Which Linux For Non-Techie Windows Users?

obarthelemy writes "Having at last gotten Linux to run satisfactorily on my own PCs, I'd now like to start transitioning friends and family from XP to Linux instead of Windows 7. The catch is that these guys don't understand or care much about computers, so the transition has to be as seamless and painless as possible. Actually, they won't care for new things; even the upcoming upgrade to Windows 7 would be a pain and a bother, which is a great opportunity for Linux. I'm not too concerned about software (most of them only need browser, IM, VLC, mail and a Powerpoint viewer for all those fascinating attachments). What I'm concerned about is OS look-and-feel and interface — system bar on the bottom with clock, trash, info on the right, menu on the left, menu items similar to those of Windows. Is it better to shoot for a very targeted distro? Which would you recommend? Are there themes/skins for mainstream distributions instead? I've been looking around the web, and it's hard to gauge which distros are well-done and reasonably active."

Comments

Prepare for all

[tsa]

Before you begin, ask the people you want to help if they are willing to try something else than MS software. They are probably quite familiar with Windows, Office, Outlook, and Media Player, and will have a hard time learning something new. That also means you will be asked a LOT of questions, mostly things that you can not even come up with because they are so logical to you. So: know what you get into before you begin!

Re:Prepare for all

[Daniel Dvorkin]

if you have to ask this question on /. you'd better not start

Every single Ask Slashdot story gets a response like this, and it's always a jackass thing to say. The whole reason Ask Slashdot exists is to allow technically competent people to share their expertise, and help others get up to speed. "RTFM n00b" responses like this are a major contributor to the negative geek stereotypes we all claim to hate, and in this specific case, a major barrier to Linux use. If you like seeing yourself as a member of a small, impenetrable elite possessed of special and arcane knowledge, go right ahead, but don't expect the rest of us to play along.

Re:Prepare for all

[Chees0rz]

if you have to ask this question on /. you'd better not start

Every single Ask Slashdot story gets a response like this, and it's always a jackass thing to say.

I think you misinterpreted his meaning, in this case. The GP was giving the advice that- if this ask /.er has to ask, then somebody better bring up the question- "Are you familiar w/ Linux yourself?"

Being a newb with Linux is a difficult enough step, and sometimes hard work. Supporting someone is even more difficult. This advice was buried in his maybe, somewhat, possibly, loaded question- Whatever answer comes up here, make sure you damn well get experience with the distro you choose before recommending others to use it. You are the tech support.

Re:Prepare for all

[aaron552]

It works great out of the box, but as soon as you want to do much tweaking aside from desktop backgrounds and install some additional software, you will run into headaches. "I can't install X without Y and Z dependencies?" And then it's off to google to find out how to get them...in a way that works with the current version of said dependency on your distro...

Seriously. Have you even used a linux distribution in the last 4 years?

For the most part, as long as you don't go outside your distribution's software repositories, you will run into very few (if any) problems. It's only when you try to install software you donwloaded from some random site that you will have problems

ER... Why?

[DaveQat]

I realize Slashdot is probably the wrong place to ask this question, but why bother transitioning them? If Windows works for them, and they're happy, you're just asking for a LOT of headaches with tech support, questions, and problems. Let them continue to use Windows in peace, unless there's some kind of real pressing issue that leads you to recommend them switching.

Re:ER... Why?

[T-Bone-T]

I agree. What's wrong with Windows 7? My dad switched from XP to 7 and was ready to go after a 15-minute walkthrough. He hasn't called to ask about anything. I tried switching him to Ubuntu but he was calling all the time to ask questions.

Re:ER... Why?

[LarrySDonald]

I'm considering something similar because frankly, XP3 catches weird things all the time (and while cleaning windows viruses has a homey retro feel, I don't want to do it all the time) and their hardware isn't really up to running vista or W7. But.. Then they're very used to windows and it'll while the product is free (and good) I'm not signing up to educate/support people for all eternity. Not trying to be obnoxious, but we can't prop up XP forever and not everyone, especially people who consider their computers more of a tool then a beloved friend, can keep their hardware super new.

Re:ER... Why?

[uvajed_ekil]

Well, just because they are used to windows doesn't mean it is working well for them or that they do not need constant help with it. XP is beginning to look dated and has always been a security problem. We all know Vista is crap, so if they're using that, switching to anything would be a reasonable upgrade. And if they are good enough with Windows that they don't need help with it, switching to Ubuntu (or Mint, even better) should not be difficult and will provide some peace of mind in terms of security. It didn't sound to me like the OP was just going in and fixing things that weren't broken just to piss people off - he maintains their computers, they care about what they can do rather than who makes their OS, and their are reasonable alternatives to XP and Vista.

Re:ER... Why?

[T-Bone-T]

Windows 7 will run on just about anything. You don't have to worry about hardware unless the computer is 10 years old. It ran better than XP on my 6 year old laptop.

Re:ER... Why?

[Manip]

Windows XP is secure if configured correctly, and Vista hasn't been crap since its first Service Pack. Your entire post feels like a throw back from several years ago.

Also, I wouldn't switch users away from Windows. It is cheap enough, with great software support, to make it worth while to keep working around any problems you encounter.

Re:ER... Why?

[assertation]

Seriously,....I'm an Ubuntu zealot, but I have learned my lesson "nation building" with tech stuff. You are never really done, people call for help and questions years later.

If they don't like windows they just need to pony up a little more cash, get a Mac and get rid of the hassles.

Re:ER... Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll tell you why. So my Mom doesn't have to buy a new computer.

Background:

My 70 y.o. mother runs Ubuntu.

Her machine dual boots into Windows 98. Yes 98.

She only uses that to make video calls to Europe using MSN messenger.

As soon as I can configure Skype or Ekiga to connect with her relatives, I can dump Windows 98.

If I had followed the upgrade path, I would have had to buy her a new machine, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, etc etc.

As Linux is constantly improving, and Windows has a constant forced paid upgrade cycle, I am getting rid of Windows through attrition.

Microsoft makes it easy for me, as they expire more features; e.g. Hotmail on Windows 98, I moved her over to Evolution on Linux and Gmail.

Attrition of deprecated paid software, is driving the transition, as well as Linux's constant improvements.

Re:ER... Why?

[sponga]

Time is money if you haven't figured it out.

To put it bluntly, the Linux Desktop missed the entire mass adoption of Personal Computers at home. Most of the desktop learning environment was done in the 90's and they have passed that skill on down to their children, so everything is just 'too big' and standardized the desktop. Plus I remember asking about a Linux desktop back in the days and the priorities were not there to develop it, more lines of whining about Windows were written than Desktop Linux code.

You can believe whatever encounters you have had and try to make them an example, but the point remains that Linux is a very chaotic environment and nobody wants to stand up to be liable if something goes wrong. That or they get really offended when you tell them you do not like what they developed and no people do not want to switch between 5 different varities of a certain App with names that do not even compare to the task they are doing.

Personally, I say just wait it out and let a big corporation like Google do something right with Linux to make it a truly great Desktop OS. Ubuntu is barely gimping along and nothing too exciting about makes it a 'must have'.
Plus Windows 7 is here and all the excuses of "Vista is bloat" have kind of gone out the door, MS seems to finally have figured out stability/security with Vista/Win7.

Linux Desktop missed the biggest opportunity to seize on MS's blunder with Vista, missed opportunity in that Win7 will last another 15+ years sitting on Businesses/home users computers.
Sorry I am more of a realist than an hopeful opportunist.

Re:ER... Why?

[ffreeloader]

What a load... Do you figure out how much it "costs" you to learn play a computer game well and add that to the price of the game? Do you count how much it "costs" you to watch tv, read a book, etc... and then never do anything along those lines because it's "too expensive" because of the time involved?

It simply doesn't take any more time to learn one environment than it does another. Just because YOU learned Windows first and think your Windows skills should be the only computer skills you should ever want or need to learn doesn't mean everyone thinks that way, or puts the same lack-of-value on new skills that you do.

You can believe whatever you want concerning the Linux desktop, but that doesn't mean you're correct. It just means that YOU believe that.

Re:ER... Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, if you have to deal with malware and have to reinstall Windows every 6 months then you are just too stupid to use the computer. My last reinstall was two years ago when my hard disk died. After that there was a smooth transition from XP to Vista to 7. No problems whatsoever. Not even with Vista.

Re:ER... Why?

[westlake]

To put it bluntly, the Linux Desktop missed the entire mass adoption of Personal Computers at home. Most of the desktop learning environment was done in the 90's and they have passed that skill on down to their children

It goes deeper than that.

Applications have been passed down from father to son, mother to daughter.

Microsoft Word 5.5 DOS [Patched For W2K] is a free download of a program first released in 1983. 27 years ago. Word for Windows took hold in 1990-1993.

Mandriva Linux

[RudyHartmann]

Mandriva Linux. Especially if you get the Powerpack. It has all the extras built right into the DVD so you don't have to go out and find it. I would also recommend getting the 32-bit version since it's more stable. I also site this article in Linux magazine: http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7643/1.html

Re:Saving Yourself A World Of Pain

[mikkelm]

I'm not sure what kind of experience lead you to believe that Windows 7 can only install with a single drive present, but it is very much not true.

Re:Saving Yourself A World Of Pain

[Xtravar]

I'm as big of a Linux advocate as anyone, but even I'm not delusional enough to think those advantages are going to sway the public.

What?

[tjstork]

you can install Linux even when there are multiple hard drives in your computer (you can only install Windows 7 if there is one and only one hard drive installed)

I have Windows 7 installed on a dual hard drive system right now. It went on with no problem at all, and didn't touch my other drive, which is an Ubuntu installation.

If it wasn't for games and some professional software being released only for Windows I would not even think about paying money for a product that is far inferior to the free one.

There's a lot of stuff that's good about Windows 7 and the story is really, what do you do more. If all you do is surf and do email, with occasional word processing, Linux is just fine. Or, if you do web development, Linux is fine. But if you want to do client development, or play games or do heavy development with a database server, then Windows 7 has a lot of advantages to it. Direct X is a solid API, there's several flavors of sound support, built in MIDI emulation, and more.

To me, the Linux sweet spot really is as a platform for web server development and hosting. Sure, you can do that with Windows, but licensing costs mean you have to have another 800,000 visits per year, assuming a $1 click per 1000 hits, just to pay for each Windows server license, and that doesn't count the cost of SQL Server, if you go that route. That in turn factors to demanding more hardware to support the Windows tax, and that's even more money. Meanwhile, Linux is free.

Re:Saving Yourself A World Of Pain

[blincoln]

you can install Linux even when there are multiple hard drives in your computer (you can only install Windows 7 if there is one and only one hard drive installed)

Er, what? Every version of Windows I've installed (back to 95 on floppy disks) supported multiple hard drives. The 9x series would format all of the installed drives prior to installing Windows itself, but that was fixed for the NT-based versions.

Linux will support RAID - 0, 1, 1+0, etc - Windows 7 only supports RAID 0, and RAID 1 for those who buy Professional or Ultimate, and cannot do RAID 1+0

Do you really want your OS taking on the overhead of RAID? Desktop motherboards with hardware RAID 0/1/0+1 are easy to find and cheap. How many desktop users actually have the four hard drives necessary (at a bare minimum) for 0+1 anyway?

Linux will not magically create a 100MB partition that you cannot erase and is essential to the operating system, unlike Windows 7 that will refuse to boot after removing the 100MB magic partition using Knoppix and cannot repair even with the original installation disks

100MB is about 1/100th of a percent of a common 1TB hard drive, right? Who cares? Why were you trying to remove it?

There are lots of things to like about Linux and hate about Windows (and vice-versa), but I don't think any of the things you mention are significant for the average desktop user of either.

My biggest problem was

[CBung]

I transitioned a friend to ubuntu recently, he was sick and tired of getting viruses and the like. He is extremely satisfied so far. He recently asked me if iTunes works for linux, because his girlfriend has an ipod. She likes to use the itunes store, so the usual amarok/rhythmbox solution doesnt work. Unfortunately if you look at the wine application page for iTunes the rating is trash. Setting him up with virtualbox is just too extreme, he does not have a windows cd around. The biggest thing is check what software they use regularly, and make sure it works first in wine or has a decent alternative. Otherwise they will just be disappointed.

Re:My biggest problem was

[Dutch Gun]

His fault, not the computer's fault.

His fault, because he had the audacity to click on a link in an e-mail, or visit a malformed web page? Or because the flash plugin he was using was slightly out of date and didn't bother letting him know it was time to update? Or because he didn't realize that www.paypal.com != www.paypa1.com? There are thousands of ways a computer can get infected with malware. Many are poor judgement on the user's part, but hell, many are no fault of the user at all - at least, not in a sane world. My definition of a sane world does not include getting your computer compromised simply by viewing a web page.

Linux has the advantage of an inherently superior security model (permissions-based security was ALWAYS the standard), where Windows has the problem of supporting legacy apps from a model that allowed total permissions from ANY process. And of course, there's the fact that Linux (on the desktop) is a much smaller target.

Blaming users is a copout. Lay the blame squarely where it deserves to go: programmers / managers who were thinking far too much about cool whiz-bang features and not enough about hardening their software from malicious attacks.

Re:Try OpenSUSE

[tomhudson]

Definitely, since this person is hardly in a position to really do much in the way of support:

Having at last gotten Linux to run satisfactorily on my own PCs

Not to be too mean, but what's so hard about getting linux to run properly on a PC?

And what's with their preoccupation with making it look like Windows?

Suggestion: either give them opensuse or give them a mac.

Re:Ubuntu

[walterbyrd]

I think Ubuntu may have the best community. And I think the community may be a big deal to a new user.

Also, I think Mint may be based on Ubuntu. As I understand it, Mint looks a bit more like Windows, and Mint offers more "out of the box."

I use debian lenny and xfce4 myself.

Re:Ubuntu

[houstonbofh]

Looking too much like Windows is not a good thing. Since Ubuntu looks nothing like Windows, people do not expect it to behave exactly like Windows. Less questions of "Where is my Control Panel? I want to add some software!"

Yeah right

[alexandre_ganso]

For some reason, our Blue Gene runs suse. And for some VERY unknown reason, someone in tech support decided that our desktops would run suse too.. As suse has the option to run gnome, I didn't complain that much, as KDE sucks hard and it seems it's getting worse.

That would be ok, it at least gnome worked on suse. It doesn't even associate .tar.gz files to anything! Let me tell about the rest.

C'mon, suse was crap, bloated and weird by the time they ran into 7 cds. It didn't get better since then.

I find KDE less frustrating than Gnome

[Colin Smith]

* It has more of the little tools which people expect and use.
* The tools are better integrated with one another. Gnome tools are standalone.
* It's faster (lower latency menus, windows etc).
* It works more reliably. The taskbar for example works, horizontally or vertically.
* It is more like windows XP like than Gnome.
* It's easier to customize/configure than Gnome.

Overall, KDE (3.5, haven't upgraded) just works well. The problem is the application namespace. The "K" thing. Seriously. Get rid of it. I don't need to know that I'm using Kontact, Knode, Karm Kaddressbook or or Kmail. Hide all that bollocks at the filesystem level.

 

Re:Ubuntu

[Urza9814]

I would have to say that, while Ubuntu is a good choice, I wouldn't do straight Ubuntu - I'd pick Kubuntu. Out of the box, Gnome doesn't look anything like Windows - it looks closer to OS X than anything. KDE is going to be a lot more like Windows.

Communities

[NotBorg]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: so what. Do tech communities matter to non-techies? Do former Windows users need or want a community? Even though they didn't need one when using Windows? The word from the Linux communities is that it is easy enough for anyone and easier than Windows. It just works, right?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trolling for Windows and it's great that Ubuntu has a community too. There is value for many in having a friendly community to scrape tech tips from. I just wonder if it really matters to a non-techie who is just looking to play videos, send e-mail, and visit Facebook.

Re:Try OpenSUSE

[Anarke_Incarnate]

Three years ago you might have been right about it being slow. Now, you're talking a few seconds at most here and there for the difference in package management. Also, YaST is so much more than a package manager that comparing it to Synaptic is like comparing a space shuttle to a toy rocket ship. As was also pointed out, the copying of the DVD is so that you can install without having to use the net, which not everybody has at all times

Re:Linux terrorist

[arcade]

One thing though..

If these friends and family want your help every so often to "fix" stuff that doesn't work with their computer - then they should change to whatever YOU feel most comfortable with.

I've told my family that I Do Not Do Windows. At all. If they've got windows-questions, they'll have to go somewhere else. (If you think I'm being mean, I'm not. I haven't used windows on any of my computers since 1999).

If friends/family/others want my help with computers, they'll have to use Linux.

Re:Ubuntu

[Zaphod The 42nd]

The point is that people who are completely technologically illiterate aren't going to do very well with windows xp. Thats what I've set up tons of family members with, they can use it, but every time I go over there and look at one of their machines, I notice all sorts of obvious problems. Viruses everywhere, terribly fragmented drives, etc. etc. Then I made them switch to OSX and Ubuntu. Yeah, it took em a couple days of complaining to learn the UI differences, but ... now their machines run all day and never crash.

If you want XP, just use XP! I don't understand Windows clone distros. If you want Windows then don't switch to Linux.

They DON'T want XP though, thats the whole point. They were forced to use windows because of their monopoly on software and mindshare (where people think microsoft = = computers) and now they just don't know any better than to realize that viruses and bluescreens aren't just "part of computers", but part of windows.

Re:Try OpenSUSE

[WaywardGeek]

I agree. Novell turned evil when it sided with Microsoft against all linux distros other than SUSE. Novell must die, and SUSE supports need to understand they are playing with the Devil.

Re:Try OpenSUSE

[tomhudson]

First, a little more ribbing (because you DO have it coming), and then we'll get serious

Obvious question: Did you try it on something reasonably new, or were these old pieces of crap with questionable hard drives, rotting capacitors, etc.?

From your answer - "since it did install on my 2 latest PCs" I'm taking it that the other 4 were in fact more-or-less dumpster-ready.

though the community, as you so effectively prove, is as welcoming to curious passer-bys and newbies as ever.

... (not finished with the ribbing, btw) ...

If you found linux hard to install, you're simply NOT in the position to help anyone else. They'll see you fumbling, and blame linux instead of your "un-1337 5k1lz". Same as if you found setting up a network hard, you're not in a position to help others do the same.

Or a car analogy: If you can barely drive a car, you're not in a position to teach others to drive a car.

Or a pizza analogy: If you've only eaten store-bought, you can't say what a good pizza tastes like.

Or a beer analogy: If you've only drunk American beer, be careful when you travel - you'll find out American beer is "like making love in a canoe - f***ing close to water."

Okay, all ribbing aside - you made two mistakes.

1) "make it like windows". Why? It's only going to confuse them, because they'll come to it with the wrong expectations. They'll have preconceived notions of how something is supposed to work, and get frustrated when it's not the same. That doesn't happen when they go to a mac - they EXPECT it to be different, and they don't get upset when it doesn't work the same way.

2) "help" - you should always be prepared to do a bit of your own research first, and to explain what you already did. You installed it on 2 pcs ... great. WHAT did you install is the obvious first question. And why isn't it "good enough?" And why did you have problems (we probably answered part of that above - unreasonable expectations on obsolete hardware).

BTW, as many others have said, linux is not Windows. Please don't try to make it into Windows. You're doing everyone a disservice, including the end user.

As for making it look like Windows, my users have a tendency to be even dumber than me. My 80-year old dad is thrown off when a video driver update changes his screen's resolution...

... and ...?

Not to state the obvious, but once the system is up and running, a video driver update shouldn't change his xorg.conf file, so that's a non-issue (and you DID make a copy to WORKING.xorg.conf, right?). And if it does screw it up, he can always change it back. If he can't learn, then he has to wait for you. Those are his options.

Your options include you logging in as a remote user, and with a few keystrokes, fixing his box when he screws things up. Or just deleting the appropriate desktop config file in his home directory and having him log back in - it will reset everything to sane defaults, so he can mess it up again to his hearts content. Learn to use ssh, vi, man, find, mc, and a few other commands, and you'll be good to help him no matter where you are :-)

Re:My 65 year old parents like Ubuntu 9.10

[Sparx139]

Although, perhaps in this case their age was an advantage. To try and create a terribly labored analogy:
If you think of learning an OS like learning a language, we've been surrounded by technology for the majority of our lives. So, we've learned Windows as our primary language.
Now it's harder to learn another language once you're older, because you are accustomed to thinking in one language. Similarly, if you are accustomed to thinking in terms of one OS, you'll find it harder to operate another.
Now, your 65 year old parents won't have been learning windows as a primary language since they were children, which means that they don't have to shift out of the windows framework of thinking in order to use Ubuntu.