OSCON 2008 Roundup

An anonymous reader writes "Infoweek wraps last week's event with Inside The OSCON 2008 Conference, which pulls together interviews with Mark Shuttleworth, Linux Foundation's Jim Zemlin, MySQL's Zach Urlocker and Sam Ramji, who directs Microsoft's Open Source Lab. Best quotes: 'We will make a significant attempt to elevate the Linux desktop to the point where it is as good or better than Apple,' from Shuttleworth; and 'If I would start a business tomorrow I'd do it in the netbook marketplace. I'd build a dead-simple $200 device that targets sports fans, women over forty,' from Zemlin." We discussed Shuttleworth's better-than-Apple proposition while OSCON was going on. Update Jamie noted this OSCON Summary Video that might also be worth your time.

Comments

Fist Proust

[Anonymous Coward]

That gay frenchy

Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shuttleworth went on to state that Linux's market share will grow when it has better eye-candy than Apple's.

And yet another clueless person making a comment about something he doesn't understand.

People don't use Macs because the GUI is pretty. They use Macs because "they just work". The fact that the GUI doesn't look like crap from the 1980's is just a bonus.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[phantomfive]

I will tell you why apple has better eye-candy than everyone else, and it's because of Core Animation. If you haven't seen it, you seriously need to look into it. It is everything you could want in an eye-candy library, and makes doing cute little things simple.

For example, when you do a search in a textbox or browser or something, OSX not only highlights the text, it makes it jump out for a second (stretch then shrink). It is really cool. I'm sure it annoys some people. It could be done on linux, but it would take a couple hundred lines. With core animation, it takes 10 or 15, and then because of the modularity of the whole OpenStep GUI system, it is easy to pass that capability into other programs.

Until Linux has a similar programming system, it will be hard to give it the same eye candy. Think about it: suppose I am trying to set up some effect on a windows machine. I know it will take a day or so of coding, so I am going to be careful to set it up and plan well before hand. If it turns out nice, I'm going to feel pretty good.

Whereas with core animation, if I suddenly think of something cool, I can just try it out. If it looks good, then great, if it doesn't, I can tweak it or throw it out until another good idea comes up. And you don't have to be an expert, it is pretty simple once you get it. So even the B-rate programmers can come up with this stuff, and the non-graphics programmers (documentation is still pretty horrible, however). That is cool. In fact it is one of the coolest things I've seen in programming in years.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

Macs don't "just work".

People try them because they are told they "just work" and they pay highly for the privilege. When they discover that they have been lied to they are assured to "stick with it" and once they are heavily invested they are afraid to pull out because they don't want to lose that investment. Then they try to enlist other people so they don't feel so abnormal.

In other words, it's a cult. And if you find that too hard to believe, keep in mind that the leader of this cult is Steve Jobs. If you can't see that he is a cult leader then you're already lost.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Brain Damaged Bogan]

apple may be a cult... but linux is a debilitating addiction:
http://xkcd.com/456

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

This just is flat out wrong.

This is like claiming that Apple has such polished desktops and product design because they have really good artists and industrial designers.

It is the management culture at Apple that makes those things happen and the people doing it are just the tools they use. And the same goes for Core Animation and the rest of OS X's UI and imaging technologies.

Just take one look at the visual abortion that is KDE 4.1:

http://www.linux.com/var/uploads/Image/articles/142661.png

Core Image isn't going to do anything to make that UI nightmare any better. There are fundamental problems that go far beyond the rendering tech used. There is a complete lack of even the most basic UI design concepts that have been developed over the past 20 years. Font rendering and layout problems, colour usage for UI elements, shadowing and light source consistency just to name a few of the most glaring errors.

A year from now KDE and Gnome will be just a train wreck of UI elements with some more random bling thrown in a continuing futile attempt to 'prove KDE/Gnome is ahead' of Windows and OS X.

Core Animation would do nothing to help the mess that is KDE/Gnome. It would just add additional pointless bling.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[daemonburrito]

I totally agree with you. I just started hacking around with Cocoa, and I am pretty blown away by how elegant it is.

Objective C is pretty amazing, too. (I couldn't speculate about whether developing for Cocoa with Java is fun or not).

It's a total cliche, but it's true: You only get one shot at making a good API. If it has warts that you want to get rid of later, be assured that millions of developers will have written code that depends on those warts.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah it's basically due to the easy modularisation of the apple API due to Cocoa (objective-c). THat makes programming for mac so simple. Linux has an equivalent to this in Gnustep/Etoile with Objective C but it is lacking developer manpower. I am convinced that with a lot of developers backing gnustep/etoile it could easily replicate the mac experience on linux and surpass it.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[dimethylxanthine]

For an example of A-programming skills you should try NextStep.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[phantomfive]

From your answer I can see you have never used Cocoa. A house-framer with a 12-oz hammer isn't going to have to work twice as hard to get stuff done as one using a 21-oz hammer. The tools a person uses are extremely important. A person who is tired from fighting all the time with the GUI-toolkit is not going to have the energy to be creative about how it looks. The GGP had a better point: it is not enough to just create 'prettiness,' it more importantly has to be functional. And that is where you get the double win with openstep: not only is it easy to make pretty, it is easy to make usable. If you so desire.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then they try to enlist other people so they don't feel so abnormal.

You just described every OS fanatic.

Of which you are clearly one, by the way.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

The real problem is not Linux itself.

The real problem is X and the fact that it is an utter pile of gash.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[ByOhTek]

I'm not so sure. Apple 'just worked' and had a GUI from the 80s (pre-os X), and now just works and has a modern GUI. It happens that that OS X is also when the masses really started using Macs again. Now, there are *A LOT* of factors that changed in that timeframe - marketing, GUI, features, etc. However, is there any proof, one way or the other, that that the 'just works' is enough without a flashy GUI?

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[story645]

People don't use Macs because the GUI is pretty. They use Macs because "they just work"

People do buy macs 'cause the hardware is prettier, which I think is what most people think of when they think Mac eye candy. At this point, Windows just works about as often as Macs do,(meaning just fine as long as it's used as intended) so usually once cost/functionality are factored in, it probably does boil down to eye candy.

Another reason things just work is 'cause Apple GUI's tend to be fairly intuitive, so it's easy to get things working, once the user gets accustomed to it. Lots of FOSS UI's aren't up to par with the typical mac offering.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[daemonburrito]

I meant to ask about the existence of something like Etoile in my comment above. Thanks.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[ByOhTek]

Actually it's both. Without good managment, the project will go every which way like an ADD child with multiple personalities. Then you get things like feature bloat, inconsistent UI and general visual clutter. I could probably add to the list as well. But without good engineers, you have an inflexible UI API that developers don't want to deal with, and end up with less 'flashy' apps. And without good artists, your project will make the users' eyes bleed. No one group is significantly more important than the others. If any of them fail, the project will be majorly set back.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

"From your answer I can see you have never used Cocoa"

Been doing commercial Mac development since the Mac II days. Used every single API Apple has ever made. Have shipped product on every OS Apple has made since the Mac II days. Am writing this on an OS X machine with Xcode running in the background right now with a project that is most likely more lines of code than you have written in your life.

You're obviously just some teenage kid who thinks Core Image is 'kewl'.

I'll be polite and just say your post was quaint.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[horatiocain]

I know you're just trolling, but man am I tired of the 'Apple is teh cultz!' post. A lot of people like OSX UI. Unsurprisingly, when you consider they've actually got a set of usability standards to follow. Why not take a look at all the independent assessments of Apple's usability design. Or the awards Macs have received. Etc, etc. No cult member will tell you to look at independent evidence. But I'm asking you to before you try to sell some crazy scheme about why Macs aren't even viable products.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

We're not talking about the people who "just like it", we're talking about the people who claim it "just works". It doesn't just work! The fact is that for the vast majority of people who get on a Mac for the first, second, or even 20th time, they damn thing doesn't "just work" it doesn't even "just kinda work". What it does is anything but. So stop speaking shit. I challenge everyone who has never used a Mac to go to the Apple Store and try to perform the most basic of tasks.. hell, try to switch from one maximized application to another. Enjoy the learning curve. They don't.. just.. work..

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[commodoresloat]

What exactly doesn't "just work" in your estimation? How are we defining ""just works"? If you take a Mac from the Mac store and sit down and use it (i.e. don't install a bunch of garbage on it before you figure out how to use it), well, most people find it pretty intuitive. You say you have problems switching between "maximized" applications -- which applications are those? Most OSX programs do not start up "maximized", and usually switching applications is a matter of clicking a window behind the front one. Or clicking the red or yellow dot in the upper left hand corner of most windows and then clicking the window behind. Most people figure this out pretty quickly. If that's your best example of Macs not "just working," it seems to prove the opposite case -- Sit down in front of windows and figure out the same thing (a lot of Windows apps actually DO startup "maximized"), or a linux machine (which could look like anything depending on the window manager installed and the programs opened). Of course a Mac doesn't "just work" in the sense that no computer "just works"; the human being always needs to do something to the computer, but MacOS X does seem to make it easier to figure out what the human is supposed to do next.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[smidget2k4]

I would disagree, while there is a (shallow) learning curve, when I plug in a printer it "just works". When I select a random network printer at my school it "just works". Yes, this is because these drivers are all installed (and is an option). The only driver I've had to install myself was NTFS3g, which normal users don't need. What part of OSX doesn't just work for you? Yes, it has its kinks and oddities (why is there not a damn simple paint program that comes with it?), but most of the differences between OSX and Windows can be learned in an hour or two. Please, if you are going to say it doesn't "just work" use some examples. My experiences obviously differ from yours. But then, I'm one of the guys who bought it because I liked having a nice UI on top of a *nix terminal.

The dock is different from the taskbar, but it is pretty easy to pick up. My 83 year old grandfather picked it up in about 2 or 3 minutes. Couldn't most users?

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

I *challenge* you to take a person who has never used a Mac to the Apple store and ask them to use a Mac to do any standard task. Actually listen to what they say. If they don't mutter "how the hell do I..?" in the first 5 minutes you've found a genius. It is not intuitive. You're told it is intuitive and you believe it, but have you actually tested it?

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was able to go to a friends house and plug in his completely foreign scanner/printer combo into my Ubuntu laptop and it "just worked", without even installing any drivers. I'd never even used a scanner on Linux before, never had need to, and I could also claim, and be correct, that the basic user interface for gnome on Ubuntu could be learned in a few minutes. That does not mean that Linux "just works", it means that "it works for me".

There's a big difference.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

I would disagree, while there is a (shallow) learning curve, when I plug in a printer it "just works".

then you do agree with me.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anpheus]

That's a trick question because you can't maximize applications.

But in my experience there are those hot corner thingers that make every window fly out of whatever nook or cranny you hid it in and then you just click the one you want. Combining youur visual processing ability and Fitt's law mean you're much more likely to end up with the window you wanted sooner than say a linear search via alt-tab.

Now I don't own any Macs, but frankly, that's a killer feature.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[gtomorrow]

Gee, i did just that about 12 years ago. Actually i was kinda forced into it being how the only computer available to me was a Mac. Took me a couple of days to understand the whole thing. In my opinion it has always "just worked." If i remember correctly, i had designed an album cover in that week. I have never looked back since. Thank you and good night.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

Took me a couple of days to understand the whole thing.

What? So it didn't "just work"? Huh?

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[wumpus188]

WTF are you talking about? Your Command or Tab is broken, or maybe you're talking about Kiosk mode? Well, you can't switch from one app to another in Kiosk mode, that's what Kiosk mode is designed to prevent.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[clampolo]

They use Macs because "they just work".

I constantly hear this quote from Mac fanboys but it doesn't make any sense. The implication is that other computer systems don't work. I'm on a machine that dual boots Windows and Linux, and guess what? It works!

And you know what else. Nearly every server in the world is on Linux or Windows and they work too. And most businesses are running Windows or Linux and it works there too. And finally Linux and other non-Apple OS's are running nearly all of the embedded systems in the world. And what's most interesting about this is how microscopically small the amount of these people who think Apple "just works" is.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[node 3]

What? So it didn't "just work"? Huh?

Hey, jackass. "it just works" mean things just work (and this is generally true). It does *not* mean "I don't have to learn how to use it".

How you got the second notion from that phrase is beyond me.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

"it just works" mean things just work (and this is generally true). It does *not* mean "I don't have to learn how to use it".

Control the language and you control the debate, eh? I see you are still drinking the Koolaid.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

People don't use Macs because the GUI is pretty. They use Macs because "they just work".

Seems to me that the beauty of the Macintosh interface is mostly derived from the way it 'just works.'

Everything about the Mac's interface is designed to be used, it works in such a way that the user will fall in love and enter the Jobs' Reality Distortion Field(tm).

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[colinRTM]

Speaking as a person who has just in the last two weeks migrated to OS X from Windows (I had used Windows since 3.11) and hitherto had little prior experience of OS X, I can definitely attest to the statement "it just works." I shan't go back to WIndows, and I most definitely won't be using Linux on the desktop again (each time was a painful experience).

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[KGIII]

I am posting this from a fairly new Mac lappy and I would estimate that I've used the Mac OS on this thing less than two dozen times. Bootcamp + XP SP3. FTW

And yes, yes I bought it for the beauty of the hardware.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jimicus]

Macs don't "just work".

People try them because they are told they "just work" and they pay highly for the privilege.

TBH, I bought a Mac because I'd had enough of issues with hardware (both under Windows and Linux) which didn't do what it said on the box.

Which is not to say there isn't the occasional issue - if I'm buying a peripheral I need to ensure it's not some Windows-only POS but to be honest I'd have avoided such things in the Windows world as well because IME Windows-only peripherals are Windows only because the manufacturer decided to shave a bit off their costs and do the legwork in the driver rather than on the chip. And seldom do you find a product in which corners are cut but is still produced to half-decent quality.

But (and again, this is purely my experience, YMMV etc etc), describing all Apple users as a bunch of brainwashed cult members is generally only done by people who have either never used OS X or never used it for more than an hour or so.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[colinRTM]

I would just like to say, your post is utter bollocks. I bought a Mac last week for the first time in my life, after using Windows since 3.11 and abhorring everyone who turns Macs into some kind of magical entity. And did everything "just work"? Yes, I can assure you it did.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jimicus]

I'm not so sure.

Apple 'just worked' and had a GUI from the 80s (pre-os X), and now just works and has a modern GUI.

It happens that that OS X is also when the masses really started using Macs again.

Now, there are *A LOT* of factors that changed in that timeframe - marketing, GUI, features, etc. However, is there any proof, one way or the other, that that the 'just works' is enough without a flashy GUI?

There's plenty of proof of the exact opposite, as it happens. Clever marketing can sell a product which is otherwise running about 2-5 years behind everything else in the marketplace.

Witness MS-DOS and the rise of the IBM PC compatible at a time when Apple had a much larger market share than they have ever since.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't find Mac intuitive at all. I am a developer who finds his way around in linux and windows without any problems and every time I need to do something on a Mac I want to scream. For me Mac is a step down from windows. Linux > Windows > OSX
GUI's are not intuitive! They might be for the designer/developer who made it but not for the general user out there.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[speedtux]

The real problem is X and the fact that it is an utter pile of gash.

That's a pretty ironic statement, given that both Apple and Microsoft had to abandon their previous window systems a few years back and adopt an X11-like architecture.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[speedtux]

If you take a Mac from the Mac store and sit down and use it (i.e. don't install a bunch of garbage on it before you figure out how to use it), well, most people find it pretty intuitive.

And this is different from Linux how?

If you plop down an Ubuntu system on someone's desktop, in my experience, they find it "pretty intuitive" as well. Actually, many users prefer the Ubuntu desktop because it's easier to find and launch the apps that they need; nobody has has had any complaints about it.

or a linux machine (which could look like anything depending on the window manager installed and the programs opened).

That's a bullshit comparison. You need to compare desktop operating systems, not a kernel and a desktop OS.

Furthermore, OS X can also "look like anything" if people choose to theme it.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, I started using OS X regularly for Expose. As I learnt more features, I could get things done easier and quicker than with windows. One little, obvious feature was all it took to get me t eventually switch.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[dredwerker]

I have just come to the major conclusion that all three of the main operating systems are right for different people. OSX and Apple in general - Pretty and easy to use - but arent you going to pay for it. Dont dare to want anything to different like crysis. Windows - I need MS Word and MS project etc.. so its like work and it has a major market share Linux - I can't go back to windows only now as I am addicted to the free software p!ssing about with new distros and making OSX people go oooo - how do you do that (compiz) What I really want (or not maybe) is the b4stard child of windows with a linux kernel and then the world to adopt it or just the world to adopt the distro of my choice ...mwwoohhahahaha

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[beav007]

What if I want to work with multiple maximised applications?

"Most applications don't start maximised" isn't a solution. I want them maximised, so if they don't start that way, I will do it manually. And from there, I can't just "[click] a window behind the front one".

And once I have 5-6 maximised applications (which is more often than not), "clicking the red or yellow dot in the upper left hand corner of most windows and then clicking the window behind" becomes an utter PITA.

OSX may be pretty, but it's a usability trainwreck. There's nothing intuitive about it.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[speedtux]

Compared to Windows the Mac indeed "just works". But it still has many problems.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems a bit expensive if you ask me.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[nawcom]

That's a bullshit comparison. You need to compare desktop operating systems, not a kernel and a desktop OS.

So you need to only compare the desktop? You do understand that this "Desktop OS" entirely depends on X11, hence it's ported to many different "Operating Systems" by itself. I can run GNOME or KDE on FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Darwin, Solaris, Cygwin, Linux - at least thats a start. The parent was correct, it's the window manager and application set you use on X11 that determines your "experience." Let me know when the X Window Server is officially an "Operating System" - it will be big news for sure. You need to learn what the correct usage of the term "Operating System" and how there is a difference between Windows running on top of DOS or OS X running on top of Darwin, and GNOME or KDE or whatever running off of a cross-compatible X Window server. There's a big-ass difference.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jimicus]

I *challenge* you to take a person who has never used a Mac to the Apple store and ask them to use a Mac to do any standard task. Actually listen to what they say. If they don't mutter "how the hell do I..?" in the first 5 minutes you've found a genius. It is not intuitive. You're told it is intuitive and you believe it, but have you actually tested it?

Mr. (or Miss or Mrs, for that matter) MG, you appear to have a great deal of anger about OS X and how intuitive or otherwise it is.

Why? Why does it matter to you what OS anyone elects to use? More to the point, how is it any of your damn business? Everyone is entitled to their opinion, surely?

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's possibly the best rebuttal to Apple's "it just works" I've ever read. Someone give this guy some positive mod points.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[saturn_vk]

You should check out enlightenment's edje library. That same animation could be done in 10-15 lines of simple, non-C code (so that designers can do the animations, not programmers)

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[wootest]

The nipple's intuitive. Everything else is more or less hard to learn.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[QuantumG]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ

For the same reason we should care about what Christians believe - cause they are delusional and accepting irrational belief as "ok" is bad for all of us in the long run.

Steve Jobs is a charismatic guy.. I get it. But everything he and his spin doctors say is not true. When he lies, we should call him on it. When people repeat his lies, we should call *them* on it.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[wootest]

Command+~ switches windows. Command+Tab switches applications. You're right that the Zoom button does fit-to-content in some apps and maximize in some apps and I'd rather see it do just one of them, preferably maximize.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[MrMr]

Just as intuitive as the nipple; now that all modern tits come with a Command key (the one labeled with the microsoft logo, or the one with 'alt').

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Burpmaster]

In other words, it's a cult.

Then how come you're acting so much more brainwashed than the people with positive things to say about Macs?

"It just works" is obviously referring to the machine being usable on day one, without requiring a lot of work first. In other words, the software to do what you want to do is already there and there's no preinstalled deadweight bloatware or nagware that you need to waste time removing. It also suggests that the software is of higher quality and crashes less often.

I'm sorry, but it's completely fair for Apple to boast that their OS "just works" when most people use Windows. Microsoft's OS is a broken (non-working) mess on day one, compared to MacOS or Ubuntu. Whether it's a clean install of Windows and you're missing apps, or it's direct from Dell/HP/etc and bogged down with junk, either way you're a good chunk of work away from a decent experience. Then there's the issue of applying the updates, since some of those updates have to be installed by themselves and you have to reboot before more updates can be applied. And I've seen plenty of systems with "automatic updates" enabled that wouldn't get any new updates until I manually went to Windows Update.

As long as they're being compared to Windows, Macs definitely do "just work."

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[ndogg]

E17 (i.e. Enlightenment) has been promising a lot of this kind of thing for a while now. Of course, the Hurd, and DNF also promise a lot as well...

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[lm317t]

For the same reason we should care about what Christians believe - cause they are delusional and accepting irrational belief as "ok" is bad for all of us in the long run.

Their belief in charity and community are just a ticking time bomb. I heard the other day they were giving out free food and clothing to the poor! This must be stopped.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[fido_dogstoyevsky]

I don't find Mac intuitive at all. I am a developer who finds his way around in linux and windows without any problems and every time I need to do something on a Mac I want to scream. For me Mac is a step down from windows. Linux > Windows > OSX GUI's are not intuitive! They might be for the designer/developer who made it but not for the general user out there.

Absotively posilutely right. Couple of years back at work I had a choice of either a PC and win xp or a mac and osx (we used PCs with win nt before that). I chose the mac to escape the ms straightjacket - after less than six months the only thing I was using it for was email (built a clandestine PC from bits and pieces for real work).

The year I spent with osx was one long frustrating battle with the UI that soured me on macs. The os was stable enough but I wish they'd spent a bit less time on eye candy and a bit more on making the UI more customisable.

Tried Linux at home (OpenSUSE 10) and was amazed at how everything _just works_ (my way). I've still avoided xp, love KDE (gave up on the gnome desktop early on).

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jo42]

http://www.linux.com/var/uploads/Image/articles/142661.png

Looks like a [bad] fanboi theme on XP...

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn straight! When I had to replace my system (formerly xp), I considered XP, Vista, FreeBSD, and went with OS X. The underlying technology (Cocoa, darwin, etc) is primarily why. Sure, I can pretty up KDE or GNOME to have custom widgets, but it's lipstick on a pig, relatively speaking.

We will make a significant attempt to elevate the Linux desktop to the point where it is as good or better than Apple,'

Step 1: replace Gnome with GNUStep.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[pshuke]

I am the bone of my Mac
Silicon is my body, and electrons are my blood
I have written over a thousand lines
Unknown to -1
Nor known to 0
Have withstood pain to use many API
Yet those hands will never hold anything
So as I pray, unlimited xcode works

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Builder]

What's X11-like about the Apple windowing system ?

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[DMUTPeregrine]

Bullshit. Babies have to be taught to nurse. Granted it's simple, and most don't need much instruction, but there is a learning curve. Ask any OB/GYN nurse.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jimicus]

Speaking personally, I don't really care what any group believes as long as they don't try and impose their beliefs on me or use them as an excuse to cause harm to me or anything I feel strongly about. I certainly have better things to do than try and convert them to atheism.

I don't really see how your "you are deluded and I will keep on telling you this until you agree with me" attitude is fundamentally different from Jehovah's Witnesses knocking on doors and asking if the occupants have found God.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[DMUTPeregrine]

It depends on how you interpret "just works". If you take it to mean you can use it with no training/manual without ever having seen the system before, of course it doesn't "just work". If you take it to mean that the built-in functionality is stable and fast, with enough functionality to accomplish most basic tasks, and an easy way to add third-party functions, then OS X does "just work". Windows and KDE4 don't "just work", KDE3.5 and Gnome (on linux with a package manager with repositories, say, ubuntu/kubuntu) and OSX do.
All operating systems have a learning curve. Everything does. The stability and built-in functionality of those systems, along with the ease of extending that functionality and the depth of the learning curve are the factors that determine if something "just works".

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

For example, when you do a search in a textbox or browser or something, OSX not only highlights the text, it makes it jump out for a second (stretch then shrink). It is really cool.

jumping text in emacs would be really cool.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop arguing sementics and stfu please, you bring nothing to the debate.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Colonel Korn]

My grandma officially can use the Eee PC Xandros OS after trying for months and failing to feel like she could do anything in OSX. Now my parents have a spare rather new Macbook of some sort...hmm...

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[asylumx]

I can't believe nobody has mentioned this, but Apple is a hardware company and their software OS "Just Works" largely because they have complete control over the hardware it runs on. Windows & Linux machines have hardware from any number of different companies across the planet which require different drivers or other software to work on their OS. Macs don't.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Eli Gottlieb]

Funny, I found a Mac incredibly intuitive and easy to use -- especially after 5 years of Linux.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[DannyO152]

First of all, my enthusiasm for looking for the interesting points amidst dismissive names, such as fanboys and freetards, is waning. Please, if we must babble our useless cliches, let us return to welcoming our frist posting "In Soviet Union" joke overlords.

The phrase "just works" dates back to the mid-80s and was no more than a relative statement at best. Since then, everyone has made great strides in simplifying usability. Comments about server and embedded space are irrelevant because, as you imply, when people talk about using or not using Apple, they are talking about consumer use. Commercial use (and there are niches where Apple systems have been and are preferred) make higher demands on systems and somebody spends time with the users and back in the server room to keep things going. Word has it that Windows systems require more administration, but I certainly cannot prove those assertions. I have experiences and observations which suggest it's true, but I would imagine this holds no more credence than your claim of dual-booting adequacy, or any other commonly heard testimony which, much like the phrase "This call is important to us," fades in believability with its repetition.

Let me conclude by adding that I want form and function, engineering and aesthetics. Again, though others are rapidly catching up, Apple has been leading the way at delivering a high level of both in a personal computer. People use Macs because people like using Macs. Was that so hard? And Shuttleworth is right in thinking that striving for a higher aesthetic in the gui and making the concomitant library changes will necessitate engineering challenges that, if met, will improve the *buntus' usability and lower the barrier to consumer application on Linux development. People who think it's about an Apple-esque skin are missing the point.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Jorophose]

Seperate from the core OS, and you can install other DEs.

Granted it's far from X but this is just a quick observation. I'm sure there's other resemblences, but everyone has moved to creating a window system that can be removed from the OS. That was pretty much X's only really good idea.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[ByOhTek]

That's not proof the opposite happened, that's circumstantial evidence suggesting that you can't be sure it happened. I already said you can't be sure one way or the other, so you really didn't counter my point.

There are a *lot* of factors that could be involved.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[commodoresloat]

Again, *what* exactly doesn't just work? What task do your users mutter about not finding a solution to? And how long does it take them to find it on their own, in comparison to other OS's out there? I've helped "break in" a number of users on Macs for the first time and I haven't really seen the experience you're describing. Not at all. Yet I have seen it from longtime Windows users who are just transitioning from an older version of Windows.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[pdusen]

Says the guy bringing out "stfu"....

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[commodoresloat]

How is this different from Windows? If you want them maximized you maximize them and then you command-tab to switch, just like you would alt-tab in windows. Neither is more intuitive than the other but at least MacOS begins by default without the apps minimized so that there is an obvious way to switch before you learn the magic keystrokes.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[poolmeister]

But that's the point. The major Linux distros are now reaching the point where they DO 'just work' on the majority of PCs, there's no farting around with driver discs like in Windows.
There are a few thorny hardware vendors that are making it difficult for those distros who value software freedom and open licenses to support 'out of the box' (Broadcom possibly being the most notorious).

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[speedtux]

That was pretty much X's only really good idea.

Many other technologies you take for granted today were pioneered with X11: mixed desktop and 3D graphics, client/server 3D graphics, separation of window management from applications, theming, 3D look-and-feel, remote GUIs, pixel accurate graphics, backing store policies, server-side extensibility, window server media handling, mixed direct screen buffer and desktop interfaces, and tons more.

And technologically, X11 and the desktops built on it are lightyears ahead of both Windows and OS X, even if you don't realize it.

X11 is still where the innovation happens; Windows and Macintosh are merely commercial imitations.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jimicus]

That's not proof the opposite happened, that's circumstantial evidence suggesting that you can't be sure it happened. I already said you can't be sure one way or the other, so you really didn't counter my point.

There are a *lot* of factors that could be involved.

I'm not sure what sort of evidence wouldn't be considered circumstantial.

MSDOS was miles behind more-or-less everything else that existed in the personal market - particularly in terms of UI and ease of setting up. This remained the case for its entire life.

Now, I can't produce evidence of this without spending an inconvenient number of hours going into the history of personal computing, but if you're prepared to seek a little for yourself, I suggest you look up the Amiga, the Atari, the BBC Micro, the Acorn Archimedes - all sold into the personal market in the 1980s.

Industries where a killer application was really important tended to stick to a particular type of computer with little regard for what was popular outside of their industry. Sibelius, a music notation and composition program, started life on the Acorn Archimedes and was a killer app at the time - plenty of musical types bought Acorn computers purely for Sibelius. (Sibelius was later ported to the PC, but not until most of the IT industry had given up the Acorn RISC-range of computers for dead)

Similarly, DTP applications were for years streets ahead on Mac OS and, IIRC, the Atari. The Atari and the Amiga also had some damn good musical sequencing applications - indeed the MOD file format originated on the Amiga.

Yet today, none of these systems survive. I would consider it fair to infer from this that being the best tool for the job is not enough for a given piece of technology to survive.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[ByOhTek]

I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm just saying that I've yet to see proof that /Apple/ is moving ahead in the computer market with a drastically inferior product, or a product, as much as I hate it, that is technically less than on-par with the competition. At least in computer/OS terms. Well, my experience suggests it's inferior in terms of accessibility for people with certain disabilities, but that hardly is a major affect for most users.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[jimicus]

There's no such thing as an inferior OS these days - it's all in the applications and, to a lesser extent, peripheral support.

I've heard it said - and there is a glimmer of truth to it - that Unix makes difficult things possible; Windows makes easy things difficult and Apple make difficult things $19.99.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[CrkHead]

I think that it gets too far into one's experience and how they work. When the Mac Mini came out, I dropped the five bills to check it out. I found that if I could not get a binary installer I could not install an application and any time I wanted to modify any settings it was a chore to dig around for them. It turned into a movie/mp3 machine and didn't do much else for the next year. Then it died suddenly and for no appearant reason (with a CD stuck in there, that was a pain).

There was some selector thing that really annoyed the hell out of me.

With a DOS/Windows backgroud, I downladed Slackware in 98 or 99 and threw it on an old machine. It "Just Worked" and I found that a lot more usable than the Mac could ever be.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Yfrwlf]

Don't forget good tools, libraries, and APIs. If you have a massive software stack that's completely unmodular because it uses no APIs or plugins or anything, making it incredibly difficult to add or remove features and actually work on the damn thing, that will help kill the project. You won't have such horrible problems with feature bloat if you make the system modular so that modules can compete.

Quite simply, don't forget the planning.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Without good managment

Maybe this is nitpicking, but you are probably referring to "good leaders[hip]". Management is more about dealing with external (and sometimes internal...) disruptive crap; whereas quality must come from within team itself. Such leadership can occasionally be provided by managers, of course, although more often it's team leads (or just more experienced team members) that get team to focus on high quality.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Yfrwlf]

Linux has several systems which are very unmodular and need to be scrapped and replaced with much more modular, flexible, and extensible systems. Use and help improve the existing APIs that are great out there, or come up with your own, but planning and planning for new plans to come about later (extensibility) is certainly one of the more important steps of a project. Of course it requires good coders and artists, too, and general community interest and support.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[Yfrwlf]

You shouldn't have to develop programs that are DE-centric. If Cocoa is so much better than GTK and QT, Freedesktop.org needs to help push some new APIs that GUI front-ends can use to create programs more rapidly that are not specific to one DE. wxWidgets seems to be really far behind and it's an API to allow modularity that's needed, not a specific library. Linux should push hard to get some professional, clean, and polished APIs together to make programming for Linux a snap, so it doesn't matter what DE the user prefers using.

If QT has a feature GTK doesn't, and you write your program to use that feature, make QT be a required dependency or whatnot until GTK can fill in that hole with something. The future of Linux is modular programming, so the sooner it's embraced the better off everyone will be and the easier access to software and less duplication of work will exist, among other benefits. Don't let Linux fragment, it needs all the help it can get. Open APIs that are well planned out and built will save everyone, users and developers alike, from being locked into massive software stacks. Modularity = win win for everyone.

Re:Better-than-Apple?

[node 3]

"it just works" mean things just work (and this is generally true). It does *not* mean "I don't have to learn how to use it".

Control the language and you control the debate, eh? I see you are still drinking the Koolaid.

What kool aid? I said "it just works" means that things "just work". You seem to think it means you don't have to know how to operate them. Which, of those two, seems like word games?

2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe that I just built a new PC for incredibly cheap and paid 100 bucks for Vista Premium - happily.

I use to be the most hardcore of hardcore Microsoft/Windows haters. Desktop Linux was just around the corner and life would be good. Unix, non-proprietary, source code available. That was years ago.

After reading The Linux Haters Blog, and who isn't?, it became clear that the dream of Linux on the desktop was dead. I finally realized just how bad things are and why progress never happens with desktop Linux distros just spinning their wheels getting nowhere.

Maybe someone will come along and ditch the entire X11,KDE/Gnome, package management, driver model, and everything is that makes desktop Linux complete crap compared to commercial desktops like Windows and OS X.

Vista is fantastic. Perhaps it was not very good before the first service pack but Vista SP1 is a polished desktop that I am getting work done and playing games. No more waiting around for the KDE and Gnome devs to finally get their shit together and put in the hard work that commercial developers do every day. Life is too short and there is too much to do instead of sitting around hoping that maybe next year desktop Linux will finally get its shit together.

http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

My main problem with Linux right now are the damn fonts... They look like complete crap without heavy aliasing. This should *NOT* be the case even with the extra font packs installed.

I think the fancy processing to handle detail hints when fonts are zoomed simply don't exist on this platform.

My second problem is reliability. For a server, ip routing, etc linux really is great. When you use X or power management features or bluetooth..etc its not long before something starts going haywire.. at least thats been my experience.

Give it a few more years and I'm sure Linux will continue to make great strides on the desktop... IMHO they really do just need to kill the damned X11 system alltogether.

Compared to RDP there is no contest in terms of network resources consumed by remote sessions. X11 is a pig.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[daemonburrito]

and who isn't?

Me.

I don't even have a linux desktop right now. I just think it (linuxhaters) isn't any good.

It reads like it was written by a 18-year-old sub-literate kid who missed the "satire" part of "fratire". Even if the writer (writers?) understood linux, I couldn't read it due to the latent homosexuality making me so uncomfortable on the the author's behalf (why is everything about balls, cock, and ass to you?).

Back in the day, we had UGH. Now that was some good hate.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't hold your breath:

http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/06/catastrafont.html

A few more years Linux fonts will suck in an equally but completely different way.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Brain Damaged Bogan]

at the risk of feeding the trolls... you happily paid for vista? that's like happily paying for sodomy by an elephant penis covered by a barbed wire condom

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting post. Vista is really worth getting now? I alternate between XP and Debian. XP is really great, but Debian is always breaking. I've spent many weekends trhying to figure out how to fix my linux's numeerous breakages and punching holes in the walls and cursing because my "apt-get update" fscked up something.
I'll look up the blog and maybe get Vista as well. It's free for me because I'm a student.Nothing to lose.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[setagllib]

WTF? "update" only retrieves the package lists, which cannot ruin anything even theoretically. "dist-upgrade" is a bit of a risk but if you're using official repositories and the stable branch, you'd have to try really hard to break something. Either way, it's hardly Debian's fault.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I meant apt-get upgrade. But first an "apt-get -s updrade" to make sure nothing is wrong. Not even dist-upgrade, but simple "apt-get upgrade" has caused me so many problems. Linux is so much more frustrating than XP has ever been. I'm kind of over the "free and fun stuff" infatuation with Linux. I still can't even get my nvidea grpahics card working correctly on linux. And forget about playing games newer than DOOM. The only worse OS I have used was OSX. A couple of years ago, when I upgraded from 10.3.9 or whatever it's called to 10.4, it broke some apps beyond repair. I don't use Apples any more.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting post.

No it isn't. It's spam.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[speedtux]

My main problem with Linux right now are the damn fonts... They look like complete crap without heavy aliasing. This should *NOT* be the case even with the extra font packs installed.

You probably didn't set up the right anti-aliasing in preferences; that can happen on Windows and OS X as well. The OS doesn't know what you need or want.

When you use X or power management features or bluetooth..etc its not long before something starts going haywire.. at least thats been my experience.

Did you buy supported hardware? If not, that's like complaining that when you install OS X on your PC, things don't work.

It's not a Linux problem when Linux doesn't work on unsupported hardware, and that simply will never get fixed.

Compared to RDP there is no contest in terms of network resources consumed by remote sessions. X11 is a pig.

That is by design: X11 and RDP are designed for totally different bandwidth/performance/functionality tradeoffs.

Furthermore, modern X11 applications are not written or tested for remote usage anymore. The equivalent of RDP in the Linux world is VNC, which works very well.

Give it a few more years and I'm sure Linux will continue to make great strides on the desktop... IMHO they really do just need to kill the damned X11 system alltogether.

You don't know what you're talking about. Microsoft and Apple had to abandon their idiotic attempts at window systems and Windows UI Server and Quartz now have the same architecture (asynchronous client-server systems) as X11. X11 is still the better system.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

linuxhaters is awesome, right? It's like maddox only somehow dumber and less entertaining (which is itself impressive, I guess).

Err... Maybe I should put it in terms you'll understand:

linuxhaters sucks big hot hard freetard cock!

- freetard

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[sammyF70]

Sounds less like spam and more like FUD to me. Any /. Dev wanna check from which IP address GP and this comment came from? Somehow I wouldn't be surprised if they came from the Redmond area.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[lm317t]

Don't reply to the AC's, they are automated AI drones spouting canned comments from a database to waste your time and forum space. They are 2nd generation spam.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[RiotingPacifist]

must be your hardware. on an intel laptop with a broadcom card + bluetooth, compiz, etc and had no problems from X11, but on a new laptop with an ati card things are a bit less stable

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[slack_prad]

Are you telling me that registered users don't spam?

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Eli Gottlieb]

If "asynchronous client-server" architecture makes something "the same as ... X11", then practically all asynchronous networked software is the same as X11. That's not a meaningful distinction.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[speedtux]

Oh, please, get a clue. We're talking about window systems here. X11 was one of the first asynchronous client-server window system. And it's the asynchronous client-server aspect that Mac and Windows users keep whining about. Yet, after more than a decade each, both companies came around and adopted an asynchronous client-server architecture for their window systems as well.

If you have some other complaint about X11, please share it with us.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[lsolano]

Excellent blog.
I love linux, I use it, I think is a great OS for a server, nertworking, etc.

But, even today, linux fonts sucks. I can not understand how fonts in linux still sucks, let's say, 15 years later.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[HermMunster]

At my shop I'm tasked to remove Vista and replace it with XP on more machines than I see with Vista come in for other issues. Those vista issues I do see are nasty and show how haphazardly the OS was implemented.

I have also been tasked more in the past few months to put linux on machines even for elderly people. People in their late 60s to early 80s want me to put Linux on their computers. And, when done I rarely hear back from them. Those that do visit me say that Linux is working well for them and that aside from the normal learning curve and some glitches Linux appears to do all that they want.

As far as the glitches go Linux is no more glitch prone than XP or Vista. At least with Linux you are guaranteed your privacy and you are significantly more secure. No one in the open source community will get away with trying to install 47 programs onto your computer that monitor what you do and report it back to Microsoft. No one will put a tool in there that forces you to activate your product and regularly report back to them (as Microsoft does) about your continued use.

Under linux you don't pay for software, software that is by all intents and purposes as competent as their commercial counter parts.

I'm happy to be the one that demonstrates a solid and attractive desktop linux to the customers that come into my store and that look at it and want it.

Two people yesterday alone looked at my desktop and thought it was beautiful and when I showed them some of the features they felt it was fancy.

What does this mean? It means that the linux is getting to the average person who can see that it is running your computer and doing things your way (without the worry of viruses, malware, and Microsoft) that's important .

Everyday Linux makes programs in most arenas. My hat goes off to those that work hard to make it possible.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Eli Gottlieb]

No, Mac users kvetch about X11 because it requires sending every little damned pixel across the connection rather than sending sensible drawing instructions like one does in Quartz. Oh, and X11's godawful color modes.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[HermMunster]

Don't even have to use profanity. Essentially you could say that "proprietard" is the equivalent of the expression of profanity you make.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[speedtux]

No, Mac users kvetch about X11 because it requires sending every little damned pixel across the connection rather than sending sensible drawing instructions like one does in Quartz

Are you just not listening? X11 and Quartz do the same thing: they both have connections and they both send vectorized instructions across them. The only difference is that X11 has been doing this for 20 years and does it a lot more efficiently, while Apple only came around half a dozen years ago.

Oh, and X11's godawful color modes.

Those are the same "godawful color modes" Apple used to support as well. If you don't like them ignore them. X11 is going to keep them because it is much more widely used than just the desktop, in scientific devices, factory automation, and lots of other settings.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Brain Damaged Bogan]

if debian is breaking you are doing it wrong, it's arguably the most stable linux distro around. if you are worried about stability take the universe and multiverse repos out your apt sources.lst

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Burz]

linuxhaters is awesome, right? It's like maddox only somehow dumber and less entertaining (which is itself impressive, I guess).

Err... Maybe I should put it in terms you'll understand:

linuxhaters sucks big hot hard freetard cock!

- freetard

Actually, even Jeremy Alison of SAMBA fame agrees with the general thrust and acknowledges the technical acumen of the LinuxHaters blog. He is a big proponent of free software, GPLv3 etc., yet considers it valuable criticism of the way the community is running things. So I guess that makes you a doctrinaire, humorless, freetard. :p

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah... So I went back over there, and tried to find the "technical acumen" and "valuable criticism" you speak of, but I just couldn't find it. Tell me with a straight face that this article demonstrates the author's "technical acumen".

And why should I care at all with Jeremy Alison says?

This isn't about foss advocacy for me. It's about an ignorant punk spamming my beloved slashdot for some adsense pennies. Fuck them.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

That was my admittedly weak attempt at imitating the style of the blog.

I fail, but you get the idea.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Burz]

It is written in the style of the Unix Hater's Handbook. So yes, its insulting and potty-mouth but it effectively draws the humorless and doctrinaire in, and those are the types with the least tenable ideas and attitudes about "Linux". LinuxHater makes mincemeat of them, showing what a sorry gruel of platitudes and excuses they keep dishing out. IMO he is doing us a big favor.

Check out the article on fonts... the author has his Linux chops and knows well of which he (angrily) speaks.

And really, who would bother to get so angry so often unless he loved something about Linux? Its clear to me and others that he hates it and loves it too.

Re: Adsense, I didn't see any ads on the blog, except the ones for LinuxHater t-shirt/mug things.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[daemonburrito]

[tired of posting AC, here I am, the linuxhaterhater...]

It is not written in the style of Unix Hater's Handbook. Unix Hater's never degenerated into homophobic right-wing rants. And it was clever. And well written. And technically accurate.

I re-read the handbook for the first time in a decade when the Allison op-ed hit slashdot (and you saw the little hissy the author threw about the summary link being to zdnet, right? That wasn't a joke.) Unix Hater's is every bit as good as I remember (see my earlier comment).

Allison's point of view seems absurd to me. He thinks that the "community" has to embrace this cretin so that they don't seem humorless. That's just PR. It reminds me of Bill O'Reilly going on the Colbert Report to show he wasn't "humorless". It's not genuine, it's not necessary.

About the fonts article, I am totally unimpressed that you managed to find an article that wasn't totally uninformed, when there are a dozen articles on the front page without any merit at all.

Allison's good-humor act isn't fooling anybody on the other side of the fence. And this blog is a terrible bug report system. Linuxhaters only value to foss, as far as I can tell, is showing the problems that linux beginners encounter. And even that involves cutting away 80% of the boring pseudo-fratire lameness.

Linuxhaters is no Unix Hater's. Not even close.

Re:2008 - The Desktop Linux Dream Is Dead

[Burz]

Yet Unix isn't even close to Linux in terms of the pretense and hubris of trying to sell a desktop solution without defining a platform.

LinuxHater goes overboard now and then, but who doesn't on their blog. In any case, he is neither a news broadcaster nor a newspaper columnist.

BTW I didn't notice homophobia in the blog entry you lined to. But if its any consolation to you, he takes a FOSS blogger to task for some pretty sexist behavior on a developer site. No doubt he is being opportunistic about it, but the upshot is that the more he brings up stuff like this, the more likely he is to get egg on his face if he does any more 'PI' stuff himself.

He did start pushing this theme is labeling the FSF a terrorist organization. I think that's at least a little bit funny, don't you? Tee-hee??

Sun Party

[Anonymous Coward]

If you need any evidence that Sun is going down the tubes, just look at the arrogance of the Sun party.

The company that is trying to BUY it's way into open source and then ignores the communities trying to act like they are "cool and hip" at OSCON.

KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[Anonymous Coward]

Core Animation isn't going to turn this UI disaster:

KDE 4.1 preview
http://www.linux.com/var/uploads/Image/articles/142661.png

OS X
http://www.file-extensions.org/imgs/app-picture/1254/mac-os-x.jpg

magically into a desktop of OS X's quality. And the same goes for Gnome.

KDE & Gnome:

The APIs are junk

The UI elements are primitive and mostly halfassed Win2k era clones

There are no UI tools of the calibre of Interface Builder

The Linux font system(s) are a mismash of crap

X11 is archaic crap

Making a desktop of OS X's level of quality is enormous hard work. The KDE and Gnome devs simply do not have the skill, commitment, and maturity to put in the massive amount of work to make their desktops of the level of quality.

It's been a decade they've been working on KDE. It's time the KDE devs moved on to something else. The total mess that is KDE 4.0/4.1 shows it is time for them to move on to something less challenging than trying to match Apple's OS X.

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[phantomfive]

Yeah, I agree, it needs a lot of work. It will happen, let me tell you why. Microsoft is going to be out of the picture (even their stock-holders have no faith in them: check their stock price). So what is left? OSX. Imagine you are Dell, HP, and Lenovo. What are you going to do if you can't push OSX, and Microsoft is dying? You start pushing Linux. Maybe this won't happen, but it isn't an unreasonable scenerio.

And it can be done. Each one of the problems you have listed can be overcome, and furthermore OSX has showed how to solve a lot of those problems. It's going to be a lot of hard work, but it can be done. And incidentally, I don't even think Interface Builder is that great. It gets the job done, but the latest version annoys me.

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[larry bagina]

Apple: down 23% fom their 52 week high
Microsoft: down 30% from their 52 week high
VA Linux: down 66% from their 52 week high

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[stony3k]

Apple: down 23% fom their 52 week high Microsoft: down 30% from their 52 week high VA Linux: down 66% from their 52 week high

Why look at VA Linux, when they don't even sell Linux anymore? Take a look at Red Hat, which is down only 14% from their 52 week high.

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[jmcbain]

What are you going to do if you can't push OSX, and Microsoft is dying? You start pushing Linux. Maybe this won't happen, but it isn't an unreasonable scenerio.

It is a completely unreasonable scenario. And where do get off saying that Microsoft is a dying company? Here's their FY 2008 earnings release. Tell me again how $60B a year is a dying company. Perhaps you were talking out your ass?

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[Jorophose]

No, OSX is NOT going to "defeat" windows.

Apple is a hardware company, first and foremost. The software they sell is to increase their revenue. They tried being a software company. If it wasn't for Jobs there would be no Apple right now.

It's only Linux at this point. That's the reason why you've got to go and yell at the idiot developpers behind KDE4 who think they know UI design, and tell them to get their asses back on track. What they're doing is bassackwards, they're designing things all wrong (I don't know shit about "good UI" and I think it's bullcrap but I can see all the "wrong things" in KDE.) and it's time users gave them a piece of their mind more directly, or helped with better themes, instead of simply nagging on slashdot.

OSX is an ugly look. KDE4 needs to be KDE4.

I don't think anybody is looking hard enough for interface developpment tools, Qt has a million, and so does GTK...

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[phantomfive]

In addition to what the other guy said, I would suggest looking at the P/E ratio instead of the percentage change from the 52 week high. It is (in general and of course fraught with errors) a better measurement of what investors think of the company. Apple had a P/E ratio above 40 at it's peak, and currently has a P/E ratio of 31. A rough measurement is that the P/E ratio of a decent company should be around 20.

Microsoft has a P/E ratio of 14, which I believe indicates people see very little growth possibility for Microsoft, although I don't think most investors have factored in Microsoft or Linux taking their Market share.

And of course, what stock investors think often has no relation to reality, it is just surprising to me, because the general computer industry is growing at roughly 15% per annum, and yet there is such pessimism on Microsoft's stock.

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[phantomfive]

It is a completely unreasonable scenario.

It is not a completely unreasonable scenario. Are you suggesting there is no way for Microsoft to lose the market? Are you aware that at one time, people said similar things about IBM? IBM is still around, but it isn't in any way the company it once was.

Microsoft's lifeline is Windows (and office). If people don't want it anymore, then the cash flow dries up. Mac sales grew by 40% over last year. The previous year they grew by 30%. Apple is expected to introduce a new line of low cost computers by the end of the quarter, which will (hopefully for them) increase the speed of Mac adoption.

Is my scenario going to happen? Maybe, maybe not. You can never be sure about the future: but it is not unreasonable.

Re:KDE and Gnome Have Failed To Match OS X

[phantomfive]

and it's time users gave them a piece of their mind more directly, or helped with better themes, instead of simply nagging on slashdot.

Uh huh....you do realize it seems like you are simply nagging on slashdot, right? The sad thing is, interface development tools are not enough, if the underlying framework is hard to use.

Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[Anonymous Coward]

About 3 cups vegetable oil
2 (1 1/4-inch-thick) boneless top loin (New York strip) steaks (about 1 lb each)
3 1/8 teaspoons spice rub for beef
1 (1-lb) package frozen french fries
2 large garlic cloves, thinly sliced lengthwise

Put oven rack in middle position and preheat oven to 450F.

Heat 1 inch oil in a 4- to 5-quart heavy pot over high heat until it registers 375F on thermometer.

While oil heats, pat steaks dry, then rub all over with spice rub (and salt if necessary). Heat 1 tablespoon oil in a 12-inch ovenproof heavy skillet over moderately high heat until hot but not smoking, then sear steaks, turning over once with tongs, until well browned, about 5 minutes total. Transfer skillet to oven and roast 10 minutes for medium-rare.

Check oil while searing steaks, and when it registers 375F, begin frying french fries in 2 batches (add fries carefully; they may have ice crystals, which could cause spattering), stirring occasionally, until golden and crisp, 4 to 5 minutes per batch. Transfer fries with a slotted spoon to paper towels to drain and season with salt and pepper while hot. Return oil to 375F between batches.

Turn off heat under pot, then add garlic and fry until pale golden, 30 seconds to 1 minute, and transfer with slotted spoon to paper towels. Toss fries with garlic in a large bowl.

Transfer steak to a cutting board and let stand 5 minutes. Slice steak and serve with fries.

Re:Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[Frogbert]

If you're going to troll(?) at least do it in metric please!

Re:Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this modded Funny and not Informative?!

Re:Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[Anonymous Coward]

The metric system is the devil. My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.

Re:Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[Plutonite]

I can do better than oven roasted steak.

Parents, talk to your kids about Linux, before somebody else does:
http://xkcd.com/456/

Re:Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[DMUTPeregrine]

About 700 ml vegetable oil
2 (3.2 cm-thick) boneless top loin (New York strip) steaks (about .45 kg each)
15 cc spice rub for beef
1 (.45 kg) package frozen french fries (or strip-cut some potatoes, lazy american)
2 large garlic cloves, thinly sliced lengthwise

Put oven rack in middle position and preheat oven to 233 C.

Heat 1 inch oil in a 3.7- to 5.7-liter heavy pot over high heat until it registers 190 C on thermometer.

While oil heats, pat steaks dry, then rub all over with spice rub (and salt if necessary). Heat 14 ml oil in a 30-cm ovenproof heavy skillet over moderately high heat until hot but not smoking, then sear steaks, turning over once with tongs, until well browned, about 5 minutes total. Transfer skillet to oven and roast 10 minutes for medium-rare.

Check oil while searing steaks, and when it registers 190C, begin frying french fries in 2 batches (add fries carefully; they may have ice crystals, which could cause spattering), stirring occasionally, until golden and crisp, 4 to 5 minutes per batch. Transfer fries with a slotted spoon to paper towels to drain and season with salt and pepper while hot. Return oil to 190C between batches.

Turn off heat under pot, then add garlic and fry until pale golden, 30 seconds to 1 minute, and transfer with slotted spoon to paper towels. Toss fries with garlic in a large bowl.

Transfer steak to a cutting board and let stand 5 minutes. Slice steak and serve with fries.

Re:Spice Rubbed Steak with Quick Garlic Fries

[linuxpyro]

That sounds good, I'll have to try it.

It's true!

[commodoresloat]

"Anonymous Coward" is very well known in the MacOS programming community.

Someone..

[Anonymous Coward]

'Someone else commented from the floor that Microsoft might well be an "assassin" if admitted into open source circles.'

Hi Bruce!

That you're nitpicking?

[Mathinker]

Everything new has a "shallow learning curve". This "insight" makes your initial post inane, in retrospect, except for the "cult-of-Apple" part, on which I have no comment.

Any insightful discussion on the "just works" part of your post would have to get into differential comparisons of new user experiences under various OS's.

Re:That you're nitpicking?

[QuantumG]

No.. I'd be happy to say that no OS "just works". It's not a question of Apple-vs-Whatever.. it's a matter of Apple lying.

Re:That you're nitpicking?

[torstenvl]

Dude, you are obviously trolling. This is nonsense. OS X does "just work," for many many many reasonable definitions of "just work."

Example 1: I don't have to fight with my computer just to find out what the date is. In most computer users' experience, this is ridiculously hard, because WinXP inexplicably stops showing the date on hover-over-the-systray-clock sometimes. Now, if you're on your home computer, you can double-click and bring up the calendar view where you can set the date. But if you're at work, you can't, because you don't just need Administrator privileges to change that view, you need Admin privileges to SEE that view. Utterly stupid. In OS X I click the time. Date is at the top of the drop-down menu. Done. It just works, every time.

Example 2: I don't have to guess at required codecs. Ever try playing a random video file on bare WMP? This may have changed recently, but I definitely had experiences of audio but no video, with no explanation. None. Just blankness. QuickTime will tell you "Whoops, you need this codec, lemme download that for you, or here's how to get it." It just works.

Example 3: Windows Update vs. Software Update. 'Nuff said.

Example 4: IE7. W. T. F. IE7 is the alpha version of a radical UI experiment focus-group. Tabs interspersed with commands, address bar has things which have nothing to do with addresses, app menu in the middle of the widget area... W. T. F.

Example 5: Programming environment. Use the graphical installer and then, automagically, you can use "cc" from the command line like God intended. Simple. Easy. Done. It just works.

Example 5.5: Programming interfaces. This point was made a little bit up. Apple makes programming for new UI paradigms almost as easy as programming for console-based ones. Check this out:
#import <Cocoa/Cocoa.h>
#import <AppKit/NSSpeechSynthesizer.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    NSSpeechSynthesizer* mySynth = [[NSSpeechSynthesizer alloc] init];
    [mySynth startSpeakingString:@"Hello, World!"];
    return NSApplicationMain(argc, (const char **) argv);
}
That's not a scripting language. That's Obj-C. Simple. Easy. You get the picture.

The fact is, OS X is a great OS and works far more consistently than Windows could ever hope to. Apple inspires fanboyism because their stuff is good. Everything about the PC world you have to fight and fiddle with. I have better things to do with my time.

That's not to say you won't have some adjustment time, especially if you've learned everything the wrong way. Windows is like BASIC -- use it for too long and the barrier-to-entry to clear thinking and good engineering becomes higher and higher. But it's so worth it.

how about compiz-fusion??!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

you can say osx has great icandy, but what about compiz-fusion?? i never seen multi desktops on a spinning cube, nor the wobbly windows, nor the burning windows, or the magic lamp effect on any other os then linux!!!

Re:how about compiz-fusion??!!!

[ati11a]

Actually compiz-fusion (for having animations inter-window) and clutter (http://clutter-project.org/) (for having animations intra-window i.e within widgets) is a deadly combo. If only toolkits like GTK+ had an OpenGL or clutter backend..

Re:how about compiz-fusion??!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I know your post is sarcasm, but it's prompting me to put forward an unpopular contention.

Even having these options available hurts the perception of desktop linux.

You don't see these effects on any other OS because 1. they're useless 2. they have a childish connotation. It doesn't matter if it's off by default. Incumbent users may look at the options and say "How neat! Fellow developers giving me the choice to do something novel with my window manager. +1 in my book." Normal people think "What is this, the Fisher-Price computer?"

Apple tech like Expose, Spotlight, and Dashboard is there for productivity. That it also counts as eye candy is a bonus.

Oh, your meaning wasn't clear

[Mathinker]

Sorry, then; just be aware that your meaning wasn't clear to me until you replied. You might want to add the "No OS just works" up front next time.

Re:Oh, your meaning wasn't clear

[QuantumG]

Yes, good point, thank you.

Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

[deanston]

Is that all the Linux leaders today can think of, is copying or matching what has already been done? "When we catch up to OS X..." "If only we targeted netbooks..." - Why can't they think of anything original? By the time they've reach their their target it will have already moved.

I got tired of spending more time tweaking the system instead of working on my projects so I got a base model MacBook Pro online. No taxa and with discount. The Mac works for me NOT because of the eye candy but the overall system design makes work pleasant and smooth. You don't have to go through 5 submenus and 3 tabs just to adjust some setting. Nothing is perfect, but it works more often and easily than other OS I found. The same tasks/apps installs faster, launches faster, error out more gracefully, takes less footprint than the Gateway I have at work with the same specs running XP Pro. The Mac runs cooler and quieter, and staring at its screen for hours doesn't hurt my eyes like with PC monitors. The multi-touch trackpad is something every laptop will eventually imitate.

Just because not every GUI behaves like on Windows and not every short cut key work the same do not mean it doesn't "just work". I find the Windows paradigm often leads to the most physically and mentally debilitating UI design ever.

Come on, Linux! Find or invent the next big thing. Focus and get all the groups to work on it together!

Re:Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

[Eli Gottlieb]

Is that all the Linux leaders today can think of, is copying or matching what has already been done? "When we catch up to OS X..." "If only we targeted netbooks..." - Why can't they think of anything original? By the time they've reach their their target it will have already moved.

On an overall level, Linux distributions (ie: Linux operating systems) are designed by community consensus. And community consensus behaves like a gigantic committee. And we all know what happens when you leave software design to a committee.

Re:Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

[HermMunster]

Image sells. Linux needs an image. Nothing wrong with rallying others to bring the same level of image to Linux.

Companies large and small have taken up the Open Source ideology and are carrying it further. Essentially it means that Open Source is surpasing closed source, and that is hardly a copying effort to accomplish that.

In the late 80s and early 90s innovation in software concept was so varied that trade journal computer magazines were released often 2 times a month and were packed with information, products, etc. Today we are hard pressed to find a 1/4" thick PC magazine issued monthly. This means that innovation is essentially dead. Most IP is owned by a few and it is hard to bring product to market. Everyone is simply copying everyone else. Few companies exist that existed back then. There's no real competition in software today. Some exists yes, but nothing like it was when the PC began its metoric rise in the 80s and 90s.

It's just your perspective is skewed by what you see today. Windows and OS/2 copied the Mac OS. The Mac OS copied the OS developed at Xerox PARC. Likewise with every other thing you see today; mouse, keyboard, monitor, graphics, memory, hardrives, cdroms, etc.

EVERYTHING IS A COPY OF SOMTHING ELSE. Why attack Linux then?

Re:Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

[deanston]

If my perspective is skewed, it is perhaps due to working with Windows and mainstream *nix for the past 15 years. Now I just want something new and different to play with. To simply dismiss Windows as copies of Macs, and Macs as copies of Xerox or BSD is again looking backward and targeting the past, in the belief that if Linux just copy the basic roadmap of other desktop OS it will succeed the same way. Some innovation and game changing trends in hi-tech did happen along the way. Sorry, times change, along with change in economy and culture. If not then why bother imitating Apple? Shuttleworth or Psystar could just roll out FreeBSD or GNUStep to compete with Mac OS. Such over simplification does not serve the Linux cause. The public is interested in Mac OS today due mostly to the success of the iPod and good PR. There is no equivalent of the iPod market or mind share on Linux side. On top of all Linux has the most difficult position of not having dedicated hardware support like Apple and MSFT. And Ubuntu isn't going to roll out similar commercial campaign as Apple. So simply saying matching Apple's eye candy will give Linux a big break is a business plan followed by the Zune.

My attack or criticism was not meant for Linux the community or movement in general, but toward those outstanding quotes coming from the prominent Linux organizers. Innovation today is not inventing the wheel but simply providing the appearance of leadership in an area. Linus did not invent UNIX, but attempting to create a Unix clone for the average PC was innovative and daring. When Linux is used to its strength it rules. If Google would just put up a little logo on its website saying 'Powered by Linux' it will do a world of good to spread the Linux popularity. The Green PC and gOS was a nice experiment, but the momentum has to be kept up. Who is working with a hardware manufacturer closely and studying the user feedback to redesigning the product to fit that need? MSFT failed at the tablet but perhaps Linux could succeed still - imagine text book size, picture frame like, simple pure Internet terminals running a lean *nix in every kitchen. Linux should be in every toaster and TV like Sun once wanted for Java. Instead the most popular current Linux distro is still trying to take on MSFT head on, when the average PC user don't even care if there is a better, cheaper/free PC alternative? Hasn't anyone over there read The Art of War or Five Rings? The top end Linux OS has found its way on the server side, though not overtaking Windows shops in my observation. I'm afraid by the time we discover the perfect consumer spot for Ubuntu, that niche will already be grabbed by some other OS.

What about enlightenment ?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a shame that it lacks devs, because E17 is well suited for the "netbook" Shuttleworth describes - it looks and feels like a jewl, and even works on your mobile phone.

Re:What about enlightenment ?

[nawcom]

My only issue with e17 is the lack of the systray. The devs explain the reasons why they decided to not include it, and they are legit reasons, but still, the systray has become something inportant, and if it will never be revived then that's something that might keep me off of it in the long run. I always used e16 in the late 90s whenever I ran X11 off of a unix OS.

stop the rants and give us some facts

[speedtux]

May I interrupt your rant and ask for some facts please? Where are the usability studies showing OS X or Windows to be superior?

The fact is that Apple has never shown their usability to be better than anybody else's.

And you have nothing to back up statements "There is a complete lack of even the most basic UI design concepts that have been developed over the past 20 years." Come on, try naming those "basic UI design concepts" that Gnome or KDE supposedly violate.

Ubuntu mess.

[ehack]

My keyboard is a mess. See below. If Linux cannot provide the user with a working keyboard out of the box how can they expect the user yuo do offfice work ?

An engineering firm in Italy sent me an Ubuntu 8.04 Virtual Appliance for some programming work.
The keyboard cannot be reset at system level to French or Italian or anything, using the mouse interface.

This is a known Ubunti 8.04 release bug. xsetkbmap only partly alleviates the issue. Neither I or the firm know what to do. In fact, why should we ? International keyboard support is supposed to be a core ability of any "Desktop" system.

If Seattle sent countries Vista systems without customisable keyboards to sell, there would be a revolt among other buyers and regional employees.

I used Linux at Redhat 1. What was funny then has stopped being acceptable now.

Re:Ubuntu mess.

[Burpmaster]

I'm confused. Are you talking about something other than what's in the Layouts tab of System -> Preferences -> Keyboard? Because there's also the keyboard setup that happens during the install process. What's missing?

Re:Ubuntu mess.

[sammyF70]

"virtual applicance"? as in : runs in VmWare?

If that's the case, then complain at VMWare.
Their Ubuntu8.04 image is screwed up for people with non QWERTY keyboards. The VMWare tools are also not available as .deb package, which means that anybody trying Ubuntu in VMWare will necessarily go through a compile (and probably subsequently say that "Linux is not ready for the desktop, cause you have to compile stuff just to install")

A standard Ubuntu 8.04 install sets up the keyboard correctly.

Re:Ubuntu mess.

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI (and for the benefit of the metas), I've modded you flamebait since I know your complaint to be false. Ubuntu will configure a standard keyboard to work in French (and I expect Italian), I know this because I've done it!
From other replies it seems like maybe your "Virtual Appliance" refers to VMWare and that it's their problem.
This does not excuse your post however, which is simply a series of lies.

Re:Ubuntu mess.

[HermMunster]

The issue you are encountering has nothing to do with Linux or Ubuntu. It has to do with how they configured and locked down your configuration. Linux keyboarding works fine. I doubt 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the population of the 50 million worldwide users have issues with Linux and their keyboard.

Re:Ubuntu mess.

[ehack]

OK. Thank you very much for that pointer. I will reinstall my own VM.
I thought it was general, because several people complained on the Ubuntu forums, and were told to go edit files ... it seems there has been a kernel change which has messed up some keyboards like the MacBook Pro I'm using.

Edmund

Re:Ubuntu mess.

[ehack]

Actually, I'm stuck using Ubuntu because it has support compiled in for some FTDI based usbserial hardware I'm using - usually I employ Puppy in a VM. And yes, I consider resorting to a compiler to be something to be done with malice aforethought :)

Edmund

Open Source Lab open its doors?

[nawcom]

What I'm curious and excited about is when the Microsoft Open Source Lab actually opens up some good ol MS source code! Or am I misinterpreting what the Lab is for? I'm just guessing it's either for that - or for dissecting open source software and seeing which parts used stuff from their imaginative IP list that Balmer is always adding new things to. Who wants to bet that they buy their lab goggles from McAfee?

and that is why

[Anonymous Coward]

The tools a person uses are extremely important. A person who is tired from fighting all the time with the GUI-toolkit is not going to have the energy to be creative about how it looks.

You must be joking! Are you seriously saying that Objective-C is easier to use than, say, Python, Ruby, or even C#?

You must have had too much of Apple's magic cool aid.

XCode, Cocoa, and Objective-C are tedious.

What is "better than Apple" mean?

[erroneus]

At one time, I thought it meant better at graphics, audio and visual editing and creating. That, of course, was a myth in that Adobe products do the same stuff on a Mac as on a PC. It can't be the visual interface of the Apple can it? If that were all it would take, Microsoft would have done something to make Windows such eye-candy that Apple couldn't have kept up with the changes. They knew it wasn't just the look all by itself. Then what could it be?

BRANDING!

Apple is one of the most well-developed brands on the market. People think Apple is cool. People are falling all over themselves to get iPods and iPhones. Why? Not because of their quality, versatility or portability... there are loads of devices that beat iPod and iPhone hands-down in those areas individually and collectively. It's that damned Apple branding that is setting stuff. This page >> http://www.aboyandhiscomputer.com/show.php?ItemID=2204 illustrates my point perfectly.

Beating that kind of brand development with Linux won't be easy and might even be impossible.

And even if brand recognition weren't the whole picture, there would be the availability of the apps people know and think they need like Adobe Photoshop or the like. These things aren't going to appear natively for Linux... not for a long time anyway and not until the Linux Desktop has significant presence. So here we have a chicken vs. egg situation ... or a catch 22... whatever. You get the idea.

Linux can beat Microsoft, but I'm not so sure about Apple.

Better than Apple

[ProfessionalCookie]

As an Apple user let me say both "Hooray" and "Finally!!" I can hardly wait :)

Re:Better than Apple

[zach_the_lizard]

As a Linux user, let me say both "Already done" and "When we will get the marketing power of Apple?"

Re:Better than Apple

[Eli Gottlieb]

So when is Ubuntu Linux (or one of the other eye-candy filled Linux distros) going to come with SimDock, Kiba-Dock, or Cairo-Dock (my favorite) installed by default? And sensible key-bindings for Compiz functions?

UI != "widgets on the screen"

[ThosLives]

I think the bigger issue with Linux isn't the UI consisting of the widgets on the screen. I think it's the UI related to how software is installed and updated. For instance, which of the three installation methods would the general public most readily accept:

1. Click and installer, then go through a wizard clicking "Next" on each screen just to get things to finish
2. Drag an icon from one place to another
3. Type strange commands into a text box

I know I've simplified these things, but by and large, the installation wizard and things like apt-get or RPM managers are cumbersome. I know that there have been instances on Linux (can't recall any on Windows) but almost all OS X installs are "drag this icon into your Applications folder and you are done." (Very rarely do OS X apps have a wizard, and those are mostly for power-user grade applications like Xcode or applications ported from the Windows world - I point my finger at companies like MS and EA here).

The other bit about Linux application installation issues is the concept of dependencies - unless things have changed significantly, trying to get applications to work on Linux is a chore to find out if you have the right dependencies, or to learn the package managers to try and make sure the dependencies are met. I would posit that if you fix the software installation process on Linux, you'll go a long way - longer than if you just make the widgets look different - to making Linux "desktop ready".

The other aspect that should be addressed is the "don't pander to the computer savvy mentality." For instance, Ubuntu is hailed as being one of the prime targets for the desktop, but it asks users to suddenly redefine kilo-, mega- and gigabyte by using different terminology (MiB vs MB); change concepts like drive mounting "where's my C drive!?!" and other things which, while yes they are just education topics, are things that are never really presented to the users when they first step into a non-Windows world.

Simply stated, the problems are not technical but social, and that's probably why the majority of the Linux crowd - which is focused on technical issues - is not where they want to be in terms of general public acceptance.

Re:UI != "widgets on the screen"

[AvitarX]

Where have you been on the OSX install?

Every app I install is a wizard, with few exceptions.

perhaps smaller apps don't have wizards (guitar, or cyberduck come to mind), but even unstuff, a fairly small and purely OS X app has one.

All of Creative suite has installers (those would be ports TO windows if I am not mistaken). Quark Xpress, Font Agent Pro.

All the unixy port stuff (well it's package files). I can't think of any commercial apps that don't have an install wizard, or a first run wizard that is the same, only more annoying because it catches you later.

Re:UI != "widgets on the screen"

[nyctopterus]

I don't think installers are the problem at all. The add/remove applications in Ubuntu blows away OS X and Windows with ease of use. I can't think of something that would be faster or more user friendly.

If anything, the application manager is the killer app (for Ubuntu at least). No, what's holding Linux back is the lack of certain "must have" applications. The biggies to me are iTunes (and iTunes store), and lack of professional-grade design software. I, for one, would switch from Mac to Linux if I could do something with the vast amount of my output invested in PSD and AI files.

Mac OS also does have a more refined interface than any Linus distro I've seen, but I don't think that's holding people back (it would annoy me if I switched though).

Re:UI != "widgets on the screen"

[HermMunster]

You don't install linux programs by typing strange commands into a text box. That's optional for those that aren't as visual and want to fine tune what is happening.

Most linux programs are installed via a program called synaptic. You load it, find the program, mark it, and click Apply. It finds everything it needs for you and does the install.

Another option is to download the .rpm or .deb file and double click on that. Let it happen.

It is nearly never required to type commands into a text box these days. But, say someone has already entered the command into a web site and you don't feel like typing. You can copy that text into the clipboard and paste it into the terminal window and hit enter. Couldn't be easier.

So, in reality, all the ways it can be done in linux are only bested (IMHO) by Apple's "drag to the applications folder" approach.

Apple

[smoker2]

I have apple turned off in my ./ preferences. But apple stories still show up in the rss feed.
And now there is an apple fanbois convention going on in linux.slashdot.org too.
Is there any chance you can keep apple in the apple section ? Please.

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Then tell those linux zealots to stop saying stupid things like "we're better than OS X" when they still think "usability = pretty UI".

Re:Apple

[ToasterMonkey]

Ok fine, do that. I urge the entire Linux user community to please tune out anything that has to do with Solaris, Windows, Mac OS X, and any OS that isn't derived from sacred Linux code.
Don't even look at a Mac or Vista desktop, you wouldn't be interested, nothing to see there. Linux is perfect, and in every way. It's not even useful to draw comparisons between Linux and other ungodly OS's, so just run a mental grep -v Apple|Sun|Mac|Solaris|Windows|Microsoft filter on everything you read. Correct my regex, and I'll end you.
Don't ponder what a commercial OS can do on proprietary hardware, x86 is the best hardware EVAR. Linux is a better desktop than Windows and Mac OS X COMBINED, and a better server OS than Solaris, AIX, HPUX, and I hear it even gives Z/OS a run for its money.

Just stay in your happy place, and you'll all be fine.

Oh, and don't forget to drink the koolaid!

Re:Apple

[ShieldW0lf]

It's all about control, monkey boy. You can encrust your cage with rubies and diamonds and put a full bar in it, I'm still not going to live there. Same thing with iEverythingElse. I'd sooner whistle to myself.

"Sports fans,women over 40"-oh dear

[Kupfernigk]

Someone called Zemlin seems to be a complete and utter idiot.

Women over 40 in fact constitute over 1/4 of the developed world adult population. That's not a targeted audience. In fact, I suspect that, as they have had significant life experience so far, it is a much more varied market than women under 40. Which shows that he doesn't understand what is meant by targeted marketing.

As an example, I've just ordered a MSI Wind with XP - why? Because the main reason for it is to work with my 3G HSDPA modem, that's why. Do I want a special Linux version with a built in modem? I do not. To get reliable reception, I need to be able to remote that modem up to 3M from the computer.

So here is an immediate point about the netbook market; I want to be able to remote my antenna so I don't have to sit on the car roof, or on my boat cabin, or on the side of the house which faces the phone mast, just to get a decent signal with a good S/N ratio. I'm a target market: mobile professional users living in rural areas. Currently Windows XP meets my needs and Linux doesn't. I am not interested in eye candy; I want a nice legible screen, and workable keyboard, a responsive operating system that does not need to spend the first 15 minutes of every day downloading anti virus updates and checking them, and the ability to get a 3G or ordinary wireless connection efficiently. Linux meets everything except the last, which unfortunately is the deal breaker. I don't even need long battery life because wherever I go I am normally near either mains or a 12V outlet.

Now, I know that this is not the "fault" of Linux. You will not find me wanting to replace either of my Linux servers with anything else, thank you. But real targeted marketing on the desktop would be to identify some real key user roles, and address their needs to make the result better than Windows, with no actual deal killers.

Mac OS X here is a red herring. Anybody as stupid as my neighbour who bought a Mac because he thought it would be "intuitive", and then found none of his expensive academic PC software would work, or the other one who bought a Mac because it was "easy to use" and still can't work out how to send an attachment, and forgets to label Office files with ".doc", is not going to have their problem fixed by Gnome or KDE any time soon (until there is a wetware upgrade...).

Netbooks are a possible market because their low cpu power makes anti-virus software a pain in the backside, and they will not run Vista. But that means that the focus has to be on communications, and efficient working with a smaller screen. To make that happen will need input from a company like Nokia or Samsung, who are not wedded to overpriced hardware like Apple or Sony.

Zeroconf

[0100010001010011]

One of the biggest 'just works' is Zeroconf/Bonjour. You can take a room full of brand new out of the box Macs, turn them on and they are on the network. Nothing to setup. Toss in a zero conf printer (like those from HP) and again, nothing to setup. I went to my Uncle's for Thanksgiving and had to print something. Without setting anything up or even forgetting I didn't have a printer installed I did the "Apple-P" and low and behold his USB printer on his desktop was setup as a ZeroConf, I hit print and it just worked.

Zero Conf on Debian wasn't as fun. It took a few hours of reading the config files, but it's now working. Best part is being able to reference any computer on the network by .local instead of IP and having it figure it out. Mac and the Debian box even talk sexy ipv6 to each other automatically. But it was far from "just working"

This is why Shuttleworth is dead wrong

[Burz]

I have used and administered Linux systems for a decade now. Whenever I try to setup a "Linux" desktop such as Ubuntu, there is always a long list of problems that would never, ever afflict a Mac or Windows system.

Here are some of the current problems:

- NumLock light is opposite the NumLock mode (this on a dead-common 104-key setup). We see a very high degree of spurious breakage of what should otherwise be very solid functionality.

- Right-click in Firefox 3.x sometimes executes random context item without even displaying the context menu. This bug remained in the 3.0 GA release (and I doubt Mozilla cares all that much, as they are actually not fond of "Linux" as a PC platform).

- Certain non-GPL drivers keep disappearing whenever a system update happens to include the kernel (an essential design flaw of the Linux kernel, though a workaround should be possible).

- Video settings keep getting 'reset' after system updates. The user is then often deprived of a workable UI and they are told to edit xorg.conf from a CLI! Bizzarrely, Xorg and the others will supply example GUI apps (like a clock) but won't write a GUI to manage the display. The 'experts' at the Xorg and Xfree projects also have no concept of a usable 'fallback' mode for a desktop display, say switching to XGA res and framebuffer mode when things go wrong. Supposedly this would be "up to the distro" to take care of, but "the distro" doesn't have the comprehensive knowledge to make an integrated fail-safe display configurator (or not a good one).

- NetworkManager in the Control Panel having a markedly different feature set than the seperate network manager that resides on the "systray"... and that stamp over each others' settings particularly when Wifi is used. This is disgraceful.

- Poor support for a wide range of devices, large and small, internal and USB: TV tuners, modems, Wifi, etc. Even video cards are still a problem.

- Audio blockages in inexpensive hardware. Don't rely on calendar alarms, nor softphones, nor audible status indicators because they may turn out to be inaudible - you never know. And ever it shall be through last year's fashionable audio architecture, and probably next year's too.

- High power consumption on both desktops and notebooks. On desktops, starting many programs will spin-up all of my drives 'just because'. And why a file dialog that pops up with my home directory needs to spin up all of my drives is beyond me. It certainly isn't needed on other desktop OSes. I can't tell you the number of times that changing the display res or doing a system update has remove the power-saving option from xorg.conf. Also, many other examples of low battery life on laptops.

Other observations:

- File browsing is very screwed-up. The browsers keep displaying data through differing schemas, often within the same program, and they have differing ways of describing a file path. Even when they stick to a URL format, the 'handler' part can be made-up and non-sensical, conflicting with other parts of the same utility for accessing the same resource. When file dialogs from other apps are brought into the picture, the confusion becomes severe.

- Drivers: There is no standardization and logo-branding effort to address the devices problem. Are hardware vendors supposed to put a penguin on the box if their product is compatible? They don't really know, and no one at the Linux Foundation or the major distros is going to approach them about this simple but essential practice. There is also no ABI, but I won't "go there".

- Drivers: The group that is responsible for adding and maintaining most device support isn't interested in providing a simple way to find out whether a particular device is supported. Because, you know, that would be interfacing with end-users... Ick.

- Apps: Try doing tech support for a "Linux" application. I have done it for a living! There is literally no way to predict what sort of UI you will have to guide them through or which supporti

Re:This is why Shuttleworth is dead wrong

[HermMunster]

I myself hate to be quoted because often doing so takes sentences and phrases out of context. Overall you have to read the meaning of what's being said and address that instead of nitpicking someone's inability to precisely elaborate what they mean. So, I won't do it to you.

Over the past decade you are correct, many of these issues existed, and some still exist. By far, the issues were addressed in the past couple years and most of the problems you speak about affect all the operating systems.

As a small business owner where I accept customer machines for repairs I can say that I have experienced all of the above issues in both the Windows arena and the Macintosh. In may ways, I experience them and a great number of additional problems,problems that make those above look quite minor.

As a person that can rightly compare my experiences in all three operating systems I have to say that my Linux boxes are better for desktop use, in general, for everyone, not just for the two extreme ends of the spectrum.

When I first looked at Linux it was a stable kernel with various tools used to maintain. Getting a GUI to work was very difficult. Today though getting your GUI to work and to make it act consistently is as easy as clicking the install icon.

What I noticed the other day though was that when I was looking at certain folders in gnome I noticed some had lists and some had icons. What I found was that when I looked at Windows I saw the same thing. I saw the same on the Macintosh I own. What I decided was that the apparent inconsistency had everything to do with me and nothing to do with gnome. I had been changing these and exiting the folders and when I came back they were as I had left them, and that made a somewhat inconsistent look, at least to anyone who doesn't really use the computer.

The issues you were having with drivers is really an issue with one design issue is one I take question with. The proprietary drivers require essentially that you build a kernel loadable module that is specific to the "kernel" release. When a new kernel is released you have to rebuild the kernel loadable module. That means that some drivers may appear to stop working, and in reality they can. Those drivers already found in the kernel are unaffected unless the entity that compiled the kernel did so and excluded certain pieces of hardware.

Now as I said I do take issue with this. And I have seen more than my share of unhappiness about it, but I have also learned to be careful about which updates I install, as all updates are optional. I agree that the average person wouldn't know which ones to avoid and this makes it doubly hard. In most cases, if you turn off the feature that flags you for updates the user will never know and their computer will continue to roll along, albeit sometimes wtihout the updates one might feel are necessary. Overall, tho I think the issue with updating the kernel when proprietary drivers are involved needs work and there should be some warning that doing this could cause problems.

As far as the video settings goes that's actually the issue with the drivers that you spoke about later. I say that because you appear to have 3-4 entries when all three are the same cause, though they may manifest themselves differently.

Networking really, for me and for everyone I have set linux up on has become a non issue, unless it is a wireless thing. Yes, wireless is sort of in the dead zone and significant work needs to be done. I honestly feel that it is tough for the developers and they tend to beg out when it gets tough. We don't see them put in the effort necessary to solve this.

Much of what you are telling us is really related to the hardware manufacturers not providing drivers or not providing proper specificications so that they can be created. I also think the hardware manufacturers are gun shy due to Microsoft hostilities toward the open source community when they issued threats of lawsuits about 235 alleged patent violations. Those were

Re:This is why Shuttleworth is dead wrong

[Burz]

I think you are wrong on many technical points, and that people with your mindset are a large part of the problem preventing a worthwhile FOSS desktop system from being developed.

On a couple of the technical points: If these issues have largely been addressed, then why are my Numlock lights reversed? Why do I have to edit a file in /etc to fix it? And Why has Firefox 3 for Linux gone on for so long with a massive UI bug that is not shared by the OSX and Windows versions?

Why is there no SDK? No default IDE to fill the role of Xcode and Visual Studio? No standard way to install software (RPMs are standard, but how they are installed varies greatly and the dependencies aren't likely to match up anyway)?

As for your customers, I would venture to guess that the Linux users are far more rare and skilled than your Mac and Windows clients. You likely do not have a large and representative sample of average people using a "Linux" desktop.

Windows for Workgroups, to the various other protocols that were used, to Novell dominance in network servers, to Win 95/98/ME/2K and then compare that to Win XP and now to Vista, it is obvious that all these OSes experience every issue you speak about in your post as it relates to Linux.

Sweet-smelling crap. Did you even read my posting? Win95 and DOS systems experienced the downsides of repositories and package managers? O RLY??

I agree that we need to give Linux a more polished image and that technologies need to be adopted to provide that.

"Linux" is a kernel, not a full-fledged operating system or product that is actually recognizable to a person off the street. You might as well be polishing a mirage.

Have a nice day.

Ummmm...

[crhylove]

The last time I attempted to use iTunes was an unmitigated disaster. I'm pretty sure we are already beating apple. I never have problems like that in Rhythmbox. TVtime needs a lot of work though....

you're doin it wrong....

[commodoresloat]

The nipple is the command key!

Ugh..

[Anonymous Coward]

You're just feeding the linux haters blog you know...

Linux beating Apple on desktop, ROFLMAO.

Microsoft Open Source == oxymoron

[HermMunster]

There absolutely is nothing even remotely resembling Open Source going in any Microsoft entity, subsidiary, or within Microsoft itself. Open Source was defined 10 years ago and Microsoft's efforts in no way even remotely resemble that definition.

Microsoft is trying to Embrace Open Source, to Extend it their direction, and then Extinguish it by making the real Open Source obscure and arcane.

We are smarter than this people. We do not want Microsoft involved in Open Source at any level for any reason, period. We don't want what we have created tainted by the beast.

Chasing the Tail Lights mentaility

[Anonymous Coward]

You've hit the nail directly on the head. This is something I've been saying, and getting modded down for, for years. Surprisingly enough, burying the truth doesn't seem to have resolve the problem in any way. Go figure.

The whole Linux on the Desktop thing has finally been abandoned... and by no less than it's biggest advocates. The entire reason was that, despite over 15 years of trying to copy Windows, they still haven't been able to find mainstream success as nothing more than a low-rent Windows knockoff. And true to form, they even bashed Microsoft for it when they gave up, because obviously their lack of vision and skill is Microsoft's fault.

Now they will magically succeed by switching targets. Rather than being Microsoft wannabes... the new breed wants to be Apple wannabes! Improvement, right?

You know where Linux should go? They should push hardcore for the embedded device market, because that's up for grabs. Palm could have owned it... but they were apathetic and failed. Windows mobile is too bloated, and besides that it's too expensive. Google is full steam ahead on the fail boat, just like everything they do which isn't either search or advertising. Symbian is owned by Nokia, 'nuff said.

Shockingly enough, Linux has found very little mainstream success in being IBM's bitch. They might want to rethink that... but smart money says they won't. The powers that be within Linux... including Linus... now have a vested interest in keeping IBM happy, and that has zero to do with being either a desktop OS (smart decision) or in the embedded device market (bad decision). Why? Embedded devices don't help mainframes get sold.

Sam Ramji?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't he be trying to make sure that Spider-Man 4 is better than the last one, rather than mucking around at Microsoft?

Anger... Fading...

[daemonburrito]

It was just the spam that got my goat, really. Were it not for that, it just would have been background stupidity.

About the homophobia, randomly from the front page:

What's up ass-captains? I've been very fortunate to be able to watch you guys shit your panties [...]

I want to find the FSF/terrorist thing funny, as I'm not so mad anymore, but I just can't, mainly because of this:

You guys are like the Al Jazeera of tech journalism.

I have so many problems with that sentence that I don't know where to start. For instance, what's wrong with Al Jazeera?

The foss community has a freaking awesome sense of humor, our cup runneth over with funny memes. We don't have to prove to anybody that we can take a joke. I mean, we can claim Linus "You are all stupid and ugly" Torvalds; we're obviously cool with some smack talking.