Well, by that reasoning, NOTHING except Windows is "ready for the desktop". So that means MacOS X is not ready for the desktop?
"Right now the people who run Linux are the people who cna handle running Linux on their own. The people who run Windows are the people who can't."
You can exclude my parents. And I suspect there are other similar people out there. For everybody who has limited needs (there are many people like that out there), and have a technically inclined friend, Linux can be just fine.
Yes, I do. What's the first thing you do if you don't know what to choose? Why, you ask other people of course (well, either that or you go on research yourself; what do you think students do all the time anyway? Do you think other people are incapable of learning?). Almost everybody will come to the same conclusion: RedHat, Mandrake or SuSE for those who are new to Linux. Which one you choose out of those 3 doesn't matter: it's like flavors of ice. And do you really think the salesman will sell him a copy of Gentoo?
How much efford does it take to find out which distribution is suitable for you? Not much. In fact, nobody I know has ever been put off the fact that there are many Linux distributions. The only people who complain about things like that are - tadaa - Slashdotters, and nobody else.
While we're at it, how many computer manufactures do you think there are? Dell, Compaq, Sky, Vobis, Albert Heijn, Aldi, bla bla bla. How many different insurance companies are there? How many different banks? How many different TV programs? How many different news papers? OMG people are confused and are unuable to do anything! Not. That's like saying n00bs are not capable of distinguishing the difference between a truck, bus and normal car when they want to buy a car. That's like saying people will never go to restaurants because there are too many choices on the menu.
Just because there are many choices doesn't mean you'll never able to choose something, or that you must spent weeks/months to choose something. Ever heard of something called recommendation?
"Second, if I want to use the nVidia drivers (which nVidia actually provides, bravo!), then all I have to do is RECOMPILE THE KERNEL!"
Uh... huh?? You lost me here. The NVidia installer provides a bunch of pre-compiled modules for certain kernel versions. If your kernel version doesn't match, then it tries to compile a module for you. No kernel recompilation is necessary.
Yeah now try my Epson printer. I plugged it into XP, ran the setup tool, and it crashed. Reboot - same thing. Nice huh? On Fedora, I run the printer setup tool and it was autodetected. Within minutes I could print. Things in Windows fail more often than Slashdotters want to admit.
In the GDM login manager, click Settings (or whatever that button is called again; I haven't looked at it for quite a while since I set it up to autologin:). Somewhere in that graphical dialog there's a nice checkbox that enables you to automatically login as a specific user.
"Oh come on... When you buy a computer off the shelf, it comes pre-installed with Windows."
EXACTLY. Windows comes preinstalled. So why do you compared preinstalled Windows with non-installed Linux?
"And before you say it - YES - those same people could just as easily have ordered a computer pre-loaded with RedHat or whatever. But why should they? Why WOULD they?"
What's your point? People don't know Linux, so they don't choose Linux no matter how userfriendly or easy. And somehow it's Linux's fault that it isn't widely known?
"OK, sure. I have bad luck. What then? If some new user tries the install, has bad luck (non-standard hardware, whatever), where does that leave him? Reading man pages."
How's that any different from Windows? I spent half a day trying to get my new printer working on Windows XP. The installer kept freezing or otherwise just doesn't work. Not even after reboots.
"But Gentoo? Forget it."
So uhm... don't use Gentoo? You are not Gentoo's target audience. Isn't it only common sense to use a product that targets you?
It doesn't matter what operating system. If something goes wrong, the newbie is screwed. Windows XP is far from perfect. Things go wrong more often than Slashdotters want to admit.
That article is targeted to technical people. People like the Slashdot crowd. Why is it not OK to use jargon when you know your article's target audience understand it?
"It's getting the box TO that point that STILL is difficult, and STILL requires geek-knowledge and man pages and whatnot."
Actually, no. It runs on an ancient RedHat 7.3. Let me summarize the installation process for you: - Insert CD. - Wait till the graphical installer pops up. - Next, Next, Next. Videocard, mouse, keyboard, network card are all autodetected. - DHCP is automatically setup for you.
Uhm... yeah that's pretty much it. Everything else is just general tweaking to make it run faster. But getting the system to a usable state really is just all of that!
Well you just have bad luck. Linux have been working perfectly fine on all computers I installed it on.
"90%? Sure. But THAT is the problem."
Not everybody needs 100%. Have you ever considered that? There are many users who are satisfied with 90%. It's just that the Slashdot crowd are geeks, and therebefore think absolutely everybody want 100% and getting every single bit out of their computer.
"Yes, getting widget X to work is just a matter of looking in the man page and finding the correct command and args"
And this is exactly the kind of myths the Slashdot crowd are spreading. You DON'T have to do anything to get a widget set working! Let's take a look at Fedora 1 for example: - Installer autodetects soundcard, graphics card, mouse, keyboard, etc. etc. It's simply a matter of Next, Next, Next. - After installation, the X server works (and before you nitpick on this: no the user doesn't have to know what an X server is). - The desktop works, no reading manpages or commandline magic whatsoever. - My network card is also autodetected, and DHCP is automatically setup. I can immediately browse the web by clicking on the "Mozilla Web Browser" icon (notice the word "Web Browser"; the user doesn't have to know about Mozilla to know it's a web browser).
So, what's your response to this?
"All the average user wants is to be able to send an email, or browse the web for porno, or whatever."
They can! This is something you already can do with a preinstalled, preconfigured Linux system! In fact, my parents have been using Linux to browse the web for years. Honestly, have you ever tried?
Yeah, because anybody who disagree with the "Windows rules, Linux will never succeed" crowd (the crowd being most of Slashdot) is automatically a zealot or lying, right?
Well... yes. Many, many people continue to use IE even after knowing there are alternatives and that IE is full of security bugs. Those people don't get labelled as "zealot". But somehow it's wrong to do the same thing with FireFox?
There are many, many people out there who continue to use IE, even after knowing there are alternatives and that IE has many security holes. So what? Why doesn't anybody label those people as "MS zealots"? But when someone says he still continues to use FireFox he gets flamed down for being a zealot?
Uhm no. Most people these days don't know what Netscape is. Those who do remember Netscape are those who have been using a computer for a while. However, when they heard "Netscape" they immediately think "buggy, bloated, slow", etc. The name Netscape will have no impact on most people, but will have a negative impact on most people who do know Netscape.
You prefer KDE's direction? Fine, use KDE. However, other people don't like it, and prefer GNOME instead. Isn't that the whole point of having choice? What you call "steady improvements", others call bloat.
Uhm yeah that's great, but it doesn't matter. All that matters is the numbers. If software companies see the Linux sale numbers, they'll *think* that more and more people use Linux, so they may port their software.
It doesn't matter whether people actually put a pirated Windows on it. All that matters is that companies *think* the numbers are correct.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, by that reasoning, NOTHING except Windows is "ready for the desktop". So that means MacOS X is not ready for the desktop?
"Right now the people who run Linux are the people who cna handle running Linux on their own. The people who run Windows are the people who can't."
You can exclude my parents. And I suspect there are other similar people out there.
For everybody who has limited needs (there are many people like that out there), and have a technically inclined friend, Linux can be just fine.
Yes, I do. What's the first thing you do if you don't know what to choose? Why, you ask other people of course (well, either that or you go on research yourself; what do you think students do all the time anyway? Do you think other people are incapable of learning?). Almost everybody will come to the same conclusion: RedHat, Mandrake or SuSE for those who are new to Linux. Which one you choose out of those 3 doesn't matter: it's like flavors of ice.
And do you really think the salesman will sell him a copy of Gentoo?
How much efford does it take to find out which distribution is suitable for you? Not much. In fact, nobody I know has ever been put off the fact that there are many Linux distributions. The only people who complain about things like that are - tadaa - Slashdotters, and nobody else.
While we're at it, how many computer manufactures do you think there are? Dell, Compaq, Sky, Vobis, Albert Heijn, Aldi, bla bla bla. How many different insurance companies are there? How many different banks? How many different TV programs? How many different news papers? OMG people are confused and are unuable to do anything! Not.
That's like saying n00bs are not capable of distinguishing the difference between a truck, bus and normal car when they want to buy a car. That's like saying people will never go to restaurants because there are too many choices on the menu.
Just because there are many choices doesn't mean you'll never able to choose something, or that you must spent weeks/months to choose something. Ever heard of something called recommendation?
"Second, if I want to use the nVidia drivers (which nVidia actually provides, bravo!), then all I have to do is RECOMPILE THE KERNEL!"
Uh... huh?? You lost me here. The NVidia installer provides a bunch of pre-compiled modules for certain kernel versions. If your kernel version doesn't match, then it tries to compile a module for you. No kernel recompilation is necessary.
Yeah now try my Epson printer. I plugged it into XP, ran the setup tool, and it crashed. Reboot - same thing. Nice huh? On Fedora, I run the printer setup tool and it was autodetected. Within minutes I could print.
Things in Windows fail more often than Slashdotters want to admit.
In the GDM login manager, click Settings (or whatever that button is called again; I haven't looked at it for quite a while since I set it up to autologin :).
Somewhere in that graphical dialog there's a nice checkbox that enables you to automatically login as a specific user.
In other words, this is a chicken-and-egg problem, and Linux will NEVER get out of the vicious circle? Is that it?
"Oh come on... When you buy a computer off the shelf, it comes pre-installed with Windows."
EXACTLY. Windows comes preinstalled. So why do you compared preinstalled Windows with non-installed Linux?
"And before you say it - YES - those same people could just as easily have ordered a computer pre-loaded with RedHat or whatever. But why should they? Why WOULD they?"
What's your point?
People don't know Linux, so they don't choose Linux no matter how userfriendly or easy. And somehow it's Linux's fault that it isn't widely known?
"OK, sure. I have bad luck. What then? If some new user tries the install, has bad luck (non-standard hardware, whatever), where does that leave him? Reading man pages."
How's that any different from Windows? I spent half a day trying to get my new printer working on Windows XP. The installer kept freezing or otherwise just doesn't work. Not even after reboots.
"But Gentoo? Forget it."
So uhm... don't use Gentoo? You are not Gentoo's target audience. Isn't it only common sense to use a product that targets you?
It doesn't matter what operating system. If something goes wrong, the newbie is screwed. Windows XP is far from perfect. Things go wrong more often than Slashdotters want to admit.
And it's somehow Linux's fault that hardware vendors don't support it?
And how many average users install Windows themselves? (Those who can certainly aren't average users.)
That article is targeted to technical people. People like the Slashdot crowd. Why is it not OK to use jargon when you know your article's target audience understand it?
"It's getting the box TO that point that STILL is difficult, and STILL requires geek-knowledge and man pages and whatnot."
Actually, no. It runs on an ancient RedHat 7.3. Let me summarize the installation process for you:
- Insert CD.
- Wait till the graphical installer pops up.
- Next, Next, Next. Videocard, mouse, keyboard, network card are all autodetected.
- DHCP is automatically setup for you.
Uhm... yeah that's pretty much it.
Everything else is just general tweaking to make it run faster. But getting the system to a usable state really is just all of that!
Well you just have bad luck. Linux have been working perfectly fine on all computers I installed it on.
"90%? Sure. But THAT is the problem."
Not everybody needs 100%. Have you ever considered that? There are many users who are satisfied with 90%. It's just that the Slashdot crowd are geeks, and therebefore think absolutely everybody want 100% and getting every single bit out of their computer.
Yeah, because anybody who disagree with the "Windows rules, Linux will never succeed" crowd (the crowd being most of Slashdot) is automatically a zealot or lying, right?
"And I'm sure I'll get modded as a troll,"
WTF?!?!?! EVERY single "Photoshop rules, Gimp sux0rz" post on Slashdot has been modded UP. Wake up from your dream.
"Also, do I still have to kill the toolbar or log out when I make a change to a menu"
Install FAM. It's used for file change notification.
"IF Microsoft did this, people would be singing from the halls that Microsoft has given in, or getting desperate."
So? It's their own fault that they've gotten a reputation that's so bad that people treat them differently.
GNU's Not Unix. Do I need to say more?
Well... yes. Many, many people continue to use IE even after knowing there are alternatives and that IE is full of security bugs. Those people don't get labelled as "zealot". But somehow it's wrong to do the same thing with FireFox?
There are many, many people out there who continue to use IE, even after knowing there are alternatives and that IE has many security holes. So what? Why doesn't anybody label those people as "MS zealots"? But when someone says he still continues to use FireFox he gets flamed down for being a zealot?
They're here: http://freedesktop.org/~keithp/screenshots/
In that case, Netscape has lost and will never win. MSIE in included in Windows - nothing can be easier than that.
Uhm no. Most people these days don't know what Netscape is. Those who do remember Netscape are those who have been using a computer for a while. However, when they heard "Netscape" they immediately think "buggy, bloated, slow", etc. The name Netscape will have no impact on most people, but will have a negative impact on most people who do know Netscape.
You prefer KDE's direction? Fine, use KDE. However, other people don't like it, and prefer GNOME instead. Isn't that the whole point of having choice? What you call "steady improvements", others call bloat.
Uhm yeah that's great, but it doesn't matter. All that matters is the numbers. If software companies see the Linux sale numbers, they'll *think* that more and more people use Linux, so they may port their software.
It doesn't matter whether people actually put a pirated Windows on it. All that matters is that companies *think* the numbers are correct.