the password again. you can also use "sudo su" to make sudo stick permanently for that terminal session.

      The other real benefit for not logging in as root is the problem with file ownership. Any files created by the root user cant be read or edited by anyone else unless you specifically set the permissions. This becomes a problem when config and data files associated with certain applications get created when you are the root user. it ends up breaking the application for anyone else who tries to run it. so NEVER start an application with sudo. i really messed up my ubuntu installation once by running a media player as root to get round some bug or other. it started a chain reaction whereby more and more apps need to be runs as root becuase more and more files were getting owned by root. eventually the window manager wouldnt start so all i could do was log in to a terminal. luckily i found a webforum where all this was explained, and i managed to methodically change file permissions back to what they should be through the terminal. (i've never had a problem with ubuntu that required a reinstall!)

      obviously certain admin apps need root access, and they use "gksudo" which is a GUI interface to sudo that pops up the "please enter your password" box in gnome or KDE when you do stuff like open the network settings dialog.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    18. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Wow, lots of good advice there!

      Now I'm wondering -- isn't there any linux utility that can change files' ownership en masse? If there is, it could be used to fix such a mess. If not, some enterprising coder oughta give it a whirl.

      The Mandrake config thing wasn't timing out, it was sometimes a matter of mere seconds between login demands. Quite annoying! it had some other problems too, like when it asked to save or abandon changes didn't make the best of sense. Hopefully by now it's matured some... I need to look at a newer disty, since overall, I've liked MDK best. (I still can't call it Mandriva. Silly name!)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    19. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      you can do things en masse with the command line if you're remotely programmerish, but for the GUI-only user i dont know what kind of things there are.

      the problem wasnt having a mass of files with the wrong permissions - it was having certain key files that needed to be precisely picked out and given exactly the right ownership. just converting everything in the /etc folder to be owned by your user account would be even an worse thing to do than running apps as root.

      to be honest there's no reason the average user would be in the situation in the first place - it was only me being dangerous with a little bit of knowledge that caused me to have to follow through and actually understand what i had been messing with.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    20. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That's indeed an advantage of the command line -- the ability to do stuff in batch mode. I started in plain old DOS, where batch files were a way of life. :)

      The downside of the CLI is that most of the time, you can't SEE what you actually DID ... so if you made a mistake, too late now!!

      And that's why we have tools like XTree and Midnight Commander... so CLI junkies can see their mistakes BEFORE they make 'em :)

      Thanks for the clarification on the permissions thing -- I definitely prefer to learn from someone else's pain rather than experience it firsthand :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    21. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      it would be interesting if they could build an "undo" command into the filesystem. i dont know much about journalling filesystems, but maybe the journal could be used to work backwards. but i am just rambling out of my depth now :)

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    22. Re:Tried Ubuntu, didn't work for me. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Windows has a limited "undo" function for file moves and such done thru Explorer. I have no idea what's available on *NIX... I will say its "delete is forever" thing bothers me. I can recover ooopsies in DOS/Win easily enough, if I get to 'em fairly soon. Dunno what's available for *NIX now but used to be you had to recover ooopsie-deletes by doing a sector dump, then look for your file in the raw data. (Kindof like recovering data from a swapfile!)

      Like yourself, I have no idea what the limits of a *NIX undo utility would be, tho I expect either the filesystem or the OS would need to keep some sort of logs and backups. Of course, real *NIX admins NEVER make mistakes, so only us silly users would want such a thing ;)

      BTW there are some interesting posts over on the "10 years of KDE" article. Myself, I like KDE best of the *NIX desktops I've tried.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  15. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife can put this on our bookshelf right next to my copy of "Advanced Reconstructive Microsurgery for Non-Doctors".

  16. For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by krell · · Score: 4, Funny

    For starters, we can stop calling versions "flavors" when the word "version" will do just fine. "Flavors" are for suckers. Who wants to lick an OS anyway? Especially one called "Warty Warthog"?

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you quite understand the difference between a flavor and a version.

      Three different flavors: Gentoo, Fedora, Ubuntu
      Three different versions: Fedora Core 3, Fedora Core 4, Fedora Core 5.

    2. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by krell · · Score: 1

      "Three different flavors: Gentoo, Fedora, Ubuntu Three different versions: Fedora Core 3, Fedora Core 4, Fedora Core 5."

      You are right, I do not understand. Is it like the difference between "flammable" and inflammable"? Or the difference between "Trekkie" and "Trekker" ?

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    3. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the Fedora example, "Fedora" is the flavor. 3, 4, and 5 are the versions; they are different iterations of the same flavor.

    4. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by cavemanf16 · · Score: 1

      And using crappy business jargon like "flavor" to describe an entirely tasteless entity (software code, in this instance) is retarded.

    5. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by saider · · Score: 1

      A version (to me) indicates a point on a timeline. Version 1 is the first version, then comes version 2, etc.

      A different word is needed to distinguish products. Each product can have its own version history. Why people settled on "flavor" is beyond me, but I don't see it as an unreasonable choice.

      A flavor called "Warty Warthog" is just plain bad marketing. Of course the most popular Jelly-Belly jelly bean flavor is "Vomit".

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    6. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by krell · · Score: 1

      "And using crappy business jargon like "flavor" to describe an entirely tasteless entity (software code, in this instance) is retarded"

      Oh? Then you have a problem with this statement in the parent post "Fedora is the flavor"? Oh, go lick a hat!

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    7. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by Kandenshi · · Score: 1

      Indeed! Silly business bozos and even worse, the physics freaks terming things "flavours" when there's nothing even remotely tasty about quantum mechanics!

    8. Re:For non-geeks, get rid of "flavors" by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "A flavor called "Warty Warthog" is just plain bad marketing. Of course the most popular Jelly-Belly jelly bean flavor is "Vomit"."

      Um, that's a codename, not the name of the product itself. It's similar to what Microsoft had with Vista/Longhorn. Do we have people saying stuff like "The OS is called "Longhorn"? That's retarded!"? No we do not.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  17. Ubuntu isn't that good a distro.. by traveller604 · · Score: 0

    For one it couldn't even detect my Logitech DiNovo keyboard nor my Logitech MX900 mouse. What is up with that? Anyways I'm a Suse fanboy. Suse Linux 10.1 is as good as Linux gets @ the moment. :)

    1. Re:Ubuntu isn't that good a distro.. by daverabbitz · · Score: 1

      Why does it need to detect your Keyboard/mouse? I assume they are either USB or PS/2 units, hence they should just work. If they don't it means the hardware is wrong. There is a standard protocol for USB peripherals called HID, and if your Logitech units don't support it, they are garbage.

      --
      What could be better than a jet powered motorcycle? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8l6GTHLSWE
    2. Re:Ubuntu isn't that good a distro.. by traveller604 · · Score: 0

      Bluetooth.. thru a logitech hub which is connected thru usb. Every other distro I've tried has gotten it right.

  18. Since when did number of books == popularity? by garcia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And the plethora of books on Linux that are being published underlines the popularity of this OS.

    There has always been a "plethora" of books on Linux and a variety of other subjects that no one in the general public gives a shit about. I'm interested in knowing just how this means anything significant.

    1. Re:Since when did number of books == popularity? by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      See, publishing is a *business*, and books don't get written without an audience of people buying them. Generally, if people are buying how-to books about something, they're at least trying to do it. And if those numbers go up, then it implies that thing is more popular.

    2. Re:Since when did number of books == popularity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, if that many books are coming out for an OS, some people have to be using it. What's the ratio of authors:users? There also has to be customers for these books, they're not just writing and printing them for the fun of it.

  19. ubuntu is disappointing by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 5, Funny

    i remember in the 90's when getting linux installed made you a geek god. ubuntu is a breeze to set up and pretty much just works right out of the box. customizing the kernel for your processor and everything is super easy as well. thanks ubuntu for ruining linux for elitist pricks like me :-(

    --
    sarcasm:
    -noun
    1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
  20. It is a FACT that blah blah blah... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Funny
    It is a fact that GNU/Linux has grown from a hackers operating system to...
    It is a fact that anytime someone starts a sentence with "it is a fact", they are really slamming an opinion against the wall and hoping it sticks.
    1. Re:It is a FACT that blah blah blah... by snarkth · · Score: 1

      If it doesn't, it wasn't syrupy enough.

        *snark*

  21. Ubuntu works for me by dsurber · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm not a Linux expert, but I'm no noob either. I started using Unix in 1982 and I've used Red Hat, SUSE, Mandrake, and Gentoo over the years. I use Red Hat every day at work. I just installed a Ubuntu machine and although my install is much more complicated and more difficult than the standard 6 step install, it is still far and away the best experience I've ever hand with Linux. (Gentoo was far and away the worst. I've got better things to do with my time than recompile code that has already be compiled thousands of times before.) I've actually been enjoying using it, at least when things go well. I'll probably pick up the book and I'm sure I'll learn some stuff.

    1. Re:Ubuntu works for me by Agilo · · Score: 1

      I'm glad it works for you. I've started using Linux almost 4 years ago, have tried various distro's and have recently switched from Gentoo to OpenBSD (and about to make a leap to FreeBSD) and Gentoo has been the best Linux experience I've had yet (Ubuntu was far and away the worst. I hate having everything preconfigured and set-up for beginners).

      It's all down to the user's taste.

      --
      - Agilo
    2. Re:Ubuntu works for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bah!

      If ya started using UNIX(R) in '82, you'd know by know that real UNIX users
      build everything from scratch.

      Real UNIX was a reel of source code you had to spool into yer Sperry mainframe so you
      could cross assemble a freshly-ported kernel onto some disguarded no-name PDP clone mini
      somewhere in the basement.

      You must ah been one o them pro-pri-ah-terry Microsoft Xenix / SCO users !

  22. Why all the flaming? by Mark19960 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is *MY* deal with Ubuntu...

    My wife is horribly bad at downloading and installing crap and malware, visiting crappy, malicious pages with internet exploder, etc.

    Her machine used to run slackware that I had set up for her, no problems at all.
    However, updating things usually meant me sitting there for a few hours to do so.

    I tossed Ubuntu onto a cd, told her to install this, and she did it.
    She loves it.

    She can install things she wants with the GUI, it keeps itself up to date...
    The layman can do it... it is painless.

    I was skeptical at first but, I saw, I believed.

    Why flame it or call it crap?
    For what it is, and it is actually quite good, it just works.
    I am not a fanboy, by any means.
    I have Gentoo and Debian machines all over, for my use.

    Remember the target audience for Ubuntu: people that are not computer savvy.
    (like my wife)

    It works for her, I would ask everyone to at least LOOK at it before you flame it.

    1. Re:Why all the flaming? by Captain+Sarcastic · · Score: 1
      I would ask everyone to at least LOOK at it before you flame it.


      Oh, you silly, simple man - don't you know that this is Slashdot? Where people get their exercise by jumping to conclusions, and then jumping up and down on top of anyone who doesn't support them? <grin>

      Now, having said that - I agree with you. We've got Ubuntu loaded on a laptop that otherwise would be a paperweight. It's currently hooked up with a wireless chip, and the sound feeds into our home stereo, so as a result, we can play MP3's, Shoutcast stations, and so forth. (With thanks to the gentle on here who recommended StreamTuner for that last). We don't need an anti-virus on it, we do very minimal web browsing on it, and all told, Ubuntu's been doing quite nicely for us.

      Which means, of course, that I am probably going to be the object of scorn, derision, and general flamage as one who sold my geek birthright for a, well, face it, a system that does what I wanted it to do without my having to build it from the ground up.

      --
      Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
    2. Re:Why all the flaming? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what way too many geeks don't get -- MOST people just want to fling the CD at the machine, thump on a few fairly obvious and OPTIONAL configuration points, and go on about their business. They don't have the time, inclination, or background to delve into building their OS from scratch.

      Ubuntu was a step in the right direction, and sounds like this book totally groks the concept: Get 'em up and using it right away, then offer more stuff to mess with -- when and IF the user wants or needs it.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Why all the flaming? by Plutonite · · Score: 1

      My wife is horribly bad at downloading and installing crap and malware, visiting crappy, malicious pages with internet exploder, etc.

      Your wife did online gambling sites and pornography and you knew about it? And being crap at installing malware is a GOOD thing!!

      j/k

      I use Ubuntu sometimes for development, along with Fedora and other "nice" distributions. What benefit/savvy-ness would I gain in moving to a distro like Debian? There is nothing you can't do with FC5 and a src package. Performance aside, why do you need less friendly distros in your life?

    4. Re:Why all the flaming? by Jaknet · · Score: 1

      I find all these "it's so much easier to install than windows" comments hard to believe. I have been using pc's since the early 80s and having to write my own software as it was not available comercially. So I recently downloaded the ubuntu 6 live cd and gave it a go dual booting with xp.

      Now a standard xp install goes along the lines of insert disk, fill in various bits of info (cd key, date time etc) then install sp2 and even before sp2 I have full access to all my hard drives both read and write.The just add any other programs as required.

      Now with the live cd click install usual select language time date etc and let it sort out how to partition the drives as needed and then up and running.............. NO. It admits that I have hard drives, but as to actually letting me even access them not a hope in hell..... next start searching various forums for some ideas only to run across an annoying atitude of "you're a *nic noobie.. and this OS can do wonderful things but we are going to make it really hard for you to find out how to do it..... tough we only deal with experianced users". Eventually managed to get it to admit that there was info on my drives and actually what it was... but not allowed to access it... more searching and managed to access it.. then "Sorry but you have ntfs and not writing to it so tough"

      Ok I dont work in IT as a full time job, but I am reasonably pc switched on... and from past experiance Ubuntu is a right royal pain in the ass to set up. Yes peoples granny can use with no problems... once its all set up by someone else.... but trying to get joe blogs to change from his xp box to this... not a hope in hell, unless someone else is going to sort it out for him and possibly have to re-format every hard drive to suit.

      Much as I hate to say this as I am not a ms fanboy in the slightest, but also been dual booting various versions of vista as well as a tri-boot Ubuntu, xp and vista... and vista has been the easiest os I have installed in many years... everything just worked after the install.. did not have to run any motherboard, graphics, sound or network drivers (ok after less than 2 weeks it slows down to a speed that makes a pig stuck in thick toffee seem fast.. even with daily de-frags etc)

    5. Re:Why all the flaming? by dylan_- · · Score: 1
      NO. It admits that I have hard drives, but as to actually letting me even access them not a hope in hell..... next start searching various forums for some ideas only to run across an annoying atitude of "you're a *nic noobie.. and this OS can do wonderful things but we are going to make it really hard for you to find out how to do it..... tough we only deal with experianced users". Eventually managed to get it to admit that there was info on my drives and actually what it was... but not allowed to access it... more searching and managed to access it.. then "Sorry but you have ntfs and not writing to it so tough"
      You're comparing installing Vista alone with installing Ubuntu as dual boot. Of course dual boot is more difficult. What people are saying is that it's easy to install Ubuntu as the only operating system.

      You could try comparing installing Vista onto a machine running Ubuntu with getting Ubuntu running on a machine with Vista. I think you'll quickly find which is easier...

      As for the bad attitude from the Ubuntu forums, I've found them to be always extremely friendly to beginners. But I'm willing to be proven wrong: link to the threads where you received this attitude please.
      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
  23. Unreal 2004 by A+Wise+Guy · · Score: 1

    I installed this distro on my pc with dual boot and I was able to play unreal tournament 2004 without tweetking anything else. It ran it off the bat. Other distros needed the nvidia driver installed.

  24. Dual-boot? by regular_gonzalez · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As someone who has never used Linux but has been intrigued (and intimidated) by the prospect, this book sounds like it would be right up my alley. Not mentioned in the review is whether the book discusses how to set up a dual-boot system, as I (and I suspect most Linux neophytes) don't want to forgo Windows straight away.

    --
    Due to circumstances beyond my control, I am master of my fate and captain of my soul.
    1. Re:Dual-boot? by Lispy · · Score: 1

      If you install Ubuntu off the LiveCD, wich is recommended, it will detect your Windows installation and offer an option to install as a dual-boot.
      Painless.

  25. What definition of "non-geek" is he working with?? by maidden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the author missed a very basic point, which is that non-geeks don't wanna read books about computer stuff.

  26. Noob Who? by HermMunster · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Linux, no matter how much you like it is still not ready for the masses. It lacks the ability to easily install programs such as the Macintosh and Windows has. Online repositories are not the answers as they are maintained by individuals who do not write the programs themselves. Repositories are specific to a distro and sometimes even a version of a distro.

    Computers were never meant to be used solely by the likes of those who love to tear things apart. That is the second of two major roadblocks keeping Linux out of the main stream.

    Get programs to install as easily as they do on OSX and Windows and rid the community of the mentality that you are a noob and weak if you don't want to play the game at the lowest disassembled level.

    Ubuntu is no where near as good as it could be. The developers have given up on the idea of making it simple and strong and capable for your grandmother to use and maintain by herself.

    Drivers are still a problem. There's alot of proprietariness out there that the Linux community can't handle. Much of the video driver capabilities (for example) are left out of the generic drivers installed during the setup. Much of those left out capabilities will always be left out because they are precisely that, proprietary.

    I've run Linux for 3 years and I can only say that I spend significantly more time maintaining it than I do any other OS (my OSX boxes and my Windows boxes). The online repository never worked and it relies on high bandwidth to do its job. The vast majority of people still are on dial-up. Some can't afford high speed and others can't get it. Those majority won't ever be able to use linux when the idea is that the updates should come from on line.

    To expect, nay demand, that the users have a compiler on their computer is the worst notion in the idea of personal computers. Remember these are personal computers. You can't and should not be telling others what they can or should be doing with them. That's why they are called "personal". You do what your person wants to do.

    The notion of insulting people because they choose one distro over another is ludicrious. Why is that? It is because most of you are noobs at virtually everything in life. You can't design your own refrigerator. You won't design your own home. You don't know the laws, regulations, and codes necessary to build anything. You won't put together your own car nor will you assemble your own TV. You can't make your own medicine. You don't know how to repair your plumbing, you can't figure out how to make electricty. You can't make paper, nor ink, nor most anything that you use regularly in life.

    SO WHY THE HELL ARE YOU CALLING OTHER NOOBS?

    Most of the zealots can't even think through the above argument to give a solid reasonable applicable reply. I'm not insulting people. I'm trying to get across that you expect people to build their own OS, compile code, debug the issues, as a granny or a teenager. You don't even understand the fundamentals of most people's lives (marriage, children, education, transportation, etc are the primary concern of people's lives), allt he while you disrespect those that want to use their computer to do a task rather than making the computer the task.

    If you can't get on the bandwagon and apply your own real-life issues and recognize others have their own, then you are a retard.

    I know this post will get me some negative karma because alot of people really support linux here. I'm not saying linux is bad at all. I'm just saying it is not ready for mainstream use. Over the past couple of years there's been alot said about that. There's been this on-going debate abou whether Linux is desktop ready.

    The kernel is a fine piece of work. It is a spectacular piece of work. It is at the top of the dog pile when it comes to stability. But the average user doesn't seen the kernel. They don't want to see the kernel. They just want the computer and their programs to work. They don't want to sit an

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    1. Re:Noob Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok, who let the n00b in here?

    2. Re:Noob Who? by mackyrae · · Score: 1

      I don't know if you've noticed, but to update a Windows computer, you still need to download. I do agree about having to compile from source. In this case, I want to point you to http://www.getdeb.net/ where you can get .deb files for Ubuntu instead of having to compile.

      --
      look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....a girl? yes, a girl browsing Slashdot on Linux
    3. Re:Noob Who? by ydrol · · Score: 1

      The online repository never worked and it relies on high bandwidth to do its job. The vast majority of people still are on dial-up. Some can't afford high speed and others can't get it. Those majority won't ever be able to use linux when the idea is that the updates should come from on line. How do you get updates/software for your other OS's? By post?

    4. Re:Noob Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's this nifty distribution called SLED which you can purchase online and be mailed cds/dvds whith tens of thousands of applications on it. No downloading or compiling required.

      Don't bitch about problems the linux community has when the whole community doesn't have them. It's like saying America sucks because old people can't drive.

    5. Re:Noob Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "You won't put together your own car nor will you assemble your own TV. You can't make your own medicine. You don't know how to repair your plumbing, you can't figure out how to make electricty. You can't make paper, nor ink, nor most anything that you use regularly in life."


      Speak for yourself, This is slashdot, most people here could do very well if they had to make these things. There are ALOT of things that I myself had never known how to do, but I got off my lazy ass and LEARNED THEM if it was something important enough to me.
      I think the reason Linux has not reached mass appeal yet has more to do with the average person's mindset (read:being lazy and not wanting to have to learn something) rather than it being too difficult. Ubuntu (as linux distro's go) is perfectly simple to use if you are willing to try.
    6. Re:Noob Who? by HeavyAl · · Score: 2, Insightful
      First off, I've read /. for years and this is the first time I have ever been compelled to post. Chalk it up to this guys' troll actually pushing my buttons enough to get me ticked.

      Number one, why are you going on about Linux in general when the topic is concerned with Ubuntu specifically? This is about a Distro-specific book, not Linux as a whole so stop your whining. Yeah, Linux as a whole has some issues, but this isn't the place to drag them out. The goal here is to get 'newbs' interested in a distro that has a lot going for it in hopes that they will eventually want to embrace Linux itself as a whole and finally come to realize that there is more to the computing experience than fighting with all the downfalls of proprietary operating systems.

      Computers were never meant to be used solely by the likes of those who love to tear things apart. That is the second of two major roadblocks keeping Linux out of the main stream.


      Well, I'd have to say that since Linux was initially put together by a guy working on a school project that it WAS built to be torn apart, but it's grown beyond that and Ubuntu shows us that just about anybody with a bit of sense and the ability to follow clear directions can get it to do what they desire.

      Get programs to install as easily as they do on OSX and Windows and rid the community of the mentality that you are a noob and weak if you don't want to play the game at the lowest disassembled level.


      Sounds to me like you are insulting the intelligence of 'newbs' here. Everyone was a newb once. I've spent over 15 years working with technology of various sorts but I had to start somewhere. If I had decided that as a newb it was beyond me I would never had made it this far. Don't insult peoples intelligence. Learn as a newb and then impart what you know to others. Don't spread this kind of FUD it just makes you look like a dogmatic wannabe.

      Ubuntu is no where near as good as it could be. The developers have given up on the idea of making it simple and strong and capable for your grandmother to use and maintain by herself.


      So you're in bed with the dev's now, eh? I'd bet they look at it differently. And aside from Ubuntu the whole Linux community has taken strides and is continuing to do so on all useability fronts. You are making your opinion sound as if its some kind of law.

      I've run Linux for 3 years and I can only say that I spend significantly more time maintaining it than I do any other OS


      Sounds like you need to go back and run Ubuntu itself for a bit longer. Upgrading Ubuntu is painless. There has been only one major issue with the update system regarding a broken X server installation and though this was admittedly a bad thing the whole community pulled together to help fix it in only a few hours of time after it happened - and no one tried to pull the wool over anyones eyes about it. A mistake was made, it was addressed and rectified. Other than this I have personally not had ANY update issues with Ubuntu.

      To expect, nay demand, that the users have a compiler on their computer is the worst notion in the idea of personal computers.


      Where do you get this notion? Last install I did of Ubuntu (Dapper on a friends machine) The dev tools weren't installed by default. Just the basics, and even if you need more synaptics does it all auto-magically. Get your facts straight.

      I could go on and on, but I think the bottom line here is that you have some personal issues that you seem to be venting to the general public that are not even in line with the context of this particular discussion. Your talk of demands, universalness, etc sounds more like spreading FUD than it does any kind of productive contribution. If any of us 'zealots' felt the way that you portray us to feel then none of the ground that has been covered thus far with Linux would ever have been made.

      Bring on the Noobs, I say. We want them. We need them. We welcome them. If we didn't this wouldn't be a battle worth fighting.
    7. Re:Noob Who? by Darundal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      WTF? Have you EVER used Ubuntu? The Ubuntu Community is possibly the most understanding community out there, with even the most noobish questions being answered nicely sans condecension. You state that updates online are a bad idea. Neither windows or OSX update any other way, normally. OSX I have no idea about (not talking about new os versions) and Microsoft will, if you send them money, send you a CD with all the updates UP TO A CERTAIN DATE. They do not make this readily apparent to any end user, so they might as well not do this at all. You state that installing any linux software requires you to compile any software you want yourself. Yet again, not true. Apt-get? Synaptic? Hello? And a myriad of other programs that come compiled when you download them. The only semi-valid point you have is the one about the drivers. I myself had to download the FGLRX drivers before I could even get X to work...

    8. Re:Noob Who? by FrostDust · · Score: 1

      How do you get updates/software for your other OS's? By post?

      You've been able to order a disc of XP SP2, for free, for a while now.

    9. Re:Noob Who? by AntiDragon · · Score: 1

      OK, I'm biting...

      Mixed feelings on this really. You're not entirely wrong - we shouldn't expect people to know or learn (beyond the basics) about the nitty gritty details of a FOSS OS. Yes, people have as much right to just expect a "product" and have it "just work" as they do with a car, a house, or any kind of service (utilities, legal etc.), but there's a significant difference between "product" and "hobby".

      No one knows it all. There's just not enough time in the world.

      But here's where you're rubbing me up the wrong way. Let's use the house analogy, shall we?

      You buy a house. You want it furnished. You go to your nearest carpet store. You want a pale green carpet with a blue diamond motif. Oh - no, look, they only have yellow with red diamonds! Well, you're relying on someone elses skills and expertise to create the carpet, so you just have to deal with it and pay the piper.

      Now you want a conservatory added. You decide against paying a contractor - you'd rather save some money and do it yourself. Also, you didn't like the limited design choices you had available. So you build your conservatory. It takes a *long* time and you have to look up all sorts of building techniques.

      You find that it leaks in winter.

      See any parallels? It's a real cliche here on /. but Linux is not a "product". The fact that it is anyway near as "user-friendly" as it currently is id almost besides the point. If you *don't* want to have to know how your PC works or worry about various low-level idiosyncrasies, then purchase a pre-defined, packaged OS. Honestly, moral and ethical issues asside, you have two established commercial OSes to choose from.

      Like any consumer product, you pay for the convenience of not having to bother with understanding something's construction. You pay for the privelage of having someone else put prior effort into making it easy to use. And you hand off responsibilty for how a product will evolve and change to the company that sells it to you.

      The usability of Linux is a thin layer over something that was created for those who *do* know about how computers work, who *are* interested in the small details and who *do* have the time and skills to handle an OS that forgoes simplification in preference to openess. The fact that something like Ubuntu is as easy to use as it is is a testament to the efforts of those who have donated an incalculable amount of free time.

      How does the saying go? You get what you pay for. That makes Linux (or BSD etc.) based OSes very good value for money.

      Incidentally, refering back to your examples, yes, you might not expect someone to know how to make an engine, but they still need to learn how to drive a car ;)

      --
      "...So I hung back and lurked. For 18 months. Can't beat a good old-fashioned lurking."
  27. Ubuntu is great for experienced engineers by Theovon · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been using Linux since 1995, and I have spent a lot of time learning system administration of Linux boxes. Before I switched to Ubuntu, I was using Gentoo, so I've compiled my share of apps and kernels. After a while, though, the novelty of manually editing configuration files wore off. Professionally, I am an X11 driver developer and graphics chip designer. Academically, I've done web programming, AI, high-performance computing, and many other things. There's nothing wrong with wanting to manually configure your Linux box, but my interests and needs have shifted to where what I need and want to do has nothing to do with Linux system admin. If I want to install an OS, I want to just install it. If I want a new app, I want to just install it. I do lots of coding, but little of it has anything to do with hacking other people's open source software. So I have chosen Ubuntu so that I can get the system to do all of the low-level stuff for me so I can think about other things.

  28. Ubuntu out-of-the-box experiences by Zarhan · · Score: 1

    A friend is attempting to try "30 days of Linux" for office use for a total Linux newbie (but experienced Windows/DOS user). Anyway, he's having a blog of the attempt at http://blogit.tietokone.fi/linuxinjaljilla/ (in Finnish). At first, he naturally asked for recommendations on what distros to use, and Ubuntu/Kubuntu was most popular, so he went with Ubuntu.

    So far encountered problems seem small but trivial: His monitor (CRT) remained at 60Hz and he couldn't find any setting to change it to higher refresh rate. Eventually, with lots of help, he was able to edit xorg.conf directly and get the thing working.

    To me this seemed very odd - I remember back in 2000 or so when installing Suse Linux and SaX pretty much auto-configured everything and allowed the settings changes too.

    Today, another issue surfaced - no auto-mounting existing ntfs volumes. He eventually had to manually edit /etc/fstab to get the Windows partitions to show up. I thought that if you have a "clickety click" installer that they would automagically include existing partitions in fstab and create mountpoints...

    Anyway, so far my perpection of Ubuntu as a friendly distro has plummeted and I think I'd now recommend Suse's corporate instead (Personally, I'm using Gentoo, and love it, but for someone looking for an user-friendly and easy-to-learn distribution...).

    1. Re:Ubuntu out-of-the-box experiences by KayosIII · · Score: 1

      Yeah I fell fowl of that first one as well - well sort of - Ubuntu set my screen refresh too conservatively and I couldn't get my full 1440x900 res happening. So yeah there is still the occasional rough edge. I believe that Xorgs autoconfiguration has gotten good enough in recent developments to do away with configuration files all together. If for one will be quite happy if that turns out to be the case

  29. Here's a suggestion for Ubuntu by melted · · Score: 1

    Could you guys maybe license the tech and legally package media playback, font hinting, etc. on a $35 "Ubuntu Addons" CD or something like that. I know there's Automatix, but I don't like the fact that when I run it I break a shitload of laws, no matter how retarded they are. Personally, I'd rather pay a license fee and enjoy computing the way it should be in year 2006.

    1. Re:Here's a suggestion for Ubuntu by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Automatix doesn't break any laws. It is just not compatible with the GPL. That is why you have to download and run it yourself, Canonical cannot include it in the default install.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  30. for the record... by StressGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use Ubuntu at home and have for a while now. It has become my primary OS. I tested a few of them and it ultmately came down to SuSE and Ubuntu. While a strong argument can be made for either one, Ubuntu finally go the nod - not only for all the reasons you mentioned, but because of its relatively small footprint.

    I wouldn't call myself a zealot, but I am a tinkerer. However, I also have a wife and kids who need a computer that just works the way they think it will. Ubuntu fits that bill nicely. In fact, my 5-year old son developed a decided fondness for penguins as a result of exposure to things like gcomris, Tux Raxer, Tux Paint, Pingus, etc.

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
    1. Re:for the record... by Skrynesaver · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think people misunderestimate the power of Ubuntu to evangelise.

      I've tried most major distros over the years (must get round to Gentoo), my sister however used to work in DTP on a Mac before getting a PC at home.

      Until recently she was using a Win2K machine to manage her new business from home, I introduced her to Ubuntu through gcompris, her family were out in our place for a meal, it was raining and her 5 year old was in need of entertainment, I sat him in front of gcompris and silence (apart from some really iritating music) descended, her fella was most impressed by the quality of the educational software and my sister was surprised by how easy Ubuntu is to use.

      I called round to them, set up a dual boot, selected apropriate packages and now they are rarely in Windows.

      Ubuntu/gnome offers a simple interface, Synaptic makes package management straightforward, I could carry on for a while but essentially Ubuntu is a beautiful distro to introduce people to Linux with, though perhaps less educational than Slackware back in the day!

      --
      "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
  31. Ubuntu - Linux for Lamors by v3xt0r · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    or people who demand that their OS have more of a brain than they do.

    When I see the stock photos on the ubuntu site, it clearly reminds me that I am not one of those 'normal' people, and don't want to be, nor do I want to share a distro with people like that.

    Slackware on the other hand... =p

    --
    the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
    1. Re:Ubuntu - Linux for Lamors by BorgHunter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, having an OS that works with a minimum of goofing about really sucks.

      Don't get me wrong, from time to time, I get the "learn something new" bug too. But normally, I just want my OS to work, and get annoyed when it doesn't. I know how to fix it if it dies, but that doesn't mean I like doing it all the time. I know what a configuration file is, how to edit them, how to compile and install programs...but I don't want to do that all the time. I don't want to use the trusty trio of ./configure, make, make install only to discover that some obscure dependency isn't met. I like aptitude and how it manages packages without me having to worry about all the piddling shit. It's simply easier, and it affords me more time to do other things that I enjoy. As many have already pointed out, your arrogant attitude turns people off of Linux. Frankly, your arrogant attitude also makes you look like a giant ass as well. There are more important things to worry about than how "nerdy" something is; it's as ridiculous as worrying about how "cool" your car is, when the function of a car is to transport you from one point to another. However, it's your choice.

      --
      "Excuse me, did you say 'Trekker'? The word is 'Trekkie.' I should know; I created them." -- Gene Roddenberry
    2. Re:Ubuntu - Linux for Lamors by J_Doh! · · Score: 1

      Here here...... well put. The "My linux distro is cooler / more l33t than yours" crowd are a real yawn when they force the opinion on you. ./Yawn

      --
      To secure peace is to prepare for war ...
    3. Re:Ubuntu - Linux for Lamors by v3xt0r · · Score: 1

      I've written code that is used in Ubuntu (as well as other distros), and I don't hate any particular distro, I just hate the way Ubuntu's being marketed to the masses. IMHO, linux is not for everyone, and not everyone should be using linux.

      The more morons that switch to linux, the more exploit-centric it will become, as there are more chances that rootkits and other forms of exploits will be made to target such a 'market share' like Ubuntu.

      The more people who use the same distro with the same package-manager-configured settings, the easier it will be for that to happen. That may or may not happen, but that's just how I see it (forward-thinking, albeit a bit paranoid perhaps). =)

      For linux newbies, ubuntu is a great distro. For lazy people who don't like to compile software or use a command line (which really defeats the purpose of linux, imo), it is also great.

      But, honestly... who cares what I think? Do you think I care what you think? =)

      --
      the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
  32. i don't believe in books or looks by kras · · Score: 1

    as distro's change you have to buy new books to keep up. ubuntu is very user-friendly (i use it now after starting with debian in 98, getting on with mandrake in 2000, going forth wit mandriva until 2 months ago. i just wonder if buying a book will inspire people to visit help sites, forums, newsgroups etc. to learn more once they have to upgrade Ubuntu, or install new (unknown) software, and learn that not everything is point-and-click like windows makes them believe. use of the terminal is a must, IN ANY LINUX DISTRO. we are talking to a non-DOS generation here.

    --
    memento mori
  33. Doh! #1 because it's scott free! by grikdog · · Score: 1

    Gee, giving quality away for nuthin'? No wonder it's popular. What is this, the worker's paradise?

    http://shipit.ubuntu.com/

    --
    ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
  34. Training wheels by quill_n_brew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    After reformatting my Windows box more times than you can shake a mouse at, due to security issues (I didn't know you needed it!), about two years ago I decided to check out Linux. A true n00b in Geekland. Still am. After going through dozens of distros, I finally landed on one that didn't make me want to put my fist through a wall. When Dapper came out, I was actually licking my chops. My wife just pointed and laughed -- she thought I had become a convert. To Linux, yes, but not to Geekdom. I take no pride in saying I am still ham-fisted at the command line. I'm a writer, not a hacker. And I got all the books, the usual suspects, the O'Reilly tomes, et al. With all due respect, I really did not need to read what kind of shirts Richard Stallman wears and whether pigs have wings. I just wanted MP3 capability. So I skip to those pages, via the index. Now that I actually know what a forum and a wiki are, I go there. Books are nice. I hope to publish many some day. But tapping into the friendly minds of Those Who Know has proven to me much more effective and efficient. I'm sure it's a fine book. But n00bs who just want to know how to put tab A into slot B are better off asking legitimate, bona fide geeks. Who knows -- I might even be one some day. And look at me now -- I read /.

    1. Re:Training wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Dapper came out, I was actually licking my chops. My wife just pointed and laughed -- she thought I had become a convert. To Linux, yes, but not to Geekdom.

      dude... you're writing on Slashdot.

    2. Re:Training wheels by quill_n_brew · · Score: 1

      Dude...what are the chances of you elaborating on your pithy comment? I didn't think it was disney.com. Yeah, I describe a childlike enthusiam for a cool technology. Isn't that what we do on Slashdot? Childlike or otherwise?

    3. Re:Training wheels by cptnapalm · · Score: 0

      Since you mentioned that you are a writer, check out Lyx. It is in the Ubuntu repositories (universe, I think). Latex is used as its backend so the printed document looks great. I've always hated dealing with word processors until I went through the Lyx tutorial (took about 45 minutes).

    4. Re:Training wheels by debest · · Score: 1

      "Pithy comments" are unfortunately a very common occurance here, and any discussion board. That's what the moderation system is for: if you change your preferences, you rarely see them again.

      Seriously though, welcome to Slashdot. Some of us want intelligent discourse. Just ignore those who don't, and have fun!

      (Oh, and by the way, if you're posting on Slashdot, you *are* in fact a geek! Try not to think of it as a bad thing! ;-)

      --
      Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
    5. Re:Training wheels by quill_n_brew · · Score: 1

      Cool, thanks.

    6. Re:Training wheels by quill_n_brew · · Score: 1

      Excellent tip -- thanks a lot, I'll check it out.

  35. That doesn't always work by Darthmalt · · Score: 1

    I followed all those steps but every time it tries to load the linux kernal it crashes and rebots even installed it on the HD using another comp (worked fine) switched the HD back to the comp I want to use for a linux box but just keeps rebooting. Same when I tried to install SuSe. I would consider myself an advanced user but sometimes things just don't work. I need to get another mobo (instead of this HP tatooed POS)and see if thats the problem.

    1. Re:That doesn't always work by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like motherboard problems to me.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  36. It is easy to install SW by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    All I can think is that you haven't actually used Ubuntu, Mandriva, Xandros, Suse, Fedora or any one of a whole zoo of easy Linux systems in the last five years or so. installing software on any modern distribution is super easy. I don't think it can be made any easier.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:It is easy to install SW by RKBA · · Score: 1

      "installing software on any modern distribution is super easy. I don't think it can be made any easier."

      I was ecstatic when Mandriva 2007 automatically recognized my Hauppage video capture card, and would probably still be running it on my second computer except that ..., get ready for this... it failed to recognize my Soundblaster sound card!!! Har, har, furthermore I think that was the *only* time I've ever had *any* Linux distro fail to recognize a sound card. Yes, I'll get it working eventually and have already started checking forums, etc., for troubleshooting steps, but I'd rather there were an easier way.

    2. Re:It is easy to install SW by photomonkey · · Score: 1

      Are you sure about that?

      It would seem to me that double-clicking Setup.exe and then a handful of "Next" buttons is easier (and more intuitive for non-power-users than sudo apt-get install program (and then hoping that your repository list is correct).

      It would also appear that dragging an icon (oddly enough, labeled "Drag this icon to your Applications folder") into your Applications folder is easier and more intuitive for non-power-users than ./configure --> make --> make install --> then trying to figure out how/where to execute the program you just compiled and installed.

      It's entirely possible that installing software in Linux is very easy to you. I'm also not saying that the process is illogical. It's just that for users who have been using Mac or Windows for the last 10 years, it's a rather long jump to the protocols and processes of modern Linux.

      I'm a professional photographer by trade and use very highly complicated systems that allow me full control over the camera and the subject. I can understand why my wife likes her 'push the button and get a pretty decent result' camera way better than my large, heavy and complicated camera that has strange buttons and symbols and requires a fairly deep knowledge of the system to use well.

      My point is, I accept that while easy and intuitive for me, my $5000 professional camera is not geared or aimed at everyone. I don't think my wife and my friends are dumb for not being able to use it as well as I.

      All that having been said, I have been using Linux off and on since RedHat 6.2 Seawolf, and I think, even today, most Linux distros are BARELY USEABLE for anyone in either of these categories: a) A relatively experienced Win/Mac user and b) people with generally low computer skill.

      --
      Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
  37. Your opinion by topace3 · · Score: 1

    Posts like these sometimes make me confused. I've administered Linux and Windows boxes, and while the windows ones break, get infected, fail to install, reboot spontaneously and BSOD (legal upgraded WinXPSP2), the Linux boxes run forever, simple to update, maintain and extend. And that's using Portage, the single most buggy and failure-prone package-distribution platform there is. Compared to that, APT is the stuff of gods. I've seen people with no linux experience pick up ubuntu, try it and fall for it. Actually, it seems easier to get non-computer-oriented people to like linux. Why could that be? Could it possibly be that it takes time to learn Windows as well? computer noobs learn whatever interface you throw at them, while powerpoint-geeks yell 'Where is the Start menu?'. Granted, building your own kernel requires some hardware knowledge, some time, guts and a few attempts the first time you do it, but try modifying NTKRNL. It's just not that simple. Further more, if you've gone through one of the lib-etc-opt-var maze to find what links where and what reads what, take a little time with the windows registry. Makes me want to kill myself every time. You might say: But that's the beauty of Windows! Most users just want an enviroment where everything comes with a default behaviour that just works(TM). Here, I'd say that it doesn't and you'll probably say that it does, but going back to the subject: This is what Ubuntu is. Ubuntu is an effort to create that environment where you get a default full-featured graphical interface that just works. The project might still be far away from their goal (for example, the driver for radeon cards > 9250 needs to be fixed, or replaced by FGLRX), but it's a move in the right direction. To this you say: Linux is not yet ready for desktop use. this has always filled me with sadness. shure, X is bloated and memory hungry. But normal people with overpowered hardware won't notice this. Shure it takes time and effort to learn how to use xterm, shure the graphical tools for configuring and using the system have some way yet to go, but if we don't give linux to theese beginners, how will we ever know what to improve? Simple installing is created by assigning "dpkg -i" or "rpm -i" to open package files, prompting for a password (maybe one would have to write a graphical version of SU or SUDO, or steal the existing ones from fedora/ubuntu. The mentality is improved by filling the community with beginners, so that when somebody asks a simple question, there will always be those who don't think it's stupid. Oh, and please stop with the "I'm hated, so I'll get modded down" attitude. You're currently at (3, Insightful), which doen't reflect any hostility at all in my eyes. There was a time when /. was only linux fanatics. That time has long passed, and the massive amount of people who complain about it are proof.

  38. Better yet, Bookpool.com by KingSkippus · · Score: 2, Informative
    Speaking of "willing to buy the book", Slashdot links to B & N here, but Amazon has it cheaper (look at the "Used and new..." 3rd party sellers), and I'm sure there are other sites that are also cheaper. Why does Slashdot keep linking to B & N all the time? Even if their reviews make a book seem great, the relatively high prices they link to aren't very attractive.

    As was pointed out to me very recently, Amazon.com gives more money to the Republican party and B&N only gives money to the Democrat party. Maybe it doesn't matter to you, in which case feel free to buy it wherever. And maybe that's not the reason Rob picked B&N instead of Amazon.com, I don't know. But it does matter to me, so I personally like the B&N links better.

    Or if you're looking for the best price on a new copy from a well-known and reputable online retailer, get it from Bookpool.com instead. (It's only $21.95 there.)

  39. Re:What definition of "non-geek" is he working wit by Reziac · · Score: 1

    Well, maybe not. I haven't seen this book yet, but... What the original "For Dummies" series GOT, is that non-geeks want to pick up a computer book and NOT HAVE TO READ IT. They want to look in the Table of Contents, find an *obvious* reference to their problem, and see a SIMPLE, ABSOLUTELY ACCURATE step-by-step guide -- preferably visual rather than text. (People who don't speak computerese are less likely to be confused by a picture than by a series of foreign-sounding words.)

    So, yes, you're absolutely right that non-geeks don't want to READ about computer stuff -- largely because as far as they can tell, most are not even in English, and few books come with an interpreter.

    But non-geeks still need reference books -- they just have to be geared toward non-geeks, and written in plain language -- NOT in geek-speak.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  40. I don't believe you... by mohjlir · · Score: 1

    ...your UID is waaay too high for you to be able to remember that!

  41. don put so much stock in numbers by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 1
    --
    sarcasm:
    -noun
    1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
  42. Nah, version doesn't sound right either by Tarlus · · Score: 1

    Versions would be like 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, etc.

    A better word than "flavors", in my opinion, would be "variety".

    "Ubuntu is one of many different varieties of GNU/Linux."

    --
    /* No Comment */
  43. Eh, not all is lost by Tarlus · · Score: 1

    You still have Gentoo.

    --
    /* No Comment */
  44. Counter-intuitive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Computers were never meant to be used solely by the likes of those who love to tear things apart. That is the second of two major roadblocks keeping Linux out of the main stream.


    To the contrary, as much as we'd all like to *believe* that computers were meant for the masses, in reality, they were *actually* meant for those who understood how they worked (i.e. those who like taking things apart). You can own a refrigerator, you can own an oven. Those are easy, simple things. If they break, just replace it. Asking someone to own and know how to fix a computer, especially one running linux, is like handing them a personal space shuttle and, when they crash, saying, what the hell were you thinking, didn't you just know that if you push the stick forward, you go down? It's kind of sad we still entertain the notion that the masses can just start using computers.

    I respect Ubuntu in that it, like all of the other good OSes, those being the newer Windows and Mac OSes, have dealt with enough crap that they generally delay the learning curve. So don't bash it. It's a super-intricate piece of code. Just don't expect the masses to know how to fix it.
  45. MOD PARENT DOWN: REFERRAL SPAMMER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a nice referral link you got there.

  46. GNU or Linux?? by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

    I'm confused. Is he writing about GNU or is he writing about Linux? Or is he writing about them both at the same time in the same book. I don't see how the term "GNU/Linux" could explain or clarify or lend ANY kind of understanding.

    --
    Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  47. It is [NOT] a fact... by Spinlock_1977 · · Score: 1

    It is a fact that GNU/Linux has grown from a hackers operating system to be a viable alternative to any commercial proprietary operating system.

    I love linux and use it all the time, but sweeping statements like this one do little to futher the Linux cause. It's simply untrue that generic open-source Linux has all the process isolation, quota management, acl support, etc. that OpenVMS or MVS has. Ok so you can get glue-on, paid-for patches & extensions and stuff from proprietary vendors who'll sell you the support contracts you'll need to manage such patched boxes, that have somewhat equivalent features, but...

    Let's stop painting Linux as equally capable, out of the generic box, as all proprietary systems (some of which have features that far exceed Windows too). Facts, not semi-warm BS, will further the Linux cause.

    --
    - The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
  48. OT by Britz · · Score: 1

    I like Ubuntu and all and have it installed, but Flash is unfortunately universally needed. Mplayer with proprietary codecs maybe not. And PDF support works somewhat. And Java... But so many webpages use Flash now.

    There is no Flash in the apt sources that come with Ubuntu. So to add Flash you have to change /etc/apt/sources.list (you can install it by hand, but then you won't have security updates).

    So Ubuntu is NOT for Non-Geeks. I can install it for Non-Geeks, but they won't be able to do that by themselves. Period. (and this sucks, because otherwise Ubuntu is pretty cool)

    And I don't like Flash either. And I don't like taxes...

    1. Re:OT by ChrisJones · · Score: 1

      Erm, there are graphical tools for managing software sources, e.g. synaptic (in the default install) and all of this is documented in the help wiki.
      Also, steps are being taken to try to improve this, such as the commercial repository and more helpful prompts detailing what to do when something that should work, doesn't because of stupid licencing restrictions by vendors

      --
      Chris "Ng" Jones
      cmsj@tenshu.net
      www.tenshu.net
  49. Advantages vs. SuSe? by slyborg · · Score: 1

    Been using the 10.1 release on a couple servers at work, been pleased with it. I've been around the mortal coil long enough to remember when SuSe was the distro du jour, and my impression is that it just became unkewl for the kewl kids when Novell bought them. Since I'm old and fat now, and have learned from experience that in the geek world, reinventing the wheel is a way of life, I'm not eager to investigate yet another King of the Distros just to find out it is more or less the same as the last three, only with transparency.

    Any views on how this stacks up vs. Suse 10.x?

  50. Ubuntu Linux for Non-Geeks by burdicda · · Score: 1

    I bought the book after browsing the section dealing with gtkpod alone
    it was so common sense and respectful how he treated the reader...

    I was not used to reading a linux book that was so clear
    and understandable.

  51. Let's teach them use firefox!! by ghostbar38 · · Score: 1

    Yes, because is very hard send an email from firefox on Linux, very very hard! And is worst when you need to teach them use aMSN...

    --
    ghostbar page.
  52. Barnes and Noble or Amazon by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    As was pointed out to me very recently, Amazon.com gives more money to the Republican party [buyblue.org] and B&N only gives money to the Democrat party [buyblue.org]. Maybe it doesn't matter to you, in which case feel free to buy it wherever. And maybe that's not the reason Rob picked B&N instead of Amazon.com, I don't know. But it does matter to me, so I personally like the B&N links better.

    I don't care for either party, Democrat or Republican, so as to whether I use B&N or Amazon doesn't matter. I buy from both, though I don't buy from B&N online. For more expensive books I'll order from Amazon if the price is much lower, however I not only buy books from B&N but magazines and drinks as well as I'll sit in the cafe and read.

    Or if you're looking for the best price on a new copy from a well-known and reputable online retailer, get it from Bookpool.com instead. (It's only $21.95 there.)

    Thanks for the Bookpool link, as I'm not working I need to save what I can so I'll check them out.

    Falcon
  53. Training wheels? by DoubleRing · · Score: 1

    Please don't listen to anyone who tries to tell you that just because something is easy to use makes it less powerful and for "n00bs." I used to be a viligant Fedora advocate, until one day I finally broke down and installed Ubuntu. It was like dying and going to heaven. Personally I'd rather be running a composition I wrote in Noteedit through ZynAddSubFx and Hydrogen, piping the audio through the Jack Audio Server to Ardour, mastering the tracks through Jamin, using the resulting music as background for my Blender animation, bringing it all together using Cinelerra and integrating live action footage fetched with Kino, creating nice cover art with Inkscape and Gimp, authoring the DVD with Dvdauthor and soundtrack CD using Serpentine, and uploading the content to my Apache server (ok, I don't have an Apache server) than crying over rpm-hell and pounding config files into submission. Through experience, Ubuntu is truly easier to set up, and I spend less time actually doing what I want than trying to get my computer to do what I need (other than Wine, which has always been a mean horse). There's two types of geeks in this world, those that learn things because they concern themselves with elitism, and those that learn to use their knowledge for something useful.

    --
    Before you die, you see DoubleRing...
  54. Re:OT - Need to use Automatix to get full use! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can't use Automatix (there is some command line skills needed) in order to get what Ubuntu left out (the non-free stuff), or if you can't use EasyUbuntu, then you have but one LINUX choice left...

    FreeSpire - has all the goodies preinstalled, is FREE... and if you want to pay more for some proprietary apps, you can and it is all easy to do (note: FreeSpire is a distro cousin to Ubuntu because it is also part of the Debian Family of Distros).

  55. Non-geek-friendly != not Geek-Friendly by billstewart · · Score: 1

    It's possible for a book to be friendly to both geeks and non-geeks. It's also possible for it to be non-useful for both, of course:-) Just because something explains things in shiny friendly terms with short words and lots of pictures doesn't mean it's hostile to geeks, if there's real information there and some transparency to the references, so we can read quickly over the newbie stuff and find out how to actually install things. On the other hand, the content has to actually be there, or it's not useful.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  56. linux preinstalled by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    No, Linux is nowhere because it doesn't come preinstalled,

    Admittedly not on many but Linux does come preinstalled on pcs. Less than two weeks ago I got a new pc with Linspire preinstalled. If it were preinstalled on more pcs and they were earier to find then more people would use it.

    Falcon
  57. online repositories by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I've run Linux for 3 years and I can only say that I spend significantly more time maintaining it than I do any other OS (my OSX boxes and my Windows boxes). The online repository never worked and it relies on high bandwidth to do its job. The vast majority of people still are on dial-up. Some can't afford high speed and others can't get it. Those majority won't ever be able to use linux when the idea is that the updates should come from on line.

    You have the same problems with both Macs and Windows, when you update your OS. I've had to reinstall Windows a number of tymes and I used to run Windows Update after a reinstallation. Without broadband it got to the point where it took a few hours to download these updates, so Windows has the same problems with long, big, downloads. The only other way to get updates for Windows is to order the updates on cd, I know because I had to do this. And now MS doesn't even support two versions of Windows I have, NT4 and ME. Because of Activation and WGA MS has driven me away from Windows. The PC I'm using now runs ME and it's old so I've been planning on getting a new computer, preferably a laptop, so because I don't want to deal with either Activation or WGA I decided to get a MacBook Pro. However as Intel has released the Merom, Core 2 Duo, I've been waiting for Apple to release the MacBook with it in. Because they haven't announced one yet I ended up getting a cheap PC with Linux preinstalled.

    It wasn't Linux that created the computer revolution

    It wasn't average users that created the computer revolution either, it was hardware and software hacker members of the Model Railroad club at MIT then hardware and software hackers on the west coast like the Woz and Jobs and Bill Gates that created the computer revolution.

    Falcon

    Sorry, I know I left out a lot of people but I can't recall thier name right now.
  58. I didn't say it did by melted · · Score: 1

    It leaves all this law-breaking mess to you. Read the fine print.

  59. Photoshop CS by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    there's no Photoshop CS (GIMP doesn't have 16-bit support (FOR HOW MANY FRICKING _YEARS_ NOW?) and lacks some advanced essential (to me) photo editing tools and libraries of pro actions/filters)

    Though it's not supported yet CodeWeavers is working on getting PH CS to run in Crossover, 7 runs but not CS. As I plan on getting a MacBook I'm hoping Adobe releases Photoshop for IntelMacs soon. If not then I may end up running it in CrossOver Mac. Thanks for the bit about GIMP not supporting 16-bit yet, I plan on getting into photography and was thinking about giving GIMP, and Inkspot, a try. If Inkspot can't either I'll have to fork over the money for Photoshop CS.

    Falcon
  60. Perfect sample of a new Ubuntu user by wysiwia · · Score: 1

    Thanks, you are a perfect sample where Ubuntu gets its new users. Ubuntu draws its increasing user base from other Linux distributions but sadly not from Windows. So while Ubuntu is growing and is on the way to become the major Linux distribution, it still fails to overcome its own Ubuntu Bug #1 (https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bug/1).

    O. Wyss

    --
    See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
  61. ok GIVE ME A BREAK by AgNO3 · · Score: 1

    Only a geek would be installing there own OS. Whether its windows or Linux or Mac OS. Only a geek would EVER want to even know what the terminal is let alone use it. Its like writing a book for non gear heads who don't want to be gear heads and then explaining how to use a torque wrench to properly tightening the bolts on the valve cover. Really what is more geeky then , "......the relationship between Ubuntu and Linux." Really OK go ahead tell me I am flamebaiting or trolling but I am not I am telling you that the only people that would care about anything in this book are geeks. Non Geeks by there nature as non geeks would have to become geeks to want to learn this thus making them geeks. Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh CIRCULAR LOGIC. Non geeks are for sure not going to want to deal with the installing of proprietary blah blah blah. Damn I am a geek and I am like F this. I mean really. A 300 page book on how to use my computer would scare the hell out of me. Let alone non geeks that just want to plug the thing in and surf the inter-web read there email. They Don't want to know how are why it works. They just want to do it. I think Ubuntu can do this and I think this book is a bad idea if it is really targeted to non geeks. If you really want to appeal to non geeks you write a 10 page book with lots of nice color pictures. Really. Again just to be clear. I think Ubuntu is easier to use then Windows and I wonder who would really read this book?

    --
    OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(
  62. An idea for a "non geek" book by trojjan · · Score: 1

    I've been using Linux for 2 years now and just love it. When I started it was really difficult getting things to work. Over time I learned how to get Linux to do what I wanted but the most important thing I learned was how to find answers to problems I get, whether it can be solved by reading the man page, do I need to google and whether I have ask for a solution on IRC or some forum.
    Since I got confident about using linux Ive been trying to get my friends and family to switch to Linux they love Linux, they love not having to deal with anti viruses and the logical structuring of everything. They keep asking their problems but the problem comes when someone is not there to help them with it. They don't read the man pages, they never google. Once one problem becomes two they'll say windows is better at this thing and in a short amount of time they are back to using windows.
    In every "non geek" book there should be atleast one detailed chapter on how to find solutions to your problems where everything like --help,man pages,info pages,google,IRC,websites and forums is explained. I don't think its enough to give an appendix telling the readers these are some websites you might get some help on. The "non geeks" should learn to search for information if they want to use Linux.

  63. Good for everyday usage, but still has issues. by loic_2003 · · Score: 1

    I have ubuntu installed on a couple of machines and have been using it for some time. It still is a total pain in the ass, though, I'm afraid to say.
    On the plus side, it sets itself up *ok* if you let it do it's thing, and run the http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=138405 Automatix install script. However, it's still got all the same issues as any other linux distro.

    I spent hours trying to set up an application that used the wireless card (I was trying to find out how hard it would be to break into my own wireless network). It seemed that for every step I wanted to take forward, I needed to take 10 steps backwards. For example, I needed to installa a driver, so I research which I need (find the chipset of the card, hunt around in forums, etc), download the driver and boom! No go. Why? Oh right, I need to compile the driver, but there is no compiler installed (I find this after much hunting on the net). OK... so I need the compiler.... more hunting, more hunting, bingo! I find how to install the compiler. Easy enough, I just have to run a command or five in the terminal (didn't windows 95 remove the need for a terminal? That was 11 years ago...) and it's installed (oh, that's once I set up ubuntu to allow root logon, which it doesn't do as default (more researching!)). Ok, so I have the compiler installed, I compile the driver. Hunt around for the obscure location to which it's been installed and run it. Goody goody! I'm going to use my wireless card soon and it's only been three hours! Uh oh.... something's balked... oh right... hmm.. now I need to recompile my fucking kernal to install a bloody driver!! Some more research uncovers that it can take several hours for a kernal to compile, at which stage I switched off my linux box, turned on my mac and was doing what I had originally intended within 10 minutes, including research and application download time.

    My previous mission was to get quake 3 running on linux. After much research and time spent, I got the game running with accelerated graphics, but I never got sound to work. I dunno... I guess I've been spoilt by windows and osx where I just double click on something and it works. Yeah, I may have to reboot the machine for a driver update, but that time spent is *nothing* compared to the time spent trying to get linux to run.

    I see linux as the kit car of operating systems: you can get it to do anything, but you really need to learn a huge amount before you get anywhere worthwhile. I guess OSX would be more like a Mercedes in that you turn the key and it works, and if you lift the bonnet (hood) you have a big piece of plastic hiding everything with a shiny logo on it. Windows would be something like a ford or renault: cheap, cheerful, fairly reliable.

  64. ubuntu to the rescue ..... by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

    My wife's Compaq computer died (fried motherboard) so I ordered a new motherboard for it.
    (the dead one had a socket A semptron cpu, the new one is a socket 754 Athlon64). I couldn't
    find a cheap OEM Compaq MB to replace the original, so I just got a Biostar that had the same
    mounting hole layout and fit in the box. I was able to reuse the memory and HD. I also had
    to get an OEM copy of WIndows XP because that was the only way to restore the OS on a new MB.

    While we were waiting for the USPS to deliver the new HW and SW I took my daughter's old Duron-800mhz
    system and installed Ubuntu on it so my wife could still read her email. It took a while for her to
    get used to it, and she eventually found the games. Other than being a little slower than her windows
    box (800-vs-1800mhz....duh!) it wasn't bad. Now that the windows box is back on line I'm going to have to find a cheap KVM so she can have the Ubuntu box back as well. It will be interresting to see
    if I fixed her only compaint, web sites not 'working' due to no flash or java. (I installed easyubuntu).
    I'm really surprised at how useable Ubuntu was for someone who only used Windows. (I did have to swap the top and bottom panel bars to make it more like 'doze). I was also surprised at how useable Ubuntu has configured Gnome, almost enough to make me give up KDE if I put Ubuntu on my machine.

  65. Just my opinion.. by cheros · · Score: 1

    As an ex SuSE user myself:

    (1) less bloat. SuSE is good stuff, but it doesn't half get /HUGE/ on the disk. The basic Ubuntu still fits on one CD. Also handy when you want to kickstart from a LiveCD (in case of problems, or an NTFS rescue for someone) - less to load before you can get busy.

    (2) it works. 10.1 was absolute crap and should have never been released. There's just so much to fix before you have a working system (screwing up the update system itself was a really inspired move, duh) that recommending it to Linux newbies is the best way to get them running back to Windows (you may sense my disappointment here - I used to buy every new SuSE version from 6.3 onwards after abandoning RedHat).

    (3) easier to get hold of (partly size again). One CD to download instead of a whole series. Note that this is the most subjective part, though: SuSE is well kitted out so you simply need that many CDs (or DVD) to store it. It just happens to get in my way now, and Ubuntu is the easy answer. I'm even looking at maybe changing the office server over to Ubuntu. However, IMHO this is where it's desktop focus loses from SuSE 10.0, but that may also be because I'm not 100% familiar with the Debian and Ubuntu way of working.

    WHat does annoy me is that I'd like bits of Edubuntu, Kubuntu and Ubuntu, with the Ubuntu logon logo (and sound). I now have a laptop that shows Kubuntu bootup, Edubuntu logon screen and Ubuntu desktop because I obviously installed things in the wrong order. So I'll probably do it again at some point, can't be asked to work it out..

    As always, YMMV. It's just what /I/ found.

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  66. distribution by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    "distibution" is the proper term. "distro" for the geeky. Version is a release of softwaere at a point in time.

  67. I read this book about 18 years ago! by X'16435934 · · Score: 1

    Actually I only read the 1st chapter...
    The book came with about ten 1.44 Meg diskettes labelled "Windows 3.1"
    After getting totally bored by chapter one, I just popped the 1st Windows diskette into the A: drive and typed 'install'.
    18 years. Huh.
    Well, perhaps Linux still has a chance with non-geeks... I hope so.

    I still wouldn't recommend it to my 80+ yr-old ex-Mother-in-law! (yet)
    But perhaps my ex-wife.. (heh heh)

    I wish Shuttlesworth all the best.

    (incidentally I also run the DDrake as a file/print server on one of my other older PCs. Works great!)

    -Facade

    --
    - Ecsad Essemal
    The Hexadecimal TV-REMOTE!
  68. Re:I read this book about 18 years ago! (redux) by X'16435934 · · Score: 1

    Addendum to previous message - private corres. with ex Cow-Orkers:
    ...................

    As I recall, I read part of chapter one, got bored, popped in diskette-one and then typed INSTALL.
    Fellow (ha ha) techie Fran lectured me, saying I should really read the book before installing it
    Huh? RTFM?!!
    Worried that she might report back to (the big boss - her HUSBAND), I said that 'Well, I already actually read chapters 2 and 3 last night".

    A week later I was easily using Windows, while Fran was still busy "studying the book".
    (I think she was up to chapter 6 by then - there were about 20 chapters)
    I wonder if she ever DID install Windows 3.1 after she was, umm, "retired", soon to be followed by us early 1990s outsource victims.

    -Facade é www.dejavu.aqk.ca

    --
    - Ecsad Essemal
    The Hexadecimal TV-REMOTE!
  69. Why I gave up on Ubuntu: a non-geeks perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First the background: I'm a 16 year old girl and I definately wouldn't class myself as geeky, though I'm more interested in technology than most of my friends.

    Last month I installed Ubuntu, but within a few hours I went back to OS X. It was easy enough to install and everything, the only problem was that I couldn't get my wireless internet to work. Yes, of course I could spend hours googling for a solution or asking a linux-y friend to come round and help. I could even buy a wired router and get internet to work that way. But what for? Why should I waste hours of my life getting Ubuntu to work when OS X does it just fine?

    I really would love to use Ubuntu, support open source, stop lining Jobs' and Gates' pockets, yadda, yadda, yadda. I'm just not prepared to sacrifice my soul for it.

    P.S. If anyone can help me out with the wireless internet problem, I will be your best friend forever :-)

  70. My First Linux... by Warbringer87 · · Score: 1

    Was ubuntu. Sure, I installed KDE afterwards (basically Kubuntu), but that fact is that it is simple enough for myself, a first timer to get the hang of it, and I have gotten a number of people to give it a shot as well. I am not yet near using it as my primary OS, but it managed to get me in the linux world as no other OS was able. The four flavors of Ubuntu are enough to appeal to a lot of people and groups. Plus, the community is so awesome and helpful, and I personally expect a lot of growth of Linux Desktop users over the coming years.