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."
Mossberg isn't just dumping on Linux or open source. He generally likes the idea of OSS:
Rather, he notes some average-user-level problems with Ubuntu (simple things like video, audio, and mouse issues). He's talking about usability by people who don't read Slashdot and are not related to (or dating) someone who DOES read Slashdot.
Of course, he still thinks that "the Apple iMac as the best consumer desktop computer on the market." And we all know the iMac is horrible to use and support!
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
He may be a Windows user, but he's also a much respected reviewer. Let's stop the attack and look carefully at his points and address them if necessary. How about a 'Getting Started' tutorial for new users to learn the UI and differences between Windows and Gnome?
I'd say for hardware support Ubuntu is way ahead of where Win2k was in 2000 or 2001.
That's great, but it's 2007 now.
I don't respond to AC's.
I think his point is that he shouldn't have had to.
Of course he didn't. Dell doesn't ship those. Read the article, he's reviewing as shipped by Dell.
Anything not working is a legitimate complaint. Period.
It doesn't matter if the issues are legal or technological; if something doesn't work, it's an issue.
None of which typically applied to a brand-new out of the box computer with Windows Pre-installed. What Walt was reviewing was a laptop provided by Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed by Dell. All of us Linux fans have been saying that the only fair comparison between Windows and Linux would be on machines with the OS pre-installed. We now have that situation, and Walt has some very valid criticism. Although I don't think the need to download new CODECs is all that severe, the poor video performance, problems with the touchpad and the crashing volume control applet are absolutely unacceptable for a pre-install.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Whilst reviews are great, it would have been nice if he could've asked a simple question about this on the ubuntu forum - I guess Windows users aren't used to the option of doing that.
You're right. If I have to go to a forum to get basic functionality of a brand new product working right out of the box, that product gets returned. Having to get "support" for a new product means that that product is broken.
I don't respond to AC's.
The problem that Linux has is that it's written by wildly disparate groups of people with different ideas about how an OS should work from a user perspective. The strength of Linux is that it's written by wildly disparate groups of people with different ideas about how an OS should work from a technical perspective.
It's perfectly possible to make a UNIX OS be usable by the masses -- Apple's done that with OS X. The difference is that Apple "cheats" -- they only support a certain range of hardware, all of which is a known quantity to them. They're not dealing with the issues of a Frankencomputer made from whatever bits of hardware happen to show up.
The only way to get Linux as a mass-use OS is to user test the living hell out of it. That means a continual process of refactoring so that the user never has to view the command line unless they really want to. That means making sure that every application follows a consistent HIG. That means that the first person who says something along the lines of "RTFA" gets canned.
What matters isn't technical excellence, but a culture of usability. The Linux subculture is still based around the hacker ethics -- and that's why Linux remains an OS primarily for people who enjoy compiling programs and manipulating settings. That has to change. The culture needs to be one of taking a critical look at every stage in the process and presenting the user with a set of simple and consistent choices that let people use their computers rather than worrying about getting their machine in a usable state. Ubuntu's leaning in that direction, but they still have a long way to go.
The problem is that changing a culture is a hell of a lot harder than just writing software. A culture in which people are expected to navigate the Internet looking for answers will keep Linux marginalized. A culture that says "this problem is too complicated and needs to be simplified so that the average user gets it" is a culture that can take Linux to the mainstream. Not only that, but it encourages technical development as well -- a good number of the reasons for unnecessary complexity is because there are unnecessary complications in the way a piece of code works. At the end of the day, a solution that's simple for the user is often simple at the code level as well.
I've been using Linux for a decade now, and Ubuntu is a great distro -- but it still isn't enough. The only way that Linux will get mainstream acceptance is when Linux developers start consciously thinking about the overall user experience. It isn't the code that's the problem, it's the culture, and looking for technological solutions to cultural problems doesn't work -- just look at what Microsoft is trying to do with its current strategy.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
See, that's still a problem. He doesn't care that it's Free or not, just that it doesn't work as it should out of the box. Much in the way that democracy (or communism, or whatever) is both a political ideology and a form of government, Linux is both a social movement and a family of Operating System products. The thing is, he's taking the position not of the marching, banner-waving revolutionary in the street, but of the average citizen who doesn't care what that ruckus is, just that the busses run and his water's on. It's a sad fact, but that's all the vast, vast majority of people want.
Walt is right, Dell's Ubuntu offering is not ready for the masses. However, I see this largely as Dell's fuckup.
Dell is shipping vanilla Ubuntu on these things. No media codecs, no accelerated drivers for nvidia cards, not even a properly configured X server. Can you imagine them doing the same with Windows? It would be a disaster.
what is Dell supposed to do?
Pay for the codecs. There are legal options.
Why? Are licenses for the codecs going to cost Dell more for a Linux machine than a Windows one?
Somebody (meaning you) still has to pay for the license in that copy of PowerDVD after all. Windows machines don't support a lot of standard codecs out-of-the-box either. Just try playing a XviD movie on a stock PC with Windows Media Player. Oh, yeah, I remember, Windows tells me it needs to find the codec, then it fails to do so. And this is easier for a novice user because....?
I've bought a lot of Dell hardware in my career, and in general I'm pretty happy with Dell. But I agree with others here who say they just haven't done the job with their new Linux lines. Why GNOME and not KDE, a much more Windows-like desktop? Why no codecs and other multimedia support? Why no fine-tuning of the touchpad driver if that's an issue? You don't think Dell ignores issues like that when they configure their standard XP or Vista images, do you?
And, yes, if they're going to sell Linux machines then they damn well need to support them. Does that mean they may not make as much on Linux machines in the short term? Perhaps, since they'll need to build a support staff. In the longer run, they'll discover they're getting a lot fewer support calls per Linux machine than they do for Windows.
I'm not saying it'll be easy to sell Linux machines to a mass audience, but it's not impossible. It does require that the OEM put a little effort into it. If Walt there is having troubles with his trackpad, whose fault is that? Hint, it's not Canonical's.
Oh, and it wouldn't hurt to bundle Firefox, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice on those Windows machines you sell either, Mr. Dell.
done by Dell. They just installed the basic Ubuntu and shipped it with the system at the step where it asks for a user name and all that. I had to spend significant time configuring the NVidia drivers, sound card, and audio/video codecs (probably a few hours altogether). I would bet that it would take days for someone new to linux to figure out how to do all that. For shame Dell... How hard would it have been to configure Ubuntu with the right drivers at least and then ghost that system onto every box you shipped.
Another interesting note about comparing it to Windows and OS X... I installed Windows XP SP2 in a dual boot configuration so I could play some games. Good god almighty, setting up windows was painful. I must have visited a dozen different sites, downloading 200MB in drivers, before I got everything working. The damned network card didn't even work after the initial install. I had to boot into Ubuntu, save the network driver to a USB key and then boot back into Windows. Also, I've had the system set up for about 3 weeks now and I still can't get the sound to work in windows. I've looked all over the web for the right windows sound driver with 0 luck. As for OSX, I still haven't been able to even install it! Oh wait, OSX only runs on Apple hardware... My forgot. Seriously though, if anyone know how to get the sound working in windows on an XPS 410 box, please let me know!
For those of you who are touting this story as a demonstration of linux's failure on the desktop, sod off. This wasn't a failure on the part of linux or ubuntu. This was a failure on the part of Dell in not providing a fully installed and configured system.
As a review for the Dell XPS 410:
After a Windows XP fresh install:- Network card: not working
- Video card: working but at 1024x768 with no 3d acceleration
- Sound card: not working (still not working, even after weeks of trying to find a driver)
After a Ubuntu fresh install:1, 2, 3, 4, 5... That's the combination on my luggage!
No, it does not. Vista Home Premium and Vista Ultimate are the very first versions of Windows to include DVD playback capability -- all other versions of Windows (including other Vista versions) do not have the ability to play DVD videos.
If your computer play DVDs out of the box, it means that the system integrator installed DVD player software and codecs for you. You paid for it, separate from Windows.