I am tired of working hard

[Computer Hobbyist]

For those who don't remember me, I have been an Linux user for a long, long time. I have tried many distros and have had fun with them, but I am tired of working hard. All I want to do is play DVDs. I don't want to download a dozen libraries and sixty three different Codecs. I just want to load some software and play DVDs. I am tired of loading a new distro every year or two and having to load plugins for Mozilla or whatever. I am tired of jacking with anti-virus software that requires an advanced degree to use. I am just tired of working hard. Software should make life easier, not harder. Has any alternative software advanced to the point that it is easy to use.

I just wanted to check in and see if there is a distro for people who don't want to be geeks anymore.

[glc]

Try Ubuntu.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Thanks.

[flcpge]

Why would you need to change distros every year or two? Pick one and learn it. I've found Mplayer to be very versatile for video. If I'm lazy and want something that works, a good "alternative" is Windows.

I'm tired of working hard too, but that's life.

[Statica]

Ok .. let's move on with the subject at hand .. aka getting you working with DVD's and videos for you for the platform you have chosen. and I hope that the people following this will benefit from this as well.

Firstly, Ubuntu is good choice to get it working from stock .. if you dont have a distribution that support DVDs then you do need to add in the packages. Remember that it isn't like the powers that be really care for Linux users playing their DVD movies.

Secondly, flcpage does have a valid point about changing distributions very often. The basic thing that makes Linux such a favorite among NIXers is the modular nature of the OS. Linux does not try to be an all-in-one OS (which is what we like right? choice?) but provides you the platform to do what you need to do. Of course, the downside is that some distributions - depending on their target audience may wish to ignore some packages. In fact, if you have a stable Linux working, you may not even need to do an upgrade of the operating system. Usually, a kernel upgrade is all it takes.

[Computer Hobbyist]

I haven't changed distributions for a while. I have experimented with Fedora on another machine, but I don't want to lose my data so I haven't put it on my main computer. I have also tried to install Gentoo and a couple of others. I actually got FreeBSD running on my second computer until I had to give it to a child (after installing Windows 2000.) I run Mandrake 10.0 on my main machine and have been since it was released. Of course it is sort of an orphan. Some time ago I lost k3b (I tried to upgrade and the upgrade threw up all over me. One of the things that was lost was K3b) and have had to use x-cd-roast. It is not the most transparent software in the universe. I have been using Xine and it works fine for some things. It just doesn't want to run dvds. Why? I don't know. It is hard as hell for my old brain to figure out. I would like to run Mplayer but it doesn't seem to be an easy install. Help.

Folks, I just thought you might want to know, but I am a strong supporter of alternative operating systems. I am just tying to get my DVDs to run and to figure out how to reinstall k3b.

[jgis19]

1st I have no dog in this fight! I use both Windows and Linux and dual boot. I have tried at least 10 Linux distros over the past 2+ years and and there are some easy ones and some difficult ones. I finally coughed up $49.00 for Xandros on sale at Frys and it is the easiest too use of any of them. Every thing just works. You can use Xandros upated to get packages from their repository or use Debian,it's as simple as that. I know the Linux zealots frown on this distro because you are not compliing your own kernels and packages etc. but it is the only one that let me upgrade my Nvidia driver with out spending at least two hours,it was just automatic. I can play DVD movies,burn cd's and DVD's,watch movies etc. This is the closest os to Windows that I have found.
Like you I am too old and don't have enough patience too use something that takes that much effort to do what you wan't it to do.
I still use WinXP about 50% of the time but find interesting to use both.
Just my 2 cents worth.

[ffreeloader]

As long as you've been around Linux you should be able to get Debian running pretty easily. There are non-Debian servers from which you can install Mplayer and all the necessary codecs using apt-get, all you have to do is add the servers to your /etc/apt/sources.list file.

You could probably do the same in Ubuntu, but I wouldn't swear to that as I've never run Ubuntu.

[Computer Hobbyist]

I tried the live demo of Ubuntu this morning. Very clean and easy to use. I thing I will look it over carefully this evening and will consider installing it.

[kilgoretrout]

If you can afford it, I think you would love a Mac.

[faulkner132]

Originally Posted by kilgoretrout If you can afford it, I think you would love a Mac.

I agree. My wife uses one (and doesn't look back) and they are so user friendly it is sickening.

[Computer Hobbyist]

I have owned a Mac. They are nice. I prefer my current system.

I don't want to start anything on this thread but a big hunk of the world is looking for an open source alternative to Microsoft. Linux should be that alternative, and it does some things very, very well. What the Linux Community has failed to do is really understand the average user. The average user doesn't need training wheels. The average user needs consistency in installation. The average user needs a system where software packages install more often than they fail to install. It needs somebody or group willing to stand up and say this is how a package is supposed to install on a Linux system. These are the calls. If you need some library supply it with the package. Don't insist on the user upgrading their system for you. An application install should be easy.

Last night I tried to install MPlayer on my system from source. I discovered that I need to first install the GTK development files. Now that isn't all that difficult, but it is annoying. The kind of annoyance that seems to strike Linux users more often than not. That is what I am talking about when I said I am tired of working hard.

Computers and computer operating systems (including Linux) are far enough along in development that application installs should be easy.

If we want to take this thread to a better location for a good rant session, I am game, but I am not interested in training wheels.

[flcpge]

Hey computer hobbyist,

Not everyone can agree what defines the average computer user. Some think they have more skill, some less and would need those training wheels. I agree with you on a good package manager. That's why I like apt-get and portage. So did you get Mplayer installed and are you watching movies?

Try that Ubuntu cd and download the binaries for mplayer and the w32codecs. See if that helps.

I forgot, to watch dvd's you need libdvdcss2.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Skill is not the issue. Ease of use is the issue. The GUIs associated with Linux are pretty damn easy to use. Easier for me than Windows. The problem is in application software. Some of it is very very good. Apache is world class. Open Office sits on my Windows desktop as well as in my Linux box. Most Linux application software is very difficult to install. Without applications average users want to use, Linux is going to be relegated to being nothing more than a poor mans Unix. it will run some servers and a few million cash registers but not much more.

Why can't there be a simple hard and fast, works every time, install procedure. Why do we have to hunt high and low for libraries.

Somebody asked earlier why I change distros so often. Well I don't change them that often, but when I do it is usually because of the application software associated with the distro. I want this application or that and installing it on my previous distrobution was unnecessarily hard.

Too bad the folks at the heart of Linux seem to be techno freeks unwilling to understand the simple truth that smart people don't like to play programmer all the time.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Try that Ubuntu cd and download the binaries for mplayer and the w32codecs. See if that helps. I forgot, to watch dvd's you need libdvdcss2.

You notice what you just told me. To get mplayer to work I need to down load mplayer, w32codecs and libdvdcss2. In addition I need to download a skin. I also need to download a font. I also need to download gtk development files.

If I were in the software business and tried to sell mplayer to a customer I wouldn't be able to do it. Who would want to hunt down all that stuff just to run dvds? (Hint--it would come prepackaged.) Nobody but somebody patting himself on the back for being brilliant. After a while even brilliant people want to do stuff with their toys.

Sorry for the rant.

[flcpge]

OK, I was trying to help you. Sorry about that.

[Computer Hobbyist]

I am sorry. You were trying to help. I appreciate yoiur thought. As I said my rant should be posted someplace else.

[catacon]

A good, user-friendly distro is SuSE. If you buy it with a guide (SuSE Bible, etc.) you can get it for around $40 and it works well. No need to enable MP3 support or video support, it has almost everything there. It costs a little, but I think it's worth it.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Thanks, I have to look at Suse as well. Isn't Suse owned by Novell?

[thefultonhow]

Originally Posted by catacon A good, user-friendly distro is SuSE. If you buy it with a guide (SuSE Bible, etc.) you can get it for around $40 and it works well. No need to enable MP3 support or video support, it has almost everything there. It costs a little, but I think it's worth it.

I used SuSE at one point, but ran into a huge problem. The Standard edition doesn't have a compiler, so anything that needs to be compiled from source couldn't be installed. Apparently this is not a problem with Professional, and you'e right that SuSE is easy to use, but I found this to be a major limitation.

There's also the problem that AFAIK there's no similar service to apt-get included with SuSE, so you have to satisfy all depenencies manually.

[glc]

Isn't the reason for all the hoop jumping being the differences between all the distros? It sounds a bit unreasonable for open source developers to spend all the time and resources to package a different app for each and every distro that needs to be supported. Therefore, package the basic agnostic app and make you go after specific libraries to match your distro.

Freedom of choice is a double edged sword.

[catacon]

I have used SuSE Professional, which is nice. SuSE has YaST (Yet Another Setup Tool) which is a VERY nice install program. It fixes all the dependecies and is easy to use. And yes, CH, SuSE is owned by Novell.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Originally Posted by glc Isn't the reason for all the hoop jumping being the differences between all the distros? It sounds a bit unreasonable for open source developers to spend all the time and resources to package a different app for each and every distro that needs to be supported. Therefore, package the basic agnostic app and make you go after specific libraries to match your distro. Freedom of choice is a double edged sword.

GLC, You have hit the problem right on the head. Everybody thinks they can produce a better distro. A distribution is just Linux bundled with a bunch of almost randomly picked applications software running on a gui, which is itself nothing more than an application running on the underlying linux core. Frankly, I am growing weary of all the different companies claiming that they have the way to bundle a bunch of software.

Looking pretty doesn't get it done in the corporate world. Ask Apple. What gets it done are the applications.

Why don't we all insist that distributions develop some sort of commonality, at least at the level of application installs and functionality.

[Statica]

There already is .. tarballs! Personally, I wouldnt touch a binary distribution package; granted that I dont use much rather than extremely mission critical software, but I still dont know what's the big issue with downloading and compiling from source. Personally, I find it rather funny when people use rpms and other such "shortcuts" for things like kernels!!
Of course, I realize I'm in the minority .. the majority of people want to have easy chocies... I used to think that they wanted choices, but it's not quite that .. at least with Linux. Perhaps a lot to do with their false tag of being an OS that can become a general purpose OS - without any prior knowledge. Personally, I'm just happy to have stuff that works, if it takes a bit more time for me .. at the added benefit of knowing what the flags were during compilation, I'm happier. I know I'm in the minority in not looking for packages and ready-to-microwave software.
It isn't in freedom of choice, GLC; I'm afraid to say, it's a lot to do with unrealistic expectations. The freedom of choice is amazing, let's not call that a sword .. the double-edge sword comes in marketting/advertising the choice into something it isn't!

Looking pretty does get it done in the corporate world. Apple almost didn't make it in the corporate world because they stopped being pretty; Apple is making it quite nicely in the corporate world because they know their niche and fill it quite pretty .. and yes the company is looking better than it ever has. The no longer try to advertise what they aren't!

[Computer Hobbyist]

Statica,

Looking pretty might get it done in some places, but it doesn't do the job in places where people want to actually use the computer to do real work.

Apple has a small but loyal following. It has a reputation for doing graphics well. Probably undeserved at this stage, but a reputation none-the-less. Apple is doing well not because of its computers, but because its Ipod is a giant success.

I know that you use Linux, like a lot of professionals, as a sort of poor man's Unix, to run core apps on servers. That is great. The niche has served Linux well, but if it is to break out it has to start showing up on desktops in large numbers.

Maybe everybody is right, Linux should be left to the professionals.

My hope for Linux has been that it would develop into an alternative to Microsoft on the desktop. Competition is good for everybody, even Microsoft. Maybe Linux can't breakout because the license does not lend itself to shrinkwrapped software. Maybe the Berkley style license will allow Freebsd to develop into a real alternative to Microsoft, but with all the effort going into Linux I am not so sure. I just wish application producers could earn a living writing for Linux.

Oh well, I am trying to work up my courage to install a newer distro. Again into the breach getting Mozilla plugins to work, working with Samba, creating shares, finding the Microsoft computers on my network, and all the time consuming stuff that always goes into setting up various apps. What are a few more all nighters anyway?

Maybe I will just use my player to watch DVD's on my TV. Probably the best solution.

Good night.

[faulkner132]

If there were a single, agreed upon Linux distro where standards were established and was actively developed, I think it could compete for desktop users.
Right now there are roughly 29,384 +/- versions of Linux to choose from... imagine if the developers were working together on a single distro...

[ffreeloader]

I don't want to start anything on this thread but a big hunk of the world is looking for an open source alternative to Microsoft. Linux should be that alternative, and it does some things very, very well. What the Linux Community has failed to do is really understand the average user. The average user doesn't need training wheels. The average user needs consistency in installation. The average user needs a system where software packages install more often than they fail to install. It needs somebody or group willing to stand up and say this is how a package is supposed to install on a Linux system. These are the calls. If you need some library supply it with the package. Don't insist on the user upgrading their system for you. An application install should be easy.

Well, you ignored my first post about Debian, but I'll say it again. Apt-get figures out dependencies very well. I've never had a dependency issue when using it in 2 years. They are automagically installed every time.

It's also very simple to install things like mplayer. I showed you how before. Apt won't install the things like win32 codecs but it will tell you about the package names and all you need do is copy and paste them into a second apt-get install command.

To tell the truth I much prefer this to Windows installs. I at least know what all packages are being installed when something I want is installed. I am also told what all packages are necessary to get optional functionality out of the program, and can install those packages using copy and paste.

I'm curious. Why is it that something this simple is not an attractive option for you?

[Computer Hobbyist]

I don't know why I haven't ever thought much about Debian or the other products that use the online "get apt" kind of install. I think it might have something to do with my failed efforts to use that kind of install in my early experiments with one or two distributions. My problem was that the distributions couldn't get past my router, or maybe it was my ISP's router, to actually get the apts. Maybe things are better now.

I keep hearing all the folks talk about liking to know exactly what is installed on their system, but do you really know what is installed on your system, really. I doubt anybody has an in depth undrestanding of the thousands of applications found in a typical linux distro install. Really, do you know what is installed when you read an install log? Do you spend the time to gain a real understanding of all of the code associated with a typical application? How do you have that kind of time?

[ygidanoc]

Sorry to say your just going to have to wait... Linux IS NOT easy for the average computer user. Ubuntu is the easiest "free" distro, and Xandros is the easiest over all distro. Ubuntu (breezy) does provide a visual add/remove programs which is a front end for synaptic, it provides pretty pictures and descriptions etc. In 2-3 years I think ubuntu will be on par with windows xp assuming they continue to receive developmental funding. Until then you just have to wait, learn the command line, or go back with windows.

[ygidanoc]

ffreeloader,

anything command line related is inherently to intimidating for most computer users... even though it is blindingly easy once you learn it, they all want a gui. honestly I used to be like that, and most people do not want to invest the time required to master the CLI, and I cannot blame them.