Here is your almost daily dose of different views on the subject of Linux desktop readiness: “Linux is Desktop Ready“, “Why desktop Linux can’t succeed in its present state” and “Is the Age of Desktop Linux Approaching?” Enjoy the diversity!
Linux [Is/Is Not/Soon to be] Ready for the Desktop
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
just not every desktop. for mine it isn’t.
I am an experienced software developer. I use linux for clients if they ask me to, but in my free time i want my home pc to be as usable as possible without too much hassle.
this means (for me)
– a media player that works out of the box.
– easy internet and mail access.
– a platform that can play games.
as a result i don’t want to
– memorize cli commands. if it isn’t fully graphical: byebye.
– no hassle with sources and makefiles. i just click setup and next.
– have to hack night after night just to get my hardware going. wireless lan for example. my card comes with windows only drivers.
but i do not deny that it can be a usefull platform. just not my choice for the above reasons.
as for security: using automatic updates and a firewall, i don’t suffer from worms or viri (fingers crossed).
Int.
please fix
I can’t fix it, the link is correct and it was working 10 minutes ago. They have broken something in their code, it is not on our end.
thanks for checking 🙂
They never supported games, videoplayers etc.
RPMs is an unfinished product.
I use Debian and it has everything I need. If I need to use a gui, IceWM does the trick.
Linux is not ready for the desktop. If it was, it would be there. Obviously its not there. And you can either sit around and bitch about why it does or does not deserve to be there in its present state, or figure out WHY IT IS NOT. And when you figure that out, then it will be ready.
Linux is finished, it never was able to run on the desktop. Redhat finally came out and stated the facts and Windows was a superior operating system.
Wow. Just. Wow.
Why is somebody posting with my name. look at the IP!!
The 2nd URL doesn’t work: Fatal error: Call to a member function on a non-object in /export/home/addaboy/website/includes/blocks/online.php on line 66
“Users often ask when Linux will be ready for the desktop, said Nat Friedman, vice president of research and development for the Ximian division of Novell. But that’s the wrong question, because for many desktop users, Linux is already ready, said Friedman, a developer of the Gnome Linux desktop.”
Good point. It is indeed ready for many desktop users. Here in Amsterdam a pilot is running. In Munchen, GNU/Linux and KDE got adopted already.
“Hall predicted 2004 and 2005 will be “the age of Linux on the desktop.” As falling prices make PCs affordable for people in developing countries, computer users there won’t want to pay hundreds of dollars for Microsoft software, he said.”
That would be before Longhorn. So if i were Microsoft i’d talk a lot about Longhorn, and especially not about the bad sides like Palladium.
“”When the price of used computer systems drops to something like $50 for a good Pentium II … you’ll find more and more of these so-called Third-World countries will be utilizing these (PCs) and free and open software for their businesses,” Hall said. “With Linux, they can do it with very little money.””
[mode=hippie]This is what i love so much about GNU/Linux. It is affordable, even for relatively poor people. Instead of warez, it can be done legal. $50 might seem nothing to a rich one, and $100 for a MS license (or whatever, sorry i always got OEM’s) too, but it’s a lot money for the 1st world workers class and about anybody in the 3rd world. Not to mention the 2nd world[/mode]
Now if only MS would give such people a free (beer) license instead of corporations who are running Free software…
Redhat finally came to the fact that you cannot promote software that is not functionaly for the home user. Linux is not designed for the desktop, it really does not have a place. MS Windows is the better alternative, even Redhat is converting over MS Windows. They are even flying a Windows flag out front!
Since there seems to be an influx of Linux bashers to this thread I will step up to the challenge.
I use Linux on my work machine and the machine I use for daily computing at home. I have a machine that I typically use only once a month to play games at a lan party. Lately, I have been considering trashing Windows on that machine in favor of Debian or Gentoo because all of the games that I enjoy playing play in an x86 Linux environment.
Linux may not be ready for your desktop but it certainly is ready for a majority of the desktops. Why does an employer need to let his employees run 500 different applications that are not pertinent to their job and pay an exorbitant amount for those applications? Answer: He/She doesn’t. The employer can roll out customized Linux desktops for their employees and the employee will hardly even notice the difference. Want an example? See http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=4303
The question is probably to whom is linux ready on the desktop. I know many that uses it on the desktop, power users mostly, and a few corporate users. They’re fine with it. They can read docs and “fix” thing that needs to be fixed.
My parents could probably use it for some stuff, but guiding them to e.g. installing a new printer, even installing a program would be a hard chore compared to if they had windows..
Not ready for the desktop… I am using it right now for the desktop… all my applications run…
Finished??? O’please.. flame bait… No one at Red Hat said that MS was superior… Superior in what??? maybe click and run….
my nephew turns on my linux or *bsd machies to play games… and he actually does install games on my machine… (he is 10 years old)…
thoes that say linux has nothing to offer or that it isnt ready for the desktop have not even tried it…..
wait until TCPA kicks in and MS deletes the crap off your hard drive.. who will be laughing then…. suckers…
I say, if you don’t like what’s provided, write a desktop yourself.
So the powerusers that use Linux on the desktop can ‘fix’ anything?
I find that amazing, because they could not even make it work on the desktop to begin with. Redhat even stated to use ‘Windows’ on the desktop.
If the powerusers can FIX anything, why don’t they start by fixing linux where it can be used. Instead of broken sym links, seg faults, kernel panics and so on???
I’ve been using linux as my primary desktop for 4 years. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. Is it the least painful for what I do with it? Yes… and I’ve tried windows, qnx, beos, netbsd, openbsd, freebsd, solaris x86…. Package management with portage needs serious work; it’s still the best option I’ve come across, although BSD is also strong in this area. Installing new hardware -could- be easier, but I think that with things like hotplug, and automation like that found in gentoo’s package system (I just need to “emerge nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx” if I have an nvidia card to get the drivers, compiled for my kernel) are helping a lot. I’ve found some stuff easier to do under Linux than Windows.
Yes, you do run into strange bugs on linux, and occasionally using the cli facilitates things. They tend to be easier to track down solutions to than Windows problems, in my experience; I’ve seen Mac errors that baffled everyone around, but I’ve not spent a lot of time with a Mac at home, so I can’t really compare that. A fair number of Windows changes/fixes require regedit, which is, frankly, more obscure than most things in /etc.
No OS is perfect. I wouldn’t recommend desktop linux to everybody; for me and my relatives, it works well. I personally have stopped using Windows; some people I’ve helped with installing/setting up linux rarely use Windows.
If you’re seriously into the newest PC games, have truely oddball hardware, or need an app with no linux equivalent, it may make sense to dual-boot or stick with your current platform; ditto if you don’t want to install an OS.
Use what works. I’m tired of hearing trolls for various platforms saying “MyFavoriteOS is the best! It’s the only good one! Everything else sucks! Haha!” If they give specifig reasons why; great. If those are valid; even better. Linux has many major flaws; it’s still one of the best operating systems available, and ready for some desktops; no more can be said of any OS that I know of.
a)like playing games
b)like watching videos
c)don’t have time to wait linux to boot
d)want to find files on the HD
e)like pointing and clicking to install programs (I love it)
f)think there are too many fanatics in the linux world
g)don’t want to be a a weirdo using a OS nobody else uses.
Don’t get me wrong. I want linux to suceed. I’m saying LINUX IS NOT READY the way it is today.
this means (for me)
– a media player that works out of the box.
Mplayer from PLF. Plays more media formats than Windows Media Player.
– easy internet and mail access.
You gotta be kidding, right? With Mandrake, you have Internet access before the end of the installation process if you have a cable modem. Once you reboot your computer (a single time) you are ready to surf the net. Configuring e-mail is no more complicated than in Windows.
– a platform that can play games.
Well, it depends which games. Personally, as a hard-core gamer, I play mostly on consoles. I use PCs for FPS and RTS games – fortunately, this genre is very well represented on Linux, even more so if you use with Wine/WineX (WineX has a push-here-dummy installation interface as well).
as a result i don’t want to
– memorize cli commands. if it isn’t fully graphical: byebye.
You can use and setup a Linux system without ever using the command line. Of course, using a command line is often much faster than using a graphical interface (which is one of the reasons they’re beefing up Windows’ shell for Longhorn). I have a little command line box on my taskbar, and I often find it’s faster to type in the name of the program rather than go and select the right menu option. Anway, you can do pretty much everything graphically now, so it’s mostly a matter of personal preference. My girlfriend is barely computer literate, and she doesn’t find using Linux any more difficult than using Windows…in fact, she thinks Linux looks nicer (fonts look much better on Linux with freetype 2.1.5 than under Windows).
– no hassle with sources and makefiles. i just click setup and next.
URPMI is even simpler to use: less clicks than in the Windows method, and easier to find software. But if you like the Windows-type installer, check out Autopackage.org.
– have to hack night after night just to get my hardware going. wireless lan for example. my card comes with windows only drivers.
A lot of Linux drivers are already in the Kernel, so you don’t need to install them. What’s your WAN card type? I’ll see if it’s supported in kernel 2.6. Of course, since not all hardware is supported (though the overwhelming majority is) it’s always a good idea to check it out for Linux compatibility before you buy it.
Again, whether Linux is ready or not for your desktop is mostly a matter of personal preference.
They probably run their site on Windows! 😉 (I’m JOKING!)
People actively try to fix segfaults and kernel panics. Broken symlinks are a userspace thing; the distribution or packager ought to fix any they cause, but if a user makes one, beyond a certain level of “are you sure?” I fail to see what the OS should do…
What it boils down to, MS Windows has Media players, applications, functionality and it just works.
Linux on the otherhand is full of useless applications, command line jargon, and so on. It is never going anywhere on the desktop, Redhat just stated the facts and they said to just use ‘Windows’ on the desktop.
To me it is a open and shut case. Just ‘use’ Windows and be done.
I absolutely understand your points. But actually, for those simple tasks, linux is far superior.
Look at me for an example: I have to sit at a public PC at my college with Win2k and a hellofalot of ServicePacks installed, but otherwise default installation.
So. I wanted to watch the movie of the Longhorn Release (one should know it’s enemy
– and, what happens? The video stream does not play. Why? Because only MS-formats are supported.
Ok, now if i boot the machine up with my newly-release Knoppix-CD from Nov3, mplayer automatically has all the codecs I could ever think about, so playing works without hassle. With GUI, of course. CLI is just an option, which comes in handy sometimes. But I agree totally with you: if something has no GUI, ditch it.
But for the other points:
this means (for me)
– easy internet and mail access.
With Mozilla 1.5 readily-installed, internet-access is easier than ever. Why? You don’t have to install a Google-Bar. You don’t have to install a Popup-Blocker. You don’t have to disable Active-X. Ok, Flash is sometimes a problem, but I guess it could be bundled with the distributions (don’t know about copyright tough). No problems with Outlook, no hassles. Just works.
And for more Internet security: No problems with Exploits. No Firwalls and Virus Scanners and Disabling of services needed (of course, 100 % security is not achievable). But there is no hassle. And for the games:
For office-type of users, linux has a whole bunch of wonderful games buildin, a lot more than Windows. Yeah, and some of the Mainstream-Games like UT2k3, Quake3, RTCW and Halflife (Wine) work pretty without hassles. Tough you’re right, more games and overall better platform support would be nice. So in my opinion it is more than ready for the business / office desktop, if it comes preconfigured there is no hardware hassle also.
If is also ready for the developer-desktop and simple PC users. Power users however have some problems, but that’s just because it isn’t supported / widespread very much.
The only problem left inhereted in the Linux-Desktop itself is its complexity, which is hopefully totally covered under GUI-Configurationtools in the nearer future. (Anyone think Fedora will help here? Plz don’t flame!)
So, just had to say this. Because WindowsMP is not just all bliss. And it reports to Redmond and wants to lock you in MS formats.
I think it’s now officially flamewar week on OSNews. Seriously all we need now is an article on why Apple should go x86.
Linux is not ready for the desktop. If it was, it would be there. Obviously its not there.
You mean your desktop, right? ‘Cause it is on mine. Along with Windows ME, 2000, and XP.
Redhat even stated to use ‘Windows’ on the desktop.
Uh, no they didn’t. Read the Friendly Article again, dude.
BTW, in three years of Linux use I’ve never had a kernel panic. I don’t even know what it looks like! Meanwhile, Win2K has spontaneously rebooted a couple of times on me…
If Linux had a standard user interface, media player, fonts that were easy on the eyes, worked with ALL hardware correctly ect…
That is the tough part, plus had some APPLICATIONS for the average user other than the ones out there.
It is like politics, the USER has spoken and he/she does not like Linux on the desktop. They like Windows, maybe something else will come along, but for now Windows is the best operating system right now on the desktop. Redhat stated to use ‘Windows’ so even they admit it.
If you say Linux isn’t ready for the desktop, don’t forget to add “yet” at the end of it.
Cause once upon a time there was this thing called Windows 3.0, and it was the laughingstock of the entire computer industry. Which proves that anything can be polished up with enough time.
a)like playing games
Depends on the game; it works nicely for me – I like frozen-bubble and various rogue-like games, but many are available. If you want the newest commercial titles, it probably isn’t the -only- OS you want to run.
This is osnews.com; there’s frequently news on operating systems like openbeos, syllabus, atheos, and so on. If you don’t like linux, fine, but the idea that you can only run one OS seems a bit absurd on a site like this.
b)like watching videos
Mplayer. Xine. I watch videos under linux, with no problems, in a variety of formats.
c)don’t have time to wait linux to boot
Been using mandrake? Linux -can- boot very quickly; it can be set up to boot very slowly. I’ve seen it be faster than a default Windows install.
d)want to find files on the HD
I use ‘find’, a cli tool, but there are several graphical ones that work quite like the Windows find command; I fail to see how it can be a problem, unless you cannot find files under any OS.
e)like pointing and clicking to install programs (I love it)
I’ve grown sick of it. “Next. Next. Next. Done.” Way… too… much… work. Why do all that when you can in one click or one command, depending on your tool of choice? With automatic dependancy checking? I realise it’s become less of a problem with more recent versions of Windows, and the reboot isn’t -always- necessary, but I absolutely hate having to install a half dozen packages separately, with several clicks each, and having to insert my Windows CD because it can’t find some DLL, and then rebooting and repeating for the leftover packages.
f)think there are too many fanatics in the linux world
Perhaps. I’ve found that to be true of the Mac and Windows worlds as well, in addition to the BSD one. Use something on its technical merits and how much you like it, not the number of idiots who use it; every os has fanatics which are absolutely embarrasing to it.
g)don’t want to be a a weirdo using a OS nobody else uses.
Well, why are you here? This is a site about operating systems, including the less-used ones. Linux is pretty widely used; arguably, you ought to be using TRON if you just want popularity. You will or will not be a weirdo regardless of what operating system you use.
“Don’t get me wrong. I want linux to suceed. I’m saying LINUX IS NOT READY the way it is today.”
For you, perhaps. Hopefully you weren’t trolling, and will listen to the answers given… it may still not be for you, but to make that decision based on entirely wrong information would be sad.
“You mean your desktop, right? ‘Cause it is on mine. Along with Windows ME, 2000, and XP.”
Why?
What’s the point of having all those OS’s?
I really don’t understand when people constantly switch between OS’s like this.
I can understand switching between Windows and another System b/c you may not have all the apps you need available for both, but all those? What does ME give you that 2000 doesn’t? What does 2000 give you that XP doesn’t?
I run Slackware 9.1 on my laptop, that’s it, no dual booting. I pick an OS that fits my needs and stick with it.
It would be neat if Linux would work on the laptop, I have read user logs on installing it on the model I have. I tried to install and it would not work with all the hardware.
Maybe it is time for them to go back to the drawing board and revamp their underpinnings for Linux. Give it a few years or so, it may come around.
in responce to Interfacer
I believe that even windows isn;t all graphical because you have alot of perameters that a command line interface gives you that the gui cannot. So it really depends on what you are doing to say it is fully graphical.
media player
Fact: MPlayer is a better media player than Windows Media Player, RealPlayer or QuickTime player.
fonts that were easy on the eyes
Fact: Linux has better font support than Windows. Here’s the proof (1600×1200 desktop):
http://archie.homelinux.net:8080/screenshot2.html
worked with ALL hardware correctly
Does Windows work with ALL hardware correctly? ALL of it? So that means that there is no hardware problem with Windows XP whatsoever? Somehow, I doubt it.
Anyway, that’s an easy problem to solve. Just check for Linux compatibility before you buy – it ensures that you’ll be able to use the hardware, and it rewards manufacturers that support Linux. Everybody wins except the monopolists, like you.
“a)like playing games”
As you can read in the article, one can easily play games.
“b)like watching videos”
du -ms movie
16452 movie
Hmm, i’m wondering why i’d have that when i couldn’t play ’em? MPlayer
“c)don’t have time to wait linux to boot”
Don’t have time to wait <fill in OS here> to boot. BS. My personal GNU/Linux doesn’t even boot a lot. If you want an OS which boots fast it’s important because you have to reboot a lot; which is a Windows problem. BeOS and QNX boots quite fast if you ask me.
“d)want to find files on the HD”
Easy possible, even with GUI frontends. No debate needed.
“e)like pointing and clicking to install programs (I love it)”
Synaptic. Among loads of others. Depends per distro.
“f)think there are too many fanatics in the linux world”
Whatever. Such people exist in all camps.
“g)don’t want to be a a weirdo using a OS nobody else uses.”
Argumentum ad populum.
“If Linux had a standard user interface, media player, fonts that were easy on the eyes, worked with ALL hardware correctly ect…”
It doesn’t need a standard user interface; work towards being able to unify the look of kde, gnome, and a few major apps like mozilla and openoffice should suffice for most people, and the diversity has seriously improved the situation. I’d rather have kde, icewm, gnome, and blackbox than CDE or twm as my only choice.
It has several media players. See earlier posts in this thread.
It has some pretty nice fonts; the “bitstream vera” ones come to mind; I tend to use arial or helvetica.
Nothing works with all hardware correctly. Nothing. Linux is working towards it; it recently started working with my scanner, for instance. Linux is not currently the best at this, and if you need something it does not support, it’s probably not the best choice for you right now, at least as a primary OS, but the hardware support has gotten pretty good – try knoppix sometime to see how much of your hardware not only works but is auto-detected, with no manual driver installation needed.
“That is the tough part, plus had some APPLICATIONS for the average user other than the ones out there.”
What? You want applications, or different applications, or? There are applications; not as many as for Windows, but there are several good choices for most common tasks, and a variety of more specialised ones. If you need a Windows-only “vertical market application” or medical program, again, linux is not currently your best option; if you need to surf the web, use email, watch movies, play games, and/or code, it ought to be fine, generally.
“It is like politics, the USER has spoken and he/she does not like Linux on the desktop.”
What user? I’m a user who does. Most users have never heard of it; they’ve not ‘spoken.’
“They like Windows, maybe something else will come along, but for now Windows is the best operating system right now on the desktop. Redhat stated to use ‘Windows’ so even they admit it.”
Um… most users I know do not like Windows. I’ve met a few that do; far more are greatly frustrated by it and Microsoft Office.
If you like Windows, great. Why do you feel the need to criticise alternatives that you’re obviously not familiar with?
If Linux had a standard user interface, media player, fonts that were easy on the eyes…
I guess you didn’t tried Linux lately. The fonts are great. Then again, it’s something really subjective.
…worked with ALL hardware correctly ect…
1. You’re asking something that not even Windows do…
2. Bitch hardware companies that don’t want to open their specs or provide drivers for Linux.
It is like politics, the USER has spoken and he/she does not like Linux on the desktop.
Oh really? Which user? The majority of users don’t even know there are alternatives outside of Macs…
Redhat stated to use ‘Windows’ so even they admit it.
I’m tired of that false argument. Redhat’s CEO said that home users should stick with Windows right now. They never said that they’re ditching Linux on the desktop, let alone migrating their company to Windows. If they did, provide me a link and I may start believe you, but until then, you’re either clueless or a troll… or a clueless troll.
f)think there are too many fanatics in the linux world
There are many Windows fanatics in these comment sections – will it drive people away from Windows?
Sorry folks, had a DB problem there, the site’s back
Here are some beaten-to-death horses. They won’t run.
1. If you think there are no Linux applications for home or office productivity, you didn’t look very hard, if you looked at all.
2. If you think Linux suffers from segfaults, kernel panics, etc., then you have never used Linux; you heard stories about Linux. If you think Windows does not suffer these maladies, then you have never used Windows (and yes, throw XP in there).
3. If you think CLI is hard, then you are relatively new to this “computers” thing. There was a time CLI skills were required to make use of computers, and ordinary Joe-Blow users did it just fine; after all, I did. Even now, I can access files and programs faster in ‘cmd’ than I do in the XP GUI shell. Probably faster than most home users could, too. CLI is not hard.
So, in summation, the above arguments should no longer be used in these endless “Linux is stupid/ready/finished” debates. They only the ignorance of those who use them.
Oh, and sorry if that sounds like a flame; I don’t mean to insult anyone.
>> “a)like playing games”
> As you can read in the article, one can easily play games.
Not the latest and greatest games.
>> “b)like watching videos”
> du -ms movie
16452 movie
> Hmm, i’m wondering why i’d have that when i couldn’t play ’em? MPlayer
Videos at least work on Linux. Not an issue.
>> “c)don’t have time to wait linux to boot”
> Don’t have time to wait <fill in OS here> to boot. BS. My personal GNU/Linux doesn’t even boot a lot. If you want an OS which boots fast it’s important because you have to reboot a lot; which is a Windows problem. BeOS and QNX boots quite fast if you ask me.
This is just a dumb argument no matter who brings it up.
>> “d)want to find files on the HD”
> Easy possible, even with GUI frontends. No debate needed.
Another dumb point. (original point that is)
>> “e)like pointing and clicking to install programs (I love it)”
>Synaptic. Among loads of others. Depends per distro.
The problem that it does depend on the distro. What if the app is not provided by the distro? With Windows, developer makes one package and it works.
>> “f)think there are too many fanatics in the linux world”
> Whatever. Such people exist in all camps.
Well put.
>> “g)don’t want to be a a weirdo using a OS nobody else uses.”
> Argumentum ad populum.
What you said
You mean your desktop, right? ‘Cause it is on mine. Along with Windows ME, 2000, and XP.
Yes, keep that attitude. That attitude is exactly what will keep it on YOUR desktop and off the average computer user’s desktop.
I don’t think that anyone that reads OSNews.com should use the excuse “well its on my desktop, so its obviously ready!” You are not the average computer user. The average computer user does not want to spend 10 hours tweaking their system to a usable point. The average person does not want to open up a command line, set things a executable, and use command just to install a program. They want to click. Why? Because they do. Who cares why? They do. If you don’t want to agree, then don’t, and Linux can just fail.
Quit with the smug attitude. Instead of sitting there arguing that Linux is ready for the desktop, why don’t you open your eyes. Linux is only on 2% of the desktops out there. LINUX IS OBVIOUSLY NOT BEING ADOPTED TO THE DESKTOP. Do you understand that? The best thing that you can do agree every time that someone says Linux is not ready, and then ask them why and fix it. Obviously people have problems with Linux. So when someone says “I have a problem with Linux” don’t say “no you don’t.” Say “well what problem do you have so that we can make it better?” If you just keep ignoring the fact that people obviously don’t want to use Linux, then you’re doing Linux a disservice, and you’re only assuring its doom.
It’s redy for my desktop and its redy fore som other desktops but not for all desktops
The thning with linux is that getting the desktop like you want is probobly harder on linux but when you are there its just plain nice.
movies well movie playing is better on linux than windows
windows media player say that it cant find the codec and then
trys to download a codec that dosent work. then you have to find the codec you need on the net or install a codec pack that renders windows useless. on linux i run mplayer/xine and it just works.
games well i stoped playing those before i switched.
hardware support its true that linux dosent support all the new hardware. but then agin winxp has problem with older hardware. in the computer shop i work at we made alot of money buy selling hardware to people uppgrading to winxp since there old modem and so on stoped working nothing is perfect and nothing supports everything
i write all the documents i write in kile(latex) and its working great.
internet heck i always sits on irc while im installing
so linux is ready fore some desktops.
and btw why should power users speend all the time to fix linux for others. i fix my linux like i want it i have no problem and the i use linux like my desktop and do my work on it. i dont have the time to fix things for people.
if you want something fixed fix it your self or pay someone to fix it,
I’ve had non-technical people try a pre-installed Linux system, and they had no trouble whatsoever using it. With something like the Click’n’Run interface from Lindows, installing software is even easier than in Windows.
The “Linux is not ready for the desktop because it’s only on 2% of desktops” argument is not rooted in logic. After all, OS X has barely, what, 4% of desktops? Would you argue that it’s not ready for the desktop as well? You’re ignoring two important factors: inertia and anti-competitive practices by MS.
“Quit with the smug attitude. Instead of sitting there arguing that Linux is ready for the desktop, why don’t you open your eyes. Linux is only on 2% of the desktops out there. LINUX IS OBVIOUSLY NOT BEING ADOPTED TO THE DESKTOP. Do you understand that? The best thing that you can do agree every time that someone says Linux is not ready, and then ask them why and fix it. Obviously people have problems with Linux. So when someone says “I have a problem with Linux” don’t say “no you don’t.” Say “well what problem do you have so that we can make it better?” If you just keep ignoring the fact that people obviously don’t want to use Linux, then you’re doing Linux a disservice, and you’re only assuring its doom.”
Great post!
That is my point of view. Some guys believe Grandma is going to type command lines.
It is NOT going to happen.
DEMOCRACY NOW! GIVE US AN EASY TO USE LINUX!
Not another “is linux ready for the…..(desktop, enterprise, crapper, whatever)” posting. Eugenia, Adam, how about a moratorium on this stuff? Do we really need another flamewar on this subject?
I don’t think so.
Fact is: Any OS is ready for the desktop, if you are willing to put in the work to get it there. That goes for windows, as well as alterntive OSes. All have their strengths, all have their weaknesses.
Get over yourself, and get over it! It’s not a zero-sum game here people! If linux works for your desktop, bravo, if it ain’t your cup o’ tea, congrats.
I don’t see the religion.
>>Synaptic. Among loads of others. Depends per distro.
>The problem that it does depend on the distro. What if the app is not provided by the distro? With Windows, developer makes one package and it works.
Now that is hardly true. Many applications are packaged for Win 9X/ME OR Win 2K/XP. If you deny this, you’ve never used Windows. Why is this so? Because many Win 9X/ME applications will NOT work on Win 2K/XP. Proof? Try to get Grand Theft Auto 2 (which was packaged for Win 9X) to run on XP. I dare you.
“Ok, I hear you crying out, “What about installing a new application?!” ./configure, make, make install isn’t exactly mind blowing folks. And the Redhat GUI RPM installers, or YaST, or whatever your flavor is, are as slick as can be for any system including Windows. Try getting that newly released video game working on an XP box. That’s not exactly apple pie buster.”
Requiring a user to compile code is just stupid. If the compile doesnt work for some reason, the user is then screwed. What about RPM installers? The problem is too many different distro’s that need different packages. THis requires the distro makers to make the packages. That is fine, but they can not possibly make packages for ALL software or host it. Not the end of the world, but a disadvantage none the less. It can’t be brushed aside as the author does. Also, installing the latest game is as easy as putting in the cd and click click click and play.
“The only other thing I can think of that might be a bit daunting is installing new gear into the box and having the OS pickup and use it. That’s a stretch for saying that Linux isn’t desktop ready, but I’ll address it anyway. Windows sucks at this and always has. Nothing installs on it without a hickup.”
What??? Hardware is as easy as plug it in, put in the cd from the manufacture click click click and done. At least in most cases, the rest come with instructions on how to install on Windows. Easy. Linux, not so much.
“So let’s call it even and say that someone who doesn’t just ‘know’ what to do on any OS will call a buddy.”
No, it is not ‘even’. Name one piece of hardware easier to install on Linux then Windows?
“Personally, when a six year old can handle it, I think it’s ready. Sometimes, I guess, there’s never a six year old around when you need one.”
The only problem is that the six year old did nothing but play a game. Lets see the six year old install an app not in the repository.
“So why hasn’t Linux been able to make a dent in the desktop market? Sure it’s passed Mac now,”
Sorry, but did anyone else decide it wasn’t worth reading with a first line like that. Kind of hard to belive anything in a article when the first line is so incredibly wrong. Last I knew <1% was not greater then 3%
I think this is one of the many faults of linux users when going on the desktop debate. They for one overestimate linux’s market share. The truth of things is there is very few people running linux, but if you are in places like OSnews or Slashdot all day your not going to understand that. Linux has a strong hold in the server market. Other then that it has nothing.
Also people simply don’t get what people want. Yesterday someone in a forum here said something to the effect of people will like linux because they can change and modify it’s looks and said most users of windows change how windows looks and thats why windowblinds is so popular. In reality nearly no one changes the look of windows. And few have ever used let alone heard of windowblinds. A deep miss-understanding of the masses that is really hurting linux. It doesn’t offer what people want. People do more then just check email and surf the web. A good chunk of people are going to have something wacky compaired to the masses they do. There will always be that one thing.
People don’t care about opensource,
People don’t care about security except when someone ask them, in reality and when they use their computer they don’t care. But if asked of course people will say yes.
People don’t want to learn anything
People want to be able to use all the same stuff their freinds do.
People just want to click and go.
Windows simple works.
In the end there is no reason to switch, even if linux did everything better then windows at somepoint and had every app they ever want and so forth, people still arn’t going to switch since they have a setup that works. This is why apple can’t get more users. No matter how hard they try, people are still just plain content with windows. To get a win98 and down user to switch is far easier then to get a winXP user to switch. As more people have XP it’s going to be harder to pull people away.
“Fact is: Any OS is ready for the desktop, if you are willing to put in the work to get it there. That goes for windows, as well as alterntive OSes. All have their strengths, all have their weaknesses.”
that must be the best qoute today.
heck windows isnt ready for the desktop fore some persons it sure as hell isnt ready for my mother i have tried to tech here to use windows so long that i have given up. she still tryes to enter the password where it says username.
use wath works for you could it be more simple want to try something else well get use to the fact that you have to learn something new.
if a desktop are ready fore the users well all users are different.
if you make something foolprof there will always be a bigger fool
but that dosent mean that programmers shouldnt try to make them foolprof
As most people have been saying it is all a matter of preference. I have a Windows machine in work and I use a Linux machine at home and I can work on both just as quick.
I like Linux because I like to configure and tweak everything, I enjoy programming and find programming easier to do on Linux, there are more command-line tools and and the shell is simply easier to navigate than is the windows one.
I can browse the web, watch movies, listen to music, burn CD’s etc without switching back to Windows. Anyone who takes the time to learn how to use Linux can be just as productive as someone who is using Windows but the argument is why should they bother learning it?
In work windows simply works (at least it does for me!), it does all the jobs its meant to do, and I get my job done. I have tried testing Linux desktops in work and most of the user’s find it too difficult or intimidating, or simply cannot be bothered to learn how to use it because they have grown up with Windows. People’s first PC’s came with Windows, most magazines are for Windows, and people simply don’t want the hassle of installing WineX to play a game. I remember someone saying to me “If all you want to do is play games, and use Microsoft Software then use Windows”
So as far as I am concerned Linux attracts power users and Windows attracts the average user who isn’t really bothered how an OS works they just want it to do it’s job.
“Not the latest and greatest games.”
Latest != good/great/cool/stupid by definition.
Greatest = subjective.
What if i find Lemmings the greatest game all time?
It’s true the ”professional gamer” games aren’t always available on GNU/Linux. However, some _are_. Some are even ported to GNU/Linux. ID software is doing a great job on this, for example.
Though i can give also examples of games i ran on GNU/Linux with WINE which ran quite good. Then there’s also WineX, and Xen.
Regarding old games, there’s DOSbox and ScummVM for example. These are also ported to Windows. So generally, this ain’t a big deal though DOSbox can be a bit too slow but i think that’s not GNU/Linux related (i played lots of cool games like Elvira, Monkey Island, Dune2, with a friend here last weekend. Totally awesome!).
“The problem that it does depend on the distro.”
Not really. On the package format. APT/.deb isn’t Debian only; Portage/.ebuild isn’t Gentoo only. RPM/.rpm isn’t RedHat only.
Then there’s also Alien.
“What if the app is not provided by the distro? With Windows, developer makes one package and it works.”
Apt-get update in the GUI (i think just click on update), then install it. Debian GNU/Linux Woody (stable) is conservative on new software so if you want top-notch it’s better to run a new distro or run for Sarge/Sid (testing/unstable).
If the app in question isn’t in the distro there are multiple ways to get it. That’s not different in Windows. There’s .rar, there’s P2P, there’s .zip, one can buy a packet, and so on. In GNU/Linux you can buy proprietary apps too or use P2P, or download the .tar.gz. But then instead of clicking yes-yes-yes without reading -which one should for example for a license- you have to do ./configure;make; make install for example. It’s not really that harder, just a bit i think. And it’s different. Different != harder. Different is based on the status quo, and different therefore doesn’t mean ”worse”, ”better”, ”bad”.
Linux distro != Linux distro.
You chose to run a certain distro which uses GNU/Linux and certain other free (or non-free) software. But like i said, with a slight bit of CLI knowledge one can compile an app him/herself. (this was the first thing i learned on my RedHat 5.2 and 6.0 boxes and it wasn’t that hard. Just take the time
forgot to add: such ”professional games” are not for average desktop users at least that’s how i see it. I also highly doubt average desktop users need more apps when running a new ”user-friendly” GNU/Linux distro like RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE (those are the most known, there’s more) because afaik these are quite complete. If not, i’d like to hear your opinion which apps are really missing.
“just not every desktop. for mine it isn’t.
I am an experienced software developer. I use linux for clients if they ask me to, but in my free time i want my home pc to be as usable as possible without too much hassle.
this means (for me)
– a media player that works out of the box.
– easy internet and mail access.
– a platform that can play games.
as a result i don’t want to
– memorize cli commands. if it isn’t fully graphical: byebye.
– no hassle with sources and makefiles. i just click setup and next.
– have to hack night after night just to get my hardware going. wireless lan for example. my card comes with windows only drivers.
but i do not deny that it can be a usefull platform. just not my choice for the above reasons.
as for security: using automatic updates and a firewall, i don’t suffer from worms or viri (fingers crossed).
Int.”
I’m also a developer. (Don’t know why that is even relevent.) I use Debian Linux and I find installations applications on Debian must easier. All I have to do is type “apt-get install my_favorite_application” and it automagically downloads the application plus all their dependencies.
Try this on Windows. You have to hunt and peck for lost DLLs till you die.
What happens on Linux in the case where the developer goofed and didn’t install the correct dependencies on Linux? I type “ldd program” and look for the dll. Then I type “apt-file search dll_here” and then I just “apt-get install package_containing_dll_here”. (Time to type commands: on the order of minutes)
What happens on Windows? Complain and wait for the developer to fix it, call tech support, try and dig for it yourself(google it till your eyes fall out). (Time to wasted: hours)
What about hardware support? My old-ass HP plotter/CD-ROM/(substitute your favorite old still working device here) works out of the box. HP/Mitsumi/(substitute your favorite old still working device here) no longer has the driver available for XP so I’m screwed there. No amount of fiddling will get it to work.
Ease of use is relative to each individual person. As you can see, Linux is very easy for me and anyone else with even a mild amount of intelligence. You don’t have to memorize any CLI commands, but you’d be a fool not to. (Hint: They’re 10 times faster than GUI clickity clicking which is also available.) The only reason you’d not want to use Linux is if you are allergic to typing. In that case, why do you want to use a computer at all?
Re: The “Linux is not ready for the desktop because it’s only on 2% of desktops” argument is not rooted in logic. After all, OS X has barely, what, 4% of desktops? Would you argue that it’s not ready for the desktop as well? You’re ignoring two important factors: inertia and anti-competitive practices by MS.
You’re doing exactly what I said in my post. Rather than saying “ok, yeah, you’re right, Linux does have only a 2% share of the market. What can we do to fix that?”, you come back with “Oh yeah, that doesn’t prove anything! Your argument isn’t rooted in logic!”
I don’t personally care if Linux succeeds or fails. If it succeeds, good, it creates an alternative. If it fails, who cares, someone will come along with something else. I’m trying to give you suggestions on how to change your attitude to help it not fail, if that is what your hopes are.
And about Windows, OS X, and Linux. Mac is not a direct competitor with Windows. Mac has about a 95% share of the media production market, and that is what it’s goal is. Mac knows that they are not going to ever be able to compete with Microsoft for the consumer market. Microsoft, however, is Linux’s main rival. Windows can easily take away Linux’s market share.
If you’re happy with Linux having only a 2% share of the PC market, then fine by me. As I said before, I couldn’t really care less. I’m just telling you, if you want Linux to get a 10%, 20%, 50%, whatever % of the market share, you have to quit negating the reasons people are giving you as to why they don’t want to use Linux, and start embracing them and making the changes they seem to want.
Some guys believe Grandma is going to type command lines. It is NOT going to happen.
You don’t have to use the command line if you use Linux (especially not for your typical Grandma’s usage). If you just tried a modern distro you’d see that this is no longer true, and is just FUD.
DEMOCRACY NOW! GIVE US AN EASY TO USE LINUX!
Democracy has spoken: Linux is now easy to use.
I don’t have an answer to this question, but I don’t see how anyone can realistic determine the market share of Linux users. Every copy of Windows has (well, is *supposed* to have) a license. This can be counted. Mac machines are sold pre-loaded. They, too can be counted.
The Windows numbers can be misleading, since most new machines come pre-loaded. That means the consumer counts as a Windows user, even if that user is wiping it clean and installing something else. The same can be true of the Mac, but probably not to the same extent.
But one CD install set can legally be used for many different machines. You install, then your buddies install. Public and school libraries have Linux installation disks available for checkout. ISOs are freely available. How can one keep track of all that?
tell me something if all you have to do in windows is click to install software why do you have a differnt version for win9x, win200, xp and windows 2003. Why do I have to sit infront of the machhine while it installs so I can reboot it and press next. with apt-get all I do is type apt-get install (whatever package) With Yast it is graphical I select the packages I want, from a huge list, click install, and it downloads and installs with out me there
I think that linux is a great desktop. And is ready right now but it have several problems:
a)like playing games
A lot of games were not designed for linux. Do you want to use Wine? Thanks but is alpha code right now… It’s compatible with win98!
b)like watching videos
I’ve used mplayer/xine several times, It does some things like displaying ascii videos and thats ok. But… Do you want to use some sorenson quicktime? (apple trailers) ah… mplayer hacks ms quicktime… which is equivalent to crack software….
In MS/Mac world audio/video applications (that do a lot more than WATCH video works years-light without problems: Movie editors, MIDI editors, video compositing, DVD players… Linux is improving in these areas (gstreamer is a good foundation) but they need some work.
c)don’t have time to wait linux to boot
Well… Linux right now doesn’t need a loooot of time to start… but there are projects in freedesktop handling these issues
d)want to find files on the HD
You can use CLI, but these area is better in Linux, but easier in windows
e)like pointing and clicking to install programs (I love it)
Well… this case I think that is just different but I find Linux way OK
f)think there are too many fanatics in the linux world
Well… several guys believe that… but that another issue
g)don’t want to be a a weirdo using a OS nobody else uses.
Well… there are millions of linux users… and thats another issue
> Latest != good/great/cool/stupid by definition.
Greatest = subjective.
What if i find Lemmings the greatest game all time?
Spliting hairs. You understand my point. More games work on Windows then Linux.
> It’s true the ”professional gamer” games aren’t always available on GNU/Linux. However, some _are_. Some are even ported to GNU/Linux. ID software is doing a great job on this, for example.
Good for them, doesn’t change the fact that many many games are not available.
> Though i can give also examples of games i ran on GNU/Linux with WINE which ran quite good. Then there’s also WineX, and Xen.
Even if you include all the games able to be emulated, still doesn’t match up to those available on Windows.
> Regarding old games, there’s DOSbox and ScummVM for example. These are also ported to Windows. So generally, this ain’t a big deal though DOSbox can be a bit too slow but i think that’s not GNU/Linux related (i played lots of cool games like Elvira, Monkey Island, Dune2, with a friend here last weekend. Totally awesome!).
I am actually slowly working through Days of the Tenticle(sp?) again
> Not really. On the package format. APT/.deb isn’t Debian only; Portage/.ebuild isn’t Gentoo only. RPM/.rpm isn’t RedHat only.
If I run debian and try to install with an ebuild, it will not work due to the lack in dependecy resolving. THe ebuild will have no way of knowing what I have or don’t have.
> Then there’s also Alien.
I don’t know what that is.
> Apt-get update in the GUI (i think just click on update), then install it. Debian GNU/Linux Woody (stable) is conservative on new software so if you want top-notch it’s better to run a new distro or run for Sarge/Sid (testing/unstable).
> If the app in question isn’t in the distro there are multiple ways to get it. That’s not different in Windows. There’s .rar, there’s P2P, there’s .zip, one can buy a packet, and so on. In GNU/Linux you can buy proprietary apps too or use P2P, or download the .tar.gz. But then instead of clicking yes-yes-yes without reading -which one should for example for a license- you have to do ./configure;make; make install for example. It’s not really that harder, just a bit i think. And it’s different. Different != harder. Different is based on the status quo, and different therefore doesn’t mean ”worse”, ”better”, ”bad”.
So if a package is not in the repository, you expect people to compile from source? Not good.
Also, speaking of proprietary software. They don’t want to provide the source so are they forced to make a package for each distro?
> Linux distro != Linux distro.
You chose to run a certain distro which uses GNU/Linux and certain other free (or non-free) software. But like i said, with a slight bit of CLI knowledge one can compile an app him/herself. (this was the first thing i learned on my RedHat 5.2 and 6.0 boxes and it wasn’t that hard. Just take the time
Compiling is not a valid expectation of the average user. There is a certain amount of knowledge to do this that most people dont have and dont want.
Windows has not ready for the desktop for a long time. Win98 or WinME crashed on me 24/7. I mean those were crappy(TM) operating systems. Fortunately that’s a lot better now.
Linux never suffered those stability problems, but I agree for desktop use some things need to change for Joe User. I think it will succeed eventually.
So we’ll see.
“The average computer user does not want to spend 10 hours tweaking their system to a usable point. The average person does not want to open up a command line, set things a executable, and use command just to install a program. They want to click. Why? Because they do. Who cares why? They do. If you don’t want to agree, then don’t, and Linux can just fail.”
Well, current distributions work without all the tweaking that you mention. Things normally work out of the box currently, with no more configuration then you have to do on a fresh Windows installation. You can click to install. Actually, you do not need to see the CLI any more then you do in Windows, as the installation routines are fully graphical by default, although you can go to the text mode if you really want to. You are referring to the way things were a couple years ago, but not how they are today. May I suggest trying out a current distribution such as Mandrake 9.2, SuSE 9.0, and maybe even Fedora Core 1?
Besides that I will ask…what are the specific issues/items you are trying to do that do not seem to work?
> I’m also a developer. (Don’t know why that is even relevent.)
I is one big developer party here. Count me in too.
> I use Debian Linux and I find installations applications on Debian must easier. All I have to do is type “apt-get install my_favorite_application” and it automagically downloads the application plus all their dependencies.
As I always say, and what about stuff not in the repository.
> Try this on Windows. You have to hunt and peck for lost DLLs till you die.
Huh… download or pop in cd, click click click, done. Windows is just as easy.
> What happens on Linux in the case where the developer goofed and didn’t install the correct dependencies on Linux? I type “ldd program” and look for the dll. Then I type “apt-file search dll_here” and then I just “apt-get install package_containing_dll_here”. (Time to type commands: on the order of minutes)
> What happens on Windows? Complain and wait for the developer to fix it, call tech support, try and dig for it yourself(google it till your eyes fall out). (Time to wasted: hours)
Won’t happen because everything comes with it. If developer screwed up then it happens. I have also seen developers screw up and release software on Linux that does not compile. A screw up is a screw up.
> What about hardware support? My old-ass HP plotter/CD-ROM/(substitute your favorite old still working device here) works out of the box. HP/Mitsumi/(substitute your favorite old still working device here) no longer has the driver available for XP so I’m screwed there. No amount of fiddling will get it to work.
I am glad that you still use hardware from over 4 years ago. The problem is there is tons of hardware created today that does not work on Linux.
> Ease of use is relative to each individual person. As you can see, Linux is very easy for me and anyone else with even a mild amount of intelligence. You don’t have to memorize any CLI commands, but you’d be a fool not to. (Hint: They’re 10 times faster than GUI clickity clicking which is also available.) The only reason you’d not want to use Linux is if you are allergic to typing. In that case, why do you want to use a computer at all?
I never get involved in this argument. Both are just as easy to use.
“>> “a)like playing games”
> As you can read in the article, one can easily play games.
Not the latest and greatest games.”
Depends on the writer. UT2K3 was shipped with the Linux installer on the 3rd CD, and installs and runs flawlessly. Return to Castle Wolfenstein was also released with a Linux binary, however that has to be downloaded from ID Software and then installed. If you like the MMORPG style then Neverwinter Nights has a Linux client, again released by the original software manufacturer. Anyway, my point that the latest and greatest are there should you take the time to read about the game you are going to purchase. I do wish they would put Linux on the packaging for those though, then this would not be an issue, since it would be very obvious.
“I don’t personally care if Linux succeeds or fails. If it succeeds, good, it creates an alternative. If it fails, who cares, someone will come along with something else. I’m trying to give you suggestions on how to change your attitude to help it not fail, if that is what your hopes are.”
You should not be talking this way. You do not understand Linux at all. It’s already a success. Market share is not as important as market GROWTH. Honestly, Linux is taking away a lot of Microsoft business as entire governments are converting to Linux from Microsoft products. Even .1% of the marketplace is enough to make both you and me filthy rich. You can see how even 1% would make Microsoft cringe.
The reason why he’s defensive is not because he doesn’t want to learn about the shortcomings of Linux to improve it, it’s because people are saying things that are untrue and are not real shortcomings. Would you like it if you were a good worker and then someone came to you and said you’re not ready to be promoted because you’re sloppy? Would you become defensive?
Of course Linux has some technical deficiencies (what OS doesn’t?) but the majority of the posters in this thread list subjective things that are mostly untrue for the majority of Linux users.
> Depends on the writer. UT2K3 was shipped with the Linux installer on the 3rd CD, and installs and runs flawlessly. Return to Castle Wolfenstein was also released with a Linux binary, however that has to be downloaded from ID Software and then installed. If you like the MMORPG style then Neverwinter Nights has a Linux client, again released by the original software manufacturer. Anyway, my point that the latest and greatest are there should you take the time to read about the game you are going to purchase. I do wish they would put Linux on the packaging for those though, then this would not be an issue, since it would be very obvious.
The point is the same. Many more new games run on Windows then Linux. Simply put. Nobody can argue that.
“You’re doing exactly what I said in my post. Rather than saying “ok, yeah, you’re right, Linux does have only a 2% share of the market. What can we do to fix that?”, you come back with “Oh yeah, that doesn’t prove anything! Your argument isn’t rooted in logic!””
Because
1) Market share doesn’t proof a product is good or bad. Solaris, BeOS, QNX are bad just because they’re not used as much as Windows or TRON? Saab is a bad car because Volkswagen is populair? It’s simply a fallacy to use popularity as argument for something to be good or bad.
2) It’s impossible to get such numbers right.
3) According to me it doesn’t matter. What matters is diversity, which i personally would prefer with Free Software licenses and multiple OSes, kernels, programs, etc. Choice matters. Having about all the power over all computers like MS has, is according to me dangerous. My problem is not the X% GNU/Linux has, my problem is the ridiculious high % a certain company has. Companies should not have too much power. Actually in capitalism the free market should lead to concurrency.
“And about Windows, OS X, and Linux. Mac is not a direct competitor with Windows. Mac has about a 95% share of the media production market, and that is what it’s goal is. Mac knows that they are not going to ever be able to compete with Microsoft for the consumer market.”
They do compete somehow. Just not on _every_ aspect. Apple is afaict 33% owned by MS.
“Microsoft, however, is Linux’s main rival. Windows can easily take away Linux’s market share.”
No, i think Microsoft cannot completely take away Linux’ market share, even not on desktop. What you forget is that some people do not like Microsoft and their ways. Some people will never, ever run Microsoft software again, or certain Microsoft software like Windows. Microsoft will have a very hard, if not impossible time to get these users back. The same counts for BSD users who don’t like the GPL. There’s more then just desktop, user-friendliness. There’s also things like political reasons, emotions, history.
What could happen is via ways like patents, making GPL illegal, forcing people in other ways but such are appeal to force; abuse of power. Indeed in such way GNU/Linux can be made bade away but that would be ”cheating” huh?
“I’m just telling you, if you want Linux to get a 10%, 20%, 50%, whatever % of the market share, you have to quit negating the reasons people are giving you as to why they don’t want to use Linux, and start embracing them and making the changes they seem to want.”
Because some reasons are according to some people invalid. Can happen, right? That’s what a discussion is all about. What if we all agreed on everything… boooring:)
Some things are simply beyond developers’ power. For example in the recent GNU/Darwin someone insisted he wanted to run AutoCAD natively. Well bad luck brother, they own the source. However there are ways users can get such programs ported to GNU/Linux. Together we can make a difference.
Has any one of you CLI guys tried navigating XP from a keyboard? To me it’s a ton faster than navigating from a unix cli.
To go from here to ../stuff/morestuff and run myprog:
Unix CLI:
cd ..[Return]
cd stuff/m[Ctrl-D to get list]ores[Tab][Return]
./myp[Tab][Return]
Windows XP (explorer.exe):
[Backspace]st[Return]mo[Return]m[Return]
9 keypresses vs 20 or so. Of course the CLI sequence can be slightly shortened, but in XP explorer you have full overview all of the time.
and that is why its good to know the cli.
cd../s[tab]/m[tab][tab]or[tab]enter
./my[tab]enter
or
../s[tab]/m[tab][tab]or[tab]/my[enter]
ofcourse if i made the app i would have it in my path and print my[tab][enter]
>As I always say, and what about stuff not in the repository.
I download from another website if available, I can alien it (convert RPMs to .DEBs, etc), or compile it from scratch. [all which take very little typing] See, I have the choice and the option of doing that.
What about Windows applications that are not in your repository…oh that’s right you don’t have one. You probably have to run to the store and buy it.
I don’t even have to leave my house. How easy is that?
>Huh… download or pop in cd, click click click, done. indows is just as easy.
Nope. I can’t even count the number of times I had to download VBRUN. Installed applications twice because it locked up the first time, etc.
>Won’t happen because everything comes with it. If developer screwed up then it happens. I have also seen developers screw up and release software on Linux that does not compile. A screw up is a screw up.
If it doesn’t compile, it’s probably your setup. But that’s not the point. My premise was that there was a screwup. On Linux, it’s fixable, on Windows you can fix it with your sweat and tears or maybe not at all. Won’t happen is the silliest things I ever heard. Happens all the time.
>I am glad that you still use hardware from over 4 years ago. The problem is there is tons of hardware created today that does not work on Linux.
So what? Does anyone care when it was made? I should just be able to use it. Forget 4 years, why should I throw something that’s 10 years old away if it still works and does what I want/need? It’s unbalanced to say that Windows is great because new hardware is supported that Linux doesn’t support…while all the old hardware that Linux supports that Windows does not is irrelevent. Linux has great hardware support. It supports most of the common hardware and even some of the most obscure and old ones you can’t imagine. Besides that, hardware support is not even a function of Windows. Their support is done by the manufacturers while Linux people write their own. That’s not a trivial feat.
boy are you out of it command line when the program isn’t in the path
/stuff/morestuff/myprog
that is it. you only have to search if oyu don’t know the name. second unless it is your program you jsut create a symlink to /usr/bin which gernerally in the Path.
also your method only works if you don’t have multiple letter m’s directory’s such as media, microsoft, Misc. it affects programs, as well as directories, and is a probelm with that kind of search no matter what os you run
“The point is the same. Many more new games run on Windows then Linux. Simply put. Nobody can argue that.”
I misunderstood you on that one. You are right, can’t argue that one, and I totally agree. A true example is the upcoming games, as Doom 3 will have a Linux binary, Duke Nukem Forever will not, and I have no idea about Half-Life 2 (most likely not as a guess). So out of 3 of the most looked forward to games, only 1 will definitely be supported on Linux. It is the only thing forcing me to keep a copy of Windows installed is the games, at least the ones that will not run under Wine and WineX anyway.
Even when Windows have some advantage mostly because better hardware support than overall quality I think that linux is ready for the desktop.
I think that you can browse the web, read emails, use documents, even listen music, see pictures cheaper (and a lot of ways better) than Windoze.
But the little details like hardware support, winmodems, digital video cameras, hardware detection, applications for every use, video manipulation… these things are simpler in windows…
So… linux is ready for the desktop… the things that do it do cheaper and in several ways better than windows… but several things just need more polish…
Right now, Linux (in desktop) can compete with Windows because is cheaper… but Windows is still more desktop complete…
In the server… Windows is just old-fashioned server…
“Even if you include all the games able to be emulated, still doesn’t match up to those available on Windows.”
(Dual-boot)
That’s according to me a selfullfilling prophecy. It can evolve otherwise, but currently it’s beyond our power since we do not own the source of say Halo
. Once people stand up, and ask for a port to GNU/Linux, and the company sees money in it, gamers will be able to run their games native. I believe gamers who together insist on such _can_ make a difference because i see in activist world this is also possible. It doesn’t always work, i’d eat my shoes when MS would port Halo, and some GPL-hating or GNU/Linux-hating (among other possibilities) companies wouldn’t do it either but some will.
You see here how proprietary closed-source products help a monopoly position.
(Frankly i prefer Free (speech) software and pay such people an amount of what i can and make the proprietary Free (beer) in some way but that’s besides the point)
“I am actually slowly working through Days of the Tenticle(sp?) again
”
Heheh fun:) in which way are you doing this? Like on what kind of box with which software? I’m wondering how such performs too if non-native.
“If I run debian and try to install with an ebuild, it will not work due to the lack in dependecy resolving. THe ebuild will have no way of knowing what I have or don’t have.
> Then there’s also Alien.
I don’t know what that is.”
http://kitenet.net/programs/alien/
Not sure if there’s also a frontend for it.
Perhaps it can be converted i haven’t looked up if .ebuild is supported by it. Alien can save your day if there’s a .rpm only on your Slack/Deb box especially if it’s linked static or source.
“So if a package is not in the repository, you expect people to compile from source? Not good.
Compiling is not a valid expectation of the average user. There is a certain amount of knowledge to do this that most people dont have and dont want.”
One can learn it. It’s not _very_ hard and not by definition needed on day 1 after install. A good GNU/Linux book would talk about it. Then there’s less README and less INSTALL. Basics. If they don’t want such, they can stick with another program or call support or ask the community, depending on the distro.
(I got help with this on IRC when i first started. On RedHat i wanted to get Licq and QT working while i had alternatives installed. But i insisted on Licq. Got it, but had to learn some stuff first)
“Also, speaking of proprietary software. They don’t want to provide the source so are they forced to make a package for each distro?”
Hmm they can do so, if they want, but there are alternatives. They can also make a .tar.gz with a script like NVidia does. It’s not hard, they provide a help file on their site for it, and that’s about it.
Finally compiling has a nice side aspect: it learns users what source is, why it’s useful, why it’s important/powerful, and why it sucks when it ain’t there. According to me it’s a part of a good (imo) learning curve; cause Free Software for me is mainly about freedom, not money…
Whether or not Linux is “ready” for the desktop is not the right question.
People should be asking: What does Linux offer that is better than Windows? If you’re a contented Office user, why switch to Linux just to use a copycat package, especially when the same copycat package runs on Windows? If you’re a contented PhotoShop user, why switch to Linux just to use Gimp? If you’re a satisfied Mozilla user on Windows, why switch to Linux just to use Mozilla? If you’re a satisfied Outlook user, why switch to Linux just to use Evolution?
Linux needs to be more than “ready for the desktop” to displace Windows. It needs to offer Windows users a compelling reason to switch. Being just as good as Windows isn’t a reason to switch.
Peragrin, dizz: Sure, but my point is just that the GUI bashers claiming that GUI means clickety click click are wrong. Well designed navigator GUI:s should be as fast or faster than a CLI to navigate from the keyboard while giving you better overview, and windows explorer.exe is that good, while none of the linux guis i’ve tried are (possibly because linux/unix does have a better CLI).
Linux is in several ways better than Windows. Just one word:
Security.
If you need several things more: what about that Linux is cheaper, it runs in a lot of platforms more, it doesn’t have virus problems, and it have a lot of server and development stuff for free!….
well you are rigth about that the linux guis itried to work with the keyboard is so far worse than eplorer.
and you ar probobly rigth about the reason to. then agin i never did try all of the gui:s for linux and tried i guess that im ass lassy as evryone else
“tell me something if all you have to do in windows is click to install software why do you have a differnt version for win9x, win200, xp and windows 2003. Why do I have to sit infront of the machhine while it installs so I can reboot it and press next. with apt-get all I do is type apt-get install (whatever package) With Yast it is graphical I select the packages I want, from a huge list, click install, and it downloads and installs with out me there”
Well apparently you have never used Windows, or you’re trying to be a troll. But for what it’s worth. Most the time there is not seperate versions for each version of windows, just the program says it will run on all of them. One can make changes to a program if it’s to be run on NT vs 9x series. I belive most of the time it’s just a matter of the installer used in the package. All you do is click and maybe some more clicks. Also almost no programs require a reboot in win2k or XP. The only ones I can think of are Matlab and iTunes. In 98 you had to reboot more, but as most people found out, even if it says reboot you usualy did not have to. But since 9x is obsolte it’s not really worth talking about. Also for users clicking on something will always be easier, it involves no knowledge of what to do. It does not matter how simple the command line command, one still has to remember it, and has to know what they need to do. Even if all a person had to do is open a terminal and type “make” that would be far and above most people. And frankly few want to do that even if they knew how.
The odds of trying to installing a program in windows and their being a problem are extremely rare. One can be very sure it’s going to work and not bork things up. This can not be said for Linux. And probably never will be able to said.
Forgot a point in my market share rebutal: it’s also a relative thing. 1% -> 1.2% = 120%; 90% -> 90.2% = 100.222%.
I don’t really care. If you Linux supporters are sure you’ve got everything right, and you don’t think that you need to change anything to win users over, then far be it from me to tell you otherwise.
I’ve used Linux a number of times. I do all my home stuff on XP now. I do my video work on OS X. I used Linux three seperate times, each time for a period of four months. I like Linux. I think that it has a lot of promise. But I think that there are shortcomings that are keeping it from being adopted. And I’m not saying that Linux CAN’T be a viable alternative on the desktop, or that it won’t be, simply that it is not in its current state. There are people that see why that is, and things are being done. Here is one of those projects:
http://autopackage.org/
People like this are the ones that will make Linux succeed. They see that there are problems with the way it works today, and are doing things to deliver what people want. You guys sitting around saying that Linux is ready are doing nothing to help your cause, you’re actually hurting it. Five years ago I could have said that Linux wasn’t ready for 20 reasons. Now I can say its not ready for maybe 10 reasons.
One example of an area where there was a HUGE problem that has been fixed: OS installation. OS installation on Linux used to be just pathetic. Now it is very complete and concise. This type of refinement needs to happen in other areas of Linux now. Software installation is one of them. Sorry, RPMs and whatever “alternatives” are out there don’t cut it. How about nice looking freetype fonts? Are they automatically installed on Linux yet, or do you have to do all those tricks I had to do 6-9 months ago still? Windows comes with nice fonts. And there are plenty of other littler things.
I’m not your enemy here. I dislike Microsoft’s business practices, and I think alternatives are healthy for capitalism and innovation. Linux succeeding would be great, though not essential (as I said before, something else will come along). Instead of just gladhanding each other, why don’t you just admit that even though Linux is a great little OS, its not quite ready for the desktop yet. Its more ready than before, and that’s why its gone from .5% share to 2.5% share of the market or whatever its currently at. But its not a 10% OS yet. Or even a 5% OS. Does some of that have to do with Microsoft FUD and dominance? Certainly. But there is still a lot of work for Linux developers to do themselves to prepare Linux to be ready for the masses. So why don’t you ignore Microsoft, and quit telling people that they are wrong to think that Linux isn’t ready, and start finishing its last few shortcomings so that you don’t have to convince anyone of anything, Linux will prove itself.
I am thirteen years old. I have installed and configured Slackware, Gentoo, RedHat, Arch, FreeBSD, and NetBSD. If a thirteen year old can do that, why the heck can’t an adult? They can’t possibly be dumber than a child. I don’t see why people say Linux is hard. I seriously don’t.
What windows has going for it is it’s reputation as being easy to use and a unified GUI. Another, perhaps less important, part is drivers. Beside that, Windows has it’s peculiarities which users have become used to. Though, since it’s windows, they know they have to live with it as they have for such a long time. Linux desktop offerings mostly have to surpass the image of Windows desktop usability and many people dismiss it almost as by definition not good enough. Linux has it’s pros and its cons, so has windows. I have both at work and both at home. If I could get the functionality of Windows Terminal Server in Linux, the windows server would become a Linux but VNC is a joke and xmove doesn’t compile on my cygwin (yet). Oh well.
/jarek
Because sometimes adults don’t have time to spend hours and hours relearning how to do things, especially when they are already pretty happy with how they are doing things now.
Most adults only use their computers for the internet, e-mail, and word-processing. These are all things that Windows can do just fine. Their computer comes pre-installed with Windows and Office. They really don’t care if they are getting a more secure, cheaper OS from Linux, because sercurity isn’t really an issue to them, and Linux isn’t any cheaper because they had to pay (a hidden fee) for Windows XP to come pre-installed on their computer anyway.
Here we go again…….
To everoyne else, I ask you, in as calm a manner as I can, why don’t we wait and see?
An older person learns slower than a younger one.
Linux can be used by everyone, but windows is easier (or comfy) in several ways isn’t?
> (Dual-boot)
Hahaha!!!!
> That’s according to me a selfullfilling prophecy. It can evolve otherwise, but currently it’s beyond our power since we do not own the source of say Halo
. Once people stand up, and ask for a port to GNU/Linux, and the company sees money in it, gamers will be able to run their games native. I believe gamers who together insist on such _can_ make a difference because i see in activist world this is also possible. It doesn’t always work, i’d eat my shoes when MS would port Halo, and some GPL-hating or GNU/Linux-hating (among other possibilities) companies wouldn’t do it either but some will.
It is a nice idea, but I am looking at how things are now, not in a perfect future.
> You see here how proprietary closed-source products help a monopoly position.
And helps a company make money and then be willing to make the software to begin with.
> (Frankly i prefer Free (speech) software and pay such people an amount of what i can and make the proprietary Free (beer) in some way but that’s besides the point)
Free software does have its place.
> Heheh fun:) in which way are you doing this? Like on what kind of box with which software? I’m wondering how such performs too if non-native.
I am using ScummVM. Works well enough but the built in Maniac Mansion 1 game does not work.
> I don’t know what that is.”
> http://kitenet.net/programs/alien/
> Not sure if there’s also a frontend for it.
> Perhaps it can be converted i haven’t looked up if .ebuild is supported by it. Alien can save your day if there’s a .rpm only on your Slack/Deb box especially if it’s linked static or source.
Does it still allow for dependency solving?
> One can learn it. It’s not _very_ hard and not by definition needed on day 1 after install. A good GNU/Linux book would talk about it. Then there’s less README and less INSTALL. Basics. If they don’t want such, they can stick with another program or call support or ask the community, depending on the distro.
Again, the average person does not want to know these things. THey just want to use the software not learn to compile it. Also, there are subtle parts of compiling that are not easy for average users. This is why I actually use Gentoo (use flags
> (I got help with this on IRC when i first started. On RedHat i wanted to get Licq and QT working while i had alternatives installed. But i insisted on Licq. Got it, but had to learn some stuff first)
First the average user needs to learn how to use IRC. Getting them to jump through hoops is not a way to win them over.
> Hmm they can do so, if they want, but there are alternatives. They can also make a .tar.gz with a script like NVidia does. It’s not hard, they provide a help file on their site for it, and that’s about it.
Not very good alternatives.
> Finally compiling has a nice side aspect: it learns users what source is, why it’s useful, why it’s important/powerful, and why it sucks when it ain’t there.
Why does it suck when it ain’t there?
> According to me it’s a part of a good (imo) learning curve; cause Free Software for me is mainly about freedom, not money…
For me, a computer is about getting a task done. For the average user, it is not about learning how to use the computer. It is about getting something done.
Linux is more than ready for the desktops… why?
Computer users jumped all over wintel 3.0… 95/98, leads anyone who knows anything about Linux that its head and shoulders above the garbage MS & Company has shoved our direction over the years!
W
> Here we go again…….
> To everoyne else, I ask you, in as calm a manner as I can, why don’t we wait and see?
Wait and see what? If Linux is ready someday? It maybe, just not today.
> Wait and see what? If Linux is ready someday? It maybe, just not today.
Yeah…I’m saying instead of quabbling over the same tired arguments, let’s just wait and see if Linux can ever be used by the unwashed masses.
“An older person learns slower than a younger one.”
That’s for sure. I used to straight A’s in German classes, but now that I’m trying to learn Linux…I’m gonna have to take classes just for that, and I’m what passes for the “IT Manager” here. Ha!
Sometimes I try and imagine trying to explain Linux to the old timers who meet for coffee in our store every morning. Some of these guys are lucky if they can get Outlook to open without help. I wish I’d started using Unix when I was 13…
You’re doing exactly what I said in my post. Rather than saying “ok, yeah, you’re right, Linux does have only a 2% share of the market. What can we do to fix that?”, you come back with “Oh yeah, that doesn’t prove anything! Your argument isn’t rooted in logic!”
That’s because your argument is faulty: you’re saying that Linux only has 2% of the desktop because it’s not adequate. I disagree with this assertion. It’s only go 2% of the desktop because that’s were it’s at right now – in actuality, the number of Linux desktops is constantly on the rise. The think is, there’s so many desktops out there that it will take time before it makes a real dent in Windows’ market share.
That doesn’t mean that I don’t think Linux can be improved. Of course it can: in any software project, there’s always room for improvement. But I thik it’s illusory to think that having a better product means more market share, and there are actually many examples that this is not the case (BetaMax vs. VHS comes to mind).
And about Windows, OS X, and Linux. Mac is not a direct competitor with Windows. Mac has about a 95% share of the media production market, and that is what it’s goal is.
Uh, no. Tell that to Steve Jobs and he’ll blow a fuse. Apple’s goal with OSX is to win market share away from Windows. Haven’t you seen the “switch” ads? In the words of Helen Feiss: “blip blip blip…uh?”
The truth is that Mac OS X is very much ready for the home Desktop, and still it only has 4% market share. So saying that the market share of a product is proportional to its “desktop readiness” misses the mark completely, IMO, and you haven’t provided any arguments to dispute this opinion.
Microsoft, however, is Linux’s main rival. Windows can easily take away Linux’s market share.
I think you meant the contrary: Linux can easily take away Linux’s market share. MS has a monopoly – it can only go down. Linux, on the other hand, is evolving at an accelerated pace and its number of users keeps growing.
I’m just telling you, if you want Linux to get a 10%, 20%, 50%, whatever % of the market share, you have to quit negating the reasons people are giving you as to why they don’t want to use Linux, and start embracing them and making the changes they seem to want.
Change is happening, every day. Compare Linux today to what it was a year or two years ago, and you’ll see tremendous changes. As I said before, there’s always room for improvement. But when people post reasons for not using Linux that are no longer valid (such as having to use the command line, not having good media players, not rendering fonts correctly), then you can bet I’m going to tell them the truth, that some of these problems have been solved, while others are being solved.
The truth that Linux is ready for an increasing number of desktops. The other truth is that it’s not lack of quality that is to blame for Linux’s relatively low market share: as I’ve said before, inertia is a powerful (if irrational) force, and MS hasn’t exactly helped things by pressuring OEMs who wanted to install other OSes on their PCs.
The number of Linux users is increasing at a regular rate, and that’s just fine with me.
As a die-hard Linux junkie, I must say I don’t want to take desktop marketshare from Windows.
Why?
Think of it like this: the only time any Windows user will believe Linux is ready for the desktop is when it looks and acts like Windows.
I don’t want that; that’s why I don’t use Windows today.
Well, Konqueror does pretty much the same thing as you describe. It is IMO superior to Windows Explorer.
Okay, now, about GUI and CLI…let’s say I want to copy all mp3 files that have “Rolling Stones” in their filename (but not necessarily at the beginning of the filename) from one folder to another. In the original folder, there are over 75 files with “Rolling Stones” in their name, and there are some files with the same name in the destination folder which I want the new ones to overwrite.
Which is faster in this situation, the GUI or the CLI? 🙂
I can’t believe that you people are still arguing about whether Linux is ready for the desktop or not, or even whether it was intended for the desktop. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a personal matter, like religion. In fact, this debate has taken on a zealous tone that makes religious discussion sound like Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood.
If you are ready to use Linux, Linux will probably be ready for you. If not, it won’t. It’s that simple. Either way, I don’t think it’s reasonable for a transition from one OS to another to be a quick affair. I’ve been transitioning for more than a year. I’m almost there, but I haven’t gotten my multitrack recording app running yet.
Aside from that, I use Linux every day at home. I’ve arrived at a combination of software that suits me, and the horizon still looks very bright.
So those of you who don’t think Linux was intended for the desktop, maybe you should be saying that it wasn’t intended for your desktop. But leave mine out of your pessimistic predictions.
Hi all.
I do not understand why a lot of people here thinks that Linux is a bunch of terminals…
I was like them before but after 4 year with Linux I do agree with Anon E. Moose I use Linux because it’s different, not because it’s like windows.
To all the Windows zealotes I suggest trying live distros like
knoppix : http://www.knopper.net/knoppix-mirrors/index-en.html
with an open mind. Keep in mind that freedom of choice is what keeps life exciting, and Linux represent that.
I’ll just punch F3 (search), type Rolling Stones, press Return, press Home, Shift-End to select them all, press ctrl-x, alttab to the other window and ctrl-v. Dunno if that’s faster or slower, depends on the situation. But if you want to do that through CLI you have to use grep and pipes (not a bad solution, but weird filenames can sometime give problems with the command line tools).
But if you want to do that through CLI you have to use grep and pipe
Nope. This is how you’d do it in Bash:
[chtulhu@rlyeh]$ mv -f /original/folder/*Rolling Stones* /destination/folder
With Tab autocompletion, typing such a command takes about 6 seconds. The GUI way takes more time than that, especially if none of the folder windows are open. Also, consider that you’re adding a second or two as the dialog box asking you if you want to overwrite the destination file pops up.
CLI wins in such a situation. That said, I use the GUI all the time – I’ve loved GUIs since I first laid eyes on an Apple Lisa way back then. But the command line is a powerful tool – which is one of the reasons MS is revamping it for Longhorn.
The Linux hype has finally came to an end. The CEO of Redhat stated to just use ‘Windows’ none the less. Until they can have a uniformed interface, applications that install by clicking on them, and hardware support it will go nowhere fast.
Basically, it is now just back to a hobby operating system where it started. The fanfare is over and it is going to be a very hard sale to any company now. Redhat has admitted to losing the battle for the desktop, and it was time for them to throw in the towell. Now it is time for MS to really get on the ball and run with it. Linux is now a distant memory on the desktop, soon to be just another OS/2 and the like……
Somehow the backslash didn’t show in the previous post. It’s supposed to be between “Rolling” and the space before “Stones”, to escape the space (the comment posting script probably doesn’t allow the backslash character to be posted). Also, one would probably like to add “.mp3” after the wildcard at the end of “Stones”…anyway, you get the picture.