- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Unfortunately, the Linux desktop doesn't always work
|
|
|
Comments (24)
4 earlier comments in the full thread.
This seems to be an odd case that he's looking at. Automatix is really quite simple. I think the part about the codecs is because sjvn is madly in love with ESR and wants to get the message out that preinstalled codecs are the only way for Linux to survive. I usually like what he writes, but I have to question the integrity of that part. One post in an Ubuntu forum is guaranteed to come back "Use Automatix. Use EasyUbuntu." (That would also come out of an Ubuntu book.)
The OOo part is also strange. In my experience OOo and MS Office run about the same speed (OOo starts more slowly).
The difference between preinstalled Windows and install-it-yourself Ubuntu is the problem. There's nothing the developers can do about that. That's a Linux marketing thing.
The OOo part is also strange. In my experience OOo and MS Office run about the same speed (OOo starts more slowly).
The difference between preinstalled Windows and install-it-yourself Ubuntu is the problem. There's nothing the developers can do about that. That's a Linux marketing thing.
>I think the part about the codecs is because sjvn is madly in love with ESR and wants to get the message out that preinstalled codecs are the only way for Linux to survive.
Perhaps you forgot to read the article before commenting.
He set up a machine for a friend. The friend couldn't do the things he wanted to do. One need not love ESR for that to happen.
Perhaps you forgot to read the article before commenting.
He set up a machine for a friend. The friend couldn't do the things he wanted to do. One need not love ESR for that to happen.
"He also found that he couldn't run Windows media on his system. That's because those files are encoded in Microsoft proprietary formats. There are ways and means to get around that, but except for Freespire, no Linux distribution makes it easy."
I suppose it depends on your definition of "easy". IMO it is easier to use either of the options available on Ubuntu than to install Ubuntu. It should certainly be easy for sjvn to use either option.
I suppose it depends on your definition of "easy". IMO it is easier to use either of the options available on Ubuntu than to install Ubuntu. It should certainly be easy for sjvn to use either option.
bigg -
Give him credit for this:
He correctly pointed out that Windows users who upgrade to Vista are in for their own private hell.
Give him credit for this:
He correctly pointed out that Windows users who upgrade to Vista are in for their own private hell.
> Windows users who upgrade to Vista
I see people buying computers at Best Buy thinking they will be upgrading to Vista. If by upgrading they mean reformat the hard drive, install Vista, reinstall all applications, and pray that they have the necessary drivers and all their software works, I guess they will be upgrading. SP2 was a problem. I can only imagine what this will be.
Just to see what the buzz is about, I downloaded the second release candidate or whatever they call it for Vista. First I tried with VMWare. 512 MB wasn't enough. 700 MB wasn't enough. I figured maybe the problem was VMWare, so when I bought a new hard drive I tested it on a 1 GB machine. The first screen said I was missing a driver and gave basically no information about how to proceed. I said WTF and decided not to waste more time on it.
I see people buying computers at Best Buy thinking they will be upgrading to Vista. If by upgrading they mean reformat the hard drive, install Vista, reinstall all applications, and pray that they have the necessary drivers and all their software works, I guess they will be upgrading. SP2 was a problem. I can only imagine what this will be.
Just to see what the buzz is about, I downloaded the second release candidate or whatever they call it for Vista. First I tried with VMWare. 512 MB wasn't enough. 700 MB wasn't enough. I figured maybe the problem was VMWare, so when I bought a new hard drive I tested it on a 1 GB machine. The first screen said I was missing a driver and gave basically no information about how to proceed. I said WTF and decided not to waste more time on it.
Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!
My distro is so much cooler than your distro.
My distro is so much cooler than your distro.
Heh, I picked up RC1 to test on my new system. AMD x2 64 4600, 2 gig DDR800, 2x 250G SATAII drives, and a nVidia 7950GX2 1 gig card. It saw those SATA drives, choked and asked for drivers. Unfortunatly it didnt want the XP, 2000, or 2003 drivers so out came the DVD which got flipped upside down and recieved a coffee cup.
Slipped my Debian net install CD in and proceeded to use the computer. Go figure.
Slipped my Debian net install CD in and proceeded to use the computer. Go figure.
Fritz:
My distro can beat up your distro.
My distro can beat up your distro.
> My distro can beat up your distro.
As can mine ;-)
As can mine ;-)
My distro can beat up any distro... (When your frame of reference is how long the distro takes to compile itself)
Serious now, someone over here has FreeSpire experiences? Could I recommend it to new Linux users? Or should I recommend MEPISLite? I didn't use any of the two. I used Ubuntu, but for some reason, I didn't feel at home in it (probably because I almost never use any Gnome-software).
Serious now, someone over here has FreeSpire experiences? Could I recommend it to new Linux users? Or should I recommend MEPISLite? I didn't use any of the two. I used Ubuntu, but for some reason, I didn't feel at home in it (probably because I almost never use any Gnome-software).
I showed freespire to two Windows users, and the best way to describe their response is probably "cringe". This is defined in the dictionary as "to recoil in distaste". It looks like a really bad Windows imitation, and after those responses I have avoided any discussion of freespire.
The best responses have come from pclinux. The documentation is written for newbies, making it easy to find answers to many questions. The interface is comfortable for Windows users without attempting to be a Windows clone.
I was unable to switch full-time to Linux until about two years ago after discovering Ubuntu, though that might also have something to do with improvements in Linux applications. I found gnome easier than kde because it doesn't have so much stuff in the menus. I did have substantial Linux experience when I made the switch, so I may not be the perfect example. I have found Mac users to like Ubuntu.
Unfortunately I have shown Linux to probably a total of ten people, so my experiences may not be representative.
The best responses have come from pclinux. The documentation is written for newbies, making it easy to find answers to many questions. The interface is comfortable for Windows users without attempting to be a Windows clone.
I was unable to switch full-time to Linux until about two years ago after discovering Ubuntu, though that might also have something to do with improvements in Linux applications. I found gnome easier than kde because it doesn't have so much stuff in the menus. I did have substantial Linux experience when I made the switch, so I may not be the perfect example. I have found Mac users to like Ubuntu.
Unfortunately I have shown Linux to probably a total of ten people, so my experiences may not be representative.
I didn't originally start this thread out to become a 'my distro is better than yours'.
I started it out because there are so many alternatives for new users to use Linux...and Ubuntu is NOT the best for a new user. If you have expert help, yes, it's fine. But not everyone does have an expert sitting there waiting in the wings to help out. In those cases where an expert is not a phone call away (or whatever) then Ubuntu wouldn't fit the bill.
Wouldn't you rather go with a Linux that doesn't require an expert at all? Is there such a Linux? I think that there are some distros out there that fit the bill more than Ubuntu and many people agree with me.
I started it out because there are so many alternatives for new users to use Linux...and Ubuntu is NOT the best for a new user. If you have expert help, yes, it's fine. But not everyone does have an expert sitting there waiting in the wings to help out. In those cases where an expert is not a phone call away (or whatever) then Ubuntu wouldn't fit the bill.
Wouldn't you rather go with a Linux that doesn't require an expert at all? Is there such a Linux? I think that there are some distros out there that fit the bill more than Ubuntu and many people agree with me.
devnet -
It's the old issue of "ease of use" v. "ease of installation".
Compared to the bad old days of installing Slackware from 30 floppies, the "ease of installation" is almost a non-issue. With the propagation of LiveCDs in almost any flavor of mainline distribution (Fedora, Debian, Gentoo, Slackware) it really is possible to install Linux without an "expert" holding your hand now.
"ease of use" on the other hand - you've got XFCE, IceWM, GNOME, KDE, ad infinitum. Any one of these has both their good points and bad points, depending the user and their expectations.
In other words, I expect we will never see a proclamation by anyone that Linux is ready for the desktop of the general population. Heck, we still have flame-wars over vi vs. emacs (btw vi rox and emacs sux them.)
It's the old issue of "ease of use" v. "ease of installation".
Compared to the bad old days of installing Slackware from 30 floppies, the "ease of installation" is almost a non-issue. With the propagation of LiveCDs in almost any flavor of mainline distribution (Fedora, Debian, Gentoo, Slackware) it really is possible to install Linux without an "expert" holding your hand now.
"ease of use" on the other hand - you've got XFCE, IceWM, GNOME, KDE, ad infinitum. Any one of these has both their good points and bad points, depending the user and their expectations.
In other words, I expect we will never see a proclamation by anyone that Linux is ready for the desktop of the general population. Heck, we still have flame-wars over vi vs. emacs (btw vi rox and emacs sux them.)
>Wouldn't you rather go with a Linux that doesn't require an expert at all? Is there such a Linux? I think that there are some distros out there that fit the bill more than Ubuntu and many people agree with me.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. OTOH, the more a lInux fits that bill, the more some folks will despise it.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. OTOH, the more a lInux fits that bill, the more some folks will despise it.
> Wouldn't you rather go with a Linux that doesn't require an expert at all?
Pardon devnet, but that's the wrong question.
At very least you need to define 'expert', and 'new user'. Until computers and the OS's are essentially utilities like a DVD player or even automobiles, the new user will still need some knowledge and experience to set up and operate them. Also remember that some still can't program their DVD player, and how many drivers are 'really competent'? Scares the heck out of me. It's going to be a long time, if ever, till it will be "so easy a cave man can do it".
A slew of new users are unable to manage their desktops in Windows and Linux anyway. Obviously Windows requires an 'expert' to set up in the first place and even then doesn't come with much more than a browser, a text editor and email, but sure, the codecs and proprietary drivers work. A default KDE or Gnome install gives a far more complete desktop than that, requires less expertise, but comes sans the codecs, which are usually quite easy to find and install. I'm not sure I understand what the FUD is all about.
Call it inability to cope with technology, or disinterest, or plan old stupidity, one other reality that none of you like to admit is that, just like there are people who shouldn't be allowed to drive, there are people who shouldn't be allowed to use computers. Sad, but true.
> Is there such a Linux?
Relatively, perhaps, but absolutely not, nor is their any OS. All of these require 'expertise' both to install and to operate. I'm not even sure that's a bad thing.
> fit the bill more than Ubuntu
Ubuntu is very 'middle of the road', certainly usable, but way over-hyped, and, not Ideal for a new user.
Pardon devnet, but that's the wrong question.
At very least you need to define 'expert', and 'new user'. Until computers and the OS's are essentially utilities like a DVD player or even automobiles, the new user will still need some knowledge and experience to set up and operate them. Also remember that some still can't program their DVD player, and how many drivers are 'really competent'? Scares the heck out of me. It's going to be a long time, if ever, till it will be "so easy a cave man can do it".
A slew of new users are unable to manage their desktops in Windows and Linux anyway. Obviously Windows requires an 'expert' to set up in the first place and even then doesn't come with much more than a browser, a text editor and email, but sure, the codecs and proprietary drivers work. A default KDE or Gnome install gives a far more complete desktop than that, requires less expertise, but comes sans the codecs, which are usually quite easy to find and install. I'm not sure I understand what the FUD is all about.
Call it inability to cope with technology, or disinterest, or plan old stupidity, one other reality that none of you like to admit is that, just like there are people who shouldn't be allowed to drive, there are people who shouldn't be allowed to use computers. Sad, but true.
> Is there such a Linux?
Relatively, perhaps, but absolutely not, nor is their any OS. All of these require 'expertise' both to install and to operate. I'm not even sure that's a bad thing.
> fit the bill more than Ubuntu
Ubuntu is very 'middle of the road', certainly usable, but way over-hyped, and, not Ideal for a new user.
How many people do you know that don't know how to install a program for themselves in Windows? I bet you'd be surprised if you start tallying up those who don't know how to do that simple task - and that's with GUI installers. I agree with Jim; much of the bally-hooing about how hard GNU/Linux is, or any given distro is, totally misses the point.
One other thing that bugs me with a lot of the current pro Linux articles is that people keep talking about 'market share'. I even heard someone talking about Linux users as 'customers' the other day. Novell may have customers, RedHat (as a corporation) may have customers, but Linux has users and developers. I know that most people are just trying to access the number of Linux users as opposed to the customers of certain companies, but, the terminology is still inexact and disturbingly wrong.
From the beginning Linux and it's partnership with GPL has provided an OS environment that is free and open. You may pay for services, but the OS belongs to all of us. In Linux, although most of us would like to see a majority of people using our OS, 'market share' is simply irrelevant. We need to be talking in terms of bringing new users into Linux, and in teaching them how to use the OS and it's environment properly. Windows and Apple have a market. Linux has a community.
From the beginning Linux and it's partnership with GPL has provided an OS environment that is free and open. You may pay for services, but the OS belongs to all of us. In Linux, although most of us would like to see a majority of people using our OS, 'market share' is simply irrelevant. We need to be talking in terms of bringing new users into Linux, and in teaching them how to use the OS and it's environment properly. Windows and Apple have a market. Linux has a community.
> people keep talking about 'market share'.
Himmmmm. Perhaps PIB is the number we should feed the PHBs, as in Percent of Installed Base.
Himmmmm. Perhaps PIB is the number we should feed the PHBs, as in Percent of Installed Base.
> PHBs, as in Percent of Installed Base.
That's a more accurate description.
That's a more accurate description.
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
Not at all. It is, however, a problem if hardware doesn't work with Linux distros, especially given all the heat and attention some of us pay to sneering at non-free drivers, codeces, etc.