- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Underestimated hurdles to Ubuntu desktop adoption
|
|
|
Comments (45)
25 earlier comments in the full thread.
@Steven, If I could find a multiple desktops for Windows that was reliable, and not cludgy to use, i'd use it, but all the Free and free ones I've tried are not a patch on the Linux multiple desktops.
Kind of like user security and bugs in Linux. All included for free.
In Windows, you only get bugs, and they cost you.
In Windows, you only get bugs, and they cost you.
Tracyanne, I'm not even the only one who's had some positive experiences with Vista. I was actually encouraged to try it by two another long time FOSS supporters and Linux geeks. Just to make your jaw drop a little further. :D
Anyway, it's not without problems for sure, and we both did end up back on Linux, Ubuntu specifically, but when I say it performs better I'm not lying, though it's possible this has something to do with the fact that on Windows my video card has a proper full driver whereas on Ubuntu, since Jaunty, my card was dropped and I have to use the free and rather inferior, incomplete driver (R300).
You say it doesn't have the features you want so it's possible you simply have different needs and use cases than I, but I can't really make out constructively what does "monster, it's horrible and byzantine, and baroque, all at the same time" refer to specifically. :) Except the "monster" remark, cause it IS a huge beast. My install after updates took freaking 24 GB (home premium), it's crazy. And I hear it's also sluggish on 2GB of memory or less.
What eventually made me reinstall XP in place of Vista and set up a dual boot between Ubuntu and XP was tendency for Vista to grind the disk even after turning search indexing off, the fact that NTFS fragments too easily and I don't like adding defragmentation to a maintenance list, which already includes scanning for spyware and viruses, and also the huge disk space use, since I didn't want to give the windows partition more than 35GB and I wanted to try some Steam games on it which are a few gigs big.. so I have them on XP now..
Bottom line is though that I am now convinced that to a certain extent the extremely bad rep that Vista got WAS a lot due to FUD and that Linux advocates aren't exactly innocent when it comes to spreading FUD about the OS. For instance, the DRM aspect of Vista I simply didn't notice. Performance on my machine was good (I expected everything to be super slow given what some Linux fans wanted me to think) etc. Trying Vista gave me some objectivity I needed badly.
Steven_Rosenber, I agree Linux should take its own way. The problem isn't necessarily that it isn't like OS X or Windows. The problem are inconsistencies. If a particular serious desktop distribution like Ubuntu decides to provide users a unique way of using a computer which users can then get used to, it should be consistent. Otherwise this "getting used to" is highly impaired as the user begins to expect one behavior and then all of a sudden different behaviors pop up. Let it be different, but consistent and usable and BETTER than others, not just different for difference's sake. Paying for some serious usability research still helps in that area.
Anyway, it's not without problems for sure, and we both did end up back on Linux, Ubuntu specifically, but when I say it performs better I'm not lying, though it's possible this has something to do with the fact that on Windows my video card has a proper full driver whereas on Ubuntu, since Jaunty, my card was dropped and I have to use the free and rather inferior, incomplete driver (R300).
You say it doesn't have the features you want so it's possible you simply have different needs and use cases than I, but I can't really make out constructively what does "monster, it's horrible and byzantine, and baroque, all at the same time" refer to specifically. :) Except the "monster" remark, cause it IS a huge beast. My install after updates took freaking 24 GB (home premium), it's crazy. And I hear it's also sluggish on 2GB of memory or less.
What eventually made me reinstall XP in place of Vista and set up a dual boot between Ubuntu and XP was tendency for Vista to grind the disk even after turning search indexing off, the fact that NTFS fragments too easily and I don't like adding defragmentation to a maintenance list, which already includes scanning for spyware and viruses, and also the huge disk space use, since I didn't want to give the windows partition more than 35GB and I wanted to try some Steam games on it which are a few gigs big.. so I have them on XP now..
Bottom line is though that I am now convinced that to a certain extent the extremely bad rep that Vista got WAS a lot due to FUD and that Linux advocates aren't exactly innocent when it comes to spreading FUD about the OS. For instance, the DRM aspect of Vista I simply didn't notice. Performance on my machine was good (I expected everything to be super slow given what some Linux fans wanted me to think) etc. Trying Vista gave me some objectivity I needed badly.
Steven_Rosenber, I agree Linux should take its own way. The problem isn't necessarily that it isn't like OS X or Windows. The problem are inconsistencies. If a particular serious desktop distribution like Ubuntu decides to provide users a unique way of using a computer which users can then get used to, it should be consistent. Otherwise this "getting used to" is highly impaired as the user begins to expect one behavior and then all of a sudden different behaviors pop up. Let it be different, but consistent and usable and BETTER than others, not just different for difference's sake. Paying for some serious usability research still helps in that area.
Mrs. Panik's new Dell Inspiron 1210 came with Ubuntu.
Well, it came with Dellbuntu. You cannot believe how
much they screwed up Gnome. Whoever did the desk-
top design had never used anything but Winders.
But since it is Linux there were ways and means to fix the ugly.
Other than the ugly, its a very nice package. Just big enough to do extended sessions and almost as small as a netbook..Light, thin, looks cool. More as Mrs. Panik uses it.
But since it is Linux there were ways and means to fix the ugly.
Other than the ugly, its a very nice package. Just big enough to do extended sessions and almost as small as a netbook..Light, thin, looks cool. More as Mrs. Panik uses it.
Quoting:You cannot believe how much they screwed up Gnome.Oh, yes I can. Remember, "Unix gives you enough rope to hang yourself, and a couple more feet, just to be sure."
Quoting:You say it doesn't have the features you want so it's possible you simply have different needs and use cases than I, but I can't really make out constructively what does "monster, it's horrible and byzantine, and baroque, all at the same time" refer to specifically. :) Except the "monster" remark, cause it IS a huge beast. My install after updates took freaking 24 GB (home premium), it's crazy. And I hear it's also sluggish on 2GB of memory or less.
Features: Apart fom not wanting to have to deal with Antivirus software.
Simple easy to easy to implement and use security, that actually works. Multiple Desktops (doesn't have to be 3D compiz Cube,I never used the cube on Mandriva and I had 9 desktops) that are not a cludge [I've tried a lot of different ones for Windows, and they all seem rather cludgy], that come with the system, and are not 3rd party or even "power tools" addons. The ability to pin Windows always on top.
The ability to shade Windows. A fast uncluttered desktop, with the ability to extend it to suit my needs, not just to make it look pretty. The ability to use my computer as a non root user, and elevate my privileges when needed by simply straight forward means.
It's Byzantine because compared to XP and Any Linux machine I've use it's complex, unnecessarily, The Security with the UA whatever is annoying, and switching it off defeats the purpose. It's Baroque because the GUI is over designed, and it isn't easy, maybe not possible, to simplify the Design. At least on Xp I can turn off all the bumf and use the Win98 style desktop skin (it's not as pretty as my Linux desktop, but it's simpler and by no means as garish as the standard Vista or XP desktop skin)
the lack of the ability to the ability to pin Windows always on top, and to shade Windows is hugely frustrating, on any version of Windows.
Ah, then you're close to me.. Those are about the features I like on Linux too and miss on Windows, especially the windows pinning and multiple desktops.
I suppose I was mostly impressed by performance (though this is a pretty powerful machine), bling, driver support (for my video card especially), consistency and overall wholeness in general and the fact that all apps I would want work natively..
Btw, speaking of performance, it just seems like the windows GUI system is more responsive with full load than Xorg. Though my friend also blames Linux kernel memory management. On Linux if you run some very minimal window manager like openbox everything is super fast and responsive, for the most part, but if you run something full featured like GNOME or KDE there are sometimes noticeable slow downs. And this is on a machine with a Core2Duo processor with 3.5 GB of RAM so hardware can hardly be blamed, not even a video card since then performance even in openbox would have to somehow be impaired. So it seems as if Linux OR Xorg somehow slow things down when running larger chunks of stuff in memory, even when there's plenty of memory space to go around.
Comparably, even on generic Vista drivers, Aero with full desktop effects and even Winamp visualizations it all works smooth, fast and responsively without any hitch whatsoever. It does take a lot of memory, but at least it gives performance in return. It just feels like you actually get the bang for memory you've got. The windows system in question, from what I heard, is known as WDDM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model
Perhaps, just perhaps, something that was made by Microsoft could actually be technically interesting and even superior, proprietary or not.
I suppose I was mostly impressed by performance (though this is a pretty powerful machine), bling, driver support (for my video card especially), consistency and overall wholeness in general and the fact that all apps I would want work natively..
Btw, speaking of performance, it just seems like the windows GUI system is more responsive with full load than Xorg. Though my friend also blames Linux kernel memory management. On Linux if you run some very minimal window manager like openbox everything is super fast and responsive, for the most part, but if you run something full featured like GNOME or KDE there are sometimes noticeable slow downs. And this is on a machine with a Core2Duo processor with 3.5 GB of RAM so hardware can hardly be blamed, not even a video card since then performance even in openbox would have to somehow be impaired. So it seems as if Linux OR Xorg somehow slow things down when running larger chunks of stuff in memory, even when there's plenty of memory space to go around.
Comparably, even on generic Vista drivers, Aero with full desktop effects and even Winamp visualizations it all works smooth, fast and responsively without any hitch whatsoever. It does take a lot of memory, but at least it gives performance in return. It just feels like you actually get the bang for memory you've got. The windows system in question, from what I heard, is known as WDDM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model
Perhaps, just perhaps, something that was made by Microsoft could actually be technically interesting and even superior, proprietary or not.
Libveris:
Context switching, whether from one process to another or from ring 4 to ring 0 (user to kernel mode), has a cost, no matter what processor it runs on.
Windows reduces this cost by placing all sorts of horrible UI code in the kernel, ring 0. Linux (and other Unices) keep the UI code in its own process, which incurs a process schedule/switch. In other words, Windows trades security for speed.
It's business as usual for them, as evidenced even now by the Conficker fiasco. No thanks. I'll stick with Linux, which has its priorities straight when it comes to security. What good is a fast system if it gets PWN3D before you can even get the first set of security updates installed?
Context switching, whether from one process to another or from ring 4 to ring 0 (user to kernel mode), has a cost, no matter what processor it runs on.
Windows reduces this cost by placing all sorts of horrible UI code in the kernel, ring 0. Linux (and other Unices) keep the UI code in its own process, which incurs a process schedule/switch. In other words, Windows trades security for speed.
It's business as usual for them, as evidenced even now by the Conficker fiasco. No thanks. I'll stick with Linux, which has its priorities straight when it comes to security. What good is a fast system if it gets PWN3D before you can even get the first set of security updates installed?
Hm, I'm not as technical to understand why does that reduce security. And if it does, is it possible to do it without it incurring a security issue? Though I don't expect anything to change so just asking out of curiosity.
Also, given that there is an increasing amount of malware for Linux anyway the two often said theories come to mind; (1) an OS is as secure as its user/administrator and (2) Linux and OS X are mostly perceived as more secure because they're less popular.
Though I'm not saying that Linux isn't more secure by design, I'm just unsure as to how far does this fact go in actually preventing its increasing vulnerability..
Btw, I also tried Mac OS X on my machine (got OSx86) and with no 3D support whatsoever (I actually couldn't enable it for my ATI card), 3D features like minimizing, transparency and shadows worked smoothly. It could be that whatever MS and Apple are doing, even if it's in the kernel, it's making it more suitable for *desktops*...
Hmm.. maybe there should be multiple Linux kernels.. Linux Server and Linux Desktop, with optimized features for both. I've seen that idea floated before... (EDIT: Or maybe big desktop distros like Ubuntu should maintain their own modified kernels at some point or just apply special desktop optimization patches..)
I wish Haiku OS had big corporate sponsors behind it. It's another OS designed from bottom up to be multimedia and desktop use friendly (based on last code released by BeOS). Unfortunately, at this rate Haiku OS will never catch up. It could be a perfect desktop OS. It's FOSS and designed for multimedia. http://www.haiku-os.org/
Also, given that there is an increasing amount of malware for Linux anyway the two often said theories come to mind; (1) an OS is as secure as its user/administrator and (2) Linux and OS X are mostly perceived as more secure because they're less popular.
Though I'm not saying that Linux isn't more secure by design, I'm just unsure as to how far does this fact go in actually preventing its increasing vulnerability..
Btw, I also tried Mac OS X on my machine (got OSx86) and with no 3D support whatsoever (I actually couldn't enable it for my ATI card), 3D features like minimizing, transparency and shadows worked smoothly. It could be that whatever MS and Apple are doing, even if it's in the kernel, it's making it more suitable for *desktops*...
Hmm.. maybe there should be multiple Linux kernels.. Linux Server and Linux Desktop, with optimized features for both. I've seen that idea floated before... (EDIT: Or maybe big desktop distros like Ubuntu should maintain their own modified kernels at some point or just apply special desktop optimization patches..)
I wish Haiku OS had big corporate sponsors behind it. It's another OS designed from bottom up to be multimedia and desktop use friendly (based on last code released by BeOS). Unfortunately, at this rate Haiku OS will never catch up. It could be a perfect desktop OS. It's FOSS and designed for multimedia. http://www.haiku-os.org/
Libveris:
Ring 0 and ring 4, on x86, cannot stomp on each other without deliberate border-crossing on the part of the programmers. Think of it in the context of a real, current security concern:
The Adobe PDF reader has a problem with JavaScript being able to access resources that it shouldn't.
In Linux, keeping it always in ring 4 (lowest privilege) means that, at best, the application will simply die with a segmentation fault; at worst, may mess around with a user's files, but cannot alter the contents of root-owned files anywhere in the $PATH.
In Windows, the least-bad scenario is a segfault termination. However, because UI code can have access to ring 0 (highest privilege), a carefully crafted hack can result in system access with administrator rights... all files writable... partition table vulnerable... network connection wide open to everybody... get the picture?
The pathetic thing about Windows is that so many of their (MS's) own apps, including Office, expect these security vulnerabilities to be present. If Microsoft closed off all these holes, lots of applications, including the Office suite, would suddenly stop working.
Does this make more sense?
Ring 0 and ring 4, on x86, cannot stomp on each other without deliberate border-crossing on the part of the programmers. Think of it in the context of a real, current security concern:
The Adobe PDF reader has a problem with JavaScript being able to access resources that it shouldn't.
In Linux, keeping it always in ring 4 (lowest privilege) means that, at best, the application will simply die with a segmentation fault; at worst, may mess around with a user's files, but cannot alter the contents of root-owned files anywhere in the $PATH.
In Windows, the least-bad scenario is a segfault termination. However, because UI code can have access to ring 0 (highest privilege), a carefully crafted hack can result in system access with administrator rights... all files writable... partition table vulnerable... network connection wide open to everybody... get the picture?
The pathetic thing about Windows is that so many of their (MS's) own apps, including Office, expect these security vulnerabilities to be present. If Microsoft closed off all these holes, lots of applications, including the Office suite, would suddenly stop working.
Does this make more sense?
Yeah, thanks.
(for what it's worth, I can say that Vista feels like a faster OS than Ubuntu on Core2Duo with 3.5 GB of memory)).
That's fine, but the people I deal with have 4-6 year old machines with 256 meg of ram and can't even grasp the concept of left vs right click and copy and paste. (You and me...right Gus?)
We're dealing with people that possess less than rudimentary skills here for the most part,or at least I am. GNU/Linux has provided hundreds of our "clients" an environment that is worry-free of viruses and consistent system crashes. I can't argue with some of the other points as they largely bear truth but when you are dealing with people that only want to send a few emails and visit with their grandkids via Ekiga or Pidgin, Linux slays the snot out of the other OS's. The elites will work these other things out but I seriously doubt it will take a decade. Look at the almost exponential improvements in the last year. Linux went from "wireless and webcam support sux" to "it mostly just works" in one Kernel update.
h
That's fine, but the people I deal with have 4-6 year old machines with 256 meg of ram and can't even grasp the concept of left vs right click and copy and paste. (You and me...right Gus?)
We're dealing with people that possess less than rudimentary skills here for the most part,or at least I am. GNU/Linux has provided hundreds of our "clients" an environment that is worry-free of viruses and consistent system crashes. I can't argue with some of the other points as they largely bear truth but when you are dealing with people that only want to send a few emails and visit with their grandkids via Ekiga or Pidgin, Linux slays the snot out of the other OS's. The elites will work these other things out but I seriously doubt it will take a decade. Look at the almost exponential improvements in the last year. Linux went from "wireless and webcam support sux" to "it mostly just works" in one Kernel update.
h
On its way, h...
Oh, and you owe me a monitor, after your "slays the snot" comment!
Oh, and you owe me a monitor, after your "slays the snot" comment!
Granted and it does all seem to work seamlessly. There are annoyances from time to time such as my recent update to Ubuntu 9.03 with 2.6.28.11 Kernal and lost a fully operational
VMware interface. Now it didn't take much to get it all back up and running again mostly an
annoyance more than anything else.But for the users willing to persist and work with the system you will fall in love with it all as of todate I have found nothing I can't do with my linux
desktop that Winderz used to do. I keep Winderz XP in the VMware side for certain proggies
Turbo Tax and the likes. That don't sport a Linux interface.
That's fair Gus...It's on it's way. You just pay the shipping.
Oh, it's a 24 inch Samsung CRT.
h
Oh, it's a 24 inch Samsung CRT.
h
No argument there, for slower machines and basic usage Linux is the winner, and a lot more in fact. It's probably more fair to say where it doesn't win than where it does. And the list would be a known one; games, certain productivity apps, some inconsistencies and lacks in usability and sometimes performance, albeit those are less major).
I have to be honest. Nautilus is as slow as... Windows. It's bad. Give me Thunar or Dolphin anytime.
Quoting:for what it's worth, I can say that Vista feels like a faster OS than Ubuntu on Core2Duo with 3.5 GB of memory
Humour yourself and run a few benchmarks. Vista only "feels" fast because the UI responds a tad quicker thanks to running in ring 0 like gus3 explained. But I bet you that the actual amount of work done is lower on Vista.
Also, when benchmarking Linux, please don't just benchmark Ubuntu. It's one of the slowest and most resource hungry distros out there.
check your resource usage too, Vista makes extensive use of precaching.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post