This is a commentary. From a Linux user who does tech support for Windows users and works in the real world of a corporate Windows network environment. 2004 has been touted by many as the year of the Linux desktop. Indeed with the backing of IBM, Sun and now Novell, the business world looks like getting a serious Linux desktop contender. But has Linux on the desktop really got what it takes?Editorial Notice: All opinions are those of the author and not necessarily those of osnews.com
Intro
Linux has made huge strides in terms of useability in recent years, hardware auto-detection is getting better, kernels are improving, installations are smoother. Joe or Jane public can pretty much get some sort of Linux desktop running on most modern PC’s. So surely its a small step from here to acceptability in the big world. Well probably not.
Linux as a hobby OS is great. You can make a personal statement about your independence and hacking ability, and sleep better at night knowing you have a superior OS without so much as a nod to the great satan. Linux as a server is greater still. The bang for your buck, the ease of installation and reliability make it an ideal candidate for mission critical situations. But Linux as replacement for Windows on people’s desktops?
The Windows desktop is a highly developed and polished product. A Macintosh desktop is likewise, unfortunately OSX continues to only be available on fairly expensive hardware made by only one company, Apple.
Despite all of the deficiencies of Microsoft and Windows, the fact of life is that refinement over the years has produced a current Windows desktop which is slick and functional. In addition, almost every piece of consumer software will run on Windows and almost every item of hardware will work with Windows.
So if Linux is to compete in some way on the desktops, clearly a number of the key features of a Windows desktop need to be matched. Mainstream computer users have years of experience with Windows, forcing experienced users to sacrifice some of the mod cons of Windows isn’t going work. This is one of the reasons why Linux in developing economies makes so much sense.
What are these “mod cons” that make a Windows desktop?
Aside from the GUI and point n click, there are some obvious hallmarks. These are:
* Uniformity of appearance
* Consistent behavior
* Ease of use
* Ease of installation
* Reliability
* OS transparency
There are bound to be more, but these strike me as the most obvious characteristics. The question of abundance with regard to software is another issue. As many Linux advocates have observed, a few killer game applications would do more for the cause of Linux than possibly years of more quiet development. I suggest that although Linux software development proceeds along different lines, ultimately commercial products will arrive when the market appears.
Analysis
So what do I mean by these desktop characteristics? In the main, they are features that Windows users, and by extension, the rest of us, expect when using a modern PC.
Uniformity of appearance – this is either a no issue or a big one, depending on your point of view. Some people will suggest that in fact Windows doesn’t do very well in this department compared with say OSX, however whilst the more modern Windows systems may not have the same eye-candy as OSX, they still have a uniform look and feel. Unfortunately, an historical precedent has given rise to a diverse and at times competing window environment for Linux, the end result is that today’s Linux desktop can look and feel like a dog’s breakfast.
Consistent behavior – again the quick wits will say that the consistent Windows behavior is all bad, which might have been true some years ago but is far less true now. To be precise, this characteristic is closely related to appearance. For example when an icon of some sort appears on the desktop, then clicking on it with the mouse will produce a predictable response from the system. Users learn to associate and differentiate icons and their functions and become comfortable in the security that these things tend not to change. Again this has not always been a strong point with Linux desktops and to a certain extent highlights the different approach that Linux developers have taken.
Ease of use – these two feature combine to provide a degree of ease-of-use, but there are others. Desktop GUI’s reflect a certain thought process, if that process is one that shares a large area of common ground with users either by way of computing experience (ie Windows) or personal politics (say OSX) then users will be able to instinctively guess an action to achieve their desired outcome. By its very nature Linux will be forced to emulate Windows in this regard as the established desktop Linux user base is diminutive. Unfortunately emulation will always leave the user comparing the copy with the original. Ease-of-use extends to other areas; for example Windows users can easily use software and hardware because it is so widely supported and available.
Ease of installation – possibly one of the weakest user characteristic for Windows but still one that encompasses significant strengths. For users, installing a program is simply a matter of double-clicking the installer. Window’s uncompromising approach to a PC’s hard disk utilisation is an example of how a lack of choice and real options creates an easier job for end users. Most users don’t really care how a hard disk is partitioned or how it boots provided it works without users having to get involved. Live Linux distros like Knoppix have a lot to offer here. On the one hand they offer a zero pain demonstration of Linux to Windows users and on the other hand they also offer a relatively easy installation process. Most modern Linuxes also offer relatively easy installers, however the addition of software to a Linux system is often more problematic when compared to a Windows environment.
Reliability – which was for a long time a very sore point for Windows, has become one of its strengths. Yes Windows crashes, but then so do Linux boxes. Linux servers have probably got the edge, but on the desktop its not so clear cut. Complicating the desktop scenario is the user. Users tend to do funny things to their computers and are often guilty of self harm. Whilst the security of a Linux system may be more stringent and thus prevent major problems, examples such as Lindows and root passwords highlight the potential here for a repitition of the Windows scenario.
Aside from such concerns there is another component to reliability. Consider this example, Jane buys a new digital camera for her home PC. She uses Windows at work and at home she has a rent-a-box which has XP and all the usual stuff. She may have problems with viruses and she might have security concerns about the internet, but mostly she wants to be able to do her homework and now she wants to hook up her new camera and print some pictures. This is not and should not be a drama, most of the time for people with Windows and some of the time for Apple users, this type of scenario IS NOT difficult. Jane checks that her new camera is compatible with Windows XP and when she opens the box there is a shiny new cd to help her out. In this sense, Jane can rely on Windows to do her job. Simple scenarios for everyday users that can be reliably done. Linux users can do some things as easily and as reliably as their Windows friends but clearly not as many.
OS transparency – for many Linux advocates, this is an anathema. They delight in demonstrating that the command line is lurking, easily accessed with a few keystrokes. Granted, it is a tool that professional users derive great benefit from, not so the average desktop user who pays homage to the twin altars of point-n-click and GUI, and with good cause. Desktop users want to check their mail, write a report, browse the web or run a million other applications on their computer. The OS is a sideshow to the real action, doing stuff on your computer means applications and furthermore, running those applications doesn’t mean getting involved with the inner workings of your operating system. If an application is available for both Windows and Linux then users have every right to expect that using that application on either platform does not involve a complete re-education. In other words, Linux will be successful in this regard when users are more or less oblivious to the fact that the OS on their computers is in fact Linux and not something else.
Conclusion
Linux has great potential as a desktop computer with some definite advantages over Windows but until Linux matches some of the key features of the Windows desktop then any mass adoptions are likely to limited to specifically targeted niche markets and newly evolving ones.
Linux will definitely make it on the mainstream desktop, once we can lose all the extra baggage coming from all the choices.
Yes, all programs should look the same. You should not have the choice of which toolkit or widget-set etc. etc. to use when making a program. Nor should you be able to choose desktop system (the person in support need to be able to support a consistent os, not something which can be tweaked or customized to infinity).
The major problem is that code in OSS is never dropped! We need to realize that we are too proud and have to much time on our hands when we start forks and side projects to open source projects, and don’t kill projects that are not successful (just because some people prefer a flavour of $project doesnt mean it wouldn’t be better to limit the diversity and let people have consistency, but not choice).
Sure, the GPL is brilliant when it comes to creativity and development, unfortunately the products created contain such a wild array of choices that the average user doesn’t know what to do with it.
Mainstream like Britney Spears, MTV, and all that? Here’s hoping not.
>> Speak for yourself. I find it a pain in the ass not being
>>able to copy and paste anything but plain text between many
>>Linux apps.
>I can and have!
How? This is a very common complaint and I’ve never seen a solution. Try copying a selection of an image in GIMP and paste it into OpenOffice, or paste some cells from Gnumetric into KWord. IME it just doesn’t work.
>>”the hardware isnt supported!”
>Manuf. Problem
Not good enough. You can’t expect people to replace expensive hardware just to run a different OS. Poor hardware support may not be the fault of Linux, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t a Linux problem.
To run Linux with a usable dual-headed display setup, I’d have to replace my Radeon graphics card with a Nvidia card. And thanks to the primitive dual-headed display support in Linux, it still wouldn’t work as well as it does in Windows.
>>4.) Note taking/Word documents
>Open Office. I read them all…
I’ve tried opening a variety of MS Word documents in OpenOffice, hardly any opened correctly. Virtually any fairly complex Word document with images, tables, diagrams etc. has problems. Some order forms created in Word were so mangled by OpenOffice that it would be quicker to start from scratch than fix them. If you need to work on MS Office documents then 80%-90% compatability just isn’t enough, especially if you need to e-mail documents to other people.
I know you can run MS Office on Linux, but there are stability and performance problems IME. It also adds extra cost and if you’re just going to be running Windows apps, why bother running Linux?
>Now why aren’t you switching.
Because Windows still has a lot of advantages over Linux and personally I find working in Windows far more productive.
There is a company in Malaysia that is selling desktops with a localised version of Linux and OSS. Their biggest customer group has been the rural population – where this is their first ownership of a computer.
They have simplified the interface – so that it is very easy for users to use a computer. Remember the old Win 3.1 program group icons/sub-windows ? Well, their interface is similar – and it is easy for first time users.
Looking at it, Linux on the desktop has made a difference to make life easier. I think at the end of the day this is more important than whether Linux on the desktop is mainstream or not.
Are these fud pieces planted here on OS news just so M$ apologists can all congratulate themelves again?
Whoops that’l be censored too!
I’m no Linux guru by any means, but I’ve been successfully running Linux on my desktop at home for over 10 months, and loving it because I’ve realized that I don’t need Microsoft. This makes me feel great !!!
In the beginning of the transition to Linux (from Windows) you may run into some problems – it’s likely to have a Linux guru in your back pocket (or a friend that’s quite good at it.) Most the times any problems can be found on the internet, or easily and quickly be fixed by editing a system file somewhere on the system. But where you ask – that’s why it’s nice to have someone knowledgeable in Linux to quickly advise you when you encounter a problem – and you probably will !!!!
The thing about Linux that I found is that YOU are the administrator. Instantly you therefore have a whole realm of commands at your disposal that weren’t even thought about in Windows. You can do so much more in Linux as far as “tweaks” – such that it has a bad case of option-ightous.
Once you start to understand a little bit better of how it works and what it’s about, then you get much better at it. Then again, there are some people who just don’t want to know !!! For those people, I hope someday we will achieve a simple solution – until then Linux is not ready for those type of people – unless they have a friend that will act as their administrator in their Linux box.
Besides arguing around the desktop, application packaging etc. you have to look at how easy it is to manage the environment in a company. There is no equivalent to the SMS-ActiveDesktop-GroupPolicy combo in linux AFAIK.
Whilst its somewhat cheesy in that policy files use shared filesystem rather than ActiveDirectory, Microsofts system does the job. Many third party applications lever the installer infrastructure also (which integrates with SMS & AD.) Its relatively straighforward to provide central managment for 1000’s of desktops using this.
If someone can point me at a relatively well productionised distributed management (user rights, permissions; application distrubution …) I would be well pleased.
I am looking forward to the day that it will not matter what OS or platform that you are using you will be able to use an application of your choice. I am not talking about giving in to only one OS or only one platform. I am talking about hardware developers and software developers that are developing for John Q Public, developing for the needs of the Public. I believe that we can and should have a variety of OS vendors providing OSs with the underlying Kernel being of the same breed and we still can have our Eye Candy in a variety of flavors. But that the applications that are being developed should be able to be complied to run on any of them including MS. And With this I am getting at the fact that we should be able to write a Document on any of the Platforms or OS and be able to take it to the others. I have been working with Computers and software since the 1970s and the biggest complaints that I receive is that I can not share my files with a friend that uses a different computer or OS. Instead of spending a fortune trying to but the other out of business, try speeding the money to work together for the betterment of the world.
The article lists six desktop characteristics where the author apparently believes Windows is better than Linux. My two desktop systems here at work are Windows XP Pro and SuSE 8.2 on “identical” hardware. I find Linux to be clearly more reliable and easier to use than Windows, and overall better in each of the other four ways as well.
Re the camera example, again our experience differs. The wife got a new digital camera for Christmas. We couldn’t get it working with any flavor of Windows at home (XP/2K/98se). I brought it to work, no go with XP Pro either. Figured “why not”, tried it with the SuSE box. Worked. No special config, no “load driver disk”, just plugged it in and it worked. Result, this weekend we converted our home systems to SuSE 9 (with one as dual-boot XP for “just in case”).
“Linux can make it. It still has problems. Like installation of hardware and applications.
Don’t say to just go get the rpms for the drivers or an app.
Rpms don’t move around well between different rpm based distros, unless they are built for yours.
Source isn’t helpful in the least. I shouldn’t have to be a
a doctor of CS to install something.
Don’t ever tell me to just do a configure, make and a make install; it is rarely that simple. ”
Do you people even use Linux, or have you looked into a decent distribution:
Installing on several distro’s:
Arch :: pacman -Sy packagename
Debian :: apt-get install packagename
RedHat/Suse w/apt :: apt-get install packagename
Yellowdog :: yum
MDK :: HAS A GUI FOR IT
Lindows :: HAS A GUI FOR IT
gentoo :: emerge packagename
As for source being hard. ./configure && make && make install. It works 9/10 times, and that 1 is when you don’t have all the dependencies. Dependencies exist in the Windows world too though, it’s often referred to as dll hell. The Windows Installer is quite weak, a unproperly configured MSI package will install an uninstallable program.
RPM’s are different for different distro’s because they are setup different. There is no way around this. You simply have to provide the rpm’s for your distro, or users will have to avoid version upgrades for the whole system. But Windows doesn’t ever upgrade correctly either, so I don’t see the difference there.
Mac users have long argued that the more refined interface, and easier driver configuration of their OS was worth the extra cost, for them. The author of this article is now trying to make the same argument in regards to a Windows/Linux comparison.
As a long time Mac user I can tell you, it’s not gonna work. If you are satisfied that the extra cost is worth it for you, fine; but don’t make predictions about what the rest of the world is willing to settle for.
You missed the whole point of my post. I’m saying it doesn’t matter how good linux is. OSX has been at least sexier than XP for like 3 years. The point is there’s no reason for the average or even above-average user to ditch windows for linux. Even if Linux was sexier/easier to use, what consumer software does linux provide that windows doesn’t?
Linux needs some closed-source games that are really innovative and fun and free. Open-source is taking away the incentive to switch because everything good that comes out eventually gets ported to windows.
><rant>
>
>Maybe Linux developers need to start thinking: “Ok, we’ve >got about 100+ distros floating around, what about building >on some new concepts?” ie Storage or some sort of database >filesystem so that Linux can have a reasonable competitor >to WinFS in Longhorn?
Hmmm… I could say you might’ve been hiding under a rock for about a decade… there are a LOT of research material and applications of new theories in Linux and other open source software. Reiser4 is one (how about a pluggable filesystem in Win9x?) or XFS (i don’t see how the WinFS layering to NTFS can beat this one in terms of scalability to house very LARGE files – multimedia files which WinFS aims to index in the first place?), an ultra-scalable O(1) scheduler present in Linux and making its way in other open source operating systems, Beuwolf clustering, etc…. Maybe you’d need to check out recent postings and research material more often than you check out marketing propaganda.
There’s more incentive for people to contribute research using a free operating environment as you can start work right away and create a working proof of concept. Hey, you have the code to do it anyway. That’s how Unix evolved. That’s how TCP/IP evolved. A freely available environment coupled with people with enough knowhow is all it takes to implement new concepts.
What has NT technology given us? Aside from a C2-compliant config that requires you to un-network your NT-network server and a fine-grained ACL implementation, integration of the brain-dead Win32 API which negates the original cross-platform goal of the NT kernel? How about integrating graphics routines into the kernel, which makes the whole soup unstable and insecure, if otherwise bloated, in the name of graphical efficiency? How about the apps intended for NT –> a kernel-based HTTP server that runs CGI too – which allows for malformed CGI requests to be executed with machine privileges? And now with WinFS – an indexing addition to NTFS which makes it much easier for you to index your files, while making it also simple for a malicious user to sift your own files as well?
MS doesn’t have too much of revolutionary ideas if you’re looking for any – they do have sometimes, but what they have a lot more is a lot of marketing legwork more than a real deliverable that doesn’t give too much headaches or unacceptable demands.
KDE and gnome are truly slow and buggy. Even my win2k in a even slow PC is more fast rather linux (with a latest drivers video).
And of course, when you learn to configure in deep linux, the gui is good for nothing, becuase the linux configuration is almost 100% to touch some ascii text and it SUX!.
For example, Apache configuration have a gui interface BUT it take only 1% of the complete configuration, the rest must be made using a text editor!!! (they don’t known that we lived in 2004 and not in the 80′?). In opposite, IIS you can configure in a complete gui interface!.
>Debian :: apt-get install packagename
>RedHat/Suse w/apt :: apt-get install packagename
At least on Debian there’s synaptic, a GUI for package management. The version in Sarge now uses GTK2 and got deuglified.
> 1. CD-writing, which is supposed to work out of the box with > K3B, simply doesn’t work.
K3B is a little hard to get working, and has to be configured properly before you can use it. I personally use Gnome Toaster whenever I need to burn a CD.
> 2. Neither boot loader works properly on my system,
> requiring me to boot up with the Suse disc each time.
It sounds like you told it to install to root instead of your MBR on your hard drive. Most systems simply don’t work with either Grub or Lilo unless they are installed in the Master Boot Record AKA the MBR.
I have to say that as an XP user (and linux too) I am spoiled compared to the Mac users:
I bought XP back in 2001, have got countless patches and software upgrades + new stuff like moviemaker since then (messenger, mediaplayer..). All theese full-featured software I got for free.
If you consider the actual milage you get from a MS OS and the free updates and software you can get through winupdate and compare that to the cost of 3-5 linux distros (XP has been alive and kickin since 2001 and will be good through at least 2005), or OSX + the price of its (3?) upgrades (yes apple makes you pay for them, not the patches but the bigger upgrades)+ the price for the iApps (apple will soon start charging for them too!) and XP will actually look rather cheap.
Dont get me wrong OSX seems like a nice OS, Its just that apple are so good at making their customers pay through the nose for stuff the rest of the world takes for granted.
Being a expert user with both systems, I have to agree with the author.
Some of the other issues that I believe are stopping linux from ever being a serious contender in the average pc is.
Security on Linux systems need to be overhauled
Users that work in large firms like to have the same stuff at home as they use at work. ie windows, word etc.
No company offers a really good support model for large corperations.
Something akin to group policy needs to be introduced with a good central managment system
And last but not least is it cost a lot more to employ linux techs due to the complexity of supporting the product.
linux is not mainstream because companies will not support linux. for the only reason of fear. if there were more essential hardware / software support for linux, it would blast microsoft away quite fast. I use it as my full desktop and almost never use XP. Linux is quite functional and on mine, i have a unified package manager (rpm) that also updates, installs, and removes software. and when it comes to installing software, I just type in the name and it locates and installs, how great is that? not only that its tested and it works no problems ! at least in my experience…oddly enough, linux has been a MUCH BETTER desktop OS for me than a server OS by far! i know that seems odd but its the truth in my case.
Linux would be alot better if people would stop treating linux as non-existant, if it had more support via 3rd Party, it would be alot better, i think the Tux penguin and a little “Linux Supported” sticker on Printers and Digital Cameras would be a nice thing to see. someday i hope this is a reality…
People will always say that linux is not as good as windows becuase either A: close minded or B: dont spend enough time to try and expand their minds with a better OS.
my approach to Linux has always been to treat it in the manner of thinking like “thats how you do it”, not “Well windows did it this way”. doing so results in an unsatisfactory experience.
Mandrake 9.2 has been a great OS for me, and it was the ONLY Desktop OS i have been TRULY and FULLY Productive, even more so than XP.
More and more, Windows and Macs are becoming media centres.
I agree but at some point they will not be computers anymore but appliances. When it gets to that point (which doesn’t seem far off) what is the point anymore? Their functions will narrow and leave Linux for people truly interested in computers. I don’t see the downside and I don’t think most other Linux users would either. Personally I don’t care who uses it as long as no one is stopping me from using it.
Magallanes
For example, Apache configuration have a gui interface BUT it take only
1% of the complete configuration,
Er…ever heard of Webmin?
http://www.webmin.com/screens/apache.gif
There’s also a project called Comanche:
http://www.unc.edu/~jwatt/inls183/10comanche7.png
Of course, the troll is moot, as Apache is not a desktop application, but a
server one. Server admins are usually not afraid to edit text files. In any
case, there are three times more Apache servers than IIS servers in service
– that should be an indication that, in this particular instance, a GUI
does not a successful Web Server make…
For common desktop configuration there are GUI tools for practically
everything. The only reason I still use the Command Line to configure my
Linux system is that sometimes it’s faster – otherwise, I could go GUI all
the way.
In other words, you’re spreading the same old FUD.
Ravager
I seriously doubt that you are an “expert” on using Linux when you repeat
the same tired lines that anti-Linux advocates use.
Security on Linux systems need to be overhauled
Really? In what respect? Don’t you think security in Windows needs some
working on as well? *cough* Blaster *cough*
Users that work in large firms like to have the same stuff at home as
they use at work. ie windows, word etc.
I have Word on my Linux PC. What’s the big deal?
At least, your comment seems to indicate that as people start to use Linux
at work, they’ll start using it at home as well. That’s good news.
Something akin to group policy needs to be introduced with a good
central managment system
Group policies have always been part of Unix (and, by extension, Linux).
Again, I call BS on the “expert” claim.
If you specifically mean ACLs, there has been support for them on Linux for
a while now:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue57/tag/7.html
And last but not least is it cost a lot more to employ linux techs due
to the complexity of supporting the product.
It’s true Unix admins in general cost more than Windows admins, but on the
other hand each of them can handle more machines at once, so costs tend to
balance out (and even tip in Linux’s favor). So this is not a valid
argument. In any case, this article is about the Linux desktop – comments
on the cost of Linux admins are quite off-topic, don’t you think?
Ta!
Until Linux becomes as friendly to the user as it is to the system it will never compete in the Windows world. Reason is, lack of full software support.
Does Adobe make all their software available for Linux? How many of the latest and greated Games are available as Linux versions? How about Macromedia’s Flash and other of their products? I could run down a HUGE list of applicatoins that are on the MUST have list of ones out every day. None of them are Linux Versions and there is no real sign of that changing.
Linux needs to be self updating like Windows. Shouldn’t have to have a Desktop user complie a kernel file or figure it out in the least. Hardware compatibility is the single worst part of Linux as a lot of the drivers made by 3rd parties that are good, cost money above what they already paid for the hardware itself. That doesn’t sway others to by the Linux OS unfortunately. The hardware makers need to provide Linux Drivers for their products as well as the software companies need to do the same.
In short, it’s purely a support issue. Linux can be just as easy to use in it’s many GUI’s, but the total lack of any MAJOR hardware and software support for the popular companies is what is holding it back.
If they could make Linux where it could run a windows program without windows needing to be on the system with it? Then that would be the biggest step in making it a viable Desktop System for everyone. Then the next giant step is to stay on top of the Hardware industry. Or at least get them to where they’ll gladly develope and provide drivers for all their products.
One thing I would more than love, is to see Linux become the next Desktop mainstay in the PC world. I love linux and would MUCH rather have it on my system than windows. But till the programs I depend on for my own developement and entertainment are available or run on it with no issues? I’m afraid Windows wins hands down.
How many of the latest and greated Games are available as Linux versions?
Meh. Most good games nowadays come out on consoles. Buying a computer to play games isn’t a necessity anymore. If you really like First-Person Shooters, which are more fun on computers, then you can always get a good selection of them (including the upcoming Doom3) as this is a genre that is over-represented in Linux.
Seriously, as a gamer and a game designer, I find I’ve got all I need with my PS2, Xbox and GBA.
Shouldn’t have to have a Desktop user complie a kernel file or figure it out in the least.
Doesn’t have to. It took me two years before I tried recompiling the kernel. Even then I didn’t need to, I only did because I was curious and wanted to know more.
If they could make Linux where it could run a windows program without windows needing to be on the system with it?
You can. It’s called Crossover Office. It doesn’t require a copy of Windows.
but the total lack of any MAJOR hardware
Would you care to elaborate? The list of hardware that doesn’t run on Linux has shrunk a lot, and keeps on shrinking. Linux is fast closing the gap.
I love linux
Yeah, a lot of people are saying this, then they spout off a long list of problems with Linux that are no longer valid. Either they haven’t tried Linux in a while, or they’re trolling.
I think there is a misconception. There is a difference between a system being easy to use, and a system that everyone knows how to use. As the author himself said, everyone knows how Windows is used. But what happens if you sit a person down in front of a Windows box, who has never used a computer before. Will he be able to use the system easily? This is the intuitive part of “Ease of use”. The other part of it has to do with uniformity in multiple contexts.
Just because you know how to do something, doesn’t mean that it’s easy to use (what some people call user friendly).
As my title says singing from one hymn sheet, currently linux distros aren’t, and I think its a big problem. Linux is great cause you have all that software, lots of software for doing the same jobs.
However software installation and dependency is the real issues, RPM’s are horrific, Debian and Gentoo have the right idea they more or less have is sorted, but source compiling takes ages and not everyone has that long to wait.
Configuration: This is one of the little things, not all of us care for editing config files or go off searching for them, this is another place windows and macOSX scores u can config virtually everything in a single place.
My next one is a real irritation, firstly I like gentoo as its rubbish free and allows me to install what i want and nothing else, but why is the supermount patch not included in the main kernel development by http://www.kernel.org, as i said its the little things i want to be able to hit eject on my removable devices and the disc pops out like in windows and macOSX, i know distros like suse, redhat and mandrake have them but it really should be in all of them.
I do like linux but at the moment it won’t be replacing my windows install as the software and hardware support isn’t at the level I need. I’m a heavy Maya and photoshop user, maya won’t install due to the dependancys of RPMS and Gimp does but not quite cut it compared to PS. But I am a big liker of bluefish
its sort of like having dreamweaver without the bulk.
Once upon a time…. An OS that was created by some crazy developers, and used by more crazy developers. It was studied by some CS students. These students gets older and graduated and were employed by big companys.
One day, there was a need for a secondary server, because there was a need for an internal webserver. One of these students remembered the free OS and installed it.
These worked so well that some time after it was used on the main webserver, and the mail server, and every other suitable server.
Then came the hard times. Everyone was searching a way to expand the company, but pay only some pennys for every new desktop. Then the CS student put one, and then two, and then three new of these new desktops on the free OS on the company, using the most cheap hardware and of course the free software.
These worked so well, without virus, with easy, universal connection to the servers, a beautiful thin client that he beginning to ask: how about converting the old desktops? These will end the headhaches of every new virus, and different versions of software.
He worked very hard: many pieces of these old hardware doesn’t have proper drivers, many old apps can’t work on the new OS, people doesn’t like to use something new and cheaper. But, one by one, it converts almost all company. There was of course some resistent parts: the human resources guy, who has all his information in an old app in an old PC, the graphical designers, and the manager, who wanted a fashionable WinXP v5.0 installed on his new fashionable laptop.
One day, one of the employees needed to do some computer use in his home. He doesn’t like to use the PC for games that uses his teen son: it was a constant war on time to use, and after, there was always configuration or virus problems or something that was broken. So he decided to go and buy one of these cheap PCs with the free OS who he is used to use at work.
… (it will be continued)
At the end of the day, you have:
1- Only one new desktop PC with the new WinXP v5.0 (the one of the manager)
2- At least, four new desktops on the free OS. And one of them in a house.
3- A non reported number of old PC converted to the free OS.
Most people are supposed to know Windows and are happy to install their programs without problems is the impression given, that’s not my experience nor friends’. Most people put up with Windows and based on their horrific experiences, I’m surprised that many of them use a computer at all. If you know a fair number of Windows users, you know a fair number of people who pester you to have a cratered machine working again as quite unprovoked all sorts of nasties can and do happen, like the call I got one evening from a friend saying Windows had crashed and his daughter had lost all of her school project. OK, I said, I shall try to get over there tomorrow evening, he then said that her project was due in the following morning – 45 minutes drive across town, ages rebuilding Windows and installing drivers, at midnight, 5 hours later, I was on the road back home. If that is easy, then I don’t appreciate easy.
This isn’t an isolated happening and these days, I try not to initiate any conversation with Windows users about the subject of computers out of great fear of sinking loads of my time free in that morass — As one friend said to a lady who told him she had a problem on Windows XP — “Yes, you have a problem” as he made a swift getaway.
A colleague borrowed my SuSE 8.2 disks and installed it on his wife’s PC, some 6 months ago, she loves it ” NO MORE CRASHES, NO MORE LOST WORK and she can get on with her camera work and other stuff she needs”, related to me by my colleague who was seeing Linux for the first time as he installed it, he’s no Unix guru either and the only call I’ve had on it has been a THANK YOU for loaning the CD’s.
Remember Dr. Jeckyll and Mr Hyde — a typical Windows user(s), “I have no problems with Windows, it’s fine” says Dr. Jeckyll, “I lost a document I’d been working on for a couple of hours. “The bloody thing locked up” etc. etc. said Mr. Hyde.
I agree with the comments: Linux should become more standardized, and it has to “catch up” with Windows if it wants to compete on the same market.
But I don’t want to see individuality disappear for Linux distributions. Let Mandrake, Lindows, SuSE and Lycorise compete with Windows, if that’s what they want to do. I’d prefer to make my own decision based on trying out various distributions.
As to the “unified” look, KDE and Gnome can create this: the user picks the desktop they want.
As to file systems, yes I think that the init stuff (systemV / init.d) should become more standardized, more like how Slackware runs theirs. But if the distro includes some GUI app to change stuff, what more is there? I don’t find much difference really, since most the newbie-oriented (or desktop distros) have a centralized control area. SuSE has Yast2, Mandrake has their control center, etc etc.
This is the beauty of Linux to me: try the distributions out for free, and the one you like you can help support. Also, I can pick a different distribution per computer, based on its role. Slackware for the Samba server on my LAN for backing up stuff. Smoothwall for my firewall/router machine. Knoppix for my wife’s computer, which has to be Windows 2000 for her desktop publishing and webpage design in Adobe. Mandrake for my personal computer (because I don’t want to have to spend time to do normal things). I can support all the distros independantly through paypal.
I say Linux should just be itself — no need to compete with windows honestly. Those who want freedom from Microsoft can use Linux if they choose. If not, they don’t have to. I’m for freedom of choice in this matter.
The author is entirely correct about one important class of users. Linux on the desktop is ready for a wide class of other users, though. I’ve been using it that way since 1996. I use the command line by preference because it’s a much faster user interface than mouse mazes; also, I was proficient with the shell before GUIs were invented. I refuse to install Gnome or KDE for the same reason I refuse to install Windows — or even learn to install the latter. They bog my hardware down, slow me down, impose extra learning curves, and add no capability.
One thing that would go far to make Linux a much better desktop, IMO, is straightening out the tangled mess that is font installation. It needs to become possible to install a font once, and have it automatically become accessible to X, the printing system, and all applications. I understand this is being worked on energetically.
No, she doesn’t rely on windows when she plugs in the camera, she relies on the fact that Windows is the target for all hardware manufacturers because they are an illegal monopoly.
If linux had the same install base you can bet your ass that camera manufacturers would make sure their hardware worked out of the box. When you buy windows you’re not buying a polished product so much as PREVENTING INNOVATION by supporting an illegal monopoly.
It’s been a while, but I used to do 2nd/3rd line Windows support. Most of the users I supported ran Windows at home BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT WE RAN AT THE OFFICE! They wanted to be able to take work home with them, and hence they wanted to run the same software we ran.
That logic’s going to drive a reasonably large portion of the home market, and games will make up the bulk of the rest of it. That means the only part of the home market to worry about is the gamers. For everyone else, concentrate on the office.
Now, a question. It seems hardly a week goes by without some big (1000+ employees) company or other announcing they are migrating/have migrated to Linux. What I’d like to know is, what percentage of their employees have/intend to migrate too?
I ran a GNU/Linux-based Cyber cafe over the last year and can readily refute this author’s main points. I felt much the same as him when we first started, but quickly learned it wasn’t true.
In fact, we originally presumed we’d have to give our GNU/Linux systems a Windows-like theme. But, due to laziness, we started with a standard KDE theme and noboyd–not a one person had any trouble using it… even though they had never seen it before. Try that with a Mac! MacOS X looses most people, in contrast. The responses we got from anonymous surveys were consistently positive about the user interfaces and general usability.
Main problems we had:
(1) Mozilla was virtually impossible to stabilize. We finally settled on the firebird version, which had acceptible crash rates. But any time Mozilla crashes (and it did, frequently), it freezes up an entire user account and has to be remotely killed with a kill -9. Sometimes, though rarely, it would rapidly respawn processess and we’d have to run a script to auto-kill all processes under the user name.
(2) People responded interestingly to OpenOffice: perhaps about 30% of people who sat down to it just freaked when you looked at it and asked, “Don’t you have Word?” But those who gave it a try, found it easy to use and seldom had any compatibility errors. But we did have problems with fonts and we had to make the default save types for Microsoft products. People would freak when they discovered the fonts looked different on Windows or Macintosh computers. And, prior to OpenOffice 1.1, the spaces in some fonts were not noticeable… That was a major problem. Eventually, we provided Microsoft Office…. But people have been MUCH happier with OpenOffice 1.1’s improvements.
(3) Applicaitons were generally not a problem accept for a few… People wanted photoshop and did not want to take the time to learn the Gimp. SPSS statistical ananlysis software was also required. And the GNU/Linux-based instant messengers were never quite on par with the Windows and Mac equivelants. Other than these, however, people really seemed to enjoy exploring the games and other programs available. I saw them using all kinds of applications. They played everything with enthusiasm from Chess and Frozen Bubble to bzFlag, Pacmanarena, and TuxRacer….and Freecraft. They played with KStars and every little scientific toy, graphics applications, QCAD, etc. etc.. And did calculations on KSpread.
If you ask me what’s lacking for GNU/Linux success on the Desktop, I would break the question into two parts: The Consumer Desktop and the Business Desktop. For consumers, they need games. For businesses, they need fully manageable solutions. But for both to take off like wildfire, they simply and only need one major PC retailer to aggressively sell pre-installed systems at physical stores everywhere. That’s all. It has it’s plenty of worthy selling points–most notably, all you get with it in terms of software.
Matthew
I’m sure that commercial vendors are going to create distros that push Linux in that direction. I’m also certain that some of the problems that result from people forced to install Linux on computers maunfactured for WIndows will resolve themselves as the software gets smarter, and Hardware vendors get more savvy.
(Example: Most of my problems as a beginner revolve around trying to run Debian on a computer with a soundcard that the stable version of Debian, with its older 2.2.20 kernel doesn’t support. So I struggle to supplement Debian with other distros with newer kernels. I run Red Hat for streaming media and Slackware for music and video. It’s all very cumbersome… but one of these days, I’m going to get a new computer, or Debian is going to get a new kernel… and that’s when it’s all going to come together. Debian has a great classic look, a smorgasboard of desktop environments, and, as has been noted here by others, a huge library of software, whose ease of installation rivals or exceeds Microsoft. )
But unless you’ve got stock in Red Hat, does it matter if Linux becomes “mainstream”? The important thing is that Linux does exist, and that we aren’t at the mercy of the megalomaniacs of Redmond. The idea that Linux for the desktop is unteneble is nonsense. Hoever, as a desktop for the layman, Windows has an edge–an expensive one, not only in terms or money, but in terms of rights and empowerment– but with a viable competitor, Microsoft will be forced to give its customers value and rights they otherwise would have surely withheld. We’re already seeing signs of that with the restoration of support for Windows 98. Microsoft may want to crush us, but we don’t need to crush them. We don’t need to live in a world that is all Linux. We don’t need to think like Microsoft.
We need only to remain uncrushable to break the Microsoft monopoly– and guess what? We did it. It’s over. From now on, we’re all going to live in a world where there is a choice. Whether you run Linux or Windows, this is good news indeed.
Ok,
I don’t know what versions of Linux you are using and how old, but I have Linux on all my PC’s and Laptops, even coexsisting with my Windows XP work laptop. When I installed the new version of Xandros 2 on my work laptop it understood that I had a Windows XP on the drive and allowed me to create a partition by just telling it what size I wanted. Try that with Windows!
It also understood that I had a laptop and docking bay and configured all hardware acordingly. Oh and by the way I didn’t need the silver disk from the manufacturer.
It found my PCMCIA wireless card and configured that for me when I took it home to my wireless network. With no magic manufactures disk.
I also installed it on my desktop at home and have had no problems with any software or hardware. It understood that I had a CD burner and a seperate DVD drive and configured both to work by just inserting a DVD or blank CD, Again with no magic disk required.
I also installed Suse 9 on another of my desktops and had the same experience. When I installed a blank CD it automaticaly pops up to ask what type of file I need to burn. When I insert a DVD it starts playing with the default application or one of my choosing. When I installed a TV card magically the Suse install started and installed the files needed over the internet without intervention from me. One click later I was watching TV on my PC.
Oh and by the way if I for some reason need to use a Windows Office or Macromedia application it will install the CrossOver Office for me and simulate the needed Windows reboot, without Linux rebooting. Oh and if the application misbehaves it only will cause problems for that application not the whole desktop.
So I would say that Linux is very close to being desktop ready?
I know it’s probably a bit late to be replying to this thread but anyhow, gotta say something…
As always (and like most Linux diehards) you have completely missed the point. The point is not that linux can do these things, but more what you have to do to make them happen.
Linux doesn’t do all the things you mentioned out of the box, and if you’ve got 7 hours to recompile your kernel, and endlessly drop down to the terminal, and trawl through countless text files, and are prepared to enter an app dependency cycle you may never emerge from, and download half a dozen apps to make the thing look good, then yeah, Linux can do it! And please, do not compare “Click n Pray” to Windows Installer, it’s not even in the same ballpark. And BTW, can I run Moxi or Telly MC800 on my good old Athlon 1600? … No.
Windows and Macs can do it out of the box. End of story.
And no, I’m not trolling.
Again, you show that your knowledge of Linux is hopelessly outdated. It is no longer necessary to recompile your kernel – I compiled the kernel for the first time after using Linux for two years.
It is also untrue that one has to “drop down” to the terminal, there are GUI tools to configure the system.
With modern installers, dependency hell is a thing of the past: I haven’t had a single dependency problem in months!
Half a dozen apps to make things look good? Hardly. The screenshots I showed were all from a typical Mandrake install.
As for Click’n’Run, which I’ve tried once, you’re right when you say it’s not in the same ballpark as Windows Installer – it’s much better!
Telly is a set-top box, but there are plenty of DVR programs for Linux that you can install on your Athlon…like Freevo:
http://freevo.sourceforge.net/screenshots.html
Oh, and neither Windows nor OS X can act as a PVR/DVR out of the box. You do have to buy additional software.
As for “normal” Multimedia, Mplayer for Linux plays more file types than any media player for Windows, and the quality is perfect. In fact, it plays QuickTime movies better than Apple’s own player on x86 hardware (and starts up about three times as fast, too!).
Now, tell me. Can you change the language of your Windows installation, or do you have to buy another copy? You might not care, but I live and work in a multilingual environment. Oh, and how is bi-di text support coming?
Hey, I heard that you can finally support more than one simultaneous session on a Windows box…funny, I’ve been doing that for three years, using old Pentiums as client computers for roommates.
Care to bet on when the next Windows worm will slow the Internet down to a crawl and cause millions and millions of dollars in damages. Trustworthy computing indeed!
So, like most Windows diehards, you just don’t know what you’re talking about. Try out a modern distro before spewing your FUD.
(FYI I’m not a Linux diehard – I use both OSes daily, which I’m sure is more than you can say.)
MythTV – I don’t know this one as much but I’ve heard some good things about it.
http://www.mythtv.org/modules.php?name=MythFeatures
If I can agree that Linux needs improvements before mass adoption, GNU/Linux is in an enough advanced stage to be massively tested. Knoppix 3.3 CD-ROM is the ideal solution to test Linux in a few minutes even if your computer is on Windows because it uses only you RAM memory and doesn’t write anything to your hard disk. You must boot on the CD (any modern PC can do that by default or should be set in the bios) and a few minutes after decompression of the useful tools into your RAM (shorter time if you have 256Mb or more memory) you can access to your network and googling. Openoffice (Word, Excel, PowerPoint clones) are usable. Gaim lets you use MSN messenger. MP3 files can be listen etc. By clicking on icons of your desktop you can “mount” your hard disk readonly and test your .doc or .xls files. Typing smb:/// on the explorer (an URL like http://) you can access your network at work or at home if you have one.
Knoppix is only useful for testing.
If you want to test a mailing tool and even better than Outlook you should use Evolution which is unfortunately not on this “LiveCD”. But Ximian Evolution is present on other LiveCDs and in particular on PCLinuxOS. You can stop your computer while on Knoppix or PCLinuxOS at any time, it won’t hurt your computer because everything is on memory nothing on hard disk. To get these two LiveCD, google for Knoppix or PCLinuxOS and download the ISO files (about 700MB) and burn them as “ISO” files with your CD burner. You will be impressed by the progress made by the GNU/Linux community in the recent years. I made about 50 copies of Knoppix (with a nice CD cover) as a Christmas gift and about 5 copies of PCLinuxOS (doesn’t work with French keyboard unfortunately).
What are you man? An MCSE? Transparency in windows? duh.