Please tell me I am wrong about Linux

[David M]

I have heard about Linux since the late 90's. Linux was purported to be the OS that at least competes with Windows, if not brings down Windows.

It's 2005 now and there is no user friendly version of Linux that for the typical computer novice like myself, that is easy to install and run. There is no software either that is easy to understand, install and troubleshoot. One pretty much has to understand UNIX?...correct?

I hear the drivers are difficult find and to install...etc etc

What happened to a user friendly version of Linux?

What happened to all the software?

Why are not half the homes and businesses in the USA running Linux?

Why is Linux not a serious competitor to Microsoft?

I invested in RHAT (Redhat) not long after its IPO so I did believe in its future at one time. I believed in Linux and still do...but what happened?

Why don't we see people debating whether to buy a Linux or Microsoft OS?

Why is Linux languishing as a viable alternative to Microsoft?

I truly would like to see a user friendly version of Linux and tons of software.

When will it happen? What could make it happen? Could it be that people don't work for free and developing a user friendly OS and software just wont happen untill people get paid for their work to write Linux software?

I am honestly not bashing Linux...I love the concept and I love competition and would love to see Microsoft get a well deserved arse kicking. I am just really curious why its has not grown appreciably over the years.

Please don't attack me for asking what I think are fair and legitimate questions of Linux. Perhaps my perspective is all wrong...but my perspective I believe, is also most peoples perspective of Linux...accurate or not and fair or not.

David M

[Dangermouse1]

I think you are wrong.
It's 2005 now and there is no user friendly version of Linux that for the typical computer novice like myself, that is easy to install and run. There is no software either that is easy to understand, install and troubleshoot. One pretty much has to understand UNIX?...correct?

Wrong you cant get any easier than running one of the live versions straight off a cd without having to install it on your hardrive. There are also a lot of Linux distos that are as easy to install as windows or easier. I have used RedHat9 Mandrake and SUSE to name a few and all have been at least as easy to install as windows.

What happened to a user friendly version of Linux?
I have used RedHat9 Mandrake and SUSE and yes they are different from windows but not less user friendly.

What happened to all the software?
There are 1000`s of programs for Linux and like the OS`s there free.

I would not go as far as saying windows or Linux was better than the other they are different and in a lot of ways very similar I use both and maybe you should read some of the other posts about which version to try and give it another go afterall it will only cost you your time and the price of a cd or 2.

[TheJackal]

I dont necessarily agree with you 100%, however I believe that Linux will not be accepted in a major way by the end user, until there is a standard for Linux software design. Right now, open source Linux software design, is just a bid free-for-all, with no standards or direction.

[elocal]

It's 2005 now and there is no user friendly version of Linux that for the typical computer novice like myself, that is easy to install and run. There is no software either that is easy to understand, install and troubleshoot. One pretty much has to understand UNIX?...correct?

It is not hard, it is just different. You are used to Windows, I would guess (please correct me if I am wrong), the way you do stuff is not going to be the same. There are still many VERY "user friendly" flavors of Linux, as stated before by Dangermouse1, these include Fedora, Mandrake, etc... That does not mean these "friendly" distros are better, it just mean that they have graphical frontends to the many text based configuration tools and files.


I hear the drivers are difficult find and to install...etc etc

Drivers are compiled in the kernel or as modules. So if the kernel of the distribution you are using has the drivers for your devices compiled in you shouldn't have any issues. Other distros include modules in their repositories of packages that you just install. If none of this is available, you download the driver's souce and compile it, this is very well documented in README and INSTALL notes.


What happened to a user friendly version of Linux?

See question #1.



What happened to all the software?

There is LOT of open source software. Software is not a weakpoint open source. Usually there are many apps that accomplish the same objective for you to choose.


Why are not half the homes and businesses in the USA running Linux?

Because microsoft holds their market tightly, people are used to Window/Microsoft ways, manufactureres include it by default, schools use it in their system. People are familiar with Microsoft software, it will be a pain for them to change, it will be gradually hapening though, I see that people are getting much more tecnologically educated now.


Why is Linux not a serious competitor to Microsoft?

It is a serious competitor, it just does not have the serious market share, but it is getting there. You know if Microsoft has a competitor when Microsoft try to make a camapign of attacks, like they have done with their TCO(Total Cost of Ownership) articles, and their different policies.


I invested in RHAT (Redhat) not long after its IPO so I did believe in its future at one time. I believed in Linux and still do...but what happened?

Redhat is not Linux, it is just a company that gets revenue from basically selling Linux support to other people and companies that use their distribution.


Why don't we see people debating whether to buy a Linux or Microsoft OS?

People, generally, are ignorant. And see question #4.


Why is Linux languishing as a viable alternative to Microsoft?

It is not languishing, in fact, it is growing and eating microsoft's market share; slowly, but steady.


I truly would like to see a user friendly version of Linux and tons of software.

When will it happen? What could make it happen? Could it be that people don't work for free and developing a user friendly OS and software just wont happen untill people get paid for their work to write Linux software?

There is ton of software, and there are many user friendly Linux distributions. If they are no as user friendly as you expected, I guess learnign the different ways works very well.

[thefultonhow]

Why are not half the homes and businesses in the USA running Linux?

Why is Linux not a serious competitor to Microsoft?

Why don't we see people debating whether to buy a Linux or Microsoft OS?

Why is Linux languishing as a viable alternative to Microsoft?

Linux is a VERY serious competitor to Microsoft, so much so that they are spending millions of dollars on PR/advertising/spin/FUD to counter the threat. The thing is that Linux is not competing in the low-margin desktop space, but rather in the lucrative server market. Many companies debate whether to go Linux or Microsoft -- for their servers, not their workstations. I'd say that it's a fair estimate to say that half of the servers in the US are running some derivative of Linux.

The reason, of course, is cost; Windows Server 2003 costs thousands of dollars per license, and companies often have to buy multiple licenses. Linux, on the other hand, is very cheap comparatively. Microsoft has been attacking Linux's Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), which involves man-hours dedicated to administration and training, the hardware, etc., but they haven't been very successful.

[David M]

Thanks for your thoughtful answers. I may give Linux a try. Can Linux be dual booted with Windows as the other OS on the same machine?...or do I need a separate machine?

[rightcoast]

I always say that if a user was given a Linux machine configured for them, they would be happier with it. The problem with Linux for "Average Joe" is configuration and updating. With the advent of apt-get, flavors using that are eassier to update than MS, IMO. Dependencies are far less of an issue.

Linux won't "win" until people have the option to order a pre-built PC with it installed and configured for them.

I saw this somewhere else before once, and am paraphrasing.

"i don't know I was just surfing the web, reading email. I clicked a link and it crashed"

That is how many people explain the moment a virus entered the PC, I spend a few minutes a week explaining what a double click is to people and believe that users like that would better off if hand a ready *nix machine, no doubt in my mind.

I linked to a good tutorial on dual booting here in this thread.
http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.php?t=125108&highlight=dual+boot+red+hat

[Wolf_10]

I jumped into the Linux environment this year to learn about it. I am a Linux newbie and am speaking from an average users standpoint.

I have used Knoppix and bought Novells SUSE Linux 9.2 Pro, and I am impressed and disapointed at the same time. Linux has so much potential but fails the average user. The average user drives the desktop market.

Heres my take, Linux IS difficult for the average desktop user. I think Linux is missing out big time on a big market and for bad reasons. Linux producers won't hide or replace the command line. They say its easier, but that is only true for people who learned about the command line. 98% of the rest of the world does not care or want the command line. It's ugly and you have to actually remember commands.

People want to point and click their way around an OS and never open a manual. Linux is still too complicated for most people. A part-time computer geek like me can have endless entertainment learning about the OS. But most people don't want to learn about thier OS, they just want it to work without thinking about it. They don't want to mount or unmount and the only kernel they want to hear about is a kernel of popcorn or maybe kernel sanders. :o

[kiwipcman]

Linux really is growing strong in the server market, down here in New Zealand.

Linux is not very common desktop OS here, it probably has more to do with apathy and fear of the unknown than user friendliness. KDE and Gnome desktops are not that different to navigate and Staroffice or even Openoffice apps are good enough for most users needs.

Companies like Red Hat are really gaining strength in Australia and New Zealand. I know several folks now working in new positions at Red Hat Australia.

When I sat my MCSE exams a while ago, for every 100 MCSE there were about 3 Linux guys...locally I'm sure it's very different in the USA and the rest of the world. I went back to Uni last week to catch up with my old tutor, he told me that this year he has 4 students out of every 20 getting Linux certification. So in my part of the world Linux has really started to get a strong footing, though the jobs and the home users are not there yet.

At home I run a dual boot with XP and Red Hat 9.0. As long as you install your windows OS first and have a couple of partitions set up it's really quite easy to install both OS's onto a PC. You'll get the best of both worlds.

I use linux for almost all of my programming, web, email and office needs. I use XP for gaming and to provide the option for my wife and kids.

I think the big limitations are for gaming and multimedia applications. But it is all changing...slowly.

[digitalfreedom64]

In my opinion Linux won't be a threat on the desktop until it has some kind of direction. As it stands now linux is a free for all. It is my belief that an OS can't survive in the desktop market unless there is some kind of standard. If someone can link a distro that will convince otherwise i'll consider switching.

[Ind-PC_student]

The truth is that what is going to destroy windows is not any other o/s
It is its price, use of resouces, cust cotting on the developing side, reliability [or lack of], its ever expanding minimum requirements , and its patronizing attitude towards its customers.

And most of all its monopolly over OEMS companies there will be a time that it wil no longer be able to grow and it will colapse slowly.

[digitalfreedom64]

The reason I rufuse to use linux is the interface and the lack of driver support.

[thefultonhow]

The reason I rufuse to use linux is the interface and the lack of driver support.

What's wrong with the interface? I think that KDE is maybe a bit more cluttered than Windows, but it's not so much so as to render it unusable. Drivers are not that much of an issue -- I believe that ATI and nVidia have Linux drivers -- but there is the issue of application support. The main reason I'm not going to switch is that there are three applications that there are no robust Linux alternatives to -- FirstClass (the email system used by my high school), Inspiration (an outlining and diagramming program), and iTunes (for iPod sync).

[Ind-PC_student]

The KDE interface is not the only one there is also the GNOME that in my opinion is quite nice and it has built in support for the hotkeys on the top of the keyboard works very well on mine.

[mairving]

I dont necessarily agree with you 100%, however I believe that Linux will not be accepted in a major way by the end user, until there is a standard for Linux software design. Right now, open source Linux software design, is just a bid free-for-all, with no standards or direction.
What is Linux Software Design? Are you talking about the Architecture of Linux itself or the programs? If you are talking about the Architecture, then you are wrong. It is tightly controlled with standards and easily reviewable since the source code is available. If you are talking about the programs, you are also wrong since many of them are Open Source and have nothing to do with Linux besides it being Open Source also. Take MySQL, for example, it is Open Source, although not GPL'd, but there are versions for Windows, Linux, Unix, BSD, AIX, OSX, etc. Others like Apache are similar. These programs are not Linux ones and they are well designed with high standards and direction. Some like Apache are used more than Microsoft's IIs web server. Plenty of other examples as well.

I think that a lot of people particularly people who use Linux for casual home use, feel that it leaves a lot to be desired. I personally rarely if ever use a GUI on Linux. Actually it has been a year or two since I have used Linux after porting my servers over to FreeBSD. Many would casually try Linux, see the pretty desktop but then get disappointed that their hardware or their latest game wouldn't work and then complain about how God awful Linux is. Well the Linux desktop isn't really what Linux is all about. There are a lot of people that would like to see it move in that direction. Novell who now owns SUSE should help by throwing some of their weight into it. There are plenty others out there who have no real desire to see 'nix' moving into the desktop direction, myself somewhat included.

[digitalfreedom64]

Well the problem with ATI is that they have like 4 different driver versions for different types of linux and i couldn't figure out what driver to download. They have this detection thing that's supposed to help you find out which to get but i couldn't get the stupid thing to work.

[Ind-PC_student]

The truth is that what is going to destroy windows is not any other o/s
It is its price, use of resouces, cust cotting on the developing side, reliability [or lack of], its ever expanding minimum requirements , and its patronizing attitude towards its customers.

And most of all its monopolly over OEMS companies there will be a time that it wil no longer be able to grow and it will colapse slowly.
I think I was wrong about this reply but the most important thing is what Linux has brought to the world of computing the variety and freedom of choice, as one solution does not fit all users!

And most importantly every user has a diferent aproach to computing.

[copyright_1978]

By standardisation I believe my mate means there is no real structure to the way the Linux market rolls-out its software. For instance, because of the vigorous competition in the Microsoft based market, vendors go through a tight software development method, i.e. Business Planning, Market Analysis then development hence the software application tends to be better quality to compete in the software market with the exception of a few specialised applications like servers etc. For the home user on the other hand, tight development methodologies haven’t been put into practice hence you get developers flushing the application scene with an introductory application whatever it is which undergoes a few extra years of development by the community. Also seamless integration is also another problem for the Linux community since Microsoft based applications often provide seamless integration into their existing solutions such as office etc, Linux is lagging in that region.

The bottom line is, for the commercial industry, Linux may or may not be suitable, if it is, they often have the in-house capabilities to re-engineer open source applications to align with their business functions. For home users though, Linux has still got a long way to go, since as my mate mentioned it’s a free-for-all situation and we are lumped with what we get by the community.

I prefer windows purely because it has the software I need. It also crashes a lot less than Linux applications.

I do wish that someone continues this thread so that I can test out my masters degree knowledge in this subject.

[Ind-PC_student]

By standardisation I believe my mate means there is no real structure to the way the Linux market rolls-out its software. For instance, because of the vigorous competition in the Microsoft based market, vendors go through a tight software development method, i.e. Business Planning, Market Analysis then development hence the software application tends to be better quality to compete in the software market with the exception of a few specialised applications like servers etc. For the home user on the other hand, tight development methodologies haven’t been put into practice hence you get developers flushing the application scene with an introductory application whatever it is which undergoes a few extra years of development by the community. Also seamless integration is also another problem for the Linux community since Microsoft based applications often provide seamless integration into their existing solutions such as office etc, Linux is lagging in that region.

The bottom line is, for the commercial industry, Linux may or may not be suitable, if it is, they often have the in-house capabilities to re-engineer open source applications to align with their business functions. For home users though, Linux has still got a long way to go, since as my mate mentioned it’s a free-for-all situation and we are lumped with what we get by the community.

I prefer windows purely because it has the software I need. It also crashes a lot less than Linux applications.

I do wish that someone continues this thread so that I can test out my masters degree knowledge in this subject.
There is a old saying that goes like:

If you want to ruin a perfectly good Idea put a commite on it!!
example windows, lets take a look at its priorities

1 Make the stock holders happy, and make a monopoly
2 Profits Very important
3 Commercial campaighning
4 Name calling at other operating systems
5 FUD advertizing and ever expanding minimum requirements
6 Unreliable comparisons one sided metrics
7 User registration The ID NO
8 Service Packs and size of applications
9 Expensive System and office Applications
10 Customer satisfaction

As for linux

1 Cooperation
2 Users satisfaction
3 Security
4 Community involvment
5 Researvch into new technologies Filesystems and Kernel updates
6 No acountabitlity to share holders
7 No pressure to Make profits
8 Stable swap partition size
9 No need for Negative campaining
10 Profits not that important

[Ind-PC_student]

As for your cenario of linux applications crashing more often than windows ones I find it quite extraordinary, because for me the system in windows crashes more often then linux

As for integration i find that linux is very well integrated with open office.org in my distro.

And as MR Torvalds once said "Linux should be like the automobile Industry, Very widespread and diverse"

[surewhynot]

After reading this thread curiosity got the cat. I downloaded Ubuntu live and gave it a try. I would recommend this for anybody who is curiuos. I have no prior Linnux experience and I'm not even that great with Windows lol. Overall it seems pretty easy. I havent had a problem yet.
I have an old computer laying around that I might load linnux on just to learn more.

[nocturnx]

Linux is still gaining popularity and becoming a larger threat to microsoft everyday. Even Walmart sells PC desktops pre-loaded with linux! Thats a huge step towards getting it out to the average mainstream user. I think if more people where educated on linux they would definatley be looking that way.

[Chiquito]

Just go to Distro Watch . com a nd get a C/D for a $1.99 of Mepis 3.3.1. If you want support go to Mepis . org and get a C/D fo less than $15.00 shipped. And if you don't want to spend any $$s download it for free and then go to Mepis Lovers . org forums and they will help you with everything.
#1. Mepis looks like XP, #2. Mepis is easier than XP to install, #3 Mepis comes with all the drivers for your new video and sound cards even configures itself to wireless, #4, it comes with two web browsers, and one that is absolutley awesome, #5. it comes with most free software including video editing software that usally is an extra with Windows, two offic programs, #6. if I can install and use it so can you cause I've been using or actually learning about computing for about two years. Good luck,Chiquito!!!

[Ind-PC_student]

Just go to Distro Watch . com a nd get a C/D for a $1.99 of Mepis 3.3.1. If you want support go to Mepis . org and get a C/D fo less than $15.00 shipped. And if you don't want to spend any $$s download it for free and then go to Mepis Lovers . org forums and they will help you with everything.
#1. Mepis looks like XP, #2. Mepis is easier than XP to install, #3 Mepis comes with all the drivers for your new video and sound cards even configures itself to wireless, #4, it comes with two web browsers, and one that is absolutley awesome, #5. it comes with most free software including video editing software that usally is an extra with Windows, two offic programs, #6. if I can install and use it so can you cause I've been using or actually learning about computing for about two years. Good luck,Chiquito!!!
In cheep linux site you can even buy a pre installed mini itx pc with fedora core dont know about monitor ill find out about it.
http://www.cheeplinux.co.uk/

[Ind-PC_student]

No monitor but you now have a choice of operating systems CentOS, Fedora and Mandriva I might buy one just to try those small silent mini-itx units.

[Ind-PC_student]

Competition is not that important Linux should make sure not to fall in the same trap as microsoft and other commentcial software companies, in the pursuit of profits neglect quality.

[Ind-PC_student]

Adverts aside I still enjoy linux because of it's flexibility and of course it teaches me something about system and software configuration far more than other alternatives

[Ind-PC_student]

My conclusion is, yes you are wrong about Linux mate as long as Linux continues to be community driven it will always be better and far more secure then all the commercial counter parts.

It is my theory about security:

Commercial software is easier to compromize then comunity OSS software for a simple reason, the number of people working in each case.

1 Comercial software Just employ a limited number of people developing and usually there are those "idiotic" old fashioned manager that use the cost cutting solution of downsizing staff and departments, making the software dificult to update and less secure and easier to compromize.

2 Community Driven software usually developed by loads of users, supporters, sympatizers, enthusiasts and freelancers, making the speed of making updates, patches and new versions much quicker

And in conclusion people that usualy make build or program "viruses and other nasty apps", Will find it more dificult to compromize the second case, due to the varierty of standards and the speed of wich the solutions (patches are developed), although community driven software is usually open source the amount of knowledge to gather is greater and more dificult to learn then the one size fits all strategy.

[Ind-PC_student]

My conclusion is, yes you are wrong about Linux mate as long as Linux continues to be community driven it will always be better and far more secure then all the commercial counter parts.

It is my theory about security:

Commercial software is easier to compromize then comunity OSS software for a simple reason, the number of people working in each case.

1 Comercial software Just employ a limited number of people developing and usually there are those "idiotic" old fashioned manager that use the cost cutting solution of downsizing staff and departments, making the software dificult to update and less secure and easier to compromize.

2 Community Driven software usually developed by loads of users, supporters, sympatizers, enthusiasts and freelancers, making the speed of making updates, patches and new versions much quicker

And in conclusion people that usualy make build or program "viruses and other nasty apps", Will find it more dificult to compromize the second case, due to the varierty of standards and the speed of wich the solutions (patches are developed), although community driven software is usually open source the amount of knowledge to gather is greater and more dificult to learn then the one size fits all strategy.
??? Is there any one with a diverging opinion, will anyone defend the Winslows monopoly?

Are there any other theories about this topic Or did i have the last word?

Would anyone add to this discussion?

[Xayd]

And as MR Torvalds once said "Linux should be like the automobile Industry, Very widespread and diverse"

that's a great quote, the response from myself as a user would be

but the difference is the automobile industry doesn't have three different guys singing the praises of square vs rectanguar vs triangular tires that won't fit on any cars, all while a tire distro runs around behind them making the tires round so that the car will work.

and it's not hard to find versions of various softwares written for linux that don't work with their own dependancies in their released state. end users often don't see it because distros fix these compatibility issues for them, but they exist.

try to compile gnome from scratch someday, you'll likely find it quite impossible (and no, gentoo zealots, emerge doesn't count as "from scratch" ;)).

and that's the one complaint i have. i think Linux as an OS, not just a kernel, would be better served if the kernel maintainers also had a distro standard for various things that are required for basic operating system functionality.

as long as the right hand doesn't have to care what the left hand is doing because "the distros will fix it for us", these situations won't ever really improve, because there's no motivation for them to.

as long as gtk or pango or glib or jade whatever it is decides to break all compatibility with previous versions, and in so doing break other software as well, all to implement a new way to translate "whoa" written in a PDF file into traditional japanese with anti-aliased fonts or other such ridiculous thing that 99.999% of users don't even use, without someone with an eye on the bigger picture telling them "that's fantastic, fix compatibility and it'll see the light of day, til then the old version will be standard", it's always gonna be a hassle for the end user.

and i'm sure there will be those that respond to this idea with a "who are you to tell people what they can and can't do", to which i would respond with "if your own system is running a distro and not assembled from scratch, you've had a distro do the same thing for you too".

and this is coming from someone who uses linux every day. there are lots of useful softwares for linux that windows has no comparison for, but for long term viability, i think linux's current development cycle of kernel ---> supporting software in various stages of working or entirely broken ----> distro putting it together and "fixing" it into an OS for the end user is already a failure.

[Ind-PC_student]

That was true until recently, but now they are starting something called L.S.B.
[linux Standard Base] and it willl soon solve some of this problems as you will see.

And under windows you can certainly not change your display manager or compile one either, but under linux on a popular distro you can choose about 4 or five different types of display managers, for example on suse 9.1 i had GNOME DM, KDE DM, FWM, TWM, XFCE, enlightenment.

as for dependencies when I install a .rpm file if there is a dependencie short fall i usually find the missing dependency by installing a lib*.rpm file depending on filename specified in the dependency failiure message.

as for installing some games i aleady sucssessfully installed a sh <prgname>_install.run
file without problems.

in my case GLEST. and i am very bad at it!!!.

[Ind-PC_student]

that's a great quote, the response from myself as a user would be

but the difference is the automobile industry doesn't have three different guys singing the praises of square vs rectanguar vs triangular tires that won't fit on any cars, all while a tire distro runs around behind them making the tires round so that the car will work.

and it's not hard to find versions of various softwares written for linux that don't work with their own dependancies in their released state. end users often don't see it because distros fix these compatibility issues for them, but they exist.

try to compile gnome from scratch someday, you'll likely find it quite impossible (and no, gentoo zealots, emerge doesn't count as "from scratch" ;)).

and that's the one complaint i have. i think Linux as an OS, not just a kernel, would be better served if the kernel maintainers also had a distro standard for various things that are required for basic operating system functionality.

as long as the right hand doesn't have to care what the left hand is doing because "the distros will fix it for us", these situations won't ever really improve, because there's no motivation for them to.

as long as gtk or pango or glib or jade whatever it is decides to break all compatibility with previous versions, and in so doing break other software as well, all to implement a new way to translate "whoa" written in a PDF file into traditional japanese with anti-aliased fonts or other such ridiculous thing that 99.999% of users don't even use, without someone with an eye on the bigger picture telling them "that's fantastic, fix compatibility and it'll see the light of day, til then the old version will be standard", it's always gonna be a hassle for the end user.

and i'm sure there will be those that respond to this idea with a "who are you to tell people what they can and can't do", to which i would respond with "if your own system is running a distro and not assembled from scratch, you've had a distro do the same thing for you too".

and this is coming from someone who uses linux every day. there are lots of useful softwares for linux that windows has no comparison for, but for long term viability, i think linux's current development cycle of kernel ---> supporting software in various stages of working or entirely broken ----> distro putting it together and "fixing" it into an OS for the end user is already a failure.


Well ithing you might be right in some aspects but I am inclined to ask this very simple question?

If you tried even to change the Dsplay manager of windows and compile another, what would you think would be the action undertaken by the MS$ winslows$ people?

And it would be very nice if you Post onto the forum main page with the details on how you attempted to compile the gnome desktop and what failed and what error messages you found.

And we might as a group find solutions to the problem, like old saying says "problem shared problem halved" and the biggest benefit of this thread would be more knowledge I might just find a solution to your problem.

It is very brave of you to even trying to compile it, i think Your audacity and determination is very praise worthy, not everyone is even capable of using the comand line, mainly me after three years of sussessfull linux usage am still starting to learn the basics of the bash.

[Ind-PC_student]

and dont forget to state the files used for the installation.

[kilgoretrout]

To all those who don't think that linux in particular and open source software in general are not a significant threat to MS, I have to inform you that MS disagrees with you.
Every publicly traded company is required to annually file certain disclosure statements with the Securities and Exchange Commision. For the last several years, MS has identified linux and open source software as a major risk to the continuing viability of its business model in those SEC filings.
These filings, submitted under oath and with substantial civil and criminal penalties for failure to disclose known business risks, stand in sharp contrast to the statements made in MS's unrelenting PR campaign against linux and open source.
So whatever your personal assessment may be as to the continuing viability of linux, MS's assessment is clear - linux is viewed a huge threat to MS's business model justifying a continuing multimillion dollar FUD campaign against linux and open source software.

[Chiquito]

this is a good thread and a good topic, I really don't have an argument but its been a wonder to me to see something like Linux or Bsd offer itself to the public. I actually like windows especislly my XP but for security from a non commercial point of view there is nothing like getting and using Linux just right out of the box. Right now ther is a new Trojan that even Spybot or Ad-ware or anyone can spot, its a keystroke loger. Its so subtle no one knows about yet. Doesn't change the registry settings or anything... I use XP for most everything and when I want to do something special like log in to an account at Pay Pal or the bank I go to Linux... I use Mepis because for me, I don't have a lot of know how, Mepis installation is a no-brainer and it still has all the functionality of windows with advanced encryption, it comes with 2 browsers office programs and some programs you can download like windows. If you want a good video editing program, in widows it will cost you anywhere from $59.00 to $600.00 and this comes with the Gimp and a free tutorial. It comes in many seperate languages, games, and office programs. All this for a $1.99!!! Also Mepis comes witha photo editing and it will configure it self to wireless or Dsl... I don't think windows will go away but with so many people working on Linux or Bsd you defintly will have some choices... Like someone posted right before me people just want to buy something right out of the box and put it to use and Bill Gates is giving people what they want, hes just charging them for it.
Also the way that people are constantly changing and up grading the kernel in Linux it automatically keeps the people who come with the maleware and viruses away... In-Pc_student thanks for keeping the thread going. Chiquito!!!

[Ind-PC_student]

I almost forgot to reply about the hassle for the user, some users like the hassle.

old saying "more dificult the task Bigger is the satisfaction on the results!"
This saying is usually on another language so it does not sound as nice as in its original language sorry!

[ffreeloader]

I have heard about Linux since the late 90's. Linux was purported to be the OS that at least competes with Windows, if not brings down Windows.

It's 2005 now and there is no user friendly version of Linux that for the typical computer novice like myself, that is easy to install and run. There is no software either that is easy to understand, install and troubleshoot. One pretty much has to understand UNIX?...correct?

Incorrect. I have built several Debian machines for friends that are complete computer neophytes. The couldn't even successfully copy and paste in windows and they are using Debian, and accomplishing much more with it, than they ever did with windows.

I hear the drivers are difficult find and to install...etc etc

This is a fallacy. I recently installed a Linksys NIC in a dual boot machine to replace an existing card. Debian found the card, installed the correct drivers, configured the card from the my existing /etc/network/interfaces file. I didn't have to configure anything. It did all this at the intial boot after installing the card.

When I booted into Win2K Pro windows didn't recognize the card. I went to device manager and pointed windows to the exact folder on the included cd and windows promptly installed an incorrect driver from another folder. However, I didn't find this out until I had done the mandatory reboot and had no network connectivity. I went in and unstalled the card in device manager, rebooted, and once again pointed windows to the correct driver. It once again promptly installed the wrong one. So, after that reboot I copied the correct folder to the hard drive from cd and did the card uninstall and reinstall once more during which I pointed windows to the folder on the hard drive. It once again installed the wrong driver from the cd. It didn't use the drivers I pointed it to. I finally figured out the problem and took the cd out of the drive and that finally forced windows to use the drivers I had copied to the hard drive. After finally getting the correct drivers installed I then had to configure the card.

Just which OS was more user friendly? You tell me.

What happened to a user friendly version of Linux?

Already answered for me.

What happened to all the software?

Debian comes with more than 15,000 software packages. How come with Windows?

Why are not half the homes and businesses in the USA running Linux?

A lot of businesses run Linux. I just interviewed for an ISP server admin job in which all their servers are Linux. Linux owns a large share of the web server market and despite MS's efforts at keeping it out of file server market it's making inroads with Samba. Hey, I can implement a Samba file server that transparently authenticates all domain users in an Active Directory domain through the domain controllers. It will automatically create home directories for each user who authenticates to the Samba server and correctly maps Windows user groups to the Unix permissions. It's a tremendous piece of technology.

Why is Linux not a serious competitor to Microsoft?

It is. However, many people have bought into MS's marketing strategies. MS's greatest assents aren't its developers or products. MS's greatest assets are its marketing and sales people. The have managed, by repeating the same mantra over, and over, and over, and over again, to convince a large share of the population that it's much easier to live with insecure unstable products than it is to learn to use something better.

Linux people just need to learn to be better sales people. Then we'll really see MS's market share decline.

I invested in RHAT (Redhat) not long after its IPO so I did believe in its future at one time. I believed in Linux and still do...but what happened?

Straw man. What happened to automobiles? GM's bonds are now junk bonds.

Why don't we see people debating whether to buy a Linux or Microsoft OS?

What's this thread about?

Why is Linux languishing as a viable alternative to Microsoft?

Already answered.

I truly would like to see a user friendly version of Linux and tons of software.

As far as I'm concerned, Debian and a lot of its descendants fit the bill to a tee.

When will it happen? What could make it happen? Could it be that people don't work for free and developing a user friendly OS and software just wont happen untill people get paid for their work to write Linux software?

No. It's already happened.

I am honestly not bashing Linux...I love the concept and I love competition and would love to see Microsoft get a well deserved arse kicking. I am just really curious why its has not grown appreciably over the years.

Sure you are. You just deny/ignore the evidence exists that shows you're wrong. Linux has grown tremendously over the last few years. Would you consider a product that is increasing it's marketshare by 35% a year to be a failure? I sure don't. Any business would love to have that kind of growth.

Please don't attack me for asking what I think are fair and legitimate questions of Linux. Perhaps my perspective is all wrong...but my perspective I believe, is also most peoples perspective of Linux...accurate or not and fair or not.

Yeah, your perspective is all wrong.

[Captn]

What happened to a user friendly version of Linux
David M

Im using Fedora Core 4 and Im fairly NEW to Linux and I love it, my brother installed Ubuntu and he likes it alot. Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntulinux.org/) is user friendly as is Fedora Core 4 (http://fedora.redhat.com/) and the people in the Fedora Core Forums (http://www.fedoraforum.org/) will help you out if you do have any issues. Hope this helps. ;)

[Captn]

What happened to a user friendly version of Linux
David M

Im using Fedora Core 4 and Im fairly NEW to Linux and I love it, my brother installed Ubuntu and he likes it alot. Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntulinux.org/) is user friendly as is Fedora Core 4 (http://fedora.redhat.com/) and the people in the Fedora Core Forums (http://www.fedoraforum.org/) will help you out if you do have any issues. Hope this helps. ;)

[Captn]

What happened to a user friendly version of Linux
David M

Im using Fedora Core 4 and Im fairly NEW to Linux and I love it, my brother installed Ubuntu and he likes it alot. Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntulinux.org/) is user friendly as is Fedora Core 4 (http://fedora.redhat.com/) and the people in the Fedora Core Forums (http://www.fedoraforum.org/) will help you out if you do have any issues. Hope this helps. ;)

[Captn]

I apologize for the 4 replys, as I only meant to post once. :o Can someone delete all but post #38 for me. Thank you in advance.

[Ind-PC_student]

Incorrect. I have built several Debian machines for friends that are complete computer neophytes. The couldn't even successfully copy and paste in windows and they are using Debian, and accomplishing much more with it, than they ever did with windows.



This is a fallacy. I recently installed a Linksys NIC in a dual boot machine to replace an existing card. Debian found the card, installed the correct drivers, configured the card from the my existing /etc/network/interfaces file. I didn't have to configure anything. It did all this at the intial boot after installing the card.

When I booted into Win2K Pro windows didn't recognize the card. I went to device manager and pointed windows to the exact folder on the included cd and windows promptly installed an incorrect driver from another folder. However, I didn't find this out until I had done the mandatory reboot and had no network connectivity. I went in and unstalled the card in device manager, rebooted, and once again pointed windows to the correct driver. It once again promptly installed the wrong one. So, after that reboot I copied the correct folder to the hard drive from cd and did the card uninstall and reinstall once more during which I pointed windows to the folder on the hard drive. It once again installed the wrong driver from the cd. It didn't use the drivers I pointed it to. I finally figured out the problem and took the cd out of the drive and that finally forced windows to use the drivers I had copied to the hard drive. After finally getting the correct drivers installed I then had to configure the card.

Just which OS was more user friendly? You tell me.



Already answered for me.



Debian comes with more than 15,000 software packages. How come with Windows?



A lot of businesses run Linux. I just interviewed for an ISP server admin job in which all their servers are Linux. Linux owns a large share of the web server market and despite MS's efforts at keeping it out of file server market it's making inroads with Samba. Hey, I can implement a Samba file server that transparently authenticates all domain users in an Active Directory domain through the domain controllers. It will automatically create home directories for each user who authenticates to the Samba server and correctly maps Windows user groups to the Unix permissions. It's a tremendous piece of technology.



It is. However, many people have bought into MS's marketing strategies. MS's greatest assents aren't its developers or products. MS's greatest assets are its marketing and sales people. The have managed, by repeating the same mantra over, and over, and over, and over again, to convince a large share of the population that it's much easier to live with insecure unstable products than it is to learn to use something better.

Linux people just need to learn to be better sales people. Then we'll really see MS's market share decline.



Straw man. What happened to automobiles? GM's bonds are now junk bonds.



What's this thread about?



Already answered.



As far as I'm concerned, Debian and a lot of its descendants fit the bill to a tee.



No. It's already happened.



Sure you are. You just deny/ignore the evidence exists that shows you're wrong. Linux has grown tremendously over the last few years. Would you consider a product that is increasing it's marketshare by 35% a year to be a failure? I sure don't. Any business would love to have that kind of growth.



Yeah, your perspective is all wrong.
I am very glad to hear such good results, and its true we are very bad at selling the idea of linux in my case i have no experience at selling or trainig for it!

but I am very curious about your customers feedback could you tell us how many times they had to use or asked for the restore/rescue CD?

Under window I had already to use the OEM CD 5 times the last one made my files dissapear?

BY the way this post made my day!

YES user friendly Linux certainly is.

[ffreeloader]

but I am very curious about your customers feedback could you tell us how many times they had to use or asked for the restore/rescue CD?

Under window I had already to use the OEM CD 5 times the last one made my files dissapear?

I don't regularly do work for a lot of other people, however, of those whom I do computer work for that run XP, everyone of them have had need of their rescue cd, most more than once. I've had to rebuild one Debian machine, and that was caused by a complete neophyte in a hurry. He killed the power in the middle of logging off, and it corrupted something associated with Korganizer and KDE as he was using Korganizer from inside Gnome. I never could find what was corrupted so I had to rebuild the system.

However, that's the only rebuild I've had to do. I've rebuilt all but one of the Windows systems I've worked on due to it either being much quicker to rebuild rather than fight severe malware infestations, the system being hacked and not being trustworthy, or things just getting so corrupted that nothing but a complete wipe of the system partition and reinstall would fix it.

By comparison Debian is painless. I spend time on user education about Linux, but that's a wash because those same people are completely clueless about Windows too and I'd have to spend time educating them about Windows too. I think it's time well spent because I just don't hear complaints once the Debian machines are up and running and the user educated enough to use it.

[Ind-PC_student]

I find that very strange because the yoper linux distro is made in new zealand
and is spaecially optimized with the i686 processors from pentium II to the latest p4 AMD athlon.

[Xayd]

That was true until recently, but now they are starting something called L.S.B.
[linux Standard Base] and it willl soon solve some of this problems as you will see.

And under windows you can certainly not change your display manager or compile one either, but under linux on a popular distro you can choose about 4 or five different types of display managers, for example on suse 9.1 i had GNOME DM, KDE DM, FWM, TWM, XFCE, enlightenment.

as for dependencies when I install a .rpm file if there is a dependencie short fall i usually find the missing dependency by installing a lib*.rpm file depending on filename specified in the dependency failiure message.

as for installing some games i aleady sucssessfully installed a sh <prgname>_install.run
file without problems.

in my case GLEST. and i am very bad at it!!!.


that's the point tho, if i want to install everything from source i shouldn't have to have a distro that runs around behind me and fixes things that don't work before i try to compile them. as long as the distros fix the software for the independant projects, the independant projects don't have to care about intercompatibility or even whether what they release works or not. someone else is doing the work for them, why should they care?

Ind-PC_student it's not just me, we've already seen, for instance, Patrick Volkerding threaten to drop the Gnome desktop from Slackware because of its horrid state and the amount of time required to fix bugs that the individual projects required to have a functioning Gnome desktop have refused to fix themselves over many years. if i remember correctly he said he was spending somewhere along the lines of 60% of the entire time he spent working on Slackware releases just fixing Gnome and its various dependancies so that it could be compiled.

i hardly think the rest of the distros would have it that much easier. that's just not right, imo.

in short, the BSD distros have it right and Linux has it wrong ;).

The OpenStandards idea is great but until you force projects to adhere to it somehow you're not really making any progress, you're just arguing semantics. Your software doesn't appear under FreeBSD stable until it works as advertised and is verified as such by the group of people who oversee FreeBSD ports. If you write a new version that breaks backwards compatibility, it will likely be ignored and no FreeBSD user will ever see it.

That's what Linux needs.

[Ind-PC_student]

Actually I say that the compiling a application from srach for some users is not needed,
Usually you can get the packages preconfigured by the distro's package manager depending on the distro the latest one i am trying has an option to download an app from the web, how fast depends on the connection speed and package size.

[ffreeloader]

Ind-PC_student it's not just me, we've already seen, for instance, Patrick Volkerding threaten to drop the Gnome desktop from Slackware because of its horrid state and the amount of time required to fix bugs that the individual projects required to have a functioning Gnome desktop have refused to fix themselves over many years. if i remember correctly he said he was spending somewhere along the lines of 60% of the entire time he spent working on Slackware releases just fixing Gnome and its various dependancies so that it could be compiled.

I don't know if I'll argue right or wrong on this, but the bugs in Gnome are the reason the Debian Gnome package usually lags a release or two behind. The developers have too many bugs to fix before the package can be considered stable enough to include it in Debian.

I've heard the same grumblings about KDE too. In fact, when I first tried Mandrake it was the KDE bugs that made me hate the OS. I never could get it to work right, and it wasn't until 2 or 3 years later than I learned why. But, it did confirm for me that Mandrake didn't care enough about the product they put out to make sure all the critical bugs were fixed before they released the product. It's soured me on Mandrake/Madriva ever since.

I don't get why the developers for Gnome and KDE don't care enough to fix the problems before they release their products. It doesn't make sense to me. Why release a product with critical bugs? However, if the distro's want to include these products in their release then they have to take responsibility for their quality inside the distro. There really isn't any choice for them, other than just dropping the software, but then they may get a major backlash from their users so they're kinda caught in the middle.

[Xayd]

most of this stuff is destkop related. here, i stumbled across an old mailing list posting from a few years back that sums up an example or few quite well...

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2002-March/msg00004.html

note that it's from march '02. and what has improved since then? very little.

like i said, try to install a base X-less system sometime and then install X and a desktop (especially Gnome) from sources sometime. you'll find it impossible without modifying the individual dependancies far beyond what is required with any other open source software that's considered stable, because they simply do not work with each other.

and the time spent by distros "fixing" Gnome, KDE, and their related dependancies is basically time wasted. if these projects worked as they should that time could be spent improving or creating something that would actually be useful, rather than fixing bugs and dependancy catch 22s that the authors of this software should've dealt with years ago (but doesn't have to deal with because distros have no choice but to fix it for them).

and they can't say that it can't be done, look at how easy it is to use source distributed software these days with autoconf, automake, and libtool, versus how it was before those tools became widely used.

[Ind-PC_student]

most of this stuff is destkop related. here, i stumbled across an old mailing list posting from a few years back that sums up an example or few quite well...

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2002-March/msg00004.html

note that it's from march '02. and what has improved since then? very little.

like i said, try to install a base X-less system sometime and then install X and a desktop (especially Gnome) from sources sometime. you'll find it impossible without modifying the individual dependancies far beyond what is required with any other open source software that's considered stable, because they simply do not work with each other.

and the time spent by distros "fixing" Gnome, KDE, and their related dependancies is basically time wasted. if these projects worked as they should that time could be spent improving or creating something that would actually be useful, rather than fixing bugs and dependancy catch 22s that the authors of this software should've dealt with years ago (but doesn't have to deal with because distros have no choice but to fix it for them).

and they can't say that it can't be done, look at how easy it is to use source distributed software these days with autoconf, automake, and libtool, versus how it was before those tools became widely used.
There are more desktoP environments then just Kde or Gnome, I have just installed

XFCE [looks very nice and light use of resources]
Enlightenment [eye very candy themes]
TWM [good structure]
Blackbox [still have to try and see]

They are lighter and better in my opinion, although they are new there is great potential for these projhects.

[Ind-PC_student]

You might be right on the GNOME Compatibility and dependencies, but that does not make linux any less efficient lets look at the comparison MS$ OSS$ functionality.

1 MS$ when the display adapter crashes what can you do to fix it without reeboting?

2 OSS when the display adapter crashes what can you do to fix it without reeboting?

1 Nothing 2 Use the command line i had to use it once under SUSE 9.1 on purpose i deleted the monitor specs on purpose and then i used Yast on the command line to Configure the proper monitor capabilities and it all worked without having to reboot once

Sure the GNOME is dificult to install, but at least you are alowed to install it!!

And the truth is the display managers are not a weakness because there is a lot of choice under linux.

Just because One Display Manager is dificult to complile from scrach that won't make Linux any less effective!!!

[Ind-PC_student]

and further i use it i think the best linux is getting every year and the support for linux is increasing in bussiness side as i never seen before.

Now i have received a program for the linux expo in london this year there are double the companyes showcasing for linux then last year it is fantastic .

[Ind-PC_student]

And yes linux may have its faults, with some applications and hardware compatibility.

But the majority of those issues are caused not by linux, but by the policies of the software and/or the hardware producers!

Those issues aside linux is a very worthwile operating system and every person who uses this operating system is allways learning something new.

Although i admit having some problems with internet still enjoy linux very much.

It can be very relaxing for a change instead of wasting time with updates and repetitive maintenance tasks, i can spend most of my time using linux on a more productive maner then the ussuall OEM systems

And i think there is no need to bash other operating systems as I once did they do that to themselves without our help.

And as I have said yes original poster you are definitely wrong about this subject.

[Ind-PC_student]

Was mine the final word on the subject?
any more opinions on the matter or am i right about them?

[surewhynot]

In the past three months I have been experimenting with Ubuntu. This thread aroused my curiousity. To report back it has definately been a rewarding experience. Any problems i came across have been small and easily fixed. I really didn't have any more problems than i've had with XP. I should add that i had no prior linnux experience and am a light pc user. basicly web surfing, e-mail, home office and media. I would suggest evrybody try it. Just my two cents.

[Chiquito]

Surewhynot, thats it and you are right. I am using Mepis and the interface and look is very much like XPs and it is actually easier to install, I just have a few problems with the command line but only because I'm going out of my way to understand. I am also a begginner and I feel more secure doing business on the net with Mepis... Chiquito!!!