Slashdot Mirror
Shuttleworth Says Ubuntu Can't Just Be Windows
ruphus13 writes "When Mark Shuttleworth was asked what role WINE will play in Ubuntu's success, he said that Ubuntu cannot simply be a better platform to run Windows apps. From the post, according to Shuttleworth, '[Windows and Linux] both play an important role but fundamentally, the free software ecosystem needs to thrive on its own rules. it is *different* to the proprietary software universe. We need to make a success of our own platform on our own terms. if Linux is just another way to run Windows
apps, we can't win. OS/2 tried that ...' The post goes on to say, 'Linux simply isn't Windows (nor is Windows Linux) and to expect fundamentally different approaches (and I'm not just thinking closed versus open) to look, feel, and operate the same way is senseless.'"
OS/2 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows applications while Windows was a $100 way of running Windows applications. It didn't matter that OS/2 was better, it wasn't (in the minds of most consumers) $400 better, especially when it needed $400 more RAM as well.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
With me...there are some windows applications I have to use (Quickbooks pro for my company I contract through), and on jobsites often there are tools they have that are only windows based.
I find when I have to use those windows boxes on site, I often really, really miss having my unix tools (sed, awk, etc...) around. If I could have my linux install, and have the hard core tools to use, and be able to also run windows apps when I needed to, I'd be happy to go.
That need, obviously isn't one Joe User needs, but, maybe it would work the other way around with JU. He has his windows apps, and over time, discovers the neat tools and functionality that Linux offers. Frankly, as long as he has his apps he needs from windows, he doesn't care what the OS is.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
So this news story is fluff spun out of two lines of IRC chat?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Time to start eating, paytard. I exclusively use Ubuntu, love it, and it's color scheme. Btw=> you can change the colors, paytard.
I like it much better.
On windows I can't set up my own dns forwarding proxy with a few simple commands, or add a powerful compiler or set of scripting language interpreters and libraries with equal ease.
Ubuntu is great for me. I don't give a crap about running windows apps.
Time to eat your own ass.
We're not going to try and base our business model on WINE.
Much better to have native apps.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
In a stunning public relations coup, Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MNPLY) has successfully overshadowed Ubuntu Linux 9.04 "Juicy Jubblies" by announcing that it is laying even more people off.
Microsoft announced new and expanded roles for remaining key executives as another several lesser, losing quitters deserted upper management. "It shows the fantastic opportunity available to everyone at Microsoft to climb seven or eight reporting levels up the org chart," said marketing marketer Steve Ballmer to pitchfork-wielding Wall Street analysts today. "If we haven't laid them off for making too much money or not kissing enough ass."
The Yahoo! deal is expected to go ahead. "We figure they'll go broke before we do. Probably." Mr Ballmer also plans to run the Yahoo! servers on Windows NT rather than FreeBSD after a similar change worked so well at Hotmail. "Some say synergy's another word for two plus two equals one, but you just have to make the value of one work for you."
Windows 7 betas have been greeted with remarkable positive press. "Of course, the betas preview the 'champagne and hookers' edition, which would be way too much for netbooks and explode users' brains. Imagine thinking those little things are computers! So we're releasing what we call Windows 7 Dumbass Edition(tm). It lets you log in and look at the shiny. Even Spider Solitaire has the ribbon toolbar! And you can buy an upgrade to the version that runs programs! It lets you do that!"
Dumbass Edition(tm) comes with pre-installed viruses to make the computer part of the Storm, Conficker and FBI botnets. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
However, Microsoft has indicated to its press corps, Microsoft Completely Enderlependent Analysts, to ixnay on the evensay and highlight the job openings for work on Windows 8, firmly penciled in for a 2012 release. Windows 8 will be optimised for low-end 32-core systems with a mere 16 gigabytes of memory -- 28 cores for the interface, 3 cores for the DRM and one core for everything else. "'Seven' is just so this year. I hear they'll get $DATABASE_FILESYSTEM done next release for sure!" said ZDNet marketing marketer Mary-Jo Enderle. "It'll be awesome(tm)!"
"I'm sure it'll be fine, fine," said Bill Gates, upping his hours at his charitable foundation and scheduling the sale of several more packages of Microsoft stock.
Larry Ellison of Oracle, who recently purchased Sun Microsystems, merely snickered, muttered "Java. OpenOffice." and let out a long and resounding laugh.
Mark Shuttleworth of Canonical, speaking from his castle on a crag high on a mountaintop in west London, was sanguine at Ubuntu's news being overshadowed. "I lost ten million dollars on Ubuntu last year. I'm losing ten million dollars on Ubuntu this year. I expect to lose ten million dollars on Ubuntu next year. At this rate, I'll be broke in ... sixty years."
http://rocknerd.co.uk
I recently switched to Ubuntu (from running other versions of Linux on my main home computer since 2000) and I have to say it is quite nice. I use WIndows at work because that's what we're told to run. I honestly don't understand why people like you exist that find Linux to be so absolutely terrible. At home I have a laser printer, scanner, webcam, gps, sony ebook reader, digital camera, digital video camera and wireless. All these things work on my Linux boxes and I have no problems with them. I am very productive with Linux.
While I too wish he'd eat his own ass, every attempt I've made so far to configure ubuntu 8.10 to use a static IP rather than a DHCP IP has resulted in failure.
Now I'm probably just being a dumbass, but I'm a reasonably technical dumbass. Even reasonably non-technical dumbasses could do such a thing in windows.
With something like bootcamp or virtualization Mac can run windows apps but Linux needs to market itself more like Mac. Different with its own set of applications, tools and unique way of doing things. That of course includes Wine as a seamless way to run legacy apps without buying a copy of Windows.
As long as Linux is playing catch-up to Windows in terms of available applications (Gimp vs Photoshop, Dia vs Visio, Wine...), it will never become a successor in a Windows dominated world. What it needs is to either 1) Do something better or 2) Provide some need that Windows just can't/won't fulfill.
Look at the flip side of the coin, Windows has the games, familiar office applications (the de facto standard, actually), and the familiarity for people. Linux has fewer games, less commercial support, and is sufficiently different and scary for the computer illiterate. Ubuntu has done a great job at minimizing the fear factor, but it needs to go that extra step and beat Windows at it's own game: Solving the problems that users need to solve. Make email/web browsing as easy as possible. Make peripheral attachment as easy as possible (plug and play). Get as much support from software/hardware vendors as possible.
Linux in general has come a long way even in the past 3-4 years, but there is still a ways to go.
They need to be Microsoft BOB. Or Lotus Notes.
I did so.
I've now converted my webserver over to Ubuntu.
It runs more smoothly and interacting with the services and settings are easier with the console and a secure SSH session.
I also find I'm enjoying the package manager as I do not have to go manually download and install every application I want and worry about the mess Window's Add / Remove program will leave behind.
I normally agree with Shuttleworth, but I don't think he's right here. He's right in the long-term, Ubuntu shouldn't just be another platform for running Windows apps, because ideally long-term all apps will be written cross-platform to hit both markets.
However, in the short term, I firmly believe that Wine is the only way to massively increase Ubuntu's market share. It's the appications that people care about, like iTunes, Photoshop or Autocad. If Wine can run your Windows apps, what do you have to lose by migrating? If Ubuntu doesn't run Windows apps, then whole crowds of people just can't dump Windows for it.
"Even reasonably non-technical dumbasses could do such a thing in windows."
No they can't.
But this does not solve your problem. How have you tried to do it? Perhaps we can help.
Did any of those monkeys have typewriters? I THINK NOT.
Setting: press conference room. Shuttleworth is standing behind a podium with disheveled hair and sweat stains spreading underneath his arms. Reporters sit in chairs before him. ... Ubuntu is trying to ... "be" Windows? ... so you want to be Windows? ...
Reporter A: So
Shuttleworth: Ok, for the last time, I am going to go over this very very slowly.
*Shuttleworth writes Ubuntu and Windows on the chalkboard and puts a massive "does not equal" sign in between them.*
Shuttleworth: Ubuntu cannot and will not ever "be" Windows. I've been over this for the past two hours, can we move away from Windows/Ubuntu comparisons here?
Reporter B: But you want to be a widely used operating system?
Shuttleworth: That is correct.
Reporter B: And Windows is the most widely user operating system?
Shuttleworth: Also correct.
Reporter B:
*Shuttleworth lets out a long drawn-out sigh, massages his forehead and takes a drink from his glass of water*
Shuttleworth: *holds up two pieces of fruit* In my left hand I hold an apple. In my right hand I hold an orange. Although both are round, the two taste different and have different colors and subtle shapes
Reporter C: Hold on, an "Apple"? I'm not following you, are you saying you're trying to "be" OS X?
Shuttleworth: This press conference is over!
My work here is dung.
The problem is that certain software is often a show stopper. When someone can't run it they are back to windows. Having the linux environment along with the ability to run that one specific piece of software seems like a plus to me.
Until you see game developers start publishing on Linux, people will be reluctant to change.
That is why you need one linux distro, and backed by one developer who has power and money to sway game developers (i.e. Valve) to publish on their platforms. Don't get me wrong. The concept of free software is supposed to be compatible and tolerant of many different design / distros. But to overturn a powerful, strong enemy, we need to stand united. We need to have one distro that will stand out.
United We Stand, Divided We Fall.
Ein Distro, Ein Penguin, Ein Developer!
New Economic Perspectives
Well, best start with the UI...I've not seen a *nix GUI environment that didn't resemble Windows in more than a few ways...not really cutting edge...Gnome and KDE need to do some work develop a distinctive UI paradigm...Mac OS has an underlying philosophy and guidelines...Windows has some of the same to a lesser extent...What do the *nix windowing environments have?
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/how-to-set-a-static-ip-address-in-ubuntu-810-intrepid-ibex.html
Keep in mind that the 8.10 release is not designed for broad use and that most users (even now that 9.04 has been released) should still be using 8.04, the last stable LTS release.
what role WINE will [play|serve|insert_verb_here] in Ubuntu's success
With each successive release, windows just cant seem to be windows either.
"To err is human, to mod Funny divine."
And to have a nice, beautiful terminal window, instead of running bash in the default WinXP's terminal window, install RXVT (available in Cygwin's installer) and run bash in it.
Support fast mouse cut'n'paste, nice window resizing, acceptable scroll back buffer, etc.
If you're forced to endure windows, Cygwin's bash+rxvt help soothing part of the pain.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
It seems to me that the only success stories of competing software companies are the ones that stayed away from the desktop. The desktop computer is a dumping ground for Things To Do With Computers. Microsoft dominates that area and people think about computers in that light. The success stories lie in specific applications of computing devices away from the desktop: phones, gaming consoles, book readers, internet viewers, etc.
Naturally, once one of those areas forms and gets popular, Microsoft dives into it. But if Unix enthusiasts can create a new category of useful devices that it can define, develop, and dominate, then it can become a behemoth in its own right.
For running apps in a corporate enviroment. Many current business apps (think more along the lines of ERP/CRM/indrusry specific apps rather than Word/Ecxel) aren't supported by their vendor when running under virtulization with a full version of Windows (e.g. Citrix or VMware) so it is very unlikely that they would be supported under WINE. While it is possible that the apps may run fine under WINE most companies would be unwilling to risk running their mission critical applications (I.e. The apps they make money from) in a completely unsupported environment like WINE.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
need to work together and get companies to port. All they need is a few to move over. The rest will come. Intuit's Quicken, quick books, and taxpro are BIG ONES. Autocad should have moved over eons ago. And OpenOffice should be ROCK SOLID on Mac just like the others.
The question ppl should be asking is WHY is Apple gaining desktop? because they PUSH to get the apps that are needed. Just like Safari. Jobs hit all the banks and got after them to make it work with safari. And Safari is now up and coming. If the Linux world would learn from that, and push a few of the top companies to port their app to Linux, then we would see massive surge in it. As it is, Shuttleworth has realized that having Linux INSTALLED at time of purchase is big.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
iver never done this but i'd guess you want /etc/network/interfaces
killall NetworkManager
man interfaces
nano
iface eth0 inet static
address 192.168.1.1
netmask 255.255.255.0
i think you'll need, to permanently kill NetworkManager with:
update-rc.d -f NetworkManager remove
and /etc/resolve.conf will need configuring for your dns servers
ofc the whole thing is probably covered in a tutorial you could find on the ubuntu forums
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Ubuntu cannot simply be a better platform to run Windows apps.
Exactly right. Morphing Linux into a Windows software platform would be a major mistake. You'd still be locking users into one way of doing things. I'm sitting here looking at our developers, all working on Linux. One uses pico, one a text editor another uses Eclipse. We all work differently, even different distros, and all manage to get our work done.
In a Windows shop we were all using the same OS, the same development environment and the same tools. Everything was regimented into MSFT's way of doing things and limited by the latitude they decide you get. Their tools, their rules, their training, their way. And it seemed we were always dancing on their string over something. Licensing, product activation, version compatibility issues, so we'd get paid to rewrite working applications for new frameworks, security patches that break things, the upgrade treadmill. Hours of undocumented time pouring through knowledge base articles. It was a constant waterfall of nit-picky little things that we would have to bend our schedule, manage our time to accommodate. The bonus was you always looked stressed out and busy and it was job security. Without regular maintenance, apps would stop working. You have no idea how much time you spend digging sand in a MSFT environment until you move off it.
I think it's nice that Wine exists for those odd times you need to run a Windows app. But that should never be the OS focus. And in the bigger picture of proprietary v free, as long as MSFT dictates your application environment, you're still dancing on their string.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I've gotten several people in my family started with Ubuntu, and one weird thing I've observed is that none of them ever seem to spontaneously figure out how to install applications -- they don't even seem to realize that the open-source apps are out there, or that it might be desirable to install them.
Okay, maybe this is a good thing, because maybe it just means that a default Ubuntu does a very good job of including enough apps that the average user can do everything they need to do. Or maybe it just means that most people, unlike me, don't enjoy playing with software.
But it really does make me wonder whether the Linux community could be doing a better job of selling itself based on the availability of a huge number of free, high-quality applications. Apt-cache stats says that I have 25,000 packages installed on my desktop machine at home, all of them free. If even 1% of those cost $10 each, we'd be talking about a massive investment in order to build up a similar software library using proprietary software.
Now it might seem obvious to linux geeks that you should say, "I want to do x, therefore I search on freshmeat for an app that does x, and then I install it." But most people don't even think that way about computer software. They're in the habit of buying it in a store, or on amazon, and they expect it to cost money. Synaptic doesn't exactly advertise itself very well, either. Users seem to putter around for years in Gnome without ever noticing that there's a utility built into the menus that would allow them to download a ton of free software.
Find free books.
Ubuntu won't "just be windows" because it is free (NOT as in beer). The more I use my 360 and PS3 to try to play media from my PC the more I understand how bad the protected DRM-everything model is for consumers. That's the future of Windows, guys. People are not going to put up with their hardware refusing to do what should easily be able to do as long as there is an alternative that will do everything else too. Convenience is king, and DRM is becoming increasingly restrictive and annoying.
I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
"Regrettably," he adds, sighing as he drops a Windows XP box with an "Ubuntu Linux" sticker placed over the product name into the trash. "Would have saved me so much money..."
The enemies of Democracy are
Coming from people behind the most Windows-like (both in philosophy and appearance) distros, this is fairly amusing.
I had this same problem, took me forever and ended up switching to dhcp w/ static leases on my router anyway.
Why would people go through the effort to change one way of running Windows apps to another way of running Windows apps if it didn't offer other benefits?
Ubuntu can not simply be a platform for launching Windows apps. It must be a viable platform in its own right.
That being said, I hope Shuttleworth uses his wealth, visiblity and sway right now to do more than just raise the visibility level of Linux.
Why not do more? Why not raise a stink about the state of Xorg? Releases always end up cutting features, and then arrive over a year late regardless, and it is largely built on 20-year old legacy code. Now that it is modular, wouldn't it be easier now to rewrite aspects of Xorg and redesign it for modern needs?
He should be pushing for major upstream changes, such as his suggestions regarding notifications (which should jump on the back of KDE's new system tray specs).
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
95% of the people who use computers are using Windows applications. (Don't mod me to -1 'cause you have a stat saying it's actually 93.7%, schmuck). The vast majority of the bazillions of people running computers are running Windows aps on Windows.
Why? Because they work. They do what needs to be done. And primarily because people know how to use them to do what they are using them for.
So if you want 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) to be as used by all the bazillions of people who are using computers, then it better run Windows aps,... and run them well. Better than Windows, for that matter. Because nobody is going to shift to 'your' operating system unless Windows either stops working, or evolves into such a pain-in-the-ass to use (with endless pop-up windows and BSODs) that people are willing to risk switching away from Windows. And if Windows works, which it does...currently.. then why bother switching when you can't be sure that the alternative that you are being forced to switch to is actually going to work and you aren't having to go through some mutha-fugging 'learning experience' just to get back to the level of applications computer skills that you already have under Windows.
So, in the real world, 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) isn't going to be used by the vast majority of people until you need to be a serious computer expert in order to tell 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) from Windows.
What I'm saying is. You have to be indistinguishable from Windows AND better than Windows before millions are going to switch to 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) from Windows.
Heresy, talking like this on Slashdot. But truth is always heresy. Get used to it. Move on. Fix the things that people hate about Windows with 'your' operating system (Mbuutuu, Umbongo,... whatever the fuck it is...Why did you give it such a bizarre name if you wanted it to be widely used and be taken seriously?) and everyone will switch.
But....
Our operating system is `~free~`. Well, la de da, everything is free if you don't pay for it. And who actually pays for Windows? It comes with computer that you buy. It comes with the computer that was issued to you at your work. It comes with every computer that you buy second-hand on CraigsList. For all realistic perspectives from the average computer user, Windows is -free-, too. If you're buying thousands of licenses for your corporate group, well of course it's not free. But you're not an average computer user.
So why the big discount?
OEM (where your OS is stuck on that machine and cannot be sold)?
Student?
MS Employee discount?
Flea Market copy (that passed WGA, so must be valid, right?)
THANK YOU.
I have no mod points, so I'll say it again:
THANK YOU.
It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
Someone said they miss the tools on Linux while using Windows...
may be all they need is GNU/Windows instead of GNU/Linux?
Or Debian with Windows kernel instead of Linux or FreeBSD kernel?
Oh well I still miss Linux kernel...the ability to write drivers for my homebrew hardware. Not that it can't be done on Windows, and I didn't try writing one for Windows yet, but I think it's easier to write one for Linux.
To me the difference between purchasing Windows and choosing to go open source can be compared to the difference between getting a Dell desktop or going to Newegg and making your own.
Sure you can save a lot of money at newegg and make a powerful machine. You need to assemble it yourself (which for myself was much fun). Service wise its only adequate. I had a DVD burner break down, it was still under warranty I consulted my return policy, did what I had to do and had a new DVD burner back in my machine in a week.
But with Dell. You pay much more for a really good rig. You dont have to assemble it (and while assembly is fun - it can be a hassle). Service wise, as someone who works in the industry - Dell is fantastic. With the right warranty they will send a local technician straight to your office to repair anything. Peace of mind can be bought. You can have a warranty so good you can toss your insanely expensive laptop out a window for kicks and have it replaced shortly.
As long as there are people in the world who cant handle the extra hassle of servicing open source - there will be a market for Windows. But given the direction the world economy is taking that could change fairly soon (in my lifetime anyways). Right now whoever provides the best service wins. And in an environment like Open Source. Its hard (not impossible) to guarantee top notch service. Sad but true.
And this has been another installament of Captain Obvious!
Years pass and people still argue over the pointless portions of OS argumentation.
Here is the core fact that everyone needs to really grasp.
The OS does not really matter. If it brings noce things to the table, that is nice.
The Applications, Tools, Productivity, and output capability matter 100% more than wether the underlying core is called Ubuntu or Windows.
When Linux provides the API's, Tools, Support for the wider world, people will use it. Linux has a wide range of software, that is true. It also has enormous gaping holes in coverage of widely known applications, and in areas like Gaming, and well beyond. I'm not saying it has no API's, I'm saying that if I were writing an app, I can't write it for Linux, because there is no 'Linux', there is only thousands of distributions, usually with their own cookie issues.
The whole platform benefits from the aspect of having a lot of tools and API's and other things going on, but people need to understand that if you continue to change the core stuff like sound, desktop managers, installers, in a constant churn, you're creating a hostile environment to applications. This 'strength' is also the primary weakness.
The long term support and stability of Ubuntu I am sure is somewhat helpful in this regard, but again, Ubuntu is merely one distribution, not the platform.
If you are a game dev, or Adobe, or THQ, you'll look at Linux and its overall state, and view it as hostile, and a support/dev nightmare. Most development that does happen, is done under the safe wrapper of Wine, rather than boldly coding native (example) - and its very clear why that short cut happens.
We`re all equal
" OS/2 tried that .."
No, Windows tried that with OS/2..and won.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Keep in mind that the 8.10 release is not designed for broad use and that most users (even now that 9.04 has been released) should still be using 8.04, the last stable LTS release.
Untrue.
While there is no long term support (LTS) for anything since 8.04, but for those of us who don't need it, that isn't a concern. There is 18 months of support for every Ubuntu release. That is plenty long enough for most uses.
If I were designing a process that required multi-year support and maintenance, then I'd certainly think about LTS, but that isn't the world I work in.
The cost is beside the point.
I am a long-time Linux (and much more recently OS X) user, and if I am presented with a piece of software that requires Windows to run it, I usually prefer to just do without.
Fortunately in my discipline (biotech) developers are beginning to realise there are alternatives - for instance, Geneious is a stupendously fine example. It's definitely not free, but it is available on multiple platforms, which is a big step away from where we were a couple of years ago.
Compare this with Endnote which is rapidly losing ground to Zotero because the developers refuse to cooperate with the *nix world.
How about an easier development platform for building cross-platform applications. That would make it easier for developers to sell apps that work for a larger audience. Why work so hard to move Windows apps over to Linux when you could encourage builders to build a dedicated-platform application with an environment that has this cross-platform functionality built in from the start.
(I have no intentions of starting a Java debate)
Too bad most people don't care about that, and everybody else can use DynDNS or NOIP for their DNS forwarding.
It's not as techie, but it works and people can still play their games and run their favorite applications. Linux doesn't provide any benefit for the average user, and thus will be relegated to the server market where it does quite well.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
>>>"if Linux is just another way to run Windows apps, we can't win. OS/2 tried that ..."
If Linux tries to be proprietary, you can't win that way either. Atari ST and Commodore Amiga tried that approach, and they went bankrupt. People want and need to be able to run the same stuff they run at work, or in school, or wherever. If they cannot move their files back-and-forth, then they won't be choosing your proprietary OS - they'll be choosing Windows.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
"the difference between getting a Dell desktop or going to Newegg and making your own"
Have you considered getting Linux pre-installed?
"Service wise, as someone who works in the industry - Dell is fantastic. With the right warranty they will send a local technician straight to your office to repair anything"
How much would this call out service warranty cost. I do know, for the average home user, it's a phone call to a call-center in Mumbai, who tells you to restore from disk.
davecb5620@gmail.com
I installed ruby on windows for the first time today with the windows one click installer, it worked like magic.
I don't see how strawberry perl is particularly hard to install I even think it's easier to use on windows as it doesn't keep nagging you about internet access when I grab something of CPAN.
Then there's vbscript and jscript interpreters built into windows already.
I've yet to install python but I expect it to be as equally easy. I think you might be way of base on that point.
I run Ubuntu as my desktop OS.
Why not just right click on the network manager tray icon, go to "Manual configuration.." (Which gives you a gui to create said file and doesn't run the risk of goofing formatting), click "Unlock" and authenticate, click the interface, click properties, click the radio button on static ip, click close, click close? Perhaps you need to go to a terminal and type "sudo /etc/init.d/networking restart" when done to bring the interface up with the new config cleanly.
My Babylon
And with Windows it's Right-click on 'My Network Places' -> Properties. Then pick the connection ->Properties. Pick the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) option ->Properties. All mouse-driven, all GUI, all easy. Adjust away.
That's the difference. With Ubuntu|Linux, you've got to *know* how to get to the Terminal, then you've got to type stuff, then you've got to edit config files. Then restart things. Then something else breaks, which requires not the usual 'Add/Remove' program function to fix it, but a trip into 'sudo aptitude blah-blah-blah'. Then maybe that works, maybe it doesn't. Of course, it's trivially easy to find umpteen tutorials on *how* to do this stuff. Linux-lovers get excited over that. And that's totally cool. And I'll buy the argument that it is "better" to actually learn how your O/S works. But casual users, mainstream users, money-spending users, no way. They just want it to work.
I have three notebooks; one running Vista, one running Ubuntu 9.04, and a Macbook. I use them interchangeably, depending on what I'm doing. Ubuntu 9.04 is the best release of Ubuntu yet, but it's still kludgy compared to Vista or Mac. And when things break in Ubuntu (like when my WiFi simply stopped working after a recommended update & reboot) it required quite a bit of troubleshooting and 'tinkering' to get it working again. After a half-hour, I was back in business. But it required a half-hour of work to fix. Enjoyable fun for the computer nerd. But not for Grandma. People want apps that are easily installed, easily removed, and consistent in their method of installation.
And until some Linux distro figures that out (Ubuntu 9.04 is *damn* close) they'll never capture enough market share to hit critical mass. Based on the improvements I've witnessed from Ubuntu 6.xxx through today's 9.04, they may be there by Ubuntu 10 or 11. Here's to hoping. :-)
Especially in the current financial climate, I'm surprised no one has mentioned this little fact about the fundamental difference between Linux and Windows: Windows is entirely dependent on Microsoft.
Linux will never go extinct as long as the source code exists and someone is around capable of maintaining that source code.
If Microsoft were to cease operations (chapter 7, god forbid), Windows would have no foundation to continue. The source is closed, so even if there were people willing to work on it in their spare time, they would not have access to the source.
Before you mod me as a troll, just remember all the companies that were "too big to fail" 10 years ago that aren't here today.
Linux strength is that it is a community, not a corporation, that keeps it alive and running.
Not many people will read this post, but remember all the good operating systems tied to companies that were destroyed from mergers/acquisitions: I will always remember Tandem NonStop. It was my personal favorite, I hate you for destroying them Carly. /Personally, I run FreeBSD, I've always favored Unix over Linux.
...Linux simply isn't Windows (nor is Windows Linux) and to expect fundamentally different approaches (and I'm not just thinking closed versus open) to look, feel, and operate the same way is senseless....
There are things Windows does better than Linux especially software installation.
I know apt and yum resolve dependencies well to a large extent but in some cases, there are version conflicts and lots of chaos in the Linux domain. This does not help at all.
In my opinion, software for Linux should be developed for a particular kernel period. So that one can say, This software will work with this kernel and users should expect it to work.
Point taken. What I meant to say is that since 8.04 is not at the bleeding edge of Ubuntu development and still supported for quite a while longer with security and functionality updates, it is ideal for most users who would rather not spend a great deal of pouring through forums and dealing with major bugs (*cough* burning with Brasero in Jaunty *cough*).
"Even reasonably non-technical dumbasses could do such a thing in windows."
No they can't.
But this does not solve your problem. How have you tried to do it? Perhaps we can help.
Every single person in my dorm in college in 1998 was able to figure this out on their first day with no help from the school. They were all using Windows or Mac OS Whatever Was out Then. I can't comment on the difficulty of setting up a static IP in Ubuntu, but in windows and MacOS, even 10.5 years ago it was trivial for even first time computer owners.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
No i expect a normal person to use the GUI such as network manager or just google it. However my solution is a pretty good guide that will work 99% of the time across every release of most distros and is quicker than using a GUI.
Try giving somebody instructions for setting up a static IP on windows, that will work on windows XP/vista/7. For configuration GUIs can suck my balls, i'll take a text file with a nice header over a fancy GUI, especially as you only configure something once!
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
There is a proper time to push WINE compatibility with Ubuntu -- after a few major industry players, as you describe, put out an Ubuntu version of their software.
The key is to get a user's most important apps running natively, so that there's an incentive to switch. Then you add the compatibility layer for their other miscellaneous apps to take away the disincentive to switch.
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
Evan only there was some sort of integration of small networks on a global scale that could be searched...
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=ubuntu+8.10+to+use+a+static+IP&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=ubuntu+8.10+to+use+a+static+IP&fp=KqtEvp1-d7s
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"If OS/2 had been released even as late as 1992, Microsoft would have been unable to compete with its technical superiority. We would have OS/2 and not Windows. A lot of things would have happened very differently... the delay in OS/2 was a significant historical cusp"
I thought OS/2 was a joint IBM Microsoft project, according to this document Ballmer was enthusiastic that we shipped OS/2, at least until the divorce when he went on the road to demo OS/2, 'crashing the system had the intended effect -- to FUD OS/2 2.0'
davecb5620@gmail.com
If Ubuntu were a $0 way of running windows applications it would take over the world.
Ubuntu shouldn't be *just* windows, it should be windows and more. The problem is that the "and more" part Ubuntu already does perfectly but the "just windows" part is still not complete.
If wine could run every relevant windows applications, people could forget the applications and concentrate on what the system itself does.
Linux is so much better, so much more powerful, easier to use, secure, and stable than windows it's a shame so many people are turned off Linux because their work requires exactly this or that application.
As much as I'd like to make fun of the hardcore linux nerds that look down upon all else as inferior, I'd have to say your troll garners 1/10.
Ubuntu isn't bad, I would likely use it full time if my raid array were supported (without having to splice monkey DNA into the kernel). I do dig the interface in Ubuntu far more than post-XP windows, because when they moved to Vista and beyond it sucked ass.
You however can eat ass.
I expect it filmed and up on youtube tomorrow.
I am not a user or fan of Ubuntu but, Mr. Shuttleworth has summed it up perfectly. Clap clap clap! Push forward on the strengths that the Linux community has built. It really is worth all the effort, getting the deserved respect is a good start.
I wasn't talking about dynamic DNS, I was talking about a DNS proxy program like dnsmasq.
You're right that most people don't care about that, but I was replying to a direct AC challenge to try ubuntu and say you prefer it to windows. For my (niche, geek/developer) uses, it's far, far preferable.
Yeah, because those are common tasks...just the other day my mother was wanting to do that.
"Time to start eating, paytard. I exclusively use Ubuntu, love it, and it's color scheme. Btw=> you can change the colors, paytard"
Have you tried changing the Gnome or KDE Theme manager?
davecb5620@gmail.com
.And with Windows it's Right-click on 'My Network Places' -> Properties. Then pick the connection ->Properties. Pick the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) option ->Properties. All mouse-driven, all GUI, all easy. Adjust away.
Your instructions fail in Vista. I would assume the fail equally well in Windows 7. I'm not even sure they'll work in Windows 95/98.
Tell me again how GUI instructions are better.
It's just been added to Cygwin recently, and it's a pretty nice console. Based on PuTTY's console.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
the iPhone does not suck. Linux on the desktop however? Good luck with that.
Even when a user figures out that there's lots of free software just a few menu selections away, way too many of those gloriously free programs don't install properly, require some chain of obtuse non-automatic dependencies, or just disappear into the filesystem somewhere. So what if it's free if you can't find the app when installed? I'm a long-time professional geek that can figure this stuff out, but frankly if I have to figure it out then apparently the authors didn't make the user (me) the priority and I'll go elsewhere for apps that obviously work when installed.
The iPhone, however, puts an icon for your just-installed app right there on the screen. Easy.
So I return to the ongoing issue with free software: it takes money, usually a lot of it, to finish that last 5% of a program that is so vital to making it useful to the masses, and so boring to do that only money can motivate someone to do it.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Go on, mod me down, Canonical shills
You give yourself away. A true anti-Ubuntu rant would have used the phrase "Ubuntu hippies".
No, they're not, and I never claimed they were. The OP challenged anyone to download ubuntu and say they prefer it to windows. No qualifiers, no "try it on grandma", just a crappy troll.
So I responded.
Different GUI's have different steps for configuration. Instructions for Gnome won't work in KDE or XFCE. Modifying the interfaces file will work on nearly all versions and distributions of Linux.
http://www.mhall119.com
Right click on NetworkManager applet -> 'Edit connections'. Select network -> 'Edit'. The tab 'IPv4' should have the same options that windows has.
That was how you do it with a almost current NetworkManager (0.7.0) in GNOME. Not that difficult in my opinion.
Try giving somebody instructions for setting up a static IP on windows, that will work on windows XP/vista/7. For configuration GUIs can suck my balls, i'll take a text file with a nice header over a fancy GUI, especially as you only configure something once!
That's the problem, I do this all the time, and it's by far easier walking people calling in through a GUI interface than having them have to drop to a terminal and typing/editing commands. Not everyone in the world lives at the command prompt; most of them get intimidated when asked to pull one up. I'm not about to tout the superiority of Linux when the first and only thing that they want is to get their computers configured and online
Further, I can't drive to Orange County, CA (from Rhode Island) at 3 in the morning when I'm tech supporting a short between the keyboard and the seat. It needs to be done quickly so that Mister Short can get it plugged in, and online so that he can get to bed at some point; and I can move on to the next person that's complaining about something else not working on the network.
So you can tout "...Configuration GUIs can suck my balls..." all you want. But just remember, the people that know how to troubleshoot are in the minority; and those that are there need to drag the rest of humanity along until they're ready to learn/re-learn a foreign OS.
"The truth points to itself." - Kosh, Babylon5
The geek thinks like a home builder, an almost extinct species.
He'll quote retail list for the most expensive box he can find - or imagine.
The hardware is never the same. The CPU is now quad core. The OS 64 bit. 4 GB of Kingston DDR2 Value RAM $50. The 1 TB HDD $90.
This is what $700 buys this week:
Gateway LX6810 Refurbished Desktop - Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 2.33GHz, 8GB DDR2, 640GB HDD, NVIDIA GT 120 w 1 GB RAM, 500 watt PS, Vista Home Premium 64-bit
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/how-to-set-a-static-ip-address-in-ubuntu-810-intrepid-ibex.html
I'm not sure if it still exists in 9.04.
What does Shuttleworth mean? Linux can't be a different way to run Windows apps? Those Windows apps are out there because people need those applications. What is the alternative? Is he suggesting to completely reinvent the wheel? Is he suggesting that everything that is on Windows should stay on Windows, and Linux needs to something else entirely? Maybe Linux can be the social networking platform of choice? Maybe I should RTFA, but the entire premise seems stupid. There isn't anything that Linux can do that OSX or Windows can't. The three simply do what they do in different ways, with different quirks, strengths and weaknesses.
"Keep in mind that the 8.10 release is not designed for broad use and that most users (even now that 9.04 has been released) should still be using 8.04, the last stable LTS release."
The non-LTS releases are still supposed to be stable. They're definitely not "development" or "testing" releases. The only difference between LTS and non-LTS should be how long they'll produce bugfixes for them, not the bugginess of the actual release.
If you go to the Ubuntu website, they give you the latest release (9.04 in this case), with an option to download 8.04 if you want longer suppport. There's nothing about LTS releases being designed for "broad use".
This static IP thing looks like a pretty embarrassing bug in what should be a stable release. Making excuses for them doesn't help the situation.
setting static IP has been broken in ubuntu for a couple of releases now, i don't see why nobody has fixed it yet. each time, i end up installing wicd to manage my network connections http://wicd.sourceforge.net/
Not that anybody asked....
While platforms like Firefox, silverlight, Iphone and even Facebook are moving in this direction, the OpenSource platforms should be thinking about "always on, always accessible" applications.
Rather than having to "update" or "install" - apps should just "be there". Whether they are "there" or not is immaterial to the user.
Developing an interface that has (essentially) an infinate number of apps available at one's fingertips is not trivial (how do you make everything accessible, without overwhelming the user - and keep them within three clicks away?). The web will be the backbone - but the browser will not be the interface - the OS itself will be the interface.
-CF
I trust we'll see gnome-globalmenu in the default panel configuration soon then?
Unfortunately, the virtues we keep hearing about are primarily useful to the techie types and not the general public. This is still one of the many key issues keeping Ubuntu from the mass public.
There are many people who will not agree with you and that explains why the Linux market share numbers are still as low as compared to other platforms.
What I will do is to quote this very intelligent man:
Have a read.
"Until the Linux community comes together under a common vision for Linux it has virtually no chance of competing with Microsoft Windows for a place on the desktop. As long as the Linux community is split between the different Linux distros, and as long as Linux continues to be designed for power users, by power users, it will remain out of reach for the broader desktop user community. The Linux community needs to agree on one flavor of Linux. The Linux community needs to focus on that one single Linux platform, developing not to the needs of the power user but the common user. The Linux community needs to simplify Linux. Until this happens Linux will remain in the shadow of Microsoft Windows. And that's right where Steve Ballmer wants it."
He goes further:
"I love Linux. I deploy Linux in the data center all the time. Linux is a very capable, flexible, and reliable platform that can easily run major enterprise systems such as databases and web sites. But it takes someone with a higher degree of technical skill to install, support, and maintain Linux as compared to Microsoft server solutions. You find those skills more readily available in the IT world. Those skills do not exist in the world of the common desktop user."
And further more:
"Until the Linux community stops whining about the evils of Microsoft and begins to deliver a Linux-based desktop OS that is as simple and user-friendly as Microsoft Windows there will be no real deployment of Linux on the desktop. For the common desktop user Microsoft Windows is the solution to their needs. Linux may be more secure. Linux may be less prone to fault or failure. But Linux isn't worth a dime if it is too complex to use, and for the vast majority of desktop users that is exactly what it is."
These are not my words. He seems to be right. Linux has been around for a decade but its [usage] numbers are still low. Why? Read above.
With your Windows example, you demonstrated that it is easy, if you already know how to do it. There isn't anything particularly intuitive about it. Grandma wouldn't be able to do this.
I'm not trying to flame; it is just that the out of the box intuitiveness of Windows is tremendously overstated.
"Don't take my word for it--download the Ubuntu live CD yourself and try it. If you like it better than Windows I'll eat my own ass."
Comparing a live CD of any O/S against a full install of any O/S is bound to make the O/S on the live CD look worse by comparison. Come up with a live CD from Microsoft that can outperform any Linux live CD on a diversity of hardware. Does something like that even exist?
No, you aren't a dumb ass at all... Ubuntu switched networking configuration to a total mess with the so called network manager, and configuring a static IP with that is infamously error prone. The most common advise is to remove network manager and replace it with either WICD or gnome-network-admin, depending on your needs.
That's all fine and dandy, but until Canonical can name me some open source software that can compare to Adobe's Windows/Apple stuff (Photoshop, Premiere, Illustrator, InDesign, etc.), then it's either WINE, Windows, or Apple for me (and even WINE doesn't run the latest stuff). That hippie "OSS or nothing!" stuff is great for light work and 1 a.m. dormroom philosophy, but it doesn't cut it for those of us who use our computers for a lot more than browsing the web and sending some email.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I would be much happier using X (under Linux) if there was a sane clipboard model. On Windows (and OS X), the clipboard and the standard interaction with it is consistent and sane across the entire system.
I absolutely* cannot stand highlight=copy for text. It makes the entire system so much less usable that it completely kills the experience for me.
* The lone exception being a text-only program such as a terminal.
We're not going to try and base our business model on WINE.
Much better to have native apps.
How do you keep the "Linux" app from being ported to Windows?
The market 20X - 100X - larger.
Thoughts about funding - staffing - marketing - profits - are going to start creeping into the mind of any FOSS developer, no matter how pure.
Google doesn't fund Firefox out of charity.
It expects to see real numbers - big numbers - delivered in return.
The "native" Linux app is most likely a UNIX-like utility. I am not sure it can be anything else.
Take a look at Puttycyg for a somewhat more humane terminal (DOS style terminals are retarded).
Quack, quack.
Now, don't take this the wrong way. I love Ubuntu. I love Unix. I love Mac OS X. I love the Terminal, and I love bash. I like scripting and entering commands. Hell, I even like to press alt-f2 and drop into a full text-only session and browse the web with elinks.
That said, the page you linked to sends users into all that unfamiliar territory. It only reinforces the stereotype that you have to know archaic commands to get stuff done in Linux. And ones like this are particularly troublesome, because it's resolving a problem getting online. But you have to be online to learn how to fix it. So what's somebody going to do? Head straight back to their Windows box to get online and look it up, then wonder why they're messing with this Linux stuff.
:q!
I would dare say that most of the "just works" crowd doesn't know the difference between a static and dynamic ip address.
Once you want to do something non-standard you either get the windows experience (it's easy if you can do it at all, but you probably can't) or the linux experience (it will take a little (or maybe a lot of) work but you can do basically anything your heart desires.)
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
...when the closest analogue is Mac OSX? I understand that Windows has all of the market share and all of that, but they have, other than some trivial GUI stuff, NOTHING in common. At least OSX and Linux share similarities, like BSD (OSX's base) and Linux.
I agree that text configuration is easier (unless you've got a remote desktop style app). You CAN use a GUI for Linux network configuration, but it's easier for me to email a bunch of text "paste this in.." than it is to.. "Click on this. What does it say? Ah.. it shouldn't say that.. did you click on? Oh, right.. no, you should have clicked on.." (I'm usually giving advice to people using a different OS than what I'm running).
oh, no go to the system -> Preferences -> network configuration choose a connection and hit edit. use the pull down and select manual. then input your settings.. wow hard.. and all with a GUI.. even..
I think it would make more sense do do it the other way around; make Ubuntu / foss applications work better on Windows which eventually results in "Why am I paying so much (monetary, time, etc...) with proprietary software when most all what I use is foss? From there, what is the benefit of staying with Windows as Microsoft stops supporting it? It will become a battle of loosing support for my favorite foss as XP fades in support, acquire Vista or 7 paying for it or dealing with cracking it, or legally and inexpensively stay up to date easily with all your favorite software by moving to Ubuntu.
I think Ubuntu should take a lesson from Microsoft and bring some of the power of Linux poorly over to Windows, get everyone addicted, keep support realy pathetic, but not enough to get people to not want it, and as people complain, let them know that "while you are doing your best to bring the newest and and greatest stuff over to Windows, it is really hard to support such an old, outdated model, and until then, for the best support, you should really stick with Ubuntu.
One of several reasons I don't use mac is that OpenOffice just doesn't perform as well / smoothly. Same with Windows. I don't like the old way of keeping software up to date. In Ubuntu, the latest version for the distribution us usually good enough, but if I want more, I can just add the OOo repository. Easy!
I would love to see the look on Balmers face if asked the same question: "Hey Steve, do you think that the development and support for Cygwin is going to really help fuel the future Windows and future releases?" I predict at least three stammers before pulling something out of his ass. As cool as the whole Windows XP mode in 7 is interesting, I thought it was pretty cool for a moment until I realized I wouldn't do anything with it in reality, I think it could hurt Windows long run. As Ubuntu looks to the future in many ways, Microsoft having to battle with people that want to stay in the past isn't going to compel industry leaders to look to a future with Microsoft.
Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!
Don't take my word for it--download the Ubuntu live CD yourself and try it. If you like it better than Windows I'll eat my own ass. (It'll be the color of Ubuntu.)If everyone tried the CD they'd see how bad it was. Windows advocates do download it and know how badly it sucks.
I have Ubuntu running on three systems currently:
They all work just fine, thanks so much.
I'll even give you some things that I think it does better/worse than Windows:
Better:
Worse:
Bottom line, my house will probably remain a dual-boot home for now. But the Windows part is pretty much down to iTunes and video games. For everything else, there's Linux.
And to make matters worse, the LTS really seems to mean nothing more than getting security updates. If something's broken in the LTS release, tough luck if it's not a security issue. It might only be fixed in the next release.
One example is that in Ubuntu 8.04 the networking printing using IPP protocol is broken. You can't print to a network printer using IPP protocol due to a gnome bug.
There was a patch done to fix it but it would not be incorporated. I finally went the upgrade route.
This is just a small point though. I'm grateful for the work they're doing and enjoying using the latest Ubuntu release, in my experience every version has worked a bit better than the previous one. It's just wrong to say that LTS is what regular people should be using. I'd rather say that's what they should be using if they have no problems with it.
For Linux to catch up to and overtake Windows, hardware vendors need to up their game when it comes to providing drivers and support. Unfortunately, they have no incentive to do so.
Why? Because they're quite content with the software-hardware-industrial complex they currently partake in with Microsoft. Every new version of Windows has increased hardware requirements, which leads people to buy new computers and/or hardware to run them. All of these computers have Windows on them, of course. Intel, nVidia, AMD, etc. are all happy - everyone's products get bought (even if they're not that great) because the user simply doesn't have a choice. If they want to stay current, they need to pay for a multicore processor, an extra few gigs of memory, or a bigger hard drive.
On the other hand, you have Linux. Jaunty Jackalope runs just as fast (actually, even faster) than Feisty Fawn did on my three year old Dell laptop. You have Damn Small Linux and Puppy Linux that take advantage of even older and less capable hardware. Linux makes old hardware useful again and enables users to be content with their current hardware. Why do they need to buy a new computer when their 7 year old gateway that used to run Windows ME now runs Ubuntu without slowdown or problems?
Software is the route to fixing this, as once enough people get hooked by native, killer applications, hardware vendors will have no choice to support Linux or else they won't be capitalizing on a growing market segment.
"It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"
This is it. The windows world runs by the mantra that WE WILL NOT REQUIRE ANY KNOWLEDGE WHATSOEVER FROM THE USER. This even extends to things like the directory structure to the point where over half of windows users get their files by opening the program and clicking on the file they were editing. If you were to change the save as directory, their files would be lost as far as they were concerned. They'd have to recreate them from scratch.
Files are saved in folders with long paths such as c:\Documents and Settings\Users\Desktop\My Documents\whatever program\more shit\yet another directory\god damn this is a long path\file.xyz by default. In unix /home/username is traditional or at worst /home/username/Desktop
There are wizards for everything. The wizard sets you up, but then you can't make changes. To make the changes, you need in depth knowledge of the quirks of the wizard, or special tools from some admin cd. And your knowledge of the quirks of whatever wizard is not transferrable to the next version of windows which has completely replaced that wizard with another more braindead one with less options which makes more changes you didn't intend when it is used. Not only is no knowledge required, but knowledge accumulated is not rewarded, ensuring that almost nobody learns anything.
Honestly to use a computer users SHOULD be REQUIRED to know a few things because it makes possible interfaces which are faster and easier to use in the long term. These few things include: What a URL is. What directories/folders are. How to get to the desktop starting from the root of the directory tree. Be able to look at a path in text form, and navigate to that folder. It's absolutely fine if computers are pretty much unusable without this knowledge. It takes 30 minutes to aquire and enables interfaces that will save the user many many many many hours of tedium over their lifetime as computer users.
When knowledge is rewarded, it tends to be accumulated. When it is not, then nobody bothers to understand anything. This is something linux can do. It's not afraid to scare away a newbie, so it can be better for day to day use, rewarding the efforts of those who take the time to learn to love it. When you acquire skills in using a free tool, nobody can ever charge you for using that skill again. If you know how to use OpenOffice to create a spreadsheet, then you can create a spreadsheet for all time. If you can only use Excel, then you can create a spreadsheet if you have a copy of Excel which you will need to shell out to MS for. No money? Then you don't know how to create a spreadsheet do you?
Of course there's no reason Linux needs to scare newbies away on purpose. It should strive to supply easy to learn tools, ( gui ones too ) which make configuration as easily grokkable as possible by people who don't want to be bothered by it. Even computer nerds DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE INNER WORKINGS OF EVERYTHING TO DO SIMPLE TASKS. However guis should not get in the way of deeper knowledge, rather they should take you into such knowledge gently, like a guided tour.
...
While I too wish he'd eat his own ass, every attempt I've made so far to configure ubuntu 8.10 to use a static IP rather than a DHCP IP has resulted in failure.
I wondered if I was the only person having that problem. I eventually gave up and just punched my IP address in manually each time I rebooted. If it's any consolation, 9.04 is working just dandy.
I have a DFI motherboard with dual NICs, and I use a 192.168.2.0 network address. Hope that helps.
Internet scofflaw
Connection manager can be pathetic at times. http://wicd.sourceforge.net/ is the way to go.
2) Provide some need that Windows just can't/won't fulfill
Freedom.
Thank God!
Wicd is the way to go
Exactly right. Morphing Linux into a Windows software platform would be a major mistake.
This is the developer speaking.
Not the user. Not the office manager. Not the kid manning the help desk.
Users like having one way of doing things.
It makes their life easier.
The astonishing thing about The Ribbon in Office 2007 is how quickly and easily this fundamental change in the Office UI took hold.
That doesn't happen unless you really, really, understand the user and the task.
The proprietary developer has to do this.
The FOSS developer can find excuses not to.
He may not have the skills or the resources. He may not even know where to begin.
Hello! Let me introduce myself, I am deposed general of Nigeria...
But seriously, I have Lenovo IdeaPad S10e with Windows XP, I haven't been able to get connected to my wireless router till 2 updates for the wireless drivers for Windows. On Ubuntu 9.04 they just WORK. In fact, most of things JUST WORK. Even things that you would not expect to work.
If Shuttleworth could get Yahoo to release their latest messenger in Ubuntu he would get a big boost in home users. If not, then atleast get it to work under wine.
... after all, MSDOS had huge popularity and it was totally useless compared the the Atari ST or MacOS or whatever - much less friendly and much harder to use.
That "wise" man is just another one of the people who don't know but have a much expressed and not very insightful opinion.
I think that people get their software from the "king of the hill" and the that being the "king of the hill" makes everything much easier for an OS. It's just self reinforcing because everyone pays respect to the king e.g. manufacturers of hardware and software make their products work on windows.
If you want linux to go your way then pay for it to happen or do some work.
This is all just my personal opinion.
That's because you shouldn't be using OpenOffice for academic writing. It's ok, but it's painful if you have to say.. typeset equations.
You should be using LaTeX. If you need a gui, then use LyX, which has, to date, the most efficient and capable equation editor I've seen so far. It's helped, of course, by including a pass-through feature for anything it doesn't understand.
LyX integrates with a few bibtex managers, or flat text files.
And of course, the big advantage is that you don't even bother writing the style file. You just use the standard one from the appropriate body (ams, for instance), or get it from the publisher. You use the markup for what it was intended for: telling the software where the sections are, and what bits of text are the titles for those sections, subsections, etc.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
I genuinely don't know the answer to this: what did Mac do to allow people to run Windows programs on their machines? Did they emulate a Windows box? Did they dual-boot? What's the experience like of using programs from both operating systems?
All I know is that when I heard you could do that, I thought, "hmmm, that takes most of the risk out of switching." And maybe instead of trying to guess how to run things under WINE, it's wiser to use a solution where "in this little Window in Ubuntu, I've got XP itself running and such-and-such program running in it." Ship Linux boxes with that feature installed.
Yes, Linux needs to compete on its own strengths. But if you want average consumers to switch, they need to perceive that they won't lose anything in the process. "Keep running your Windows programs AND get all this cool stuff for free." Maybe later they'll give up the Windows programs, too.
(If my implementation ideas sound screwy or naiive, I apologize.)
I think that most of the people who wines about Linux not being good is the people who just wants Windows for free and without all the problems, viruses and insanity like DRM. Following Microsofts whims around are a bottomless pit of wasted time. For every API linux manages to mimic Microsoft creates ten more and "forgets" to document half of them.
If you want Linux to succed you need to make Linux better, not more like Windows. Right now its very easy to use Linux at home for almost every task possible except using Windows applications. I dont think making Linux handling more Windows applications will be better for Linux. It will rather take away any incentive for comercial developers to make native versions.
I can name a few things Linux could use better than more Windows support:
More work on Sabayon, its really excellent user profile handling and eons better than the Windows 95 policy-crud NTConfig.POL Microsoft spews out.
Better and more integrated filesharing than samba. Samba fits into linux as a melon in that dark place the dancing baboon talks out of. Skip Windows altogheter and concentrate on Linux and sharing files between Linux machines easily.
One standard way that you can deploy applications from a developer into multiple distributions. Multiple choices exist, one of them has to come out on top. Doesnt at all have to replace .rpm .deb or tgz etc.
Other than that i cant think of one single thing i lack in Linux. Thats despite that i use it in work, at home and manages a great bunch of Linux machines.
HTTP/1.1 400
The opposite it true as well.
Linux is trying to be a $0 way of running Windows applications, and Windows is a $100 way of running Windows applications.
However, despite the presence of Linux, piracy of Windows STILL remains high, showing that people would rather steal Windows than use Lunix for free.
Given that fact, I really don't see where Linux fits in the desktop marketplace.
Personally, I've always felt Linux advocates are their own worst enemy. By focusing on the desktop, they are missing out on pushing into markets with literally NO competition. Cell phones, PDAs, smart devices, etc.
If Linux took a page from MS's strategy of success, they could actually pull out a long-term win. MS didn't beat the server bigwigs by fighting them head-on. Instead, MS focused on an area with no serious competition- the desktop. And now, MS owns the server market, and it owns the desktop.
The "new" desktop is portable devices. If Linux focused on the portable device market, it would eventually own the desktop, and maybe eventually the server market.
However, the Linux community is fixated on beating MS in their area of strength, which is why they are now losing most of their customer base to Apple, or people who finally just go with Windows full-time.
Okay, it's on! Gonna hack your printer at 4am and scare your cat!
XP isn't bloatware.
...
Amazing. People really can get used to anything. How an OS that needs a FULL CD when it doesn't actually CONTAIN anything can not be called bloatware I shall never understand. Don't link to linux images, those contain a full suit of software not just simple editor, a basic media player with no codec support.
I hope your defence is that you are just young.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
$500? Who pays $500 for Windows?
You can get a Windows laptop from Dell for 2-3 hundred dollars. You can get a copy of Windows from a store for $89 for Vista Basic to $199 for Vista Ultimate.
So what lower part of your anatomy are you pulling this $500 figure out of?
The great need for Windows applications (Outlook, Word, Excel, Quicken) is much less. In the old days, you needed these Windows applications. Now, most people spend about 90% of their time using web based applications. PDF has greatly reduced the need for Word and Excel for most people since the biggest issue was being able to read the document.
Windows is in trouble, but not because "it sucks". Windows is actually a fairly good OS. The problem is that Windows is quickly becoming the most expensive part of a computer. When you're selling a PC for $300, and your choice is to add a $0 Linux or a $100 Windows OS, what would you choose?
In the old days when computers were over $1000, adding Windows was a small part of the cost and made your computer quite useful. Besides, people demanded it. Now, people aren't demanding Windows and the cost of Windows is approaching 25% of the cost of the entire machine. Linux (especially with the new Netbook front end) is looking better and better.
Windows is also suffering from the ever shrinking platform. Windows simply doesn't scale down to smaller displays and smaller memory footprints. Windows also doesn't work well on non x86 chips. Windows is the dominant OS on the desktop market, but despite Microsoft's best efforts, it hasn't made a dent on the Smartphone market or the Setup box market. It is now struggling in the PDA market and has less than stellar success in the Netbook market.
Shuttleworth is 100% correct. Let Linux be Linux. Linux will be the OS of the Net while Windows can remain the OS of the ever shrinking corporate desktop office. People no longer care about their OS which is why setup boxes are Linux based and Linux will become the OS of the Smartphone. Sooner or later, Linux will creep upon what remains of the Desktop market too, but only if Linux is easy to use.
Concentrate on getting the Linux desktop working and don't fret about Windows compatibility. Look at the Mac. It's not looking to run Windows programs. Apple's only concern is that it can play nicely in the Windows world. If Linux did 1/4 as well as the Mac, it would more than triple its desktop share.
That's the problem, I do this all the time, and it's by far easier walking people calling in through a GUI interface than having them have to drop to a terminal and typing/editing commands.
On the phone, yes, walking someone through GUI steps is easier because speech-to-text isn't efficient and you can alter your instructions to fit different GUIs based on real time feedback from the user.
On the web, however, where you can't modify your instructions based on real-time feedback from the user, and where accurate copy-pasting is possible, CLI instructions are easier.
http://www.mhall119.com
Seems to me like reverse psychology. Arguments against Ubuntu:
1 - It is brown.
2 - It sucks.
Great logic. If someone truly hates Ubuntu, why insist so much that others try it? And even tries to sympathise: "Windows advocates do download it", so you won't be a traitor if you use it.
With the added bonus that after such a bad recommendation, anything that works will be seen as a boon.
I like the way internet trolling is evolving.
entropy happens
And with Windows it's Right-click on 'My Network Places' -> Properties. Then pick the connection ->Properties. Pick the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) option ->Properties. All mouse-driven, all GUI, all easy. Adjust away.
This is just the way it is in Ubuntu! Right click on nm-applet icon. In the 'Wired' tab, click the 'Add' button. Give the new connection a Name, select the IPV4 tab, change the 'Method' dropdown from auto to manual IP, then click 'Add' to add manual IP information. Hit OK, then close. Then click nm-applet icon and under 'wired' section, click the new connection you made. Pretty Damn Simple.
And then when I want to switch back to DHCP: just click nm-applet icon, and choose DHCP. Then when I want to go back to the static network, click applet again and choose the connection I made. MUCH simpler than windows, and 100% GUI.
Go back under your bridge...
ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
I use Linux at home since five years and I find very little need to run Windows apps; but it is true that when you need to run that occasional app it would be helpful if it would run on Wine. I would have had two windows applications that I needed to run in the past couple of years. The first one was a piece of software that came with my sportswatch to evaluat trainings. This runs fine on Virtual Box with a Windows XP running on a virtual machine. The second occasion was when I wanted to run a bios upgrade utility for my laptop (Lenovo). This was designed to run on MSDOS or Windows and I hat neither of them. For the latter case I wonder why the hardware suppliers does not supply a bootable cd image with a Linux to install the new bios; it should be more reliable than the windows app they now use and it would work for everyone, not only those running Windows.
Indeed it would be more beneficial to OSS as a whole to have native apps running on linux instead of just running what another OS can run. However, in order for people to be willing to ditch windows for linux, a heck of a lot of apps have to be improved. Let's be real now: most linux alternatives do not compare to what professional apps can do on windows (gimp/photoshop, audacity/sonar, flash, and the list goes on...).
If wine is not to be used, then the only other option is to make OSS be comparable to its alternatives in a way that its not only fairly similar, but exceeds its closed source counterparts in capacity and features. In other words, OSS not only needs to copy, but make it better.
Pure insanity. I mean, really. I demand that an operating system cost 50 bucks, or less. I demand that my software is mostly included with the operating system. Those special things that I need should be available for ten bucks or less. I mean, I don't even spend a thousand dollars on HARDWARE (build my own) so why should I spend hundreds and thousands on OS + SOFTWARE??
I sit in front of a dual core Opteron, with everything I could possibly need installed, and it cost me a grand total of about $600, including OS, office suite, virtualization, entertainment - the works.
I refuse to pay Microsoft, Adobe, Apple, the government, or anyone else for any of this. I simply refuse.
What's more, I think it simply insane that common people DO PAY $200+ for an operating system, 200+ for their office suite, $50 a pop for numerous games, plus more music and movies than I could possibly store on a terabyte drive.
I simply see no value in any of it.
Open source enables me to do ANYTHING that the proprietary stuff can do, at little to no cost. (I contribute a little bit now and then to open source, so there is a little cost to me in the long run)
End rant.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
netsh interface ipv4 set address name=â€<ID>†source=static address=<StaticIP> mask=<SubnetMask> gateway=<DefaultGateway>
Where:
ID is the name of the LAN Connection
StaticIP is the static IP address that you are setting
SubnetMask is the subnet mask for the IP address
DefaultGateway is the default gateway
Best of both worlds, no?
This space for rent.
Lookup netsh in Windows.
This space for rent.
http://www.windowsreference.com/networking/how-to-set-staticdhcp-ip-address-from-command-line/
This space for rent.
As long as there are people in the world who can[']t handle the extra hassle of servicing open source[, ]there will be a market for Windows.
You're making an assumption that servicing open source is an extra hassle.
That isn't necessarily always true. In fact, it might be the case that open source at some point is less hassle.
My experience is that I get a much cooler feature set for an equally tolerable amount of hassle.
What about the wobbly windows? I'd call THEM a virtue, and they're utterly useless! There are a few Compiz effects that improve usability, like the magnifier, the desktop wall, inverting colours (useful for reading large amounts of text on screen, white on black is easier on the eyes than black on white). The wobbly windows also improve performance for me, actually. Without a compositing window manager, windows kind of leave trails when I move them - this happens in Windows and Linux, so I'd guess it's my craptacular computer.
Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
There isn't anything that Linux can do that OSX or Windows can't.
Looking at it through your narrow window is your deficiency, not a Linux deficiency.
One thing Linux can do that OSX and Windows can't do, is give the end user freedom to do as pleased with the OS, make source code available for modding, adding/removing functions, etc.
This was the main reason for Linux to come about in the first place.
This is what Mark S. is trying to say. Linux can never be like windows, and still remain Linux. Their 'philosophies' are diametrically opposed.
Windows and Mac OS are both proprietary with the developer/vendor wanting to remain completely in control of the OS.
Linux is by it's very nature hostile to anything but full end user control of the OS.
That's why tha vast majority of this whole thread is 'off topic' trying to compare Linux with Windows.
It makes about as much sense as comparing a farm tractor to a submarine.
The only valid comparison is that both do what they were designed to do.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Ubuntu:
1. Right click network icon in taskbar, select "Edit Connections"
2. Select your connection, click "Edit"
3. Select "IPV4" settings tab. Change the combo box from DHCP to manual, and enter your static IP info.
The end. All mouse-driven, all GUI, all easy. Adjust away.
OSS improves fast. Any idea of "how things are with the Linux desktop" are pretty much invalidated after a year. I've been able to do the above process more or less for at least 3 ubuntu releases now.
If Ubuntu were a $0 way of running windows applications it would take over the world.
History disagrees. Perhaps you've forgotten about Lindows?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._Lindows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linspire
And while Lindows was NOT free at $99, it was a $0 investment over a Windows upgrade, in its day.
http://www.wired.com/software/coolapps/news/2001/10/47888
Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
And my Windows 95 spec computer couldn't run XP, and my Amiga wouldn't have coped with 95, and my god was it a nightmare getting AmigaOS running on my ZX Spectrum.
If your happy with the software on your abacus, use it. Don't get an $2000 abacus emulator and then bitch that it's a poor substitute.
If Ubuntu/Kubuntu was merely about attempting to create a free replacement of the Windows API, it would be like skipping the embrace part altogether. It's impossible to stay compatible with Windows software (just think about the ODF perversion) and there always will be a new API with undocumented/patented/DMCAed extras such as DirectX 11, DotNet 4.0, WMA, ...
I think Shuttleworth has said something like this in the past: We need to be good at things where proprietary software can't or doesn't want to go and we need to do this again and again.
Most of you will know this anyway:
And my advice is to switch to a distro with decent GUI configuration and less breakage, like Mandriva.
Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat
I had the same problem. A little googling later, here was the solution (and yes, I agree, this is absurd and I hope it's either already fixed or will be by next release):
Get rid of dhcp client:
$sudo apt-get remove dhcp3-client
Change interfaces to match your static IP setup:
$sudo vi /etc/network/interfaces
and (assuming your primary interface is eth0) change it to:
# The primary network interface
auto eth0
iface eth0 inet static
address [static ip]
netmask [netmask]
network [network address]
broadcast [broadcast address]
gateway [gateway address]
replacing [static ip] with your actual ip address eg 172.16.1.33 and so on..
To set DNS without it being overwritten by resolvconf every time you reboot, create
$sudo vi /etc/resolvE.conf
# DNS
nameserver [nameserver 1 address]
nameserver [nameserver 2 address]
then create an init script to copy this file to resolv.conf at boot:
$sudo vi /etc/init.d/fixresolv
#!/bin/bash /etc/resolvE.conf /etc/resolv.conf
cp
and use update-rc.d to create the init script links:
$sudo update-rc.d fixresolv defaults
Run it once immediately so you don't have to reboot just to set DNS right now:
$sudo /etc/init.d/./fixresolv
Finally, restart network services:
sudo /etc/init.d/networking restart
If all went well, you'll now be up on a static IP with working DNS which will continue to come up properly next time you need to reboot.
You can setup stack IP addresses by point an click 9.04 and 8.10 with the following procedure:
1. Right-click on the Network-Icon in the notification area.
2. Choose: Edit Connections
3. Choose: The wired tab
4. Choose: The listed entry (if none choose New)
5. Press edit
6. Click on the Tab: IPv4 Settings
6. Choose in the Method dropdown: Manual
7. Click on the Add button
8. Fill in your IP address
9. Press apply
Well it's faster just adding the right lines to /etc/network/interfaces
1. Open Terminal: Application>Accessories>Terminal /etc/network/interfaces /etc/init.d/networking restart
2. Type: sudo nano
3. Add the right configuration
4. sudo
Hmmm,
Right-click on NetworkManager Icon, left click "Edit Connections", select appropriate connection under wired (or wireless etc), click edit, authenticate using password, left click IPv4 Settings, select "Manual" as method, Add in appropriate information, apply and close. No command line, no raw file editing. Completely mouse driven.
You were saying what now?
... a good powerpoint viewer. One that supports all powerpoint slideshows perfectly, no matter how much multimedia is embedded. A lot of home users receive annoying powerpoint presentations with some stupid joke or something, and they LIKE it.
They aren't supported very well in linux. Some are, many are not. Especially when sound is embedded. And Average Joe will open a presentation, notice it isn't what it is on Windows, and then believes Linux is no good.
than I can say that the cheapest version of Linux is about $100.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but Exchange server is a database with a web interface. Don't we have all the components already? Compared to the Wine project goals, it would be almost trivial to throw some stuff together to make a feature-equivalent app.
As much as I would love to belittle Microsoft's work, replicating Exchange's functionality would be a monumental undertaking. God knows how much time I've spent battling lock-in to get decent interoperability with other systems. To give you some idea of this complexity, you can run Exchange on an X.25 network (and I think, in Exchange 5.5, the daemon spoke directly to the hardware). The overview of Microsoft's Exchange protocol suite runs to 81 pages!
Now, certainly, 95% of Microsoft's Exchange customers could get by without things like X.25 support. For lots of people email DB + IMAP + webmail is pretty good. But many Microsoft customers can't get by without a groupware platform, a highly-integrated distributed authentication database (with Kerberos support) and directory service (with an LDAP interface) with a customizable schema, and on, and on, and on... When you look at it that way, Exchange is a pretty good deal. It certainly functions reliably in our environment, and trust me, I would make a stink about it if it didn't.
The big tradeoff, of course, is that your data is locked up. But I think most IT managers say, hey, we're already running Windows, so what's the big deal? Anyway, if you could switch people off of Exchange without any trouble, people would do it. As it stands for most IT shops, that's like switching out an Apollo flight computer mid-mission. It ain't gonna happen.
IMO intuitiveness of any software out of the box is tremendously overstated and overrated, I remember when I actually used windows for the first time which was windows 95, it took a while to get a hang of things, and to get adjusted to mouse usage in the first place.(till then I was using Dos at my school). I switched to windows 95 then because it was so cool, and it was one of its own kind, and Macs were like UFO from the country I come from.
-- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
I don't know how much of what Mark Shuttleworth says, he actually means.
I think he says a lot of things, at times at least, primarily with the goal of keeping either the FSF or the Debian people happy, when that possibly isn't how he himself really feels.
Why do I think this? Simple. I've been using Ubuntu for nearly three weeks now. Despite what Shuttleworth might say here about Linux being its' own system, Ubuntu is the anti-Linux. It is trying harder and more desperately to be a "Free-as-in-Stallman," direct clone of Windows, than any other distribution I've ever seen, and the results, on balance, are utterly disastrous.
(Background: my first exposure to UNIX in general was FreeBSD in 1995 on an ISP's dialup shell; I installed Slackware maybe two years later, played with Red Hat when it first came out a year or two after that, have compiled Linux From Scratch, and have had Debian and Mandrake installed at various times as well)
In that time, I've seen that it has very serious problems. It's probably the least stable, and definitely the least transparent and discoverable, Linux distribution that I've ever used. It is completely non-standard; absolutely nothing is where I expect it to be, at all. Ubuntu's tagline for long-time Linux users could be the same as that of the new Star Trek movie; "Everything You Know Is Wrong." ;)
Sysvinit is unhappily married with a new system called Upstart. There is a truly eldritch kernel compilation framework; modprobe.conf does not apply at all. Cups and Bluetooth are installed on systems irrespective of whether you have those devices or not, and if you don't and want to save space, stiff cheddar. If you try and remove them, apt will remove the rest of the system with them. The whole thing is packed to the rafters with Byzantine Debian voodoo; it's an absolute nightmare.
I've had ALSA crashing and becoming corrupt entirely randomly, requiring a complete reinstall. I had a weird crash a few days ago which rendered my nvidia drivers completely inoperable for playing games, but for some inexplicable reason 3D still works just fine for Compiz. The command "mount -a" doesn't work, and Windows partitions aren't automatically added to /etc/fstab, so after I add them, I either have to mount them individually or reboot.
The package "build-essential" doesn't install anywhere near everything that is needed for a Linux From Scratch build; I had to compile texinfo and its' deps, and ncurses from source, since things still wouldn't work even after I installed the apt-get packages.
Go into the Ubuntu support channel on Freenode as well; I was there yesterday, and it is an absolute madhouse. The place is packed, and there are people firing questions at the ops faster than they could ever hope to answer them. The single biggest complaint people have, is that hardware of various kinds randomly and intermittently simply stops working.
My advice to anyone considering using Ubuntu as a distribution? Don't. It is, without a doubt, the single worst, most broken, wreck of a distro that I've ever used; and believe me when I say that after my stint with Debian, that's really saying something.
If you want user-friendly, get Fedora Core. If you want a distro that, in my own mind, lets Linux be itself, get Slackware or Arch. Stay well away from Ubuntu and Debian both; for me anyway, they're just not worth the pain and suffering.
This icon, over here, lets me use google, and watch videos on youtube... This icon, it's to write documents. This thingy over here, it lets you see the Earth (seriously!!).
Me: Can you click on the Start button and..
Customer: Wait, what? Me: Click on the Start button.. at the bottom left of the screen... Customer: Oh! I see it!
Seriously. Every damn day. This is where I stay quiet and *tears her hair out*. The amount of complexity in installing your operating system, setting it up for internet access, setting it up to play multimedia (codecs etc), and it many cases even installing the apps they need like Office.... these things DO NOT MATTER. If I asked one of my customers to install XP themselves... or bring home their new computer without a PDF reader installed, without flash installed (for those cool videos!), etc... They'd all leave! They get their computer back, they know they can open their attachments (video, pdf, etc), they know they can write a document, look at youtube, search google. This makes them happy!
Now, compare to Linux... you do not ask the customer to download it, burn it to an iso, and install it. No. A techie does it. I run my own business, doing nothing but Linux install, support, upgrades. When they get their computer back, or their new computer.. they can open pdf files (default in every linux install). They can view multimedia (I installed the codecs, verify sound works, etc.) They have shortcut icons on their desktop to start "the word program". Another to browse the net. Another for Skype (that I installed), another for playing music. These people.. Are happy! I cannot see how anyone can complain about the pains of installing and configuring linux (as if Windows was a breeze to get set up!). Joe Average User does _NOT_ install his own operating system, and he does not configure it for use. He gets it, and uses it. If you don't see that, you need to work in a small-time PC repair shop for a little while, talk to some real computer users.
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. - Krishnamurti
It's a bug smartarse. Ubuntu has a full gui way of doing it that involves right clicking on the connection icon and going "edit connections".
It's always worked for me but apparently it doesn't work for this guy with 8.10 (which as pointed out isn't an LTS).
I dunno how that works, if I didn't want I wouldn't have had to drop to a terminal at all for the last couple of releases.
What's so hard about right clicking the network icon, selecting "edit connections" and pressing "Add" on the "Wired" tab? To me it takes less mouse clicks and far more intuitive than Windows...
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
Off the top of my head when I was a network admin setting a static ip in win98 would cause the computer to go unresponsive for a while, require a restart, and sometimes work and sometimes not.
In all fairness, there was a (well known) bug in the NetworkManager in 8.10 that would revert you to DHCP on boot up (ie. unless you felt like fiddling, you had to be present during restarts, which is annoying). -posting anon. cuz I moderated
/etc/networking/interfaces
for example/description of simple syntax: man interfaces
then uninstall network-manager: apt-get remove network-manager
then to make it take effect: ifdown eth0; ifup eth0
the way mentioned is good and i use it, but for something a little more robust you can also just map the mac address on your dhcp server so it always get the same ip, doesnt work with a POS router however.
You changed from Mint to Ubuntu? Heh, I've just done the opposite for a general use desktop. What was the main reason for dropping Mint?
Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
i use google scholar to find my refs. Once exported from google scholar the ref can be pasted directly into kbibtex with a single middle-click and it automagically inserts another sanitized entry into your bib file, which is a plaintext database for use with latex.
http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~fischer/kbibtex/
It's true that both examples fail the intuitive test for a novice user (after all, what novice would know about static IP addresses) - but the functionality is at least discoverable in the windows case. I mean, in the linux case, imagine the plight of the poor novice if they googled for instructions and got: "vi /etc/network/interfaces" (i.e., vi instead of nano).
That said, the page you linked to sends users into all that unfamiliar territory. It only reinforces the stereotype that you have to know archaic commands to get stuff done in Linux. And ones like this are particularly troublesome, because it's resolving a problem getting online. But you have to be online to learn how to fix it. So what's somebody going to do? Head straight back to their Windows box to get online and look it up, then wonder why they're messing with this Linux stuff.
haha, that is exactly the same I thought when I saw the page, compare that to Windows XP
And you see one example of why Linux Distros are still miles away from the usability and intuitiveness of Windows.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Wicd [sourceforge.net] is the way to go
And that is yet another big issue in the Linux world.
IIRC previous Ubuntu versions used something else than Network-Manager, then they changed to "Network-Manager" because it was supposed to be easy, next version they may change to this Wicd and next next next version to something else.
I wouldn't let my dad or grandpa try an OS that changes its interface as a bitch underwear. And this is every 6 months to 1 year!!
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
So you guys just released it for shits and giggles?
Also I like the solution to configuring a static IP address involves 4 commands entered in to the terminal. It's not like netsh on Windows allows you to do it in one. Oh, wait.
becos i can't get the SETI screensaver to work on Ubuntu .... any ideas ???
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
and the ability to use Linux apps concurrently with Windows apps.
I run Windows XP on Virtualbox to run legacy apps... except for Eudora I am running via Crossover Office until Eudora for Linux is ready for prime time.
Now that I run Eudora in Crossover Office, I run XP maybe an hour a week. Once Eudora for Linux is ready... I'll be running Windows apps for maybe an hour a week.
Tech Public Policy stuff
I'm now running my Eee PC900 with Kubuntu Jaunty right out of the box with support for everything. The hacked kernel that was required to support my netbook is now no longer required.
OpenGL runs well enough on the netbook video chipset that I can even use the "spinning cube" desktop switcher animation. . . as long as I'm willing to charge my battery twice as often.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Shuttleworth need not be concerned that installing WINE on Ubuntu by default will turn Ubuntu into a "better platform to run Windows apps". Usability of WINE and for that matter, even Crossover Office with real-world Windows apps is too hit and miss to make this possible. While WINE is a remarkable technical accomplishment, I've got two proprietary Windoze e-book readers that lock up when one points their library paths at large numbers of books. I'd say that Crossover Office works well with about 1/2 the apps I've tried it on.
While I do run Linux (Debian) and Windows on this desktop box, I run XP via virtualbox, and practically everything Just Works. I also run XP for about an hour a week to access a few legacy apps with features I need... or that simply do not exist in Linux, like the USPS Shipping Assistant. And during that hour, it's a better Windows app platform than Windows ever was running native on any box I've ever dealt with. But Linux apps really are good enough for about 99% of my computer use.
I run Kubuntu full time on my netbook... the only reason I have Crossover Office on the Eee PC is so I can read the very few DRM-broken e-books I own on it. (Mobipocket and eReader will work if you import books into the library one at a time). And it came up when installed on my netbook with no significant problems, even the wireless worked.
IMO, there is simply no reason not to install WINE by default with (K)Ubuntu unless one is doing a very lean installation for a very small mass storage environment, and that's an option that can be deselected in the install process.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Here's an example: I'm building a "Media Center" on Ubuntu for home use (watching movies, playing Hulu, running emulators, playing MP3s). I'm not doing anything very advanced, but it has taken me several installs to get something even marginally working!
First install with 8.04, couldn't get the DVD codecs to run correctly. No problem, wiped it and installed 9.04 because it was supposed to be slicker and easier. Guess what? NONE of the codecs would load, dvd playback wouldn't work, and the USB wifi was dead in the water. Ooookay, let's try MythBuntu: Supposed to be very user-friendly, and I can customize it to NOT do the MythTV part, and just run what I want. Wiped, installed, and could never get ANY functionality out of it; not even firefox would connect. Lovely. Okay, back to Hardy Heron, at least the WIFI card worked, right?
So, after one more wipe and install, Hardy is up and running. Great, let's drop VLC on it. Oooh, no go, some big dependency issues. No problem, I'll tweak the software sources, run apt-get update, and try again. Great, got VLC! But wait, the DVD codecs are proprietary, so I have to find the proper version and download/install THOSE now. Get them installed, and suddenly VLC plays DVDs beautifully; perfect! Mp3s working? Check! How about some of the AVIs I've ripped from my DVD collection in the past? Ooh, sorry, no go; I need more codecs! Of course!
Alright, lets give VLC a break, and try out Hulu/YouTube: No go, not running the right version of Flash. No problem, it gives me a download link; I click it, it's downloads/runs the .deb, and...fails! Wrong version of libpango installed! Well, I'll just update it...wait, it's already the NEWEST version? Hmm. Okay, I'll simply remove the Adobe Flash 10 plugin, and install version 9. Oh, now FireFox doesn't recognize that version? Huh. Eventually, I got a version of Gnash able to run Flash on Hulu/YouTube. Perfect! Except when I maximize the Flash playback, it gets REAL jittery, and can almost make you motion-sick! Plus, I tried to install XBMC, only to have the launchpad toss me some 404 errors.
Now, I am by far no Linux newbie; I built and maintained the SLES and SLEDs at a School Corp. at my last job (about 100 desktops, integrating with our Netware 6.5 server for authentication/filesharing), and I've dabbled with various distros over the years (including installing Debian on a all-in-one PPC!) However, Ubuntu is NOT ready for ANY "ease of use" title, nor can your average Joe pick it up and have it "just work." Until Ubuntu can give the average person the same "Hey, I bought it and it works!" experience that Windows does, it will be seen as little more than a diversion for those tired of viruses.
That being said, I'm completely on your side of hoping that Ubuntu DOES become a way to not just run Windows apps flawlessly, but to outshine it's competitors in security, ease of use, and dependability as well. That is the start of a much better world!
Last night I played a blank tape at full volume. The mime next door went nuts.
You are talking $$ so that's probably in the USA. In the UK I bought OS/2 2.1 in the mid 90's; I can't remember the price but I do remember it cost less than DOS+Windows 3.1 at the time. Yet it included all the actual DOS and Windows code that could be run in a virtual DOS machine (VDM) under OS/2 supervision. And yes, it was better than running them natively because the supervisor could shut down the VDM if the app misbehaved - Windows 3 apps mostly sucked. OS/2 was *too* cheap : IBM were losing money on every sale to try to prime the market.
Also at that time it was possible to get a refund for a PC not pre-loaded with Windows - Evesham Micros gave me a 50GBP discount anyway.
But when I pointed all this out to people they did not want to know. Didn't understand what I was talking about. They thought Windows was something that was inborn to a PC, and most people still think that today.
Setting up network connections was much easier then.
We've had a lot of time to make it more complicated in the interim. No I am not joking. The user interfaces are a lot more baroque now, trying to handle many more cases. Win95 internet was super easy to set up. Win 2008 server is much much more annoying.
-josh
people are already confused about the multiple meanings of the word "free".
No they're not. Potential users start out completely clear about what "free" means to them: when used in the context of something which you habitually pay money for (like software), it means that it costs $0.00.
Free software advocates are causing confusion by playing silly Humpty Dumpty games ("words mean precisely what I intend them to mean") with a word in common use. If you want to distinguish GPL software from nasty sell-out "Open Source" then call it "software libre", call it "copyleft" or (now here's an idea) call it "GPL". Don't deliberately pick an ambiguous name just so you can score pedant points when people inevitably misunderstand.
The trick to getting wider adoption of Linux is to start finding ways to promote it to people who don't give a damn about access to the source code. Telling them that they're stupid because the word "free" does not mean what they think that it means is not a good sales pitch.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
It could be done in one. The only reason it's more difficult in this case is because of the bug. Please tell me you're not of the delusion that Windows has never been released with a software bug.
Anyway, I don't care. LaTeX will still be readable long past the time ODT, DOC, DOCX and whatever new incarnation/version of those are more than unreadable.
You are aware that DOCX is simply a bunch of XML files zipped up together? So you can simply unzip a DOCX file, open up the "document.xml", and you have your text.
Even if all conversion utilities disappeared from the planet, it would be simple to write a script to strip out the XML tags and leave you with your text, or for that matter, to use the XML tags to preserve the formatting.
Now, if the ZIP format goes kaput... well, then you may have a point.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Time to eat your own ass.
Umm... Yummy!
My fault -- I should've been more specific. I was thanking the advice for most users to stay on version 8.04. :P
It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
I do not use Gnome as much, but when I did there was a nice GUI for setting networking up, including static IP. In Kubuntu 9.04, you go to the menu, click system preferences, click on network preferences in the section network and connectivity, network management, cabled network, edit. As mouse-driven and GUI as in Windows. I would argue that it is even more intuitive, as I do not know if "Internet protocol" is where I would look for *anything* if I were a newbie (wassa a protocol, neeway?).
You can also right click the network icon on your systray and pick network management directly from there, but only if you added the plasmoid there yourself, as it is not by default.
I really think you are talking about people already knowing how to configure windows, more than Windows being really easier. The first time I had to configure a network in Windows it took me some time to figure out, and still when I see someone that does not know already, they usually struggle unless following straight directions. I can confidently say that the main Linux desktops are at least as easy to configure in this and most regards as Windows.
Did not Mark espout at one time that he wanted his ubuntu to be like os/x at one time? I do not remmember os/2 was to be a windows clone. They promised all of their own apps and those apps to be better.
So are we talking about vista vs xp or are we talking about how Linux as competition to microsoft? I'm confused, I am also sure someone is going to open their mouth about how MS is sooo much better than linux etc etc. Let us look at a few items, *the best things in life are free....funny you don't have to pay for linux *"embrace, extend and extinguish" when you are the soccerfield, then i guess it is easy to kill off the players. The fact that microsoft is constantly under fire because they move into a market and spend all the money to embrace technology that they did not develop, then extend it through its OS as trial or as THE only option without those who really knew that options exist beyond them thus extinguish all competition. Think about internet explorer and netscape, or microsoft office, lets also add into the mix that microsoft doesn't care about adding and improving features or software unless they are forced by someone who comes up with software better than what they gave. hence the browser wars etc etc. there is also vendor lock in, the fact that they don't fix security leak and all these issues but you are still paying top dollar. What I will say however is that they are not exactly wrong for this process, I think the problem is in the hands now that people are clueless to open their eyes to other options that are out there. Back in the early years of O/S for the home PC it was pretty much all fair. no one really had the big kinks worked out to make things work semi out of the box. Microsoft made that step. yet now linux finally has distro that is ready for the basic user but people down it simply because the distro is young. lets look at the idea that it is FREE, it has basic get you by software that can do many things you want right out of the box. when it comes down to the software options there are not as many as windows but then again compare ubuntu to early ms windows OS. i think the point is ubuntu has to get to the point where you can do the basics right out of the box without a lot of work. The second fact is that it is an all uphill battle, not many people in the world really know about linux, secondly if not many people use the OS then obviously a lot of the software the general home user would use IS NOT GOING TO BE THERE. Someone is always going to want to down something when they are a hardcore fan of the competition. Thats not wrong or right. I see ubuntu as a great opportunity, not only that you can reuse old computers, but that you are putting money out of your pocket. Lets think about those that don't have money to plop out on a new pc or os. The idea behind linux is great. It may not be Microsoft Windows, but it has noble idea. I think givin time the OS will continue to become a viable alternative for those who are willing to make it through the growing pains. If you think the idea of linux is going to be stomped out by a new release of any other OS then you are probably living in another world. There will always be someone out there working on linux distros and software for be it a hobby or necessity. puff im out of breath. p.s. if you are offended it wasn't my point and you obviously didn't get my point so eithe reread or build a bridge and get over it.
Never seen Ubuntu before?
System->Administration->Network->Select the Connection->Properties
Finding TCP/IP properties in Windows is easier? WTF?!
This always remind me of that jwz's phrase of xml, which was quoted from some awk thing I guess..
Anyway, you miss the point. Yes, docx, odf are zipped files with xml inside. And .pages used to be a folder with xml inside.
This doesn't preserve the document, it preserves the strings. Not much better than "strings file.doc" does.
What I meant is that you will have from 20 years now on the SAME document in latex. The same formatting, positioning and archaic appearance. None of them you have stripping xml - which is quite dumb anyway.
I the best comparison Shuttleworth cam come up with is OS/2, he'd better be 'upgraded' into TODAY. Problem seems to be that many Linux applications still LOOK and FEEL like OS/2. There is still no such thing as reasonable documentation. There is still DEFINITELY no such thing as interoperability between applications. Until these issues are resolved, Linux is destined to DIE.
I'm using 8.10 right now and your instructions are incorrect.
Thank you, Mark. Thank you for shutting up the rising tide of morons in the Ubuntu community who seem to keep trying to force the idea that Ubuntu and Linux in general needs to be "more like Windows." Back when I still used Ubuntu, I was very much annoyed by these morons on Brainstorm trying to push some really stupid "make Linux like Windows" ideas on everyone. I submit anyone who thinks Linux should be more like Windows are not meant for Linux and are living in denial.
I am beginning to think that maybe Darl McBride was attacked viciously by a penguin as a child.
If we can't beat Windows, the questions must be put: Do we even want to? Is it not possible to figure out our own game? If we want to beat them, then we should come up with better questions centring around where we want to start; what specifically do we want? If we want to beat them, where do we want to beat them?