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."
to install debian than to type in the windoze license key.
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....
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.
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.
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)
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 ?
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.
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
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.
"2008: The year of the Linux Desktop?"
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.
Of course, the article itself already stated:
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!
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.
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!
...oh. Never mind.
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
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.
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.
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
My blog
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.
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.
"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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
Ceci n'est pas une sig.