Is Ubuntu ready for prime-time? A test. [Archive]

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 10:08 AM

So far Linux writers seem to be in a world of their own. If they really wanted to open Linux for the masses they could have made linux a lot more user friendly years ago. But that would remove their little elite linux user geek "club" Mystic and then they would have "Linux Windows" They have a very long way to go to get Linux in the main stream OS market unless they make some major changes. I am very computer literate and I won't put up with the Linux frustration, I have tried most Distros available and am not impressed with the advances they have made to make Linux more user friendly. I don't see how they expect the average computer user to put up with it. :thumbd:

Franklin

May 4th, 2008, 10:43 AM

{QUOTE-> I won't put up with the Linux frustration, I have tried most Distros available and am not impressed with the advances they have made to make Linux more user friendly. I don't see how they expect the average computer user to put up with it. :thumbd: <-QUOTE}
Couldn't agree more!

Ocky

May 4th, 2008, 10:44 AM

I was and still am an Ubuntu noob, but have found Gutsy Gibbon very
user friendly, bar a few nuisances eg. Opera and flash. Most of what
I can do in Windows XP, I can also do with Linux Ubuntu and there is
always the forum if one gets stuck. My better half, who knows absolutely
nothing about Linux, is a happy camper with Ubuntu GG. Ok she mainly
browses and emails and makes cd's etc., but is happy to have patches
and updates delivered in an easy peasy way. She's also happy that
with firestarter (firewall) there is nothing to do. Same with Avast AV -
I update it about once a week when I also do a scan. Once setup I find
it so much less time consuming than Windows XP (although I like XP
as well). GG was (is) my very first Linux. The new Hardy H. release
does seem to be laden with problems and I will wait a while before
installing.

Mrkvonic

May 4th, 2008, 10:48 AM

Hi,

My only question is:

Why do people expect to be experts in a completely new OS within 10 minutes? I don't think anyone here or anywhere mastered Windows within 10 minutes. When Windows 3.11 came out, how many people simply powered it up like a good ole friend and started using it? How many did that when XP came out?

I take myself for a very quick learner and I think it took me several months before I could call myself XP literate.

Why on EARTH anyone thinks Linux should be copy paste of Windows and masterable within 10 minutes?

BTW, what happens when someone equally inept in Windows tries this on his friendly OS? The same thing. He searches for answers. Or gets lost.

Give IrfanView and Thunderbird to anyone used to MsPaint and Outlook. Let's see how quickly they'll adapt.

Now, extrapolate to a WHOLE OS.

Mrk

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 11:05 AM

Most people here at wilders are computer literate or at least help is close at hand. But of the hundreds of millions of users out there that aren't really comp literate and really don't care to be as long as they can just click a couple of boxes and do what they want when they want. These are the majority of users and they are the ones that linux is going to have a hard time converting if they ever can considering that the majority opinion is that Linux is not user friendly. It seems that The Linux coders are addressing their programing towards the more literate of the computer users. It is going to be next to impossible to convince windows users that have grown up with a very friendly user OS to convert to an OS that requires you to be part programer just to get most of the apps to work in linux and I am sure that they wouldn't used to having to install programs just to make installed programs work. Linux would be much easier to teach a person that had never used a computer at all. As I stated in my previous post, Linux has a very long way to go.

I am not saying Linux is not a good OS, I am just saying it is not very user friendly and most people won't put up with the frustration it will surely cause. Not when Windows is so much easier to us.

lodore

May 4th, 2008, 11:22 AM

i have been using windows since 95 and if i messed stuff up i fixed it myself.
the other day i downloaded Kubuntu 8.4 and tryed it out as a live dvd.
i double clicked on the connection icon typed in my wpa2 key and then opened Konqueror
i typed www.youtube.com and searched for a video.
as noted on the article of this thread it took me to the adobe site and i hadent got a clue on which file to download and what to do with it.
if you use windows or OSX it will take you to the correct version and tell you what to do. but with linux it doesnt.
partly adobe's fault.

at that point most users would give up and go back to windows.

if installing flash was as easy as installing skype then users would have no issues.

if at this point the main stream started using linux most of the ICT support calls wouldnt be why is my computer slow or why is it crashing but simply how do i install flash or java.
i find linux annoying and quite hard to use and i have always loved messing around and trying operating systems and utilities.

the other problem that i have found when i have tryed linux is that there is to much choice.
that is tons and tons of distros and i dont know which one to use. choice is good but sometimes there is to much choice.

as stated before most people use linux because its different and they find commandline fun
if linux hit the mainstream the people who really like linux would simply find something else.
i completely agree with BigC:thumb:

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 11:29 AM

I'm always surprised with your reaction towards "linux" Bigc.
You speak of "it" as "it" was a collective mind, borg like, and things happened exactly because they/it meant it.

I mean, there were guys who had more on their mind than making it "user-friendly" for the masses. Others of course, didn't even care. So what.
Do you want to force them to lead their lives as you want?
People who are already sharing the source code... throughout out their lives...
Think about this.

It's the ones who aim it for the masses like Ubuntu (who give it away, source code and everything..) that could be criticized for job well done or not. Not all the "linux geeks".
I can't count how many they are, not even how many OS's, can you ???

wat0114

May 4th, 2008, 12:21 PM

First, the Java installation is an absolute piece of cake using Hardy Heron as long as Firefox 3 beta is installed I suspect the fellow did an upgrade, so it left the older version installed. Even opening a video in youtube, I had Java installed inside 60 seconds after the prompt. I tested this mere minutes by removing Java then going to Youtube to open a video.

Second, I don't know about the majority of the distros, but I would say the latest Ubuntu is is user-friendly. I have not had to use a single Terminal command yet to get anything done. Excellent help is also available using Google. Also, I had a whirl with PCLinux2007 the other night and also found it user-friendly - an excellent distro.

All I can say is Ubuntu serves my needs extremely well and I encounter far fewer nagging problems with it such as freeze ups and overall slow performance. Clearly it has outperformed even the newest install of XP, at least on my machine.

I'm in agreement with Mrk and Ocky on all their points.

bktII

May 4th, 2008, 12:29 PM

Thanks Benny. I love to read articles about Linux and Linux fanbois.

Another dimension: Wireless

Wireless setup is a rite-of-passage on Linux. Great angst. Google these two words: "ubuntu" and "wireless".

I recently set up wireless ( initially wpa-tkip, then changed to wpa2-aes ), on my laptop which I dual-boot: Windows XP Professional SP2 and Debian Etch.

For Windows XP, I needed to do the following:

(1) search for MS update KB893357, which adds wpa2 support to XP, as it was not available under optional updates when I went to the MS update site
(2) download KB893357 from http://www.microsoft.com/Downloads/details.aspx?familyid=662BB74D-E7C1-48D6-95EE-1459234F4483&displaylang=en
(3) install KB893357 by running WindowsXP-KB893357-v2-x86-ENU.exe
(4) reboot
(5) finally; setup wpa2 in the Windows networking GUI ( graphical user interface )

For Debian Etch, I needed to do the following:

(1) add non-free ( temporarily as it turned out ) to /etc/apt/sources.list
(2) via Synaptic, download and install a fw ( read firmware ) cutter package for my wireless NIC. However, it was not able to download a driver from the web sites referenced in the Debian package. This created recurring errors whenever I updated Debian or installed new packages. I finally had to remove the fw cutter package via Synaptic and remove non-free from /etc/apt/sources.list. The Debian firmware, however, was left in place.
(3) copy the wireless NIC *.sys driver file from Windows XP drivers folder and place it on my Debian system
(4) run the command-line fw cutter to to extract firmware for Debian from the Windows XP driver
(5) modify /etc/network/interfaces to enable wpa2 ( after some searching to determine the appropriate settings )
(6) disable the existing wired network interface via the Networking GUI ( not necessary for Windows )
(7) disable/enable the wireless interface via ifdown and ifup command-line ( I could have used the Networking GUI for this )

I now have wpa2-aes wireless on both Windows XP and Debian Etch.

For wpa-tkip, steps (1) thru (4) were not needed for Windows XP. I went directly to step (5). All steps were still necessary for Debian, although the content of /etc/network/interfaces was different.

My conclusions:
o wpa-tkip was MUCH easier on Windows XP than Debian. With a good password, long and random, wpa-tkip security is good enough.
o wpa2-aes was easier on Windows XP than Debian; however, probably beyond what many Windows users would want to do. Perhaps Windows XP SP3 will include KB893357? If so, different story.

Debian is most definitely not aimed at the masses and I like it just the way it is. How much easier would this be on Ubuntu 7.10 or 8.04? As I only run Ubuntu virtualized I don't know, but would love to see a post on this. Hopefully, they are making progress.

InfinityAz

May 4th, 2008, 12:56 PM

I'm very impressed with Ubuntu 8.04 (in fact I converted one notebook over to it). It is a little frustrating to feel lost at times but that's how I'll learn my way around. v8 automatically configured everything for me, thank god.

When Linux works it works well but when there are issues, it can be a major pain.

If a system was already set up and the person's needs are simple, I think the new version of Ubuntu is close to prime-time. However, as soon as the person wants to stray far from their comfort zone or do some things they take for granted in Windows or Mac, they can run into major problems (i.e., Linux does not come close to passing the mom or grandma test).

wat0114

May 4th, 2008, 01:10 PM

{QUOTE-> (i.e., Linux does not come close to passing the mom or grandma test). <-QUOTE}

Sorry, I beg to differ. How hard is it to open up Firefox, Evolution email, Word processor, spreadsheet, listen to music off cds or mp3s, or even burn a cd for that matter, using Ubuntu? it's all under Applications and it's very easy to place their launchers on the panel for even easier access. There's even an excellent assortment of pre-installed games included.

lodore

May 4th, 2008, 01:12 PM

{QUOTE-> Sorry, I beg to differ. How hard is it to open up Firefox, Evolution email, Word processor, spreadsheet, listen to music off cds or mp3s, or even burn a cd for that matter, using Ubuntu? it's all under Applications and it's very easy to place their launchers on the panel for even easier access. There's even an excellent assortment of pre-installed games included. <-QUOTE}

i didnt think mp3 was bulti in due to the free nature of the distro?
plus it will be hard to watch youtube videos and view other content that needs plugins.

midway40

May 4th, 2008, 02:02 PM

Most distros will not come with the proprietary codecs and drivers because of the GPL license. There are some distros that does include these codecs, such as Linux Mint, that does however (some Linux "purists" objects to this practice).

wat0114

May 4th, 2008, 02:06 PM

{QUOTE-> i didnt think mp3 was bulti in due to the free nature of the distro?
plus it will be hard to watch youtube videos and view other content that needs plugins. <-QUOTE}

Yes, true, the codecs for compressed audio and video need to be installed, as does the Java for browsing, but it is very easy in the latest Ubuntu release just by following the prompts. It's no more difficult than similar installs using Windows.

19monty64

May 4th, 2008, 02:46 PM

{QUOTE-> Sorry, I beg to differ. How hard is it to open up Firefox, Evolution email, Word processor, spreadsheet, listen to music off cds or mp3s, or even burn a cd for that matter, using Ubuntu? it's all under Applications and it's very easy to place their launchers on the panel for even easier access. There's even an excellent assortment of pre-installed games included. <-QUOTE}
Partitioning is also a breeze in Ubuntu and PCLOS. I just wish they had an English-translator in their help-forums for us Windows-users that don't understand the geek-speak ;D ;D ;D .

Mrkvonic

May 4th, 2008, 02:51 PM

Hello,

A few questions:

How many noobs can download the right codecs for their player in Windows and not get infected? Choose the right codec pack? Bundled?

How many Windows users can partition?

How many Windows users keep all their software up to date - and how much effort it takes to do it? Download Secunia PS (or whatever it's called), then run a scan and get some 43 results. Then, download each and every update by hand, one after another. Ubuntu, two clicks, done.

How many Windows users can solve problems that do not have an .exe ready to do it for them. Personal example, I still have a few weird issues here and there with Windows drivers, PartMgr etc - I'm unable to solve them. In Ubuntu I may have sweated more, true, but everything is configurable and eventually I solved all problems.

How many Windows are capable of troubleshooting a service or startup item etc?

Food for thought.

Mrk

wat0114

May 4th, 2008, 02:53 PM

lodore

May 4th, 2008, 03:03 PM

{QUOTE-> Hello,

A few questions:

How many noobs can download the right codecs for their player in Windows and not get infected? Choose the right codec pack? Bundled?

How many Windows users can partition?

How many Windows users keep all their software up to date - and how much effort it takes to do it? Download Secunia PS (or whatever it's called), then run a scan and get some 43 results. Then, download each and every update by hand, one after another. Ubuntu, two clicks, done.

How many Windows users can solve problems that do not have an .exe ready to do it for them. Personal example, I still have a few weird issues here and there with Windows drivers, PartMgr etc - I'm unable to solve them. In Ubuntu I may have sweated more, true, but everything is configurable and eventually I solved all problems.

How many Windows are capable of troubleshooting a service or startup item etc?

Food for thought.

Mrk <-QUOTE}

1. the real answer is there is almost no need for a codec pack in windows
2.partitioning in windows is easy once you know how. i have taught my best friend how to do it when he needed to reinstall windows. so he can store his data away from windows. granted for ages i didnt know partitioning was possible but it was easy to learn and i now use it to my advantage alot.
3.most applications have there own updator which with a default install checks for updates every so often.
4.quick google search finds out what program its related to,uninstall program and install lastest version. thats 9 times out of 10

19monty64

May 4th, 2008, 03:08 PM

How many Windows-users can boot into safe-mode, let alone dLo and burn an ISO???

midway40

May 4th, 2008, 03:57 PM

Vista has a basic partition resizer that is nondestructive. I used to have to use a third party app to do this in past Windows versions.

Anyway the thread was referring to normal computer users and most of them wouldn't know what this was.

Riverrun

May 4th, 2008, 05:13 PM

{QUOTE-> So far Linux writers seem to be in a world of their own. If they really wanted to open Linux for the masses they could have made linux a lot more user friendly years ago. But that would remove their little elite linux user geek "club" Mystic and then they would have "Linux Windows" They have a very long way to go to get Linux in the main stream OS market unless they make some major changes. I am very computer literate and I won't put up with the Linux frustration, I have tried most Distros available and am not impressed with the advances they have made to make Linux more user friendly. I don't see how they expect the average computer user to put up with it. :thumbd: <-QUOTE}

I don't know if you've ever tried PCLOS, but it's just about the easiest OS I've ever seen. It provides all the advantages of Linux: Speed, Security and Stability. It's easily the most user friendly Distro around.

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 05:43 PM

{QUOTE-> I'm always surprised with your reaction towards "linux" Bigc.
You speak of "it" as "it" was a collective mind, borg like, and things happened exactly because they/it meant it.

I mean, there were guys who had more on their mind than making it "user-friendly" for the masses. Others of course, didn't even care. So what.
Do you want to force them to lead their lives as you want?
People who are already sharing the source code... throughout out their lives...
Think about this.

It's the ones who aim it for the masses like Ubuntu (who give it away, source code and everything..) that could be criticized for job well done or not. Not all the "linux geeks".
I can't count how many they are, not even how many OS's, can you ??? <-QUOTE}

Pedro, I really don't care what OS people use. I post my Opinion and experiences. I have never told anyone that they should run "a"or"b" os. You make it sound as if I am telling everyone to use windows which is not true. But in rebutal, What irratates me is the people that do use linux are trying to say it is as easy as windows or at least close. And that is very far from the truth. It should be made very clear to people that are told to try linux of the pit falls that are not present in windows that they will encounter in Linux. Most people that listen to the rheortic about linux and give it a try (which is not an easy task for a non techie) are left with an installed OS that they usually can't understand or use. The Linux developers could spend a little more time in the information they give to the uninitated Linux users that would give them a heads up on what to at least expect when they install A distro.

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 06:01 PM

{QUOTE-> I don't know if you've ever tried PCLOS, but it's just about the easiest OS I've ever seen. It provides all the advantages of Linux: Speed, Security and Stability. It's easily the most user friendly Distro around. <-QUOTE}

You see the thing is you are insinuating that I don't have speed, security and stability with windows. Which with Vista I do have. I just don't want an operating system that will give me what I already have but would have to work three times as hard to get what I already have. That Is my personal opinion. Others will have their opinions also I am sure.:thumb: That is what is nice about having the choice to choose what we like.

HURST

May 4th, 2008, 06:12 PM

Personally, what I dislike the most is the endless "crusade" of most hardcore linux users I know (not all of them), trying to (convert) convince everyone about the benefits of linux and how "MS is evil" and all that stuff.

I remember the first time I installed Ubuntu on my PC a few years ago, I had a lot of trouble to get it to work properly, and at that time I had no time to spend hours and hours in forums and googling for answers that MAY solve problems. So I asked the IT guy at my university for help to uninstall it, and his answer was "and why would you wanna do that?"

The "open source is good-windows is bad" philosofy annoys me.

With time and 3 more attempts, I finally could actually use linux with (almost) no problems. It was Kubuntu 7.10. I still use it sometimes, but in windows i'm much more productive, and I can't run some software under linux. (I know, VM's, but I don't like them so much).

I DO like Linux. I DO would like that it had a bigger market share. I DO have learned to appreciate OpenSource, and try to use it as much as I can.

But I would really like that Linux distros where much more user friendly. Some have done a great job (Ubuntu, Kubuntu, PCLinuxOS, Sabayon, etc), but I feel there's still a long path ahead before "mom and grandma" can use it.

--------------

BTW, the guy in the article should have tried with Kubuntu, KDE is more similar to Windows than Gnome.

Nick Rhodes

May 4th, 2008, 06:26 PM

A better test would be taking someone who has not use a computer before and asking them to do a series of tasks on both machines.

That test is more of a is Ubuntu ready for windows users, but I found it quite positive, if the same test was been done with OS-X there would be alteast as many problems.

My wife had no problems running a Redhat fork for about 6 months - using IM, email and web. I managed the config (cmd line), but the desktop stuff in gnome she had no problems with.

For my current needs and uses Linux (Ubuntu/Debian) do 95-99% of what I need, whereas Windows XP does 100 % what I need.

I think Linux big issue is lack of marketing, ask the average person on the street what linux is and they do not know.
IMHO Linux Desktop will be perfected (ready for prime-time) soon (a year of 2), but it will take longer to popularise and gain recognition.

Riverrun

May 4th, 2008, 06:46 PM

Riverrun

May 4th, 2008, 06:54 PM

{QUOTE->
IMHO Linux Desktop will be perfected (ready for prime-time) soon (a year of 2), but it will take longer to popularise and gain recognition. <-QUOTE}

I agree with you, Linux is developing at a rate of knots. It's very exciting. There are some wonderful Distros out there such as Puppy which loads and runs entirely in RAM to the extent that I can take the Live CD out of it's drive and Puppy will happily work away.

Nick Rhodes

May 4th, 2008, 06:56 PM

{QUOTE-> You see the thing is you are insinuating that I don't have speed, security and stability with windows. Which with Vista I do have. I just don't want an operating system that will give me what I already have but would have to work three times as hard to get what I already have. That Is my personal opinion. Others will have their opinions also I am sure.:thumb: That is what is nice about having the choice to choose what we like. <-QUOTE}

Its interesting, as we suffer speed, security and stability issues at work with Windows desktops and servers, heres some examples compared to Linux:
Our new .net webservices require a 4th webserver, when we only needed 3 using redhat/apache tomcat services.
External security audits of the same servers showed the Windows webservers to be using insecure default SSL configurations, which the apache machines did'nt.
Our Team Foundation Server database has errors/corrupt in 6 months of use by 2 developers (branching is broken), when our SVN server running for years with a team of 6 has been 100 % reliable.

Then on my desktop, a new HP laptop with XP as of Sept 2007, Outlook 2003 crashes on average daily, with a dll exception - this issue affects many users on different machines. Microsoft is aware of the issue (with IMAP), not fix yet (waiting 4 months).
Both Evolution and Thunderbird on Hardy Heron live work flawlessly.

Just examples, I know there are probably examples where windows is more secure, stable and faster than linux and as you say we have choices which is why we use a mix where I work.

lucas1985

May 4th, 2008, 08:34 PM

- Linux is really difficult for people who have Windows hard-wired into their brains.
- Linux can be frustrating to people who think that they are "tech-savvy" but can't get things to work in two-clicks in a GUI.
- Linux is utter easy for grandma when she buys an OEM computer (i.e., a Dell or HP preloaded with Linux) or her grandson setups the machine for her.
- Linux is of no use for people who depend on Windows-only applications.
- You don't need to be a Microsoft basher to see the advantages of Open Source software.
- You don't need to be a Linux zealot to see the advantages of an OS with Unix roots.

midway40

May 4th, 2008, 08:43 PM

I installed Ubuntu 8.04 on my laptop last week. I did have to do some CLI work to get my Atheros wireless working but other than that it wasn't too bad. It just felt "clunky" since the last time I used it (6.10) and it is on a faster computer at that. I took it off and put Vista back on it since then.

When I first tried Linux some years ago it seemed like everything had to be done in CLI. I wondered why there was even a GUI since most of the time you were in Console. But over time this has gotten a lot better though it still has some ways to go before mom and pop can use it.

I also tried the Linux Mint LiveCD but after I rebooted I got a boot error from Windows. Fortunately Vista told me that it could fix the problem for me and it did so I didn't have to do the recovery console-fixmbr bit. I wasn't aware it could do that but glad it did, lol.

I also downloaded PCLOS Gnome (I prefer Gnome over KDE) because it looked kinda cool. But I must got a bad download because I got errors trying to run the liveCD on both my laptop and desktop. I will download it again this week and try again.

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 09:15 PM

{QUOTE-> Pedro, I really don't care what OS people use. I post my Opinion and experiences. I have never told anyone that they should run "a"or"b" os. You make it sound as if I am telling everyone to use windows which is not true. But in rebutal, What irratates me is the people that do use linux are trying to say it is as easy as windows or at least close. And that is very far from the truth. It should be made very clear to people that are told to try linux of the pit falls that are not present in windows that they will encounter in Linux. Most people that listen to the rheortic about linux and give it a try (which is not an easy task for a non techie) are left with an installed OS that they usually can't understand or use. The Linux developers could spend a little more time in the information they give to the uninitated Linux users that would give them a heads up on what to at least expect when they install A distro. <-QUOTE}
You see, the linux developers are the kernel guys. OS's are many. Which one.

Did you check the Ubuntu docs, PCLinuxOS docs, Debian's, Suse, RedHat, Arch...
See where i'm getting at?

Refer to a specific OS, or we won't get anywhere.

As with Windows, you don't just hand over a pc with Windows to someone who never used one. You tell him/her how it works, or can Windows talk?
The experience the OP links is most interesting, and reveals things to improve still.
But all the "problems" his girl friend had would be easily solved if she could ask questions, exactly like in Windows.

bktII

May 4th, 2008, 09:37 PM

{QUOTE-> I installed Ubuntu 8.04 on my laptop last week. I did have to do some CLI work to get my Atheros wireless working but other than that it wasn't too bad. <-QUOTE}

This is important. The end-user does not care whether the fault lies with the hardware mfr. or the distro. Most notebook/laptop users want wireless working. Most are not CLI literate in Linux or Windows. This is a common use case.

Kerodo

May 4th, 2008, 09:51 PM

I've distro hopped a lot for the past year and a half, and I would have to say that learning either OS, Linux or Win, is perhaps about the same. If you work with Linux for a while, you learn the ins and outs, and it's fairly easy. But I think perhaps many of us forget our early learning curve days with Win as well.

That said, I do lean toward Win, mostly because I think it's just more polished and a bit better done in general, rather than being easier to use or learn. Linux distros are quite inconsistent and sometimes pretty buggy. They are more user friendly now, especially ones like Ubuntu or PCLOS. But for some reason, I usually return to Win.

Truth is, they both have their merits and drawbacks....

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 09:55 PM

{QUOTE-> You see, the linux developers are the kernel guys. OS's are many. Which one.

Did you check the Ubuntu docs, PCLinuxOS docs, Debian's, Suse, RedHat, Arch...
See where i'm getting at?

Refer to a specific OS, or we won't get anywhere.

As with Windows, you don't just hand over a pc with Windows to someone who never used one. You tell him/her how it works, or can Windows talk?
The experience the OP links is most interesting, and reveals things to improve still.
But all the "problems" his girl friend had would be easily solved if she could ask questions, exactly like in Windows. <-QUOTE}

I am not speaking about any particular Linux distro but linux in general. To make this easier on you why don't you just list the Linux distros that are as easy to use as windows and have as short a learning curve as windows. Oh I guess that isn't a fair question because there isn't one. that is the point I am making. Like I stated several times before, I don't think Linux is a bad program at all. It just isn't ready for Mr. or Mrs. average computer user yet. I am sure it will eventually get there but the time is not now. And I will agree that Ubuntu has done quite a bit to address new linux users but so far it is not enough.

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 10:18 PM

Ok, you insist on "linux in general". It's just wrong, but ok, i drop it..
{QUOTE-> To make this easier on you why don't you just list the Linux distros that are as easy to use as windows and have as short a learning curve as windows. Oh I guess that isn't a fair question because there isn't one. that is the point I am making. <-QUOTE}
So i've already replied?
PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu, Mandriva, Suse, WinLinux (just for you), Fedora, Linspire, Xandros, + more probably. Didn't try them all, then again i'm not criticising them either..
{QUOTE->
It just isn't ready for Mr. or Mrs. average computer user yet. I am sure it will eventually get there but the time is not now. And I will agree that Ubuntu has done quite a bit to address new linux users but so far it is not enough. <-QUOTE}
Did you try the ones above? And which for more than 1 hour, if any?

The problems i've seen are basically linked to hardware manufacturer's support (drivers, hence the complicated CLI instructions), and 'oh no i can't read MS docs properly' - proprietary, almost a secret, which shouldn't exist.
And it's an installation problem, not a problem with using it. The learning how to use it is mostly the same as with Windows. The program's names change.

Shoot :)

Edit: i don't know if it's Winlinux or LinuxXP, i forgot mostly because i didn't care for those.

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 10:26 PM

I have tried all of the ones you listed and more except Xubuntu I have even used the server versions of several of them. When I had my computer shops I had to know how to use linux to be able to work on and service some of my customers desktops and servers. I know how to use linux but I don't really care for it as you have probably deduced by now. 8)

Bye the way Pedro, I am enjoying our little exchange of thoughts.

EDIT I always dual booted so I could give them at least a week before it hit the deep six. I almost kept SUSE at one time but I came to my senses ;D

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 10:32 PM

I always enjoy exchanging thoughts with you too Bigc, which is why i'm have a hard time with the 'linux program' and 'linux geeks'.
I think i know you know, or something like that, but.. :P

{QUOTE->
EDIT I always dual booted so I could give them at least a week before it hit the deep six. I almost kept SUSE at one time but I came to my senses ;D <-QUOTE}
I think i know why too. It's those programs that are only available for Windows right? A few programs you just got used to, besides those docs you need to read.

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 10:39 PM

It is just easier to call it "the Linux Program" or the Linux Geeks. I am probably one of the biggest computer nerds there is and a bit geeky. To me calling someone a geek is not a cut or detremental remark but just more of a fit all nick name. And I do realize how many people give their time and effort to open source and Linux in general and it is no small achivement but a herculean endeavor.

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 10:48 PM

I didn't think it was a detrimental remark either, but rather putting everyone in one bag. Some program for the kernel, others the windows system, others the package manager for distro xyz, others just code programs for it..
One distro with objective no.1 performance, another with objective no.1 security, another grandma proof, etc.
For example, one can't criticize Slackware or Arch or OpenBSD even, because "even i cant use it let alone granny" :D
They're just built for other purposes, and don't give a damn about granny, or market share for that matter (true for many, but not all).

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 10:52 PM

{QUOTE-> I didn't think it was a detrimental remark either, but rather putting everyone in one bag. Some program for the kernel, others the windows system, others the package manager for distro xyz, others just code programs for it..
One distro with objective no.1 performance, another with objective no.1 security, another grandma proof, etc.
For example, one can't criticize Slackware or Arch or OpenBSD even, because "even i cant use it let alone granny" :D
They're just built for other purposes, and don't give a damn about granny, or market share for that matter (true for many, but not all).[/
QUOTE]

I do believe that Linux is on the right road, it just has a few more bridges to cross and a couple of more curves. but there are a lot of people working to get it there and that is a fact. Who knows maybe even a hold out like me might give it a try again in the future. Miracles do happen. ;)

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 10:57 PM

How long has it been then? And did you try the latest PCLinuxOS / Ubuntu?

I can tell you i saw Ubuntu beta on a laptop and i was stunned. Vista was on another partition, and no bs, i thought it was slower, and i don't find it appealing at all.

I bet Windows 7 will be much better (just have a gut feeling), but i won't use it, not by my own free will.
Notice free will. If i'm forced to use Windows, am i free?

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 11:04 PM

Yep you are free to use what you wish. Actually I really do like vista. I won't go into datail why but I love it. and would never go back to Xp. I have had not one problem with Vista. I couldn't ask an OS to run any better. In reality there are a lot of people that are having the same experience with Vista that I am.

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 11:10 PM

{QUOTE-> Yep you are free to use what you wish. <-QUOTE}
No i'm not. Word is the only one that can properly read MS documents. Standards aren't enforced, and Microsoft bribes everyone. I'm not free to choose.
I can and will choose for home computer, but for work i'm basically stuck.

And, as time goes by, MS makes new formats that older versions of Word can't read. Eventually my legitimate copy of XP + Office 2003 can't cut it.

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 11:13 PM

I guess that is what you call between a rock and a hard place:doubt:

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 11:20 PM

I'm still waiting for the European Comission, and the whole OOXML debate.

bigc73542

May 4th, 2008, 11:22 PM

{QUOTE-> I'm still waiting for the European Comission, and the whole OOXML debate. <-QUOTE}

Yep, it is likely to hit the fan ;D

midway40

May 4th, 2008, 11:22 PM

{QUOTE-> Notice free will. If i'm forced to use Windows, am i free? <-QUOTE}

Again, that can apply the other way as well. I could use either but I choose to use Windows. No one is putting a gun to my head--that is freedom of choice.

I used to believe in Linux and what it stood for until I was disturbed by the obvious smear campaign against Vista with all kinds of wild FUD being spread. There are alot of Linux fanatics out there that quite frankly scare me with their writings. The community itself is fragmented with over a hundred distros in existence. Examples of the factions within the communities are the "Purists" vs the "Neos" (my terms for the Old Guard and the New), Debian vs RPM, this distro vs that disto, etc. As long as these conflicts exist Linux will never become a major OS.

Used to you didn't see this in the Windows world. There are just "software fandom" such as in security which is evidenced on this forum. But now you see battle lines drawn everywhere between XP and Vista. It is certainly saddening to see.

Pedro

May 4th, 2008, 11:29 PM

{QUOTE-> Again, that can apply the other way as well. I could use either but I choose to use Windows. No one is putting a gun to my head--that is freedom of choice. <-QUOTE}
No, it's not the same by a long shot. No one forbids MS from using odf, and they have all the specs.

If i can exchange documents without technical issues with you, on whichever OS, then i'm free to choose the OS i prefer.
{QUOTE->
I used to believe in Linux and what it stood for until I was disturbed by the obvious smear campaign against Vista with all kinds of wild FUD being spread. There are alot of Linux fanatics out there that quite frankly scare me with their writings. The community itself is fragmented with over a hundred distros in existence. Examples of the factions within the communities are the "Purists" vs the "Neos" (my terms for the Old Guard and the New), Debian vs RPM, this distro vs that disto, etc. As long as these conflicts exist Linux will never become a major OS.

Used to you didn't see this in the Windows world. There are just "software fandom" such as in security which is evidenced on this forum. But now you see battle lines drawn everywhere between XP and Vista. It is certainly saddening to see. <-QUOTE}
You're just confusing things. The World is like that. While i don't like those arguments, i like that the world is diverse, multi-colour. I don't like grey.

midway40

May 4th, 2008, 11:48 PM

I do not use ODF, which is another freedom of choice, so none of that applies to me.

No I am not confused but far from it from my observations in the Linux world. By the very nature of this "diversity" you speak of Linux will never be a major player. It took a billionaire "capitalist" to bring Ubuntu to where it is now in popularity if you hadn't noticed.

lucas1985

May 4th, 2008, 11:52 PM

{QUOTE-> This is important. The end-user does not care whether the fault lies with the hardware mfr. or the distro. Most notebook/laptop users want wireless working. Most are not CLI literate in Linux or Windows. This is a common use case. <-QUOTE}
When you buy an OEM system (how many average Joe's build their computers with their own hands and install the OS and applications?) you won't have to deal with CLI stuff. Hardware support is not an issue for the average guy.
Linux only needs demand, which is already happening with mobile phones (Google Android and others), ultra-portables (Eee PC, OLPC, etc), goverments (security/auditing reasons, standards-enforcement reasons, cost savings, etc), etc and it also needs fair competition (elimination of the Windows tax)
{QUOTE-> The community itself is fragmented with over a hundred distros in existence. <-QUOTE}
The Linux kernel is only one.
{QUOTE-> I do not use ODF, which is another freedom of choice, so none of that applies to me. <-QUOTE}
If you have .DOC files, you're locked into Microsoft Office, which means you're also locked into Windows. And being locked into Windows means suffering from planned obsolescence and always-changing "standards".
{QUOTE-> It took a billionaire "capitalist" to bring Ubuntu to where it is now in popularity if you hadn't noticed. <-QUOTE}
Before Canonical, there were a fair amount of companies which have Linux as its core business. Ubuntu brought little to the Linux world, excepting marketing and a support community for the SOHO market.

steve161

May 4th, 2008, 11:59 PM

I don't think it comes down to "linux is not user friendly". It is more "linux is not windows, and that is what I know". MS rules and that is what most people are comfortable with. I am nooberific, and was somehow able to install PCLinuxosOS, then dual boot with Ubuntu. No command line, just click on the default choices. Actually, I have not used the command line yet with PCLOS, and just a few times with Ubuntu (copy and paste from the forum). But my peers in my real life think that switching to Firefox is too much of a hassle, and I do not even bother to bring up the linux thing.

Pedro

May 5th, 2008, 12:04 AM

{QUOTE-> I do not use ODF, which is another freedom of choice, so none of that applies to me. <-QUOTE}
Yes, it's your choice, but you fail to see the issue.
Let me try. Imagine that you send me a doc, but i can convert it to odf, properly.
If technically it's unfeasible, then yes, everyone should use a free (open and free) standard that everyone uses. You should not care about what extension it has, you should care if it works.
{QUOTE->
No I am not confused but far from it from my observations in the Linux world. By the very nature of this "diversity" you speak of Linux will never be a major player. It took a billionaire "capitalist" to bring Ubuntu to where it is now in popularity if you hadn't noticed. <-QUOTE}
It's not so diverse when we consider how many distributions actually aim for market share. Also, diversity is not a bad thing, think outside the box. There's not need to have a huge market leader. It's only bad for you and me, the "consumers".

And yes, it took investment in order to be competitive on the desktop. I can tell you there's nothing shocking in that revelation.

Got to go for now.

lucas1985

May 5th, 2008, 12:16 AM

{QUOTE-> I don't think it comes down to "linux is not user friendly". It is more "linux is not windows, and that is what I know". <-QUOTE}
Couldn't agree more.
But, the majority of the world (5+ billion people) doesn't even have a computer. And cloud computing and web services are slowly displacing the desktop as the reference point.
Just imagine the next billion PC-enabled people buying cheap, little Linux boxes because that's what they can afford. And the next million developers coding in Javascript and don't caring about the Win32 API.
Microsoft is scared about the future.

bktII

May 5th, 2008, 12:26 AM

{QUOTE-> When you buy an OEM system (how many average Joe's build their computers with their own hands and install the OS and applications?) you won't have to deal with CLI stuff. Hardware support is not an issue for the average guy.
<-QUOTE}

The OP did not mention an OEM system with Ubuntu pre-installed. Neither did the article referenced by the OP. You also state that the alternative is building ones own computer. Interesting use of extremes.

I suspect that the majority of people currently running Ubuntu have installed it on PCs purchased from OEMs with Windows pre-installed. Hardware is often an issue in this case. And this is a clear disadvantage that Ubuntu, and other distros, have to deal with.

However, for those who purchase PCs from OEMs with Ubuntu pre-installed, I would expect wireless to work without any CLI stuff as you say. Let's assume that you are using Ubuntu 8.04 and want to set up wpa-tkip or wpa2-aes wireless, does this version of Ubuntu allow you to enter the settings from the GUI? ( I am specifically referring to the contents of the interfaces file in /etc/network. ) If so, then Ubuntu has made a very important step forward.

wat0114

May 5th, 2008, 12:31 AM

{QUOTE->
If you have .DOC files, you're locked into Microsoft Office, which means you're also locked into Windows. And being locked into Windows means suffering from planned obsolescence and always-changing "standards". <-QUOTE}

OpenOffice will open these.

bktII

May 5th, 2008, 04:14 AM

{QUOTE-> A better test would be taking someone who has not use a computer before and asking them to do a series of tasks on both machines. <-QUOTE}

This was the point of my wireless setup experience; Win XP vs. Debian. Also, this is based on wireless (and wireless security) being an important use case, which it is today.

{QUOTE-> I managed the config (cmd line), but the desktop stuff in gnome she had no problems with. <-QUOTE}

And this is the point of this thread. How many households are going to have a knowledgable person like yourself available to manage the config (cmd line)?

bktII

May 5th, 2008, 04:39 AM

Here is a scenario for windows-based wireless security setup for Ubuntu with heavy use of event-based programming:

Somewhere in networking a command button that reads "configure wireless security" exists. The user presses this button, and a window pops up with five command buttons:

(1) wep
(2) wpa
(3) wpa2
(4) back
(5) help (describes wep, wpa and wpa2)

The user presses command button no. (2), wpa, and a window pops up with two text boxes, one for the wireless network ssid and the other for the passphrase. And a command button for going back to the prior window. TKIP will be implicit in this case. The user enters the ssid and enters their pet's name for the passphrase, "spot". A message box appears informing the user that the passphrase must be between 8 and 63 ascii characters and the passphrase text box is cleared. The user enters "spotspot". A password meter is activated and a window appears informing the user that wpa is susceptible to dictionary attacks and recommends a password length of at least 31 comprised of random ascii characters. There are two command buttons in this window:

(1) continue
(2) re-enter passphrase

The user presses command button no. (1) and the wpa parameters ar written to /etc/network/interfaces.

If any of the "user-friendly" Linux distros are going to capture market share from Microsoft and Apple, there is going to have to be MUCH greater use of event-based programming than there is today.

Huupi

May 5th, 2008, 05:51 AM

Prime Time i guess it will never happen,maybe Mac Os's will be taken seriously within 7 years or so. Marketshare and profits are and will be dictated by the general public in their wishes and capabilities.It would been smarter if Linux will more go with the flow and adapt more to wishes and capabilities of the masses.Otherwise it will end up like Don Quichote defeated by windmills. 8)

farmerlee

May 5th, 2008, 09:18 PM

I think its ready for anyone who's willing to spend a bit of time to learn. I'm a linux newb and it didn't take me long to learn to use ubuntu. I now use it for a lot of my everyday tasks.

L815

May 6th, 2008, 04:14 AM

I'm a huge fan of Linux, and myself have struggled to find 'that distro'. It's been a tie between Ubuntu & Fedora. Fedora has jumped a long way, and is really nice in appearance and is really fast and sleek. Ubuntu is a bit more user friendly but is slower in comparison, and doesn't look as good.

Many programs I use on windows that are cross platform (emule, azureus, vlc) don't seem to work as well in Linux, nor do they look as appealing. Firefox has huge tab buttons, weird website fonts (mostly developer issues), and Opera's menus have strange font issues as well.

Installing applications is a breeze, though I find a rolling release distro to be best in comparison to windows. I like to be up-to-date with the latest and greatest software. Installing manually programs which do not have installers was a bit strange to me, but after a while I understood that what a windows msi or exe installer file does is essentially the same thing I do in linux by hand, although I have more control.

While I do see huge improvements, I think it is still far from replacing windows completely. It will catch up but it won't rival the desktop scene for a while. Ubuntu is coming this way and it's already starting to feel a bit bloated compared to others. I also agree the infinite amount of choice is a bit overwhelming.

It's like trying to drink a cup of water which never empties. Eventually you will drown.

I think once the hardware issues are almost next to none, and outside sources start working more with Linux and not just Windows & Mac, Linux will truly begin to shine more than it has been (starting to seem that way).