Slashdot Mirror
Walt Mossberg Reviews Ubuntu
sciurus0 writes "Mainstream technology journalist Walt Mossberg recently reviewed an Inspiron 1420N with Ubuntu installed by Dell. Citing problems such as an oversensitive touchpad and poor multimedia support, he suggests that 'from the point of view of an average user, someone who wouldn't want to enter text commands, hunt the Web for drivers and enabling software, or learn a whole new user interface' Ubuntu isn't a good choice compared to Windows or OS X."
...the truth hurts. :P
My humor is probably your flamebait
This column is written for mainstream, nontechie users of digital technology. These folks aren't necessarily novices, and they aren't afraid of computers. They also aren't stupid. They simply want their digital products to operate as promised, with as little maintenance and hassle as possible.
Isn't this a contradiction?
So, I have steered away from recommending Linux, the free computer operating system that is the darling of many techies and IT managers, and a challenger to Microsoft's dominant Windows and Apple's resurgent Macintosh operating system, OS X. Linux, which runs on the same hardware as Windows, has always required much more technical expertise and a yen for tinkering than average users possess.
Isn't this biased and patronizing? And is there proof of the last claim? I can set up most Linux distros such that a user needs no knowledge at all of Unix. How is that different from OS X?
Lately, however, I've received a steady stream of emails from readers urging me to take a look at a variant of Linux called Ubuntu, which, these folks claimed, is finally polished enough for a mainstream user to handle. My interest increased when Dell began to sell a few computer models preloaded with Ubuntu instead of Windows.
Translation: I'm going to stomp all over you so stop bugging me.
I've been testing one of those Dell Ubuntu computers, a laptop called the Inspiron 1420N. I evaluated it strictly from the point of view of an average user, someone who wouldn't want to enter text commands, hunt the Web for drivers and enabling software, or learn a whole new user interface. I focused on Ubuntu and the software programs that come bundled with it, not on the hardware, which is a pretty typical Dell laptop.
How can he claim to be something he's not?
My verdict: Even in the relatively slick Ubuntu variation, Linux is still too rough around the edges for the vast majority of computer users. While Ubuntu looks a lot like Windows or Mac OS X, it is full of little complications and hassles that will quickly frustrate most people who just want to use their computers, not maintain or tweak them.
Again, lets enumerate what those are Walt? We'll get to those later.
Before every passionate Linux fan attacks that conclusion, let me note that even the folks who make and sell Ubuntu agree with it. Mark Shuttleworth, the South African-born founder of the Ubuntu project, told me this week that "it would be reasonable to say that this is not ready for the mass market." And Dell's Web site for its Ubuntu computers warns that these machines are for "for advanced users and tech enthusiasts."
What does where he comes from have anything to do with it?
So, what do I mean when I say Ubuntu is too rough around the edges for average users? Here are some examples.
Yeah here comes some steaming piles of rational!
There is no control panel for adjusting the way the touch pad works, and I found it so sensitive that I was constantly launching programs and opening windows accidentally by touching the thing. Every time the computer awoke from sleep, the volume control software crashed and had to be reloaded.
Isn't this Dell's issue? Even under Windows, Dell tunes their OEM install.
When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be "bad" or "ugly."
Well, what does Free mean to you Walt?
To get the computer to recognize my Kodak camera and Apple iPod, I had to reboot it several times. When it did find the iPod, it wasn't able to synchronize with it. Playing videos was a bad experience, with lots of flickering and freezing. Oh, and there's no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.
And if there were, then it would be in violation of MPEG licensing. Good call Walt.
The
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
Exactly.
Ubuntu is a Linux distribution.
It is based upon the GPL.
That's Free as in speech. NOT free as in beer. Which is what that idiot seems to have missed.
Ubuntu is NOT about being a free (as in beer) replacement for Windows/Macs. It's about being a Free (as in speech) system.
Picking up a Free system and then complaining that it doesn't work with your non-Free items is
Looks like Walt reviewed it from the point of view of someone who completely refuses to read, think for themselves, or even lift a finger to accomplish simple tasks.
That begs the question, why would such a person need or wish to use a computer in the first place? A respirator and feeding tube might be more appropriate.
Let's reword this: Windows has an issue because
No, he recommends OS X. He says that Windows is better for non-advanced users *out of the box* than Ubuntu. And he didn't actually recommend Vista as better, he simply compared a Vista box for price comparison.
Spreadsheets are not a basic windows function. That is MS Office - an advanced user's add-on.
Are you talking about Vista? If you are referring to XP, that is highly inaccurate. It may not be safe, but is easily done. Once again, we aren't talking about Outlook, which is an Office item.
He's not an idiot, he *is* biased, and he quoted Mark Shuttleworth, the South African-born founder of the Ubuntu project, which helps prove his point which you so ardently decry:"it would be reasonable to say that this is not ready for the mass market."
Oh, and yes, I am an Ubuntu user (well Kubuntu, to be exact).
"Little is much when little you need."
Ok; premise was "Is Linux Desktop ready for average Joe?" What does Waltman do - review an untuned version of linux for the software. Sabotage? Yes.
And I'm so far from a Linux zealot I can't tell you... Home office; W2K 4 installs, XP 2 installs, MacOS X 1 install, MacOS classic, 2 installs, Linux (nee Mandrake distro) 1 install... I use everything; I'm a zealot of nothing. But thanks for the label! In the last few weeks I've been tagged as a MacOS zealot, a Linux zealot, and a C++ zealot. Did I put anywhere in my message anything to show I'm a fan of linux, or did I question Waltman's journalism?
Call me a zealot.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
Uh, yes, I am insisting its sabotage. Because Walt misrepresents himself and his intention. Because this is a bad example of "is linux ready for mainstream". All OS have issues.
And sure, I get defensive, but I don't you are any more open minded or unbiased (or compromising) then I am.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
The thing is, just releasing the specs for OSS people to write drivers makes a negligible difference to their market share. However, money does talk, in terms of hardware specs, codec licensing, and all the rest of it.
Linux does pretty well as a freebie OS for geeks who are happy to live with (or more often fix/work around) its limitations. But a free-as-in-both operating system is always going to be at an inherent disadvantage compared to a commercial player that can afford the cost of including good stuff as part of the purchase price, and the 98% of the world who just want their computer to work don't care about the geek perspective and the legal issues and the fact that if you just download this patch and recompile your kernel it can be fixed (at least 98% of the time).
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
No novice user is going to every try and play an XviD video because they will never come across it during their daily 'novice users' usage, meaning web and email. So that's really not a good comparison.
Windows plays DVD's out of the box. No linux distro does. Windows doesn't do it for free, but the end user doesn't think about that. That's what makes Windows Consumer/Mainstream, and linux not.
>Having to get "support" for a new product means that that product is broken.
Here here! I don't know how linux distros get away with shipping with so many bugs. With all the problems that windows vista has, if it had *nearly* as many bugs and broken software as your average linux distro, microsoft would go out of business immediately.
Also, I'm sad to say that support on Ubuntu forums has really degraded since ubuntu became more popular. You used to be able to get help from competent people for your problems, but these days the forums are so crowded with idiots who don't know anything *about* linux, but who nevertheless feel compelled to comment on your questions, that it has become a frustrating waste of time.
The last few times I've asked about how to fix a software or hardware problem, some *genius* has suggested that I use some other piece of software instead... or get a different graphics card... Here's an idea? How about I stop using your shitty operating system *entirely*.
OMG! It's AWESOME!
Geez, kid- give it a break!
Act a little cooler- and you could sound like the nerdy punk in that Mac vs MS commercial. (which reminds me- I haven't seen it on TV lately)
Perhaps that's because, alas, the MS nerd married the chick and is busy raising a family, whereas the loquacious Apple guy moved back to Mom's basement.
Four months ago, I bought a laptop with Vista. I quickly configured it, got rid of the Norton/ Dell/ Toshiba 'added-value' Bloatware, installed my own FREE Antivirus & MS Defender, and the box has been running 100% ever since.
Of course, I do the periodic MS updates when suggested. No hassles.
(Oooo! Maybe Bill Gates is spying on me!)
MENUS: Well, of course I immediately configured Vista to look like the W2K 'coke-classic' menu system.
My kids were running it for three weeks before they discovered it was Vista not Win2000.
You're right- the new menus are crappy.
But after installing 7.04 Feisty Faqqer (or whatever it's called) in dual-boot, I discovered that Ubuntu would not support my wireless LAN.
(Please, no ath0 SUDO suggestions- I've tried 'em all; they plainly do not work.)
So I went back to Vista and it's been great. Currently on my home aqk network I have W2K, XP-pro, Vista and two flavours of Ubuntu.
Edgy Eerdvark (or whatever) is now run on an old Celeron just as a server, to BU data and print. But that's about ALL it is used for.
Don't get me wrong- I LIKE Ubuntu; particularly the price.
But other than price, what does it offer over Vista?
Sorry for the rant, but I get tired of these ponytailed nerds running around with pants that are too short, whining about how great the Mac... uhh, sorry, Linux is.
Shuttleworth has his work cut out for him. I wish him well.
- Ecsad Essemal
The Hexadecimal TV-REMOTE!