Interesting, but misguided?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| warsaw Jul 27, 2004 5:27 AM EDT |
I think that as insightful as this particular article is, the commentator is essentially a misguided Windows user who has approached Linux on his own terms; he seems to be pointing out more the differences in UNIX desktops, and not necessarily the flaws. Criticisms -- such as the lack of "Add/Remove" program on most Linux desktops -- seem to bely the author's lack of experience with other OSs. Surely anyone who's poked an SuSE or Mandrake desktop with a stick would NOT feel that "very few [package managers] handle things like library dependencies, binary incompatibilities, or...conflicts". Similarly, the old canard that Linux users have to be technically savvy enough to manually edit and configure text files in order to facilitate device support is also disproved with most modern distros. Ultimately, the reviewer is no more a UNIX expert than he explains -- having booted a Knoppix distro (he doesn't suggest any experience with a more "solid" product) he's possibly drawing conclusion that aren't at all consisted across the UNIX Desktop board. The failings of Knoppix -- or any given distro -- do not reflect the effort put into more Desktop-centric distros. That being said, there are many good points raised here. The article is very well articulated, and possibly pokes holes in things we Linux users don't stop to think about or merely have learned to "live with". As an author approaching Linux from the point-of-view of a Windows user, there's a lot of stock in the observations he makes. After all, if the Linux Desktop is going to catch on, we're going to have to convert a LOT more users who are currently comfortable with Windows! Cheers, Tim |
| Void_Main Jul 27, 2004 6:23 AM EDT |
I have several problems with this article. First of all it is quickly apparent that the title of the article is misleading. The person writing the article is "far" from being informed. If he was then instead of whining about why specific things he finds in Windows do not exist on his emergency Linux CD he would investigate what the Linux way actually is and inform his readers how it is different. It's not that the capabilities are missing, it's that they are "different". Not only are they different but they are usually superior. The second problem I have with it is that it is under the "UNIX" category. Linux is not UNIX. In fact UNIX is not UNIX (all flavors have different ways of doing things at the level he is working at). The third thing is that KNOPPIX really was designed as an emergency disk and not as a desktop Linux distribution. Klaus has done such a fine job at this disk that it is often used as a demo disk for Linux. I personally have turned it into a custom VPN disk for our shop so you can boot it up anywhere and with the appropriate secureID credentials will connect you directly into our network. It's a wonderful tool, but it's just that, a tool. If the author would have done the leg work and come up with solutions to all of the "shortcomings" that he ran in to so he could pass them on to the reader then I would have given the article a thumbs up, but since he made no attempt them I had to give it a thumbs down. Most real desktop distros today have the things he complains he is missing. Again, Linux is *not* Windows, nor would I ever want it to be. He mentions Add/Remove Programs which he finds in Windows, Red Hat and Fedora have an "Add/Remove Packages" which is very much like that. Other distros have similar things. I actually prefer not to use that tool because I find apt to be a far superior way to install/remove software. If you want the graphical interface there is "Synaptic": http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/redhat/fedora_1_apt-get_must_h... He mentions not all software being provided by the companies packaging system so he has to hunt it down. Seems to be the same for any OS if you ask me. How much software can you install directly from Microsoft's site? Every app you need to use in Windows you have to not only hunt down but have to pay for it as well. You will find FAR more apps in the distro's repostory that install with the flick of an apt than you can from Microsoft's site. For commercial apps not found in the repository, every one I've ever installed had just as easy of an install process as any Windows app. Now, if you want to complain about the lack of commercial apps then you have something to complain about. Start getting on the commercial vendors so they know you exist and maybe they'll start porting. The more people like you out there the better chance of getting the apps. I won't be of much help though because I don't really have any reliance on any commercial proprietary app. |
| peragrin Jul 27, 2004 10:50 AM EDT |
Windows ADD/Remove program is nothing more than a script. A program has to list itself with Add/Remove. The guy didn't know about synaptic,which does that with a couple of thousand of programs. As for commercial apps, well they aren't used often. But MSFT provides very little functionality with their software. Now i would like a central hardware utillity, that can both detect and add modues for drivers. If someone could add a synaptic style interface to the programs that already do this we would be all set. His only valid concern is that there can be to many choices for beginers. Distro's should cut out the default fat, and limit the installed choice, giving the option to install everything else later. By creating this limit experienced inux users can have fine control, but newbies get a simple set of options to learn from. |
| Void_Main Jul 27, 2004 11:03 AM EDT |
I don't know. The distros I am most familiar with have that sort of install option that brings it all down into a simple choice like "Workstation Install", "Laptop Install", "Server Install" or if you wanted to dive in deep like I always do there is a "Custom Install". That last one gives you a bazillion more choices where the first ones are all canned installations that make the choices for the user. |
| warsaw Jul 28, 2004 1:24 AM EDT |
"There is no central place (or at least not an obvious one) to go to find out which programs are installed, and to perform maintenance tasks such as removing previously installed programs or adding new ones that you have downloaded." Categorically untrue. I site SuSE, Mandrake, Fedora, etc. etc, as examples against this myth. "some software may not be provided via the company's packaging system, so I still have to go hunt it down (source/tarballs/RPMs/etc) and try to install it myself." And the alternative is? Neither Windows nor MacOS are any different. "I could have gone to a Knoppix user forum somewhere and got my question answered there, but its my opinion that I shouldn't have to do that just to figure out how to make my mouse cursor solid. I finally just gave up out of exasperation." RTFM, to use a vulgar acronym. It's not fair to expect the answer to bite you on the nose -- if in doubt, turn to documentation. "The ridiculous tradition of naming every program "XCrapConf" or "Kmmbdg" or "Ggjkdhf" has got to stop. It's not helpful. It doesn't tell you anything about what the program is for." This sounds suspiciously like a double standard. I have trouble beleiving that Joe User, who's never touched a PC before, would find the terms "Outlook Express" or "MSN Messanger" immediately obvious. Besides, SuSE 9.1 Personal and Mandrake 10.0 address this issue very suitably. Here's a few random sound-bytes that are so ridiculous that they need no comment: -"when some poor user gets stuck down the unexpected case, they're left up a creek with little help without a UNIX demigod at their disposal." -"you've got to focus more on empowering ordinary users to be their own PC admins." -" I know I could have gone to a Knoppix user forum somewhere and got my question answered there, but its my opinion that I shouldn't have to do that just to figure out how to make my mouse cursor solid." -" If the user can't find it, they're typically going to give up and assume it's not there, can't be done, or isn't worth the effort. Super-geeks are the only ones with the patience for this kind of nonsense." -"I can tell you that there is no single distribution in existence which is adequately immune to the bad design tendencies I've highlighted here." |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!