OSNews

1) I am pretty sure my SuSE install talked about installing alongside windows and resizing windows. It makes no guarantees it won't break windows as any messing with the partition table can break stuff.
2) Dialup is very simple in KDE setup and running. However it does depend on your modem.
3) Worked for mine, did it during the install, however it configured multiple queues which is confusing for a Windows person.
4) Any Digital Camera using the USB Mass Storage standard just works. Scanner I admit was a little tricky but I had a cheap no-name brand of scanner.
5) Ok I have never had that problem with my two LCD's , one Philips one BenQ.

My experience was that most/all of my periferals and network configs worked out of the box with SuSE 10. Windows XP is a different story, could not get > 800x600 until I loaded the video card driver, couldn't config the LCD screen until I loaded that driver, sound card etc was limited until I got the mother board drivers loaded (4 reboots).

Remember Nubie's don't often install OS's, they use pre-installed.

While I do agree with most of the points you mention, why many distros lack this attention to detail I believe is because of distinct and different priorities.

There are the HobbyOS which focus on new and insteresting features/ideas/concepts/technology ... and then the For-ProfitOS which mostly have a target customer base and desired market area in which they focus on the request/paid for/most profitable/least costly features/ideas/concepts/technology.

The bottom line is that at this point neither groups see the compelling reasons behind those details as they fall some where in between new & interesting features and the high profit & highly demanded consumer requested feature sets.

Thats why I think they have and continue to fall through the cracks.

1.) No one, in the software business, guarantees data. Maybe Oracle, maybe.
2.) That's for a couple reasons.
a.) Wireless literally sets itself up in the installation when it works.
b.) When it doesn't, it's for lack of drivers. Wireless and modems are notorious for being hard to support.
3.) What?
4.) Yea, more docs on Sane would be great. You figured it out, write them .
5.) It usually does, if you know anything at all about it. It's understandable to know little about your monitor though, but I assure you it's in the manual you threw away when you bought it .

When you write your argument, make sure to give reference of the hardware you use. I could write the same thing about Windows causing some posters to point out the flaw in the argument.

When you mention "Newbie", the problem is the assumption that Windows = Linux/BSD distribution which already falsened your logic.

1) detail explaination about dual boot system and assurance that grub will not erase their beloved windows. in fact I have never come across any of linux live cds(after inserting in cd drive) explaining resizing and partitioning of preinstalled windows. Nubie will run away from QT parted
What kind of distro did you use? Most Live CD already provide the way to partition disk (Knoppix, Puppy Linux, Berry Linux to name a few).

2) install any kind of internet connection? if Nubie doesn't see internet within first 1/2 hr of installation, he is frustated. Again no distro explains dialup(what is pppconfig??) or broadband wireless installation to Nubie. Why this Basic task to connect internet is so enormous for distro makers?
Do you honestly think a complete newbie will find an easy way to get dial-up connection without assistance no matter the OS?

3)My printer to be worked within next 1 hr without configuring cupsys by hand.
Name and manufacturer of that printer please.

4)My digital camera and scanner should work withing next two hours. No distro explains what is SANE and how to tweak it...
Again, name and manufacturer please.

5)My LCD monitor should be working as soon as i boot into new system. Without editing xorg.
Once again, name and manufacturer please. Usually manufacturer provide driver for Windows XP therefore the problem is related to manufacturer.

true. and good free standard help here. like say being able to open openoffice files anywhere and so on.

about the only people that need specificaly windows these days are those that play the latest windows only games, work with in-house or custom developed software running on windows with no available code or have similar reasons.

the more general purpose the tasks one needs done is. the more likely it is that you can do them on just about any os.

still, a bit strange to see them go from debain to gentoo. but i guess it have allready been stated that with a bit of friend/neighbor support at start and no need to do the install themselfs, people can use just about any linux distro.

would be interesting to check how many of the wal-mart linux pc customers still use them.

in many ways its wrong to look at a linux install vs windows as 90%+ of the windows users have never installed windows from scratch.

hell, these days most comsumer pc's come with a custom installer that either just overwrite the windows or reset the system back to factory defaults and all.

something similar can nicely be done with linux. it may even prove easyer...

I think it's more like 95% do not install Windows ever. It's the other 5% that do it for the rest. From OEM provided reimaging CD's the come with the computer when it comes from the store to the IT department who do it for you at work, the virtually no enduser is expected to install the OS.

Great point.

LINUX is just a KERNEL ! Not an OS !

X windows has alot to do with the negative experiences of LINUX .

"Just shows to go ya that most people don't care about the Windows/GNULinux/BSD/OS-X debate. They just want to get their work done. Platform makes no difference."

What most users really want is to avoid learning anything new. If they can get their work done on their existing platform, they are unlikely to welcome learning another platform or method of operation.

The part geeks and advanced users seem to forget;
Most people don't share the passion for computers, technical issues, or learning in general.

Non-technical people, hate technical things.

You need to be more specific:

Most people resist change.

The argument isn't tech versus non-tech, it's change. I know some incredibly gifted technical people that hate Linux (or OS X for that matter) not because they can't use it, but because it forces change upon them, and they are unwilling to leave that comfort zone. It's the same reason that so many OSS folks get so upset when licenses change, or external forces cause change.

Let's take for example the Suse users all up in arms about the possible move to Gnome when Novell bought Ximian. Here is an example of a group of people that are willing to embrace Linux are unwilling to embrace the possibility of change. Could they have gotten the same work done in Gnome, sure, but it would require change.

That's the fundamental issue that faces all of the alternative platforms.

It takes something to cause a desire to change. Linux doesn't have that. There is no marketing group that is giving the world any reason to change other than, it's free, and even that isn't selling, because to the consumer, it's not free. It's a $499 new computer, or a $99 box of Suse Linux. Further, there isn't that Digital Camera that says, Plug and Play with Linux on the side of the box. There isn't that iPod with a big sticker on the side that says 'Works with Linux'.

Microsoft has that comfort zone established, and the old mindset of nobody got fired for using Microsoft hasn't died. Novell isn't 'selling' to consumer's only businesses, and even that's less than it should be. IBM, Linux is only offered on the business targeted computers. Gateway, Dell, <insert tier 1 consumer vendor here> are all offering Linux to businesses, they aren't targetting the consumer. Only the Walmart computer's are doing that, and only online at that, you can't buy them in the stores, not at Sam's either.

Apple is the ONLY alternative vendor making an effort to make a consumer desire to change. The iPod, Digital Cameras, on demand TV shows, hardware that looks nice on a kitchen counter, software that just works (for the most part). They are also the only alternative platform that has a single point of focus and vision, not the fragmented Linux & Unix world.

But regardless of all of this, there is no question that Linux can get the job done, there is a question as to why a consumer would desire to put forth the effort to embrace that change? Because ultimately, most people don't like change and resist externally imposed change.

or to put in a diffrent way:

what they want is an appliance that do one thing and do it well.

sometimes i wonder what if we give them a cpu that you can hook up to diffrent storage media. these storage media store diffrent programs or collections of programs in a rom, and have some storage space for user files.

at will you can jump from one attached storage media to the next, suspending the use of the others (alltho a ongoing task, like the downloading of a webpage or mail can continue).

basicly make the computer more physical to use.

want to jump to a diffrent storage media? hit the change button on the cpu box until the small use light on the media lights up (there should be a diffrent one for working. preferably flashing).

no need for installing files, no need for drivers.

want that multimedia suite to handle a diffrent codec? download it and put it into the codec folder on the user area of the media its on.

hp?news_id=13337&ci'd say (k)ubuntu is even easier compared to windows, as it also updates things like office and ALL other apps, and also handles upgrades to new versions - unlike windows update. you can also install software much easier, and as you don't need virusscanners and anti-spyware to keep your pc running, a pre-configured kubuntu kick's windows' ass anytime.

exept of course when it comes to microsofts monopolistic behaviour, when it uses its power to force you to use windows/office/etc... (talking about defaulting to a non-free non-open fileformat in word, having a broken webbrowser etc etc).

I don't get what the issue is with long upgrades on gentoo? You do them overnight, and they never get in your way. You can even do them as you are working, and they don't get in your way.

The advantage of gentoo is that their updates/installs invariably work as expected. The quality of gentoo packages is second to none on any distro I've tried. I just can't imagine going back to a binary based distribution. They always feel like they're held together with sellotape.

Time is irrelevant when the computer does things in the background and doesn't get in your way while it does it.

I am sorry but I still think the concept of distributing the source instead of the compiled app is just plain stupid. If one machine can compile it for 40'000 users and everyone else benefits from it why the hell would you want to leave your machine on for the night? It costs money, requires more energy (hence damages the environment). It is just inefficient and absurd for anyone who is not a programmer to get all those sources just to compile and then delete them.

As for computers doing things in the background:
- on a laptop it eats your battery
- responsiveness disminishes (yes, even on linux having a gcc task using 100% in the background doesn't make gimp that usable).
- leaving your computer on could just to compile once again the whole OS is going to reduce its life in the end (disks mostly).

Howdy all

I am sorry but I still think the concept of distributing the source instead of the compiled app is just plain stupid.

Why not just use pre-compiled apps? Gentoo does support this (there are caveats though).
The main reason that gentoo normally has to compile things is that you may have set your system up with non-standard USE (compiler) flags (in which lies it`s flexability), these may create binary incompatablity with certain binary files your trying to install.
And before you ask, solving binary in/compatablity is a bit harder then just checking version numbers

Your only looking at one aspect of it all, if everything was as simple as 1 way to do something we`d all be in flying cars and living in peace.

I've been a long time Gentoo user (>3 years). I'm also a non-IT person (I'm a pediatrician). I think the real benefit of Gentoo is not the ricer aspects of tweaking your system, but the excellent package management system with portage.

And as far as compiling apps and upgrades sucking the life out of your computer, all I can say is that I had Gentoo installed on a crappy 6 year old P-III laptop, and was able to compile apps and use both KDE and Gnome without a noticeable slowdown in performance.

There are some people that are good at giving advice and there are those that simply try to help but end up sometimes providing the wrong information. An example is with the article and the family involved. While I have my reasons for using SUSE Linux a RPM based distribution from Novell, most relate to my field of work, supported software/hardware and the big one...ease of use. Now I know there are fans of Debian distributions but if I were to recommend a Debian distribution to a Windows user especially for the family home I'd say Linspire is the easiest to install and use. It boggles the mind why someone would suggest Gentoo or even Debian unstable to a former Windows user not unless that person(s) has extensive experience using Linux. It's like someone recommending a former Windows user to just compile the software program instead of installing the binary (ie: package_name.rpm). Which on SUSE Linux for example a binary RPM can be installed with the click of the mouse and the root (Administrator) password given (aka: one-click-install). When I demonstrate Linux to someone interested I use LiveCD or LiveDVD that run from their disc drive so as to evaluate both the OS, included software and how it runs on their hardware. I typically will show SUSE Linux due to my experience with Novell though I'll also demonstrate Mandriva Linux and even Linspire. Any questions the user may have I simplify the comparisons not only with each Linux distribution but also how they relate to their current OS.

Edited 2006-01-18 03:03

It boggles my mind that everyone seems to think people are too stupid in general to use Gentoo. It's not that hard. I converted someone who knew very little about computers in general to someone who now can configure and install Gentoo from a stage one on his own, getting everyting to work along the way. It's not for everyone, and some people have so little patience they will never try anything new, but Gentoo is not exclusively for Linux experts. In fact when I started using Gentoo I did not know nearly as much about Linux as I do now.

It boggles my mind that everyone seems to think people are too stupid in general to use Gentoo

I've said it before : a lot of people think of themselves as more intelligent than anyone else because they know how to work their way around Windows. A lot of these people, lost in the Windows way, were unable to even install a Linux OS. So these people can't understand that others can do with computers what they could not do. I say that based on my experience.
I recall saying several time to my wife (who is computer illiterate) that when I tell people that she uses Linux on the desktop, they think it's impossible, so she must be a genius; I also told her that she is more computer literate than a lot of Windows expert out there, who could not do half of the things she does now (especially printing, I was impressed with what she managed to do in KDE).

I converted someone who knew very little about computers in general to someone who now can configure and install Gentoo from a stage one on his own, getting everyting to work along the way

I've not done so much, but I converted (nearly) all my neighboorhood to Mandriva (I'm french). It was simple actually : one day, I said STOP, I will not lose any more hours supporting your Windows. I'll be glad to support your Linux though. Within a month, all the Windows were dead or unusable ) (that tells you the amount of support I was doing).
Now, these people are still in contact with Windows shills, as I hear them telling me the same stupid things like "but this is too complicated on Linux, but it's easy on Windows". I don't argue anymore, I don't even ask them if they really tried it (they never even try, just spout back the FUD). I just tell them : "then do it yourself on Windows if it's so easy, I don't know Windows anymore". That's when they say : "help me do it in Linux then, I don't have time now to do it on Windows", which is rather funny for me everytime. Two of them I have partially or not converted. One of my brother bought a laptop specially to be able to MSN with a webcam and use (a pirated) MS Office (I find this stupid, but oh well). The other also bought a new box, but is not connected on the internet, he just play games (I find this stupid too, given that he does not play a lot actually, he just fell for the latest game hype, he would have been better off with a console).

But it sounds like having them run linux would be a support nightmare.

Actually, it is much less of a hassle than supporting Windows (I should know, I act as unofficial tech support for family and friends - on the one condition that they run a firewall and ditch IE/OE).

The fact is that Linux, once correctly set up, just works. Just to make sure, you can run sshd on the box (with a long, complicated password, of course) and do remote maintenance with ease.

> Just to make sure, you can run sshd on the box (with a long, complicated password, of course) and do remote maintenance with ease.

If you're going expose somebody elses computers to the internet through sshd you should at least use public-key authentication. It's more secure, easier to use (since you don't have to type (and occasionally change!) passwords anymore) and it stops those annoying dictionary attacks.

If you're going expose somebody elses computers to the internet through sshd you should at least use public-key authentication. It's more secure, easier to use (since you don't have to type (and occasionally change!) passwords anymore) and it stops those annoying dictionary attacks.

do both. a 2-part authentification is much better then any kind of 1-part authentification.

the more parts there is to the access prosess, the more likely it is that a attacker will go look for a easyer target...

> do both. a 2-part authentification is much better then any kind of 1-part authentification.

AFAIK OpenSSH does not support this, if you allow PasswordAuthentication you can always log in using the password regardless of the setting of PubkeyAuthentication.

If you're going expose somebody elses computers to the internet through sshd you should at least use public-key authentication.

I'm not familiar with how to use public-key authentication with sshd...do you have a link to a good HowTo?

It's more secure, easier to use (since you don't have to type (and occasionally change!) passwords anymore) and it stops those annoying dictionary attacks.

Sounds good, though I always use 12+ random characters for passwords (a mixture of uppercase, lowercase and numbers), so I figure it's relatively safe. Also, lately I've begun creating a menu entry to start/stop sshd, so they can do it only when I need to do maintenance.

But I'd be interested in trying out your suggestion.

http://sial.org/howto/openssh/publickey-auth/

Basically: run ssh-keygen on your box, which will generate a public/private key part. Keep the private key secure on your own box and copy the public key to the PC you want to access remotely. If you've verified it works correctly, turn off password authentication on the remote box sshd_config. Note that if you use putty on Windows you need to use a tool to convert your private key to a format putty understands.

Actually, if you read the article, she couldn't get her work done (accounting) in either Windows or Linux.

if your refering to that problem with gnucash and quickbooks, there was a comment about her looking into kmymoney2. it may be that both are basicly overkill for what see wants to do, and that the interface is overloaded.

basicly it says more about a single app then about the whole system.

she was nicely able to both update the os (given written instructions) and use openoffice to keep records of her spendings.

in the end it boils down the the old discussion about a glass for beer. either its half full or its half empty, it all depends on the way one approach the data

"it may be that both are basicly overkill for what see wants to do, and that the interface is overloaded."

I like that you brought that up. There is a lot of software out there today, and a lot of it tries to incorporate as many features as possible with the outcome being a confusing UI more often than not. Since I started learning how to program I've written my own simple applications which work prefectly for me compared to commercial products.

Ultra noobs can *use* linux, in "appliance" mode. An internet kiosk and such. As long as I am around to administer the linux boxes in my home, my wife and eventually kids will use linux every day, to do all sorts of things.

Funny, my non-technical girlfriend has no problems using my Kubuntu laptop.

In fact, I'm not sure she really understand what an OS is. All she knows is that the music player and the IM programs are better on my laptop than on her Windows PC...

If you are only a user and never install any software or hardware then linux is fine. Lots of nice apps and if it is properly configured it just looks like a good os.

Now, don't tell me your girlfriend could survive with her linux computer without your geeky help. At some point in life she'll be wanting to do somehting and at this point she'll have to ask for help. Had she had, say, a mac, it is likely that she could easily learn how to install a new app she found on a webpage or a driver.

She can't survive on Windows without help from geeks.

The common Windows user is incapable of using the start menu, incapable of installing applications (apart from spyware), incapable of uninstalling applications, and don't care about security (no firewall - no antivirus - no nothing).

About Mac OS X : Agreed. (To a certain extent - Mac OS X has severe usability problems as well.)

Fact is: No matter the platform most users will sooner or later need help from people with more knowledge. EOD!

Funny, I had no trouble learning Linux. The difference was that I wasn't a Windows power user, so I didn't have to worry about my ego when making the switch.

A lot of people don't give Linux a fair chance because they think they're 'l33t d00ds' as long as they have an OS they're familiar with. As soon as they are confronted with Linux and realize it's not Windows and they aren't going to know it well enough to impress their friends right away they usually go back to Windows with their tails between their legs. Often after only giving it a short trial period where they didn't bother to put a legit efford into learning it beyond poking and prodding around briefly without bothering to look at documentation. They usually leave with their pride hurt, they blame their inability to learn the OS on the software itself rather than their unrealistic expectations to simply install the OS and know how to use it because years of using Windows only gave them the impression they were 'uber geeks' who could use anything beyond the hardest of things such as assembly language. That's not everyone's reason for not using Linux, some people just preffer other operating systems. But by no means is Linux as a whole user unfriendly, there are distributions out there which are more point and click than Windows, yet still different enough to stump people who don't want to learn but expect the to be able to use the OS based on their Windows monoculture experiences. Most of the people I know with whom Linux actually took had used several different operating systems for extended periods of time. They knew how to find and read documentation, they had the deductive reasoning required to apply what they learned from that documentation, and learned much more from experimentation. They had all the excellent qualities that you would not find in someone who's spent too long in an OS monoculture.

I know lots of people who learned how to use Linux, the only think it costs is anywhere between a week and a month to become comfortably familiar and independent with it. Most people just stick with Windows because it's familiar to them and because it's not hard to find someone who already knows the OS to teach you the basics of how to use it.

//She has been using the laptop for over a year now, and I never have to intervene. She really likes frozen bubble.//

If she's just using Firefox and playing "Frozen Bubble" then she's obviously not taxing her laptop much. Linux is just as good as any OS, for such minimum requirements (probably better than Windows).

Many, many, many, many folks, however, use their laptops for much, much more. And a properly installed/configured/patched Windows system is the OS of choice.

Many, many, many, many folks, however, use their laptops for much, much more.

Good, because a Linux laptop can do much, much more as well.

What I do on my Kubuntu laptop:

- Surf the Web (this include accessing bug databases for work)
- Chat on MSN and Yahoo (with webcam)
- e-mail, e-mail, e-mail
- Do these in Wireless Internet cafés (fun!)
- Write a novel (using MS Word out of habit) and occasionally print out a few pages on a network printer to have people read it (I'm a quarter of the way through)
- Control my budget and expenses with some Excel spreadsheets I made for myself and my roommate
- Listen to music with Amarok
- Put songs on my iPod with Amarok
- Watch DVDs on my TV (it's got TV out through s-video)
- Burn CDs and make DVD backups (all legal, of course)
- Control my home network
- Play KNetWalk (fun little puzzle game - I do my "real" gaming on PS2/Xbox, playing Battlefront II at the moment, it's awesome)
- Share my laptop with my girlfriend (she has her own user, with her own desktop, all under Linux - she doesn't mind as long as it has her favorite wallpaper)
- Almost never turn it off (I love suspend-to-RAM...)
- Get weather info, birthday reminders, etc. with Kontact
- Download and test LiveCDs from other Linux distros, using KTorrent and k3B

My Kubuntu laptop fulfills all my needs, and I'm sure it would fulfill the needs of most computer users. A minority of people might actually require Windows due to some specific software, but you're deluding yourself if you think that represents the majority of users.

//A minority of people might actually require Windows due to some specific software, but you're deluding yourself if you think that represents the majority of users.//

Well, a *majority* of users (in business) require Windows, because that's what their IT depts tell them to use (for better or worse). I choose Windows on my laptop because: 1.) I know how to configure it for very good stability and security; 2.) I follow best practices to avoid trojans/viruses/spyware; and 3.) many apps I use are Windows-only. Unfortunately, there are many users out there that don't have #1. or don't follow #2.

Now ... for a personal laptop use, yes ... most Linux distros would suffice. So long as the "average user" knows someone smart enough (like yourself, obviously :-) ) who could setup the system for them.

But that's rare.

Well, a *majority* of users (in business) require Windows, because that's what their IT depts tell them to use (for better or worse).

That's not a requirement as much as an arbitrary decision from the IT dept. You're right, of course, in the sense that those people could not use Linux even if they wanted to...however, that doesn't mean that they wouldn't be able to do their job with a Linux PC if their IT dept. allowed it...

Now ... for a personal laptop use, yes ... most Linux distros would suffice. So long as the "average user" knows someone smart enough (like yourself, obviously :-) ) who could setup the system for them.

...or they buy them preconfigured, along with a nice manual. We're not there yet, I'll admit, but it's certainly feasible.

This article is a farse.

Please give some arguments next time. Comments like yours are utterly pointless, and give no help to the discussion and/or the author. Oh, and it's farce, not farse.

Given his nickname, average score, and comment history you really don't know what you're asking for.

This guy's got a history, albeit a short one in it's entirety, of posting flamebait against Linux. A veritable troll imo.

Go ahead, have a look if you don't believe me.

He could have meant, "This article is a arse"?

No, don't think so. In that case it should be "This article is an arse"

I was about to mod you down... then I thought, "what a waste of a vote"... It's best to reply.

You don't like the article? Fine. You don't believe the events are true? Fine. That doesn't mean they aren't true. Like Thom said, if you think it is a farce, then state your reasoning. And just denying the article isn't a argument. You're just trying to convince yourself. Not anyone elses.

Do yourself a favor. Start believing in yourself.

Unfortunatly I love Xara Xtreme a vector graphics program that exists only in Windows but they are trying to build it for Linux (it was a news in OSNEWS not to long ago).
This is why I usually install Codeweaver's Crossover Office (a souped up WINE), as well as run Parallels (a VMWare like program to run a real copy of Windows in a window). I do a lot of Windows development with Visual Studio (the gotta eat thing, ya know), so I need these other options. However, a lot of my development has been shifting to Java, so my need for Windows has reduced.

Unfortunatly I love Xara Xtreme a vector graphics program that exists only in Windows but they are trying to build it for Linux (it was a news in OSNEWS not to long ago).

i dont recall the name of it right now but isnt there a GPL vector graphics package thats getting high marks these days?

i dont recall the name of it right now but isnt there a GPL vector graphics package thats getting high marks these days?

Inkscape's pretty good:

http://www.inkscape.org/

It's available for Windows as well (we have started using it at my place of work).

As long as they don't play games or any specific window app I am pretty sure this can go unnoticed. If you put the ugly XP background on your kde desktop they might even not notice :-)

I have been willing to switch people in my family but some of them play games which makes even a mac an impossible choice. Some other are just skilled enough to realize they don't know how to manage a linux system (while they could do it vaguely in windows).

I am curious about the experiences of people who tried to do a "switch from the start" with children or someone who just never had a computer. Most often you get used to something and the difficult thing is changing.

http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-jr/
You might ask on their irc channel.