You my friend are the exact reason why Microsoft will own the world... They count on people like you to keep Linux to a point where it will never mature.
It'll be forever a server platform without support for the desktop, is that what you want?
I don't normally do this, but your either a knucklehead or pretty new person to all of this.
X is in fact a bitch to install.
I run Mandrake, and yes thats a nice step in a good direction... but its not OS X or Windows bubba, it has a long way to go...
X is slow. On my dual 400 with 512mb, its a tank.
But then again, so is XP... Maybe not its worse point, but its still not zippy.
X is not bloated? Why is it like 30mb's of
source? Whats that bitmaps and fonts. Don't be a jack ass. Hell, have you ever tried writing from the X-Toolkit or X-Intrinsic's. Please.
X is an almost 20 year-old technology that is what is it. Old. Its not something I would think to base my new desktop environment on. Why didn't BeOS use it? Why didn't Apple use it???
Go back to Alfred High Schools Media lab, I think someone needs an overhead projector delivered to a classroom 204...
Reading your reply was like listening to nails grind on a chalk board.
Dude, not everyone looks at Linux with rose colored glasses like you do.
You went through my list and basically didn't refute anything but said "your full of crap" to most of the things i brought up. Which tells me your being mostly emotional and not technically logical. Offer solutions not not more rethoric, It makes your points far more believable when your not just going "bah!, you don't know what your talking about". Having a good reasoning behind your flaming is better than just telling me that I'm a dope.
Also, to the people that think I want X to go away, I should clarify. I view X as what it is, I'm just saying that there should be an alternative desktop that is NOT based on X. X can still live and breath a healthy life. I think it should... I'm just saying that for the majority of the 99.98% (ok, I rounded off) of the desktop users, theres a problem with Linux as a desktop.
The problem is that Linux relies on X, and X sucks as a desktop for the masses. We all know that, and don't try and convince me that an almost 20 year-old architecture is going to bode well these days with my 62 year-old Dad who asks me "Hey, should I use this Linux thing since you like it so much". Let's face it, its klunky.
I told Dad to stick with his Mac...
Here are the problems as I see it (my opinions, I've got about 20 years into this stuff, so I atleast I get to spew my opinion, heh. )
First and foremost:
- No killer desktop application: Yep, thats right. There is no compelling reason for people to use Linux on the desktop. Why switch or even start there? If there isn't an application they can only run on Linux (or run *better* on Linux). BeOS talked about this, never got one... Mac had Photoshop/Quark etc. Windows had Word/Office/IE... Linux needs a similiar app.
Now maybe this application isn't really a desktop application but something like a content creation product, media/video/audio, who knows, but Linux doesn't have one now.
- X Windows: Relying on a HUGE layer for your graphical underpinnings is a big mistake. Remove X. Its too complicated to install, too big and too slow. I could give a hoot about all you so called "Linux Hackers" who say that Linux is for the elite. I look at it as I see it -- it shouldn't be this damn hard, and this damn big! Windows 98 installs in 10 mins -- nice goal to shoot for. Xfree86 my ass, move off that clunker and have a nice thin layer at the bottom... sheesh.
- No Office platform worth caring about: OpenOffice is pretty good, but its NOT MS Office, lets be honest. If OpenOffice started inching more towards the MS side of the world, it wouldn't be such a bad thing -- hey, why not include Evolution in OpenOffice, come on Ximiam, that might help things?? An installable *complete* solution with a good e-mail product. Hmmm... I think OpenOffice is getting there, but its about half the way there... It needs more time and a lot more MS compatibility.
- No good browser: Konq. Nice start. Opera, getting better (although, I could without all the added poop). Mozilla -- please. Netscape -- please. Those two suck on Windows too.
Linux needs a completely IE compatible browser. 100% compatible (there I said it, hate me for it). From a Web designer perspective, to a developer -- the browser choices on Linux are horrible -- we need IE, or an IE clone. I think our best bet is to have Konq. lead the way...
- Fonts suck: Every default font on KDE/GNOME that I've seen pales in comparison to a Mac or Windows desktop/environment. We need good fonts. Freetype2, ok, now we're getting someplace. But thats only recently...
- KDE and GNOME desktop's look like crap: I find every GNOME and KDE environment I try, just looks like junk compared to a Mac or Windows experience. Things just seem patched together, and not completely thought out. Now, I'm not saying Windows or the Mac is the best GUI's around, but boy, didn't anyone learn ANYTHING from those GUI's?!?! I don't see anything in the KDE or GNOME desktops that I would say "hey, thats better than windows", or "wow, I like this better than the Mac".
Personally, I think Linux GUI developers should steal the hell out of both and create a GUI thats even better!
- No good printing: Yeah, yeah, theres CUPS, but you have to GET that and its a pain and driver support is fairly weak. I like the Mac: You plug a printer in to the USB port, click print... boom! printout. No futzing around.
- There are two competing graphical platforms. GNOME and KDE. Thats not helping the overall cause.
- No Desktop "Champion": We need someone (thought we had it in Eazel) that can champion the desktop and create that "killer desktop" that everyone has to have. Linux needs a Linus of the Desktop.
Here are the solutions as I see it:
1. Remove X, standardize on one low-level graphical kernel -- DirectFB anyone?
2. Standardize on one API layer for the GUI, much like Win32, we should have a set of API's that are "God" when it comes to writing GUI under Linux. None of this, Bonobo vs. Qt vs. blah, blah, blah. One standard API thats small, easy and well maintained -- I vote for an API that uses XML/XSLT as its abstraction layer.
3. IBM. IBM should step in and see this as a chance to re-kindle the OS/2 vs. Windows war that was waged from 90 - 92 (which they got their asses kicked).
By dumping some money into the Desktop side of the world (not just the server side), they could create a platform that can beat Windows and Mac.
Hell, I have an idea: Why not port the Workplace Shell right over to Linux, Open Source it and then simply support it as a business platform replacement for OS/2 (if you work at a big company, you know how HUGE OS/2 got during the mid-90's)? Well, in my mind, this could happen again, but only with a platform like Linux under it.
Sure, this is a task, but I bet it would start making believers out of people. Plus, since the Workplace Shell already has a decent amount of applications for Business (3270/5250 emulators), it wouldn't be hard to start eating away at that Fortune 500 companies spending money on XP Professional. IBM could say "hey, why buy that when you can simple get Linux installed on an IBM Desktop for free, oh and we run those same applications... Believe it or not IBM still "kills" at the business level over Microsoft.
3. Gain critical mass with that killer application. Linux need a Photoshop or MS Office.
Anyone got one out there?
4. Stop battling between desktops, choose one or create a new one and settle on that -- but don't use X.
I actually had a Typo on the "ZOZO", I did mean "ZOSO", my bad... My typing
No, there isn't a town called "Cape Cod", your correct, anything sticking past the cape code canal is considered "Cape Cod". Oh, and NOT the left, but the rigt side. The left side is Springfield, and thats not *really* a part of MA. Hehehehehe... If you ask any Bostonian "what's out past Worcester", he or she will look at you as if you asked what's inside a black-hole
I think I've been to Springfield once in my whole life and that was because I got lost going to NYC -- don't ask.
The previous post might actually be right. Maybe it was used (the brant rock site) as the first "voice transmission". Can someone clarify that?
Actually, the original site is not in Cape Cod.
Its in a villiage called "Brant Rock", or better known as Marshfield for people looking on the map.
I know because I lived about 200 yards from the cement base. This thing is a ruins now.
As kids, we used to use that sucker as a meeting point to hang out, drink beer and get stoned (like 77-79'). I have (somewhat) vivid memories of my friends 8-track of ZOZO playing "Going to California" while we laid on that thing and looked up into the stars -- obviously with a good buzz on...
Its exact location is in a camp ground called "Blackman's Point Trailer Camp", I'm not sure why people are saying the Cape Cod site was the original. That one wasn't used, the one in Brant Rock was the actual site (from what I rememeber reading and learning). I could be wrong, but something tells me that I'm not.
If I remember correctly, there was a plauque but I think it was vandalized and removed by some local knucklehead. This thing was nothing but a big block of cement layers with these glass or porcelain bells (all of which were fun to smash I guess, because they were all broken!).
That old cable might be more "reliable" than WiFI, sure, I'll agree to that. But you have to admit to it NOT being practical. I'm putting an addition onto my house and I WAS going to run cat5 all the way through to a couple hub's then back to my router, then I'm like "wait sec, thats a lot of work for 3 computers plus a laptop." I then realized that a LinkSys 802.11 hub and a bunch of wireless cards and PCCard's were a much cheaper (yes, i said cheaper) solution than having the electrician run cable, setup outlets etc. etc. Plus IT'S SOOOO COOL!!!
Again, its apple's and oranges. This woman was talking 56K modem vs. 1mbit connection here!!! there is NO comparison.
She's a nut. She must live in a town where only 5 people have a computer, because all I know is that my neighbor on some local POP can't even get a answer at the modem bank between the hours of 8pm and 12pm at night... and he's using a major provider. Her reasoning might be OK for like Kansas, but here in Boston --- fuggetaboutit..
We have every frickin' college kid in this town dialing in to to "chat" with their friends from home. Hell, you can *almost* hear the bits flinging over the telephone wires when you walk down by MIT...
These are the same people that think Vinyl LP's sound better than CD's... pfffffttt...
Hey, I'm dumping my WiFi LAN here in favor of an assyncronous 9600 baud serial line system. MUCH more reliable.
Come on!!
In my own experience: I've had Mediaone/Roadrunner/AT&Broadband since May of 1995--I was the second installation in my town of about 56,000 people.
I've had probably 1 time where I was down more than a day (it was and that wasn't the cable company. It was because some jack*ss down the street decided to run NT Server with DCHP Server, which eventually messed up the whole town...
They've since protected against such knuckleheadness.
I love my Broadband, my wife loves and the kids love it...
Slashdot Mirror
You my friend are the exact reason why Microsoft will own the world... They count on people like you to keep Linux to a point where it will never mature.
It'll be forever a server platform without support for the desktop, is that what you want?
I don't normally do this, but your either a knucklehead or pretty new person to all of this.
X is in fact a bitch to install.
I run Mandrake, and yes thats a nice step in a good direction... but its not OS X or Windows bubba, it has a long way to go...
X is slow. On my dual 400 with 512mb, its a tank.
But then again, so is XP... Maybe not its worse point, but its still not zippy.
X is not bloated? Why is it like 30mb's of
source? Whats that bitmaps and fonts. Don't be a jack ass. Hell, have you ever tried writing from the X-Toolkit or X-Intrinsic's. Please.
X is an almost 20 year-old technology that is what is it. Old. Its not something I would think to base my new desktop environment on. Why didn't BeOS use it? Why didn't Apple use it???
Go back to Alfred High Schools Media lab, I think someone needs an overhead projector delivered to a classroom 204...
sheesh.
Speak with knowledge, not with your attitude.
Believe it or not, I actually agree with you right not. Simply because thats ALL that Linux has right now for a Linux Desktop -- X.
What other choices are there?
Reading your reply was like listening to nails grind on a chalk board.
Dude, not everyone looks at Linux with rose colored glasses like you do.
You went through my list and basically didn't refute anything but said "your full of crap" to most of the things i brought up. Which tells me your being mostly emotional and not technically logical. Offer solutions not not more rethoric, It makes your points far more believable when your not just going "bah!, you don't know what your talking about". Having a good reasoning behind your flaming is better than just telling me that I'm a dope.
Also, to the people that think I want X to go away, I should clarify. I view X as what it is, I'm just saying that there should be an alternative desktop that is NOT based on X. X can still live and breath a healthy life. I think it should... I'm just saying that for the majority of the 99.98% (ok, I rounded off) of the desktop users, theres a problem with Linux as a desktop.
The problem is that Linux relies on X, and X sucks as a desktop for the masses. We all know that, and don't try and convince me that an almost 20 year-old architecture is going to bode well these days with my 62 year-old Dad who asks me "Hey, should I use this Linux thing since you like it so much". Let's face it, its klunky.
I told Dad to stick with his Mac...
Here are the problems as I see it (my opinions, I've got about 20 years into this stuff, so I atleast I get to spew my opinion, heh. )
First and foremost:
- No killer desktop application: Yep, thats right. There is no compelling reason for people to use Linux on the desktop. Why switch or even start there? If there isn't an application they can only run on Linux (or run *better* on Linux). BeOS talked about this, never got one... Mac had Photoshop/Quark etc. Windows had Word/Office/IE... Linux needs a similiar app.
Now maybe this application isn't really a desktop application but something like a content creation product, media/video/audio, who knows, but Linux doesn't have one now.
- X Windows: Relying on a HUGE layer for your graphical underpinnings is a big mistake. Remove X. Its too complicated to install, too big and too slow. I could give a hoot about all you so called "Linux Hackers" who say that Linux is for the elite. I look at it as I see it -- it shouldn't be this damn hard, and this damn big! Windows 98 installs in 10 mins -- nice goal to shoot for. Xfree86 my ass, move off that clunker and have a nice thin layer at the bottom... sheesh.
- No Office platform worth caring about: OpenOffice is pretty good, but its NOT MS Office, lets be honest. If OpenOffice started inching more towards the MS side of the world, it wouldn't be such a bad thing -- hey, why not include Evolution in OpenOffice, come on Ximiam, that might help things?? An installable *complete* solution with a good e-mail product. Hmmm... I think OpenOffice is getting there, but its about half the way there... It needs more time and a lot more MS compatibility.
- No good browser: Konq. Nice start. Opera, getting better (although, I could without all the added poop). Mozilla -- please. Netscape -- please. Those two suck on Windows too.
Linux needs a completely IE compatible browser. 100% compatible (there I said it, hate me for it). From a Web designer perspective, to a developer -- the browser choices on Linux are horrible -- we need IE, or an IE clone. I think our best bet is to have Konq. lead the way...
- Fonts suck: Every default font on KDE/GNOME that I've seen pales in comparison to a Mac or Windows desktop/environment. We need good fonts. Freetype2, ok, now we're getting someplace. But thats only recently...
- KDE and GNOME desktop's look like crap: I find every GNOME and KDE environment I try, just looks like junk compared to a Mac or Windows experience. Things just seem patched together, and not completely thought out. Now, I'm not saying Windows or the Mac is the best GUI's around, but boy, didn't anyone learn ANYTHING from those GUI's?!?! I don't see anything in the KDE or GNOME desktops that I would say "hey, thats better than windows", or "wow, I like this better than the Mac".
Personally, I think Linux GUI developers should steal the hell out of both and create a GUI thats even better!
- No good printing: Yeah, yeah, theres CUPS, but you have to GET that and its a pain and driver support is fairly weak. I like the Mac: You plug a printer in to the USB port, click print... boom! printout. No futzing around.
- There are two competing graphical platforms. GNOME and KDE. Thats not helping the overall cause.
- No Desktop "Champion": We need someone (thought we had it in Eazel) that can champion the desktop and create that "killer desktop" that everyone has to have. Linux needs a Linus of the Desktop.
Here are the solutions as I see it:
1. Remove X, standardize on one low-level graphical kernel -- DirectFB anyone?
2. Standardize on one API layer for the GUI, much like Win32, we should have a set of API's that are "God" when it comes to writing GUI under Linux. None of this, Bonobo vs. Qt vs. blah, blah, blah. One standard API thats small, easy and well maintained -- I vote for an API that uses XML/XSLT as its abstraction layer.
3. IBM. IBM should step in and see this as a chance to re-kindle the OS/2 vs. Windows war that was waged from 90 - 92 (which they got their asses kicked).
By dumping some money into the Desktop side of the world (not just the server side), they could create a platform that can beat Windows and Mac.
Hell, I have an idea: Why not port the Workplace Shell right over to Linux, Open Source it and then simply support it as a business platform replacement for OS/2 (if you work at a big company, you know how HUGE OS/2 got during the mid-90's)? Well, in my mind, this could happen again, but only with a platform like Linux under it.
Sure, this is a task, but I bet it would start making believers out of people. Plus, since the Workplace Shell already has a decent amount of applications for Business (3270/5250 emulators), it wouldn't be hard to start eating away at that Fortune 500 companies spending money on XP Professional. IBM could say "hey, why buy that when you can simple get Linux installed on an IBM Desktop for free, oh and we run those same applications... Believe it or not IBM still "kills" at the business level over Microsoft.
3. Gain critical mass with that killer application. Linux need a Photoshop or MS Office.
Anyone got one out there?
4. Stop battling between desktops, choose one or create a new one and settle on that -- but don't use X.
I actually had a Typo on the "ZOZO", I did mean "ZOSO", my bad... My typing
No, there isn't a town called "Cape Cod", your correct, anything sticking past the cape code canal is considered "Cape Cod". Oh, and NOT the left, but the rigt side. The left side is Springfield, and thats not *really* a part of MA. Hehehehehe... If you ask any Bostonian "what's out past Worcester", he or she will look at you as if you asked what's inside a black-hole
I think I've been to Springfield once in my whole life and that was because I got lost going to NYC -- don't ask.
The previous post might actually be right. Maybe it was used (the brant rock site) as the first "voice transmission". Can someone clarify that?
Actually, the original site is not in Cape Cod.
Its in a villiage called "Brant Rock", or better known as Marshfield for people looking on the map.
I know because I lived about 200 yards from the cement base. This thing is a ruins now.
As kids, we used to use that sucker as a meeting point to hang out, drink beer and get stoned (like 77-79'). I have (somewhat) vivid memories of my friends 8-track of ZOZO playing "Going to California" while we laid on that thing and looked up into the stars -- obviously with a good buzz on...
Its exact location is in a camp ground called "Blackman's Point Trailer Camp", I'm not sure why people are saying the Cape Cod site was the original. That one wasn't used, the one in Brant Rock was the actual site (from what I rememeber reading and learning). I could be wrong, but something tells me that I'm not.
If I remember correctly, there was a plauque but I think it was vandalized and removed by some local knucklehead. This thing was nothing but a big block of cement layers with these glass or porcelain bells (all of which were fun to smash I guess, because they were all broken!).
I was wondering what happened to Air Supply after the 80's...
sheesh.
That old cable might be more "reliable" than WiFI, sure, I'll agree to that. But you have to admit to it NOT being practical. I'm putting an addition onto my house and I WAS going to run cat5 all the way through to a couple hub's then back to my router, then I'm like "wait sec, thats a lot of work for 3 computers plus a laptop." I then realized that a LinkSys 802.11 hub and a bunch of wireless cards and PCCard's were a much cheaper (yes, i said cheaper) solution than having the electrician run cable, setup outlets etc. etc. Plus IT'S SOOOO COOL!!!
Again, its apple's and oranges. This woman was talking 56K modem vs. 1mbit connection here!!! there is NO comparison.
She's a nut. She must live in a town where only 5 people have a computer, because all I know is that my neighbor on some local POP can't even get a answer at the modem bank between the hours of 8pm and 12pm at night... and he's using a major provider. Her reasoning might be OK for like Kansas, but here in Boston --- fuggetaboutit..
We have every frickin' college kid in this town dialing in to to "chat" with their friends from home. Hell, you can *almost* hear the bits flinging over the telephone wires when you walk down by MIT...
heh.
These are the same people that think Vinyl LP's sound better than CD's... pfffffttt...
Hey, I'm dumping my WiFi LAN here in favor of an assyncronous 9600 baud serial line system. MUCH more reliable.
Come on!!
In my own experience: I've had Mediaone/Roadrunner/AT&Broadband since May of 1995--I was the second installation in my town of about 56,000 people.
I've had probably 1 time where I was down more than a day (it was and that wasn't the cable company. It was because some jack*ss down the street decided to run NT Server with DCHP Server, which eventually messed up the whole town...
They've since protected against such knuckleheadness.
I love my Broadband, my wife loves and the kids love it...