GIMP 2.8 development still under control

I simply configured my Awsome Window Manager to manage Gimp for me. It's running in multiple window mode but Awesome makes it behave like it's in single window mode. The nice thing is that I can still have multiple pictures open.

Here's a screenshot. The Gimp toolbar is always on the left. Awesome takes care to arrange my pictures on the right, keeping them all maximised like a tiling window manager should. It works pretty well. Best of both worlds IMHO.

http://www.jejik.com/sander/temp/awesome-gimp.jpg

Ridcully -

That would fail the minute somebody wanted to use iTunes are add some unsupported hardware.

A friend of mine bought a Linux netbook for an application I thought ideally suited to it -- until he came and asked me how to use his mobile as a modem to hook up to 3G.

In Windows, it just worked. In Linux, it could be made to work after sufficient surfing, huffing and puffing. He replaced the Linux machine with a Windows equivalent.

@Ridcully:

In 2004(!) I heard just such a story, told to me as "I did this to my wife" who was standing there, and concurred what he said. He set up his wife's system to dual-boot, with Linux as the default, KDE as the desktop, icons in the bottom panel in the order his wife was expecting, etc... After a week, she still hadn't noticed that she was running Linux, so he pointed it out to her. Four hours after that, it was a 100% Linux system.

dinotrac - With my Sony Ericsson W850i phone and Linux Mint, I just plug the phone's USB cable in, the phone prompts me "Data Transfer / Phone Mode" and it immediately connects. I did not have to configure anything.

My girlfriend has a Nokia 5800... that does not work quite so effortlessly, unfortunately.

jacog -

The problem isn't with setups that work, it's with setups that don't.

@dinotrac........True. I was thinking in terms of the very general user who is only after the basics, not the Apple locked business. Moreover with hardware, my personal experience seems to be that most of it can now be fairly readily made to operate. Printers especially are pretty good ~ I use the commercial package TurboLinux as the driver set and so far have encountered nothing I cannot run. Scanners still seem to be the worst niggle. Cameras ? Nope. So again, the general user who probably wouldn't want a scanner anyhow. Mobiles......that whole area is in such a flux that dual boot seems to always be the best option purely because the mobile makers are still concentrating on the Win majority......and who can blame them ?

Nevertheless as gus3 has admirably described, there are undoubtedly many more similar users who *could* just use Linux and enjoy its browsing freedom. My own wife runs a dual boot Linux Windows laptop. She readily admits she is a "computer illiterate": she just follows a learned routine and clicks on what she wants to happen. But as far as she is concerned, Linux and Windows behave in identical fashion and her requirement for Windows is a trivial matter of a delightful mahjong game she really enjoys.

Rid...

Yup, but the trouble is defining and finding that basic user. My friend seemed perfect until he tried using his phone as a modem.

It's part of why the desktop has been so much tougher than the server. It's not the desktop per se, but the zillions of assorted things that people do with it.

@dino:

I would submit that that is the difference between a desktop system and a server. The server is configured to do a task (if it's Windows), or set of tasks (if it isn't Windows), and do it/them well. The desktop's task set is much more broad, and expandable nearly on-demand.

And then there's the tabulæ rasæ like Slackware, Gentoo, LFS, and the BSD's...

Quoting:I was thinking in terms of the very general user who is only after the basics

Such users do not exist. Dino's example is excellent. 90% of the people can do 90% of their work on Linux. Problem us that people won't want to switch until they can do 99% of their work on Linux. And those last 9% of work contain a giant array of different tasks. You end up with few people who can actually switch.

But... you can still sell those 90% of people on e.g. netbooks very well. They can do that remaining 9% of work on their Windows Desktop and use their Linux netbook to couch-surf the other 90%.

Another thing that holds people back sometimes, is the reliance on apps-by-name. Girlfriend's mother is case in point. She loves her Mint-KDE setup on her Acer Revo, but she was asking me about some Windows app she used to run and whether it'll work on Linux.

I was about to go searching for "appname wine linux" when I paused and asked "What does it do?". She described it as a screenshot app that shows you a preview of the screenshot, and then gives you the option of opening it in a graphics program or saving it. So I pressed the PrintScrn button, the relevant window popped up and I said "Like that?" and she was more than happy.

I find those people tend to ask "Can I run x on Linux" rather than "Can I do x on Linux".

jacog -

Yes, sometimes. Sometimes, they really mean "Can I run x on Linux"?

It might be because they have grown really accustomed to x. It might be because everybody in their office runs x, thus giving them a support system. It might be because they trade files with friends for needelpoint patterns.

User machines are harder than servers. By a lot.

dino, agreed... although the first two reasons you mention are entirely the woobie-factor, and can be unlearned.

The third reason though ... "Can I run Needlepoint Pro on Linux?" vs. "Can I run needleworking software on Linux that support Needlepoint Pro file format?" ... the latter question is still better, even if the answer might be "No".

I am thinking in terms of determining whether a Linux Desktop is suitable for a specific individual. One has to try and determine everything s/he might need to do with it, and whether you'll be depriving them of any of it.

I come across people all the time who have already more or less made up their mind that they would like to try Linux as an alternative. For those people I usually try and get a detailed laundry list of what they might want to use it for, and whether it's a good fit for them.

Often there will be game-breaker apps that they do need, often there will be alternatives to compensate, sometimes not. I try to use WINE as an absolute last resort, and if an application only "mostly" works in WINE, I won't suggest it as an option for those peeps.

jacog -

Sure, and it's good to bring anyone in-house that you can. It's just a more daunting and difficult task than many people realize. Windows' most powerful selling point is not any single feature so much as the network effects it has built over the years.

And if you actually do get someone to try it, you become their tech-support. :)

> Yes, sometimes. Sometimes, they really mean "Can I run x on Linux"?

If the machine is powerful enough, the best solution to those types of problems is to run a Virtual Windows machine for the few apps needed. Of course, even that doesn't work for gamers. :(

For some folks, the best thing is to have a dedicated Linux machine for Internet use and a dedicated Windows machine for whatever they need Windows for. That's pretty much what I do.

And for some folks, the best solution (whine, grumble, grind teeth) is just to run Windows.

Sigh.

If they have arranged their computing needs so as to be bound to such an insecure system, despite being warned from every direction about the dangers of doing so, then I have no sympathy for them when their systems get pwnz0r3d.

gus -

They haven't arranged anything. They've gotten computers that they were used to or that friends suggested or were like the ones they used at work. They've bought hardware or software to do something they want or need to do.

Those are hardly crimes.

Person A works for company B. Company B mandates use of Windows for access from outside corp network. Typical.

Scenario 1: Person A picks up malware unknowingly, and transmits it to company B's servers. Two days later, every single desktop on the corp network powers off suddenly and without warning at 2:05pm. Tough noogies. (Yes, I saw something very similar happen.)

Scenario 2: I am person A. I tell company B that any Windows-only policy of theirs concerning my personal equipment, including my home network, is null and void. If the company wants me to work from home, using only Windows, the company can provide and maintain the equipment and connection at their expense.

The warnings are out there, all over the place, and Microsoft still can't put together a secure system. People will lock their cars, lock their doors at night or when they leave home, but they'll use Windows, plug in stray thumb drives, and browse with Internet Excoriator. Maybe they're betting that fat criminals who hardly ever go outside will be easier for the cops to catch?

No sympathy from this direction.

> Company B mandates use of Windows for access from outside corp network. Typical.

Yep. That's true for my company (for the next 6 weeks, anyway). Even though a Linux version of the same connection software is available. The scanning software to pre-check for malware doesn't work with Linux, and it disconnects you at that point.