Whirlpool

I don't want to start another Windows vs Linux thread, but indulge me.

Linux is free, yet despite years of publicity it still doesn't enjoy widespread adoption of Windows.

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

Since this is a Linux forum – I'm perhaps asking the wrong group, but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

Sidenote: I'm a Windows user myself, but I'm not going to state my reasons so not to bias the thread.

FFS, for the average housewife all they see in the media is M$ ads so there.

RussianMob writes...

but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

Familiarity.

For those born after 1980, they started on Windows (or to a lesser extent Apple) and have been on that platform all their lives, and it feels comfortable to them.

I like to learn about computers, not how to use programs, and Linux appeals to me.

My wife has a computer with Kubuntu running on it, but I did the 'ease-in' approach by getting her to use Firefox, Open Office etc on Windows before doing the switch.

1. Habit.

2. Games.

3. Habit.

Most people are clueless about what happens on their computers. 99% of the people on whirlpool are far more clued in than the general populous. Therefore, most average people, as you're talking about, don't even think to change or think that there is any other option besides windows.

Case in point – I changed most of our client laptops to Linux here. I made them look similar to windows (taskbar at the bottom), and renamed Open Office stuff to Word, Excel, Powerpoint. None of our average joe clients have noticed... well, one or two have, but nobody has had any issues adjusting to linux, and yeah... most wouldn't know it's not windows.

So yeah habit.

Would love to start using linux, however.

1) I'm afraid if I install it and partition my drive (which I belive is what you have to do for dual booting)...I'll wreck my hard drive and lose everything (probably a baseless fear).

2) I've never used it before and have tried to read instructions on how to use it.....all sites that I've looked at provide instructions as if I already knew what I was doing. I can't find simple instructions that make sense, and from the number of sites that are terribly incommmunicative I know have the feeling that Linux users are technological elitists, who aren't interestd in sharing the most fundamental ideas about how to use linux....and I've been to forums as well to see how noobs are treated....dissmissively was the general tone.

3) I don't know anyone who uses it...so I don't have anyone to ask about what I do when things go wrong....and I'd rather not ask in a forum on the net...see 2).

4) There are more versions of linux than there are computers on earth – I've got no idea why so many versions and don't have the faintest idrea as to which one I should choose.

5) documentation that a noob can read doesn't exist.

6) To do a course to learn linux I'd have to sell my children..see Red Hat Linux....nearly swallowed my tongue when I saw those prices.

7) Most sites I visited for information were last updated in 2005 or 2006....

.....Versus windows – click on start..........it's impossible to use a poorly documented operating system that doesn't have a support network over a well documented operating that has support galore.

If anyone's got tips on where I could find solutions for 1) to 7) above, please post. Would appreciate it greatly.

No wireless support at uni.
No games (or at least not without a lot of screwing around)

supersleeper writes...

I'm afraid if I install it
Very fair point.

I've never used it before
that is where a live cd is SO nice. It boots from your cd drive into ram and you can have a go without trashing or touching anything on your PC. Most PC type mags have some sort of linux iso available and explain how to burn to disk. ( being windows users most will know how to burn a cd. )

there are many how to's out there. http://www.howtoforge.com/howtos
http://apcmag.com/the_definitive_dualbooting_guide_linux_vista_and_xp_stepbystep.htm

I don't know anyone who uses it
Be the first and help is always on WP.

There are more versions of linux than there are computers on earth
Agreed however a few threads exist on that topic, my 2c worth, Mint or Ubuntu ( /forum-replies.cfm?t=1170440 )

documentation that a noob can read doesn't exist.
true but many how to's around. It's a learning curb keep both systems OS's and play with linux till you are happy.

To do a course to learn linux I'd have to sell my children.
That may be one solution the the noise in the house :)
I think that would be for full time employment in that area , but for home use it's all self taught and help is free on forums.

Most sites I visited for information were last updated in 2005 or 2006....
You will find that the principle of the info is relevant to up to date versions.

The main Idea is first to have fun and play with a new OS and expand your experience without cost. Just your time.

I'll bite too:

1) I like the vista interface more then the interfaces I have tried so far. It feels smoother and looks nicer IMO. Completely subjective, but you wanted to know why.

2) It runs all the software I want. Games/internet programs/custom software.

3) All my hardware works best under windows. And its pretty simple to setup and add more hardware when I want to.

I wouldnt mind getting into Linux, even after my disastrous last effort(was trying to set it up to dual boot but had some problem with it took quite a while to get back working, totally due to my own stupidness), but there are a couple of things stopping me:
1. Time to learn
2. Time to acutally install it
3. Theres bloody heaps of distros to choose from
4. Some programs wont work on linux.

The reasons i stay with windows
1. Ive already got it with the purchase of my pc
2. I already know how to use it
3. All my programs run
4. Im pretty darn lazy and windows currently does everything I need.

All the reasons for me not to change dont amount to much and I WILL get around to changing one day but for now im happy to plod along as is.

I dont think i will end up purchasing vista or 7 so i think I will end up going to linux when i buy a new pc, but until then ill stay with windows.

I heard a while back that Dell were going to offer the option of pre loading with Linux(maybe i was dreaming though hmmm), i think that might go some of the way to converting people to Linux.

rugger..
Well then stay with it no need to change. No sarcasm or any other innuendo meant there is no reason to then. :)

kevrox writes...

rugger..

Well then stay with it no need to change. No sarcasm or any other innuendo meant there is no reason to then. :)

Ack, sorry I didn't mean any offense in my reply. We have just been through a few of these threads and :)

I think linux will need something of pure awesomeness to convert windows users at this stage. Most people are probably realitively satisfied with windows. Being as good as windows is simply NOT good enough now.

Ack, sorry I didn't mean any offense in my reply. We have just been through a few of these threads and :)

I agree too, may one vs the other threads. My reply was not reacting to Ack, sorry I didn't mean any offense in my reply. just agreeing with you.

it's just that some purist linux users can be very sarcastic and narky in these types of threads that is why I said No sarcasm or any other innuendo meant

RussianMob writes...

Since this is a Linux forum – I'm perhaps asking the wrong group, but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

Me:
- No Photoshop and GIMP doesn't meet my needs.
- No Microsoft Office and OpenOffice doesn't meet my needs.
- No Cubase and there are no decent alternatives.
- No Foobar2000 and there are no decent alternatives (I have tried every major Linux media player).
- I'm a programmer and most of my work ends up on Windows.
- I get absolutely no benefit from running Linux on my desktop.

Most people I know:
- Few native games and you shouldn't have to mess around with WINE.
- No Photoshop and GIMP doesn't meet their needs.
- No Microsoft Office and OpenOffice doesn't support MS formats well enough.
- It's not Windows.
- Windows does everything they need, easier.
- It didn't come pre-installed on their PC.
- They get very little benefit from running Linux on their desktop, but a hell of a lot of re-learning and problems.

Most companies I know:
- The cost of training, support and generally reduced productivity would HUGELY outweigh the savings on the software itself. TCO would go through the roof. Linux is not free.
- As above, too many incompatibility issues in basic day-to-day tasks.

There are lots of reasons, but those are the main ones. I think most Linux users get very few actual benefits out of not running Windows. It actually cracks me up how the desktop Linux community always falls back on their "viruses and spyware" argument. Seriously, I've had one virus in my entire life and I only got it from being a moron. This is a non-issue, imo. However, Linux users probably enjoy it more than Windows, so godspeed to them.

That said, server Linux ftw.

Basically just games for me to make it my everyday OS. I dual boot though, and all my non-gaming/minor gaming PCs have linux on them. Windows is annoying (I'm one of those weird people who actually finds it harder to use :s), and I wish I didn't have to use it, but unfortunately nvidia's linux drivers still aren't on parity with windows, and wine is not really a solution for me...

rugger writes...

something of pure awesomeness to convert windows users

Well I am a convert. I love Ubuntu. I was just so fed up with Windows in the first place and couldn't wait to get rid of it. I wish I made the change sooner. The best part is that I no longer have to worry about viruses.

But I think it all comes down to what OS works best for you. For some people linux is best, but for some people windows is best, and for some people a mac is best. It is kinda like ice-cream... some people like chocolate, some people like mint choc-chip and some people like vanilla.

Everyone's different. I think we should all learn to accept each others choices and have some peace for once...

I've tried switching to a linux desktop a few times and it always seems to come back to:

A) What can I do in Linux that I can't do in Windows?
and,
B) What can I do in Windows that I can't do in Linux?

If there's anything important in column B then you end up dual booting or running VMs to do what you have to, which just means two separate O/S's to maintain, update, get hardware working on when I buy something new, etc. If that's balanced by gains from column A then it can be worthwhile, but if it's not, then it's a lot of headache for not much actual benefit.

For what I do (sysadmin) there's not a whole lot in column A. Putty's great for SSH and I tend not to run GUI's on my servers so there's very rarely a need to get a remote X session up or anything.

On the flip side, there's a lot of my job in column B. Running a Linux workstation in a predominantly Windows desktop environment introduces challenges and getting things done generally takes more time than it would if that same workstation just had Windows on it. I'm past the point in my IT career where I enjoy doing things the hard way just for the challenge, and I no longer get a smug, superior glow from having a "better" or "free-er" operating system than the next guy. I could do 99% of my job with linux on my desktop and an XP VM, plus the ability to TS to Windows servers, but why go to all that trouble? I'd just spend half my life working in a VM and I'd still have two operating systems that needed to be maintained.

These days I just want something that does everything I need it to with a minimum of hassle. Even with the need to run an A/V package, Windows is still a lot less hassle day to day (in my job, and at home) than Linux.

I have some mates who prefer linux on the desktop. In some cases it's because they're coding for linux servers and it just makes sense. Lots of programmers use their own workstation as a testbed. In other cases it's anti-MS sentiment or sheer bloody-mindedness. In each case they're getting something out of running linux, so good luck to them.

For a lot of the world, there's nothing to be gained by running linux except extra "challenges". For most people, they don't want challenges, they just want something that can do everything they want it to, and everything they're likely to want it to do in the future, but haven't thought of yet, without too much trouble. If one of those things they later decide they want to do is eTax, or MYOB, or Fallout 3, then linux just became too much hassle for them and they're going to regret installing it.

OK, end rant. I'm sure you've all got the point now =)

Why is a question aimed at NON Linux users being asked in the LINUX forum ?

Edit: Deleted Rant

RussianMob writes...

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

Hardware support would help. I know the Linux community in general is very helpful, particularly here at WP but it is still very hard for the average person (even a Windows Geek) to get certain hardware to work under Linux. I've tried a few distros over the years and really liked a few of them. I'm giving Kubuntu a go again at the moment. 9.04 didn't run too well on my Asus laptop but on the desktop it runs well.

I still have a few programs that I (think I) need Windows for: Iriver Plus 3 and Outlook for syncing with my WinMo phone. For the time being I guess I could use Vista through a VM to do that until I find a Linux solution.

I like what Linux represents and would like to use it exclusively. The problem is not so with the kernel but rather with the quality of drivers supplied.

For example, on my Toshiba A200 laptop, bluetooth doesn't work unless I install another module developed originally for HP Omnibook laptops. There's very minimal support by Toshiba.

The ATI display driver is still not there, so I have to use metacity without eye candy.

The usb tv plays HD, but quality is far below the one in Windows.

For me it comes down to usability, which is still not a match for Windows, (on my current laptop, at least).

So when I get the next computer, I will make sure it is fully supported in Linux.

I play games mainly. I love using linux live cd's and I always find great use for different distro's when troubleshooting computers,
eg backtrack for lost wep keys, knoppix/ubuntu for general troubleshooting and bit defender live cd.

I use to use linux on my netbook however windows 7 just demolishes it in terms of battery life

like the above post mentions I LOVE what linux represents and would love to use it almost exclusively however windows does what I want better than linux currently (I hope that changes)

Why is a question aimed at NON Linux users being asked in the LINUX forum?

Possibly to bug us Linux fans. I am getting so sick of these stupid Windows Vs Linux threads. I wonder how long it will be till the Mods close this thread...

I think it's a lot like changing banks, you know there are better deals out there but it's a PITA and sometimes its more the anticipated effort than any real effort that makes people think...oh yeah one day I'll give it a go =)

I personally find windows frustrating and limiting. I work fixing windows pcs, and use working windows pc's at work. We also sell macs, and my workshop pc is running opensuse (only after i started work there). It's like breathing a sigh of relief when i get to use osx or opensuse – windows shits me to tears sometimes.

That being said I understand where windows people are coming from, and am not trying to poo poo your decisions for staying with it, but for me I yell and swear at my linux computers far less than the windows ones.

rugger writes...

It runs all the software I want. Games/internet programs/custom software.

This.

Beritknight writes...

I've tried switching to a linux desktop a few times and it always seems to come back to:

A) What can I do in Linux that I can't do in Windows?
and,
B) What can I do in Windows that I can't do in Linux?

And this. 9 years of it. I don't think it will happen anytime soon for me.

I use XP at work and 3 of my 4 PCs at home run XP pro. It's mainly a useability and convenience issue. Once set up properly, most XP pro boxes are pretty stable for daily use. I have a Ubuntu box running as a fileserver. Linux has come a long way since I installed my first linux box from 20 floppies back when a 486DX-2 66 was the fastest thing around. In those days I was installing SunOS on Sparc classics as well and tinkering with my Amiga 500.

I think predominantly the only thing stopping me from switching to linux fully as my desktop workstation is the time spent to find, explore & get use to new Linux equivalent apps. Having said that I just installed Edubuntu on an old PC for my kids to play with Tux Paint. My 4 year old now knows how to login onto Ubuntu & Logoff. Who knows.. maybe I'm bringing up a Linux convert.. LOL

I think that the OP has posted in the correct area for this topic. Targetting those that are interested enough to click the Linux/BSD section of Whirlpool but have never made the change or at least tried Linux. Posting this in the Windows or Apple section could easily start a flame war :)

Back on topic. While I am a Linux user (as well as Windows and OSX) I can understand why people would not stray from what they know.

Many of my friends/family don't know about Linux because they have everything they want with Windows. They have been using Windows for a long time. When they go to the average PC/Apple store to upgrade or buy a new computer no-one mentions Linux for some strange reason.

Gaming and an incompatible tv card are the major stumbling blocks for me. That said, if I'm not watching tv or playing a game, I don't care either way, mint's just as good if not better for simply surfing the net.

From my experience, my Ubuntu desktop boots and serves my tasks (no image/video editing) fine on a daily basis. I have a better idea of how my operating system works and I seem to be able to interact with it better than Windows. Windows just seemed like a plethora of background processes that chewed resources and I couldn't stop them.

Jambo writes...

FFS, for the average housewife all they see in the media is M$ ads so there.

Not a housewife but I have not seen a single MS ad, well, ever. I've seen Apple's Mac vs PC ads.

Anyway, lamest excuse ever. Word of mouth is more powerful than any advertising blitz.

CraigRat writes...

Familiarity.

MacOS adoption begs to differ.

My reason for not switching to Linux as a main OS is the lack of non-free software. If it's not FOSS, it's not on Linux. FOSS is good for browsers, bad for business.

I am happy to put up with a lot from the OS, but I need to be able to get certain things done or I'm not interested.

Edit: While I enjoy firing up Ubuntu every once in a while, I find that there is nothing that I can't do in Mac OS/Windows (well, moreso Mac OS as the terminal is a lot more useful than Windows' command prompt). Reversing that, there are a lot of things I can't do in Linux that I can in Mac OS/Windows.

rugger writes...

I like the vista interface more then the interfaces I have tried so far. It feels smoother and looks nicer IMO.

You're a more patient man than I. I absolutely hate the interface, and see no advantage over XP (nb, I am on Vista Business Basic, but I assume the interface inconsistencies are the same throughout the different flavours).

alf writes...

MacOS adoption begs to differ.

But MacOS still comes installed on a computer, and is already there when you turn it on. It also comes with support, and known applications, from what the public believe to be a respected company.

RussianMob writes...

I don't want to start another Windows vs Linux thread, but indulge me.

Doesn't really seem like it but kudos on finding another way to phrase the same sort of question and generate the same kind of debate.

RussianMob writes...

Since this is a Linux forum – I'm perhaps asking the wrong group, but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

For me, having to use something like Wine to run games etc.

RussianMob writes...

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

Simple – half-decent Newbie documentation. The BIG problem with Linux in general is that any documentation (if it exists at all) is that it is written by gurus for gurus. For first-time users, Linux documentation is a farce.
Perhaps a bit harsh but a valid generalisation.

jaredoconnor writes...

- No Cubase and there are no decent alternatives.

+1

No Corel support either

I need to take Audio and Graphics projects to other venues and post facilities so compatibility is the #1 issue.

i have tried ubuntu and i keep going back to windows mainly because of the gaming but things like task manager are so much easier to get to and use with ubuntu to kill a process which is buggy you have to use alt + F2 type in what you want and there you go in windows its all there by default and just works.

Linux does have its benefits and a lot of things can be made to work with with windows and sometimes better than windows but the amount of screwng around that it takes to acheive this isnt worth it. for example samba 20-30 minutes if experienced which is like 1-2 minutes in windows. although there is one thing i would LOVE in windows – a terminal like in ubuntu this is the best thing in linux by as far as im concerned( apt-get install is A-GRADE win.)

Zach Moore

I'm the opposite to you I think.

zach moore writes...

i have tried ubuntu and i keep going back to windows mainly because of the gaming but things like task manager are so much easier to get to and use with ubuntu to kill a process which is buggy you have to use alt + F2 type in what you want and there you go in windows its all there by default and just works.

I find Gnome's system monitor app quite good.

Linux does have its benefits and a lot of things can be made to work with with windows and sometimes better than windows but the amount of screwng around that it takes to acheive this isnt worth it. for example samba 20-30 minutes if experienced which is like 1-2 minutes in windows. although there is one thing i would LOVE in windows – a terminal like in ubuntu this is the best thing in linux by as far as im concerned( apt-get install is A-GRADE win.)

Ubuntu and Fedora at least have an option to share files in your home via a GUI tool now. Fedora/RedHat have a quite good GUI if you want something more and I'm sure there are debain/ubuntu counterparts. I"ve seen people struggle and fail to get basic Windows sharing working.

As for apt-get/yum etc I rarely use them anymore PackageKit is a quick GUI package handler. Hopefully it will become widespread in Linux. It's default in Fedora and available on Ubuntu.

RussianMob writes...

I don't want to start another Windows vs Linux thread

Yes let's try not to have that :)

but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

The simplest answer is this: I only need one operating system. I already own Windows (so using it is "free" right now) and need it to play games, I have no incentive to install linux at all.

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

It needs to be *better*. Not just "almost as good any minute now", but better. I could, again, tell the story of how I installed Ubuntu of my mother's PC, but I better won't. Let's just say it wasn't better for me back then, and I gladly spent the hundred-something dollars to end my misery.

Another point which I've always thought about is that there has to be a real reason to switch.

Let me take some common free (as in freedom) software

Pidgin: Provides a sleek minimalistic interface, is light and is able to send messages through facebook twitter etc. MSN messenger is bloated, has unnecessary "glam" and looks like it was designed for people that like their eye candy

Pidgin provides something completely different to the Microsoft alternative and that's why it's become the defacto IM install on many new pc's

Firefox: Provides extensions, is faster, renders pages more correctly, is more secure than it's Microsoft counterpart

VLC media player: Plays everything under the sun, is light and portable, and is EXTREMELY easy to use. It's microsoft counterpart? You have to install codecs etc for it to play certain types of files

The software listed above has become essential to any computer user with knowledge about what programs they're running etc and I would bet at least 80% of people on here are running at least one of them.

Which brings me to my final point. In my opinion linux to the average consumer does not give them anything windows doesn't. All the software listed above gives people a real reason to use their software over the microsoft alternative and this is shown by a 30% market share in firefox and VLC and pidgin being featured in every top ten software list under the sun.

Linux needs to bring something to the table that Microsoft doesn't. Most people have windows pre installed with their pc so it being free is not that big of a deal. In my opinion linux devs need to start thinking about what they can bring to their distro that will be so different to what the alternatives have to offer. I hear people all the time ask me "what benefit does linux provide over using windows?" There has to be something that makes people go "oooo that's cool I'll give that a shot." Not just make people "think oh it does all the same stuff windows can do why should I change"

supersleeper writes...

If anyone's got tips on where I could find solutions for 1) to 7) above, please post.

RTFM.

.....Versus windows – click on start..........

Of course, you were born with this instinctive ?knowledge???.

OK, back to thread, nobody has to 'know' all possible games in human heritage. BTW we need some simpletons too, or the world would be too dull.
Consider.

Have fun.

Steel Monkey writes...

4. Im pretty darn lazy and windows currently does everything I need.

+1; +11; +111..........

Welcome to the crowd!!!!

Note: NO translations, please!

Slack user from Ulladulla.

RussianMob writes...

Linux is free, yet despite years of publicity it still doesn't enjoy widespread adoption of Windows.

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

1. Out of box support for Windows games and software within Linux. Yes OOo does work but it *still* doesn't beat Office 2007 for document creation and it doesn't have Visio! Point out an alternative to Visio that does support Visio (and integrates well within OOo) and I'll use it. Furthermore, WINE derivatives like Cedega don't seem to come pre-installed in any distro I know. Few games out there (eg. Quake, RTCW...okay, whatever Id Software make) have been ported to *nix and Linux systems, the rest will need something like Cedega to make it halfway operational.

2. A system of folder arrangement that doesn't seem to relate to physical reality. When I first had a go on Fedora, I found it a bit weird that the root folders of certain drives had to be accessed via another mount folder. Why? Why can't you double-click a My Computer icon and access these root folders straight up with a double click? In this case Let's not argue my point from a Windows standpoint but rather from a CP/M or MS-DOS standpoint. You have your root drives...C: A: D: for instance and you could quite easily change directories in DOS 6 at least. At the most you might need ATAPI mounting for the CD drive. In Linux you'd need mounting for everyone.

3. A lack of uniformity between distros. There is XP and Vista and 7 out there, and just about everyone can pick up their choice of Windows and just use it. With Linux, there is not just a "Linux" that everyone can understand from its fundamentals. For instance, going back to Fedora...there was a game I wanted to try out but it was in code so I needed to compile it...the issue was that Fedora 4 at the time didn't have all the necessary software to compile. The reason? It relied on rpm binaries. The same went for Debian and Ubuntu, both want deb files. You can't just pick up free software and install it straight off in Linux without having a level of technical knowledge perhaps twice as indepth as that to operate Windows effectively. Yes, we can RTFM for each distro, but the manual pertains only to that distro and doesn't really help much with the real world.

4. As if you'd ever find decent ATI drivers. Next.

windows is better, thats why. you can blame in on marketing or whatever else you like, but at the end of the day its just better.

Lubiraz Alerano writes...

RTFM.
I've read the manual(s) they're assumption based.....which is frustrating.

Of course, you were born with this instinctive ?knowledge???.

Intuitive perhaps?...or are you suggesting everyone is born knowing command structures?

Perhaps had you paid attention to the first line of my post you would have seen that it was genuine, not an opportunity to supposedly post a "mines better than yours" type reponse.

...and thakyou kev, people like you make Linux an opportunity.
I'll try a CD with Ubuntu and see how I go.

...as for you Lubiraz....being overly defensive and unable to see the points of others who've never used Linux doesn't do you any credit. Perhaps an opportunity, like kev has done to suggest a simple way to get started without any risk.

The longest journey starts with a single step for me it is the firststep that that is a concern...and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I don't see any reason to be rude to those who have posted genuine (perceived) reasons not to use Linux..perhaps a contenance of those concerns with some well pointed advice (as kev has done) would be appreciated by those who know very little of Linux and would like to learn......I've used non Linux systems for almost 30 years ........ it is a little harder to change than you might imagine.

supersleeper writes...

...as for you Lubiraz....being overly defensive and unable to see the points of others who've never used Linux doesn't do you any credit. Perhaps an opportunity, like kev has done to suggest a simple way to get started without any risk.

Funnily enough we get very tired of these threads in this forum. We get tired of a lot of the rubbish and incorrect statements that get made.

Here's some documentation for Ubuntu if your interested. People here will help if you ask in a reasonably intelligent manner.

https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/

https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/installation-guide/i386/index.html

My advice is that a lot of windows people re-install from time to time so you should think about doing a clean install of windows if your serious about having a look at linux and dual booting. I would also take it as an opportunity to learn how to fix the mbr in Windows so if you want to get rid of the linux bootloader later on.

supersleeper writes...

1) I'm afraid if I install it and partition my drive (which I belive is what you have to do for dual booting)...I'll wreck my hard drive and lose everything (probably a baseless fear).

http://wubi-installer.org/
Runs Ubuntu under windows natively no partitions, its just another program.

2) I've never ...
3) I don't know anyone who uses it...
5) documentation that a noob can read doesn't exist.
7) Most sites I visited for information were last updated in 2005 or 2006....

http://ubuntuforums.org/
https://help.ubuntu.com/

Ubuntu forums has a specific section for people who are new to Linux, in which flaming posts are frowned on and deleted... it is heavily moderated to stop such nastiness.

You will find Ubuntu and any of the other major distro's all have similar mechanics to Windows, Firefox and Open Office work identically on Linux as they do on Windows.

Google Linux User Group you will find some very active groups here in Australia that meet once a month and would be more than happy to help out a newb for free at one of their meeting.

Certificates are just pieces of expensive paper, experience is priceless.

never be afraid to ask and to learn.

4) There are more versions of linux than there are computers on earth – I've got no idea why so many versions and don't have the faintest idrea as to which one I should choose.

Yes that is the beauty of OSS (Open Source Software), it is overwhelming to the new comers because they aren't used to such freedoms and choice. Start with one of the main stream distro's like... have a guess... Ubuntu... its whole philosophy is based making the switch easier, and it is acheiving its goal.

Once you have the basics and get a little knowledge you will soon realise that all the differences are mostly cosmetic and underneath they are all pretty much the same.

....Versus windows – click on start..........it's impossible to use a poorly documented operating system that doesn't have a support network over a well documented operating that has support galore.

OK now for a minor flaming response to an unwarranted/uninformed comparison.

Windows, has Windows Update, Ubuntu and all other major distro's have an automated update system.

Windows has Technet, Linux has sourceforge, trak, launchpad and many many more.

Windows has Microsoft Press, Linux has O'Rielly Press, and both have many many many many books published on the subject.

Microsoft doesn't have support contracts they have VAR's (Value Added Resellers or OEM's) that offer support contracts, like IBM, HP, SUN and DELL... Linux has Distro's like SUSE/Novell, Red Hat, Ubuntu and many other who do offer support contracts directly, as well as through VAR's like... you guessed it... IBM,HP,SUN and DELL.

Perception, you buy a computer it has Windows on it, why? OEM licensing, Microsoft sells Windows to computer manufactures at a reduced cost, provided they sell all, or a majority of their computers with Windows installed. If they agree to do this then they can have Windows for (NFI on the actual costs) say $20 while their competitor who doesn't have an OEM Licensing Agreement has to pay $80. So the exact same speced computer will cost $60 more if you buy from the opposition.

This practice has been going since Windows 95, if you remember back then their was another OS called OS/2 Warp, MS OEM forced OS/2 into extinction via this method... now it usies the same tactic install Windows or pay more for Windows then your competitor to keep Linux off main stream computer sales. There are other issues with Linux in this market but they are fast becoming a non issue with every new release.

WHY is this an important point... people just think that Windows is computing because every computer they buy has it on it, and they are too uneducated to know any different.

Educate yourself.

Games is the biggest issue for us.

I have several PCs at home and they all run the OS that suits what they're for.

One runs Ubuntu 9.04, and it is the workhorse and the Samba server. My semi IT literate wife prefers it over the XP machine for documents and email.

One is an old P4 running Mythbuntu connected to the TV. (Free TiVO FTW)

The last one runs Windows XP solely so my 10yo son can play his games. Even then, sometimes he plays Tux Racer on the other one. We also keep it for the financial records package supplied to us by our advisor that won't work under WINE.

Funnily enough, this XP machine is the one I had the most trouble getting drivers to work on (eg bluetooth shenanigans, webcam driver causing BSOD).

Thanks for the lengthy and informative responses – some uselful (and surprising) information that will get me started.....I'll head off and "educate myself". :)

Gumby can you recommend an O'reilly book for absolute beginners?

supersleeper writes...

Gumby can you recommend an O'reilly book for absolute beginners?

Install Ubuntu using Wubi and use it, really there is little to learn in using the desktop as it is very similar to Windows... Setting up hardware and installing additional software is the tricky part.

Desktop with Firefox...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/gumbynotalent/Ubuntu.jpg

See the applications menu highlighted that is your Start->Programs menu.
Places menu next to applications is Windows Explorer (File Manager)
System is the Control Panel.
The little guy on the right is the Start/Stop/Reboot/Logout options.

Trash Can is bottom right, and bottom left is display desktop.

Ubuntu + Wine + WoW
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/gumbynotalent/org.png

Ubutnu + Wine + TF2
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/gumbynotalent/wwwwwwwwwwww.png

Use the forums to ask question, don't say "Linux suxs because I cant do..." or "Windows is better because..." you will only get flamed.

http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Jaunty
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

As for books, I've been coding UNIX based systems since 1986 so I probably don't know a good beginner guide, The Dummies Series of books has an Ubuntu book.

My mother (64) uses Ubuntu every day and has done for 3-4 years now, she used Windows 98 before but was a very basic user. Switching her had little to no impact on her ability to use the computer to use Firefox, Gmail, Picassa, Skype and play Solitaire... she even uses the Update Manager and has on 2 occasions after calling me used Synaptic to find more card games to play. If she can use Ubuntu/Linux then any able body person should be able to.

I love my mum, but computer literate she isn't.

EDIT :: Books

https://help.ubuntu.com/6.06/book/book-toc.html
http://fridge.ubuntu.com/node/504

1. Compatibility.

2. Gaming.

I can't speak for myself (maybe need a thread on why DO you use Linux?), but I can give the reasons why various relatives and friends do not.

Nephew (age 45): Does not run the accounting software our accountant requires us to use. Does not run the software the franchise requires us to use. ISP supports only Windows and Mac. Can't use with e-tax.

No.1 son (age 40): Bigpond refuse to support it. What's an operating system?

No.2 son (age 38): Bigpond won't support it. Does not run my wife's games. Your computer sucks (actually a comment on my satellite link, but Linux gets blamed). He actually uses Open Office and Firefox on Windows.

Sister (age 75): Won't run my software that has forty years of property records, and I am not prepared to learn something new even if I can find something else. Computers waste more time than they are worth. Won't run the software our accountant requires us to use. Can't use with e-Tax. Active8me won't support it.

Niece (age 42): I have to use XP at work, don't want to have to be current with two systems. Won't run my games. Activ8me won't support it.

One of the things that's stopping me is the fact that I just can't choose which one to use. There's too many flavours, and peer support for all those flavours is spread out too sparsely for my liking.

It'd be great if there were say, less than 10 flavours of Linux, all of which were compatible with each other.

Another thing is driver databases, to make a happier plug and play world. You can install just about anything in a Windows XP PC and not have to worry about installing drivers straight away.

I'm also concerned about compatibility. My favourite programs like JetAudio, Yahoo! Messenger, etc might not work correctly. Also, finding stable, mature, feature packed apps for something I might need.

I'd like to use a free OS, I really would. But I just don't have the time to figure out all the issues involved with doing so.

Ayu-mon writes...

Another thing is driver databases, to make a happier plug and play world. You can install just about anything in a Windows XP PC and not have to worry about installing drivers straight away.

This is incorrect statement... Windows only PnP devices have embedded drivers, this is contrary to the PnP specification, and causes issue when using these devices with other operating systems, including Windows own family.

Thankfully this practice is slowly being withdrawn from the market.

Drivers are a manufacturers responsibility, they either need to supply drivers or supply adequate documentation so a driver can be written. 99% of basic computer complementary (Mobo, CPU, HDD, etc etc) work out of the box with Linux, however! Linux Distro's are restricted by size of the media they choose to support, e.g. Ubuntu comes in several versions on different CD's with the major differences being Kernel compiles and associated drivers for that CPU platform, it also comes as a DVD, 700MB vs 4GB, the extra 3.3GB of drivers and software, you'd be hard pressed to find a mainstream component that didn't have a driver on the DVD.

Peripherals are a different story, but you'll find that most mainstream consumer electronics will work out of the box.

Cutting edge hardware can be hit and miss for a few months, depending on what it is and how backwards compatible it is.

Here is a good start for documentation on Ubuntu.

Free pocket guide :

http://www.ubuntupocketguide.com/index_main.html

Ubuntu full circle magazine "free":

http://fullcirclemagazine.org/

A complete guide to setting up Ubuntu:

http://www.howtoforge.com/the-perfect-desktop-ubuntu-9.04

Ubuntu wiki for 9.04:

http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Jaunty

There are so many guides out there.... and yes most of them are up to date , this is a misconception by some posters.

Even google has a complete search engine dedicated to Linux...

http://www.google.com/linux

cheers

fuzzy-muzzy writes...

Another point which I've always thought about is that there has to be a real reason to switch.

Linux needs to bring something to the table that Microsoft doesn't.

IMHO I think it already does because of it's licence, it's no cost (or can cost less), non-proprietary.

Most people have windows pre installed with their pc so it being free is not that big of a deal.

Well, it can depend, if you've got an OEM version of Vista for instance and you upgrade your computer too many times... time to buy a new licence. Plus there's 100 different versions, it's a nonsense.So i'm supposed to pay $100 (or whatever it is) more for an animated background ?

I hear people all the time ask me "what benefit does linux provide over using windows?" There has to be something that makes people go "oooo that's cool I'll give that a shot." Not just make people "think oh it does all the same stuff windows can do why should I change"

There are some other obvious reasons besides costs like some performance, network features and having more transparency/control etc but I think there's also a case where some people just end up disillusioned with Microsoft or just want to try an alternative.

There's a lot of shortcomings but basically on most machines it's not that hard to install and the hardware support isn't _too_ bad. It looks like it's APIs/apps preventing most people from switching. Who knows though. There's always WINE or virtualization if you're savvy enough.

CraigRat writes...

My wife has a computer with Kubuntu running on it, but I did the 'ease-in' approach by getting her to use Firefox, Open Office etc on Windows before doing the switch.

Haha .. awesome!

I did the same thing in my family.

I'll respond with another question:- Why SHOULD I use Linux?

...but to answer the question, I am an IT professional and farily comfortable in a *nix environment. However, as home I don't want to be messing about trying to get program X up and running because frankly, it would be like being at work...but 10x worse. For my home computing, I want an non-challenging experience.

Also, my major bug-bear with Linux is the community. 99% of Linux users I have come across are snobbish, elitist and self-righteous plonkers who look upon "n00bs" as though they are something that has been left in a flaming paper bag on their doorstep. I've just got no time for that kind of attitude.

RussianMob writes...

despite years of publicity it still doesn't enjoy widespread adoption of Windows.

1. Average Joe wants a computer
2. Average Joe goes into a shop that sells computers
3. He looks at all the computers which conveniently are already running Windows in some form.
4. He presumes that "Windows" is in fact part of computer.
5. He buys computer with Windows on it.
6. Windows plays up and he rings a tech friend and says "my computer broke".

Until the day comes the average joe can walk into a computer store (even Bing Lee, Hardly Normals) and choose a computer and then walk to another section of the store and choose an OS they will:

1. never understand that the OS is separate to the hardware
2. never realise that they are actually paying for Windows.

This probably won't change. Microsoft would be working very hard every day to make sure it never did (marketing, deals with suppliers, etc)

PS. I use Linux, almost exclusively (darn photoshop).

-troy- writes...

This probably won't change.

Eee PC had a very nice chance to change that (or just reverse the issue). A study why it failed would probably shine some light.

The majority of stores that sell PCs don't give you an option to have Linux installed. Until this changes, Windows and OSX will dominate the OS market. Although, I think Linux will always only have a niche of the desktop OS market.

I'm a Windows user, as I love Office 2003/2007, Windows Media Player, Adobe Creative Suite and Spider Solitaire! I just don't see the point in installing Linux and running these via Wine.

If there was a 'killer app' on Linux that didn't exist on Windows, I'd probably change – or at least create a VM to run it. My software development is all done in VMs currently (for backup and isolation purposes) and all VMs are variants of Windows (Win7RC, Vista, XP, and 98 – don't ask).

Advanced computer users can make the most of Windows so it doesn't really have as many disadvantages as it might for less-capable users, i.e. they can avoid dodgy websites, phishing scams, install and maintain virus protection software, and so on. And, finally, it's that familiarity thing. For me, time is often money, and I simply don't have the time to learn Linux the way I'd need to learn it if I was going to use it for software development.

I'm hoping one day to somehow score a job that requires Linux work, and be compensated for the learning experience. I'll keep dreaming .... :^)

To put it frankly , we get the same bulls... threads every week , the OP has made one post and that was the first one...come on mods , this is turning into a religious debate!

Oldlucky writes...

the OP has made one post and that was the first one...come on mods , this is turning into a religious debate!

+1
I want to get on with helping those who want to learn

Oldlucky writes...

this is turning into a religious debate

+100

RussianMob writes...

I don't want to start another Windows vs Linux thread, but indulge me.
You know you are starting one!

Linux is free, yet despite years of publicity it still doesn't enjoy widespread adoption of Windows.
Because Microsoft has made excellent (legal wise) contracts and deals with others to ensure competition doesn't have a chance. If you've ever read their OEM agreements, you can understand why Apple doesn't bother releasing OSX for general PCs and why Linux can barely enter the market. (Let alone other OSs).

MS also have produced a stable tool set and APIs (like DirectX) to code on. Too many choices (as seen in open source world) confuses developers.

Linux has just started to reach hardware companies like Intel, AMD, etc. We've only just got meager support from software folks...Its going to take a while.

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?
Learn to produce GOOD code. Any idiot can pick up a book and learn to write code. But it takes time to develop into a good coder. I estimate if you spend 70 hours per week; in about 3 yrs, you'll achieve that competence and skill to produce fantastic quality solutions.

Since this is a Linux forum – I'm perhaps asking the wrong group, but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?
I'm about freedom to choose. I don't want to force or corner anyone into something. I let the code speak, not my mouth. I don't work in marketing. Nor do I need to "market spin" anything.

Sidenote: I'm a Windows user myself, but I'm not going to state my reasons so not to bias the thread.
That's your choice. I'm a Linux user. I use it because it does what I need.

In my office we use Lotus Notes, Citrix, Office, a lot of web based apps and a few Terminal Service connections for some propietary apps.

That looks like a prime candidate for linux. I hate the fees that Microsoft charge us for everything and obviously if we can save money with linux etc. it's a no brainder.

What stopped us was Open Office. We have thousands of documents already created, lots of manuals and legal documents. I tried weaning my users off Office 2000 -> Open Office 3.0. For users that create documents from scratch it's pretty good. Not perfect, some of the key combinations are unintuitive for Office users ( for example, hitting the DEL key in Calc pops up a dialogue, in Excel it DELetes the info in the cell as you would expect it to) but none of that was insurmountable and we were fixing those niggles as we got them.
For users that open older documents it's hit and miss. One thing that blew up in my face was when a legal doc was emailed from a Word user -> Open Office user. When he opened the doc and sent it on, Open Office had changed a lot of formatting. Not major stuff (although the table of contents was a lot different) but it was an 80 page document. We couldn't have that. There were lots of instances like this that made us just bite the bullet and pay Microsoft for Office 2007 licenses. That'll do us for another 5 – 10 years. We're not spending money on training so if the user knows 2007 they can have it. If they don't the license allows us to install Office 2003 instead.

I'll look again when Open Office 4 comes out.

Why is thread STILL in the Linux forum, It Cleary says in the title that it is asking NON Linux Users.

C'mon mods.

mickoneill30 writes...

For users that create documents from scratch it's pretty good. Not perfect, some of the key combinations are unintuitive for Office users ( for example, hitting the DEL key in Calc pops up a dialogue, in Excel it DELetes the info in the cell as you would expect it to) but none of that was insurmountable and we were fixing those niggles as we got them.

We're not spending money on training

And that's the problem. If you don't train people, how are they supposed to get your business to adopt a new solution? Training is a once off expenditure.

A business shouldn't be run like that.

For users that open older documents it's hit and miss.

Document compatibility has always been a problem between MS Office and OpenOffice.

In fact, if you keep track of what's going on in this front, you know Microsoft is intentionally being incompatible. Example: They chose ODF v1 spec for Office 2007 SP2, because there is a loophole they can use as an excuse to justify intentionally reading ODF wrong. They then can blame the standard being the problem!

Suspicion is raised when others (including an open source project that THEY funded) can read and write ODF perfectly!

Their actions are pretty clear: Use document standards to protect MS Office.

stmok writes...

And that's the problem. If you don't train people, how are they supposed to get your business to adopt a new solution? Training is a once off expenditure.

That's not the problem. Training is not a once of expenditure. Most companies have turnover. Training is ongoing. We don't need to train for Office 2003 & 2007. If a new user comes in we find out what they're comfortable with and give them the MS Office they're familiar with. They still get training but in what we want to train them in. We don't want to train users how to use an Office application. We're not a training company, we're a business.

Document compatibility has always been a problem between MS Office and OpenOffice.

You're not arguing with me there. I just said that's the reason we CANT move.

I care that Microsoft are doing this on purpose but I care more that my users are able to open documents that are 5 years old without having to worry about formatting problems. We get a lot of MS Office files from companies outside of ours. When we open documents we don't want to worry about changing formatting unintentionally. With a trial group of 20 people it was a support headache. We couldn't afford to roll it out to everybody in the company. There was the cost of training + the cost of testing old documents + the cost of formatting new documents that come from outside the company.

This thread was asking why people don't move to linux. It wasn't asking why are Microsoft bad. I know they're bad and I HATE having to pay them. I was just saying why we didn't move to linux.

Bradtek writes...

Why is thread STILL in the Linux forum

Probably cause the question asked is really targeted to solicit responses from the "closet Linux observers" who normally don't want to be seen or really don't want to "stray" and keep reassuring themselves taking the right choice (by telling us Linux users why they will not switch) but for some reason despite having no interest in Linux they keep lurking in here.... :-)
Putting this in Windows forum would be considered trolling and shutdown soon.

rumburaknet writes...

but for some reason despite having no interest in Linux they keep lurking in here.... :-)

I've been thinking that the last few of these threads, There is all these users that don't really seem interested in Linux for whatever reason but they seem to turn up when these threads appear.

kraekan writes...

There is all these users that don't really seem interested in Linux for whatever reason but they seem to turn up when these threads appear.

Are you saying that linux fans don't read Windows threads? If even only to remain informed you'd think they'd do that. Obviously not.

Personally,as a Windows user reading linux threads I'm not only doing it for jollys and to antagonise linux users. :)

mickoneill30 writes...

Are you saying that linux fans don't read Windows threads? If even only to remain informed you'd think they'd do that. Obviously not.

I rarely go into the windows forum because I don't have any interest in it. I read the Win 7 thread a fair bit to see what people where saying when I tried out the recent release myself. It's only when something like that comes up that I would go in there, why would I don't actually use wiindows?

iConfused writes...

Arrogant Linux users mainly.

Well "aloof" was the impression I had.....until yesterday.

I have to say how impressed I am with the responses from posters in this thread....I wasn't sure what the reaction would to posting my "honest" opnion of what I have found on the net so far in terms of trying to find a starting point to explore "the other side".

People in this forum have changed my opinion on the Linux community entirely. Thankyou for the posts in here and the PM's received that have given me a starting point with Linux, and the offers of a little bit of tutilage....I'll be taking you up on that.

Once again, thankyou.

RussianMob writes...

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

i cant tell you what would bring me to linux(i have used it but long time since the last install) what i can tell you is that i use windows for the simple fact is i grew up with it, started with 3.1. so useing it and setting it up for my liking(not really likeing it but....) is second nature to me.... linux of any distro doesn't have that going for it. that and to use the stuff i want takes more buggerising arround then i am preparied to part with.

What brought me to linux.?

PC USer Magazine OCtober 2008 – Home Linux Server..

Had been looking at linux for a while and tried live cds.
The PCuser home server, no keyboard mouse or monitor , shared storage and stream music and video to the house, backup my kids laptops, and stable it works.

When my Windows pc died last month used it exclusively , very fast, boot times, browsing fast, Peer to peer stuff easy.
Did I mention it was fast.?

Bite the bullet. try it.

mickoneill30 writes...

Training is ongoing. We don't need to train for Office 2003 & 2007.

How many times a day does help desks get asked question by users on how to use Office XXXX? Lots, especially Outlook questions, and these people are employed because they are supposed to know hoe to use the software!

FACT – 90% of users could move to Open Office as there level of understanding of Office XXXX would translate directly to Open Office and they could still ask the same questions they do now without any training. People only like using what they are familiar with, why did all the Office users require retraining when Office 2007 came out?

iConfused writes...

But also Linux is just a copy of various other OS's, but doesn't copy any of them particularily well.

Linux is a kernel, the OS is GNU/Linux, kernel + software. Linux the kernel has more in common with Windows kernel then different, also Linux kernel has been in development longer then the current Windows kernel, both take ideals and systems from UNIX.

saying the Linux kernel (Monolithic) doesn't do things well would also mean that Windows and OSX /BSD also don't do things well as they are just modern implementation (well not BSD as it is the oldest) of UNIX.

I would be very interested to know what part of the kernel is a poor copy of some other kernel?

As for GNU software, again what is a poor copy of what? perhaps you may have your statement ass about.

Since this is a Linux forum – I'm perhaps asking the wrong group, but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

In my case, FreeBSD. I use it at work on our web server, mail server, storage server, overseas web server, and internet gateway.

I won't use Linux unless I really, really have to – though I am looking to put it on my EEE.

When it comes to desktops, Linux isn't as user friendly or as mature as Windows. I don't want to spend most of my time helping people overcome problems that just don't exist in Windows.

mickoneill30 writes...

That's not the problem. Training is not a once of expenditure. Most companies have turnover. Training is ongoing. We don't need to train for Office 2003 & 2007. If a new user comes in we find out what they're comfortable with and give them the MS Office they're familiar with. They still get training but in what we want to train them in. We don't want to train users how to use an Office application. We're not a training company, we're a business.

The business I worked for, trained all of us "core people" on OpenOffice because the boss's mate set his whole business up on open source. (Linux, etc)...The only thing he pays for is maintenance support.

He had a rule where we train new employees on OpenOffice and Linux basics as part of the "first day on the job" process. (Get them familiar before throwing them into the fire). Its slow for us to bring new people in, but it pays off in the long run.

The boss is an ex-soldier, and believes in preparing his people before sending them into battle. (His words).

When I left, they had one Windows XP machine with MS Office 2003 that had MS sponsored open source ODF plug-in.
=> http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/

...The point of that machine is to act as the "translator" of docs coming from the outside, and nothing more. The whole setup seemed to work reasonably well with OpenOffice.

iConfused writes...

But also Linux is just a copy of various other OS's, but doesn't copy any of them particularly well.

And how much are you charged for upgrades?

I'm still on $0 spent on software (no pirating, all legal)...How about you?

Gumby No Talent writes...

How many times a day does help desks get asked question by users on how to use Office XXXX? Lots, especially Outlook questions, and these people are employed because they are supposed to know hoe to use the software!

800 users in my organisation. We get little to no calls on how to use Office. The users get induction training when they start and that's it. In my post I said we used Lotus Notes? Not sure why Outlook calls would be a problem for us then. We do get lots of Notes calls but that's probably for the same reason why users call for Outlook support. Changing mail groups, recalling mail, restores, managing spam etc.

FACT – 90% of users could move to Open Office as there level of understanding of Office XXXX would translate directly to Open Office and they could still ask the same questions they do now without any training.

Again did you read my post? It's not the training bit that was the problem. If training was the issue then your FACT above would be true. We would have done it if the cost was justified. It was the document incompatibilites that killed us. Open Office is absolutely fine for a smaller organisation or an organisation that doesn't have gigabytes of existing doc files. For those that do then we're stuck with MS Office. At the start of this year we had to decide on whether to go with Open Office or buy a pile of licenses for MS Office. We really, really wanted to go with Open Office. We trialled it for 2 months. We had a trial conversion programme for many documents and we trained the users. In the end for us when we added up the costs and time required and the cost of the increased calls to IT we went with MS Office.

I'm not arguing here. If somebody can tell me how to use Open Office with my existing documents I'll drop MS Office and start moving some users to linux. It's not just the cost of MS Office. Windows is a cost too. Anything that removes costs while not making it harder for the users will be looked at seriously.

Some users get very defensive when anything about linux is negative. If people stopped seeing it as criticism and more a problem that could be resolved I'd say we'd get more uptake on linux.

Edit: Anyway. That's the last post on the topic from me. Simple question asked and answered and then the usual going around in circles.

I know some people have got skype running on linux but I have not been successful. This is the only obstacle for me.

skype works fine....maybe more of a sound card problem ? Have you posted elsewhere for assistance ?

The average person uses MS at work, MS at any internet cafe they go to. They probably don't even know linux exists.

Also many people don't understand what open sourcing means for development. Therefor they think that if MS costs 100s of $ and linux is free then logically linux must be crap.

Drivers and software also hold linux back. A lot of hardware lacks adequate linux drivers. Installing software, especially in a distro that doesn't have a "add/remove programs"/synaptic package manager can be more difficult

I use linux now, but to be honest i was a bit scared to venture outside of ms windows, so being not to sure about linux may tend to keep people away from it.

Now that i have started using linux i just cant do without it.

I find ms windows to cumbersome if that is the right word, and to sluggish, i did not know that before i stared using linux, because i had nothing to compare with.

So to those people that are frightened just like i was, i suggested get out of windows at least for a test drive of linux, people on here and linux forums are always willing to help with any questions that you may have.

Edited my post as well.

iConfused writes...

Personally, I don't think Linux is worth more than $0

And i believed that you are not being biased, not only that but also ignorant of facts.

I think the admin should delete this crappy thread.

I use linux exclusively on the servers I run (mostly LAMP web environments, along with a few dev environments with things like svn on them), and windows (xp, Vista) on desktops.

Why windows? Linux on the desktop doesn't give me the software I want natively. I use things like Photoshop (and no, the GIMP is NOT a competitor), Sony Vegas Pro and associated pro-level audio editing apps. The linux ecosystem simply doesn't offer me the same convenience and reliability in the desktop for the prices I pay in the Windows ecosystem.

Horses for courses.

I'm not evangelical about either – I just use what works for me.

When talking about Microsoft Office, you need to consider the unethical practices of Microsoft. Introducing the ooxml type files is a stinker of a move. They have only one purpose, to force companies to buy Office 2007 or later to be able to open documents.

So for those that find it "all too difficult" to move to Open Office, you are helping to perpetuate an injustice.

http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/

Steel Monkey writes...

I wouldnt mind getting into Linux, even after my disastrous last effort(was trying to set it up to dual boot but had some problem with it took quite a while to get back working, totally due to my own stupidness), but there are a couple of things stopping me:
1. Time to learn
2. Time to acutally install it
3. Theres bloody heaps of distros to choose from
4. Some programs wont work on linux.

The reasons i stay with windows
1. Ive already got it with the purchase of my pc
2. I already know how to use it
3. All my programs run
4. Im pretty darn lazy and windows currently does everything I need.

All the reasons for me not to change dont amount to much and I WILL get around to changing one day but for now im happy to plod along as is.

I dont think i will end up purchasing vista or 7 so i think I will end up going to linux when i buy a new pc, but until then ill stay with windows.

I heard a while back that Dell were going to offer the option of pre loading with Linux(maybe i was dreaming though hmmm), i think that might go some of the way to converting people to Linux.

Pretty much sums it up.

I find many Linux advocates think all users is as interested in their PC as they are.

Most users are not, even on windows it can take someone a very long time to become accustomed to a simple feature. How many people use the Help feature?

It's like pulling teeth to get some users to help themselves, or even read the messages on the screen.

It's like me expecting drivers to service their own cars, and being surprised when they don't rush to do it themselves.

If there was some universal distro it might help, but then you need to overcome the technical aspect of installing it in the first place.

If Linux advocates were really interested in seeing Linux take off, they would do some free/low cost training at community centres, free installations etc. to help new users to become accustomed to using it.

Ohgeezx2 writes...

If Linux advocates were really interested in seeing Linux take off, they would do some free/low cost training at community centres, free installations etc. to help new users to become accustomed to using it.

They do --->
Beginner's Workshop

Ohgeezx2 writes...

but then you need to overcome the technical aspect of installing it in the first place.

Seriously, to install linux on hd is easier than installing windows xp.

And you don't have to keep inserting cd's into the cd-dvd player-burner, linux does it all for you, that is pick up all your hardware automatically..

Daly Waters writes...

When talking about Microsoft Office, you need to consider the unethical practices of Microsoft. Introducing the ooxml type files is a stinker of a move. They have only one purpose, to force companies to buy Office 2007 or later to be able to open documents.

So for those that find it "all too difficult" to move to Open Office, you are helping to perpetuate an injustice.

Or install the compatiblity files, so older versions of word etc can open 2007 documents..

Ohgeezx2 writes...

If Linux advocates were really interested in seeing Linux take off, they would do some free/low cost training at community centres, free installations etc. to help new users to become accustomed to using it.

You mean like Microsoft provide, that enables people to understand Windows?

Me bite as well

Well I took the plunge and loaded Ubuntu 3-4 months ago

And to be honest, it's not as good as XP, but it's not far behind

I am dual booting but hardly even use XP now

Ubuntu is great, there are some little glitches but I can live with them
When I boot back into XP I get pissed off these days, it all works but lags and stuffs me around just like always, if I had never tried Ubuntu I would never have noticed some of the annoying features windows has

So far I have only run across one spreadsheet OpenOffice wouldn't modify (some crappy website calculator), otherwise it's all sweet

I do get the occasional W98 type lockup, which shits me, but when I boot back into XP I get 'other issues' that shit me just as much (even more so now, it's like damn! I forgot about that crappola)

So I'm a convert, I am not a windows bagger by any means, but Ubuntu/Linux is a damned fine workable alternative, sure it has some disadvantages but there are some quite pleasing aspects/advantages to running Linux as well

The live CD's give you a look at how it works but once loaded proper it works a whole lot better

So I say give it a go, it's not quite windows, but it's still a damned fine system

And I didn't find the changeover that challenging, I don't think training is needed, if you can work windows it doesn't take a lot of brainpower to switch to Ubuntu, it's pretty much the same road/highway but the signs are in different places, but training or not, some people just wont listen............

wazzaperth writes...

Linux is a damned fine workable alternative, sure it has some disadvantages but there are some quite pleasing aspects/advantages to running Linux as well

Thank you for putting it so eloquently ......

For me it's apps, pure & simple. I've played around with Linux for years but have about half a dozen apps I just can't replace.

The minute wine handles them is when I switch. The good thing is wine is really starting to rapidly improve...

The Lone Ranger writes...

Therefor they think that if MS costs 100s of $ and linux is free then logically linux must be crap.

If you ask the average computer user how much Windows (whatever variant) cost them they'll say either (a) nothing, came with the computer or, (b) I got a copy from X person. When people buy a PC, they see the price and feel that the money they are paying is for the physical unit, the software in their view just came with it and didn't cost anything. Truth is if you break down the purchase price a small amount would be attributed to the cost of Windows.

Linux is being portrayed as a free product, instead it should be advertised as its grassroots as 'free as in freedom'. People are always weary of what is free, they would rather (when it comes to software) take something for nothing that sells for $X dollars than take something equivalent that they are legally allowed to have a copy of for no money.

Another point is the education of users. If you ask most people what software they need to type up a document they'll say Microsoft, or Word, or Office, not one will say "I need a word processor". Trying to tell a someone that Openoffice will suit all their home word processing needs just as well as MS Office is damn near impossible – I don't even bother helping anymore.

But all in all probably the biggest reason more people don't use Linux is because of commercial software requirements. I've been a Linux user since oooh 1999 roughly, and I still have trouble running a primarily Linux shop at home. My current issues are 100% compatibility with MS Office for Uni, and the need for a Windows install to run required software for Uni (I'm since running MS Office via crossover and a XP install via VB so I am near 100%). The only hardware issue I've ever really had was my old ipod, took a bit of fiddling to get working. My digital camera? easier under Linux than Windows, my HDD camera? easier under Linux than Windows (plus there are far better open source video apps compared to the crap that came with the $1000 camera). Games also come under the commercial software requirement – a non issue for me, I'm a console gamer.

Drivers and software also hold linux back. A lot of hardware lacks adequate linux drivers. Installing software, especially in a distro that doesn't have a "add/remove programs"/synaptic package manager can be more difficult

Actually you've got more of a chance of Linux out of the box installing drivers for your hardware than you do Windows...but Windows you are certain of finding a driver for your hardware after install somewhere (CD, net etc). With the Add/Remove programs, the distros that do not have that functionality still have a package management system of some description (usually command line) but those distros are not usually intended for new users.

I've had a good amount of exposure to Linux OS', so don't think that I immediatly dismissed it as a capable OS.

In regards to the topic, I don't think people necessarily don't want to move to Linux, it's just that there is no real reason to.

Chances are unless there is a 'killer app' that is solely exclusive to Linux based OS', there is very little to entice new users. Why move if the OS can provide everything you require and want?

Sure there are a few people who complain about the lack of Windows' "stability", but I've been running XP since it's release (havnt bothered to upgrade, why would I?) and It's been very good to me.

I have a tweaked out XP (via nLite, removed out all the unused applications/services), have Avast Antivirus installed and store the applications I need, if it hasnt been used in a month or probably won't be used anytime soon, it's gone!

Following this simple formula (a winnng one at that), it allows me to achieve a "stable" Windows.

I'm not doing anything on an enterprise level, I'm just a student and until I'm obligated to use Linux, I'll probably just stick with Windows.

Thats my opinion.

You guys are tempting me to try a current linux distro. I haven't tried one for years. What's the best user friendly distro these days? It has to be fully GUI based.

I don't want any command line or config file editing or I'll stop using it.

sp0radic writes...

It has to be fully GUI based. I don't want any command line or config file editing or I'll stop using it.

This one --> Less waiting, fewer clicks, and less complexity

Ubuntu is fairly decent and Linux Mint (based off of Ubuntu) is a really easy distro to pick up.

wazzaperth writes...

I do get the occasional W98 type lockup

never seen a lin pull a '98 style lockup, even if something crashes so hard it takes the x-server with it and locks the display so you cant ctrl-f1 to a console or ctrl-backspace to retart X, i have still been able to SSH in from another box and kill the offending process.

sp0radic writes...

I haven't tried one for years. What's the best user friendly distro these days? It has to be fully GUI based.

OpenSuse is all from the GUI, Ubuntu and Mint are also very good.

RussianMob writes...

What's stopping you?

My latest attempt to switch was a failure. Previously, my only excuse was "games". Seeing that I only play Warcraft III and HL2 based games, and seeing that they're both on WINE's A-list, I thought I'd be able to install Linux Mint 7 and make the transition. Installed Wine Doors, typed name and ticked the box, but then nothing showed up on the list... I'd previously loaded Wine Doors on my old computer and it worked perfectly. It seemed the perfect program for managing those two games, but didn't work out that time. Is this a known bug in Wine Doors, or are you only allowed to register a name once?

sp0radic writes...

I don't want any command line or config file editing or I'll stop using it.

Do you use a "computer" that goes through POST without keyboard. Show us the link, please.

Have fun.

I installed Ubuntu as a dual boot on my XP machine. It was good, but the things that held me back were some slightly dodgy drivers and the need to learn command line stuff. I also just tried Windows 7, and have become a big fan.

I was bloody impressed with Ubuntu though, everything "just worked" from the moment I put the CD in during installation. I guess for me there just isn't enough to be gained by going fully to Ubuntu – yes, it's free, but the only app I need to pay for on a Windows machine these days is Windows.

Sure, you don't *need* to resort to command line, but as soon as you encounter a problem with the GUI not being able to get things done that's your only option (ie. had a problem getting the latest apps installed from repositories, and the only way around that is some command line guff).

And like others have said, I've been swearing at different versions of Windows for 15 years or something. I think with 7 they've done a pretty good job.

Even though I run the Windows 7 RC, I still like Ubuntu (and other distributions for that matter) better. I love the higher degree of control, it makes me feel as it is doing what I want it to do, not how someone else thinks you should do it.

The only thing stopping me is my darn nVidia RAID setup – no distributions seem to support it. If anyone could shed some light on this it would be appreciated :).

The current problem with Linux for new users is the way it works.
Example.
I bought a new USB camera the other day as they were on special and cheap.
To make the camera work under windows, I simply insert the CD that came with the camera, it self installs and I then plug in the camera and bingo, the camera works.

Ive also got Ubuntu so I tried to install the same camera, Its a Logitech S2500.
2 days later I gave up,as the camera just isnt supported under Linux.
Finding this out was hard.

Do you see the problem.
Windows is designed for people who dont know anything about computers and can follow simple instructions.

Linux needs the same simplicity, but it just isnt there, you need to be a guru to achieve simple things.

If Wine could be designed in such a way that it would allow Windows drivers to self install from CD like the camera above did, then non knowledgeable people could then use it, just by following simple instructions, and then you would see a pickup in LInux use.

The only other solution, which I cant see happening , is to convince every hardware manufacturer in the world to include Linux support with the product at the point of sale.

mauried writes...

The only other solution, which I cant see happening , is to convince every hardware manufacturer in the world to include Linux support with the product at the point of sale.

Very valid point and probably one of the biggest obstacles in Linux take up, unfortunately hardware vendors have no incentive to do so if it is only for what some argue is only 1~2 % of world market. The classic "catch 22" and on top of it Linux also doesn't have the Apple® leverage/influence so drivers on CDs are usually only for MS/Apple distros.

sp0radic writes...

What's the best user friendly distro these days? It has to be fully GUI based.

I don't want any command line or config file editing or I'll stop using it.

If i where you i would try linux mint 7.

I use it, the only setback that i have with it is my webcam wont work, but i have an old webcam that not even the manufacturer worries about it anymore.

My webcam is a Kodak dvc325, also may i add if you like the looks of windows xp, then try pclinux 2009.

My webcam works with pclinux 2009 ok etither in kde desktop or gnome desktop, it's your choice, something that ms windows lacks.

mauried writes...

Ive also got Ubuntu so I tried to install the same camera, Its a Logitech S2500.

2 days later I gave up,as the camera just isnt supported under Linux.

Finding this out was hard.

Do you see the problem.

Windows is designed for people who dont know anything about computers and can follow simple instructions.

You do see the problem though. Windows is for people who don't know anything, no more than Mint or even Ubuntu. Its the hardware and software people who are the problem, not the operating system. Logitech should provide Linux drivers.

Software wise, my main bugbears are Quickbooks and the Australian Tax Office's ECI BAS Lodgement programs. Both of these only work in Windows or Mac.

For that, I don't blame the Linux world, I blame Reckon and the ATO.

A rider to that though, in the commercial software providers case, Linux is generally seen as the area where software is provided open source and for free. This perception probably deters the likes of Quickbooks being written for Linux. We probably have to accept that no-one is going to write a business accounting software program which is tweaked and updated to comply with Australian tax and GST without some cost recovery.

However, until these sort of commercial programs are available on Linux, business uptake of Linux is going to be restricted to the keen innovators.

Daly Waters writes...

Linux is generally seen as the area where software is provided open source and for free. This perception probably deters the likes of Quickbooks being written for Linux. We probably have to accept that no-one is going to write a business accounting software program which is tweaked and updated to comply with Australian tax and GST without some cost recovery.

Using Quickbooks for example, had that application been designed with cross platform tools and built with being a cross platform application, it would more than likely cost no more than it currently has to build a Windows only application. The upside of making it cross platform a software company suddenly expands their possible user base for next to no extra cost.

I personally think the biggest issue with porting applications to Linux from Windows is historically all these applications were built on Windows and only ever intended for Windows. Newer versions were developed against the previous versions etc, so to produce a Linux version a complete rewrite would be required. Had as I said before a cross platform development model taken place we probably wouldn't have the lack of commercial software for Linux as we currently do. Think of Mozilla and their development platforms...how easy to release binaries for Mac, Windows and Linux.

So you're right, no-one is going to write an application for Linux. A complete development process would need to take place, and there just aren't enough Linux users willing to buy to make it cost effective. Sad but true.

you need a decent internet connection with a large download limit per month to enjoy Linux. Even to get the codecs and non-free applications (flash, etc) it can take hours on a slow connection just to get started.

sagaci writes...

you need a decent internet connection with a large download limit per month to enjoy Linux.

That is just a rubbish, standard dial up connection is plenty, and codecs+ flash etc are no more than 10-25 MB download. I used Linux on dial up for years and your statement is just .....

rumburaknet writes...

That is just a rubbish

+1

I have wireless mobile broadband from Dodo – slower than a snail – with only 1.5Gb per month and I'm fine.

lack of SLI + dual monitor support.

sagaci writes...

you need a decent internet connection with a large download limit per month to enjoy Linux.

Not so. I used Linux for years on dialup. Certainly easier with satellite, but you don't need more than a few hundred megabytes a month for Linux unless you are doing a lot of playing around. Probably need less than you would for Windows what with security updates, service packs etc.

Of course, if you are downloading lots of new distributions and the latest version of everything as it becomes available, you can use a lot of your quota, but generally speaking, the amount you really need to download is pretty small – most security updates even for my whole system (i.e. including all applications as well as the O/S) would be under 100MB, usually way under. Just checked – update waiting for my OK – 9.8MB!

JDNSW41 writes...

but you don't need more than a few hundred megabytes a month for Linux

Might I also suggest using a distro that uses LZMA compression (for package management and updates) or delta updates (or both) to save bandwidth.

Although I will admit that I too had the misconception of having to have broadband with Linux. However, again it comes back to usage. With me for instance, I am the type of person who likes to play with a lot, which of course uses up a lot of quota / bandwidth.

I've had people say that Linux is crap because it's free. Only businesses with tight budgets would use Linux, and Linux is really only used for web servers, apparently.

Strangely enough, I was also told that Linux is for stupid people who don't know how to crack Windows. For starters, this person clearly doesn't know the difference between cracking Windows and downloading a cracked Windows, and also have their logic backwards because most of the world's stupid people run Windows.

Needless to say, it was a fun argument. And I've barely even used Linux because I can't be bothered with it. I have heaps of distros, just no motivation to try them.

rumburaknet writes...

That is just a rubbish, standard dial up connection is plenty, and codecs+ flash etc are no more than 10-25 MB download. I used Linux on dial up for years and your statement is just .....

Flash, sun java runtime plugin, codecs (ubuntu-restricted-extras and non-free-codecs), vlc and/or gxine, banshee, compiz plugins, samba, some kind of gui firewall, fonts and wine

to get reasonable functionality and connectivity

rugger writes...

1) I like the vista interface more then the interfaces I have tried so far. It feels smoother and looks nicer IMO. Completely subjective, but you wanted to know why.

2) It runs all the software I want. Games/internet programs/custom software.

3) All my hardware works best under windows. And its pretty simple to setup and add more hardware when I want to.

I pretty much feel the same way.

Games are a problem with very few exceptions.
Hardware support always seems to lag, and when it arrives features are sometimes limited.

Trouble shooting is difficult too.
There are many help sources around, but with a far smaller install base than Windows it is comparative easier to find assistance for your Windows issue.

sagaci writes...

Flash

Must also be downloaded in Windows.

sun java runtime plugin

Must also be downloaded in Windows.

codecs

Must also be downloaded in Windows.

vlc

For anything other than what WMP can play, must also be downloaded in Windows.

banshee

A lot of people don't use WMP. So another media player (iTunes / whatever) must also be downloaded in Windows.

some kind of gui firewall

Must also be downloaded in Windows for anything better than the very basic Windows firewall. Don't forget antivirus.

apart from the fact that you need an internet connection to download to correct drivers for your modem, if they're available.

edit: requiring a linux-savvy tech to do the job

sagaci writes...

apart from the fact that you need an internet connection to download to correct drivers for your modem

I didn't have to download any drivers for anything. My modem, camera, printer, wireless mouse, and whatever else all works great first time, every time!

sagaci writes...

apart from the fact that you need an internet connection to download to correct drivers for your modem, if they're available.

What?? No, unless you are using a Winmodem (which are trash even in Windows), then you should be fine. Especially if you use a serial port modem. They work out of the box in Linux, in fact, I have my SwanSmart Turbo serial port modem here which will not work in Windows without drivers, yet it works fine in Linux out of the box. And yes, even my PC built last year still has an old-style port header on the motherboard for use with the modem. Even USB modems should be fine with Linux.

1) I use Internode and have my Ubuntu system configured to run all updates and installations directly from their mirror. Works great. No impact on my quota.

3) I exclusively use Ubuntu on my main desktop PC and love it.

2) I have been using Linux since 1997, and took up the torch until about 2002 when I gave up. I have not since recommended it to anyone although I use it exclusively.

Why? It's too damn confusing, and sometimes it seems like monkeys on a keyboard that occasionally unite to produce something really good. I got tired of playing help desk to people who just wanted something that worked and having to say "oh that software is not available for Linux yeah you need Windows or a Mac"

It's a nightmare for developers who are expected to develop something for all the gazillion distributions and variations out there. Sure this is great for democracy, freedom, innovation, fighting capitalists and corporate Big Brothers – but for developers it makes almost no business sense.

Ubuntu came along and brought some unity and I think market share has started *creeping* along again, thanks to a temporary growth in the netbook market (now no longer).

The RTFM scoff at newbies attitude seems to have diminished too but this really held back Linux and relegated it to a "geek server room full of balding pony tails" image. This was a big one that even put me off for a while until I got tired of Microsoft again for my own reasons.

But mainly the biggest problem I think is the almost total disunity – so much creative energy is dissolved away on orphaned projects – which is the strength and the philosophy of Linux – but also the main marketing weakness and why until something commercially viable comes along to give developers certainty of ROI over a period – and market share to target – that Linux won't ever budge beyond the 3% or whatever it is now.

Take for example me trying to explain to my wife's friend how to install Open Office 3 off the main OO repository using AptOnCD and Synaptic and I thought oh gee, I'm doing this person's head in, just use XP and give me my night back please.

I'm happy with Linux, always have been, except for the almost total lack of commercial developer interest that *requires* me to use Microsoft for mainstream and the really powerful applications, but I will never recommend it someone who does not have a *lot* of time and inclination to learn about it, or someone in the house on call who can configure and maintain it for them.

As we can see by this thread alone – there's enough to write a volume of books on the topic.

1. People don't know that alternatives exist.
1.1 The small % that do know (i.e you in this forum) might not want to change. You're a fanboy of Windows or it just works for you. That's cool.

1.2 For the even smaller amount left from section 1.1 they might try Linux. It's a new environment and you notice small things that piss you off – like you your friends can't shake your MSN window, or you just can't accept Rhythmbox as a music player that just does just that – playing music. It's a bit like your house, you get conditioned to all its flaws but go to a new display home and you become highly critical! Same deal.

So you do the easy thing and boot back into 'home', your windows installation. Ahh that's better. You can now chat in an ad ridden messenger client, you can play music in Media player, you can hit the torrents and download photoshop CS, heck lets just get the latest Office 2007 while we're at it. There's little problems here and there but you post on various forums for help, after all there's no place like home, and in fact there's no escape like you did from linux – if you reboot you'll just be starring at the same problem.

At this stage I think I've covered most of the reasons why people don't 'convert' to Linux. Note I'm not being critical, I'm just showing the path.

1.3 An even smaller amount will come back to Linux, give it another shot, because they want to, because many have an interest in computers. Sure they went back to Windows but there's a burning urge to be back.

---------
We want people to use Linux and associated technologies whilst doing no evil. We're up against some large hurdles though. Piracy is not our friend. People say Photoshop is better than Gimp, but they illegally download Photoshop most of the time. Ditto for MS software or most software / games. That's not fair, but then again who said this was a fair game?

Worse, companies thrive on piracy, Microsoft wouldn't have gotten where it it is without it. Developing countries like India pump out smart developers. These people become .NET experts by illegally buying VB6 form the video shop. Now they're locked in, they're trained – there's no turning back. Once you get the world by the throat you can start bullshit like product activation and generally pissing off your paying customers.

The linux communities do no such thing – but that's what we're up against.

Back on the other side, not so nice things keep happening like patenting simple ideas on the user interface to funding legal attacks against Linux (read, MS funding SCO to fight IBM regarding Linux). This brings Fear, uncertainty and doubt, and MS are no doubt proud of this. So they should be, it was their goal.

There's more...from vendor lock-in through closed formats, to OEMs loosing out if they offer Linux.

So this is what we are up against. I'm surprised and quite pleased there are this many people out there using linux – for the combination of reasons, from the freedom to go about your work, to legally using software. It's not just about the open source freedom. It's about not having your world shat on. You decide.

All this before you can even point out that Linux doesn't play games or some obscure hardware doesn't work.

Critical factor number 1 – think about this.

Bank or shareholders give you $1 million and 1 or 2 years to develop software and start getting a return.

Would you develop for Linux – with a multitude of confusing variations – each with a microscopic market share each but a collective small market share – and wear the ongoing development costs with each flavour as they update or change

Or would you develop for the Playstation 3 – that has market share – and is the *same* anywhere you go in the world – all the time – and you *know* that in 5 years – the PS3 will be the same – firmware changes aside. Which one would a bank or shareholder be comfortable with?

Or would you develop for Microsoft – with their aggressive marketing channels and 'partner' support networks and ready to tap developer base. There is a reason MS keep re-inventing language – they even lock people and developers in with that by re-naming practically everything with some bizarre term – try being a SharePoint developer – you'll never code for anything else again – but your family will eat at night.

Or would you develop for Apple – with brand image and growing market share – a fairly certain future of growing market share and the riding their marketing machine.

Speaking as a devoted Linux user for over a decade and shareholder in various companies – I would never support a motion to develop for Linux. Sad but true.

Where I think Linux is good is the general good of humanity – developing countries and the like – freedom in oppressive regimes – and driving innovation for the sake of it.

It has a future, but not as a market success in front of users (except Android – but even that's only because the worlds biggest most aggressive company that makes Microsoft look like a placid kitten brought in unity and developer certainty).

I haven't read any of this thread. but i'm just going to answer first anyway :P

One of my biggest issues is how there isn't just c:/.
its like weird with /mnt and /user or some crap like that. It's just daunting. I want to just click on my computer and see the drives.

I've also found it quite difficult to install programs in linux.
Also all of the windows live messenger alternatives are shit! pigin, trillian. they don't fully support all of windows live messenger's features.

So if they could get the latest windows live messenger compatible with wine, then I would be much more open to it.

edit: wow there is apparently some success getting the latest windows live working in wine. maybe I shall look into linux again.

edit2: apparently its full of bugs and webcam doesnt work ect. blah.

Sleepysonic writes...

One of my biggest issues is how there isn't just c:/.
its like weird with /mnt and /user or some crap like that. It's just daunting. I want to just click on my computer and see the drives.

Don't agree with this – the Unix file structure is actually more logical and easier to follow than Windows – and about the only consistent thing across distributions. I actually prefer it very much to Windows. There is a clear logic to it, and it will grow on you – just read up a bit more (happy to answer questions – whim me or on this forum)

I've also found it quite difficult to install programs in linux.
Also all of the windows live messenger alternatives are shit! pigin, trillian. they don't fully support all of windows live messenger's features.

So if they could get the latest windows live messenger compatible with wine, then I would be much more open to it.

These comments are more like it – they support my statements above – people know certain apps and they expect them to work. Now if anyone scoffs at this post and tells the poster to get over it – then my theory is proven.

I hope, however, that responses will be helpful.

Microsoft will not make it easy for their products to work on a competing system – this is standard business practice – so MS Messenger is unlikely to ever work fully.

I prefer Pidgin because it brings *everything* together, is small, light and *fast*. I actually don't want all the other stuff but that's just me. Everything I need works like file transfer and chat.

And for some reason – the Skype client for Ubuntu is excellent – a rare example of quality vendor support (like the Nvidia drivers).

Familiarity with Windows
-Ease of use, because I know my way around it

Software
-Lots of software is Windows only

I've certainly tried to like Linux, but every distro I've used, has been a pain in the ass to get working, and sure I have the ability to learn how to do everything again, but I can't be bothered.

So, I reply to your question with another question.

Why not? It comes installed on my laptops anyway

Sleepysonic writes...

Also all of the windows live messenger alternatives are shit! pigin, trillian. they don't fully support all of windows live messenger's features.

I use Trillian on Windows and I used to like it but lately it's been more and more annoying. It's very slow to start up compared to Pidgin. I just haven't had the time to move completely over to another messenger program. I've never been a fan of Windows Live messenger either; MSN Messenger was nice and lightweight but WLM just added bloat to it. What features don't work? I'm curious to know what WLM is capable of now after so many years of not using it.

Oh wow, where do I start!

asiobob writes...

small things that piss you off

YES!

It's a bit like your house, you get conditioned to all its flaws but go to a new display home and you become highly critical! Same deal.

YES!

smaller amount will come back to Linux, give it another shot, because they want to, because many have an interest in computers. Sure they went back to Windows but there's a burning urge to be back.

YES!!!!!

You have just hit the nail on the head. Especially about the burning uge to go back to Linux, despite the fact that Windows does everything I need and want etc.

Perfect post. :D for you.

If you were given money, you'd develop it in way that makes the best return for you. In that sense I would use world class enterprise platforms like Java, with JBoss middleware, with the support of large database vendors like oracle. Boom! Windows, Linux whatever.

I haven't even gotten to the part where using open source technologies mean your million bucks goes a longer way. In fact I've seen a company do exactly this with a Mining – seismic monitoring system, and man their million bucks has made them many, many times that original amount.

There's a reason that the likes of Adobe and Skype released their products (even if their closed sourced) on Linux. It's best not to alienate a growing platform that has certainty in the future.

The world isn't just about PS3's and games.

Fanboi writes...

You have just hit the nail on the head. Especially about the burning uge to go back to Linux, despite the fact that Windows does everything I need and want etc.

Come back to what? Everything 90% of the population need and want is on Windows – MS Office for example – it's the biggest revenue earner for Microsoft and has no serious competitor in that market.

We use Open Office at home, but lets be realistic – MS Office just leaves everything in it's dust. And then there is everything else people actually *do* with computers.

No point having a rock solid OS if you can't actually do anything with it.

As I said, I write this from an Ubuntu PC and I use Linux exclusively at home – but I use MS at work and don't mind because everything I need to do to actually get *paid* and *do things* is on Microsoft. Period.

If the Linux community seeks greater market share – some objectivity and honesty is required. The football like fever that seems to consume many Linux advocates doesn't seem to cut it.

Giving people what *they* want, does, not what Linux developers and fanbois want.

That's why sales people ... sell. They don't talk about themselves, they make the customer feel like the most important person in the world and work out what they need and want and play on that, not *tell* them what they need and want.

asiobob writes...

The world isn't just about PS3's and games.

Yeah but the serious money is there. You don't see 50 million dollar mining or seismology applications, and if there are, it is for a very specialised purpose with a lot of money to be made – where reaching a large market of users is *not* the aim – where stability, security and development costs are more important. Mining and the consumer market are totally different.

If the arguments you propose are true – why are there so few commercial developers on Linux? And lets be honest – there aren't many. But the ones that do support are great, like Nvidia (I only buy Nvidia cards for this reason).

I am *not* criticising Linux – I use it myself most of the time – have done so since before it really even had a *GUI* – but I'm being objective about this. I have been active in the Linux community for a decade.

The fact I have to put on a flame suit suggests something too.

And another thing – why *is* it important that Linux be compared to Windows in market share? Does the Linux community actually *want* consumer market share? Maybe this was never the intention and comparing Linux to Microsoft is missing the whole point of open source.

I refer back to the message I wrote earlier. I have a strong feeling that a lot of MS office is pirated (at least in the home and dare I say some businesses esp the smaller ones).
Whilst feature to feature MS Office does win (and that's because OO.O isn't very innovative, and very reactive) it is indeed free, a free product that for most intents and purposes does open Excel, powerpoint and word files. This goes to likes of photoshop as well. I know the world isn't fair, but it isn't fair to compared priated software against open source ones. It is fair if we truely pay for every piece of software that requires such payment.

When developing software our aim is to maximise value, and considering Linux along with Apple is probably a sharp move. If the open source world can only reject it by making a comparitively better piece of software.

My ultimate point is as a society we're truly getting sucked into a corporation that operates on the principle of fu*king you over. I dedicated a paragraph on this earlier. Weather it be at the allowing piracy level, or the OEM level or the enterprise lock in level. There I said it. We're thought of it before, even talked about it in our minds, but I've said it. I'm not against corporations, or anyone making money. I'm not even saying MS products are shit. But I am against delivering shareholder value via unethical practises or borderline lies (I refer you to IE8 comparison MS released doing the rounds on the internet). The computing world is better than that.

Linux, or shall I say Free software has had a profound effect even with the market share of such products. Firefox is an excellent example that woke MS, otherwise we'd still be on IE6, we wouldn't have services like we do today. It's why google released Chrome, not to take market share, but to keep the bastards honest (IE and firefox).
This is the kind of competition that allows open source software to grow.

But if anything, software priacy is an unfair luxury of society, it is stealing and its part of strategy some vendors use. They can't have their cake and eat it to.

See you all tomorrow :-)

asiobob writes...

Linux, or shall I say Free software has had a profound effect even with the market share of such products

+1, well written finally some intelligent post :-)

rumburaknet writes...

+1, well written finally some intelligent post :-)

+2, Microsoft would not nearly be as far along with their products without someone snapping at their heels threatening to steal their lunch.

Use it or not, we are all winners from opensource products.

asiobob writes...

When developing software our aim is to maximise value

I'm not sure I agree with this – ideally yes this is true – but I would also argue ROI and fighting competition is a stronger motive in many cases. Maximising value implies that consumers develop a sixth sense and automatically know where this value is – whether we agree or not – a marketing and distribution channel is still required to get that message of value out – in most cases. I think this is where Linux is lacking – marketing especially.

My ultimate point is as a society we're truly getting sucked into a corporation that operates on the principle of fu*king you over.

A few years ago I would have agreed with this, now I'm not so concerned about Microsoft – I actually think open source did them an immense favour – and they know it.

I am more concerned about Google – because they play this 'trust us' card which is not that solid when you scratch the surface.

I am against delivering shareholder value via unethical practises or borderline lies

Unethical is selling weapons to the Indonesian army to use in West Papua. Ethical ends where choice ends. West Papuans have no choice. Consumers have choice, so its ethical in my books – however its marketed. People suck themselves in – it's a flaw with many consumers – we all do it in some area of our lives (brand loyalty) – and corporations are not responsible for fixing it. Sure its debatable – but we elect politicians in a democracy and we give corporations power in a competitive capitalist society – I think it comes back to us as consumers in most competitive economies. We choose where to spend our money. Most choices are fairly short sighted but that's the way it is.

Example – we all complain about dodgy offshored products in the supermarket but how many people willingly pay more – in reality – very few. We almost always choose the cheapest product and that means things break and objectionable practices creep in to get us that cheap price, but that price pressure came from *us* pushing prices lower – so it's a bit much to turn around and blame Woolworths or whatever for how they treat farmers when we *give* them that market power in the first place.

Linux, or shall I say Free software has had a profound effect even with the market share of such products

Agreed. I remember Mozilla when it was a Linux only concept release – man it's changed a lot! Now it's a major competitive force that companies are basing their business models on – it's brilliant – a shining success. But it is an open source project united to one common goal and that's why it has worked so well.

You can't buy out something like that – it must be a marketing nightmare. You can't compete with an *idea*.

This is the kind of competition that allows open source software to grow.

All the platforms benefit from competition so I state again – is it a big issue for Linux to be positioned where it is? For what it does – where it is positioned – in my books it's a tremendous success. I'm not sure this thread is asking the right question but it does raise a few interesting questions.

Such as is Linux even a 'platform'? A platform is something you can build on – something solid.

Microsoft is a platform – Apple is a platform – so is Symbian and Android (ironically Linux based) – because they are solid. Gaming consoles are a perfect platform because they *never* change over their product life.

Linux is more like a cloud – you can't really stand on it or build on it because it's constantly shifting under your feat.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses but this is why I think the wrong question is being asked – considering Apple and Microsoft are platforms and marketed that way – and Linux is an *idea* united around a common core (the kernel).

I don't think they are readily comparable.

rugger writes...

Use it or not, we are all winners from opensource products.

This is why Microsoft bailed out Apple before it went bust – because they knew they needed Apple for the market to thrive as it does now.

I think Microsoft now realise this about open source too.

I'm more concerned about Google than Microsoft – and the enormous power that we are giving them. They are only using open source because it suits their long term business strategy, nothing more.

asiobob writes...

This is the kind of competition that allows open source software to grow.

demosthenes replies...

Such as is Linux even a 'platform'? A platform is something you can build on – something solid.

Microsoft is a platform – Apple is a platform – so is Symbian and Android (ironically Linux based) – because they are solid. Gaming consoles are a perfect platform because they *never* change over their product life.

Linux is more like a cloud – you can't really stand on it or build on it because it's constantly shifting under your feat.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses but this is why I think the wrong question is being asked – considering Apple and Microsoft are platforms and marketed that way – and Linux is an *idea* united around a common core (the kernel).

I don't think they are readily comparable.

This would have to be the most intelligent post I have ever read on the comparisons between Linux and Microsoft.

All the platforms benefit from competition so I state again – is it a big issue for Linux to be positioned where it is? For what it does – where it is positioned – in my books it's a tremendous success. I'm not sure this thread is asking the right question but it does raise a few interesting questions.

Exactly Linux has never been about making money or growing market share. Its always been about community and the incredible leverage that brings to computer software/OS development and the ability to create sofware that perfectly suits that community.

demosthenes writes...

Microsoft is a platform – Apple is a platform – so is Symbian and Android (ironically Linux based) – because they are solid. Gaming consoles are a perfect platform because they *never* change over their product life.

Linux is more like a cloud – you can't really stand on it or build on it because it's constantly shifting under your feat.

Well as far as Linux Distro Vs Windows goes it's not like the binary format keeps changing. As long as it's not some kind of app that changes system settings and the libraries you use are still there or backwards compatible they are really not much different in that regard. You could even really throw in MacOS as well these days because it basically is just running on x86 hardware and could run on anything as long as the drivers were there.

demosthenes writes...

You don't see 50 million dollar mining or seismology applications, and if there are, it is for a very specialised purpose with a lot of money to be made – where reaching a large market of users is *not* the aim – where stability, security and development costs are more important.

Actually there are some! But as you point out, they are not looking at a large market. As a seismologist I can confirm that there are specialist applications everywhere from desktops to supercomputers running on Linux.

For that matter according to Wikipedia about 90% of current supercomputers use Linux.

whats stopping me ?

i'll tell you

i'm a perfect linux candidate – a bit techy, spare computers, tight enough not to buy windows etc etc

my server has 2 screens – linux doesn't support
my dell wireless hardware is not found

drivers
driversdrivers
driversdrivers
driversdrivers
drivers !!!!!!!!!!

the lack of them it screws it all up – how can anyone be confident that its going to work 100% out of the box – this is 2009 and still its not right.

sort out the driver issue and i'd be all over it like a rash

rugger writes...

I like the vista interface more then the interfaces I have tried so far.

Tried KDE, the recommended one?

All my hardware works best under windows.

You don't know that until you've properly configured it under linux. :-) Crossing your fingers and hoping all your hardware will work out of the box doesn't work for everyone. Hell, it almost never works for Windows, it keeps poping up with those damn "add a new hardware" blizzards. :-p

motomartin writes...

drivers
driversdrivers
driversdrivers
driversdrivers
drivers !!!!!!!!!!

Never had much of a problem with drivers myself though I don't use scanners and such typically, just a printer. I can remember once years ago buying a D-Link network card that wasn't picked up but fortunately they had a Linux driver on the CD. Had to compile it but that's not really that hard once you've got the hang of it. One or two kernels updates later there was support for it.

I just rebuilt my desktop and everything worked out of the box.

motomartin writes...

my server has 2 screens – linux doesn't suppor

No such thing. Since 1999 monitors no longer require drivers.
An up to date Linux distro will support it with proprietary drivers installed properly if you're using an ATI or Nvidia card. If it doesn't pickup out of the box, edit the sections in xorg.conf, otherwise use the utilities provided by your driver.

my dell wireless hardware is not found

Again it helps to use an up to date distribution. For the same reason you cannot install your wireless on Windows 95. :-)

For instance CentOS 5.3 is not really up to date. It uses Linux Kernel 2.6.18... It's and old but stable linux distro with up to date security-only patches.

When in doubt use uname -a. The latest Linux kernel is 2.6.30 but you can probably get away with using 2.6.28 (used in *buntu jaunty)

drivers !!!!!!!!!!

the lack of them it screws it all up – how can anyone be confident that its going to work 100% out of the box

Nobody said you should be confident that it's going to work out of the box. You'll only be that lucky if you buy very standard hardware with no tiny extras. In a lot of the cases in doesn't and therefore requires manual configuration. On Windows it almost never works out of the box.

The "lack of drivers" is non-existant and doesn't screw anything up, modules can be edited and in 99% of the cases it's PEBKAC.

sluxor writes...

On Windows it almost never works out of the box.

To be fair Win 7 worked out of the box on my new system. It's just that a year or two down the track hardware will have outpaced it again.

kraekan writes...

To be fair Win 7 worked out of the box on my new system.

Chances are higher however that a user-friendly up to date linux distribution such as Mint or Ubuntu will pick it up and configure it properly out of the box.

In saying that I have had two new laptops as well as other machines in the past which didn't pickup out of the box and needed manual configuration.

I'l be doing advanced Linux installs for people as part of my business, basically getting their hardware which they think is unsupported to work. Unfortunately I can only cover the Perth Metro Region and close by suburbs, if anybody with long-term linux experience would like to join me and cover other regions feel free to whim me. Unfortunately this won't be a free service, I'l have a call out fee and an hourly rate... but I'l be cheaper then a locksmith still :-p

Provided that the hardware is powerful enough and not faulty, I'm that confident that should I ever fail, they will be refunded the full price.

randomizer ± writes...

I've never been a fan of Windows Live messenger either; MSN Messenger was nice and lightweight but WLM just added bloat to it. What features don't work? I'm curious to know what WLM is capable of now after so many years of not using it.

I'm not 100% sure what other programs dont support but probably the following:
moving display pictures
nudges (some still don't support it)
winks
Windows Live database for first name last name showing <- i use this a lot
Games/activites
Msgplus
voice clips
scenes (personalised background which other contacts see)
Instant photo sharing

theres probably more. and as msn is my primary messaging platform I need it to work perfectly and have all the features.

I see so it's not so much the core functionality as it is extras. It's likely that MS doesn't allow 3rd-party access to names anyway, so that probably won't be included any time soon. As for nudges... I'm glad they don't work :D

sluxor writes...

Chances are higher however that a user-friendly up to date linux distribution such as Mint or Ubuntu will pick it up and configure it properly out of the box.

Sure I said it did in my post just about, both Fedora and Ubuntu worked out of the box. Of course being a Linux user I try to by stuff that's well supported I guess. The Netgear wireless card had been reported to work well with Linux for instance and I found it to be just as good as my laptop's Intel wireless.

motomartin writes...

when its blatantly obvious

It's not obvious to me and I've used linux for a long time both at work and at home.

motomartin writes...

Head in the sand attitude that everything works – when its blatantly obvious it doesn't and needs twiddling about with under the hood.

It works after you configure it manually.

you're in denial

No I agreed with you that it doesn't work without at least installing propriatery hardware drivers, and if you're using the open-source ones you're only option is to edit xorg.conf :-)

It begins by using Vesa (generic) mode and standard monitor ranges to troubleshoot it. Then you try different resolutions and walla... your screens will eventually work. Once you got them working, you change from vesa to the most recommended Xorg driver.

As I said, people like you I service for a call out fee and an hourly rate in Perth, or free via forum lol.

Have you even tried editing your xorg.conf and restarting X?

sluxor writes...

Have you even tried editing your xorg.conf and restarting X?

Wouldn't the Display Preferences dialog do it for you now a days?

kraekan writes...

Wouldn't the Display Preferences dialog do it for you now a days?

I don't always trust GUI to do a CLI-s job ;-), but that's the first thing I would tell them to try.

I have XP as my main machine and my fiance is using ubuntu, and I'm running Fedora as my seed box

I set up ubuntu for her because its safer, she will be learning about computers and she can change the theme to pink really easily. She uses it for web browsing, saving pictures, typing. All of which is provided by ubuntu and is free.

Fedora as seed box, enough said.!

I would also be using ubuntu, BUT!.

I play alot of games!
I have tried everything VM, dual booting and wine for example, all of which don't work as I want them. (dual boot is annoying)

If Linux can play modern day games like Counterstrike Source, Left 4 Dead, Call of Duty World at War, Call of Duty Modern Warfare, I will be using Linux straight away.

Until then, meh.

Stercus Accidit writes...

lack of SLI + dual monitor support.

Incorrect
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=607385

Basically the fact that I don't actually own my laptop (I had Ubuntu and Vista on a dual-partition and then tried to slip a performance edition of XP in there and it wrote over any other boot sector, eventually not being able to boot at all). If I could put it on again without the overhanging fear from my parents, I would.

The only thing that Linux really lacks on is the compatibility of games. I've found that the Open-Source stuff is actually better quality than any other paid-for programs (VLC, Audacity).

Tezlin writes...

I've found that the Open-Source stuff is actually better quality than any other paid-for programs (VLC, Audacity).

VLC is the best I have come accross. :)

Tezlin writes...

If I could put it on again without the overhanging fear from my parents, I would.

If your laptop was only used by you, and you never asked them for help on anything, I'm not sure if they would care what you ran on it.

Keep restore disks handy though.

(but don't run pirated versions of XP (thats what the so called performance versions are), they will only get marked as non-genuine eventually and cause you problems.)

Find me a way to set Vista to boot over Linux with GRUB, then I would reinstall Ubuntu.

i.e. When I boot my lappy up, GRUB places Ubuntu at the top so when I leave the computer, it autoboots into Ubuntu instead of Vista.

oh look – another happy user ....

/forum-replies.cfm?t=942269

Tezlin writes...

Find me a way to set Vista to boot over Linux with GRUB, then I would reinstall Ubuntu.

i.e. When I boot my lappy up, GRUB places Ubuntu at the top so when I leave the computer, it autoboots into Ubuntu instead of Vista.

https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+question/13285
That might be of help. Essentially you edit /boot/grub/menu.lst and change the default to the appropriate entry.

RussianMob writes...

Since this is a Linux forum – I'm perhaps asking the wrong group, but what (if anything) is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

I myself use Apple Macs and Slackware Linux. As for the rest of the family and friends, they are all Apple Mac users. However, what they don't know is that the router is running embedded Linux :)

just change the "default=" value in /boot/grub/menu.1st to the line in your grub menu you want to be default.

Games

klotski and gnibbles dont do it for you?

Tezlin writes...

Find me a way to set Vista to boot over Linux with GRUB, then I would reinstall Ubuntu.

If only all the other problems were as easy to fix as that :)

koshari writes...

klotski and gnibbles dont do it for you?

lol, no....... Not quite

RussianMob writes...

I don't want to start another Windows vs Linux thread, but indulge me.

We haven't seen you since you started this thread. What sort of impressions have you got so far?

kraekan writes...

It's all sunshine and lollipops in the windoze forum.

Windows users are fans of the colour blue. Didn't you hear the uproar when the early Vista betas had Red Screens Of Death? The nerve of MS to take away our favourite colour... honestly.

Tezlin writes...

Find me a way to set Vista to boot over Linux with GRUB, then I would reinstall Ubuntu.

Change the default over to Windows? Instead of default 0, change it to 3 or whatever it is.

motomartin writes...

oh look – another happy user ....

/forum-replies.cfm?t=942269

And that's another user that didn't know how to google.

Observe, the magic... but don't burn me at the steak. I assure you it's not witchcraft.

http://tinyurl.com/kvbce2

after clicking on the first link and scrolling down to the bottom of the forum page you'l find this driver

http://tw1965.myweb.hinet.net/

5.For Leadtek DTV1000 S:
Here is the v4l-dvb driver for the DTV1000 S with TDA18211HD/C1 or TDA18271HD/C1 tuner.
Here is the v4l-dvb driver for the DTV1000 S with TDA18211HD/C2 or TDA18271HD/C2 tuner.
How to know the C1 or C2 chip is using:
Open a terminal, run dmesg, and check the output of dmesg.
"TDA18271HD/C1 detected @ 0-0060" means that the TDA18211HD/C1 or TDA18271HD/C1 is using.
"TDA18271HD/C2 detected @ 0-0060" means that the TDA18211HD/C2 or TDA18271HD/C2 is using.
And here is the official LinuxTV v4l-dvb driver for DTV1000 S,
please send your test result and dmesg output to Michael Krufky.

Now I know your answer to that.. "this already sounds too hard". Well whoever told you it's going to be easy has lied to you. However, it's doable and therefore it does work on linux. :-)

Q: Non Linux Users – Whats Stopping You?

sluxor writes...

A :Well whoever told you it's going to be easy has lied to you.

mickoneill30 writes...

If somebody can tell me how to use Open Office with my existing documents I'll drop MS Office and start moving some users to linux. It's not just the cost of MS Office. Windows is a cost too. Anything that removes costs while not making it harder for the users will be looked at seriously.

Have you tried CrossOver Office? Aside from some initial font issues it has worked perfectly for me every time.

mickoneill30 writes...

I'm not arguing here. If somebody can tell me how to use Open Office with my existing documents I'll drop MS Office and start moving some users to linux.

Step 1: Install the latest version of Open Office... so 3.1 or at least 3.0. (not 2.4 via binaries on LTS version of ubuntu)

Step 2: Make it the default document handler for all of the documents you use.

Step 3: Open the files, edit, close and save.

Done. If only all the questions were this simple :-p

sluxor writes...

Incorrect

Gracias. Now I can rip you apart. People should well and truly know what they are talking about before making comments.

SLI does indeed work, but SLI with dual monitors does NOT. If you'd cared enough to read the Nvidia readme's on the subject you would indeed find that SLI + dual monitors is not supported.

If X is configured to use multiple screens and screen 0 has SLI or Multi-GPU enabled, the other screens configured to use the nvidia driver will be disabled. Note that if SLI or Multi-GPU is enabled, the GPUs used by that configuration will be unavailable for single GPU rendering.

Taken from http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/185.18.14/README/chapter-25.html

It only works in Mosaic mode, which is for the Quadro series.

Wasn't enabling that the "Big Bang" in the 180 series drivers for Windows? It would be nice if they would finally include support for it under Linux.

randomizer ± writes...

Wasn't enabling that the "Big Bang" in the 180 series drivers for Windows?

Yeah it was. Mind you, from memory, it was only enabled for Vista, and now it's enabled for Vista/Win7

I use linux for all my servers and have done for the last 6 years. Used RH6.2 – 9 at uni for servers as well.

I don't use linux on the desktop because it's just not ready for it yet. Every time I've tried it I've just found it less painful and not as good as Windows.

On the desktop, I used RH6.2 for a month when it was new. I used RH9 for a year and a half when it was new. I used Debian for a while on my spare computer. I used Ubuntu for a few months in 2007. Every time I try it, shit just breaks, or doesn't work.

From graphics card stuff to vlc mysteriously not working, to the amount of dicking around required to get new hardware working, it's just not worth it. Plus I play games. Please don't reply with lists of games that have linux versions or can work with it. It's not big enough.

As a long-time nerd, sysadmin, gamer and power user, it's just not worth the effort to use linux on the desktop for me.

It'd probably be fine for my mum who'd have no chance of fixing a problem on either OS. I comfortably recommend Ubuntu to mum&dad type people looking for a free alternative.

Stercus Accidit writes...

It only works in Mosaic mode, which is for the Quadro series.

O Rly?

Section "Device"

Driver "nv"

EndSection

Oh look it works now. Problem Solved. Plus I wonder how many people here wasted money SLI-ing two cards considering it's usually cheaper to buy just 1 card that's faster then an SLI of both cards put together.

*laugh*

You're fun.

So, sluxor ... what's MY linux experience? Can you honestly say to me that you know if I've ever used it at all? Would I have a use for your consulting?

Do I know how to google? Do I know my way around a linux command line? What use would I have for a linux desktop? Can you answer all these questions for me? Answer them, i demand it!

Cmon, come over here to QLD, have a go at getting SLI & Twinview going to my satisfaction. Being that it acts like Windows, with no switching between modes. No turning SLI on and off, No losing 2nd monitor when SLI is turned on. If you can do it, I'll shut up for evermore.

Actually nah, don't bother. I'll stick with Debian on my fileserver & Debian on my pair of colo machines. Ahhh, linux in a place where I can REALLY use it. Horses for courses. If Debian on my desktop (and don't get me started on ubuntu, while it's done wonders for the noob desktop world, I don't like it because it's TOO helpful with configuration) is not suitable due to hardware incompatibilty, I just won't use it. What a shame.

I think this thread has run its course it turning into a "Religious Debate" but I seen that 3 0r 4 pages back!....

Oldlucky writes...

I think this thread has run its course it turning into a "Religious Debate" but I seen that 3 0r 4 pages back!....

particularly when the OP hasn't shown any interested at all.

kraekan writes...

particularly when the OP hasn't shown any interested at all.

+1

Exactly , he has made 1 post and that was the first one...mmm

Thread is fine. If one doesn't like the thread then one doesn't have to read it or access it.

Such as is Linux even a 'platform'? A platform is something you can build on – something solid.

Microsoft is a platform – Apple is a platform – so is Symbian and Android (ironically Linux based) – because they are solid. Gaming consoles are a perfect platform because they *never* change over their product life.

Linux is more like a cloud – you can't really stand on it or build on it because it's constantly shifting under your feat.

In that sense Windows is a cloud too.

There are several platforms that run on top of Linux just as there are several platforms that run on top of Windows.

What ENABLES Windows to be a platform?
– .NET
– DirectX
– etc

What ENABLES Linux to be a platform?

Let's start with the Gnome platform.
We associate Gnome as a desktop but it's far more than that. It is a platform with standardized libraries for many bits of work whether it be video conferencing, multimedia (play back, encoding), a rich set of widgets to built UI's on (an extension of GTK+) etc. One of the most famous things built on the Gnome platform is the Gnome desktop we all know about.

You also have many many many bindings, whether it be C, Python, C-sharp there are bindings allowing you to interface with the gnome platform.
And it gets better with every release

– The Netbeans platform (using the power of Java and JaveEE) allowing rich, large scale GUI applications to be built. In fact it includes the latest look and feel for Vista users and GTK users. Netbeans platform has several applications built on it (see the netbeans site) including their IDE. Java (hence netbeans) will become a key platform for Linux as Java is now open source.

– As you said Android too is a platform.

So basically Linux is a platform, just like windows is. If you say otherwise that's fine, but that logic applies to Windows and MacOS as well, all three have supported technologies that enable it to be a platform.

Unethical is selling weapons to the Indonesian army to use in West Papua. Ethical ends where choice ends.

With regards to ethical behaviour of large organizations – yes selling weapons can be classed as unethical, and yes from a human rights perspective it's more important. But, according to your theory it's fine to be an Enron of the world, it's okay to be unethical in a corporate manner. It's okay to limit computing to developing countries through an operating system that limits the number of applications you can run AFTER you allow older versions to be pirated. It's okay to stifle development of competing technologies (again were would we be if Firefox hadn't come to the scene? probably somewhere in 2004). It's okay because we're not killing people. I disagree.

Whilst we are free to not use windows they make it dam hard (and not by offering a better technology either)

If there's one thing that Linux has done it's proliferated computing to the developing masses – both directly and indirectly, and now we're seeing companies (MS in particular) trying to get a share of the pie (that's cool) in dodgy ways as explained above (not cool). At least Apple isn't (yet) trying to screw people over in the developing world – maybe in sweat shops but not in terms of delivering a computing 'platform'.

My point? Don't dismiss the or under appreciate the power of Linux -even if you use it.

See you tomorrow :-)

shit, that was an epic reply.

I think this thread is fine, its not like flaming people at a personal level

sluxor writes...

Step 1: Install the latest version of Open Office... so 3.1 or at least 3.0. (not 2.4 via binaries on LTS version of ubuntu)

Step 2: Make it the default document handler for all of the documents you use.

Step 3: Open the files, edit, close and save.

Done. If only all the questions were this simple :-p

Don't forget to install the msttcorefonts, solved 99% of my document incompatibility issues of opening .doc in OpenOffice.

sluxor writes...

Windows is the most inferior operating system out of the mainstream OS market

Oh by the way, that whole statement really throws the fanboyism out there. In one sentence, you've managed to insult anyone who uses Windows.

Question. Why? Why is it the most inferior? Valid reasons please.

If your SLI dual-monitor doesn't work in nv mode (not nvidia)

Perhaps it'd work. But I don't have the time. Developers do. If I had the time to rip down my system, throw a deb install on, fire it up, yeah maybe. Bit hard when I work 6 days a week (when it's not raining, like it is now).

Edit. and after doing some reading on it, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. Hell, their main aim is to just get glxgears running. There's no real mention of activating SLI in the docos that I can see, only a request for SLI dumps to be done.

Stercus Accidit writes...

Oh by the way, that whole statement really throws the fanboyism out there.

Oh it does? I believe I made it clear in my previous posts that *BSD, Solaris, Minix and other non-Linux operating systems can perform better. What am I fanboy of then?

Question. Why? Why is it the most inferior? Valid reasons please.

I'l name just some of the few, but any perspective you look at it from an experienced user will show it:

-It has a poor implementation of a multi-user environment... starting with that a well restricted user can actually do enough damage to the system to affect other users without a great deal of hacking. This is definately not the case with a restricted linux or *BSD user account that isn't even part of the wheel group without some serious hacking. This is why even if Linux was more popular, the amount of damage performed by viruses would be significantly smaller.

-It's deliberately made to be inefficient in the use of resources to artificially push for unnecessary hardware upgrades.

-It has a lot less flexibility in the set of packages you want installed. The functional Server edition install is just a desktop edition with server applications. What if I don't want a GUI? What if I don't want to install Internet Explorer, or explorer for that matter? I can choose what file manager and browser I want installed on linux or and whether I have one to begin with.

-Windows can't be installed over the Internet, unless you use a very inefficient VPN setup, and that won't work on a single dedicated server in the US. I can reformat and repartition a single Linux machine remotely using itself by loading a live system into ram (yes the entire hard drive) given root access off coarse.

If I used a dedicated Windows server, i would have to pay some douche over there at the data center to repartition, reformat and install the OS for me.

-Windows is closed source so you can't recompile the kernel to make it more secure, to patch the exploits yourself. You have to rely on Microsoft to do their job.

List goes on...

sluxor writes...

-It's deliberately made to be inefficient in the use of resources to artificially push for unnecessary hardware upgrades.

can you please link to a relevant article to prove/validate that? (i would find it very interesting)

and why would they do that? Microsoft wont get any more money from making people upgrade their hardware, they would get less money from smaller number of users that will but their software.

zac

1) Their multi user setups are getting better. Still yes, a long way to go. Given.

2) Balderdash :)

3) It's windows. It's point and click. It will always be point and click. No point griping that it has a GUI.

4) KVM over IP anyone?

5) Yes, it's a commercial product. It's closed source. Get over it.

You don't have enough control. I get that. It's inferior in a administration sense, yeah, okay. But it's superior in ONE thing. Usability. and That's what counts on the desktop. It's out there, it's been out there a very long time. It has a large portion of the market, both in gaming and office usage. Like it or not, people will be resistant to change because of that usability factor. (Especially where drivers are concerned for more obscure hardware. Webcams are a great example).

I wouldn't class myself as an experienced user. My usage these days consists of torrenting, web design, a tad of hosting for people, some mild PHP work, and games. Windows is superior because I don't have to screw with my system for hours so I can play Red Alert 3 at 1920x1080 with full detail, while still retaining my multi monitor setup. It's quick, it's there, and it works.

sluxor writes...

-It's deliberately made to be inefficient in the use of resources to artificially push for unnecessary hardware upgrades.

This may not be inherently bad. If the most widely used OS was as lightweight as Puppy Linux there would be little reason for hardware manufacturers to push for significantly faster hardware, besides keeping up with Moore's law. Of course if hardware performance continued to increase at its current rate we would be at an advantage with a lightweight OS.

What annoys me is when people say "oh but RAM is so cheap now" or "I have 2TB of HDD space so who cares about how big the OS is?". I don't buy a HDD to have 10% taken up by the OS because the OS is not my personal data. This attitude will permit Microsoft to make the world's first 1TB OS.

randomizer ± writes...

This attitude will permit Microsoft to make the world's first 1TB OS.

Lol! I can just imagine it...

Windows Maximus – Released Sept 25, 2012!

Stercus Accidit writes...

Now I can rip you apart.
SLI + dual monitors is not supported.

'ripping somebody apart' for your own apparent inability to use the english language unambiguously seems a little harsh dont you think?

Dont even get me started on the purely subjective 'usability' stuff. It is only more 'usable' to you because you have invested MANY hours into training yourself that way.
(another multi-OS user btw – my primary machines run DNS9, there is nothing like it for lin afaik, and it is latency critical. I use lin on my HTPC, server and visitor machines (they just click and go – dont need to be shown anything – so much for the usability argument) and have done remote and local admin on servers for many years)

I've given out more aura in this thread than any other so far (only started using aura a week ago, but still!). And not just to people/posts that are 'on my side' either – thanks to those providing interesting, and in some places very intelligent and insightful reading! :)

Edit: My own reasons for preparing to move, to ubuntu or something similar (not really sure yet as I'm not so much moving TO something as AWAY from Microsoft) are probably not very unique, but may provide some interesting reading for some of you (Linnuts and Winnuts alike). Two main reasons, the first is simply that XP will naturally stagnate then rapidly deteriorate in the next few years, and I wanted to 'switch' before having to deal with that, and Vista/7/WindozeNextyear are not attractive options to me for ethical and other reasons, I don't want to support the company responsible for things like this:

Peter Gutmann vista_cost

First result is a VERY in-depth but equally interesting (and disturbing) exposè/evaluation of Vista's handling of new media, and Microsoft's obvious priorities of taking more and more control away from its users as the years tick by.

(linking to a google search instead of the article since I'm on an iPhone 3G and haven't upgraded yet lol)

Hope some people find it interesting, I know I did! (took several cups of coffee and LOTS of bikkies :p)

RussianMob writes...

but what is stopping your friends / family / workplace from converting?

I use Vista myself, simply because i know it works. No stuffing around with drivers, software etc.. Ive used Ubuntu before, and (no offense to linux users) hate it. Love Windows. Just know it better than linux and how things work.

Mac is another story.

kelwynsa8 writes...

I use Vista myself... Love Windows

Ugh! Vista! Ugh! :P

So slow to start up, so slow to shut down, so big fat and useless... well for me at least. Ubuntu works out of the box for me. I couldn't be happier. Vista is the worst thing I have ever used in my life!

Now Windows 7... that's a different story. It looks like it might be an improvement. But I still love Ubuntu – it's just more simple.

Still no apps. Particularly in the field I am in, drafting. Slap me down if I am wrong. Last I checked, still hardware issues, ie drivers. Plus there are many open source apps available for windows.

Whilst I would love to move my home network to a complete linux system it just isnt going to happen
My printer/scanner isnt recognised by linux, so far theres no driver for it, the best I can do is install a different model driver and greyscale print, no scanning which is pretty annoying
Trying to backup my system to tape so far hasnt worked (ok I am a linux noob), installed various software only to find out most of it is cli without gui, but the hard part now is knowing what software I have installed without being able to see any shortcuts, at least with windoze I can do a backup to tape without using extra software
Webcam also doesnt work yet, with windoze I just install the drivers and it works with all the messaging software, unfortunately with linux this is going to take a weekend of searching various forums with no guarantee of success
Kids use msn, yes I have installed amsn for them but so far they dont like it, trying to get them to use it anyway
Photo editing software, yes I can use gimp and have used it on windoze in the past, but I have someone that uses adobe photoshop (is that the name?), there is no way they will use gimp, so linux is out for them
Assistance for linux is mixed, sometimes you search and get a complete answer while sometimes you search and you get an answer that is useless for anyone except experts, eg. "you need to edit your fstab", when the real answer should be, "you need to edit /etc/fstab (forgive me if the path is wrong here), and add the line xxxxxxxxx at the end"
This sort of help isnt really helpful for a noob or first time user, yes windows has a lot of faults, probably a lot more than all linux distros put together but at least most people are comfortable with it and can soon learn enough to do minor administration tasks and changes, yes linux can be easy to use but theres a few areas that it just falls down for the new user

MatthewQ writes...

Peter Gutmann vista_cost

First result is a VERY in-depth but equally interesting (and disturbing) exposè/evaluation of Vista's handling of new media, and Microsoft's obvious priorities of taking more and more control away from its users as the years tick by.

The effect of DRM on the operating system is minimal, and only plays out when playing protected content. Of course, if you had used vista on a system with sufficient RAM, you would see that. (instead of just reading long winded rants)

The DRM included in vista is only what is required by the content producers.

What Linux are you running?

Greg writes...

My printer/scanner
Make and model, might be able to help?

Trying to backup my system to tape so far hasnt worked
Sure, what tape device are you using and what are you trying to backup?

Webcam also doesnt work yet,
Hmmm not much experience with webcams but again make and model will have a quick look for you.

Photo editing software, yes I can use gimp and have used it on windoze in the past, but I have someone that uses adobe photoshop
I use Picassa and Gimp, but those addicted to Photoshop might want to try Codeweavers Crossoffice they apparently support Photoshop installation on Linux, and are a major contributor to the WINE project.
http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/name/?letter=p;

This sort of help isnt really helpful for a noob or first time user
Gauging someone's knowledge level from an email post is hard, what is harder is when the same person refers back to their Windows experience, Linux and Windows are different and you will require to learn new things. You seem to have the right attitude, im sure you will get lots of help.

The trick to good support is to find the right community, most Linux Distro's have forums specifically to help people new to that Distro, and there is a wealth of How To's and guides all over the Internet.

Hopefully I can help you with some of your issues or point in the right direction.

Nathan! writes...

I couldn't be happier. Vista is the worst thing I have ever used in my life!

I use Vista, yes I like to play games that don't run stable on WINE... :(

After SP1 I would have to say that Vista's bad rep is hype, it is as good if not better than XP IMHO.

But I still use Ubuntu for every other task for philosophical reasons and true freedom of choice.

so...a round up.

linux isn't for everyone.

no-one said it was going to be easy

fanboi's

heads in sand

poor attitudes

geek-ism

its a platform that needs building on – ie don't expect it to work 'out of the box'

drivers

incompatibility

anyone see a trend?
need i go on ?

I'm not really sure how using Windows is not freedom of choice... if you choose to use Windows.

randomizer ± writes...

I'm not really sure how using Windows is not freedom of choice... if you choose to use Windows.
While your on Windows choose to roll back to an earlier kernel, or compile the kernel with different settings, or use a different file system, or install your OEM version of Windows which came with your computer on a different computer because your computer died (its illegal under EULA).

Or, choose to recode/fix anything, build your own version of Windows with the software you want and redistribute to others for profit or fun (also illegal with Windows).

Yes you are Free to choose to use Windows, but are you truly free to use it how you choose to?

Stercus Accidit writes...

But it's superior in ONE thing. Usability. and That's what counts on the desktop. It's out there, it's been out there a very long time.

Which by your definition means being as windows-like as possible. In order for something to be better it must be different. It is impossible for something to be better whilst remaining exactly the same.

Usability, User-friendly etc. are made up words. It's a fancy term for "familiar" and it's familiar because it's taught. If Linux was taught in some forsaken paralell universe, then it would be familiar and the whole concept of clicking a mouse might be foreign then. :-)

We've already established that Linux can't be used by just anyone, unless specially catered as a netbook for the basics, and in embeded devices where the user doesn't directly interact with CLI. It's not a real measure of quality. That's why geeks are geeks, and we aren't bothered by reading man pages and using --help. We love the somewhat fail-proof structure of a well designed operating system.

Nathan! writes...

Lol! I can just imagine it...

Windows Maximus – Released Sept 25, 2012!

hehe minimum specs;
Oct-core processor running at min 8ghz
32GB ram
1GB video card
Gigbit network card

There'd be some fanboy on slashdot who'd say "Well Windows 7 runs sooo much quicker on the same hardware, why would I upgrade to Windows Maximus?"

Not to forget the chances of someone on this forums saying "Oh just install puppylinux, only needs 500mb hard drive space, boots in 0.3 seconds, it'll leave the rest of the 1TB drive for your pr0n torrents and mp3s :P" (sorry puppylinux fans, I had to make comment – I do love you all.....really :P)

Linux skeers me. :(

zaac writes...

can you please link to a relevant article to prove/validate that? (i would find it very interesting)

No but I can show you some results when using the exact same version of opengl on linux and windows, asuming both have fully up to date Operating Systems and Drivers. On Linux (with KDE4.2 in this case), sauerbraten gets more then double the FPS, on same machine, with everything up to date including the OS... just different operating systems. Just to be fair I ran them all in 32bit. Which is very suprising because sauerbraten wasn't even ported to linux properly while it was in cube1 stage.

*Warning: This may not apply when using wine to emulate windows in order to play games. :-P

Rugger, if you had read the article you would have appreciated that the problems detailed therein affect not only the operating system (what's one more bit of bloat anyway), but also will affect hardware cost and quality, including range of choices for OSS users, as well as representing a pathological contempt for the rights of their customers to use their systems to their full capacity, let alone treating their customers as criminals, and continuing the trend of DRM in making piracy the only avenue for high quality, portable, fair use of media content.

And no, it does NOT apply only when accessing premium protected content – outputs and functionality are deliberately crippled and/or disabled when playing things like home movies recorded at high def.

Please in future read the article before responding – I know it's very long, but a quick look over the contents list would have indicated this is not just about a slight drop in performance of Vista machines. I use XP and a few different distros at the moment (finding one to settle on), and this problem – which is an ethical and systemic one, rather than a technical one as you alluded – will affect me negatively as well.

I provide the link again for the convenience of those only reading this page of this thread:

Peter Gutmann vista_cost – an exposé on why Microsoft's willingness to pander to MAFIA (Music And Film Industry Associations) hurts us all.

EDIT: This is in response to Gumby No Talent. You people post too fast!

I see your point, but if you knowingly choose to be bound by these restrictions then it isn't that big of a deal, at least for most people. I'm sure you know that the number of people interested in recompiling their kernel is relatively low. ;)

Restrictions are bad to some people, but many don't even know they are restricted, or don't care. I'm probably from the latter group, because I either don't have time or don't have the motivation to change things. Heck I still use one of the stock Vista desktop backgrounds. I prefer to use my applications rather than tinker with my OS. In fact I'd rather the OS operated so transparently and independently that I forgot it was running. UAC prompts and prompting for root passwords whenever I do anything make me have to interact with the OS too much (yes, I'm off with the fairies if I expect my PC to be secure without some form of authentication but this is just an ideal).

The most annoying thing about Windows (and maybe Linux but I've not used it for long enough to tell) is it is completely and utterly incapable of performing basic self-maintenance without me intervening. Why is it after 9 months of use, 2 service packs and countless updates that my C:\Windows directory is now 27GB (no joke), when my ENTIRE installation started off at 15GB? Can't Windows trim itself as time goes by, removing redundant files? Clearly not.

Greg writes...

My printer/scanner isnt recognised by linux, so far theres no driver for it, the best I can do is install a different model driver and greyscale print, no scanning which is pretty annoying

Again, You have no idea how many people say something isn't recognized by linux but they didn't bother to compile the latest version of cups, hplip, xsane.. list goes on.

Stercus Accidit writes...

Especially where drivers are concerned for more obscure hardware. Webcams are a great example

For more obscure hardware? O Rly? I have a swann webcam which is no longer supported on windows, it works just fine using latest v4l on linux.. but oh you have to actually install or compile v4l*, or search for it in your package manager. It doesn't magically install itself, just like it doesn't magically install itself on windows when it is supported.

Stercus Accidit writes...

Windows is superior because I don't have to screw with my system for hours so I can play Red Alert 3 at 1920x1080 with full detail, while still retaining my multi monitor setup. It's quick, it's there, and it works.

It works better for you because you don't know how to properly use linux and set it up for your needs. It doesn't make windows superior.

Stercus Accidit writes...

4) KVM over IP anyone?

Having a KVM over IP switch is not the same. It's having another device connected to the dedicated server which costs as much as an additional dedicated server... so in other words you cannot repartition/reformat a single/standalone dedicated server in a remote location without an approach from data center staff or through another device or another machine on the network.

Who knows maybe Microsoft will release their own version of SSH in 2012. They'l probably call it the Microsoft Shell Server.... And you'll get n00b admins going to experts like: did you *nix people hear that Microsoft has a new command-line remote access server? Do you linux people have msh? Can you install linux in server-core mode?.. just like the previous outbursts "What software do you use on linux for mounting an ISO as another CD drom drive" -*shrugs* mount (you don't need any, you just mount it)

*facepalm*

randomizer ± writes...

I see your point, but if you knowingly choose to be bound by these restrictions then it isn't that big of a deal, at least for most people. I'm sure you know that the number of people interested in recompiling their kernel is relatively low. ;)
Yes... but the number of developers willing to automate the process so you can have a streamline web server or mail server or <insert anything> rather than a I want to be everything kernel would.

Restrictions are bad to some people, but many don't even know they are restricted, or don't care.
So Freedom should be replaced with Restricted in your statement, you are Restricted to choose Windows, and before you flame back that is what FOSS Freedom is really about.

I prefer to use my applications rather than tinker with my OS. In fact I'd rather the OS operated so transparently and independently that I forgot it was running.
Freedom/FOSS isn't restricted to OS level applications but all Software, it also applies to Standards which you use to achieve your desired task. Again Windows/Proprietary Software is restrictive, not all proprietary software is restrictive and comply and even develop openly accepted standards (PDF is a good example), but protectionism for profit harms interoperability.

NB Copyright is still copyright and protected fiercely by the Open Source Movement and respected, Proprietary Software has a right to Copyright their works, but need to open up and abide by agreed standards as set by the IEEE (yes OpenXML is MS but it is a broken specification with dubious conduct leading to its acceptance but that's another thread) so that all can use. Software Patents... lets not go there, they are bad OK...

The most annoying thing about Windows (and maybe Linux but I've not used it for long enough to tell) is it is completely and utterly incapable of performing basic self-maintenance without me intervening.
Have to disagree with you (surprised?), If you installed Windows and only used Microsoft Products, and partner approved hardware, Windows Update would keep your system 100% up to date with patches and the like. If you install Ubuntu and only use software from the Ubuntu supplied repos then update manager will keep your system up to date also with little interaction. You choose to use software that isn't covered by these restrictions and you choose to maintain them, obviously here Linux land wins hands down because the availability of software choice is staggering compared to those supported by Windows Update.

Self-maintenance... what manual tasks do you need to do in Windows to maintain the system?

Linux, for desktop Linux there is nothing to maintain except your own document storage space, the rest is automated.

Gumby No Talent writes...

Self-maintenance... what manual tasks do you need to do in Windows to maintain the system?

Reformat to reclaim my hard drive space and resurrect the OS from sluggish performance. The universal fix to all Windows time-related performance problems. Haha.

Well I hope we can end this religious debate.

Summary:
Windows is inferior to Linux in every way, but linux has "1337 skills" as a prerequisite right next to those 16MB of ram for a base install and a Pentium 1. :-)

As far as those who think that Windows has better hardware support, have a look at this. Linux actually supports more hardware because almost none of the previously supported hardware gets left out.

sluxor writes...

Usability, User-friendly etc. are made up words. It's a fancy term for "familiar" and it's familiar because it's taught.

I disagree – it's also a measure of obviousness of purpose. When something is intuitive, where things make sense, where you expect they should be. The iPhone is a great example of this.

sluxor writes...

Again, You have no idea how many people say something isn't recognized by linux but they didn't bother to compile the latest version of cups, hplip, xsane.. list goes on.

Thats where linux falls down though, as a noob I wouldnt have a clue how to compile anything, with windoze I just put the driver cd in and its installed, you cant tell the average home user to recompile something it just isnt going to happen

You previously posted requesting what hw I have for assistance, thank you but at the moment I am able to use it via windoze, perhaps I might revisit installing on linux when I have more time

loss4words writes...

The iPhone is a great example of this.
Nope... iPhone is a great opinion, I think iPhone and iPod are horrible interfaces.

iPhone version 1 or 2, forward a txt message, oh minor oversight!

loss4words writes...

I disagree – it's also a measure of obviousness of purpose. When something is intuitive, where things make sense, where you expect they should be. The iPhone is a great example of this.

I agree. The way the Gnome menu's have evolved in recent years seems really good to me. If you think about what you do on a computer it makes sense, at least to me. You start applications, interact with files or the system.

The panel layout makes sense to me to. Menus top left, utilities right, switch applications and desktops bottom.

I can use the spatial mode file browsing but I don't like it. Having all those windows open doesn't feel right to me but hey it's a simple tweak to change it. I personally like to type in the location bar myself cause I usually know the path I want.

sluxor writes...

It works better for you because you don't know how to properly use linux

How many people do know how to use Linux properly? The thread asked why people dont use Linux, people give their answers, and all the responses are basically "you're an idiot" – THIS is why no one uses it. There is an expectation amongst Linux users that users will WANT to use Linux so badly that they are willing to do anything. Thats not true. If a single thing doesnt work, like wireless or video, people will just go back to Windows. WHY? Cause no one can be bothered googling for 3 days to sort out a non-issue on windows.

After reading this thread i actually tried the liveCD of ubuntu 8.04 yesterday (yes, the advertising worked) – it all work well, wireless got picked up and worked wonders. So i thought i better install the newest version, 9.04, and the wireless doesn't work. I tried updating it to the newest version, but i accidentally left the Ethernet unplugged. Instead of saying so it gave a pop-up box with a big fat "!" in it, but no text – wtf is that supposed to mean? Anyhow, i plugged the Ethernet in and it still wont let me update, gives some random error message about 'not enough space on/'. wtf? It said to type some command into the terminal, so i do that and it says "command not recognised" or something along those lines. All for the sake of getting friggin wireless working. I appreciate that Linux is a better system when it works, and some things are easier – but i'd prefer to have to visit the intel site and spend 2 minutes to get wireless working rather then screwing around for hours.

A couple of months ago i had 8.04 installed (before i formatted to get Win7, which btw, only needed one oh-so-difficult driver) and i could never ever get it to work with my 24" monitor. I also tried to install conky yesterday, but all the instructions assume prior knowledge, and i cant understand a thing. I can build a PC from parts, but as far as installing programs on Linux i am still stumped as to why its so hard.

Oh, they'll suggest using some other Distro – how many damn distros should i try? This is from the people saying that installing drivers for windows is such a pain, and how Linux is far superior in this areas – but they want me to experiment with different distros to get something as simple as wireless to work?

I *want* to use Linux – but Linux doesnt want me to use it. You can go ahead and pick my post to pieces and prove why i am an idiot, and how i just dont understand, and then quote "linux isnt windows" – but if someone like me, who can do almost anything on windows cant even get wireless, or an external screen working then who in the general public can?

I WANT linux to work. I WANT to use linux. But it simply isnt.

Why do people try and compare? Isn't it apples and oranges? I'm very keen on linux, but I still use windows. When I'm on my desktop, I usually run linux as I enjoy tinkering round with how it works. If I want games I load up windows (admittedly I'm only logging in for gmod and css now). Back to the point, I don't think it's fair to try and compare the different Operating systems. Windows users need to accept the fact that we are going to have to learn new skills and if you think that all linux users are going to flame you for being a noob, you need to stop being ignorant, all the linux forums I've signed up to have been great, assuming you use common sense and post your question/problems in the correct area.

[edit] Aside from my current laptop problem, the only driver/hardware issues I've ever had using 'out of the box' versions of Ubuntu/mint was my usb headset not working. 5 mins on the Mint forums had it solved (had to stream the media to the headset)

gopher.18 writes...

Windows users need to accept the fact that we are going to have to learn new skills

You just answered why no one uses Linux.

moore2 writes...

You just answered why no one uses Linux.

I know, I just don't understand why people don't want to learn new skills though. To me, being able to say I can use Windows and Linux is much better than simply saying I can use Windows. Especially in the IT field. What harm is more knowledge?

Gumby No Talent writes...

iPhone version 1 or 2, forward a txt message, oh minor oversight!

That's a lack of functionality, not a problem of UI.

You could figure out how to get to the text messages couldn't you? Find the settings of your wireless? Configure your email, browse the web, play music, all in under 5 minutes of turning it on? Yes, you could, you didn't need someone to show you how to use it. That's good UI.

gopher.18 writes...

I know, I just don't understand why people don't want to learn new skills though. To me, being able to say I can use Windows and Linux is much better than simply saying I can use Windows. Especially in the IT field. What harm is more knowledge?

Effort vs reward. For you and I, that's a learning experience with value. For my mum, that's a delay between getting something and being able to use it.

gopher.18 writes...

I know, I just don't understand why people don't want to learn new skills though.

I am trying to. The average computer user has no idea. See this thread for why /forum-replies.cfm?t=1219314

loss4words writes...

When something is intuitive, where things make sense, where you expect they should be.

O Rly? Can you tell me why I need to start something in order to shutdown? That makes no sense to most people who've never used a computer before. It's the first thing they say "I want to learn how to turn it off, why should I click Start first? I'm not starting I'm stoping."

So to me, user-friendly is a made up word. Everything comes with some sort of instruction manual. Windows has Help. Everything is well documented in the linux and open source community, if you bothered to read the documentation you would know. There is also this magical thing called google.

moore2 writes...

I am trying to. The average computer user has no idea. See this thread for why /forum-replies.cfm?t=1219314

True, I guess my problem really lies with the fact that on a forum for people interested in computing/IT, we still get 'religious battles' between OS's. One would like to think we would be above flaming but I guess not

sluxor writes...

O Rly? Can you tell me why I need to start something in order to shutdown? That makes no sense to most people who've never used a computer before. It's the first thing they say "I want to learn how to turn it off, why should I click Start first? I'm not starting I'm stoping."

Oh please, even if you have to ask someone to show it to you, it takes 5 seconds to learn where the shutdown button is on a windows PC. Then nobody gives a damn about it, until some linux user ironicly brings it up as a supposedly "major" interface problem.

Maybe the shutdown command is not instantly intuative, but its easy to learn. Alternatively the user can simply press the power button on the front of the computer, and windows will shut down cleanly. (its how I turn my laptop off when i'm done) Linux took a long time to catch up on that simple little item.

So to me, user-friendly is a made up word. Everything comes with some sort of instruction manual. Windows has Help. Everything is well documented in the linux and open source community, if you bothered to read the documentation you would know. There is also this magical thing called google.

90% of the documentation for linux is tailored to experienced linux users. Its complete rubbish for anyone who hasn't got some insight into the system. Its even worse for those who don't want to go digging around the command prompt.

Quick question: How do you set up a software raid array under linux graphically under ubuntu? (without going into mdadm on the command line) Is it even possible on any distribution?

rugger writes...

Is it even possible on any distribution?

Fedora, with Palimpsest.

Gah, I promised myself I wouldn't touch this thread...

gopher.18 writes...

One would like to think we would be above flaming but I guess not

I think arguing is fine as long as there is evidence provided. If no one discussed stuff then nothing would ever get done. I reckon there is such a thing as constructive arguments.

rugger writes...

90% of the documentation for linux is tailored to experienced linux users. Its complete rubbish for anyone who hasn't got some insight into the system

This is exactly what i found.

(Sorry if my comments could be taken as wanting to bag Linux, i dont want to, i just wanna answer the thread – if you disagree with me thats fine, but i'm precisely the person that is likely to try Linux)

loss4words writes...

You could figure out how to get to the text messages couldn't you? Find the settings of your wireless? Configure your email, browse the web, play music, all in under 5 minutes of turning it on? Yes, you could, you didn't need someone to show you how to use it. That's good UI.

Thats mostly because of a tech savvy user and not just because of UI design. How many people do you think ring Bigpond customer support to help setup their ADSL when the starter pack comes with a big colour sheet and every component labeled and coloured in a step-by-step set of instructions? Or Dell with a similar big colour sheet showing a user step-by-step on how to plug their computer together? In terms of usability a monkey should be able to work it out, but in reality people do have issues with technology. So just because someone can do something without help doesn't mean it is because of a good UI.

Not quite to do with a UI, but in terms of general OS usability one big issue I have with Windows is location of any log file. Yes there is Event Viewer but that doesn't say much (and doesn't include Windows Update). These text files are all scattered through C:\Windows and C:\Windows\System and surrounded by other files...real pain to find. Linux..../var/log everything a growing man needs in one spot. Same with config files..../etc...simple.

Foonly writes...

Fedora, with Palimpsest.

Gah, I promised myself I wouldn't touch this thread...

haha, it's like a slow motion train wreck you don't want to look but you can't look away. I hope linux people don't go trolling around the windoze forum as much.

moore2 writes...

The thread asked why people dont use Linux, people give their answers, and all the responses are basically "you're an idiot"

I never called you an idiot. I simply said that you needed to learn a new operating system and you chose not to. How does that make you an idiot? For instance: I'm 24 and I'm learning how to drive this year because I've never had the need to drive before. I've lived centrally on my own and every place i went to was walking distance or a pleasant train ride from me. I'm sure you're an experienced driver by now. Many Windows users out there won't need to change to something better. Simply because they are happy with what they got.

Instead of saying so it gave a pop-up box with a big fat "!" in it, but no text – wtf is that supposed to mean?

It's an exclamation mark.. amusing. I use /etc/init.d/networking so I have to say I get clear error messages when something doesn't work :). That's just like saying "what the hell is a validation error?" on windows when it doesn't let you open internet explorer to view web pages. Unfortunately windows doesn't have the "let's view actual error message" feature... instead this creates future training material for windows admins. We only have Microsoft to thank for this many IT jobs. Without them, a lot of current systems would need 10 times less maintenance.

'not enough space on/'

Same as not enough space on C: Drive... due to some permission issues, your network manager couldn't write to the directory which means your LVM setup didn't work or the user account you're using can't elevate the priviledges enough. There are many ways to fix that.

I WANT to use linux.

Then use Linux, your complaints were about gnome and network manager which is part of gnome. These happily work on non-linux operating systems. It provides pain-free networking for those who are lucky, for me it was just pain, so i use a root terminal instead.

ifconfig eth0 dhcp start
or
ifconfig eth0 10.1.1.2 netmask 255.0.0.0
route add default gw 10.1.1.1

then edit /etc/resolv.conf to say:
nameserver 10.1.1.1

A simple beginners book on linux would tell you all this under "how to network in linux", but you didn't read a book. You also need to know a little about networking. You loaded it expecting it to behave like windows, and refer to my previous statement that says it cannot be better whilst remaining exactly the same. There are too many things that can break and having proper CLI access means you're more likely able to fix it because you have more control.

how many damn distros should i try?

Maybe you shouldn't take advice from people who expect everything to work out of the box, or who had everything luckily working out of the box for them and didn't spend time learning... Unless you're about to buy exactly the same hardware.

I notice that the 'Linux users – Why Do You?' thread has less than 1/10th of the posts than the 'Non Linux Users – Whats Stopping You?' thread.

loss4words writes...

I notice that the 'Linux users – Why Do You?' thread has less than 1/10th of the posts than the 'Non Linux Users – Whats Stopping You?' thread.

It's mainly a help forum and I for one don't feel like I have to justify my choice of operating system. I would only use windows if I had to for some reason. I installed win 7 but never really log into it. I don't need to I guess.

sluxor writes...

I never called you an idiot.

Sorry, didnt meant to imply you specifically.

"what the hell is a validation error?"

Lol. I have no idea. But i dont get them.

I agree with everything you say. I am lazy. But so is everyone, which, coming back to the original topic, is why everyone uses windows, and also why people buy pre-built systems (but i dont, so i guess i am not as lazy as others)

I'd love to not be lazy.

I'll try ubuntu later thisafternoon, see if i can make any progress.

rugger writes...

Linux took a long time to catch up on that simple little item.

I'd like to hear Torvalds say how Linux is trying to be like Windows in any way.

I just love it how newborn so called IT geeks source their info from journalists and then claim how Linux is Copying windows. The X-window system existed long before Windows and Linux were invented. I'm sorry... I think Compiz should officially apologize for copying that multiple desktops thing 5 years before microsoft released it.

Just because certain distributions of linux are trying to cater for ex-windows users and are losing their credibility in impersonating windows does not mean that this is some kind of space race between Gates and Torvalds. Hell there are many other fully functional operating systems out there.

I assure you that if this was a race, Linux would be far ahead.

Do you really think every operating system aims to be user-friendly? What do you have to say to openbsd developers.. or developer lol. Does Solaris aim to be user friendly, hell no, it's there to serve it's purpose as a server operating system and if you don't want to learn how to use it, tough luck. You have little use for a ZFS store.

sluxor writes...

I'd like to hear Torvalds say how Linux is trying to be like Windows in any way.

How is intercepting the ACPI signal for "someone pressing the power switch" and then acting in a reasonable way (close programs and turn computer off) trying to copy windows. Its so obvious what should happen when you press the power button, I wouldn't exactly call it copying windows.

I just love it how newborn so called IT geeks source their info from journalists and then claim how Linux is Copying windows.

I never claimed it was. I was acting from the aspect of the thread title and op, which is to identify why people are sticking to windows after all this time.

The X-window system existed long before Windows and Linux were invented.

Yep, unfortunately, linux users get to be tortured by that huge beast called X-windows on a continual basis. Its a huge, old design that at least rivals, or even overshadows, the huge, old, crufty design of the Microsfot windows GUI.

moore2 writes...

This is exactly what i found.

(Sorry if my comments could be taken as wanting to bag Linux, i dont want to, i just wanna answer the thread – if you disagree with me thats fine, but i'm precisely the person that is likely to try Linux)

So documentation that is aimed at experienced users assumes a level of knowledge, all documentation makes that assumption. Alot of documentation is simple follow the bouncing ball even at the command line, perhaps it is uncertainty/fear of the command line that is the issue, a valid point that is slowly being addressed.

loss4words writes...

You could figure out how to get to the text messages couldn't you? Find the settings of your wireless? Configure your email, browse the web, play music, all in under 5 minutes of turning it on? Yes, you could, you didn't need someone to show you how to use it. That's good UI.

my mother (64) doesn't find the iPhone or iPod of my nephew and niece very intuitive.

The act of using a GUI would imply previous knowledge of similar interactions in order to associate interaction with activity.

Forwarding a SMS on the iPhone was a very popular question when the iPhone first came out, so the interaction couldn't have been that intuitive. <-- I worked with iPhone developers when it first cam out, even they expressed a dislike to how it was done, me personally never owned one, and never owned an iPod because of the interface.

My post was pointing out that not everyone feels that the iPhone is the pinnacle of good UI design, and that anything that requires human interaction is open to interpretation by the individual.

Gumby No Talent writes...

So documentation that is aimed at experienced users assumes a level of knowledge

This comes back to the title of the thread. There is no documentation for noobs that addresses anything more then basic installation.

Try and find me an article on how to install conky on ubuntu 9.04 assuming no prior knowledge. Most of the ones i came across only skip across the basics.

Here is one i tried to use http://www.junauza.com/2009/06/conky-installset-up-and-auto-start-fix.html.

It says "install conky via...the terminal with this cmd" – ok, i knew this one – but for someone who hasnt used it before – where on earth is the terminal? This may be very very basic – but if you havent used it before it is still a challenge. It goes on "create a simple bash script" – say what? How? Yes, i am hopeless – but i'm crap loads better at this then most computer users.

I dunno what the answer is – make it stupidly simple? No, that would never work. Really good documentation? Yes, but it'd take forever to write.

In short – where do you start to learn? Seriously – how do i learn? Tell me

moore2 writes...

It says "install conky via...the terminal with this cmd" – ok, i knew this one – but for someone who hasnt used it before – where on earth is the terminal? This may be very very basic – but if you havent used it before it is still a challenge. It goes on "create a simple bash script" – say what? How? Yes, i am hopeless – but i'm crap loads better at this then most computer users.

crap howto's(your not really talking about documentation) for conky stop you from using linux how?

You are quoting significantly more words than you have written.
Consider whether you need to quote at all — unless you are quoting to respond to a specific statement, it's usually easier to just mention who you're responding to.
Otherwise, trim the quoted passages down as much as you can.

moore2 writes...

You just answered why no one uses Linux.

I remember hearing a long long time ago that the worst thing you could do the average consumer (at least PC wise) was to make them think. I think this correlates (actually i rememeber it vaguely being in the form of the no1 rule of software dev being 'dont make me think')

rugger writes...

linux users get to be tortured by that huge beast called X-windows on a continual basis.

i think you mistake what X is. X is a protocol, there are any number of implementations of it. it IS old, and some implementations very unweildy, but it is NOTHING like MS windows, and has a different design purpose.

moore2 writes...

Try and find me an article on how to install conky on ubuntu 9.04 assuming no prior knowledge.

http://www.clububuntu.com/2009/03/installing-conky-in-ubuntu-light-weight.html
only thing that appears to be assumed (apart from the system is running) is that you know how to copy text

mycosys writes...

http://www.clububuntu.com/2009/03/installing-conky-in-ubuntu-light-weight.html
only thing that appears to be assumed (apart from the system is running) is that you know how to copy text

doesn't say what a terminal is or how to start it?

mycosys writes...

i think you mistake what X is. X is a protocol, there are any number of implementations of it. it IS old, and some implementations very unweildy, but it is NOTHING like MS windows, and has a different design purpose.

True, but the only implementation that matters (and the one I talk of) is x.org.

Gumby No Talent writes...

my mother (64) doesn't find the iPhone or iPod of my nephew and niece very intuitive.

Really? Mine does (59). And my father (58). Both of them struggle with Windows. They've both figured out how to use pretty much all of the functionality, the only bits they needed help with were their mail servers.

The act of using a GUI would imply previous knowledge of similar interactions in order to associate interaction with activity.

I disagree – as a network engineer I'm constantly working with different vendors implentation of the same functions. Some of these are in logical places that make sense based on their function. Some of them are not. That's not necessarily relative to any particular vendor's implementation. Same with working on cars – I'm not a mechanic but I do understand many of the concepts and functions of things that a car uses. Where each individual engine chooses to place these can make more or less sense and is not necessarily related to where a certain thing is on -my- engine.

Forwarding a SMS on the iPhone was a very popular question when the iPhone first came out, so the interaction couldn't have been that intuitive.

Not relevant – the lack of inclusion of a function, regardless of how much you expected it would be there, is not a UI issue. There wouldn't be a sign for a feature that didn't exist saying 'you can't forward an SMS'; if you believed there was a way to do it you would keep looking if you can't find it.

My post was pointing out that not everyone feels that the iPhone is the pinnacle of good UI design, and that anything that requires human interaction is open to interpretation by the individual.

I get that, but your counter-examples weren't really relevant and based on your responses, I'm not sure you have really done much interface design.

kraekan writes...

doesn't say what a terminal is or how to start it?

ok – so it assumes you can look into the menu and find the application called terminal. _I_ would assume you would be able to do that before you go looking to add more applications (that you cant find to run). Especially a system monitoring app.

rugger writes...

True, but the only implementation that matters (and the one I talk of) is x.org.

But you miss that it isnt just windows – it is a client sever system designed from the ground up for an entirely different purpose – it is designed to display graphical output from an application on one system to a terminal on a completely separate system, something that windows (afaik) cannot do (remote desktop and VNC are simply duplicating a local desktop to another system, duplicating the graphic processing and using a lot more bandwidth).
The CLI is like that too – posix systems couldnt care less if their I/O comes from an attached console – or one on the moon.

Kraekan, you're right... It didn't even tell people how to log in and get the desktop environment running first either... :/ very lax of them.

How many windows how-tos say 'go to your control panel and...' or something similar, without telling you where to look in the start menu?

If people don't know how to google something like 'bash script' and get the lowdown from wikipedia or somewhere similar, what are they doing trying to manage their own computer? These are the same sort of people who, using windows, ask me to help them set up new hardware for them – and it's speakers that would work without further action so long as they actually TRIED it for themselves.

Note that I'm not bagging those sorts of people – I used to make lotsa dollars with them and gave up trying to teach any of them long ago. Well, except my parents; that can backfire though, with USB devices plugged into, and destroying LAN ports hehe (hard to tell on their laptop, even for me)!

mycosys writes...

ok – so it assumes you can look into the menu and find the application called terminal. _I_ would assume you would be able to do that before you go looking to add more applications (that you cant find to run). Especially a system monitoring app.

Apparently it's not good enough but the fact that there is wonderful docs at help.ubuntu.com for Ubuntu users including new users to linux is not good enough for a lot of people in the advanced section it even has a section on the command line and how to start a terminal.

https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/advanced-topics/C/index.html

edit

for those genuinely interested in Linux for the first time there are some greats docs available for Ubuntu and Fedora.

https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/

http://docs.fedoraproject.org/user-guide/f11/en-US/html/

There are probably similar for other distros I would think.

moore2 writes...

Try and find me an article on how to install conky on ubuntu 9.04 assuming no prior knowledge. Most of the ones i came across only skip across the basics.

Pretty bad example. It's not a program designed for the beginner anyway. It's entirely possible to run into the same problem with a Windows app. Maybe not in the same category but still, what is the category ? How many users want to see all their system stats on the screen all the time ?

This example is a bit different than installing the average Linux app via Synaptic, launching it off the menu, using it etc.

moore2 writes...

Try and find me an article on how to install conky on ubuntu 9.04 assuming no prior knowledge. Most of the ones i came across only skip across the basics.

I'll write you one.

1. Click System>Administration>Synaptic Package Manager
2. enter your password
3. Search Conky
4. Tick
5. press Apply
6. wait

Done, Conky is installed, to configure it is another matter.

MatthewQ writes...

Kraekan, you're right... It didn't even tell people how to log in and get the desktop environment running first either... :/ very lax of them.

Don't joke. At work I use to switch to a console a lot on computers to fix things for users and they look at you blankly when you ask them to log on. :P

loss4words writes...

I disagree – as a network engineer I'm constantly working with different vendors implentation of the same functions. Some of these are in logical places that make sense based on their function. Some of them are not. That's not necessarily relative to any particular vendor's implementation.
You have implied prior knowledge by being a network engineer, and a text command line interface is a more often then not your interface. Knowledge of the commands and switches must be assumed, and knowledge of network topography and terminology has been assumed.

Not relevant – the lack of inclusion of a function, regardless of how much you expected it would be there, is not a UI issue.
Discussion is mute then, if Linux doesn't have GUI function then it isn't a UI issue. Forwarding a SMS is a phone function, prior knowledge of phone functions has been assumed.

I get that, but your counter-examples weren't really relevant and based on your responses, I'm not sure you have really done much interface design.
Why? Because I have a differing opinion?

You see a square I see a box... and for the record I have been writing code for UNIX based Databases since 1986, so I have coded through the evolution of the GUI interface, and I still think it is inconsistent and unintuitive to someone with no experience, vs text based instructions.

I'm not joking, it's terrible! I want my money back! Oh, wait... :p

Reminds me of a time I was trying to get a lady's computer to print (she was admin staff member in a school) – I'd been told she was scared of technology but what really drove that home was when I leant over her shoulder and ran a batch of mine from the network designed to load the right printer settings based on the computer location, with Ctrl+Esc, R, \\server\p1 (or whatever), but I hadn't turned off ECHO in my script, and when she suddenly had this black screen filled with scrolling commands she pushed herself (and her chair) back into me – it would have been funny except for the pain!

P.S: @Gumby (and the other people who keep using 'mute' like that) – http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moot_point (see definition #2).

Gumby No Talent writes...

Knowledge of the commands and switches must be assumed

No, more often than not you're figuring out the commands and switches from the UI (in that case, CLI) when working on gear. I certainly don't have time to go and learn every possible function of every device when I have to use them – you understand what you aim to do and use the UI to figure out how it wants you to do it.

knowledge of network topography and terminology has been assumed.

Correct. What we got our wires crossed on is the difference between the theory of what needs to be done vs how it is performed.

Forwarding a SMS is a phone function, prior knowledge of phone functions has been assumed.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Knowledge of what functions a phone has is assumed using a phone, not the specific implementation of how the phone gets you to interact with it. To a certain extent the UI's job is to guide you through things you might not understand but we're not relying on it to show you what a phone is and why when I dial a number someone talks to me.

Why? Because I have a differing opinion?

No, because you don't seem to understand the difference between understanding of concepts and knowledge of implementations.

If you had said that it seemed unnatural to touch the screen and slide it to scroll over to the next page of icons, that is a purely subjective concept and I can't argue with that, however bizarre it might seem to me. But not being able to forward an SMS is not relevant. The way the keyboard pops up when you click a text field is relevant, for example. The way the screen rotates (or doesn't) when you hold the phone sideways.

sluxor writes...

It works better for you because you don't know how to properly use linux and set it up for your needs

I don't know how to properly use linux? What defines being able to use linux properly?

Given time, I could set it up for my needs. I simply don't have the time. I'd like to have linux on my desktop, but time does not permit me to. This does not infer that I don't know how to properly use linux. It infers that I have a limited resource and choose to make my life easier by using Windows. Hence usability for Windows for me is superior.

However, in the past:

/forum-replies.cfm?t=323912&r=4695259#r4695259

/forum-replies.cfm?t=73282&r=1165406#r1165406

So do I know how to setup linux properly for my needs? Perhaps I do. Why don't I? Enabling SLI + dual monitors is a time consuming exercise that can simply wait. Clap clap for assuming that I'm a linux noob.

MatthewQ writes...

P.S: @Gumby (and the other people who keep using 'mute' like that) – http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moot_point (see definition #2).
Fair cope... she turned me into a newt!... I got better!

MatthewQ writes...

it would have been funny except for the pain!

haha epic LULZ on that one! haha wow, actual fear. nice.

loss4words writes...

I certainly don't have time to go and learn every possible function of every device when I have to use them

Which is why by previous usage of a similar interface you know about help switches.

you understand what you aim to do and use the UI to figure out how it wants you to do it.

CLI is a UI, but our discussion should remain on GUI interfaces because the 2 are very different.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Knowledge of what functions a phone has is assumed using a phone, not the specific implementation of how the phone gets you to interact with it.

Agreed.

To a certain extent the UI's job is to guide you through things you might not understand but we're not relying on it to show you what a phone is and why when I dial a number someone talks to me.

Yes, which is why SMS forwarding is a classic example, why was there so much confusion over a basic function? Good design?

No, because you don't seem to understand the difference between understanding of concepts and knowledge of implementations.

I'm very confident that I know the differences.

Back to the point being debated, iPhone is not the pinnacle of good GUI design, but the pinnacle of good marketing. it did nothing new, other phones existed with the same capabilities, none of its functions where unique, touch screen scrolling and pinch commands existed prior to the iPhone existing. The GUI is nothing more than an expansion on the funky new Web 2.0 and was designed to appeal to Gen Y and capitalise on iPod user acceptance of what they where already familiar with.

Apple make good products that give the user a good experience (ask any Apple product owning person, I own none), but they aren't the pinnacle of good GUI interfaces, they are the kings of shiney!

Gumby No Talent writes...

Which is why by previous usage of a similar interface you know about help switches.

or type things that make sense, like 'help'.

CLI is a UI, but our discussion should remain on GUI interfaces because the 2 are very different.

Agreed, just making a parallel :)

Yes, which is why SMS forwarding is a classic example, why was there so much confusion over a basic function? Good design?

I think we're going to have to call agree-to-disagree on this one as we aren't seeing much movement in either direction.

I'm very confident that I know the differences.

I'm not so sure you do. The initial lack of MMS on day 1 was not bad UI, it's bad functionality. Same with video recording. The fact that the phone did not do these things was not an interface problem.

Back to the point being debated, iPhone is not the pinnacle of good GUI design, but the pinnacle of good marketing.

While I agree the marketing has been excellent, the product needed to be good enough to make people want it.

it did nothing new, other phones existed with the same capabilities, none of its functions where unique,

I agree, mostly. My Nokia 6600 that I got in 2003 could go on the web, check email, chat on MSN, take photos/video/mms, upload files, SSH. The real special thing in the iPhone was the way it did the things it did – the UI. That is what made it unique. And although it's a late addition, the AppStore was unique and brilliant for phones at the time. Being able to install new apps on the fly with the ease of apt-get and integrated payment? Brilliant.

touch screen scrolling and pinch commands existed prior to the iPhone existing. The GUI is nothing more than an expansion on the funky new Web 2.0 and was designed to appeal to Gen Y and capitalise on iPod user acceptance of what they where already familiar with.

The iPhone looked and functioned completely differently from any other iPod before it though. The GUI and its method of interaction is more natural than any other device that had come before it. Touch screen was nothing new, smartphones were nothing new, but the manner in which it did it was.

I initially rubbished the device. I rabbited on about the lack of functionality, battery life, lack of 3G, lack of storage space until the cows came home.

Then I borrowed one for two weeks on a challenge and I didn't want to give it back. It was so painful going back to my old w880i or using my XDA. Everything was difficult and awkward. The UI of the iPhone is everything that makes it special.

And that's what Linux is missing – a user interaction experience that is seamlessly useful and easy to use. One that when you back to using Windows, you cringe at how much work things are to do. Not an easy thing to achieve, but Apple dominated the marketplace with a new device by simply making one that was an extreme measure better than everything else on the market. People don't care what's behind it – they respond to 'better'. When it's noteably better, and pushed, people will use it.

When a distribution of Linux appears that does the same, with the appropriate corporate push to market it, the same will happen. Assuming it happens at all, that is.

this all has what to do with what's stopping you using linux how?

loss4words writes...

And that's what Linux is missing – a user interaction experience that is seamlessly useful and easy to use. One that when you back to using Windows, you cringe at how much work things are to do.

I find linux user interaction quite good, straight forward and easy to use. You seem to disagree.

Stercus Accidit writes...

Enabling SLI + dual monitors is a time consuming exercise that can simply wait.

But it's not unsuported by nouveau, the default, non-proprietary driver in many mainstream linux distros.

Stercus Accidit writes...

Given time, I could set it up for my needs. I simply don't have the time. I'd like to have linux on my desktop, but time does not permit me to. This does not infer that I don't know how to properly use linux.

Whoops i missed that part.. Yes it does. If you knew how to configure your xorg.conf manually, it would only take you minutes, but that's a part of linux + Xorg use which you still have to learn.

kraekan writes...

this all has what to do with what's stopping you using linux how?

The UI .. that makes it special. And that's what Linux is missing – a user interaction experience that is seamlessly useful and easy to use. One that when you back to using Windows, you cringe at how much work things are to do.

I find linux user interaction quite good, straight forward and easy to use. You seem to disagree.

It's not bad, but it's not better. Not yet. And it's definitely not head-and-shoulders-above-the-competition better. When you have an install base as large as Windows that you're fighting, just being 'as good' isn't even close to enough. You have to be so good that it seems stupid to not pay attention.

loss4words writes...

You have to be so good that it seems stupid to not pay attention.

You seem to assume I care about that though. Lots of people talk about that sort of thing but a suspect that majority of Linux users don't care about windows users switching to Linux. We care about Linux getting better perhaps and some would like to see wider adoption but I doubt that the majority care that much. It's typically not Linux users that start these threads and the regulars here don't typically start the Linux on desktop this year stuff either.

edit

I use the you in the generic sense.

sluxor writes...

But it's not unsuported by nouveau

Wiki page last edited: 2009-06-22.

http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/FeatureMatrix

What's it say for SLI? Or for Dual Head for that matter?

So I can drop back to the basic default nv driver, and with a whole lot of fudging, I can get multi monitors, but have software 3d rendering. What's the point? Honestly? Gaming will be up to shit compared to what it is on Windows, so it's not usable for me, so therefore I won't use it.

And before you bleat about learning to edit xorg.conf, if you'd bothered to look at the dates of the posts I linked to, you'd see that I was using dual monitor setups WAY before any gui clicky tools came out. So what's that imply?

Stercus Accidit writes...

default nv driver

Besides, the NV driver is not very good. Its more or less a mode changing driver with no accelleration, causing awful performance.

Games stop me from switching to Linux on my gaming computer.

Pre-existing NTFS formatted harddrives stop me from switching to Linux on my server.

On another note, and I posted this in another thread; a friend of mine decided to try Linux – Ubuntu, dual booted with Windows XP. To install her printer in Windows XP, we just had to plug it in. The same install in Ubuntu required us to use the command line and navigate a menu – unacceptable for your beginning computer user who just wants things to work.

Linux is great for servers, I would prefer to use it on mine (the learning curve of getting WS2008 doing what I want seems steeper than that for the same tasks under Linux), while Windows is great for the home PC.

sir_hc writes...

The same install in Ubuntu required us to use the command line and navigate a menu – unacceptable for your beginning computer user who just wants things to work.

Bummer, I just plug mine in and Gnome installs it for me.

sir_hc writes...

Linux is great for servers,

+500

I run my home server off linux, runs great, very very stable. It has never crashed, except when I tried to run the ATI drivers on 4gig memory, but blame ATI for that

RussianMob writes...

I'd love to know what would bring more users to Linux?

From a home user perspective, I imagine that the sheer number of variants of Linux would scare off newcomers. Especially the less tech savvy. Debian, SUSE, Ubuntu, Gentoo, CentOS, Redhat/Fedora Core, Knoppix, Mint, Slackware, *BSD to name a few of the commonly known ones. Then you even get variants within variants – Kubuntu, Xubuntu, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, PCBSD. Then you have the varying GUIs within each one – Gnome, KDE, etc.

Compare that with maybe 4 mainstream variants of Vista: Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate. All of which will run the same software using the same methods of installing, and have a common interface, and use the same drivers.

For the home user, Linux has come a long LONG way – particularly since the mid 90s. Installing stuff is easy and trouble free (for the most part) using the various package manager tools. Patch management is a doddle too – at least in Ubuntu.

From a small/medium business perspective, a lot of administrators (including myself) aren't aware of what centralised manageability facilities are available in Linux. For example, what are the Linux equivalents of Active directory (centralised authentication), Group policy (centralised user privilege management) and WSUS (centralised patch management)?

I'm actually quite curious to learn more about this particular topic myself and would appreciate enlightenment – particularly with regards to patch management. As an example, my Ubuntu 8.04 VM typically wants to download about 40-50mb of updates per month. That's fine, but when you multiply that by 50 or 100, it becomes less fine. Contrast that with WSUS where you download the update once, and it gets distributed to whichever computers need it.

Packaged products from Microsoft like Small Business Server make it really easy for small businesses to run their own full-function servers. If some of the developers of the more popular distros (such as Ubuntu), could team up with the likes of HP or IBM to offer MS SBS-equivalent bundles, I think that would certainly make Linux more accessible to the entry level business market.

For that to work though, the bundled Linux distro would have to be preconfigured with file, print, authentication, email, web and VPN servers, and offer services like pushmail (including groupware functionality like remote calendar/contacts/tasks syncing), webmail, secure remote access to the office network (remote web workplace) , Outlook Anywhere equivalent, with minimal or zero client software footprint, among other things.

I'm sure most, if not of this is doable in Linux. The key is that (to my knowledge) there is no such Linux product currently available that offers this bundle of functionality preconfigured out of the box, with a unified and tightly integrated management interface.

That said, I really don't like Exchange Server. It's a beast of a thing to administer at the best of times, is a resource hog, and is an absolute pain to troubleshoot. If someone can come up with a better product than Small Business server at a similar pricepoint with the same features and easy management, I'd be more than happy to look at it seriously. However, to my knowledge, such a product doesn't yet exist.

sluxor writes...

I assure you that if this was a race, Linux would be far ahead.

Depends a great deal on what the race was about. Stability and security? Most probably. Purchase price? Absolutely (commercial distros such as RHEL aside). TCO? Hard to say. Overall user friendliness, availability of support, general popularity and software/driver support for modern hardware? Not a chance.

Disclosure: I run a solid state Smoothwall Express 3 box as my network firewall, Ubuntu as a server in a virtual machine, Windows Server 2003 x64 R2 as my server OS and XPP/Vista/Win7 as my desktop OSes.

Ken™ writes...

From a home user perspective, I imagine that the sheer number of variants of Linux would scare off newcomers.

Yes they say choice confuses people but Linux users like choice and they like to be involved in the projects they like so this is never going to change.

Contrast that with WSUS where you download the update once, and it gets distributed to whichever computers need it.

The most robust system I'm aware of is the RedHat Network but it's a pay for aimed at enterprise. Other wise you set up your own update repo.

https://www.redhat.com/rhn/

I'm sure most, if not of this is doable in Linux. The key is that (to my knowledge) there is no such Linux product currently available that offers this bundle of functionality preconfigured out of the box, with a unified and tightly integrated management interface.

So what do you offer your boss or client as alternatives? :P

edit
well I didn't know they have an open version of RHN now a days.

Ken™ writes...

For that to work though, the bundled Linux distro would have to be preconfigured with file, print, authentication, email, web and VPN servers, and offer services like pushmail (including groupware functionality like remote calendar/contacts/tasks syncing), webmail, secure remote access to the office network (remote web workplace) , Outlook Anywhere equivalent, with minimal or zero client software footprint, among other things.

wow – sounds like pretty much every server version of lin i have come across. In fact they are all things that have come from unix environments.
Suse Linux Enterprise Server has frontends for config of all this, and novell customer service to get it up, maybe that would be worthwhile for you?

kraekan writes...

Yes they say choice confuses people but Linux users like choice and they like to be involved in the projects they like so this is never going to change.

You know, this is probably one of the fundamental reasons why Linux hasn't become more mainstream. It started off as an enthusiast's alternative to the mainstream operating systems. It still is very much an enthusiast's operating system, even though it has evolved so much.

Over the last decade or so it's become much more accessible to the average joe, but it still has too many of the rough edges for it to be mainstream. The stereotypical Linux user likes to be able to fiddle, to be able to tweak stuff so that it is just right. Compare this to the stereotypical Windows user who just wants stuff to work.

Mac OS X is a case in point for exactly what can be done with an *nix-based operating system.

I suspect that a good marker for when Linux really hits the big time is when you start getting blockbuster games that are released exclusively for Linux.

The most robust system I'm aware of is the RedHat Network but it's a pay for aimed at enterprise. Other wise you set up your own update repo.

That RHNS product actually looks pretty cool. More of this sort of stuff is needed for more widespread acceptance in the corporate market, IMO.

So what do you offer your boss or client as alternatives? :P

Like I said, to my knowledge, there is nothing else like SBS on the market today. So that's what I offer my clients, and they're almost inevitably happy with the results.

mycosys writes...

wow – sounds like pretty much every server version of lin i have come across. In fact they are all things that have come from unix environments.
Suse Linux Enterprise Server has frontends for config of all this, and novell customer service to get it up, maybe that would be worthwhile for you?

I realise that – I've got my Ubuntu VM doing a lot of this stuff. But how many distros of Linux offer this out of the box, with no additional configuration required (aside from entering site info), at an equivalent cost to SBS?

Centralised patch deployment? Secure remote calendar/todo/contact sync on a full client?

1) Games

2) Games

3) Games

Ken™ writes...

Centralised patch deployment?

Apt-proxy will do this. http://apt-proxy.sourceforge.net/

Ken™ writes...

Like I said, to my knowledge, there is nothing else like SBS on the market today. So that's what I offer my clients, and they're almost inevitably happy with the results.

I'm not sure these days what SBS will do for you but you would need a feature list and put the components together yourself unless you want to pay for a novell or ibm solution on linux. Probably a lot would be covered by any distro but you would most likely need something like zimbra, or one of its counter parts, for any serious collaboration stuff.

http://www.zimbra.com/

There are also supported versions of Clarkconnect and it's counterparts if you want to go down that track but I've never looked at those and I not sure how their collaboration stuff would compare to something like Zimbra or Exchange. You don't learn as much with them as learning the various things individually.

Ken™ writes...

at an equivalent cost to SBS?

how do you define that? i mean in the case of SLES the software is free – you can download it – the subscription is a support subscription, which sounds very much like a worthwhile investment imo :)

loss4words writes...

I'm not so sure you do. The initial lack of MMS on day 1 was not bad UI, it's bad functionality. Same with video recording. The fact that the phone did not do these things was not an interface problem.

Agreed, I should have articulated by thoughts better, the rushed implementation of this function lead to a very hot topic... "how do we do it?" a good indication of bad design. However we will always agree to disagree, thanks for the discussion was a pleasure.

Ken™ writes...

OpenBSD, FreeBSD, PCBSD

These aren't Linux variants. These aren't Linux at all. If I'm a *BSD user I can still be a non-linux user... They have a totally different kernel. All Linux distributions use a Linux kernel.

See the thing is, I don't recommend linux to complete end-users. I recommend it to fellow geeks that don't have a problem with learning a new OS. Those who want to do everything through the GUI and/or have commercial support should get a mac. Everything will work out of the box for them and if it doesn't you have every right to complain.

The End. Everyones happy now.

Ken™ writes...

rom a small/medium business perspective, a lot of administrators (including myself) aren't aware of what centralised manageability facilities are available in Linux. For example, what are the Linux equivalents of Active directory (centralised authentication), Group policy (centralised user privilege management) and WSUS (centralised patch management)?
People say they use Windows Active Directory but really they are talking about Windows Policy and not the LDAP implementation. If you are a windows shop moving away from AD and Exchange after you have purchased the required Licenses isn't a smart move.

BUT Linux can certainly participate and Authenticate against a Win AD 2003 setup.
http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_&_Active_Directory
http://howtoforge.org/howtos/samba?from=10

And SAMBA 4 will have more compatibility to replace a Win AD.

WSUS
http://update-accelerator.advproxy.net/faq.html#faq04

I'm actually quite curious to learn more about this particular topic myself and would appreciate enlightenment – particularly with regards to patch management. As an example, my Ubuntu 8.04 VM typically wants to download about 40-50mb of updates per month. That's fine, but when you multiply that by 50 or 100, it becomes less fine. Contrast that with WSUS where you download the update once, and it gets distributed to whichever computers need it.
APT-GET proxy is what you are looking for, download one use many.

THE REST...
Exchange is a beast, has carved a market that will be hard to shake unless it integrates seamlessly with outlook as people will not switch from what they know easily in the work place.

http://www.scalix.com/
http://www.zimbra.com/

Used both, users of the more advanced features of Exchange should remain with Exchange.

I'm about to implement Zimbra into my current employers, but they only had POP3 mail, so anything will be an improvement, and public folders will be a welcome improvement, calendaring isn't a requirement.

If a company is already commited to using Windows why move them if they are Licensed? Infrastructure is a very easy sell, all ancillary systems like Web Servers, Proxy, IDS, monitoring Linux already dominates. Primary systems because of Windows Policy tie ins will never work because Linux is trying to be Windows and not Linux, there are plenty of alternatives but no replacements because if you want Windows... use Windows.

Gumby No Talent writes...

BUT Linux can certainly participate and Authenticate against a Win AD 2003 setup.
http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_&_Active_Directory
http://howtoforge.org/howtos/samba?from=10

And SAMBA 4 will have more compatibility to replace a Win AD.

I've always wanted to have a play with Directory Server. Now I have a grunty desktop to run VM's in perhaps I'll have a go. Looks like they have changed the name.

http://directory.fedoraproject.org/

They even have point and click management console.

http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/dir-server/8.1/console/chap-Console_Guide-Introducing_Red_Hat_Console_and_Administration_Server.html

kraekan writes...

http://directory.fedoraproject.org/

Is OpenLDAP which is different to SAMBA, http://us6.samba.org/samba/

Samba is an Open Source/Free Software suite that has, since 1992, provided file and print services to all manner of SMB/CIFS clients, including the numerous versions of Microsoft Windows operating systems.

and Keberos http://web.mit.edu/Kerberos/

Have a read of this one, might be better for you to try.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ActiveDirectoryHowto

EDIT
Also Windbind
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ActiveDirectoryWinbindHowto

Also to confuse you some more NTLM authentication, very useful with passthru services like proxy server.
http://www.opensourcehowto.org/how-to/squid/squid-with-ntlm-authentication.html

Ken™ writes...

support for modern hardware? Not a chance.

Actually it wins there too, assuming you compile the latest Linux Kernel and in case of graphics Xorg as well :-).

If someone can come up with a better product than Small Business server at a similar pricepoint with the same features and easy management, I'd be more than happy to look at it seriously.

IBM Lotus Notes + Domino. It supports multiple platforms. It's cheaper TCO. If you want all the features of exchange and all that collaboration, integration, instant messaging and <insert made up word here>ations... It is designed not just to impersonate exchange but to also provide it's own unique platforms/protocols/security as well. Domino Authentication also can replace Active Directory or you can get it to use an existing Active Directory server.

There's only one problem, being the highest product in features it's almost as bloated as Exchange.. but it definatelly is a better and cheaper product.

I would personally prefer to work with a simple Linux mail server like postfix with SSL-encrypted pop3 and smtp. It is after all a world standard. Then perhaps use Samba for domain authentication.

kraekan writes...

We care about Linux getting better perhaps and some would like to see wider adoption but I doubt that the majority care that much. It's typically not Linux users that start these threads and the regulars here don't typically start the Linux on desktop this year stuff either.

Yeah, definitely agree. I was just sayin' :D

hmmm I started a thread similar to this a few weeks ago but it got deleted, sparking an argument between me and a mod, yet this one gets approved? typical double standards.

but yeah anyway the reason I went back to Windows is because, well Windows 7 is free (for now anyway). Its faster, the interface is more familiar and intuitive, and I have no compatibility issues with anything, and most of the best software is written for Windows.

Also I reckon Linux always has a 'dark' feel to it. It could be that most distros come with a dark startup screen and wallpaper, and a lot of the time you get terminal popups which usually have a black background. And also most window managers and desktop enviroments are Grey by default. Yuck.
Take Ubuntu which is ugly Brown as an example in comparison to Windows XP (blue) Windows Vista (Greenish Yellow) and Mac OSX (White-Purple). I like to be greeted with a fresh looking interface from day 1. (yes I know you can modify it until the cows come home, but I dont want to have to do that).

Cosmic R writes...

Also I reckon Linux always has a 'dark' feel to it.

I agree with you to a degree.

But then, I enjoyed the spyro platform games in part because they were bright and colourful and fun, as opposed to many FPS games that I couldn't get into because it was all so very dull.

Maybe I'm just weird though, and everyone actually likes the dark, toned down look to everything.

Cosmic R writes...

Take Ubuntu which is ugly Brown as an example in comparison to Windows XP (blue) Windows Vista (Greenish Yellow) and Mac OSX (White-Purple). I like to be greeted with a fresh looking interface from day 1.

OpenSUSE is bright green :P

Gumby No Talent writes...

Is OpenLDAP which is different to SAMBA, http://us6.samba.org/samba/

Yes I understand that.

Cosmic R writes...

Its faster,
When you show me the metrics and statistical data I'll pay attention.

and most of the best software is written for Windows.
3 examples and why it is best.

You obviously feel that Windows is best for you, that is an opinion.

I like to be greeted with a fresh looking interface from day 1. (yes I know you can modify it until the cows come home, but I dont want to have to do that).
Fedora is blue!
Mint is green!
Don't know any other default colours cause its unimportant to me, the ability to change it is.

Also one of Ubuntu default themes, Clearlooks is Blue and grey.

kraekan writes...

Yes I understand that.
Cool, was just making sure. :)

I always thought the poo-colour defaults were designed to encourage customization by the user :p

I know I've seen LOTS of xp/vista comps on default wallpapers but no ubuntus without at least some personalisation, unless it was just installed :)

MatthewQ writes...

I know I've seen LOTS of xp/vista comps on default wallpapers but no ubuntus without at least some personalisation, unless it was just installed :)

My 8.04 install at home is still on default desktop, including the Elephant Skin wallpaper...

sluxor writes...

These aren't Linux variants. These aren't Linux at all. If I'm a *BSD user I can still be a non-linux user... They have a totally different kernel. All Linux distributions use a Linux kernel.

I was waiting to see who would pick that up ;)

See the thing is, I don't recommend linux to complete end-users. I recommend it to fellow geeks that don't have a problem with learning a new OS. Those who want to do everything through the GUI and/or have commercial support should get a mac. Everything will work out of the box for them and if it doesn't you have every right to complain.

I think I agree on principle with you here. I still think there's a place for Windows – there are things that Mac OS X doesn't do as well as Windows – run on hardware that's sold without an Apple Tax for example, without significant fiddling and possible violation of EULAs.

Gumby No Talent writes...

APT-GET proxy is what you are looking for, download one use many.

Aha. I knew there had to be a Linux equivalent. So I assume that an APT-GET proxy would have management capabilities (ie the admin can pre-download and pre-approve packages for installation)?

Infrastructure is a very easy sell, all ancillary systems like Web Servers, Proxy, IDS, monitoring Linux already dominates.

This is something that Linux really excels at, as it can be pared back to the bare essentials relatively easily, enabling it to run on low-powered hardware.

Primary systems because of Windows Policy tie ins will never work because Linux is trying to be Windows and not Linux, there are plenty of alternatives but no replacements because if you want Windows... use Windows.

This is what I was interested in. Hypothetical situation: Green fields client – need a server and new computers. Is there a pre-packaged SBS-equivalent server product that would work well in this environment? By 'SBS equivalent', I mean feature wise. The clients can be Linux, it doesn't really matter. So the features to be included would be Linux equivalents of the features I outlined in my previous post, and it would have to be pre-configured out of the box.

sluxor writes...

Actually it wins there too, assuming you compile the latest Linux Kernel and in case of graphics Xorg as well :-).

I absolutely disagree.

http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers

"We currently have a fair amount of working drivers that cover most of the available wireless networking cards. However, they don't implement all features and may have some issues, due to various reasons like companies not providing specs."

So a significant number of manufacturers still are unwilling to directly support Linux. This has lead to 3rd parties developing drivers for unsupported hardware, the net result of which has been (in many cases) partially functioning drivers.

For the average user, in almost all cases, a manufacturer provided driver is going to be better than a driver written by a 3rd party – particularly when they have reverse-engineered the manufacturer drivers. There are exceptions, of course – the Omega drivers for Nvidia/ATI cards were quite good.

IBM Lotus Notes + Domino. It supports multiple platforms. It's cheaper TCO. If you want all the features of exchange and all that collaboration, integration, instant messaging and <insert made up word here>ations... It is designed not just to impersonate exchange but to also provide it's own unique platforms/protocols/security as well. Domino Authentication also can replace Active Directory or you can get it to use an existing Active Directory server.

I think Domino is a great product. Shame about the woeful interface on the client side. I used to administer Domino servers, and it was awesome the way you could see *exactly* what the server was doing just by looking at the console. No such luck with Exchange. Restoring mailboxes, for example, was an absolute cinch with Domino. But I digress.

I last worked with Domino back when R6 was current. Things were improving, and certainly the webmail component had improved out of sight with R7. R5 and R6 never really impersonated Exchange very well, and had limitations due to the different available fields (ie for a contact). I've used Lotus Easysync, but that always made a mess of recurring calendar entries. Again, this may have improved since R5/R6.

I would personally prefer to work with a simple Linux mail server like postfix with SSL-encrypted pop3 and smtp.

In an ideal world, if you didn't need the rich functionaility that Domino/Exchange provides.

Ken™ writes...

So a significant number of manufacturers still are unwilling to directly support Linux. This has lead to 3rd parties developing drivers for unsupported hardware, the net result of which has been (in many cases) partially functioning drivers.
Can you give me a make and model that doesn't work for you?

And if their is a Windows driver have you tried using NDISWrapper?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper

SBS Server is serveral products it is a Mail Server, AD, Database... yada yada yada.

And SBS can be used for work flow and forms management and lots more than it usually is used for.

Need to know specifically what you want to achieve, if you want default SBS installation equivalent then pick any main stream distro and use its server/desktop combination.

http://www.redhat.com.au/solutions/smb/

Gumby No Talent writes...

show me the metrics and statistical data
I dont have any – it just feels faster.

3 examples and why it is best.
really? okay then.
AutoCAD – better than any CAD software for linux, obviously.
Photoshop – Better than GIMP, as shown by the industry (although I do quite like the GIMP!)
Windows Movie Maker – hardly the best software out there, but easily better than any movie software linux has to offer (for the moment).

I could go on and say MS Office, but that would probably start an argument!

Mint is green!
yeah but with dark grey – it still feels dark to me!

You obviously feel that Windows is best for you
exactly – for the moment anyway!

Gumby No Talent writes...

Need to know specifically what you want to achieve, if you want default SBS installation equivalent then pick any main stream distro and use its server/desktop combination.

http://www.redhat.com.au/solutions/smb/

I already pointed him in that general direction and pointed out most main stream distro will do what he wants with perhaps the addition of something like zimbra. You'll never convince him unless you can show him windows style wizards to configure things I think.

Cosmic R writes...

AutoCAD – better than any CAD software for linux, obviously.
http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?iAppId=86
Depends on the version, 2004 looks good with a Gold rating, 2007 not so good.

Photoshop – Better than GIMP, as shown by the industry (although I do quite like the GIMP!)
http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/name/?letter=p;

Windows Movie Maker – hardly the best software out there, but easily better than any movie software linux has to offer (for the moment).
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=6183

Not after an alternative, your choice of software wasn't the point of the question, OS independence is the point, Windows, Linux, OSX/BSD shouldn't matter, software companies make games for all console platforms regardless how different they are from each other, why not Windows and OSX for a start?

Why not Linux, well if I was to be honest mindset, most Linux Users like the freedom of Open Source and are less likely to support commercial software when a free alternative exists, even if it isn't as feature rich.

Cosmic R writes...

AutoCAD – better than any CAD software for linux, obviously.

Never heard o a little app called Pro/Engineer, among others?

Cosmic R writes...

Windows Movie Maker – hardly the best software out there, but easily better than any movie software linux has to offer (for the moment).

That's kind of sad if true, because WMM completely sucks, although mostly because of the (lack of) supported output file types.

I find the games often difficult to get going, and even then the framerate suffers considerably compared to directx under windows.
Perhaps by the time my windows xp 64 starts to feel obsoleted (instead of being technically obsoleted) and I have a new pc that gives me 60 fps regardless I will consider the move.

Cosmic R writes...

Photoshop – Better than GIMP, as shown by the industry (although I do quite like the GIMP!)

sif, just because something is more common in the industry does not make it better. Internet Explorer is still the most widely used browser, because it's the default one for most desktop users.

Windows Movie Maker – hardly the best software out there, but easily better

Then Avidemux, Kino, Cinelerra. You're right you should stick to windows. :-)

eah but with dark grey – it still feels dark to me!

Does your screen have a brightness feature?

Gumby No Talent writes...

Can you give me a make and model that doesn't work for you?

Can you guarantee to me that every device with Windows drivers will also work with Linux? If you can't, then my point stands.

SBS Server is serveral products it is a Mail Server, AD, Database... yada yada yada.

And SBS can be used for work flow and forms management and lots more than it usually is used for.

That's fine, but my point was that SBS is an integrated, all-in-one solution. It's all there for you, preconfigured and ready to go. You don't have to add anything, you don't have to change or fiddle with anything, it's there, already done for you. Besides, this stuff isn't OS-integrated for Linux either. Apache2, MySQL etc. :)

kraekan writes...

I already pointed him in that general direction and pointed out most main stream distro will do what he wants with perhaps the addition of something like zimbra. You'll never convince him unless you can show him windows style wizards to configure things I think.

With respect, that's a little unfair of you to say that. The RHEL bundle that GNT linked to is probably the closest thing I've seen to SBS so far. That's what I was trying to find out – whether there was a Linux-based product with a similar target market.

I understand that an OS is never going to be all things to all people. Linux is good for people who like to customise their systems right down to the finest detail if they so choose. Windows is good at being most things to most people. Mac OS X is good at being easy to use for newcomers, as well as offering one of the best environments for desktop publishers and multimedia people.

Besides, it's not about convincing me – I have a pretty good idea of what Linux can do. All I'm saying that it is my opinion that Linux doesn't yet offer an SBS equivalent solution that offers the same OOB experience. Yes, I know that you can configure up a Linux box to do all the same things, but that's not the point and not what I asked.

By the same token, there are things that Linux does exceptionally well that Windows can pretty much never hope to match – a lot of the embedded stuff that requires an operating system to run on low powered hardware, appliance type applications (firewalls, IDS, etc), you'd be nuts to run anything other than Linux. Smoothwall, Untangle, LinuxMCE are just a few examples (among many) of just what an be achieved with Linux.

sluxor writes...

Does your screen have a brightness feature?

cant you just accept that its just my opinion. dont get so defensive about it!

heh, maybe I can see why the mods deleted my original post on the same subject – my opinion is too contrary to the popular opinion of this forum!

Cosmic R writes...

heh, maybe I can see why the mods deleted my original post on the same subject – my opinion is too contrary to the popular opinion of this forum!

I don't think anyone would call sluxor's opinion "popular".

sluxor writes...

Does your screen have a brightness feature?

Lol, but I don't want 3 degree burns when a program deceides to actually use full brightness :P

Cosmic R writes...

cant you just accept that its just my opinion. dont get so defensive about it!

I can accept it but I do think 'it's too dark' is a strange reason. I'm not sure what you want though. If you post something people don't agree with they can respond if they like.

If you ask me all threads like this should probably be nuked.

In the non-Linux/BSD camp there are probably two types, first is people that don't like Linux/BSD and won't or can't use it. I really don't see the point in these people posting here (other than to vent or troll), the people that like and use Linux/BSD are probably well aware there are shortcomings and aren't going to be swayed anyway. Secondly there's the people that have an open mind about trying it. Really these people should just give it a go. Ask if it will run on your hardware, ask what distro etc, post if they've got problems. Make up their own minds.

Specific threads can be made in context for when apps are getting compared like e.g "Exchange Alternatives For Linux?" might be a thread title.

Sm1th writes...

I can accept it but I do think 'it's too dark' is a strange reason. I'm not sure what you want though.

I don't like linux because my cat's breath smells like cat food.

Argh !

Loss4Words: www.bentwookie.org/blog ?

He uses Linux, maybe you should reconsider ;)

Sm1th writes...

I can accept it but I do think 'it's too dark' is a strange reason. I'm not sure what you want though. If you post something people don't agree with they can respond if they like.

Its not that strange of a reason, once you understand that most people value appearance almost as much as they value functionality.

rugger writes...

Its not that strange of a reason, once you understand that most people value appearance almost as much as they value functionality.

Open up synaptic and search for blubuntu.
Install the GTK theme and the required themes.. as well as wallpapers. Walla. Considered by most bright and blue ubuntu theme.

I never liked the XP theme, and would always change it to classic in order to increase the performance of my machine. :-)

I actually like XP's default theme. Frankly I don't get the whole OS looks sucky bit. A computer is a computer, the OS is an interface to get work done.

If I wrote an OS that had a user interface that looked better than (OS X, KDE 4, Win 7) but it could only run application like DOS how many people would like it?

Richard James13 writes...

A computer is a computer, the OS is an interface to get work done.

Only if your computer is a tool. My PC == my luxury, my life.

Fanboi writes...

My PC == my luxury, my life.

Time for someone to go walk their dog ;)

randomizer ± writes...

Time for someone to go walk their dog ;)

Don't have a dog and I'll pass thanks. Too boring outside. :)

Fanboi writes...

Don't have a dog and I'll pass thanks. Too boring outside. :)

I know what you mean. It's just so much easier to waste time in my incredibly uncomfortable chair! :D

randomizer ± writes...

It's just so much easier to waste time in my incredibly uncomfortable chair!

I don't see it as "wasting time" and my chair isn't that uncomfortable. :)

Fanboi writes...

I don't see as "wasting time" and my chair isn't that uncomfortable. :)

Mine is, all the padding has gone flat. It's like sitting on solid plastic :( Oh yes... this er stops me using Linux.

loss4words writes...

I don't like linux because my cat's breath smells like cat food.

But lolcats uses Linux which must prove that cats like Linux...
http://searchdns.netcraft.com/?position=limited&host=lolcats.com

mainly.. i have no idea whatsoever it is or how it works etc.. would be keen to learn

I run Ubuntu as the OS for my file server, but other than turning it on and off I dont actually use it.

RussianMob writes...

Linux is free, yet despite years of publicity it still doesn't enjoy widespread adoption of Windows.

I wrote off Vista last financial year, so it was free (in the end) anyway!

does anyone find a fully functioning (ie firmware update, app sync, app purchase etc) itune replacement for my iphone on linux yet?

it's my limiting factor for settling with my kubuntu

Me.

I have linux on my eeepc 701, its great! It's just... I have no idea whats going on! I'll still use it, its fast and rarely crashes, and if I persist I might just get lucky and learn a few things...

But I'm a gamer, and I need windows mainly for the support. Otherwise, I would be using linux all the time!

Cheers.

Deus Sceleris writes...

Vista ............, so it was free (in the end) anyway!

Was it? --->
True cost of Vista a bit long winded but interesting if not a sorry reading indeed (things to come). Enjoy your freedom while you can.
This thread is still going .....?!

Tonight is a perfect example of why I continue to avoid Linux.
Fired up linux and started messing about, and decided to look at some youtube videos.
Tells me I have to install some packages to watch the videos, so I click to install them, all goes smoothly, and the video starts playing.
Trouble is the sound is coming through the onbouard sound rather than the USB headset which is what Ive got to playback device set to.
Go and check in sound options... yes USB headset is set. Try movie player... yes sound is going to the headset. Go back to youtube... sound is coming through the speakers.
So I do some google searches on various things trying to find out how to set the audio device for the flash plugin. (Good thing I'm literate enough to know to google for "flash"). Anyway after an hour of messing about trying various suggestions Im still nowhere.
Then I notice theres a new window appeared sometime during my googling, and it lists a heap of updates for various things. hmm might as well install them I guess, so away it goes download, installs.
So when thats finished I try you tube again. Right... now I have no audio at all. Ive spent another few hours googling and trying various things, but can't get my audio back.

So thats 3-4 hours wasted trying to get something going *which I should never have to have any bother with*. Why isnt it just using the sound device I specify in sound options. Not to mention I also have the same problems running things under WINE, in that it takes no notice of the default sound device I set.

I would never have this problem in windows. Just right click on the speaker, set audio properties, select USB headset as the output device and voila. Everything works.

So Ill just put Linux on hold for another 6 months. Maybe load up whatever is the new distribution of ubuntu then, and see if I can do simple things like watch a youtube video with headphones without having to sort out technical problems I should never have to deal with.

"Why isnt it just using the sound device I specify in sound options. Not to mention I also have the same problems running things under WINE, in that it takes no notice of the default sound device I set."

I assume you mean it's ignoring the sound device you set in the winecfg options dialogue rather than system -> preferences -> sound?

dalsen writes...

I assume you mean it's ignoring the sound device you set in the winecfg options dialogue rather than system -> preferences -> sound?

Im having trouble remembering the exact details, but I do remembering using winecfg and still not being able to et the sound coming through the usb headset.

As I recall the only way I used to be able to do it was specifying a value for the sound driver on the wine command line each time I ran it.

Unfortunately my PC is tied up doing a large newsgroup download right now so I cant conveniently boot into linux, and the problem is moot anyway since I find the wine graphics a little too slow in comparison with Directx. I get probably about a 30%+ hit in framerate.

One other general comment I could make, is even if winecfg does what it was supposed to, and there was some "flashcfg" where I could set up the audio device for flash player, the point is I shouldn't need to know about them. I should be able to run wine, or click on youtube and it should just use my system preferences audio device (as any windows app would). Sure, give me the ability to override it in xxxxcfg but thats something I should be able to learn in my own time when I choose to learn it.

I suppose Im being a little unfair, as my criticism is of some applications that run under Linux, rather than Linux itself. Actually thats probably one of the most maddening things about it, because I appreciate that Linux is such a good system, but its spoilt by unnecessarily complex applications.

(Ill try and do the winecfg thing tonight and report back)

Spam eggs sausage writes...

I would never have this problem in windows.

Exactly why I stopped using it in the first place – not that specific problem, but that's the kind of thing that happens.

Yup...hours and hours of googling and trawling through forums to try and fix something that should "just work". That's the Linux way. I'm sure some people find battling with their PC to be fun but when I want to get something working I just want it to work. I don't want to have to read War & Peace sized documentation and endless FAQ's scattered all over the web.

I have had a similar experience when trying to get a MythTV box up and running (even with the Myth specific distros). Follow all the standard docs and the front end never succesfully connects to the backend database. Frustrating, annoying and overly complicated. That's my Linux experience summed.

Emptysoul writes...

Yup...hours and hours of googling and trawling through forums to try and fix something that should "just work".

Yep... I brought a webcam which is "Windows Compatible" its shaped like hello Kitty and comes with a driver disc, but it doesn't work with Vista... isn't Vista Windows?

I wish it would "just work"... Windows is shit!

Of course its not the manufacturers fault for not providing drivers for your OS of choice, nor is it yours or my fault for not researching that the device would actually work with the OS, now is it?

Gumby No Talent writes...

Yep... I brought a webcam which is "Windows Compatible" its shaped like hello Kitty and comes with a driver disc, but it doesn't work with Vista... isn't Vista Windows?

Do you need a bucket to cry into over your $50 webcam?

You can't seriously tell me that with all your linux experience, you don't actually check that devices you buy will work in the operating systems you run. Any person remotely interested in computers who hasn't been in a coma for the last 3 years KNOWs to check hardware compatibility with vista before buying something.

Just like the people who were running 2000/XP had to make sure their hardware wasn't only windows 95/98 compatible.

Gumby No Talent writes...

I brought a webcam which is "Windows Compatible"

I wish it would "just work"... Windows is shit!

Indeed. I must have mentioned earlier that Linux at this stage in development actually supports more hardware then Windows at this stage of development (i.e. Vista/Win7). Vista's major issue upon release and still is the almost complete lack of hardware support for older hardware and a fair bit of new hardware too, like that hello kitty cam ;-).

Now you're probably thinking. Ok, let's downgrade to XP since it is perfectly reasonable to use an 8 years old more stable version of an operating system. That would be nice if the motherboards made today actually came with XP drivers. The last 7 we ordered here don't, they simply defaulted to being Vista-capable only.

So what do you do when you have an older printer, webcam and other peripherals unsuported by vista, but a brand new motherboard unsuported by XP. Some people hack their vista drivers to work on XP in this case and this is perfectly possible, but it doesn't "just work" now does it?

Funny story, my custom build of ubuntu linux picks up my new computer and my older peripherals and it just works. :-)

Spam eggs sausage writes...

Trouble is the sound is coming through the onbouard sound rather than the USB headset which is what Ive got to playback device set to.

So you are complaining that the built-in soundcard on your USB headset isn't hijacking your system sound like it does on windows?

As far as switching over to USB sound devices you need pulse audio switcher which doesn't fit on a single CD these days together with a somewhat functional OS.

And before you even paste what's on the instruction, flash does work with pulseaudio. I use USB speakers at work.

rugger writes...

Just like the people who were running 2000/XP had to make sure their hardware wasn't only windows 95/98 compatible.

Actually back then all the devices that were windows-compatible worked by installing the older driver.. oh and you get that same warning that the driver isnt signed oh noez...

Windows Vista has ditched support for a lot of hardware in order to gain performance marks. It performs better then XP on newer computers because it is aware of recent improvements on the x86/x86_64 architecture.

sluxor writes...

Actually back then all the devices that were windows-compatible worked by installing the older driver.. oh and you get that same warning that the driver isnt signed oh noez...

No they didn't just work with old drivers. Most devices could not share the same win 95/98 and windows nt/2000 drivers as they were completely different operating systems.

My old lexmark inkjet printer originally came with Windows 95/98 drivers only. There was NO way of getting it to work under windows 2000, until lexmark released correct drivers for windows 2000/XP (which they eventually did after XP was released) There was a long period there where I would have killed someone/anyone just to make this printer work in windows 2000, as I was a poor uni student at the time.

rugger writes...

My old lexmark inkjet printer originally came with Windows 95/98 drivers only.

Well you can't just click to install it.

You extract the driver files, the whatever.ini and whatever else is linked to it. I had windows 95/98-only devices too and they worked on XP by detection from device manager... You literally cannot do that with vista because the driver installation structure was modified enough.

Redistribution rights of source code is the norm.
It is my belief that Stallman like Mao have seriously slowed progress with the uptake of his ideologies. Might not mean much to a user but for me as a programmer who has dependants it is not a viable systems to create for.

Compiling source code.
Distributions handle most of that work but I think it is a unrealistic expectation that the distribution is burdened with the cost.

Donations
Seems to unprofessional. I always have the feeling I only getting flee market quality software.

More so than the software it is the limitations of the environment incubated by Open Source/Free Software that I find myself not using Unix-Like systems for the PC.

Plus the fact it is often not well supported by industry standard proprietary software.

sluxor writes...

You extract the driver files, the whatever.ini and whatever else is linked to it. I had windows 95/98-only devices too and they worked on XP by detection from device manager... You literally cannot do that with vista because the driver installation structure was modified enough.

Please provide links or proof that this is indeed how it was. Because I am pretty sure it didn't go down like that.

Gumby No Talent writes...

Yep... I brought a webcam which is "Windows Compatible" its shaped like hello Kitty and comes with a driver disc, but it doesn't work with Vista... isn't Vista Windows?

I wish it would "just work"... Windows is shit!

Of course its not the manufacturers fault for not providing drivers for your OS of choice, nor is it yours or my fault for not researching that the device would actually work with the OS, now is it?

I didn't say anything about hardware or drivers so get back in yer box. I'm talking about Linux software which is distributed with the Linux distrobution failing to work.

Emptysoul writes...

I didn't say anything about hardware or drivers so get back in yer box. I'm talking about Linux software which is distributed with the Linux distrobution failing to work.
You where talking about mythTV and the post prior was talking about USB Headphones not working and the part that I quoted when read in context as a reply to the previous post stated that you wanted stuff to "just work".

MythTV is very hardware dependent with turner cards and remote controls requiring some configuration that can be messy at worst for some devices and a breeze to install for others. I use MythTV with XBMC as the frontend to MythTV.

sluxor writes...

So you are complaining that the built-in soundcard on your USB headset isn't hijacking your system sound like it does on windows?

I think that's a rather silly comment.
Of course I dont want it to hijack my system. I just want to be able to select in in system preferences and have it work when I then click on youtube in in firefox. (like it would in windows)

I hadnt even heard of pulse audio, and even once I found out about it, and downloaded the pulse ausio device chooser, I was still unable to get any sound through youtube.

Im sure its something easily fixed by someone with some knowledge of Linux, which I dont have, and apparently arnt good enough to solve after 3-4 hours of googling and messing about.

Finally Im not complaining. The OP was asking why people arnt using linux, and Im respnding. Had this thread not been here I would have never bothered posting as Its not important for me to get it going, I was just messing about with linux to try and get into it.

Spam eggs sausage writes...

Finally Im not complaining. The OP was asking why people arnt using linux, and Im respnding.

It just some problem you had though isn't it? It doesn't really stop you going further with linux though if you wanted does it? It seems a lot of the time people expect Linux to work 100% bug free even though they most likely put up with things on Windows. I used Windows enough to know it could be very annoying at times.

I've tried giving Linux a chance as my general day-to-day OS on and off over the last 8 years or so. I'm still using Windows. Because it works.

Yes, that's right. I said Windows works. Sure, Linux can be more stable. Linux can be virus free. Linux can be faster and Linux can be free. But free is not always best value for money.

I'll never get back the amount of time I've spent trying to get things to work in Linux. Yes, the newest versions of Ubuntu 9+ and the like have great driver support. Much, much better than what it used to be. But it's still a pain.

I installed Ubuntu 9.0.4 on my Lenovo X300 laptop. It detected everything except my finger-print scanner. So off to Google I go searching for a solution and ThinkFinger comes up. Read the guides, make sure you download the version for correct distro, make sure you follow the install instructions for correct distro version. Go through all the install steps, still doesn't work. Hit Google again and find posts with people saying that in ThinkFinger 0.3 you have to run a different command on a different Ubuntu version and so on. Two hours later my finger print scanner still doesn't work.

Also turns out you need to run a manual script to spin-down the fan on my laptop otherwise it's always on full RPM... again start chasing the right commands for the script for the right distro and right version...

Or how about using my Logitech diNovo mini wireless USB bluetooth keyboard. Works out of the box in Windows, and even in BIOS, but not in Linux as there's a problem with the USB driver not correctly recognizing it as a keyboard/mouse. Have to run a script to import some hex string in some kernel config file...

That's the thing with Linux. Maybe 80 or 90% of what you want to do will work straight off the bat, but you really need to struggle for the other 10 to 20%. I've always had problems like this, whether it be a finger-print scanner, a TV tuner, a wifi adapter, etc.

The majority of people do not know what a command line is, let alone running bash scripts, compiling modules from source, tweaking for distro/version file-system/kernel differences. And when you turn to the online community, due to the huge number of Linux forks, it's very, very hard to find the right information for your case.

With Windows on the other hand, it's popular, so manufacturers make sure their stuff works with it first. Installers are easy to run, there's only a very limited number of versions you need to worry about (XP/Vista, 32/64), and I haven't had to do registry hacks for years. Most of the time, getting things to work is much, much simpler than Linux.

It's like the iPhone. The OS is pretty basic. There's no multi-tasking. There's no blue-tooth file transfer. But it's dead easy to use most of the time and people are lapping it up. And there's only one OS version, so all the apps are compatible, and all the information/documentation you find is consistent.

Linux will never be consistent as every distro tries to out-do each other. Which is it's major downfall. The average consumer doesn't care that the kernel is super stable and secure. The average consumer only cares if the system works, looks cool, and does what it should.

As for the IT dude, there's better things to spend a weekend on than trying to get MythTV working with a WinFast tuner.

kufu writes...

The majority of people do not know what a command line is, let alone running bash scripts, compiling modules from source, tweaking for distro/version file-system/kernel differences.

Not only that, but even for someone who does know, it becomes tiring. I mean, I'd have it on my desktop if there was a viable solution to my SLI + dual monitor setup. But as I've stated before, I don't have the time. Windows is already setup to handle it (well, vista and win7 is, currently using win7).

I'm at a stage now where I don't want to hack my system. I just want to install the system, and use it. Unfortunately for me, at the moment, I cannot do that with linux.

Stercus Accidit writes...

I'm at a stage now where I don't want to hack my system. I just want to install the system, and use it. Unfortunately for me, at the moment, I cannot do that with linux.

Yup, now that my student days are over I'm the same. I don't have the time or patience for it any more. I'd rather pay $200 or $300 dollars and save myself many hours of script hacking, etc. Like I said, free is not always the best value (time wasted could have been spent on more productive stuff).

I use both windows and Linux and windows is good because of gaming etc but I find windows boring as bat dung. I find Linux to be more interesting and more fun to learn and play around with to me anyways.

Also lack of spyware is a bonus to me too.

stmok writes...

I'm still on $0 spent on software (no pirating, all legal).

+1 me too.

kufu writes...

free is not always the best value (time wasted could have been spent on more productive stuff).

yes productive activities like trying to clean up spyware, viruses, malware not to mention all the other defecating that happens on Windows.

vladi voodstock writes...

yes productive activities like trying to clean up spyware, viruses, malware not to mention all the other defacting that happens on Windows.

In all the years I've used Windows I've not had a single virus, but a couple of Trojans, all of which I removed straight away, as I knew the stuff I was downloading was potentially dodgy. Maybe Linux users are incapable of surfing the web responsibly, I dunno. I run a virus scanner once every few months, it doesn't really waste much time to click "run."

vladi voodstock writes...

yes productive activities like trying to clean up spyware, viruses, malware not to mention all the other defacting that happens on Windows.

Indeed I wasted half a day getting that kind of crap out of windows have to watch out for bogus spyware programs too.

I guess I use Linux 95% of the time I kind of neglect windows. :p

randomizer ± writes...

I've not had a single virus, but a couple of Trojans, all of which I removed straight away,
many are not that easy you have to boot info safe mode and others involve installing boot on kill apps, ends up being a wild goose chase.

This also leads to not letting other people use your computer.

Maybe Linux users are incapable of surfing the web responsibly,

I guess when you are used to having sex for free and they suddenly having to pay for a hooker who demands you wear a condom. You start wondering if this really the lifestyle you wish to pursue.

Maybe Linux users are incapable of surfing the web responsibly

LOL, You mean every windows users do? I mean seriously statements like that make me laugh.

vladi voodstock writes...

many are not that easy you have to boot info safe mode and others involve installing boot on kill apps, ends up being a wild goose chase.

This also leads to not letting other people use your computer.

But you can't just assume that because someone uses Windows that they will be infected with such viruses. Same as you can't assume that someone who uses Linux can't be infected with anything, because while it's harder it's not impossible. Joe Average may get them, but Joe Average would rather pay someone to come and fix their "computer" and have most things work without messing around than care about how secure their OS is.

Plus Linux is for geeks, Windows is for most people and OSX is for cool people remember.

Mr1979 writes...

LOL, You mean every windows users do? I mean seriously statements like that make me laugh.

Statements like this which add meaning to my posts also make me laugh.

I dont get the whole holier than thou attitudes that come across different OS's I use both windows and linux and both have advantages and disadvantages.

Each to their own..

Mr1979 writes...

Each to their own..

This is the only valid conclusion in a religious debate.

randomizer ± writes...

Joe Average may get them, but Joe Average would rather pay someone to come and fix their "computer" and have most things work without messing around than care about how secure their OS is.

Fix it? end up charging you a whopping fee and recommending you buy additional hardware. Not to mention browsing all your personal data ( stealing them to).

You think this is far fetched? A Canadian current affair show did an expose on catching out your best friends scamming you.
http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/2007/10/03/geeks/

vladi voodstock writes...

Fix it? end up charging you a whopping fee and recommending you buy additional hardware. Not to mention browsing all your personal data ( stealing them to).

You think this is far fetched? A Canadian current affair show did an expose on catching out your best friends scamming you.
http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/2007/10/03/geeks/

Get some decent friends then. I go for $15/hour, and that was the rate they offered, not what I asked for. I'm not interested in ripping people off so I take what they want to pay. Of course this is not a business, if it was then I'd charge more but I'd have to if I wanted to make a living off it.

There are scammers in every business. EB Games scam people every day.

randomizer ± writes...

I go for $15/hour, and that was the rate they offered, not what I asked for.

At least we know where your interests are.

vladi voodstock writes...

At least we know where your interests are.

I don't know whether to take that as sarcastic or not.

depending on how long the work took, a carton of beer would be nice

or a smaller job, a six pack.

vladi voodstock writes...

yes productive activities like trying to clean up spyware, viruses, malware not to mention all the other defecating that happens on Windows.

As an IT professional, I very rarely get viruses or trojans in windows. You only get these if you browse to dodgy sites and download dodgy software (cracks/serials are the worst). All-in-all, I spend much less time fighting with the OS than I do when trying to run Linux.

I recently setup a Windows 7 HTPC. Windows Media Center automatically detected my Leadtek Winfast Tuner card, scanned for channels and got me up and running with Live TV in a few minutes. Granted I had to download some codec packs to play mkvs and other video formats, after I did that, I can now watch any video/audio file, watch live tv, listen to live fm radio and watch/rip dvds & bluerays (using AnyDVD HD for the BD stuff).

I could have probably done the same with some Linux setup, but I'm sure it would've drove me mad. Is there even a way to play BD rips in Linux without transcoding and stuff?

I've dabbled with Ubuntu in the past and really liked how easy to use it was despite little annoyances, but I've used XP as my primary OS for years and consider myself a "Windows user". I do like the idea of using a FOSS operating system though, and last month when I bought a new computer I planned on dual-booting XP and Ubuntu, using Ubuntu as my primary OS and running XP only when desperately needed. I wanted to stay away from Vista altogether, so I planned to use XP until its end of life and then move to Ubuntu.

But on a whim I installed the RC of Windows 7 within a week of buying the new computer, and it is so fantastic that I've not yet even installed Ubuntu, let alone ran it.

So the answer to what's stopping me is Windows 7. It's not as logically put together as Ubuntu, and if I were unfamiliar with Windows I would find Ubuntu much easier to learn, but as an existing Windows user I find Windows 7 to be the best operating system out there.

I am planning on installing Ubuntu on my laptop though, and using that around the house or when I need mobility.

EDIT: Regarding viruses, I've never been infected since I moved from a communal computer at my parents' house to my own machine around 5 years ago. If you're smart, there's no reason why you'll get infected by using Windows.

In a significant minority of cases, it has very little to do with 'being smart'... There are millions upon millions of windows machines out there infected through no fault of the user (unless you count not having a hardware firewall as a user fault, instead of a common reality).

Aside from all the very valid points to be made about Linux being less likely to get infected due to more secure design, being a smaller (and diffuse) target, and being much less inclined to train its users in unsafe behaviours, I certainly find the fact that you can get pretty much anything useful from the repos (rather than some random website) to be an obvious protection against some of the more common ways that windows machines get infected.

It's taking some getting used to, but I can already identify that benefit. Auto-updates for secondary apps (and not just the OS) has to be a big security plus as well.

And yes, I _know_ Linux can occasionally have a remote vuln found that allows code execution... But I can't remember the last time I heard of one being used widescale – meanwhile millions of windows comps get infected every year or two through remote exploits.

As to the idea of "well, nerds on windows don't get infected, they know what they're doing, it's only the plebs that download cracks"... I am by anyone's measure a total winnerd, but I have still seen windoze computers get taken over in front of my eyes and been unable to easily limit the damage – short of turning off the comp and accessing it from another machine or something..
One of the few times this happened, I was looking for some filtering software for my folks, so they could 'kid-safe' the comp for young relatives; clicked on a promising-looking google result (on IE, this is back before I found mozilla), and instantly I knew stuff was going on because of the drive activity and screen response, and within seconds the machine was rootkitted, task manager and other apps were replaced or disabled and useful websites blocked to aid in the infection's survival. If this had happened on a Linux box the damage would have been minimal, and easily fixed, or at least it would have had to be a much more competent programmer behind it to handle things like privilege elevations etc (not required when windows forced admin for anything to work)..

I know windows has advanced slightly beyond this now, but it still represents too much of a bend-over-and-take-it security model for me to ever feel safe using it for anything more than games.

And even on that note, there are so many free games for ubuntu that it'll take me a while to get through them! (then I have the dozen retail ones I own that play nice with WINE, like Diablo 2 and Titan Quest) ;)

*.exe.
do i need to say much more? this makes windows just that bit easier for me.

That, and i seem to be cursed when it comes to using linux. I've tried Ubuntu, kubuntu, fedora and opensuse. None seem to have worked for me. i get insufficient space errors when trying to update ubuntu on a standard install on a 500gb drive. I can't get linux to see a windows partition more than once per restart. I get to the login screen on ubuntu and get told my session was less than 10 seconds, logs in and tells me again it was less than 10 seconds.

I get fedora to the point of not being able to boot even. It took me 30 minutes to get Nvidia drivers to work on fedora 10 for a gigabyte 8800GT.

I read the relevent forums and setup guides for this. Had friends that are good with linux check some of these installs and they are set correctly that they can see.

All this is with standard installs on virtual machines or on physical hardware that is about 2 years old.

Windows just installs and works. has *.exe files and is in general user friendly

Edit: only success i had was with Mythbuntu, but then not really because my tv card wasn't supported, but it was the only one that other than that worked easily