The original DVD media that I bought from the store doesn't limit how many devices I can play my content on. Why should a LEGAL backup add restrictions that the original copy has. I understand the copyright holder has rights on where to play it etc. but this isn't the case. In the case of DVDs, I am allowed to play them on any compatible DVD player hardware and software. The issue here is that why should I pay to have a copy made that further restricts my use of it. If the original copyright holder wanted to set original restrictions, they should have done it when they sold it (not that I would buy it in the case) but the backup shouldn't have anymore restrictions than the original media has set.
1)Comes free (for all practical purposes) with your PC.
Maybe your understanding of free is what we are all questioning. Just because the cost is hidden doesn't mean it isn't there. You are paying to play those DVDs and Mp3s whether or not you know it. Would you please stop using the word free because it doesn't mean what you think it means unless you're in marketing.
Yo! Mad Merlin! Who in the FUCK pays $300 for windows? Who in the real world does that? Fucking no fucking one, that's who. The shit's already included in the price of your PC;
and look right here you just admitted it. It is included with the price of the PC. Do you honestly think that the PC manufacturers absorb the cost? You can't really be that dense. Everything is included in the cost of the PC, it may not be as high as the $90 because these guys can afford to make a profit by the vast volumes of PCs and Windows copies so but it is there. Your argument is weak and really carries no water. The only two things in your post I agree with is nobody pays $300 for windows, most people get it OEM or pirate it, and that you do have more professional grade software for it.
I've been able to play DVDs just fine with the last two computers I've bought, and before that I got a free copy of a dvd program (powerdvd, I think?) for windows when I bought a standalone dvd drive.
Coerced into paying? Wow are you an idiot or pretending to be one? Do you really think that copy of PowerDVD was free? Read the emphasis on your own post. You bought two computers, I am assuming the price wasn't $0, and I hope you are aware that the price to play your media is absorbed into the cost of the PC, as well as the price of Windows, and that copy of PowerDVD. One way or another you pay, but now you are saying Ubuntu is coercing you into paying for something. I guess we should blame Canonical for trying to adhere to the law (whether you agree with it or not). If you feel robbed why don't you ask your OEM for a refund of your Windows software and use that to pay for your codecs.
Also, when you buy a Dell with Ubuntu installed, your payment for that computer also covers the patents and licenses to play mp3s and dvds. So please, fuck off with this "coercion". Many windows users are comfortable with pirating software such as that copy of Photoshop sitting on every XP desktop but you expect me to believe they won't just install the codecs themselves?
Yeah because Windows was free. The only way Windows itself was free is if you pirated it or don't count it as the cost of a new PC. Also you do NOT get an assortment of third party software for free (eg Photoshop) unless you pirated that. The only thing happening here is you are paying directly instead of the costs going into the price of a PC. However, I am assuming if you are comfortable with getting things for free, just install the codecs yourself and fuck the fee because your post really makes no sense at all.
Yeah so any book that doesn't agree with your view point or the view point of the FSF is propaganda? You really need to stop drinking the koolaid. I love how someone who is such a strong advocate for freedom is so quick to want to suppress something that *gasp* may disagree with your reality. Not everyone likes the GPL, it doesn't make them evil, freedom hates, or employees of Microsoft. It just makes them people who don't prefer the GPL. There are plenty of people who provide source code openly that don't agree with Stallman's world view, like the BSD folk. Just go on the OpenBSD mailing list and see the threads back and forth between openBSD devs and Mr Stallman.
A lot of people would say that most of your posts on Slashdot are equally "propaganda" if you use your definition as the standard.
I don't know why you or other people on this thread think that Linux distributions are all going to go in the same direction. You don't have to use Gnome/KDE. Hell there are tons of alternatives, not even counting the distributions that fit a wide variety of niches. Want to use a system that 'takes brains'? Go to distrowatch and pick 1 or pick up a BSD. Also Ubuntu and other mainstream distributions don't prevent you from changing your system to suit your needs. I always have a console window up, Ubuntu doesn't obfuscate the interface to prevent me from using the console. So let the masses have a linux for them, you can only benefit from it since at the core all distributions of Linux are the same (Kernel and driver compatibility). It ensures that more hardware and software will be supported, even if you don't prefer the popular distributions out there.
I see your point, but please stop complaining about free software.
I consider myself a press big fan of free software but this argument is crap. Firefox's purpose is to be a web browser that people want to use, not a 'take it or leave it' project. I don't see why something being free automatically nulls and voids someone being unsatisfied with it.
You can always use Firefox 2 if you really want to
Yeah that's why there is a constant nag screen to move up to Firefox 3.0. Firefox obviously gives a shit about what version people use, and does want people in fact to use their browser. It is in firefox's best interest to at least know their users feedback on different things, regardless if it is free or not.
Since when do you have a say in the direction Microsoft, Sun, or IBM go in since they do provide software you have to pay for. Unless you are a preferred valued customer, they will not listen to you.
you can write your own browser, possibly on top of the codebase for Firefox.
Actually most people can't, which is why we have programmers working on Firefox and we have users who run their software. This is also another crap argument. Not everyone is going to write their own. By your post I guess no one should file bug reports either, just fix them and release their own.
No we shouldn't feed them. They need to feed themselves. Now I know this sounds trollish but before you mod me let me explain.
What "we" should be doing with countries with extreme poverty (meaning they are going hungry and need more than computer tech) is facilitating ways for them to have their own basic agricultural industry. People in poorer countries would benefit 10 fold from that than by being dependent on foreign aid that does nothing to get anyone on their feet. I am not saying "stop sending food aid immediately" but we should wean them off of it in the long run. It's like knowing someone down on their luck who is homeless that you occasionally help out. What would benefit him (and you) the most? You giving him a sandwich every day, or helping him become a productive member of society so he can feed himself?
I am also sure that when the article states "poorer countries" it is referring to countries that are significantly poor in relation to the most industrialized countries but not so poor that food is a number 1 pressing issue. There do exist countries with serious economic problems but most people eat at a decently comfortable level. Not every country that is not 1st world, is made in Sudan's poverty stricken image, just to give an example.
Then write your own Readline, find a BSD version, or go pay the author of Readline to grant you a more permissive license. Is it really that hard? There is more code out there than GPL code.
Also I am aware of your point and I *think* the poster meant user of the program as recipient because that makes more sense. Under a GPL license the user has access to the source code of the program they are currently using while a user of a program that is BSD licensed may not have access to that source code if it has been modified and incorporated into a proprietary work. One isn't better than the other. It is just like programming languages, best tool for the job, best license fo the situation. Also you may not think it is anyone's business what terms you give to your user but if you're going to use GPL code it really is. That is the point.
The GP was a douchebag but I am afraid I was able to encrypt an attachment and send it from my gmail account to my domain account hosted by google. I used winzip and used AES encryption (just picked whatever) and it seemed to have gone through. Maybe google is somehow seeing your encrypted files as executables as I know those are blocked. I want to reproduce this so let me know anything additionally that you did.
I actually own a Nokia N800 and I love it for browsing the web (going on slashdot). I love the fact that you can link it up to your phone's data plan via bluetooth as it comes in handy when there are no viable wifi spots around. The only thing I would say is, the N800 isn't really suited for typing up documents or even doing a little coding. Sure you could buy a bluetooth keyboard but it ends up being more of a hassle. I'll probably be purchasing an EeePC in the coming month but i'll keep my N800 handy when for more handheld tasks.
Well 10,000 is a hell of a big understatement compared to 200,000 don't you think? He is reinforcing your comment and showing just how much documented malware exists.
Okay you may have a point with some of the tweaks. The right alt key should work like the left but that is a preference and familiarity from Windows, but did you even read the article? What did the guy have to install to make his right alt key work? Oh right, nothing. He had to go into the preferences and set it. It's like control panel except...it's not. I also don't get it, people like you complain when the Linux desktop environment is a complete mirror image of windows or you complain that it isn't exactly like windows down to the last Icon? Which is it? I am sure the right-alt key won't make or break the experience.
Also by your logic Windows isn't ready for the desktop either, which is debated (especially by linux fanboys) but do you call having to go get the driver CD for many different pieces of hardware and installing anti-virus convenient? I think it's just habit and people like you just accept it because you are used to it. I mean Windows is on a hell of a lot more PCs than Linux is (Desktops). You guys hold Linux to this level that is unattainable and I don't think Linux will be for you for a very long time.
If I recall correctly, in Minority Report's world Ads would scan your eyes to define your "person" and show ads accordingly. Just like contextual ads except in the future.
Are you kidding? One would assume you are new to Slashdot. Most comments made about Macs on this forum are looked favorable upon. That may lead one to believe that there are many mac users on here. Your comment was flamebait in terms of just throwing out the whole idea of Linux for a Operating System that runs on Apple machines. You mac flameboys really like trivializing the whole non-mac computing world yet you tout "BSD and Unix" as your strengths. To each their own and when OSX.5 comes out this won't nullify Compiz or Beryl, which I personally see as a desktop toy however cool it may be. You just managed to take a subject that seems to be granted a +3 insightful by default and fill it with content that rightfully knocked you down to flamebait. At least you aren't as bad as the "ATTN Switcheurs" or "Windows Clickarounds" comments.
It IS about using whatever you want. The CD isn't installing Linux on those machines against the will of someone else. If they like it, use it. If they don't care for it, trash bin it. It's just like complaining about Microsoft or Apple for marketing their software all over the Television and internet and giving people incentives to upgrade/switch.
Hmm, this is cool. I did not really know about this project as I do something similar in my neighborhood. I realized that there would actually be some benefit to introducing users to some open source and free (as beer, also important to most) software. I had compiled a CD with Gaim, Firefox, ClamWin, Stellerium (It's just cool if interested), Abiword, Open Office, GIMP, and a couple of other packages. What I do when I can is put a couple of CDs out in the general area of my apartment building and other adjacent ones and leave them for whomever is interested. I also place a link for a free dialup service available in the New York City area. I just hope at least one person has gotten some good use out of it.
Okay, let me clarify I may have been too general. Ignore the subset of power users who think that everything can and should be commandline based. I use the commandline to get things done easier but for someone switching over they aren't going to want to do that. We should move beyond the commandline for simpler tasks. If you are a power user and/or managing servers etc. Then by all means. Not everyone should have to know the commandline. It would be great that part of a migration to Linux there would be a sense of empowerment over the system (using the commandline, getting a feel for the system) but a cozy GUI is also very good. We are talking simple users, not morons. All operating systems will run into snags and the commandline may need to be instituted for troubleshooting, such as the registry for Windows in some cases, but it under smooth operation the commandline can be an optional, not mandatory, piece. By the way I do agree that it is easier to get up to speed on becoming a "power user" but for pushing new users on, many don't want to be power users. This is not yet another rant about how Linux has to "just work" (tm) and be perfect and never have a snag or two like many others state.
Well I apologize for my text-tone but I get tired of comments like yours, whether they are well intentioned or not, stating things that are false. Yes, i agree, there are those who tell people to just use apt-get and vi, but these are the power users who wouldn't care for the GUI either way. People in there categories are irrelevant to people trying out a Linux desktop. A quick jump to Ubuntu's website will show you it's features as well as upcoming features for their soon to be released version. Your comment just pisses me off because it is just as relevant as me trolling on about Windows XP doing something that windows 98 does, when it was obviously fixed or talking about Mac OSX from the perspective of OS 8 or OS 9 and trust me you don't want to piss off the Mac guys. My tip is, ignore those power users, those are the people more likely to hurt Linux usage than help it. IRC is not a replacement for phone help and a man page is not always acceptable. This is something a lot of linux experts fail to realize. Not everyone's a moron but at the same time not everyone's a do-it-yourself person. I personally welcome the simplicity of Ubuntu, despite the 1 snag I got on my video settings, because I don't want to make a project out of my desktop.
Try ubuntu out through the live-cd and judge for yourself (accurately).
Why are we making the whole idea of Pre-installed Linux apply to us. We probably wouldn't want to use the preinstalled OS (Linux or Windows) and will end up installing what we want (or if XP home came on a dell, put in XP pro free of shitware). I thought the whole idea of having a pre-installed Linux was to move towards mass adoption of Linux. Many of you guys state that one of the reasons Windows is so ubiquitous is because it is installed by default in nearly every PC. An easy to use distribution is what Dell should be going for not $MyPreference because no one can please the Linux community which is known for tweaking things to their liking.
For one example, what about the choice of rolling out Gnome vs KDE. There are big fans of both in the community and those who hate the other as a big subset. What about those who prefer a more obscure window manager + environment. These are not average user concerns and this doesn't make the average user stupid. In most cases average users are after what most Linux users are after, the best tool for the job. Skill sets may vary and as a result the average user may not have the best tool but for someone who wants to do some word processing, crunch some numbers on a spreadsheet, browse youtube, and chat on an Instant Message client. KDE vs Gnome doesn't really matter to them as long as it is intuitive, stable, and reliable.
If Dell decides to actually move forward with this, you shouldn't expect or even want to be the target market. In most cases if a Linux user buys a dell with Linux pre-installed you will at least know that everything works and that your custom install shouldn't require having to purchase a replacement $hardware_device.
I really like Ubuntu and I was actually moved to install it after my hard drive with XP croaked and the only snag I got was my resolution. Ubuntu is great at many things but still blows at figuring out your driver, resolution capabilities. There should also be a more graphical way to tweak things without having to go to the xorg.conf, however rare it is.
In short this should be more focused on more widespread adoption rather than trying to please 1000 different tastes. This isn't about you guys so much as it is about the average user getting a PC with a better* option. Bickering will only bring the Microsoft clickaround fanboys more ammunition to troll about linux being one giant bash shell.
Uhh I would hope that Paint is much faster than something that is supposed to compare to Photoshop. Tell me, is photoshop faster (or more stable) than Paint. Paint should be simple enough to be stable compared to the complexities of both Gimp and photoshop and while I agree GIMP is no Photoshop. Stop comparing Apples and Pears.
If I had mod points i'd mod you up. Its ridiculous that the response is "With cheap memory and hard disk space these days...". That isn't the point. Why should anyone have 5281 copies of a library in memory just because. The package management in Ubuntu is top notch and it makes installing most apps trivial. I hope that zero installer works out for installing things that aren't in the repository (non standard stuff).
Honestly I can't really speak for Kubuntu since I use Ubuntu, and haven't used KDE since 1.92, but as far as I know under the Gnome desktop there is a nice menu that states 'Home' under the places menu that opens up your home directory. Its not important where it is but that it's just Home like "My Documents" etc. Even if K/Ubuntu decided to put your home directory in some obscure place it wouldn't matter. All you would know is "Home". New Linux users will indeed have to get used to the Home directory concept because it isn't windows but I am sure they won't get too scared. I mean if it makes you feel any better you could probably go and rename an icon shortcut on your desktop "My Documents" to make it easier to transition.
Slashdot Mirror
The original DVD media that I bought from the store doesn't limit how many devices I can play my content on. Why should a LEGAL backup add restrictions that the original copy has. I understand the copyright holder has rights on where to play it etc. but this isn't the case. In the case of DVDs, I am allowed to play them on any compatible DVD player hardware and software. The issue here is that why should I pay to have a copy made that further restricts my use of it. If the original copyright holder wanted to set original restrictions, they should have done it when they sold it (not that I would buy it in the case) but the backup shouldn't have anymore restrictions than the original media has set.
1)Comes free (for all practical purposes) with your PC.
Maybe your understanding of free is what we are all questioning. Just because the cost is hidden doesn't mean it isn't there. You are paying to play those DVDs and Mp3s whether or not you know it. Would you please stop using the word free because it doesn't mean what you think it means unless you're in marketing.
Yo! Mad Merlin! Who in the FUCK pays $300 for windows? Who in the real world does that? Fucking no fucking one, that's who. The shit's already included in the price of your PC;
and look right here you just admitted it. It is included with the price of the PC. Do you honestly think that the PC manufacturers absorb the cost? You can't really be that dense. Everything is included in the cost of the PC, it may not be as high as the $90 because these guys can afford to make a profit by the vast volumes of PCs and Windows copies so but it is there. Your argument is weak and really carries no water. The only two things in your post I agree with is nobody pays $300 for windows, most people get it OEM or pirate it, and that you do have more professional grade software for it.
I've been able to play DVDs just fine with the last two computers I've bought, and before that I got a free copy of a dvd program (powerdvd, I think?) for windows when I bought a standalone dvd drive.
Coerced into paying? Wow are you an idiot or pretending to be one? Do you really think that copy of PowerDVD was free? Read the emphasis on your own post. You bought two computers, I am assuming the price wasn't $0, and I hope you are aware that the price to play your media is absorbed into the cost of the PC, as well as the price of Windows, and that copy of PowerDVD. One way or another you pay, but now you are saying Ubuntu is coercing you into paying for something. I guess we should blame Canonical for trying to adhere to the law (whether you agree with it or not). If you feel robbed why don't you ask your OEM for a refund of your Windows software and use that to pay for your codecs.
Also, when you buy a Dell with Ubuntu installed, your payment for that computer also covers the patents and licenses to play mp3s and dvds. So please, fuck off with this "coercion". Many windows users are comfortable with pirating software such as that copy of Photoshop sitting on every XP desktop but you expect me to believe they won't just install the codecs themselves?
Yeah because Windows was free. The only way Windows itself was free is if you pirated it or don't count it as the cost of a new PC. Also you do NOT get an assortment of third party software for free (eg Photoshop) unless you pirated that. The only thing happening here is you are paying directly instead of the costs going into the price of a PC. However, I am assuming if you are comfortable with getting things for free, just install the codecs yourself and fuck the fee because your post really makes no sense at all.
Yeah so any book that doesn't agree with your view point or the view point of the FSF is propaganda? You really need to stop drinking the koolaid. I love how someone who is such a strong advocate for freedom is so quick to want to suppress something that *gasp* may disagree with your reality. Not everyone likes the GPL, it doesn't make them evil, freedom hates, or employees of Microsoft. It just makes them people who don't prefer the GPL. There are plenty of people who provide source code openly that don't agree with Stallman's world view, like the BSD folk. Just go on the OpenBSD mailing list and see the threads back and forth between openBSD devs and Mr Stallman.
A lot of people would say that most of your posts on Slashdot are equally "propaganda" if you use your definition as the standard.
I don't know why you or other people on this thread think that Linux distributions are all going to go in the same direction. You don't have to use Gnome/KDE. Hell there are tons of alternatives, not even counting the distributions that fit a wide variety of niches. Want to use a system that 'takes brains'? Go to distrowatch and pick 1 or pick up a BSD. Also Ubuntu and other mainstream distributions don't prevent you from changing your system to suit your needs. I always have a console window up, Ubuntu doesn't obfuscate the interface to prevent me from using the console. So let the masses have a linux for them, you can only benefit from it since at the core all distributions of Linux are the same (Kernel and driver compatibility). It ensures that more hardware and software will be supported, even if you don't prefer the popular distributions out there.
I see your point, but please stop complaining about free software.
I consider myself a press big fan of free software but this argument is crap. Firefox's purpose is to be a web browser that people want to use, not a 'take it or leave it' project. I don't see why something being free automatically nulls and voids someone being unsatisfied with it.
You can always use Firefox 2 if you really want to
Yeah that's why there is a constant nag screen to move up to Firefox 3.0. Firefox obviously gives a shit about what version people use, and does want people in fact to use their browser. It is in firefox's best interest to at least know their users feedback on different things, regardless if it is free or not.
Since when do you have a say in the direction Microsoft, Sun, or IBM go in since they do provide software you have to pay for. Unless you are a preferred valued customer, they will not listen to you.
you can write your own browser, possibly on top of the codebase for Firefox.
Actually most people can't, which is why we have programmers working on Firefox and we have users who run their software. This is also another crap argument. Not everyone is going to write their own. By your post I guess no one should file bug reports either, just fix them and release their own.
No we shouldn't feed them. They need to feed themselves. Now I know this sounds trollish but before you mod me let me explain.
What "we" should be doing with countries with extreme poverty (meaning they are going hungry and need more than computer tech) is facilitating ways for them to have their own basic agricultural industry. People in poorer countries would benefit 10 fold from that than by being dependent on foreign aid that does nothing to get anyone on their feet. I am not saying "stop sending food aid immediately" but we should wean them off of it in the long run. It's like knowing someone down on their luck who is homeless that you occasionally help out. What would benefit him (and you) the most? You giving him a sandwich every day, or helping him become a productive member of society so he can feed himself?
I am also sure that when the article states "poorer countries" it is referring to countries that are significantly poor in relation to the most industrialized countries but not so poor that food is a number 1 pressing issue. There do exist countries with serious economic problems but most people eat at a decently comfortable level. Not every country that is not 1st world, is made in Sudan's poverty stricken image, just to give an example.
Then write your own Readline, find a BSD version, or go pay the author of Readline to grant you a more permissive license. Is it really that hard? There is more code out there than GPL code.
Also I am aware of your point and I *think* the poster meant user of the program as recipient because that makes more sense. Under a GPL license the user has access to the source code of the program they are currently using while a user of a program that is BSD licensed may not have access to that source code if it has been modified and incorporated into a proprietary work. One isn't better than the other. It is just like programming languages, best tool for the job, best license fo the situation. Also you may not think it is anyone's business what terms you give to your user but if you're going to use GPL code it really is. That is the point.
The GP was a douchebag but I am afraid I was able to encrypt an attachment and send it from my gmail account to my domain account hosted by google. I used winzip and used AES encryption (just picked whatever) and it seemed to have gone through. Maybe google is somehow seeing your encrypted files as executables as I know those are blocked. I want to reproduce this so let me know anything additionally that you did.
I actually own a Nokia N800 and I love it for browsing the web (going on slashdot). I love the fact that you can link it up to your phone's data plan via bluetooth as it comes in handy when there are no viable wifi spots around. The only thing I would say is, the N800 isn't really suited for typing up documents or even doing a little coding. Sure you could buy a bluetooth keyboard but it ends up being more of a hassle. I'll probably be purchasing an EeePC in the coming month but i'll keep my N800 handy when for more handheld tasks.
http://www.lynchconsulting.com.au/blog/index.cfm/2 006/12/30/Subversion-plugin-for-Gnome-Nautilus
Get subversion integrated with Nautilus kind of like tortoise.
Well 10,000 is a hell of a big understatement compared to 200,000 don't you think? He is reinforcing your comment and showing just how much documented malware exists.
Okay you may have a point with some of the tweaks. The right alt key should work like the left but that is a preference and familiarity from Windows, but did you even read the article? What did the guy have to install to make his right alt key work? Oh right, nothing. He had to go into the preferences and set it. It's like control panel except...it's not. I also don't get it, people like you complain when the Linux desktop environment is a complete mirror image of windows or you complain that it isn't exactly like windows down to the last Icon? Which is it? I am sure the right-alt key won't make or break the experience.
Also by your logic Windows isn't ready for the desktop either, which is debated (especially by linux fanboys) but do you call having to go get the driver CD for many different pieces of hardware and installing anti-virus convenient? I think it's just habit and people like you just accept it because you are used to it. I mean Windows is on a hell of a lot more PCs than Linux is (Desktops). You guys hold Linux to this level that is unattainable and I don't think Linux will be for you for a very long time.
If I recall correctly, in Minority Report's world Ads would scan your eyes to define your "person" and show ads accordingly. Just like contextual ads except in the future.
Are you kidding? One would assume you are new to Slashdot. Most comments made about Macs on this forum are looked favorable upon. That may lead one to believe that there are many mac users on here. Your comment was flamebait in terms of just throwing out the whole idea of Linux for a Operating System that runs on Apple machines. You mac flameboys really like trivializing the whole non-mac computing world yet you tout "BSD and Unix" as your strengths. To each their own and when OSX.5 comes out this won't nullify Compiz or Beryl, which I personally see as a desktop toy however cool it may be. You just managed to take a subject that seems to be granted a +3 insightful by default and fill it with content that rightfully knocked you down to flamebait. At least you aren't as bad as the "ATTN Switcheurs" or "Windows Clickarounds" comments.
It IS about using whatever you want. The CD isn't installing Linux on those machines against the will of someone else. If they like it, use it. If they don't care for it, trash bin it. It's just like complaining about Microsoft or Apple for marketing their software all over the Television and internet and giving people incentives to upgrade/switch.
Hmm, this is cool. I did not really know about this project as I do something similar in my neighborhood. I realized that there would actually be some benefit to introducing users to some open source and free (as beer, also important to most) software. I had compiled a CD with Gaim, Firefox, ClamWin, Stellerium (It's just cool if interested), Abiword, Open Office, GIMP, and a couple of other packages. What I do when I can is put a couple of CDs out in the general area of my apartment building and other adjacent ones and leave them for whomever is interested. I also place a link for a free dialup service available in the New York City area. I just hope at least one person has gotten some good use out of it.
Okay, let me clarify I may have been too general. Ignore the subset of power users who think that everything can and should be commandline based. I use the commandline to get things done easier but for someone switching over they aren't going to want to do that. We should move beyond the commandline for simpler tasks. If you are a power user and/or managing servers etc. Then by all means. Not everyone should have to know the commandline. It would be great that part of a migration to Linux there would be a sense of empowerment over the system (using the commandline, getting a feel for the system) but a cozy GUI is also very good. We are talking simple users, not morons. All operating systems will run into snags and the commandline may need to be instituted for troubleshooting, such as the registry for Windows in some cases, but it under smooth operation the commandline can be an optional, not mandatory, piece. By the way I do agree that it is easier to get up to speed on becoming a "power user" but for pushing new users on, many don't want to be power users. This is not yet another rant about how Linux has to "just work" (tm) and be perfect and never have a snag or two like many others state.
Well I apologize for my text-tone but I get tired of comments like yours, whether they are well intentioned or not, stating things that are false. Yes, i agree, there are those who tell people to just use apt-get and vi, but these are the power users who wouldn't care for the GUI either way. People in there categories are irrelevant to people trying out a Linux desktop. A quick jump to Ubuntu's website will show you it's features as well as upcoming features for their soon to be released version. Your comment just pisses me off because it is just as relevant as me trolling on about Windows XP doing something that windows 98 does, when it was obviously fixed or talking about Mac OSX from the perspective of OS 8 or OS 9 and trust me you don't want to piss off the Mac guys. My tip is, ignore those power users, those are the people more likely to hurt Linux usage than help it. IRC is not a replacement for phone help and a man page is not always acceptable. This is something a lot of linux experts fail to realize. Not everyone's a moron but at the same time not everyone's a do-it-yourself person. I personally welcome the simplicity of Ubuntu, despite the 1 snag I got on my video settings, because I don't want to make a project out of my desktop.
Try ubuntu out through the live-cd and judge for yourself (accurately).
1998 called, they want their console-is-the-only-solution method back. Have you ever USED ubuntu?
Why are we making the whole idea of Pre-installed Linux apply to us. We probably wouldn't want to use the preinstalled OS (Linux or Windows) and will end up installing what we want (or if XP home came on a dell, put in XP pro free of shitware). I thought the whole idea of having a pre-installed Linux was to move towards mass adoption of Linux. Many of you guys state that one of the reasons Windows is so ubiquitous is because it is installed by default in nearly every PC. An easy to use distribution is what Dell should be going for not $MyPreference because no one can please the Linux community which is known for tweaking things to their liking.
For one example, what about the choice of rolling out Gnome vs KDE. There are big fans of both in the community and those who hate the other as a big subset. What about those who prefer a more obscure window manager + environment. These are not average user concerns and this doesn't make the average user stupid. In most cases average users are after what most Linux users are after, the best tool for the job. Skill sets may vary and as a result the average user may not have the best tool but for someone who wants to do some word processing, crunch some numbers on a spreadsheet, browse youtube, and chat on an Instant Message client. KDE vs Gnome doesn't really matter to them as long as it is intuitive, stable, and reliable.
If Dell decides to actually move forward with this, you shouldn't expect or even want to be the target market. In most cases if a Linux user buys a dell with Linux pre-installed you will at least know that everything works and that your custom install shouldn't require having to purchase a replacement $hardware_device.
I really like Ubuntu and I was actually moved to install it after my hard drive with XP croaked and the only snag I got was my resolution. Ubuntu is great at many things but still blows at figuring out your driver, resolution capabilities. There should also be a more graphical way to tweak things without having to go to the xorg.conf, however rare it is.
In short this should be more focused on more widespread adoption rather than trying to please 1000 different tastes. This isn't about you guys so much as it is about the average user getting a PC with a better* option. Bickering will only bring the Microsoft clickaround fanboys more ammunition to troll about linux being one giant bash shell.
Uhh I would hope that Paint is much faster than something that is supposed to compare to Photoshop. Tell me, is photoshop faster (or more stable) than Paint. Paint should be simple enough to be stable compared to the complexities of both Gimp and photoshop and while I agree GIMP is no Photoshop. Stop comparing Apples and Pears.
If I had mod points i'd mod you up. Its ridiculous that the response is "With cheap memory and hard disk space these days...". That isn't the point. Why should anyone have 5281 copies of a library in memory just because. The package management in Ubuntu is top notch and it makes installing most apps trivial. I hope that zero installer works out for installing things that aren't in the repository (non standard stuff).
Honestly I can't really speak for Kubuntu since I use Ubuntu, and haven't used KDE since 1.92, but as far as I know under the Gnome desktop there is a nice menu that states 'Home' under the places menu that opens up your home directory. Its not important where it is but that it's just Home like "My Documents" etc. Even if K/Ubuntu decided to put your home directory in some obscure place it wouldn't matter. All you would know is "Home". New Linux users will indeed have to get used to the Home directory concept because it isn't windows but I am sure they won't get too scared. I mean if it makes you feel any better you could probably go and rename an icon shortcut on your desktop "My Documents" to make it easier to transition.