Slashdot Mirror


The Next Leap for Linux

Nrbelex writes "The New York Times is taking a look at the state of Linux. "Linux has always had a reputation of being difficult to install and daunting to use. Most of the popular Windows and Macintosh programs cannot be used on it, and hand-holding — not that you get that much of it with Windows — is rare. But those reasons for rejecting Linux are disappearing." The article discusses major PC makers' newest offers and compares them to their Windows counterparts."

80 of 517 comments (clear)

  1. Less keystrokes by jonoton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    to install debian than to type in the windoze license key.

    1. Re:Less keystrokes by chuckymonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If I had mod points I would make you insightful. I have less problems with my mother's computer now that she has Ubuntu and I didn't have to walk her through the install. When there is a problem all I have to do is ssh in and fix, I do this while she's still using it.

      --
      "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    2. Re:Less keystrokes by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes that is all you have to do to fix it, but what does she have to do to fix it? The problem isn't that linux is intimidating for the average /. poster. It is that Linux is pretty freaking intimidating for the average computer user.

      If acceptance of linux is something that the community wants, then it needs to realize that Windows biggest flaws are also some of its best advantages. Afterall, its so easy to install programs on Windows that they practically do it themselves ;)

      The ubiquitous nature of windows makes it very easy to fix your machine should something go wrong. Part of it is due to the fact that there are very few versions of Windows, part of it has to do with the vast user base that windows has. You may not like how MS got there, but dislike of the situation won't change the problem.

      To those of you who know how to use linux, remember this: While windows may have a steep learning curve when it comes to administrative work, with Linux the curve is a brick wall for most users.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    3. Re:Less keystrokes by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When something goes wrong with my mother's Windows-based computer, what does she do? I'll give you a hint: It doesn't involve fixing it herself.

      How is that any different than Linux, with the exception that with Linux, I wouldn't have to leave my house to go fix her computer?

      The only reason I've left her on Windows is that she plays those Reflexive.net games. If they played on Linux, and were easy to install (there's nothing easy about Wine, and it only works on these Reflexive.net games some of the time) then I'd switch her over. Heck, I could even install the games for here remotely, if they'd run afterwards.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    4. Re:Less keystrokes by somersault · · Score: 5, Funny

      Fewer of your cheek, please.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    5. Re:Less keystrokes by somersault · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can actually do remote assistance invitations on Windows, or install VNC on her computer.. I'm no lover of Microsoft, but that's kind of a poor reason to choose Linux over Windows?

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:Less keystrokes by walt-sjc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The ubiquitous nature of windows makes it very easy to fix your machine should something go wrong.

      Really? Sorry, but that's just not true. In fact, the famous Geek Squad usually fixes all Windows problems by re-imaging your box (which may solve the problem, but also wipes all your data, which is not cool at all, and not REALLY a true fix.) It would be like hiring someone to fix a leak in your roof and you come home and find that the roof was replaced, but now all your personal possessions in your house are gone.

      To really fix windows problems requires a fairly significant amount of skill / knowledge that MOST end users (and Geek Squad employees) simply DO NOT HAVE. If this guy's mom runs into problems on Windows, she will call him anyway.

      Once a Linux box is properly setup and running (which I admit may be a bit of a challenge if you have certain bits of "Windows Only" hardware) it is LESS likely to have problems than a Windows box in the first place.

    7. Re:Less keystrokes by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It seems to me that "fixing" the computer for the average user is the same for Windows OR Linux: get someone else to do it for you.

      The problem with Linux for Joe Blow is not fixing it when something goes wrong but getting it to work with peripherals, or new programs. It's gotten a lot better, but when Joe goes out and buys some device and plugs it into his Windows machine, the manufacturer of that device has made it as easy as possible for Joe to get the thing working. On Linux it's not (always) so simple and he might just have to either become a Linux expert or pay someone else to set up his new widget.

      Same with software. There's a lot of stuff available for Linux and it's easy to actually obtain, but sometimes it's hard to find what you're looking for. It's also often poorly documented and sometimes works quite differently from everything else. Joe can't just go to the store and buy a nice shrink wrapped box with a manual in it, and he can't get what all the guys at work use.

    8. Re:Less keystrokes by supersnail · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Windows is not easier to install -- its just that Dell/Acer/HP did it for you. Installing an new XP from a shrink box is a long complex process, you usually lose a few devices on the way and spend another half a day trying to locate the right drivers for your sound card etc.

      Troubleshooting is not easier in Windows, especialy if an uninstall program f**s up and leaves your startup and registry in a mess.

      The only real problem from the end user point of view is the numerous intall package formats, if you are running RED hat you can guarentee that the software you really want is packed for Debian, if you are running Suse its incredibly frustrating when the latest greatest version of whatever is only available at Ubuntu. How hard would it be to get a unified package management system?

      --
      Old COBOL programmers never die. They just code in C.
    9. Re:Less keystrokes by CortoMaltese · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The ubiquitous nature of windows makes it very easy to fix your machine should something go wrong. Part of it is due to the fact that there are very few versions of Windows, part of it has to do with the vast user base that windows has. Windows easy to fix? You must mean, "Umm, where's that installation CD again?" ;) I've used Windows 10+ years, Linux 5+ years, and my experience is that Windows is difficult to fix. It's hard to find the root cause for problems, and it's difficult to figure out what can be done to fix the problems permanently. You just hack away and cross your fingers. And boot after every change in settings (okay, this has improved a lot lately.)

      Of course, Windows has interesting, non obvious features to prevent breakage, such as automatically reverting any modified system files - which can really be a PITA sometimes.

      Very few versions of Windows? NT4, 2K, XP, Vista, server/workstation, home/pro, SP n, ...? This hasn't been a good argument for years now.

      As to the user base, I prefer quality over quantity. Try asking for help in Gentoo Forums, for example, and you're in for a pleasant surprise.

    10. Re:Less keystrokes by rbochan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...In fact, the famous Geek Squad usually fixes all Windows problems by re-imaging your box...To really fix windows problems requires a fairly significant amount of skill / knowledge...

      Yes, and those that have that knowledge usually charge a price. What would YOU rather do... pay someone knowledgeable for 6-8 hours to remedy the situation or pay them for 2 hours to re-image and update the machine? Even plumbers charge $90 per hour.
      It's a simple matter of economics.

       

      Once a Linux box is properly setup and running (which I admit may be a bit of a challenge if you have certain bits of "Windows Only" hardware) it is LESS likely to have problems than a Windows box in the first place.

      I agree, which is why that's often an option for end users. It can actually be a much less expensive option in the long run.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    11. Re:Less keystrokes by khanyisa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      After school I went to university and learned that languages change and prescriptive rules like that are silly :-)

    12. Re:Less keystrokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, you should just install a non-encrypted remote control server on a Windows machine and punch a hole in the firewall to allow external machines to connect to it. What could go wrong?

    13. Re:Less keystrokes by zsouthboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      None of those things you quote in your post are necessary anymore.

      And as for your last statement, http://wubi-installer.org/ - no partitioning, and it's a real installation.

    14. Re:Less keystrokes by tchuladdiass · · Score: 2, Informative

      Install cygwin & sshd, then you can ssh into the windows box. Also configure VNC to only accept local connections and ssh port forward. Instant secure remote admin.

    15. Re:Less keystrokes by mr_mischief · · Score: 4, Informative
      Step 1 on Linux could be any of:
      • apt-get program ... done.
      • urpmi program ... done.
      • Search for it in Synaptic or aptitude.
      • yum install program ... done.
      • emerge program ... done.


      Also, if you think troubleshooting Windows is easy, you probably haven't done it much. Try installing WordPerfect Suite, Corel Draw, Photoshop, Crystal Reports, PowerTerm Pro, Lotus Notes, and PagePlus on 10 PCs. Crash half of them by cutting power. Then, troubleshoot the DLL hell and disk corruption that results.

      Troubleshooting Windows may be easier for you than troubleshooting Linux. That's not an objective measurement. I'd say both have their strengths and weaknesses in troubleshooting. One of Linux's biggest strengths is that so many production server machines so rarely need troubleshooting in the first place. I've never had a Windows server run for three months without downtime, let alone a year or two.

      Desktops of both kinds are more likely to need troubleshooting than servers, because you have more finger-poking happening. A well-administered Linux desktop is safe from lots of this, while most Windows desktops still have to be run as administrator to get real work done. Microsoft is making progress on the limited account front, though. On Linux at least you can remove and reinstall a particular package without trashing the libraries in use by other programs, and without rebooting to release any libraries still in use by other programs. Microsoft's registry is probably a really good idea for the OS, but making it a central
      repository for every application is a mess. /etc is a much better solution, and is easier to fix when something goes wrong.

    16. Re:Less keystrokes by CortoMaltese · · Score: 3, Informative

      but whilst still wiping all the other software that you've installed that doesn't come with the default installation - if I've spent a year picking this and that out of yast and installing it, so that a bunch of clever gizmos are just there when I come to need them I don't want to be having the whole lot wiped out (because they're not installed in /home) when everything else is re-imaged. And what about stuff that I've compiled from source and had to spend 1/2 a flaming day hunting down the dependencies for because developers STILL can't be bothered to include everything you need in the archive? If you re-image you'll wipe that out. You'll probably also re-image with a new version, so instead of having to find all the pre-compiled bits and move them back into the relevant places so they can be run useably, you'll have to recompile everything as well, and if you have to do that, you'll probably spend forever chasing dependencies down again, or at least making sure to compile each in the right order. I really don't have experience in yast, but I'll warmly recommend to try out Gentoo, if you're not intimidated by the thought of it. There's really not such a thing as a "default installation", but everything you've installed is recorded in the "world file", which is a great help in rebuilding a system. Just save /etc and /home, and you'll get really far. Of course, this has next to nothing to do with re-imaging the box, but for someone like you it might work nicely.

      I'm running the stable branch (I don't have enough time for the bleeding edge) and the problems with dependencies have been few and far between. The only piece of software I've needed that I haven't found in Portage (the Gentoo package repository) is Alpine, which is still in alpha stage anyway. Of course, you'll have to compile. And you'll have to compile a lot. But typing './configure', 'make', and 'make install' has pretty much become a thing of the past, 'emerge' does it all for you. And I've never had to move the installed files anywhere. And 'equery' tells you to which package a file belongs to, and which files belong to a package, so you can easily figure that out as well.

      Conclusion: The bits of your linux installation that you'll want to save aren't confined solely to /home, they're buried all over the place. at least with windows you can make sure to save all your installation files in one place and back that up as well. You have a point in that /home is not the same as your linux installation, but I'll argue that, for most people, their personal data is way more important than the installation anyway.
    17. Re:Less keystrokes by Knuckles · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Windows is much easier to troubleshoot

      Aaaaahahahahaaaaa! *wipestearsfromeyes*

      Are you serious? windows is such a bitch to troubleshoot that nobody even tries anymore. Everyone with a clue just reimages when it inevitably starts to act up, home users and corporate IT departments alike. In Linux distros I have wonderful logging by the kernel and the apps, and I can run the apps from the cmd line where they will spit out lots of useful info, and often even have a --debug or --verbose switch. (Not even counting that if that doesn't help, I can recompile with debug symbols and just attach a debugger.)

      Windows, in contrast, is so obfuscated that often you cannot even find out what is wrong in reasonable time (i.e., faster than a reimage). The Event Viewer in the computer management app is a sick joke.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    18. Re:Less keystrokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You appear to be confused about the term encryption. The stream of data that makes up your VNC connection is not encrypted. A man in the middle could watch your entire VNC session, or even inject mouse & keyboard events or take over control of the remote machine. O.K: it's unlikely. But it isn't much more secure than a Telnet session.

      The poster below has the right idea: tunnel the VNC session over SSH (which adds the needed encryption) and then only allow the VNC server to accept connections from the local IP address (I.e. from the SSH server on the same machine).

    19. Re:Less keystrokes by HartDev · · Score: 2, Funny

      Also, Linux is much less difficult to pirate than Windows...haha!

      --
      To see a few of my Android apps goto: www.hartwired.com
    20. Re:Less keystrokes by TW+Atwater · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If Windows is so much easier to administer than Linux, why does it need Remote Assistance?

      I don't know about the rest of you who serve as help-desk for a wide circle of family and frineds, but the average user is completely lost if he clicks an icon and nothing happens. The only reason Linux isn't making inroads against MS on the desktop is that you can't go down to Best Buy and find computers with Linux pre-installed.

      More than 60,000 Windows programs won't run on Linux. Partial List here.

      --
      More than 60,000 Windows programs won't run on Linux.
    21. Re:Less keystrokes by norminator · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's cool, but in using cygwin, ssh & VNC to support the idea that it's easier to securely admin a remote Windows box than to admin a remote Linux box, you just proved that you need extra steps to do the same thing...

      Under Linux, you obviously don't need cygwin, and an ssh server is usually installed and ready to go after a default install of most distros. VNC is just as available for Linux as for Windows, although most Linux distributions give you quick access to many VNC flavors through their default package managers, so you don't even have to manually download and install files.

      Of course, under Linux, you can just install an NX server/client, which does have its own setup headaches, but once it's installed, using it is just as easy as Remote Desktop. You don't need to establish an ssh connection, then tell the client to tunnel through that connection; it handles all of the ssh stuff automatically and transparently. And with the latest version of NoMachine's NX server/client, you have the option of establishing a new session (even while someone else is running another local or remote session), or attach to a currently running session.

    22. Re:Less keystrokes by Zonk+(troll) · · Score: 3, Informative

      Opera.

      Windows XP: Go to opera.com, download the Windows installer. (This is chosen automatically, so you just have to click 'Download' on the front page, and then 'Download Opera' on the next page.) Save it to the desktop. Double click on the new file on the desktop. Click Next until you can click 'Finish'.

      Ubuntu Feisty: Go to opera.com, download the Windows installer. (This is chosen automatically, so you just have to click 'Download' on the front page, and then 'Download Opera' on the next page.) Save it to the desktop. Double click on the new file on the desktop. Click ... No wait, that's it. It's done.

      Wow, Ubuntu is easier! Maybe you shouldn't have let me pick the program. While there -are- programs that are harder on Linux, any that provide a .deb file are now as easy as on Windows. Why not just select "Applications"->"Add/Remove...", select the "Internet" category, Check "Opera" and hit "Apply"?

      Far easier than navigating and downloading through a web site, and updates are handled automatically.
      --
      "The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
      End The FED. -
    23. Re:Less keystrokes by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

      FFS, people are going to have issues on any system... and have you any idea how stupid/lazy some people are? The people that I find need the most help, are the same people that I consider to have the most evil personalities :P Could just be a coincidence.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    24. Re:Less keystrokes by Braino420 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think Reflexive.net is a poor reason to choose Windows over Linux.

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    25. Re:Less keystrokes by debest · · Score: 3, Funny

      How hard would it be to get a unified package management system?

      I feel absolutely qualified in answering your question...

      "Very."

      You're welcome!
      --
      Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
    26. Re:Less keystrokes by weicco · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can actually do remote assistance invitations on Windows

      And you can do it over Live Messenger which I install to every computer I have to set up.

      --
      You don't know what you don't know.
    27. Re:Less keystrokes by Remusti · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used to work recomissioning ex-lease machines for sale, and I can tell you that is not accurate. Unless you have the OEM restore disc, which never happened for us, you are stuck hunting for drivers almost every time. Odds are, most machines will have at least one item which requires searching to find if you do not have the hardware driver discs. We had a rather large database of drivers which simply were not installed with Windows or Windows Update.

    28. Re:Less keystrokes by Knuckles · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's patently not true, or only true on very standards-compliant machines. For example, the driver to work around a laptop's usually broken ACPI implementation is with high likelihood not on the Windows CD. So are other laptop drivers.

      And even if a Windows installation is done in 60 minutes, what can you do after that? Write in Notepad, i guess. To install all the applications and assorted crap like codecs that a general user will need usually takes a few more hours. In contrast, an Ubuntu installation is also done in 60 minutes tops, but is then ready to go with all applications for general usage (and codecs will be downloaded on demand, unlike Windows, *cough* Divx *cough*).

      Of course, only when your Windows CD is old do you understand how crappy Windows is. I recently had the honor to install Win XP Pro SP1, and boy was that annoying. Of course there are many downloads with such an old release, a linux distro would not be fundamentally different (though it seems to me that for the amount of patches Windows downloaded, it should have included apps too, like a distro does). But I assure you that a linux distro would not reboot 20 times in the process. Boot, log in, Windows Update finds patches. Dl, install. Reboot. Login, it finds more patches. Dl, install, reboot, login. It finds more patches, and so on and so on. Why the fuck can't it download everything at once?

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    29. Re:Less keystrokes by mr_mischief · · Score: 2, Informative

      When did proper version tracking of shared libs happen on Windows? That's right, it didn't. The application vendors put the DLLs they need in the application's directory and use extra disk space and memory. That's not a shared library any more, is it? Avoiding the problem by taking a step back in time is not the same as solving it. The .NET framework tracks its own libraries that applications based on it use, and that alleviates some of the pain as well.

      If NTFS has gotten as good as ReiserFS and ext3 at recovering from crashes, I've missed it somewhere. It's a far leap past FAT (12, 16, or 32), but it still has some way to go AFAICT. It's pretty close I guess, but I'm not sure I'd say it's in the same boat. Maybe in the same harbor. When was the last time you crashed a Windows box with a RAID 5 array and didn't at all worry about it cleaning up after itself? I as a matter of fact kicked the power loose on a Linux box with a RAID 5 data mount this morning, being my clumsy self. No problems at all.

      I'm not a Linux freak who won't touch other OSes. I use XP and Linux both every day. I also use OS X semi-regularly. I have Amiga OS, OS/2, DOS, NetBSD, and a few other OSes on my collection of older and unusual hardware. Windows is one of the best OSes out there for the desktop, regardless of application availability. I don't think it's _the_ best, and I'm not sure it ever will be. The applications sure help its case, though. Windows definitely isn't in my top 5 for server OSes, and it might not be in my top 10 if I took the time to make the list. I'd put it in the top three or four desktop OSes, but I still don't think it's any easier to troubleshoot than, say, Ubuntu, Mandriva, or PCLinuxOS. Easier than Gentoo or Slackware, sure, but those are not valid comparisons for mainstream desktop use.

    30. Re:Less keystrokes by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Your directions require:
      1) package is in the repository
      2) leave out simple steps I listed

      Stuff in the repository is real easy to in Ubuntu.
      It has add/remove programs like Windows, but you can actually add pretty much whatever program you want.

      For stuff not native to the distribution I chose to include everything not in the package manager for my install directions. If Linux ever gets wide commercial support for desktop apps I don't think the situation will be as good though (see SimCity 2000 problems, which I assume pacman does not include).

      For this reason I actually don't think Linux will ever be a great games platform, the oldies but goodies will be hard to install, even when not too old.

      What the person posing the hypothetical was asking is a hard thing to compare, because pretty much everything in Linux is native to the distribution or unavailable. The few instanced I am familiar with that arn't are:
      1) Loki games (some other company too), with Loki getting it to run on the new glibc at the time (about 5 years ago? moving to 2.6 maybe?) was a chore.
      2)Nvidia driver, real easy, if you are wiling to type. the typical user may be afraid to CTR+ALT+F1, killall gdm, cd to correct directory, sudo sh NVIDIA-Installer
      "cd" is a trickey command to people who are unfamiliar with the command line, even browsing through folders is hard for a lot of people. I suppose an install CD could be setup to run gtk-sudo or whatever it is, and already have executable set, it a double click install would work (not for graphics drivers though).
      3)Wolfenstewein:ET, installs great, sound is OSS, so must do some wierd voodoo to make it work (I hit up a couple times, so I don't recall what it is at work), this is better than the Loki games problems, but still there.
      4)Opera Browser, download .deb and double click, enter password. Opera packages at least 3 files (RPM, TAR.GZ, DEB, maybe many more).
      5) f-prot, run a shell script and it's done.

      I have found that even though people claim it is so hard to get things to install consistently, everything that installs as a shell script has worked for me (except glibc problem, and now Wolf:ET). I use fairly mainstream distros though (Redhat -> SUSE -> Debian -> Mandrake -> Ubuntu with slackware in parallel on a server at work) which may help.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    31. Re:Less keystrokes by Tacvek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course, only when your Windows CD is old do you understand how crappy Windows is. I recently had the honor to install Win XP Pro SP1, and boy was that annoying. Of course there are many downloads with such an old release, a linux distro would not be fundamentally different (though it seems to me that for the amount of patches Windows downloaded, it should have included apps too, like a distro does). But I assure you that a linux distro would not reboot 20 times in the process. Boot, log in, Windows Update finds patches. Dl, install. Reboot. Login, it finds more patches. Dl, install, reboot, login. It finds more patches, and so on and so on. Why the fuck can't it download everything at once? Or how about patches that you need to install before Windows Update even offer the latest service pack to you? The service pack is a cumulative update! There should be no prerequisite patches. granted that when installing SP2 via windows update, some files may be skipped if they are irrelevant (already up to date), but I have personally found that on at least 5 different systems, Windows Update was not able to install SP2. I had to download the huge offline install EXE to install SP2, so I'm definitely re-downloading all the old updates. (I always try using windows update first, instead of heading directly for the service pack, for no really good reason. I guess I'm just optimistic that Windows Update might just work this time for installing SP2.)
      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    32. Re:Less keystrokes by turbidostato · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Installing an new XP from a shrink box is a long complex process"

      You can be damn sure. Just this morning a junior tech was trying to install XP SP2 on a computer. He came to me because he thought the SATA hard disk was fried. I pointed out that BIOS start messages showed it properly; then he told me the problem was that XP install just hanged. I told him, "just take the netinstall CD from Debian and run it to the point it offers to partition the hard disk and we'll see" and I returned to my stuff. 25 minutes later the boy came to tell me Debian was perfectly installed in the system, with GUI and all; just few "ENTER" keystrokes (I don't remember but I think five keystrokes will do it). It seems that somehow the SATA chipset is not of the likes of the Windows XP SP2 install CD; I let the junior to find his way out of the mess; we'll see.

      "if you are running RED hat you can guarentee that the software you really want is packed for Debian, if you are running Suse its incredibly frustrating when the latest greatest version of whatever is only available at Ubuntu. How hard would it be to get a unified package management system?"

      If you are running Ubuntu you can guarantee that the software you really want is packed for Windows. How hard would it be for Microsoft to get along everybody else and get a unified program system?

  2. The fact that it's on mainstream press.. by jkrise · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Itself means Linux has made a good 'Next Leap'. Seriously! Until a few months back, the only Linux news used to be about the SCO case, Microsoft - Novell patents FUD etc. The nature of the GPL has meant that the cat is now well out of the bag, and the mainstream press outlets are compelled to sing the Penguin March.

    Poor network performance in Vista, the OOXML vote and now, the Excel 2007 calculation howler have made bad press for Microsoft. Not a day passes on Digg without Ubuntu articles getting over thousands of Diggs. So now, the NYT, Forbes, Gartner, Yankee and the rest must join the Linux bandwagon. Or be left behind.

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    1. Re:The fact that it's on mainstream press.. by darthflo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're right about the mainstream press 'Next Leap', but apart from the Excel 2007 "problem" I don't see Digg, Vista's network performance, the OOXML fiasco or all those freedom politics helping to get non-techies to consider switching. Even the Excel trouble didn't get too much bad mainstream press 'round here.
      Linux's biggest mainstream advance over Vista will probably stay it's lower price for the next few years.

    2. Re:The fact that it's on mainstream press.. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Itself means Linux has made a good 'Next Leap'. Seriously! Until a few months back, the only Linux news used to be about the SCO case, Microsoft - Novell patents FUD etc. The nature of the GPL has meant that the cat is now well out of the bag, and the mainstream press outlets are compelled to sing the Penguin March. I don't disagree with you that the mainstream press' recent positive attention to Linux is demonstrative of Linux on the desktop becoming a success story of its own, but I don't really see what the GPL has to do with it. The license itself makes no difference as far as 'compelling mainstream outlets to sing the Penguin March.' All that matters in this regard is that Linux can get the job done and is proving itself as a viable desktop operating system. The license may have contributed to that by invigorating the developer base (a matter that's up for debate), but the GPL really has nothing to do with Linux's success -- the success is a result of the hard work of developers, testers, documenters, and community volunteers that help spread the word.

      So now, the NYT, Forbes, Gartner, Yankee and the rest must join the Linux bandwagon. Or be left behind. These groups don't have to do anything of the sort. They merely report on trends in technology. If one of those trends is Linux, so be it. They'll report. Gartner and Yankee in particular aren't going to end their Microsoft bias anytime soon though.
    3. Re:The fact that it's on mainstream press.. by a.d.trick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The license may have contributed to that by invigorating the developer base (a matter that's up for debate), but the GPL really has nothing to do with Linux's success — the success is a result of the hard work of developers, testers, documenters, and community volunteers that help spread the word.

      I'm not quite sure what the GP was trying to get at, but this is a bit misleading. The chief innovation of Linux was not technical, it was social. It's not like Linus was the first decent OS architect, but he (and RMS) founded a great community which made a great operating system (and a compiler, text editor, and much, much more). It was the community that made the software, but it was the license that make the community possible. The GNU GPL still draws far more developers than any other open source license, and this isn't all due to RMS making zombies out of us :-)

  3. Hardware still an issue by BlueParrot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Based on my experience with Ubuntu, I'd say that the biggest issue is by far hardware vendors. When given ideal hardware Linux will pretty much "just work" but there is a lot of hardware that is not just less than ideal, but quite frankly unusable. I eventually bought a new PCI wireless card because I couldn't get my existing one to work, even with ndiswrapper.

    Unfortunately there really isn't a whole lot the developers can do to change this unless hardware vendors start opening their specs. The good news is that a lot of vendors do realize that having the FLOSS community write the drivers is pretty much the cheapest way to outsource development. As a bonus these drivers tend to be a lot more stable as well.

    1. Re:Hardware still an issue by Max+Threshold · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hardware? Really? My biggest problem with Ubuntu (currently running the 7.10 beta) is with developers trying to squeeze in the latest and greatest upstream versions at the last minute, causing regressions and general strife and turning what could have been the Windows killer into an embarrassment for anyone who's trying to promote Linux.

    2. Re:Hardware still an issue by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's amazing how many features get left out of windows, that would be so easy to support, yet for some reason never seem to make it in. One feature is loading RAID, SCSI, and IDE Controller card drivers off something other than a floppy disk. The other that really drives me batty is the inability for you to set an image as your wallpaper, and have windows resize it so that the image fills the maximum amount of the screen, without changing the aspect ratio. Seriously, this has been available in Linux for at least 5 years, and Vista still doesn't do this. The algorithm would take 1 person a maximum of 1/2 a day to program, and test, even if they weren't a good programmer. Spending 6 years on Vista and they can't even add simple features like this, that would make so many home user's lives easier, is just terrible.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Hardware still an issue by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think his point was that, hey look, it's 2007-10, and they need to release this soon. Why are they trying to assfist in all of the bleeding-edge stuff *now*? Why can't it wait for 8.04?

    4. Re:Hardware still an issue by darthflo · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're in a bit of a dilemma here. Running beta software will cause some instabilities there (as mentioned by all others responding to you), but going back to stable 7.04 will probably get you the hardware-related problems GP was talking about (if you're running exotic or really new hardware anyways, Gutsy really fixed tons of issues there). I'm happy with Gutsy and a few problems, hope you are too :]

    5. Re:Hardware still an issue by Etyenne · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because 8.04 will be a LTS release (Long Term Support), and it is expected that the Ubuntu developers will be conservative with the feature set they allow into 8.04. As such, if you have a feature that is somewhat experimental, you need to push it now (to get it tested and polished before 8.04), or wait until 8.10. At least, that's the theory. In practice, I am fairly certain quite a few experimental features will find their ways into 8.04 anyway.

      Managing releases at fixed date and coordinating with upstream project release is probably the toughest challenge Ubuntu is facing. But on the other hand, this is exactly what gave it the edge in the distro war. So far, the execution have been pretty good and Ubuntu reap the benefits.

      --
      :wq
  4. Correction by smartin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But those reasons for rejecting Linux are disappearing.

    Those reasons disappeared years ago, what needs to disappear now are stories repeating them.

    --
    The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
    1. Re:Correction by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The same reasons still exist... a lot of the professional software used by many folks, still only exist on windows, and hardware vendors are not quick to support linux.

      Its been that way since i installed slackware 1

    2. Re:Correction by dave420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those reasons haven't disappeared. You still can't do 100% of what you can on Windows on Linux. Until that changes, there are real, tangible reasons for people not to switch. People don't like to compromise. There is no way any of the companies I've worked for could become 100% Linux, as there are key pieces of software that many folks use every single day that are nowhere near available on Linux. It's a shame, and it's getting better, but to say it's "there" is doing Linux a great disservice, as it entices people to sit on their laurels and not strive to actually close the gap.

    3. Re:Correction by bmcage · · Score: 2, Insightful
      hmm, do you think I can do 100% on windows as I can on Linux? Think again.

      I suppose I 'work' in a different sector than the window shops.

  5. Impact of the article ... by foobsr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From TFA: "Linux is best for technically savvy users or for people whose needs are so basic that they will never need anything other than the bundled software"

    Which basically translates to not for me for the average person, being neither a geek nor wanting to have the self-image of being 'basic'.

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  6. Linux Dell cheaper than Vista ? by eulernet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, so why is it not advertised on Dell's site ? From the TFA, Vista is 50 to 80 dollars more expensive. Does this only mean that Dell wants Microsoft to reduce its license price ?

  7. Evolution of Linux by Fireflymantis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I first got linux running back in '97 with Mandrake 5 point something, and back then I used it more with a 'shove it to MS' attitude. Things were clunky, slow, and broke easily in the GUI side back then. Definitely needed xkill as a shortcut, accessible at all times. X was a nightmare to configure and good luck getting sound working. OSS was 'the next big thing' for dealing with sound cards. *shudder*

    10 years later, there are some things that are still a bit rough around the corners, but at least now I am using it full time because I find it genuinely more usable and I can get a lot more work done using it than I ever could on windows. It is more stable, and short of accidentally hitting the switch on the power-strip with my feet, never have to deal with system crashes or BSODs.

    Right now, we are starting to see some 'really' neat things taking off like next-get UI's (compiz/beryl) and zeroconf that when refined over the next many years will undoubtedly make Linux systems the leader of the OSs. Additionally, due to the compound effect when more users switch over, more companies will release more goodies onto 'nix.

    Over the next decade I really think that there will be massive proliferation of Linux desktops and that maybe finally the IT industry can start the long journey to finally rid itself of nasty kludges presented by Redmond year after year. Of course though, we will have to watch out for self contrived idiocies such as political breakdown within the wizard circles (kernel, KDE, Gnome, Mozilla, etc) and also try and sanely resolve niggling issues like the current GPLv2 vs GPLv3 dilemma.

    So far since my indoctrination to the Linux world I have seen such vast improvements it boggles my mind, and I expect nothing less for the next 10.

  8. It is as difficult to install windows. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Most people buy windows pre installed. But anyone who had gone through a full install of Windows knows how difficult it is. When Redmond releases the next version and calls it an upgrade some chumps try to buy the install disks and attempt upgrading their machines. Or more frequently, a virus or something hits and they only thing that will really eradicate it is to format the hard disk and reinstall the OS. Even with a restore disk specifically created for that machine, many of the prompts during the restore process and install process are arcane and most users can't do anything other than accept the defaults. So why people harp on "Linux is difficult to install?", compare Linux install to windows install. Or compare pre installed Linux to pre installed Windows.

    Another disappointing thing about the article is that it positions Linux as a "cheap" alternative. The main point of Linux is not that it is cheap, it could be or it might not be. The real power of Linux is avoiding the vendor lock.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  9. Difficult? by blackbirdwork · · Score: 4, Informative

    Difficult to install? That's only for Linux from Scratch. All other distros are easier than Windows to install. Have you tried to install Windows XP on a new machine? It's a pain in the ass... remember to have a floppy drive before trying it.

    1. Re:Difficult? by blackbirdwork · · Score: 5, Informative

      It seems you never did an advanced installation of Windows XP for hardware with RAID or SATA controllers not supported by Windows...

    2. Re:Difficult? by blackbirdwork · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try to install Windows on a server with Raid or on a simple New PC with new SATA controllers, you will need drivers on a FLOPPY disk.

    3. Re:Difficult? by mauthbaux · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not just about having media to install from, it's that the windows installer will *only* accept media from a floppy drive. No USB drives (unless your BIOS allows you to map it as a floppy). No CDs. No files from another Hard drive. No networked or internet files.

      I assume that Microsoft fixed this in Vista, but years of dealing with it in XP has been a source of sufficient frustration that my next install will likely be Ubuntu.

      --
      "Operating systems suck: you're better off using only the BIOS" --trainsaw.com
    4. Re:Difficult? by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      with your old out of date hardware yes. Xp will install from the CD.

      have modern hardware without IDE but SATA? gotta have a floppy drive.

      Why dont you buy a modern PC and try it instead of living in the land of old outdated hardware.

      Why microsoft shipped XP install without the ability to mount and read a USB thumb drive is mindboggling. Vista installer is the same way. god help you if you are using a unsupported raid card for your install/OS disk.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  10. Shouldn't the TFA have been titled by amishdisco · · Score: 2, Funny

    "2008: The year of the Linux Desktop?"

  11. Drivers are a money loser for vendors by MarkEst1973 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why Closing a Driver loses its vendor money

    ESR may or may not be popular on Slashdot, but he covered this topic pretty well in the Cathedral and the Bazaar.

  12. The article contradicts itself. by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "for people whose needs are so basic that they will never need anything other than the bundled software" ... translates to not for me for the average person, being neither a geek nor wanting to have the self-image of being 'basic'.

    Of course, the article itself already stated:

    "An Add/Remove function actually makes finding programs easier with Linux than it is for Mac and Windows. Without having to go to Web sites, it lets you browse through categories of software. It took me only seconds to find several additional music players, a PDF reader and other programs. In addition to downloading the software, this feature installs it and finds any necessary additional files."

    It's a holdover from Windows/Mac, where installing software can be hard and requires some technical knowledge. The author still subconsciously thinks of installing software as 'difficult' even though they've actually seen the evidence that on Linux it's not. On any modern desktop Linux, software installation is no more complicated than "I want this program. Gimme."

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    1. Re:The article contradicts itself. by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we'd really need wine to be easier to handle and more feature-complete to satisfy those users too.

      Nope, that's a trap. OS/2 was essentially 100% Windows 3.1 compatible, and what happened? Developers thought, "Why bother writing an OS/2 native app when I can just write a Windows app and be compatible?" So OS/2 never got any apps to speak of. And we know where it is today.

      Linux needs those alternative, native (or at least cross-platform) apps.

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  13. COULD THIS BE!? by kevmatic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Year of the Linux Desktop!?!?!

    Probably not.

    There's not going to be some sudden revolution to Linux, its going to come gradually. There won't be a Year of the Linux Desktop, I'm thinking one day we'll all look back and marvel about how mainstream Linux snuck up on us.

    I doubt this article will get any more than a couple dozen people to try it. But its a start.

    What amazes me is how rapidly its improving. The Kubuntu install I'm using is only a year old, but the new Gusty Beta is so much different it might as well be a different OS entirely. How much does Windows improve in a year?

    Oh, that's right, they take SIX YEARS to improve, and ended up with Vista.

    (K)ubuntu is out pacing Windows so bad its only a matter of time before it overtakes Windows in all fronts. I mean, the automatix problem they're talking in TFA is supposedly already fixed for Gusty, and there's a ton of other features that people will love.

    And yeah, and takes days to get an XP reinstall into a usable state too, with drivers and Firefox and updates and anti virus and antispyware and office suites and media players that have to be installed.

    Seems to me people who ask the question "is Linux ready for Mainstream?" compare it to a perfect Windows that I've never seen in person.

    1. Re:COULD THIS BE!? by Aladrin · · Score: 2, Informative

      While some areas are definitely overtaking Windows (Seen Compiz in Gutsy? Nice and stable!) there are others that are pretty much out of the control of developers. I'm talking about mainstream software. It simply doesn't work on Linux, even with Wine. Once there's a Photoshop for Linux, and maybe a few other choice apps, then you'll see the acceptance of Linux as a desktop for the common man.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  14. Re:Linux must tackle this first by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Everybody I have asked to edit some configuration file has loathed the idea.

    I know what you mean! My elderly parents have no problem navigating to HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run and tweaking a REG_SZ value, but ask them to open up Gedit...

    (Yes, this was sarcastic.)

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  15. Yes, but does it run on... by TechnoBunny · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...oh. Never mind.

  16. And to bring things closer by E-Sabbath · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've found this lovely project. It's called Wine-Doors, and it's a Package Manager for Windows programs under Linux. Like Apt-Get.
    Seems to work pretty well, too.
    http://www.wine-doors.org/wordpress/?page_id=5

  17. NO! Not Automatix! by gbutler69 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Automatix IS NOT recommended for Ubuntu! It tends to screw things up preventing correct updates to the next version.

    Codecs are now installed automagically whenever you attempt to open a media file for which you do not have the correct CODEC.

    Automatix IS NOT recommended.

    --
    Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
    1. Re:NO! Not Automatix! by chrono13 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not only is Automatix not recomended, but it is almost completely irrelivant and unessary.

      On a fresh 7.10 install:

      Add/Remove, Show all packages, "restricted". Install restricted package.
      You now have installed: Java6, Flash9, video codecs, lame, dvd playback, ms fonts, and more.
      No command line, no downloading of a 3rd party unrecomended script. Just easy. Compare that to Windows.

      Even going outside of the package manager, most people find there is a deb for their distro (eg. Google Earth).

      I removed the "Made for Windows" sticker and replaced it with a "Powered by Ubuntu" sticker. Ubuntu 7.10 is the release that has replaced Windows for me.

      --
      You have been eaten by a Hurd of GNU.
  18. Re:The 'problem' with Linux. by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ok, so you are the one building the PCs for these people and you're bothered that you can't predict the hardware they're going to be using with them?

    Realistically, if they're asking you to build them, then it's highly unlikely they'll be getting third party hardware without checking with you first anyway. Third party hardware under any OS, be it Mac, Windows, or GNU/Linux, is always a problem with non technical people. Third party drivers for Windows are rarely trouble free and frequently cause more problems than they solve - a problem Microsoft has taken note of, which is why they've been moving towards making drivers themselves where possible and trying to force the use of Microsoft-approved drivers in future versions of Windows. In practice, the 90% of devices that are supported in some form under GNU/Linux will work with equal or less hassle than the 99% of devices that have some kind of Windows compatibility.

    So this isn't something to worry about. You can recommend Ubuntu to them, show them the wealth of software you can pre-install for them under that OS, and tell them that if they need a camera or printer, come to you for a recommendation. You'll be able to provide them with something low cost and trouble free. No spy-ware. No bizarre "KodakPolaroidHP SuperdooperQualityPictureMakerPrinter(tm)" that can't be uninstalled without uninstalling the driver, yet adds half an hour to the boot process and takes over the entire computer when you plug the device in. Something that "just works". Which is what they want, and it's what anyone who asks their friendly geek to build them a computer wants.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  19. Thank you by Gazzonyx · · Score: 5, Funny

    "200[x]: The year of the Linux Desktop?" I've found that title to be reliable for knowing what year it is, as it has worked for the last 5 years in a row. ;)
    --

    If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  20. Re:Not really mainstream by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Usability is a nightmare. The UI is cluttered with useless, confusing icons and half of the functions behind them don't even work properly What are you talking about? Have you seen a recent GNOME or KDE desktop? Lots of thought and care were put into uncluttering the desktop and making icons and menus make sense -- on both of the major desktops.

    But configuration is the worst problem, why is it so hard to make a system architecture and drivers that don't require constant hand holding regarding even the most basic settings? It's not. I haven't had to compile a custom kernel in gods-knows-how-long. Most common hardware devices are supported out of the box on modern, polished distros like Ubuntu or Fedora. For the four computers in my house, I only ever needed to manually configure ONE piece of hardware -- a USB wireless adapter on my laptop. The other machine with wireless has an Atheros wireless NIC, and I literally had to do nothing other than configure WPA. The digital camera, Web cam, scanner, printer, wired NICs, nVidia video cards, USB storage devices, mice, trackballs, keyboards (some with special keys), etc. were all literally supported out of the box with no manual configuration or driver installation whatsoever.

    Second, supporting Windows apps is a huge problem, too. Really? Why is that a problem? Notice no one ever says "supporting Windows apps is a huge problem for Mac OS X". That's because 1) most people don't need Windows apps when there are plenty of nice alternatives, and 2) there are options like Parallels and Boot Camp for Intel Macs. Likewise, there are options like XEN and QEMU on Linux. Ever tried QEMU on Ubuntu Feisty Fawn? Other than the need to compile a custom kernel module for full virtualization (admittedly, a bit hard), there are applications like the QEMU Launcher and the QEMU Control Panel, which make it drop dead simple to setup and run QEMU for someone who knows what he's doing. Not that setting up Parallels is a cakewalk, either, though. It still involves installing a second OS in virtual machine, no matter what. And XEN is very usable.

  21. Re:Not really mainstream by darthflo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Usability is a nightmare. The UI is cluttered with useless, confusing icons and half of the functions behind them don't even work properly.
    When was the last time you tried a fresh copy of Ubuntu? 7.10 seems way less cluttered than Vista to me and I think it's quite similar to 7.04 and 6.06 (never tried those, but Screenshots look similar).

    Of course it doesn't help that Linus himself is a big antagonist when it comes to making a system that saves the user some time with useful configuration models and efficient UI.
    Unfortunately you may be right here. Linus really is focusing on Linux's potential as an "Enterprise" OS, but that's why we need people like ck, Miguel de Icaza and Mark Shuttleworth.
  22. Re:Not really mainstream by thasmudyan · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Well, at the risk of losing even more karma even replying to this, but...

    What are you talking about? Have you seen a recent GNOME or KDE desktop? Lots of thought and care were put into uncluttering the desktop and making icons and menus make sense -- on both of the major desktops. Personally, I like KDE, I even like Gnome, but I'm a geek. And I'm not denying that desktop environments didn't come a long way towards usability. At the same time, I think it is necessary to refine them relentlessly. Anyone who thinks KDE is ready for their mom or your average office worker is clearly kidding themselves and I invite them to conduct their own study.

    It's not. I haven't had to compile a custom kernel in gods-knows-how-long. Most common hardware devices are supported out of the box on modern, polished distros like Ubuntu or Fedora. Huge issues for me are multihead configuration and other graphics integration issues. This stuff shouldn't be so hard. Granted, most distros work fine on a standard single-screen system if the hardware isn't too fancy. Again, we've certainly come a long way here. But this needs to go so much further, up to the point where no user has to even touch a configuration text file, ever again.

    Really? Why is that a problem? Notice no one ever says "supporting Windows apps is a huge problem for Mac OS X". It is a big problem because there needs to be legacy support for business apps and other expert software that can't be ported but has to be used for some time to come. Just saying "fuck this, you don't need this app" is not really the solution.

    And supporting Windows apps is indeed a problem for Mac OS X, but not a huge one. Why? Because you can install stuff like Parallels even if you are just a mere human.
  23. The other 'problem' with Linux by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're right about the hardware support. I have been planning to move my home PC to dual boot with Linux since forever: I've been leaving separate hard disk partitions free for this purpose for years. But I never have actually installed Linux on my main home machine, because every time I come to look at it and do the research, I find showstopping issues with some piece of hardware or other.

    I don't think that's the biggest obstacle to widespread Linux adoption, though. In fact, the real problem with Linux from the point of view of average home or office users has nothing to do with Linux itself. It is simply that, as TFA suggests, the applications just aren't there for serious users. To get people to shift away from the Windows platforms they're familiar with, Linux must offer better applications, yet there is not one "killer app" for Linux. Many of the best mass market OSS software is also available for Windows, particularly on the programming and server software front where Linux has traditionally been strong. For end users, there are commercial offerings on Windows as good or much better than almost anything on Linux.

    The really silly thing is that a lot of this is actually caused by the community-driven OSS model that prevails in Linux world, which admits the kind of politics that would be squished by senior management in a traditional, commercial software development company. Your average end user doesn't care about GPL2 vs. GPL3. He doesn't need OpenOffice to try and be an MS Office clone, because he's got MS Office. He doesn't care about your open standard calendar support in your mail software, he just wants to connect to his corporate Exchange server. He doesn't care that Firefox is just following W3C recommendations in how it renders the page, when the page looks wrong in Firefox but right in IE.

    This isn't to say that none of these things matters. To you and me and those who would like to see a better world, the technical details and open standards are important, and for some of us, perhaps the free software philosophy is too. But the bottom line is that the end user doesn't care. He just wants a system that can help him to do his work, relax at home, or whatever. As long as Linux doesn't have the same level of key application support that Windows has, and some "killer app" alternatives that are substantially better than what is available on Windows, it will never be the "year of Linux on the desktop" no matter how good the operating system itself may become, how easy it is to install, how pretty the widgets are in the GUI, or how many geeks object to the de facto standards and vendor lock-in that prevail in the Windows world.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  24. "Ready for the Desktop" by Xenomorph.NET · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "They" have been saying for 10 years now that Linux is ready for the Desktop. It will be ready for the Desktop when the public says it is. Not supporting DRM or getting scary "constitutes a CRIME" messages when trying to play music and movies doesn't help. Pushing "OpenOffice" as a free *clone* of Microsoft Office doesn't seem to be fooling people either. It will only take a user 5 minutes to realize it lacks the Mail functionality or even comes close in speed of Microsoft's Office. I am looking forward to Ubuntu 7.10. I still won't see it as a replacement for Windows - but it is definitely an alternative to it. Linux for me has excelled as a great tool/utility OS and a server OS.

  25. Re:what? by PFI_Optix · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Troll away, but I think it's safe to say that Linux has taken far more leaps than any other OS since OSX and XP were first released.

    It's nice to see an article that at least touches on the shortcomings that hold Linux back as a desktop operating system AND about what is being done/needs to be done to resolve those.

    I think this sums it up nicely:

    After using the operating system for writing, Web surfing, graphic editing, movie watching and a few other tasks, it is easy to conclude that Linux can be an alternative to the major operating systems. But since common tasks like watching a movie or syncing an iPod require hunting for and installing extra software, Linux is best for technically savvy users or for people whose needs are so basic that they will never need anything other than the bundled software.

    However, trying Linux -- especially if you boot it from a CD -- is a great way to find out what a lot of open-source adherents are so excited about.

    Linux is easy to start using, especially distros like Ubuntu that bundle a lot of good apps into a near-turnkey solution. I don't think any other OS is quite so functional immediately after install. Linux is also a dream for the technical-minded power users who love to customize and control every aspect of their digital workspace. Where Linux falls short right now is in the middle ground: going from the basic install to a system that is functionally competitive with Vista Home Premium or OSX without being one of those powerusers is a daunting task that can--and will, given time--be made easier.

    Articles like this coming out of the mainstream media can seem like fluff with very little content to the avid Linux community, but they need to be taken seriously. They're a good indication of what the outside world wants to see in the next round of distros, which gives the developers at least a hint of a way to expand the userbase. Based on this article and others like it, I'd suggest two things:

    1) Make media easier to start using. I'm sure there are a dozen distro teams working on this right now, so I'm probably preaching to the choir...but it needs to be said, lest no one say it at all. I've had issues making media work in Linux recently, and am sticking with Vista at the moment because I can't find a few consecutive hours to devote to troubleshooting the matter.

    2) The current method of documentation is quite informative, but a bit dry and sometimes difficult to absorb due to the format. The Linux community would be greatly benefited by solid tutorials based on the documentation and FAQs that are spread all over the internet. I'm not talking about a text file tutorial...I'm talking about a video, or even (if it's possible) a custom live cd distro for the purpose of instructing users. However it can be executed, the end result should be advancing the skill level of the user beyond that which they might reach with the current documentation. (disclaimer: I have a personal interest in this, as I tend to stall out on Linux projects because I have trouble finding some crucial piece of information that might be better taught than read.)
    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  26. Re:Not really mainstream by thasmudyan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1. The machine came with Windows, they have no clue that there is an alternative. Much the same as to many people IE is "the internet", for a lot of people Windows is an integral part of the computer and they have no concept of changing it any more than you would change the tube in your TV. (No, that does not make them retards, it makes them uninformed)

    2. It is what they know and they are afraid of change. Even when Microsoft dictates change with an upgrade, the changes between two versions of the same bit of software are perceived to be smaller than the jump between different bits of software (whether or not this is true). True, but publicity helps. However, I'm a little afraid that average people (let's get away from the retard image) when they finally say "hey, I'm gonna try this Linux thing" are in for a disappointment. I'm talking for example about people who love to tinker with their computer in their spare time. There are lots of them and they tend to be huge influencers on their social surroundings. And I know we can't win a huge portion of them over, just because nobody cared enough to make this a priority.

    3. They are not interested enough to change - their computer does more or less what they want and they don't want to go to the effort of changing (even if the change would make things better for them in the long run). I think there are huge numbers of people who are frustrated with Windows, if only for the sheepish reason that they read about the security problems. But chances are your average users has quite a bit of experience with spyware and viruses and software that you have to sell major organs for to use it legally. That is potential right there. Plus, now that so much stuff is happening on the web, the OS becomes more interchangeable. But for this change to occur, people have to be able to configure their system more effortlessly and a lot of them want to bring their pet application with them when they move in.

    Your original post came across as a "Linux sucks compared to Windows because it does $lots_of_things_windows_also_does". I'm all for improving Linux, but citing these sorts of problems as a reason why Windows is "better" (even though Windows has exactly the same problems) seems the wrong attitude. If it came across this way I hereby apologize. And I'll try to hide behind the fact that I'm not a native English speaker.

    I think the main way Linux can get into the mainstream is for it to be shipped as standard on machines (similar to what Dell are doing) *where appropriate*. Obviously shipping it to people who need Windows specific software is just going to piss them off, but there are a large group of users for whom Linux does everything they need as standard. I'm not convinced that further improvements to the software itself are going to push Linux much further into the mainstream at this time. Agreed. But it really comes down to momentum. Massive change happens only with momentum. And momentum only happens when opinion makers get in line behind Linux. Instead of telling them to piss off, listening to their concerns may be a necessary evil.
  27. ...came a long way by EasyCo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I haven't installed or used Linux on any of my local machines in over a year and a half due to a lack of available drivers and especially due to poor wireless connectivity support.

    Well... I decided it was time to give it a go again and see what kind of progress has been made and my initial reaction is "Wow, I'm very impressed". I installed the latest Ubuntu distro on a new'ish Sony Vaio laptop and was it ever a breeze! Sound, mouse, keyboard, wireless ethernet and battery life were all automatically installed and working properly. All I had to do was pop in my network key and off I went.

    I opened up a few word documents containing nested tables and objects using OpenOffice without the slightest problem. I'd say that the computing experience as a whole is vastly improved with Ubuntu and so is the speed. I haven't had the time to try other distros but if they're inline with Ubuntu then Linux is definitely on the right track.

  28. Re:Linux must tackle this first by PFI_Optix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It sounds absurd when you say it, but there's actually a lot of truth to that. I've walked elderly people through their registry before and not had a problem. "Click HKLM. Now click software. Click Microsoft. Windows. Now click CurrentVersion. Now click Run. Now double-click on that, type this, and click OK."

    This was back in the early days of XP, when a lot of home users had Win9x. I also had to walk them editing some text files like config.sys on occasion. Getting them into the editor was easy, but then..."No sir, you don't need to read me the whole file. Yes sir, I know exactly what we're looking for here. Alright, do you see a line of text that starts with 'buffers'? No? Okay, move your cursor to the end of the last--click the mouse there--right. Okay, now press enter--yes, it should start you on a new blank line. And I want you to type 'buffers=10'. Yes, b-u-f-f-e-r-s. No, don't spell equals, use the sign. Two horizontal lines, to the left of your backspace key. Correct. And the number ten, as in one zero. Yes. Now you want to save that and exit notepad. Yes, overwrite it. No, that won't break anything so long as you did exactly what I told you to do.

    The point-and-click interface gives people a sense of security. It makes them feel like they're in control without being at risk of REALLY screwing things up. And there's some truth to that: changing a switch by editing a number in a GUI field is a lot different than editing a text file. You aren't risking breaking the configuration by deleting a slash or a hyphen...the only way to break it is with a configuration that doesn't work.

    I would like to see a more unified control panel for the Linux GUIs that allowed you to tweak text files without having to dive into them. It's one of those things that would provide a bridge between being able to use the OS and being able to get the most out of it for your particular requirements. As with all things Linux it has drastically improved in recent years, but it wouldn't hurt to do more.

    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  29. Re:My latest Linux experience by dvice_null · · Score: 2

    > The bad news is, the partition resize seemed to break Vista!

    I got a challenge for you. Install Linux on an empty hard drive (shouldn't be a problem), and then install Vista in a way that
    a) You resize the Linux partition to make room for it
    b) After installation you have dual boot for both Windows and Linux
    c) Both still work

    If you can manage to do this, I bet that James Randi will give you the 1 million dollar prize.

    And for the record, not once has the dualboot installation failed when I have installed Linux after Windows. And for the most people, it just works. Obviously if you resize a partition and the OTHER operating system can't handle that, there is nothing Linux could do for that. So just resize the partition on Windows and then install Linux on the empty partition and you should be fine. Assuming you know how to change partition size on Windows (and that you are even able to do that). The very best solution of course is to do the partitioning before installing anything.

  30. Re:Dell hardware only works with Ubuntu! by kidcharles · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, calm down. You're seriously going to get all pissed about Dell shipping a binary network driver? I think it's a legitimate concern. I'm a proud owner of a Dell Inspiron that came with Ubuntu pre-installed. I don't know if the network hardware is proprietary on it. Nevertheless, with binary drivers, sure it works now, but what about with a later version of Ubuntu? What if Dell stops supporting it? Open source/specifications is not just a fell-good concept, it directly effects usability and longevity of hardware.
    --
    Ceci n'est pas une sig.