Did anyone else notice that the base model on that laptop comes with an ATi card? This (given my experiences with ATi on Linux) seems like a BAD match for the preloaded Ubuntu laptop.
The only upside I can see is the rhetoric about better open source driver pressure coming from Dell (on the Direct2Dell page).
Anyone else nervous about this being Joe Sixpacks initial experience with Linux?
a) When you're installing Windows legally, you have necessarily already paid for support to take you through tough spots."
Are you kidding? Show me someone who has actually gotten support from Microsoft on a home install. You are living in a dream land. Aside from that, if you actually wanted professional support, you CAN pay for that from Canonical. You chose not to, and therefore took the onus on yourself to figure it out.
"b) MS doesn't *need* your business in order to build up inertia; it already has it. Linux distros do not."
Linux doesn't need your business to build up inertia either. Those that matter and make decisions are already figuring out that Linux is next. The server side is there, the desktop is being adopted faster and faster. If you want to get on the train go ahead. Otherwise, live with the misery that is Microsoft, or the expense that is Apple.
Your choice, and frankly, the Linux community doesn't want users like you that will bitch for more than a year that something wasn't tested. Its a WIP, it was even more of a WIP then. Guess what that means?
Okay, so show me the Windows guide put out by Microsoft that lists that as a precaution when trying to set up a dual boot system with another OS. What, can't find one?
Okay, then show me the step by step instructions put out by Microsoft to show you how to dual boot with another OS period.. oh, can't find that either? Hmm.. strange.
Seems like you're lucky to get the information you did get and the help you did get and maybe you should have exercised a little more common sense. But just like every other SUV driving, super sized moron, you take what should be a lesson learned and turn it into an example in your mind of how the world owes you something.
You need to learn a bit more about life before that heart attack catches up with you bud. The world doesn't owe you anything, and when you're using software with no warranty that you got for free, you shouldn't bitch for 17 months that it didn't work. WAAAHHHH!!!!
Depending on what version of what OS you're coming from those would vary. One logical thing to have ready is the install media of the OS you're coming from to restore you system to its state before you started.
OS vendors are not responsible for telling you how to troubleshoot your system under another OS. Nor do they pack your lunch, do your laundry, or wash your car. Grow a clue.
"But then, wouldn't that be the same install CD I already used? Oh wait, I'm expecting you to be consistent here."
I'm being perfectly consistent. I wasn't aware you were talking about Breezy (thus the admission that I wasn't looking at the dates on the old posts). You still (albeit waiting a few days to get it) could have requested a LiveCD to be mailed to you.
"How many of them installed it without your assistance?"
All of them.
Your tone in this very conversation is exactly the reason why only a dedicated few would help you. As far as being "someone who actually has a clue about computers", if you need spelled out instructions to keep install media for an OS that you MAY want to revert back to if this doesn't work around, I don't know what kind of clue it is you think you have. Not just in computers, but life in general, a good rule is "always have a backup plan".
Do you leave the house with only the gas in your tank and no wallet or cash? Do you plan a trip and print only the directions to where you're going (assuming its an area you've never been) and not take a map JUST IN CASE? The situation you found yourself in is exactly the same. If you don't have a backup plan (like say a way to reinstall your original OS if things don't work) there's no one to blame but yourself.
If you read the licensing comments:
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the # GNU General Public License for more details.
Mark Shuttleworth (CEO of Canonical, parent of Ubuntu) says TODAY (not to mention 18 months ago) that Linux is not quite ready for the masses. I would tend to agree. He also says its getting there fast. I would tend to agree. If you want to jump on board and deal with the headaches, its a great experience, but see above as to guarantees.
Always pack a second parachute. You shouldn't need a manual to tell you that.
Ahh, so now we see the lovely attitude that got you so far in the Ubuntu help forums.
I was referring to getting a CD mailed to you after you were locked out of your box and couldn't burn a CD.
"They "gave me" the immense inconvenience of being locked out of my own box for a week -- making me far worse off than if I had never heard of Linux at all. Their "solutions" were things that you now claim are meaningless -- to download a Live CD I theoretically must have already used to install. Or they gave me instructions and then gave up when I actually followed them. Or they told me to use things (like my WINDOWS disc) that the website didn't say to have ready, because I'm supposed to read minds and know which advice to completely ignore. Yeah, I'm *so* grateful for all of that."
No, they gave you, on a CD that you could download for free, the collective work of thousands of developers for you to use however you see fit. They didn't ask anything in return for this. In fact, not only did they give you that OS, they also pointed you toward a community of users which, if you would have come to them with any ounce of common decency and respect, will spend their own time, for free again, to help you through the process (especially in those days where they know it's not all there yet).
Sorry if you don't like it. Sorry something went wrong. Like I said, Ubuntu's a hell of a lot easier to install (or upgrade to from a previous version as was also a big issue in those days) now. If you'd like to bring up a problem that actually exists, please add something new to the conversation. Otherwise you're just noise.
And I can easily recommend Ubuntu with a straight face. Ask my parents (who use Ubuntu). Ask my fiance, who uses Ubuntu. Ask friends of mine from work (who are thinking about it). I recommend it to anyone who is sick of rebuilding their Windows computer (or buying a new one) every time it gets another virus, or piece of spyware, or adware, or any of the 8 million other things that junk up Microsoft's products on a daily basis.
OS's that use completely different file systems have a hard time living together in every possible configuration... what a shock. So, try installing it again if you care enough to troll Slashdot every time a story like this comes up, or stop bitching.
I hadn't been paying attention to dates on the old thread stuff. Yes, Breezy's installer sucked, that was one of the main things they changed Breezy to Dapper (thus the introduction of the Desktop CD as the installer). Now they've gone to using a LiveCD as the installer (probably for precisely the situation you found yourself in).
That's one thing about Linux, when you get hosed up, there are others that get to the same spot who know more about it, and can bug the devs to change something. And they did. Also (unlike Windows in the same spot) there are things you can download to fix yourself up (although I started out with a Gentoo LiveCD and install CD both just to be safe, which I found in my research).
And another option would have been to pay $5 to have a CD mailed to you. Not the most convenient, but lets be real about this. This was when Ubuntu had been around as a distro for what, 2 releases? They focused on getting the installed system the way they wanted it, then they focused on making it easy to install (which it is now). They were also fairly resource limited at that point, and making progress like crazy.
So complain and bring it up all you want, but copping the type of attitude you did, to people who aren't working for Canonical (who gave you and OS for free), you're lucky that they tried to help you at all, much less that they told you exactly how to fix your problem. Sorry that it didn't work out for you Dupe. Now there's a much better installer as its been the focus of their interface designers and dev team for a few releases worth of development.
Here's what your research should have turned up (from Ubuntu's website download page)
Desktop CD: "The desktop CD allows you to try Ubuntu without changing your computer at all, and at your option to install it permanently later. This type of CD is what most people will want to use. You will need at least 256MB of RAM to install from this CD.
There are two images available, each for a different type of computer:"
Alternate CD: "The alternate install CD allows you to perform certain specialist installations of Ubuntu. It provides for the following situations:
* creating pre-configured OEM systems;
* setting up automated deployments;
* upgrading from older installations without network access;
* LVM and/or RAID partitioning;
* installs on systems with less than about 256MB of RAM (although note that low-memory systems may not be able to run a full desktop environment reasonably).
In the event that you encounter a bug using the alternate installer, please file a bug on the debian-installer package.
There are two images available, each for a different type of computer:"
So, which of those things in the list were you trying to do?
So why did you download the alternate CD if you did "so much research" which would have told you to download the normal CD to install it?
And why are you then complaining about not having the CD that you should have downloaded and burned in the first place (remember how its called Alternate?)?
Why didn't you go the "standard" route first that would have left you with the option of trying the Alternate route?
How did you install Ubuntu without a LiveCD? The LiveCD = the install cd. It just means a bootable CD. You failed to get this time and time and time again in the forums (I read them last time this came up).
I'm fairly certain you already had the live cd, or ubuntu wouldn't be on your hard drive.
They already pay fees to play this music. Ever heard of ASCAP and BMI? That's why indie radio stations can't play commercial artists. Radio stations already pay to play, and now the RIAA wants royalties on top of licensing fees?
What's the difference, someone point it out to me, please!
Umm.. if it were "tidally locked" and the same side always faced the gravitational object causing the tides, wouldn't that mean there would be zero fluctuation in tide levels?
If that's the case, it would lessen the case for a ripoff since the gnome project started in 1996 after the release of Win95 (assuming that win95 didn't have the drop shadows, and I don't have a 95 box anywhere around).
I wouldn't say that I disagree with anything above. I want it to be easy to use. However there are a few things which SHOULD be hard, those that when fumbled will render your computer useless. That way Mom, Grandma, whoever does not stumble across them in the GUI and poof, no more hard drive, poof, no more data.
Installing the OS is one of these things. If (esp at this point) it could ever be considered "too hard" for you (also the generic you), you shouldn't be doing it. Heck, why not give them a button to install a root account that auto-logs in. Just saying. Everything else, all the functional stuff that is sometimes built into esoteric command-line for no apparently good reason (other than sheer lack of resources vs importance), I would wholeheartedly agree. I'm a power to the people guy.
I just think the welcoming role of friendly neighborhood linux geek shouldn't disappear. I had a buddy at work who showed me around (well mainly pointed me toward some good resources and turned me loose, I did do my install myself, and compiled my first kernel on my own, and again and again and again, until I stumbled onto Ubuntu..)
I can think of several easy answers off the top of my head, but the EASIEST:
Billboards.
How are they usually printed up top to grab attention? Or sandwich boards, or the name of a store?
If its a title, a dropshadowed font like that grabs attention, and it being a tad difficult to read is actually a benefit in that it differentiates it from the surrounding environment and makes you take a second to focus on it to absorb the (hopefully brief) information.
Not that I KNOW that is the motivation behind it, but it makes sense. I'm sure there are literally hundreds of other reasons to do something like that, but on the other hand, maybe it was just familiar, or an element from an even earlier gui that they're both descended from...
Yes, actually, I was kidding... thus the LOL... that was exactly my point. Why is Linux held up to a higher standard than Windows on the customer end when Windows consistently leaves their customers out in the cold. At least Linux has community support by default.
Assuming they didn't just do what was easiest. When you make a new design, do you do it in a vacuum? Do you do it outside of any influence on what you've seen before? Or, do you pick a few things to improve and a few areas to focus on and pick the prevailing "defaults" for everything else?
Designers have to pick their battles when making any system. And again, if you don't particularly like it (I do, it fills my needs and stays out of my way), its not (by far) your only choice in a desktop environment on a Linux box.
A. Isn't your only choice. B. Isn't a Linux only project. C. A Jar of Almonds. D. Is different in a number of other design aspects (just as KDE is similar to Windows in different ways, as are several other desktop environments).
When you have two different projects to accomplish the same task (provide a GUI to a desktop computer) you are going to find some design decisions that are similar. Does this mean that A is trying to be B?
What in windows is Network Manager? Have you used a Wireless Network with Windows? Beryl and Compiz go the opposite direction (Windows was playing catch-up on the whole composite desktop front). What other "new features" ie things that haven't been a core part of every GUI for 3+ years are you referring to?
And then you have MySQL, Apache, etc on the server side, which Windows has been playing catchup with for years.
Well, same thing for the Ubuntu installer, when you're talking about a "normal user" partitioning and dual-booting, you're in la-la land. I understand she liked it at the end of the day, just pointing out that its a straw-man of an article, and a weak question at best.
If you want to move to Linux, move to Linux. Just understand that Linux does things differently and it isn't Windows, you wanted something DIFFERENT from Windows, didn't you? Isn't that why you're looking for an alternative?
Maybe the good folx that have developed Unix like OS's for 30+ years know a thing or two about how they should be made, and the average user should figure out what its all about and keep an open mind instead of coming in with the idea that this should be Free Windows.
I switched to Linux at the beginning of the year after moonlighting doing Windows support for YEARS. I'm not a CS major, a Network Engineer, or anything else. I'm a "Power User". You know what I did? I took my system down for three weeks and installed Gentoo. I learned. I googled.
Now I use Ubuntu, because its easy, but I appreciate what it does for me, because I learned. If you can't learn a few basics about your computer, you either a: shouldn't use one, b: should be stuck in the quagmire that is Windows.
NORMAL USERS don't install OS's. If you install your OS, you have progressed to POWER USER. Windows "normal users" call a computer shop to reinstall their OS. I know, I'VE GOTTEN THE CALLS!
Also,
If you don't want to change, don't change, Linux isn't windows, it's not trying to be, it's something different.
Slashdot Mirror
Did anyone else notice that the base model on that laptop comes with an ATi card? This (given my experiences with ATi on Linux) seems like a BAD match for the preloaded Ubuntu laptop.
The only upside I can see is the rhetoric about better open source driver pressure coming from Dell (on the Direct2Dell page).
Anyone else nervous about this being Joe Sixpacks initial experience with Linux?
"We've been over this:
a) When you're installing Windows legally, you have necessarily already paid for support to take you through tough spots."
Are you kidding? Show me someone who has actually gotten support from Microsoft on a home install. You are living in a dream land. Aside from that, if you actually wanted professional support, you CAN pay for that from Canonical. You chose not to, and therefore took the onus on yourself to figure it out.
"b) MS doesn't *need* your business in order to build up inertia; it already has it. Linux distros do not."
Linux doesn't need your business to build up inertia either. Those that matter and make decisions are already figuring out that Linux is next. The server side is there, the desktop is being adopted faster and faster. If you want to get on the train go ahead. Otherwise, live with the misery that is Microsoft, or the expense that is Apple.
Your choice, and frankly, the Linux community doesn't want users like you that will bitch for more than a year that something wasn't tested. Its a WIP, it was even more of a WIP then. Guess what that means?
GET THE FUCK OVER IT!
Okay, so show me the Windows guide put out by Microsoft that lists that as a precaution when trying to set up a dual boot system with another OS. What, can't find one?
Okay, then show me the step by step instructions put out by Microsoft to show you how to dual boot with another OS period.. oh, can't find that either? Hmm.. strange.
Seems like you're lucky to get the information you did get and the help you did get and maybe you should have exercised a little more common sense. But just like every other SUV driving, super sized moron, you take what should be a lesson learned and turn it into an example in your mind of how the world owes you something.
You need to learn a bit more about life before that heart attack catches up with you bud. The world doesn't owe you anything, and when you're using software with no warranty that you got for free, you shouldn't bitch for 17 months that it didn't work. WAAAHHHH!!!!
Depending on what version of what OS you're coming from those would vary. One logical thing to have ready is the install media of the OS you're coming from to restore you system to its state before you started.
OS vendors are not responsible for telling you how to troubleshoot your system under another OS. Nor do they pack your lunch, do your laundry, or wash your car. Grow a clue.
"But then, wouldn't that be the same install CD I already used? Oh wait, I'm expecting you to be consistent here."
I'm being perfectly consistent. I wasn't aware you were talking about Breezy (thus the admission that I wasn't looking at the dates on the old posts). You still (albeit waiting a few days to get it) could have requested a LiveCD to be mailed to you.
"How many of them installed it without your assistance?"
All of them.
Your tone in this very conversation is exactly the reason why only a dedicated few would help you. As far as being "someone who actually has a clue about computers", if you need spelled out instructions to keep install media for an OS that you MAY want to revert back to if this doesn't work around, I don't know what kind of clue it is you think you have. Not just in computers, but life in general, a good rule is "always have a backup plan".
Do you leave the house with only the gas in your tank and no wallet or cash? Do you plan a trip and print only the directions to where you're going (assuming its an area you've never been) and not take a map JUST IN CASE? The situation you found yourself in is exactly the same. If you don't have a backup plan (like say a way to reinstall your original OS if things don't work) there's no one to blame but yourself.
If you read the licensing comments:
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
Mark Shuttleworth (CEO of Canonical, parent of Ubuntu) says TODAY (not to mention 18 months ago) that Linux is not quite ready for the masses. I would tend to agree. He also says its getting there fast. I would tend to agree. If you want to jump on board and deal with the headaches, its a great experience, but see above as to guarantees.
Always pack a second parachute. You shouldn't need a manual to tell you that.
Ahh, so now we see the lovely attitude that got you so far in the Ubuntu help forums.
I was referring to getting a CD mailed to you after you were locked out of your box and couldn't burn a CD.
"They "gave me" the immense inconvenience of being locked out of my own box for a week -- making me far worse off than if I had never heard of Linux at all. Their "solutions" were things that you now claim are meaningless -- to download a Live CD I theoretically must have already used to install. Or they gave me instructions and then gave up when I actually followed them. Or they told me to use things (like my WINDOWS disc) that the website didn't say to have ready, because I'm supposed to read minds and know which advice to completely ignore. Yeah, I'm *so* grateful for all of that."
No, they gave you, on a CD that you could download for free, the collective work of thousands of developers for you to use however you see fit. They didn't ask anything in return for this. In fact, not only did they give you that OS, they also pointed you toward a community of users which, if you would have come to them with any ounce of common decency and respect, will spend their own time, for free again, to help you through the process (especially in those days where they know it's not all there yet).
Sorry if you don't like it. Sorry something went wrong. Like I said, Ubuntu's a hell of a lot easier to install (or upgrade to from a previous version as was also a big issue in those days) now. If you'd like to bring up a problem that actually exists, please add something new to the conversation. Otherwise you're just noise.
And I can easily recommend Ubuntu with a straight face. Ask my parents (who use Ubuntu). Ask my fiance, who uses Ubuntu. Ask friends of mine from work (who are thinking about it). I recommend it to anyone who is sick of rebuilding their Windows computer (or buying a new one) every time it gets another virus, or piece of spyware, or adware, or any of the 8 million other things that junk up Microsoft's products on a daily basis.
OS's that use completely different file systems have a hard time living together in every possible configuration... what a shock. So, try installing it again if you care enough to troll Slashdot every time a story like this comes up, or stop bitching.
I hadn't been paying attention to dates on the old thread stuff. Yes, Breezy's installer sucked, that was one of the main things they changed Breezy to Dapper (thus the introduction of the Desktop CD as the installer). Now they've gone to using a LiveCD as the installer (probably for precisely the situation you found yourself in).
That's one thing about Linux, when you get hosed up, there are others that get to the same spot who know more about it, and can bug the devs to change something. And they did. Also (unlike Windows in the same spot) there are things you can download to fix yourself up (although I started out with a Gentoo LiveCD and install CD both just to be safe, which I found in my research).
And another option would have been to pay $5 to have a CD mailed to you. Not the most convenient, but lets be real about this. This was when Ubuntu had been around as a distro for what, 2 releases? They focused on getting the installed system the way they wanted it, then they focused on making it easy to install (which it is now). They were also fairly resource limited at that point, and making progress like crazy.
So complain and bring it up all you want, but copping the type of attitude you did, to people who aren't working for Canonical (who gave you and OS for free), you're lucky that they tried to help you at all, much less that they told you exactly how to fix your problem. Sorry that it didn't work out for you Dupe. Now there's a much better installer as its been the focus of their interface designers and dev team for a few releases worth of development.
Here's what your research should have turned up (from Ubuntu's website download page)
Desktop CD:
"The desktop CD allows you to try Ubuntu without changing your computer at all, and at your option to install it permanently later. This type of CD is what most people will want to use. You will need at least 256MB of RAM to install from this CD.
There are two images available, each for a different type of computer:"
Alternate CD:
"The alternate install CD allows you to perform certain specialist installations of Ubuntu. It provides for the following situations:
* creating pre-configured OEM systems;
* setting up automated deployments;
* upgrading from older installations without network access;
* LVM and/or RAID partitioning;
* installs on systems with less than about 256MB of RAM (although note that low-memory systems may not be able to run a full desktop environment reasonably).
In the event that you encounter a bug using the alternate installer, please file a bug on the debian-installer package.
There are two images available, each for a different type of computer:"
So, which of those things in the list were you trying to do?
So why did you download the alternate CD if you did "so much research" which would have told you to download the normal CD to install it?
And why are you then complaining about not having the CD that you should have downloaded and burned in the first place (remember how its called Alternate?)?
Why didn't you go the "standard" route first that would have left you with the option of trying the Alternate route?
Why is this everyone's fault but yours?
Well,
How did you install Ubuntu without a LiveCD? The LiveCD = the install cd. It just means a bootable CD. You failed to get this time and time and time again in the forums (I read them last time this came up).
I'm fairly certain you already had the live cd, or ubuntu wouldn't be on your hard drive.
They already pay fees to play this music. Ever heard of ASCAP and BMI? That's why indie radio stations can't play commercial artists. Radio stations already pay to play, and now the RIAA wants royalties on top of licensing fees?
What's the difference, someone point it out to me, please!
Umm.. if it were "tidally locked" and the same side always faced the gravitational object causing the tides, wouldn't that mean there would be zero fluctuation in tide levels?
If that's the case, it would lessen the case for a ripoff since the gnome project started in 1996 after the release of Win95 (assuming that win95 didn't have the drop shadows, and I don't have a 95 box anywhere around).
Well, to continue this dead thread :), my windows xp box at work doesn't have drop shadows in the title bar. Which version of windows did that die in?
I wouldn't say that I disagree with anything above. I want it to be easy to use. However there are a few things which SHOULD be hard, those that when fumbled will render your computer useless. That way Mom, Grandma, whoever does not stumble across them in the GUI and poof, no more hard drive, poof, no more data.
Installing the OS is one of these things. If (esp at this point) it could ever be considered "too hard" for you (also the generic you), you shouldn't be doing it. Heck, why not give them a button to install a root account that auto-logs in. Just saying. Everything else, all the functional stuff that is sometimes built into esoteric command-line for no apparently good reason (other than sheer lack of resources vs importance), I would wholeheartedly agree. I'm a power to the people guy.
I just think the welcoming role of friendly neighborhood linux geek shouldn't disappear. I had a buddy at work who showed me around (well mainly pointed me toward some good resources and turned me loose, I did do my install myself, and compiled my first kernel on my own, and again and again and again, until I stumbled onto Ubuntu..)
I don't really know what my point is now..
I can think of several easy answers off the top of my head, but the EASIEST:
Billboards.
How are they usually printed up top to grab attention? Or sandwich boards, or the name of a store?
If its a title, a dropshadowed font like that grabs attention, and it being a tad difficult to read is actually a benefit in that it differentiates it from the surrounding environment and makes you take a second to focus on it to absorb the (hopefully brief) information.
Not that I KNOW that is the motivation behind it, but it makes sense. I'm sure there are literally hundreds of other reasons to do something like that, but on the other hand, maybe it was just familiar, or an element from an even earlier gui that they're both descended from...
Yes, actually, I was kidding... thus the LOL... that was exactly my point. Why is Linux held up to a higher standard than Windows on the customer end when Windows consistently leaves their customers out in the cold. At least Linux has community support by default.
Assuming they didn't just do what was easiest. When you make a new design, do you do it in a vacuum? Do you do it outside of any influence on what you've seen before? Or, do you pick a few things to improve and a few areas to focus on and pick the prevailing "defaults" for everything else?
Designers have to pick their battles when making any system. And again, if you don't particularly like it (I do, it fills my needs and stays out of my way), its not (by far) your only choice in a desktop environment on a Linux box.
What about Windows phone support... LOL
Case in point. Gnome:
A. Isn't your only choice.
B. Isn't a Linux only project.
C. A Jar of Almonds.
D. Is different in a number of other design aspects (just as KDE is similar to Windows in different ways, as are several other desktop environments).
When you have two different projects to accomplish the same task (provide a GUI to a desktop computer) you are going to find some design decisions that are similar. Does this mean that A is trying to be B?
Thank you.
Really,
What in windows is Network Manager? Have you used a Wireless Network with Windows? Beryl and Compiz go the opposite direction (Windows was playing catch-up on the whole composite desktop front). What other "new features" ie things that haven't been a core part of every GUI for 3+ years are you referring to?
And then you have MySQL, Apache, etc on the server side, which Windows has been playing catchup with for years.
Well, same thing for the Ubuntu installer, when you're talking about a "normal user" partitioning and dual-booting, you're in la-la land. I understand she liked it at the end of the day, just pointing out that its a straw-man of an article, and a weak question at best.
If you want to move to Linux, move to Linux. Just understand that Linux does things differently and it isn't Windows, you wanted something DIFFERENT from Windows, didn't you? Isn't that why you're looking for an alternative?
Maybe the good folx that have developed Unix like OS's for 30+ years know a thing or two about how they should be made, and the average user should figure out what its all about and keep an open mind instead of coming in with the idea that this should be Free Windows.
I switched to Linux at the beginning of the year after moonlighting doing Windows support for YEARS. I'm not a CS major, a Network Engineer, or anything else. I'm a "Power User". You know what I did? I took my system down for three weeks and installed Gentoo. I learned. I googled.
Now I use Ubuntu, because its easy, but I appreciate what it does for me, because I learned. If you can't learn a few basics about your computer, you either a: shouldn't use one, b: should be stuck in the quagmire that is Windows.
Please drive thru.
Not to mention that later in the article she's happy to open a console and edit files...
This article seems inconsistent at best, and a straw man at worst.
Although, I am glad she likes it at the end of the day, just not the most astounding example of Tech journalism out there.
NORMAL USERS don't install OS's. If you install your OS, you have progressed to POWER USER. Windows "normal users" call a computer shop to reinstall their OS. I know, I'VE GOTTEN THE CALLS!
Also,
If you don't want to change, don't change, Linux isn't windows, it's not trying to be, it's something different.
Now flame me, please.