“As never before, corporate customers are turning to Linux software instead of Microsoft Windows to run big business operations. Now, if only they could get the word processor’s basic “cut and paste” feature to work.” Read the rest of the article at CNN (from Reuters).
Reuters: Linux Desktop Still Miles Behind Microsoft’s
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
WRONG: In Linux the KDE or Webmin does NOT make the user interface the same. If it did this would be a mute point.
I’m not sure I understand what you mean…KDE configuration tools are certainly consistent with other KDE configuration tools, and the Webmin interface (which is Web-based) is consistent throughout. What’s the problem?
SECOND: What Windows Config tool are you talking about,
See my post above.
all of the Windows interfaces are the same
You’re joking, right?
you must be using 95 or something.
[i]Nope. Win2K.
Do NOT post false comments on here about Windows, Archie.
Well, I don’t. You, on the other hand, post quite a few false comments about Linux, and on a Linux thread as well.
I don’t troll Windows thread, please stop trolling Linux threads.
I get that all the time on my Win2K box at home
I meant my Win2K box at work.
‘Not that this matters much. I mean, interfaces for video games are different from one another’
Video games are very different from other applications IMO. Personally I’m eternally grateful that I don’t have to put up with inconsistent video game GUIs when I’m trying to get some work done.
Anyway, a lot of games of similar types do have very similar UIs/control systems. For example almost every FPS I’ve seen for years uses the mouse for aiming and the W,A,S&D keys for movement. Games that don’t follow this convention get a lot of criticism for the non-standard controls.
‘As long as interfaces are intuitive, consistency is a minor issue. ‘
Sorry, but that’s absolute garbage IMO. To me consistency is of the most important issues in any GUI. But I suppose if you cared about consistency you wouldn’t be using Linux…
‘Personally, I’ve learned to edit XF86Config-4 by hand, so I would just follow the instructions in the downloadable Nvidia PDF manual.’
I read the documentation and various guides then spent days playing with metamodes and various settings. I posted messages asking for help on Linux newsgroups and message boards and followed their advice. But after all that I never got my dual headed display working half as well as it does in Windows.
‘Perhaps it can be done from the GUI tool as well, I haven’t tried. I’m pretty certain it’s possible, though.’
I’ll believe it when I see it.
Too much is made of Linux trying to emulate Windows. That’s not the truth. Windows, and Mac, and now Linux, are all has moving toward an ideal desktop environment which has little to do with the underlying OS mechanics, and everything to do with user interfacing.
Notwithstanding various cash-cows Gates has identified in his OS monopoly–built in banking, music downloads, etc– Windows is attempting, as is Linux, to achieve a standard in desktop environment which is intuitive and natural.
Natural means: What does your actual desktop look like? You put things on it, you take them off, at will. You move a mouse cursor the way you move your “will”, searching for something to click on. What do your actual file cabinets look like? The top shelf in your closet? Where do your keep the stereo system, and movie player. can you work those things easily? What do you do when they break? This is how the OS environment is seeking to be, an emulation of real life, functionally speaking. Functionally speaking means: it doesn’t matter whether a stereo system or you computer is playing a tune for you, as long as the tune is playing.
It’s no secret that the computer desktop tries to emulate physical reality as much as possible, and Windows is ahead of Linux in this way, time and money being on its side. Instead of comparing Linux to Windows we should compare it to, say, an office, or a music, or art studio.
“Too much is made of Linux trying to emulate Windows. That’s not the truth.”
Indeed that wouldn’t be true for there are lots of WM’s and DE’s out there which are either based on an existing concept or are original.
* KDE -> Several themes, but imo None (no it’s not primarily based on CDE)
* GNOME -> None (?)
* XFce -> OSX
* XPde, QWM -> Win9x, WinXP
* Enlightenment -> None
* Blackbox, Fluxbox, Openbox -> None (?)
* WindowMaker, AfterStep -> NEXTSTEP/OpenStep
* […]
If i take my favorite, Enlightenment, i’m quite sure that my configuration is Enlightenment-unique. But even even without E, these WM’s and DE’s which are not meant as clone do have original features. The thing called choice, that you don’t have to chose between Basic and Luna, or that standard OSX theme, is already something which is so different that it means Linux CAN be like Windows, but doesn’t HAVE to be.
Perhaps that assertion is believed to be true because KDE/GNOME are so popular..?
Themes have little, if anything, to do with effective desktop design and consistency of command structure across applications.
It’s the “across applications” part that gives Linux a problem. An application written for Gnome behaves differently from one written for KDE, or any other desktop environment. That’s the problem. Certain common commands and behaviors are common to almost all applications. The actions a user takes to perform each of those ought to be identical across applications. E.g., the location and structure of a “file save” mean dialog ought to be the same in all Linux word processors, text editors, and any program that saves any kind of file at all. That’s consistency.
‘Indeed that wouldn’t be true for there are lots of WM’s and DE’s out there which are either based on an existing concept or are original.’
‘* KDE -> Several themes, but imo None (no it’s not primarily based on CDE)
* GNOME -> None (?)
To me these both seem very similar to Windows. They both have taskbars, app launchers, start menus, file managers that are similar to explorer, etc. I don’t see much that’s original or unique. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an X based UI that’s based on a radically different design, they all copy features from Windows, Mac or other GUIs.
Personally I’m eternally grateful that I don’t have to put up with inconsistent video game GUIs when I’m trying to get some work done.
Why would you play games when you’re trying to work? Anyway, part of my job is designing interfaces for video games. The fact is that, like for apps, you can only achieved a certain degree of consistency since not all apps do the same thing. Photoshop’s UI is inconsistent with Word’s, and they’re both inconsistent with Maya’s, Final Cut Pro’s, etc. And yet I don’t hear people say that OS X has bad UI, even though all these applications are available for Mac OS X.
For example almost every FPS I’ve seen for years uses the mouse for aiming and the W,A,S&D keys for movement.
That’s a good example. Lots of people like to use the arrow keys instead, and some will use the Left/Right arrows for strafing instead of turning (this has actually become the new standard). But they don’t all have the same menus, the same buttons to reload, the same “use” button, the same weapon switching scheme, etc.
So there are similarties between UIs, but differences as well. Saying that FPS are consistent because they use the W, A, S & D scheme is like saying that Windows and Linux are consitent because they use the “File, Edit, View…” menu structure.
Sorry, but that’s absolute garbage IMO.
Yes, that’s your opinion. The truth is that app UIs are inconsistent in Windows and OS X as well as Windows, and yet nobody makes a big fuss out of it. As I’ve indicated, since apps vary widely in functionalities, consistency is pretty much an utopia anyway. As long as an interface is intuitive, and that people can learn it quickly, that’s really all that matters.
To me consistency is of the most important issues in any GUI.
That’s kind of shallow. Useability is much more important than consistency.
But I suppose if you cared about consistency you wouldn’t be using Linux…
No need to get personal. I didn’t say that I don’t care about consistency, just that it’s not the big issue anti-Linux advocates are making it to be. In fact, it’s a sign that Linux has mature quite a lot when this kind of nit-picking is considered so crucial…
Anyway, my KDE desktop at home is much more consistent than my Windows desktop at work, especially now that the Qt-GTK engine is available, making the few GTK apps I use fit in with KDE.
I read the documentation and various guides then spent days playing with metamodes and various settings. I posted messages asking for help on Linux newsgroups and message boards and followed their advice. But after all that I never got my dual headed display working half as well as it does in Windows.
Sorry to hear that. Mine works just fine. Actually, repositioning the secondary screen is quite simple. From the NVIDIA readme:
“…mode names can be followed by offset information to control the positioning of the display devices within the virtual screen space; for example:
1600×1200 +0+0, 1024×768 +1600+0; …
Offset descriptions follow the conventions used in the X -geometry command line option; i.e. both positive and negative offsets are valid, though negative offsets are only allowed when a virtual screen size is explicitly given in the XF86Config file.”
It’s pretty simple, really.
I’ll believe it when I see it.
Well, there seems to be at least one other GUI tools for Nvidia configuration apart from nvidia-settings, and it does handle meta-modes:
http://yanc.sourceforge.net/index-en.html
Who says a DE should be original? It’s there to get the job done. There’s a reason KDE and Gnome follow the WIMP paradigm inspired by Xerox and developed by Mac and later Windows: it works.
If KDE and Gnome didn’t follow it, you’d say that they suck because they don’t follow conventions. Now that they reproduce it, you say that they’re not original…
There are, however, improvements to this in the latest version of KDE (can’t speak for Gnome) that Windows doesn’t have. The plus-value lies there. (Oh, and also the fact that you’re not supporting a dangerous and underhanded monopoly.)
shame ! shame !! shame !!!
‘Why would you play games when you’re trying to work?’
My point was that I can put up with inconsistency when playing a game, but it would drive me nuts when I’m working.
‘Photoshop’s UI is inconsistent with Word’s, and they’re both inconsistent with Maya’s, Final Cut Pro’s, etc. And yet I don’t hear people say that OS X has bad UI, even though all these applications are available for Mac OS X.’
They have differences, obviously apps for different tasks aren’t going to have exactly the same GUI. But they are still far more consistent than Linux apps created with different toolkits. In general it’s possible to cut/copy/paste between the different Mac/Windows apps, the have the same file dialogs and online help, etc. It’s mainly small details and aesthetic differences in Windows/Mac apps, I can live with that quite happily.
I’ve tried to work in Linux, I tried to do my normal work with GIMP, OpenOffice and other Linux tools. But it was a painfully frustrating and unproductive experience, mainly due to the much greater inconsistency. I’d get much more done booting into Windows and using the same opensource apps. At least I can copy and paste between the Windows versions of GIMP and OpenOffice.
‘That’s kind of shallow. Useability is much more important than consistency.’
IMO consistency is a big part of usability.
‘Sorry to hear that. Mine works just fine. Actually, repositioning the secondary screen is quite simple. From the NVIDIA readme:
“…mode names can be followed by offset information to control the positioning of the display devices within the virtual screen space; for example:
1600×1200 +0+0, 1024×768 +1600+0; …
Offset descriptions follow the conventions used in the X -geometry command line option; i.e. both positive and negative offsets are valid, though negative offsets are only allowed when a virtual screen size is explicitly given in the XF86Config file.”
It’s pretty simple, really.’
Compared with a lot of things in Linux it’s childs play, but compare that with Windows ease of use. The user doesn’t need to learn the syntax of a command line option to know what to put in a text config file. The user doesn’t need to read through a large text document to find the needed information. A Windows user just double clicks on the display control panel and drags an image of the monitor into the position they desire. No exiting the GUI, editing text files or messing with 3rd party frontends is necessary. It’s a good example of the advantage that Windows still has over Windows.
‘Well, there seems to be at least one other GUI tools for Nvidia configuration apart from nvidia-settings, and it does handle meta-modes’
You still have to type in the metamodes and understand what they do. That’s hardly as intuitive as dragging a graphical representation of the monitors. Anyway, when I tried YANC all it did for me was make X fail to load at all.
‘Who says a DE should be original? It’s there to get the job done. There’s a reason KDE and Gnome follow the WIMP paradigm inspired by Xerox and developed by Mac and later Windows: it works.’
Or it’s simply become so standard now that better designs don’t stand a chance. Have you considered that it might be like the qwerty keyboard layout vs dvorak and other superior designs? It’s a shame how one design becoming an industry standard can stifle innovation.
‘If KDE and Gnome didn’t follow it, you’d say that they suck because they don’t follow conventions. Now that they reproduce it, you say that they’re not original…’
Actually my all time favourite GUI is probably NeXTSTEP and WindowMaker is my X GUI of choice. I’ve switched from RISC OS to NeXTSTEP to Mac OS and then to Windows over the past 10 years. I’ve got no problem switching to a different system if I think it’ll better meet my needs.
I don’t really expect something radical from a mainstream project like KDE/Gnome. But I’d like KDE/Gnome to take the best elements from a lot of different OSes and come up with new ideas. Rather than making slight improvements to Windows/Mac features.
But they are still far more consistent than Linux apps created with different toolkits.
They will be marginally more consistent. Not enough to have much of an impact, IMO. In any case, I now mostly use KDE apps anyway, and these are very consistent with one another (for what that’s worth).
At least I can copy and paste between the Windows versions of GIMP and OpenOffice.
This is something that’s missing in Linux, for sure. No doubt people are working on it, it’s only a matter of time before it works. But this hardly makes Linux unusable! Case in point: I make word documents with lots of images for my work (game design). I can copy/paste from Photoshop to Word, but I never do it, because I need to keep copies of my image files anyway. So I work on my files, save them, then import them in Word. Am I less efficient this way? Not really – and if Word crashes (something it’s been doing for the past two weeks, go figure why) I can easily retrieve the image.
IMO consistency is a big part of usability.
The only thing consistency does is reduce a small portion of the learning time between applications. You can have hard-to-use apps that are consistent with others.
A Windows user just double clicks on the display control panel and drags an image of the monitor into the position they desire.
That is certainly easier. I’m not saying that everything in Linux is as simple as in Windows – and there is always an exception, someone who has a special setup that makes things harder. This happens in Windows as well – some parralels printers do not work well with Windows XP, and MS isn’t planning to fix those bugs. Someone who has such a printer might find it simpler to use Linux…
Regarding X configuration of Metamodes, my guess is that it wouldn’t be too hard to program either (after all, it’s only modifying a text file). Unfortunately I’m not a programmer. Perhaps that would be a valid project for a Linux/Nvidia enthusiast?
In any case, this is no longer about consistency, but rather useability. And it only applies to a small subset of users (those with NVIDIA cards and TwinView configurations). Still, did you try doing what it said in the Nvidia readme? It seems that it should solve your problem.
As for me, I don’t have a problem with my TwinView, it works fantastically. What other examples of things that you can’t configure with a GUI do you have? Because if that’s the only one, then it can only be considered an exception to the rule, and not the rule itself.
My favorite alternate WM is XFCE4: light, lightning fast, nice-looking (GTK2), it’s my default root GUI (yeah, I know, I should log in as root – I only do that whenever I update KDE…)
‘The only thing consistency does is reduce a small portion of the learning time between applications. You can have hard-to-use apps that are consistent with others.’
You might want to read something about usability some time, just about every UI designer seems to disagree with you. For example consistency is one of Bruce Tognazzini’s first principles of interface design. Personally I find that if I’m allowed to develop ‘muscle memory’ due to consistent application design I can work in the apps significantly faster and more comfortably. You’re entitled to your opinion, but to me consistency is significant.
‘In any case, this is no longer about consistency, but rather useability. And it only applies to a small subset of users (those with NVIDIA cards and TwinView configurations).’
All the other dual headed display options are much, much worse. If you have two different graphics cards you can’t even get 3D acceleration with Xinerama and I’ve heard a lot of bad things about Radeon cards in Linux. If you want a dual headed display in Linux Nvidia seems to be the only choice, what better option is there?
‘Still, did you try doing what it said in the Nvidia readme? It seems that it should solve your problem.’
I tried all that and more, nothing worked.
‘As for me, I don’t have a problem with my TwinView, it works fantastically. What other examples of things that you can’t configure with a GUI do you have? Because if that’s the only one, then it can only be considered an exception to the rule, and not the rule itself.’
My remote control using LIRC, my sound card’s ALSA settings and SWSUSP (which I never got working properly).
You might want to read something about usability some time, just about every UI designer seems to disagree with you.
The basic consistency you speak of is present in the majority of Linux apps. I know you’re trying to make a point, but frankly I think you’re being nitpicky here.
Yes, a minimum amount of consistency helps – and that’s why I prefer to use K apps if I can. But this is irrelevant, as we’ve already established that Windows apps also vary in consistency beyond a minimum level (a level that is shared by Linux, might I add).
This sounds like double standards.
If you want a dual headed display
That’s what I mean by “a subset”. With two monitors, you (and I, for that matter) are not representative of Joe User. Yes, TwinView is the better solution.
Now, I’ve tried repositioning the second monitor following the instructions, and it worked. So either you have a strange configuration, or you’re just looking for an excuse to harp on “Linux not being ready.”
My remote control using LIRC,
I don’t know what this is. Again, this seems pretty marginal. More specialized things take longer to be supported – what do you expect?
my sound card’s ALSA settings
Funny, I’ve never had to configure this – it was configured automatically by Linux.
and SWSUSP (which I never got working properly).
Adequate support for SWSUSP is fairly recent. I believe Kernel 2.6 does a much better job.
Meanwhile, my MSI GeForce4 card makes my Win98 crash and reboot into safe mode when I try to install it. Under Win2K, it used to spontaneously reset my machine when I was playing Half-Life. No OS has a perfect record when it comes to hardware, not even XP (ask anyone who’s got a parallel printer that won’t work without a parallel-to-USB adapter).
All that I know is that my Linux system (along with its two monitors) fits my needs. It also fits the needs of my non-geek girlfriend. Linux may not be ready for all hardware configurations (and no one’s claiming that it is), but it’s ready for the great majority of them. And while more obscure settings may require some manual file editing, this can’t be worse for a newbie than delving into the registry – heck, I’ve use regedit.exe for years and I still don’t understand everything about the registry!
The cut & paste issue has been one of the biggest issues with linux for years (most users notice it within hours) and still nothing much has happened.
Seems the devs are all tied up making their own distros, rpm formats, DEs etc. to be distrubed with such minor bugs…
Is there some religious/political/geek reason they neglect standardisation all the time?
Or perhaps they hope that their own (superior) format will become the new standard?
well, let me go through the apps i use on a regular basis –
firebird – netscape set the standard look of a browser how long ago now? firebird is intuitive and powerful. great ui.
OOo – ok, maybe not so pretty or consistant with the rest of what i use. however, the same could be said of microsoft office. windows has one look, office another. its been that way for about four years now.
XMMS – again, winamp set the style for the ultimate in lightweight media players.
Rhythmbox – Follows the gnome HIGs
The Gimp – Follows the gnome HIGs
gAIM – Follows the gnome HIGs
IDEa – best ide on the planet, imho should be the standard, and it isnt just a linux app.
gEdit – Follows the gnome HIGs
Totem – Follows the gnome HIGs
Nicotine – again, clone of a windows app so does its own thing
i could go on. as you can see, the trend is, if its a windows clone, expect wildly different UIs, if it isnt, the version i use tends to be a gtk app, and follow the HIGs.
‘But this is irrelevant, as we’ve already established that Windows apps also vary in consistency beyond a minimum level (a level that is shared by Linux, might I add).’
No it isn’t. Windows apps vary in consistency, but things like cut/copy/paste, online help, file dialogs, etc. are almost always consistent. That’s the minimum level of consistency I’m happy with. Linux doesn’t share that level of consistency when using apps made with different toolkits. Windows consistency is far from perfect, but Linux is simply much worse.
‘And while more obscure settings may require some manual file editing, this can’t be worse for a newbie than delving into the registry – heck, I’ve use regedit.exe for years and I still don’t understand everything about the registry!’
I’ve installed Windows on at least 15 systems, some with quite obscure and old hardware. None of them have had any problems at all, I’ve never done anything with the Windows registry, it all just works. To me dual headed displays and remote controls are quite mainstream technology. I was using a dual headed display almost 10 years ago, yet it still feels like an unfinished hack in Linux.
I’m sure there are some old hardware devices that aren’t supported by Windows XP, but at least they can be replaced with hardware that isn’t obsolete. In Linux you often have no choice but to mess around compiling softare and editing config files. It may be ready for some people’s desktops, but I prefer not to waste my time with all that BS when I can use an OS that simply works.
I swear, if I see someone else yell “Troll!” while pointing their fingers again, I’m going to scream. That term has become the biggest headache in all of my recent internet experiences. Can’t we just learn to ignore the obvious instead?
Windows apps vary in consistency, but things like cut/copy/paste, online help, file dialogs, etc. are almost always consistent.
But they aren’t always consistent. Also, there is a difference between a UI element (online help, file dialogs) and actual functionality (cut/copy/paste). As far as the first element is concerned, Linux offers as much consistency if you mostly use apps made with the same toolkits. Windows doesn’t: look at the file dialog when using Word 97 and the file dialog when using Word XP, they are quite different.
Some functionalities, like copy/pasting images, is more integrated in Windows – but again, if you use apps made with a single toolkit in Linux, you’ll have access to the same degree of functionality. In any case, we are talking about specific cases, for which workarounds exist.
Windows consistency is far from perfect, but Linux is simply much worse.
That’s a matter of opinion. Based on my day-to-day work with both OSes, I disagree – especially since Gnome and KDE have started cooperating and such projects as the Qt-GTK engine and the Qt libs for GTK apps have begun to show results.
Can Linux be improved? Sure, and it is improving, everyday.
I’ve installed Windows on at least 15 systems, some with quite obscure and old hardware. None of them have had any problems at all, I’ve never done anything with the Windows registry, it all just works.
What can I say, we’ve had different experiences. I’ve never had problem with a piece of hardware under Linux, but I’ve had Windows crap out on me due to problematic hardware a couple of times. The only thing we can conclude from this is that our personal experiences represent too small a sample to do an accurate statistical portrait of hardware problems under Linux and Windows. So it’s all a matter of opinions. Obviously, our opinions differ (as much as our experiences); I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
To me dual headed displays and remote controls are quite mainstream technology.
Well, in fact they are found in only a fraction of homes and offices. The overwhelming majority of computers use only one monitor, and do not use remote controls. The proportion is even bigger when you don’t limit yourself to North American PCs.
As I said, Linux may not be ready for all desktops, but it’s ready for a lot of them.
I’m sure there are some old hardware devices that aren’t supported by Windows XP, but at least they can be replaced with hardware that isn’t obsolete.
I wouldn’t consider parralel printers to be “obsolete” hardware. And you’re talking from a North American perspective, where hardware is relatively cheap. But a lot of people have old hardware that they still want to use, often because that’s all they can afford.
In Linux you often have no choice but to mess around compiling softare and editing config files.
Again, in my personal experience I’ve never had to compile anything to make a piece of hardware work. The only time I’ve ever had to compile anything was to try bleeding edge or obscure programs that weren’t available on my distro’s software repository.
As far as editing config files go, I’ve only done this for my Nvidia card. Fortunately, instructions were clear and easy to find – and with the nvidia-settings GUI app developed by Nvidia, as well as commercial distros that set up the card automatically (like Xandros, I believe) even this isolated case is bound to become unnecessary. There are GUI tools to configure the near-totality of settings that a normal home user will need.
It may be ready for some people’s desktops, but I prefer not to waste my time with all that BS when I can use an OS that simply works.
Linux is ready for a lot of desktops, especially if it comes pre-installed with supported hardware (in which case nearly all of your arguments fall flat). Linux “simply works” for me, including TwinView (and I can position my secondary screen like I want). I’m sorry that you ran into such problems and that it discouraged you from using Linux, sending you back to supporting a ruthless monopoly that represents such a menace to an independent and healthy IT industry. Perhaps you should try Linux again in the future, when those things you found annoying are but a memory…
> Cut and paste work just fine in OpenOffice, Abiword, and
> KWord….<snip>
What about between them? What about other apps? like mozilla, etc?
> Certainly, if users cared about consistency, Windows would
> not be the most popular OS today!
But windows IS consistent. It has the same behavior for every control. You can copy and paste between ANY app. Have you ever even used windows? The interface is uniform. There is a STANDARD at work with the windows user interface. A WRITTEN OPEN standard.
> The “works 98% of the time” comment also strikes me as odd. <snip>
Well, though i can’t really be considered a member of the ‘general public’ (I am a software engineer). I install XP, and it works. No crashes, NO incompatibilities, NO hassles. The same goes for my mom, my brother, my sister, and my girlfriend, WHAT universe are you living in?
Who is having trouble with cut and paste? I had issues in Mandrake 8,2, but from 9.0 on, I’ve never had problems with cut-n-paste between applications, regardless of what I was cut and pasting.
Have you ever even used windows? The interface is uniform.
I have used Windows since 3.0. I still use Windows. The interface is not uniform.