Slashdot Mirror
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."
11.2 is very polished and nice and YaST makes it easy to get things done if you are unfamiliar with how Linux configuration files work or are located. It can install software almost as easily as Ubuntu, but in my opinion, does more things "right" than Ubuntu does. It has almost everything you would need and good overall integration. If you install it, I recommend you do it via the install DVD rather than the live CD.
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!
-- Cheers!
Give them Ubuntu. Out of the box it's similar in look and feel to windows. If you want it to look like OS X then install AWN and Compiz (or if their system is old/slow turn on Metacity instead of Compiz) and the advanced effects thing (I forget what its called but it lets you make those squishy windows and the cube for switching between workspaces and lots of other effects.
It took me about 15 minutes to show them how to navigate around (compared to their old Windows XP machine that just gave up the ghost). The only thing I needed to set up for them was flash video so they can use youtube. The system keeps itself updated automatically and they'd already been using Openoffice under Windows.
They've got a brand new Asus notebook and Ubuntu found all the hardware bits by itself (including wifi and bluetooth). Haven't gotten a "support request" in months. I left a bootable Vista partition just in case they decide they want to get back on the Windows merry-go-round, but so far they haven't seen any need.
Best,
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.
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.
I agree fully. Having slight differences is a good reminder that the user is now unique among their peers, and uses something superior to the average. Like driving a Ferrari, it's got everything, but just a little different than their neighbor's Buick.
However, normalcy is nice. Having a steering wheel is good. This is why I usually just rearrange things a bit. Sure, it takes a bit of effort, but you can rearrange the applets on the GNOME panel and get a decent facsimile of Windows, but with different images. It's enough to match up with basic instructions from less-than-savvy friends, and it's certainly close enough to learn quickly.
Once I've converted folks, I've often put a sheet of paper next to the computer, listing equivalent options between Ubuntu and Windows. If you want to do something and can't figure out how immediately, look at the list. Eventually, that list will disappear from use.
Finally, one of the most important things I've done to convert someone has nothing to do with the OS itself. I always leave my cell phone number and a card listing the hours where I'm not otherwise occupied. For the next week, I'll get several calls, but the user gets someone friendly to help them. It also often serves as a nice introduction to the community in general. If I'm unable to really help right then, I'll direct the user to the Ubuntu forums. Calls drop off rapidly after that.
This turned into an essay. Sorry about that.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
* 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.
Deleted
Do you really want your OS taking on the overhead of RAID?
Yes, it's well-debugged, very low CPU (especially in a multi-core world), and it's portable across controllers.
Desktop motherboards with hardware RAID 0/1/0+1 are easy to find and cheap.
Because most of them just pass the job onto an OS driver.
How many desktop users actually have the four hard drives necessary (at a bare minimum) for 0+1 anyway?
RAID-1 is the major win for availability. It even improves your average seek time.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I've used Puppy, Ubuntu, and Mint recently, with a laundry list of other distros over the years.
Mint is your hands-down best out-of-the-box choice. The reason is simple -- it comes with a Flash player already installed. That means that facebook, youtube, twitter, and every other flavour-of-the-week website is going to just work as soon as installation is completed. If you're using other distros, you're going to have to enable the universal, guess about which open-source player and version will work, and cross your fingers. (Remember, if it fails ONCE, Linux is too complimicated.) It is based on Ubuntu, so you get a lot of support PLUS all the proprietary functionality that the average user will want.
Puppy is faster, and by a long shot. Even though it's not as polished, it is usable, so much so that my daughter can use it. (She is six.) I've got another copy running on my ancient P2 366 laptop, and it's actually usable.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.