Is Ubuntu ready for prime-time? A test.

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)

The Linux kernel is only one.

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".

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.

 

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.

 

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.

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

OpenOffice will open these.

 

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.

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)?

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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).

 

What is meant by '' Prime Time '',for some favoring Linux its already there,but that was not the question.
It was refferring to a situation where the masses will easely adapt to Linux,and i think that's not the case yet.

 

Hello,

Of course it is not ready. Nothing revolutionary is.

When the car came to replace the horse, people clamored like mad. They cursed this new diabolical invention ...

Today, everyone drives cars and can't imagine a life without them.

Mrk

 

For those who want to get to know better all the different distros, here's a "genealogic tree"

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Gldt.svg

 

L815: install msttcorefonts. Then you change system wide fonts, Firefox's fonts etc.
It's not necessary for system, you can change alot without these fonts. And perhaps you'll find yourself preferring KDE. I like both, and can't make up my mind about it.
For web pages, somehow i preferred msttcorefonts, i think web developers design mostly for those fonts, or something like that. I don't exactly understand the whole thing.

 

Its all to do with the fact that page layouts are designed around MS fonts, height and width and spacings.

 

Nice tree HURST.

BTW I didnt know SUSE came from Slackware. You learn something new everyday