Walt Mossberg Reviews Ubuntu

sciurus0 writes "Mainstream technology journalist Walt Mossberg recently reviewed an Inspiron 1420N with Ubuntu installed by Dell. Citing problems such as an oversensitive touchpad and poor multimedia support, he suggests that 'from the point of view of an average user, someone who wouldn't want to enter text commands, hunt the Web for drivers and enabling software, or learn a whole new user interface' Ubuntu isn't a good choice compared to Windows or OS X."

By "work with linux", do you mean upload PHP?

Because I see that a lot. You get an SSH login to your web presence and suddenly you're the "linux guru" at your place of work.

And in that 14 years, you still haven't learned to check to see if your hardware is going to be supported in a recent kernel before you buy it? I guess you bought the wrong tablet PC, because we've deployed it quite successfully for use in idiot-proof AV systems, among other things.

As a linux user of 8 years, I think desktop distributions have come a long way in that time period, and I don't find them any more or less difficult to get working than a Windows OS.

I think the only reason that you were able to get Vista to work on your laptop is because it was supplied with an OEM support disk especially for your machine; they did all the hard work of getting it on there and correctly configured for you.

There are vendors who do this for linux if you care to look for them and pay the premium.

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

Walt is right, Dell's Ubuntu offering is not ready for the masses. However, I see this largely as Dell's fuckup.

Dell is shipping vanilla Ubuntu on these things. No media codecs, no accelerated drivers for nvidia cards, not even a properly configured X server. Can you imagine them doing the same with Windows? It would be a disaster.

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

"No media codecs"
Well, yes, this is a pain, but what is Dell supposed to do? Ship it with all the "bad" and "ugly" codecs? If I were a PC manufacturer in the US, I sure wouldn't want to do that. You're just asking for the mafiaa to come after you.

Actually, with feisty, I just opened up RhythmBox and it prompted me to install the other codecs. IIRC, I didn't have to anything in the CLI.

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

what is Dell supposed to do?

Pay for the codecs. There are legal [fluendo.com] options [cnr.com].

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

Why? Are licenses for the codecs going to cost Dell more for a Linux machine than a Windows one?

Somebody (meaning you) still has to pay for the license in that copy of PowerDVD after all. Windows machines don't support a lot of standard codecs out-of-the-box either. Just try playing a XviD movie on a stock PC with Windows Media Player. Oh, yeah, I remember, Windows tells me it needs to find the codec, then it fails to do so. And this is easier for a novice user because....?

I've bought a lot of Dell hardware in my career, and in general I'm pretty happy with Dell. But I agree with others here who say they just haven't done the job with their new Linux lines. Why GNOME and not KDE, a much more Windows-like desktop? Why no codecs and other multimedia support? Why no fine-tuning of the touchpad driver if that's an issue? You don't think Dell ignores issues like that when they configure their standard XP or Vista images, do you?

And, yes, if they're going to sell Linux machines then they damn well need to support them. Does that mean they may not make as much on Linux machines in the short term? Perhaps, since they'll need to build a support staff. In the longer run, they'll discover they're getting a lot fewer support calls per Linux machine than they do for Windows.

I'm not saying it'll be easy to sell Linux machines to a mass audience, but it's not impossible. It does require that the OEM put a little effort into it. If Walt there is having troubles with his trackpad, whose fault is that? Hint, it's not Canonical's.

Oh, and it wouldn't hurt to bundle Firefox, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice on those Windows machines you sell either, Mr. Dell.

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

If Walt there is having troubles with his trackpad, whose fault is that? Hint, it's not Canonical's.

But if a screen hinge breaks surely it is.

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

Since Dell are customising Ubuntu for their installations ( http://linux.dell.com/wiki/index.php/Ubuntu_7.04#Dell_Remastered_Ubuntu_7.04_ISO [dell.com] ) I wonder if they do, or plan to in the future, include for MP3 (via LAME, etc.), DVD decryption (via DeCSS) and other such things on their European models ( http://www.dell.co.uk/ubuntu [dell.co.uk] http://www.dell.fr/ubuntu [www.dell.fr] http://www.dell.de/ubuntu [www.dell.de] ), since the code is Free Software. Just because the US corporate-sponsored government makes such things illegal shouldn't make a difference to people who live in slightly more representative states, especially if things like that are major issues cited by reviewers.

The suspend issue (volume applet crashing) is a bug which Dell shouldn't have let slip, whilst the Synaptics issue is easily solvable with third party tools and has a specification here https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GnomeTouchpadManager [ubuntu.com] .

Yes those are problems, but seriously, the number of people who think that such things are what's holding back the fabled Linux Desktop are delusional. Firstly they should look into chaos theory, there's no way everything can be controlled and still end up with a useful system. Secondly, Windows has masses of problems, like, for instance, no DVD support. The side by side comparisons of Windows vs. Ubuntu vs. OSX are only useful as eyeball attractors for adverts, the real problem in the way of the Year of the Linux Desktop is that of positive feedback loops. People use Windows because people develop for Windows because people use Windows, people use Windows so they can use Microsoft Office because the people they know use Microsoft Office, etc. Free Software systems make a point of NOT locking their users in, thus users' choice is usually between either a Free Software system like Ubuntu which sacrifices some locked-down functionality of other systems, or using a non-free system (basically, Windows) which has some functionality Microsoft restricts from their competitors along with all of the Free Software functionality happily made available by the Free Software community (OpenDocument-compatible office suites, Ogg codecs, etc.).

This makes standards adoption the most important issue to tackle, in my opinion. If files are made available in open formats via standard protocols then the locked-down functionality of systems is minimised, and thus the choice becomes more level. Hopefully a feedback loop can be established for standards, but the whole idea of standardisation means that such a loop can be sabotaged, basically since Microsoft can easily support Ogg formats in Windows Media Player and OpenDocument in Microsoft Office, but by keeping Windows Media and proprietary Office formats (including OOXML) around they once again have the upper hand, everything that Free Software supports can be matched, but Windows Media and Office formats by their very nature can't be competed with.

Re:There may be issues with Ubuntu

Windows plays DVD's out of the box.

No, it does not. Vista Home Premium and Vista Ultimate are the very first versions of Windows to include DVD playback capability -- all other versions of Windows (including other Vista versions) do not have the ability to play DVD videos.

If your computer play DVDs out of the box, it means that the system integrator installed DVD player software and codecs for you. You paid for it, separate from Windows.

That was my experience...

I purchased an XPS 410 box from Dell's Ubuntu page. I'm a pretty well versed Ubuntu user and I realized that if nothing else, I'd be buying a machine that I knew had linux compatible hardware. When I got the machine and started it up, I was very disappointed. Just like the parent said, there was NO configuration

done by Dell. They just installed the basic Ubuntu and shipped it with the system at the step where it asks for a user name and all that. I had to spend significant time configuring the NVidia drivers, sound card, and audio/video codecs (probably a few hours altogether). I would bet that it would take days for someone new to linux to figure out how to do all that. For shame Dell... How hard would it have been to configure Ubuntu with the right drivers at least and then ghost that system onto every box you shipped.

Another interesting note about comparing it to Windows and OS X... I installed Windows XP SP2 in a dual boot configuration so I could play some games. Good god almighty, setting up windows was painful. I must have visited a dozen different sites, downloading 200MB in drivers, before I got everything working. The damned network card didn't even work after the initial install. I had to boot into Ubuntu, save the network driver to a USB key and then boot back into Windows. Also, I've had the system set up for about 3 weeks now and I still can't get the sound to work in windows. I've looked all over the web for the right windows sound driver with 0 luck. As for OSX, I still haven't been able to even install it! Oh wait, OSX only runs on Apple hardware... My forgot. Seriously though, if anyone know how to get the sound working in windows on an XPS 410 box, please let me know!

For those of you who are touting this story as a demonstration of linux's failure on the desktop, sod off. This wasn't a failure on the part of linux or ubuntu. This was a failure on the part of Dell in not providing a fully installed and configured system.

As a review for the Dell XPS 410:

After a Windows XP fresh install:

• Network card: not working
• Video card: working but at 1024x768 with no 3d acceleration
• Sound card: not working (still not working, even after weeks of trying to find a driver)

After a Ubuntu fresh install:

• Network card: working
• Video card: working, but at 1024x768 with no 3d acceleration
• Sound card: working (although it was muted by default which may confuse some users)

Re:That was my experience...

Linux, or at least Ubuntu, has bigger problems.

It should not be possible for a fresh install of an OS to not have any video whatsoever.

But try installing the current version of Kubuntu on a Dell Latitude D630. This is possibly the most commonly purchased corporate laptop in the universe at the moment.

But do an install and just nothing ... black screen. Cant even open a terminal. I'm not sure how this is possible. Even windows has a software framebuffer driver that will do 640x480 on anything.

To get past this initial problem, I had to (after consulting with the local linux expert) actually go into the grub boot editor, and remove the /splash from the boot options. Otherwise, no video whatsoever, ever.

At that point, I could get a terminal, but still no X.

So right out of the bat, a standard nvidia video card, and the Intel a/b/g 3945, dont work out of the box. These are the two most common video cards and wifi cards in existence.

The broadcom 43xx gigabit nic was wonky as well, and it would cause error messages to flash across the terminal every 30 seconds or so. Even inside Vim, right across my content! I had to blacklist the drivers there.

And look at the insanity that has to be done to get it working:

http://www.control.aau.dk/~jdn/linux/d630/index.php?id=startside [control.aau.dk]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=481651&page=12 [ubuntuforums.org]

Video should always work, always, under every circumstance. There is no excuse not to have a generic framebuffer driver to fallback to. There is no excuse for an obscure grub startup setting to stop you from having command line access.

I'm not expecting everything to work out of the box, but there has to be generic fallback drivers.

I will say that the experience once I got the nvidia drivers downloaded and started was outstanding. NVidia makes a really nice script/program to build and install drivers, and fully configure X. That was really nice.

But why do I need the windows driver for my wifi card to use it under linux? Doesnt Intel open source their linux drivers?

Then after all that, everything was flaky and buggy. Gaim/Pidgin would randomly duplicate its own windows. Thunderbird crashes alot. Evolution would just 'disappear' after like the 3rd install wizard screen. No crash message, no warning, no complaint, just 'poof' and its gone.

And its not like I'm doing anything tweaky to install these apps, just apt-get install whatever. Not sure how I could be doing that wrong.

And dont even get me started on standby/hibernate. And how LVM will sometimes decide that it cannot install itself ... because it just cant. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Now ... all that being said, apt-get is wonderful. But honestly ... thats the only really compelling thing I could find with Kubuntu on that 630. Everything else was just a time sink and a royal pain in the ass. I'm sure it'd be better if I had a machine with certified drivers on a disc for everything.

This is something new?

Citing problems such as an oversensitive touchpad and poor multimedia support, he suggests that 'from the point of view of an average user, someone who wouldn't want to enter text commands, hunt the Web for drivers and enabling software, or learn a whole new user interface' Ubuntu isn't a good choice compared to Windows or OS X.

My wife has a Dell laptop and while the touchpad isn't sensitive the little nodule in the middle of the keyboard is while running XP! She doesn't use either of those though, she uses an external mouse so I guess neither matters to her.

Everyone with any sense knows that Linux isn't a great choice compared to Windows or OS X for those that don't want to learn a new UI (or anything else he said) as I've discussed here numerous times before to the pro-Linux troll mods' joy. Linux is a great option if you're not interested in additional cost, vendor lock-in, and attempts by a corporation to invade your personal privacy and choice due to their licensing allowances while covering it up with vague non-sense.

I will continue to run Windows and OS X on my desktop machines until any of the Linux distributions mature enough to match what's available on the Windows platform (which will probably never come unfortunately) and I will continue to trust Linux as my network server -- happily chugging along for years at a clip without as much as a hiccup.

Re:This is something new?

Everyone with any sense knows that Linux isn't a great choice compared to Windows or OS X for those that don't want to learn a new UI

OK, I'm going to be a little hard on Linux/*NIX here, but I'm not trolling. I love linux, I'm typing this from a Linux box, so here we go.

All *NIX GUI is pretty bad (with the exception of OS X). From my opinion, there is no real difference between Gnome and KDE, and both are pretty much a combo of 80s and 90s UNIX X window managers with a strong Microsoft Windows influence. My favorite GUI environment from the late 90s was WindowMaker, which was a ripoff of NextStep.

Linux is cool from the perspective of its openness and it being based on *NIX philosopies and style. But Even Linus will tell you that Linux is nothing new, and I believe that it would take something like a startup and a bunch of cash and forethought to make a good GUI for Linux or any other *NIX (again besides OS X).

I've used FVWM, TWM, OL(V)WM, WindowMaker, Afterstep (which is how I found /.), CDE, KDE, and Gnome, and I guess a few other Windowing environments for *NIX, and sure they are usable, but none of them are great.

It drives me up a wall that copy and paste is so inconsistant. I have to think, is it control-v, right click and use menu, middle click, shift-insert, and its common for me to get it wrong. Oh, to do page up/down, should I use page up or down keys, or shift and page up/down, or will page up and down even work? What about drag and drop? Will it work? Will it work between apps? What about a consistant Widget look and feel?

These are common GUI things from the mid 80s, but as a rank ordering from best to worst, you have OS X, Windows, and others. Windows is not that great either. The look and feel has become about as segmented as *NIX. And OS X is not perfect, but it seems clear that they have spent more time and effort with attention to these design features than anybody else.

Well designed command lines are good for new users

These are common GUI things from the mid 80s, but as a rank ordering from best to worst, you have OS X, Windows, and others. Windows is not that great either. The look and feel has become about as segmented as *NIX. And OS X is not perfect, but it seems clear that they have spent more time and effort with attention to these design features than anybody else.

I take your points, and to me it just seems as if nobody knows how to make a great GUI, or at least, nobody is making a great GUI. If there really was a great GUI out there, I might use it, but as far as I can tell there simply isn't.

I also think it's important to point out that it's completely possible to have a user friendly command line. I think command line interfaces get an unjustified reputation for new users. One of the most commonly used types of apps in the World -- the web search engine -- is based around command lines. Users type what they want, and the search engine tries to give it to them... often quite accurately. The Google command line is a great example of this. It's straightforward for new users to use quite effectively, and advanced users can customise their searches in lots of ways. It's not the type of precisely specified command line that would be associated with something like a bash session, but it's a well designed system appropriate for the task, intended to be quick to learn and easier to use.

Getting back to your comments about GUIs, I have to admit that one of the main reasons I prefer Linux as a desktop OS (and I fully agree this isn't for anyone) is that in a world where no GUI is that great, it provides an excellent command line. I primarily use the GUI these days to do regular things like open a web browser or edit a spreadsheet. But when I get sick of trying to interact with the GUI for a slightly complex operation such as moving files around in a certain way, I can switch to a command line and do things very easily.

Windows has a horrible command line as far as I've experienced. There are few consistent standards for how Windows command line tools should work together, and many Windows tools I've tried to use through a command line have been a secondary effort to an equivalent GUI tool. Often it's impossible to do simple things without invoking the GUI. The Windows Powershell stuff is quite nice for scipting functionality, but Windows still presents it through an awful interface for typing in.

Just my thoughts, anyway.

Reviews make Linux stronger

Linux (Xorg, really) does configure touchpads to be too sensitive and some things still can't be configured graphically, but the fact that Dell is willing to sell a computer with Linux is a big step. It isn't perfect, but it is getting there. Frankly, reviews like his are what Linux really needs. Linux isn't deficient, but when people point out these things, it tells us "oh, maybe we can set more user-friendly defaults for touchpads in the xorg.conf - or create a small front end to edit them".

These reviews will only make Linux stronger.

Re:Reviews make Linux stronger

Whilst reviews are great, it would have been nice if he could've asked a simple question about this on the ubuntu forum - I guess Windows users aren't used to the option of doing that.

You're right. If I have to go to a forum to get basic functionality of a brand new product working right out of the box, that product gets returned. Having to get "support" for a new product means that that product is broken.

Re:Reviews make Linux stronger

They're not configured to be sensitive enough for me. It's a preference and as long as you can configure it simply I don't see the problem if it's still useable enough to get to System / Preferences / Mouse.

No, I have a 1420n myself, and the necessary preference isn't there. The sort of sensitivity he's talking about isn't configurable via the ordinary gnome mouse dialog--you need an extra synaptics-specific configuration utility that wasn't installed by default, and (if I remember correctly) a kernel patch to recognize the touchpad as something more than an ordinary ps/2 mouse.

Whilst reviews are great, it would have been nice if he could've asked a simple question about this on the ubuntu forum - I guess Windows users aren't used to the option of doing that.

He may well have done that, but the answer he would have gotten (upgrade your kernel, etc.) wouldn't have been interesting to the intended audience for this article, and he would have ended up saying the same thing anyway (that workarounds were available, but that most users would find them complex).

And, by the way, I'm quite happy with my 1420n. Like him, I'd recommend it to people that are interested specifically in trying Linux, but wouldn't recommend it to the general computer user yet.

For the non-RTFA folks

Mossberg isn't just dumping on Linux or open source. He generally likes the idea of OSS:

Ubuntu and other versions of Linux have several advantages. Unlike Windows and OS X, they're free. Unlike Mac OS X, they can be run on the least-expensive popular hardware configurations. Unlike Windows, but like the Mac, they are essentially free of viruses and spyware. And unlike Windows and Mac OS X, they are built and constantly improved by a world-wide network of developers, professional and amateur -- the so-called open-source concept that produced the excellent Firefox Web browser.

It makes sense that all the best software brains can't be located in just two places: Redmond, Wash., where Microsoft is based, and Cupertino, Calif., Apple's base. And plenty of people reading this have had lots of frustrations with the two better-known operating systems, especially Windows, whose latest iteration, Vista, is disappointing in many ways.

Rather, he notes some average-user-level problems with Ubuntu (simple things like video, audio, and mouse issues). He's talking about usability by people who don't read Slashdot and are not related to (or dating) someone who DOES read Slashdot.

Of course, he still thinks that "the Apple iMac as the best consumer desktop computer on the market." And we all know the iMac is horrible to use and support!

Re:For the non-RTFA folks

Rather, he notes some average-user-level problems with Ubuntu (simple things like video, audio, and mouse issues). He's talking about usability by people who don't read Slashdot and are not related to (or dating) someone who DOES read Slashdot.

That is something that anyone looking at this article needs to consider. What Robert X. Cringely is to geeks, this guy is to the MBA crew. Consider the audience when considering the work.

Re:For the non-RTFA folks

Indeed. If you want people to take your consumer-level technology seriously, one of the ways to do this is get a positive review from Walt. From his wikipedia article:

Mossberg is widely regarded as one of the most influential writers on information technology. In 2004, in a lengthy profile, Wired called him "The Kingmaker", saying "[f]ew reviewers have held so much power to shape an industry's successes and failures."[1] He is also the highest paid journalist at the Journal.[2]

In other words, despite people here calling him a "fossil", this is possible the most important person in the consumer tech industry. His concerns ought to be addressed carefully.

Re:For the non-RTFA folks

Of course, he still thinks that "the Apple iMac as the best consumer desktop computer on the market." And we all know the iMac is horrible to use and support!

And yet, it's still the best consumer desktop computer on the market. Depressing, huh? :)

Re:Over sensitive mouse?

No, that doesn't work. What he wants to be able to do is control the sensitivity of the touchpad--how hard you have to press on it before it registers a touch--and the tap feature. I have this same notebook (the 1420n), it is quite easy to accidentally produce a "tap" which is effectively a left-click. The only way I know of to fix the problem is with a kernel upgrade (alowing it to recognize this particular hardware as a touchpad with something more than a minimal ps/2 mouse interface) and a touchpad-specific configuration utility.

I'm very happy with the 1420n. It's a great machine for a Linux enthusiast (and it's an advance in terms of usability), but it's not yet a great machine for the average user who doesn't care what OS they get. This looks like a very well-done review to me, and accurate based on my experiences.

You can't deny it

The hardcore Linux proponents can deny it all they want, the simple fact of the matter is that when the average user sits down with a Linux box, there are still numerous shortcomings that may make it unacceptable.

I've said it elsewhere, I've said it here; licensing MP3 would be a good start for Ubuntu. They can certainly afford it, and the US MP3 patents are only valid until 2012, so it'd cost at most $250,000 to essentially get permanent MP3 support.

Re:You can't deny it

Yes, it is a killer app because it falls under the heading of Assumed Feature. It is one f those things that everyone assumes will be present. It is notable only by its absence. When people load their new OS and find that their MP3s don't play, they aren't going to say 'Wow, it was so easy adding MP3 support myself". They are going to say "What type of cheap piece of shit doesn't play MP3s?"

These days, having no native MP3 support is on the level of having no native mouse support. A computer that won't run basic, standard format multimedia out of the box is about as useful and relevant as one that doesn't support a mouse out of the box.

Simple stuff

There is no control panel for adjusting the way the touch pad works

So, Dell does not install gsynaptics for touchpad control? Bad move, but this issue will go away soon, since it's default in Gutsy (Ubuntu 7.10).

When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be "bad" or "ugly."

I dunno about the installation dialog in Feisty (which must be what Dell uses), and I agree that the wording here can use polish. But hey, at least it asks me whether it shall install the codecs it needs. The last time I tried to play an avi file in Windows, Media Player popped up a message that it should download the codec, then it said error, then I couldn't watch it. (I am also using the same POV as in the article).

To get the computer to recognize my Kodak camera and Apple iPod, I had to reboot it several times. When it did find the iPod, it wasn't able to synchronize with it.

I don't have an iPod, but all cameras I attached to Ubuntu since Dapper just worked, even those that wanted me to install crapy software for Windows.

Playing videos was a bad experience, with lots of flickering and freezing. Oh, and there's no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.

Huh? Did Dell forget to enable XVideo? I haven't had such a problem for amny years, my AMD K6 450 played videos w/o a problem. DVD: why the hell does Dell not install a player and pay the license?

That's all the complaints the author has. Not bad, I have seen Windows users with a lot more.

Malware?

How about someone that doesn't want to search for good AntiSpyware solutions?

A good sign.

Dell needs to take these things in steed. If Mossberg's criticisms are valid - which they seem to be - then Dell isn't far off from having a system perfectly reccomendable to 'non-techies'. Perhaps then Dell can compete with those preinstalled Ubuntu laptops [system76.com] non-techies do seem to find great out-of-the-box.

Underwhelming surprise.

Mark Shuttleworth, the South African-born founder of the Ubuntu project, told me this week that "it would be reasonable to say that this is not ready for the mass market." And Dell's Web site for its Ubuntu computers warns that these machines are for "for advanced users and tech enthusiasts."

Armed with that knowledge, he goes out to write a column about:

So, what do I mean when I say Ubuntu is too rough around the edges for average users?

Apparently, though it is "too rough" it is not rough enough to keep the uninitiated away despite warnings precisely to that effect, which is a damned sight more interesting by itself than the litany of peeves he enumerates.

What's Not To Like?

I tried Linux in several distros back in 2000 and was amused but not pleased. Driver support was crazy, the simple matter of changing screen resolutions was terrible, and useful applications (beyond games) made Linux a poor choice for the basics.

Times change, however. Contrary to Mossburg, who, much of the time, is a very even-handed and well-informed tech columnist that really knows the ins and outs of Windows and OS X, I'd have to disagree with him here.

I've installed Ubuntu client in my Parallels virtual environment on my OS X system. I like it over the past Linux distros for several key reasons:

(1) Ubuntu (actually, GNOME) has greatly simplified its interface, "stealing" good elements from both OS X and Windows. From the Mac, a fixed menu bar at the top of the screen, and only four menus at that. Finding things is easy. From Windows, the notion of menu-launching key applications a'la the Start menu button (rather than mere commands found in OS X menus).

(2) Ubuntu has very good hardware support, but always there will be a system that doesn't like it as well. This is because of the same problem that Windows has (although Microsoft has more money and clout to throw at this problem): Hardware quality and variations in the computer world are astronomically huge. Expecting any operating system to support the myriad of PC hardware variations is just near-impossible. Ubuntu does much better, in my experience in using it, than say another GNOME interfaced-Linux, Fedora. (In fact, Fedora is pretty awful in client form.)

(3) Ubuntu has EVERYTHING that the average Joe Offthestreet needs for basic internet and home needs: A web browser (Firefox, arguably best in the biz), an office suite (OpenOffice, always trying to be something that MS Office thinks it is), a mail client (Thunderbird, a client so nice I've moved from Apple Mail to it on my OS X system) and lots of games and the like.

Software update processes are now less crazy and propellerhead, again taking the ideas from the commercial camps. Security is as good as any Unix/Linux client, and since its not Windows, spyware and viruses are not generally present here.

Ubuntu loses only in the specialized "gimme-gimme" internet needs of the youth and industry, like iTunes (doesn't exist, but good MP3 players and support for them are, although iTunes Music Store reins supreme, IMO), some specialty web features for audio or video, professional-level graphic and audio tools, and enterprise support (this problem is shared with OS X, despite my own personal and professional efforts to the opposite).

Installing further applications outside of the bundled, however, needs work. GNOME needs to expand further with, say, Apple's "package" concept of a single app in a double-clickable folder that contains all the binaries and libraries for the app. For now, Ubuntu works like many Linux clients, so third-party apps are hellish to do for the average Joe Whodoesntdo-cmdlines.

If I had a friend or family member that needed a computer (PC) but didn't want to fight the antiquation battles that MS wants to give its consumers, AND if my friend only needed to do web, email, and general office stuff, Ubuntu is a hands-down favorite.

Mossburg and others, unfortunately, may have had too much exposure to other operating systems to see things more simply. Not everyone needs an enterprise-level operating system...just one that works for them for what they need, at home.

Usability and Culture

The problem that Linux has is that it's written by wildly disparate groups of people with different ideas about how an OS should work from a user perspective. The strength of Linux is that it's written by wildly disparate groups of people with different ideas about how an OS should work from a technical perspective.

It's perfectly possible to make a UNIX OS be usable by the masses -- Apple's done that with OS X. The difference is that Apple "cheats" -- they only support a certain range of hardware, all of which is a known quantity to them. They're not dealing with the issues of a Frankencomputer made from whatever bits of hardware happen to show up.

The only way to get Linux as a mass-use OS is to user test the living hell out of it. That means a continual process of refactoring so that the user never has to view the command line unless they really want to. That means making sure that every application follows a consistent HIG. That means that the first person who says something along the lines of "RTFA" gets canned.

What matters isn't technical excellence, but a culture of usability. The Linux subculture is still based around the hacker ethics -- and that's why Linux remains an OS primarily for people who enjoy compiling programs and manipulating settings. That has to change. The culture needs to be one of taking a critical look at every stage in the process and presenting the user with a set of simple and consistent choices that let people use their computers rather than worrying about getting their machine in a usable state. Ubuntu's leaning in that direction, but they still have a long way to go.

The problem is that changing a culture is a hell of a lot harder than just writing software. A culture in which people are expected to navigate the Internet looking for answers will keep Linux marginalized. A culture that says "this problem is too complicated and needs to be simplified so that the average user gets it" is a culture that can take Linux to the mainstream. Not only that, but it encourages technical development as well -- a good number of the reasons for unnecessary complexity is because there are unnecessary complications in the way a piece of code works. At the end of the day, a solution that's simple for the user is often simple at the code level as well.

I've been using Linux for a decade now, and Ubuntu is a great distro -- but it still isn't enough. The only way that Linux will get mainstream acceptance is when Linux developers start consciously thinking about the overall user experience. It isn't the code that's the problem, it's the culture, and looking for technological solutions to cultural problems doesn't work -- just look at what Microsoft is trying to do with its current strategy.

"the vast majority of computer users"

Amusing. See the subsequent Slashdot article, http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/17/1543208 [slashdot.org].

It appears that the "vast majority of computer users" are the same ones who are so incompetent that they have surpassed viruses themselves as a source of affliction.

The "vast majority of computer users" need to learn how to use these complicated machines.

Instead of shooting the messenger...

Perhaps Linux would make better progress with the unwashed masses if, instead of trashing a Linux-inept user/reviewer or "fossil" (as someone called Walt), the community simply "fixed" (for lack of a better word) the issue. If the mouse pad sensitivity can be changed easily in Windows, the same should be true for Linux, etc.. If the edges are rough for the "average user" - meaning average non-Linux proficient user - smooth them over.

I'm not suggesting that the rank-and-file support the uninitiated, but perhaps Linux vendors can take these types of things as fielding notes to help them build a better product.

Unless Linux geeks don't actually *want* Windows users to switch... :-)

Low quality of software

Any moron can see that Linux isn't ready for the desktop, like Windows isn't ready for the server market. This is because most people want technology to just work. They are not technology workers and they don't care how it works because they have their own fields to learn, or are unskilled labor and can't learn.

I think what we as those who produce code should focus on is the generally low quality of software and hardware. In efficiency, capabilities and interface, our software and hardware today generally is mediocre but rarely better.

If Linux improves in these areas, it will be adopted, because the price is right and its hipness factor is higher than that of Windows or Mac OS (Windows is corporate, and the Mac is associated with smug trendsters talking loudly at Starbucks).

Let's be honest about the issues facing Linux.

1. Installation sucks. Hardware support is lacking, the process is ambiguous and confusing for most users. Included in this is "Your documentation generally sucks because it's done by non-professionals."

2. Much familiar, high quality Windows software is missing. Yes, Photoshop really is better than GIMP. And Office is better than OpenOffice. Quark is better than Scribus (or inDesign).

3. People want clear, simple, fast answers to common problems, not a "fiddle with it and come back to our mailing list so we can call you stupid again."

4. Someone to call in case of emergency who can give definite answers. It's 3 AM and your taxes are due, and there's some odd problem you don't understand. You can call Microsoft and for $200 they'll fix it. For Linux?

Knowing that software generally sucks helps us stop resting on our (or Linus's) laurels and lets us realize we have a lot to do. Software is still in its infancy. It is bloated and inefficient, it often lacks capabilities for common tasks and is unreliable, and its interfaces are generally awkward and seemingly created with no understanding of how the end user works. And interoperability is still in its infancy.

What I'm saying here is that to beat Windows, you have to be better at the game of being an operating system for people who are not obsessed with computers. Tech geeks don't understand that there are other ways of earning a living that are equally as if not more legitimate (and difficult) than typing in code patterns. These people want to focus on their specialty, not yours.

As long as we are content to scorn others for not being geeks, we will not meet their needs, and so Windows will continue to triumph over us as it is doing now. We need to stop thinking everyone out there is a tech geek. Think outside of the box? Think outside of your solipsistic skulls, and realize you haven't met the needs of the average or exceptional person out there.

Codecs are quite the opposite

I stopped caring about his opinion as soon as he started dissing codec support. The codecs are unavailable by default for a damn good reason, but you can actually get them really, really easily. In fact, it is much easier to get DivX codecs and that crap in Ubuntu than it is in Windows; no web browser required. How? Open a movie, click Install Codec in the dialog, type your password. Done! You don't get an ugly media player with it, either.

Repeat for every other codec available (within reason). I am able to view every video file that comes my way on both of my Ubuntu systems (even the 500 mHz one), and on neither of them have I needed to hunt for any more than five seconds within official repositories. ...And yes, the Universe repository is very much Ubuntu; they have to do it this way, because it would be very difficult to create localizations which appeal to each country's laws.

Explain this, Walt: How is that a lack of codecs, and how is it difficult? Expecting his readers to be /that/ stupid should be considered insulting, even for a tech columnist. I, for one, would not appreciate being talked to like a toddler.

More importantly: How is this any less trouble than in Mac OS, where we have to pay large sums of money to Apple for codecs that should exist by default? Tried any Mpeg 1 or 2s [apple.com], lately?
Not only do they not play in Quicktime, but to find out /why/ they don't play, "the stupid, vision impaired user" has to hunt through the scary Interwebs in search of the very irritating answer: He must pay $20 US and perform numerous terrifying clicking operations to gain the ability to play a file format which is available out of the box in almost every other media player out there.

So...

What he seems to be saying is that Ubuntu is ready for corporate desktop. The minor driver issues can be dealt with by
support guys but otherwise the polish is there. It may not be ready for the grandma but his review makes it sound like
Ubuntu is ready for desktop (if there is someone to custom configure it upfront).
Is there anyone working on the complete client-server install distro of Linux (something that would install a complete
Linux groupware solution on the server and Linux clients ready to talk to said server)? A complete end-to-end install
where there is no need for things like Exchange on either end.

It's a win for Ubuntu

Just the fact that Walt Mossberg reviewed Ubuntu is a huge win for Ubuntu.

I don't get it...

If you look at the Dell website it tells you it is for more advanced users and probably won't work for mom and pop. Everyone else in the world also states that you need to be a little bit more savvy to run it, but you can understand it if you want to. Now my question... If everyone in the world that is involved with this has already stated that it is not ready for mainstream use, including the company selling the laptops. Why do we need a review saying that it is not ready for mainstream use? Seems redundant to me and more like a fluff article. Also if someone is not ready to try a new GUI interface and has used windows why would you buy a unbuntu laptop? I only bring this up because of the absurd comment the author made about people who aren't ready for a new interface shouldn't get it. I'm betting if they aren't ready for a new interface they've not even begun to look this direction for their OS. In any case the article is just fluff that has no real point. Bravo to the mainstream media for taking what Dell stated so eloquently in two lines and making into a thousand word dissertation. Oh BTW last time I checked you still had to manually update codecs for media player also.

Seems OK to me

He stated the facts as a person who does not live for computer use. He had problems and pointed out some problems that may seem trivial to us but to others they can be pretty big.

I'd rather see the mass public have something with those features taken care of than to keep answering the same questions regarding codecs, etc.

Some people posted on the list about various useful websites for documentation or utilities like Automatcix for installing stuff, the only problem is those things are not in the standard install so if Linux was suddenly 'general public popular' (be scared) we would be having to post again and again all these things because they are not something that is easy for the average user to figure out or find.

Recently I was looking for a good noob guide to Linux and the various OSS licenses (up to date and no really big long winded paragraphs with legal talk or platform bashing) and didn't really find any good ones. A lot of this is the 'well we already know that stuff already' mentality that is throughout the entire computer industry (i.e. "How do I take a snapshot of a Mac screen?" everyone who's been with a Mac for a decade knows but there is no easy guide for the new Mac people.)

I for one don't mind the situation as it is - cause once the 'AOL nation' moves to Linux we have the same problems MS has with Windows, "consumer lock-in", a lot of people keeping you from getting new/necessary work done because of fear that their old Apps don't start up any more (either rightly so or not). I figure there are are probably still some adjustments coming down the pipe before we want EVERYONE to depend on Linux to have it in wide use - too early makes fixing some problems a lot more difficult.

Re:Your Citizenship Has Been Cancelled

He may be a Windows user, but he's also a much respected reviewer. Let's stop the attack and look carefully at his points and address them if necessary. How about a 'Getting Started' tutorial for new users to learn the UI and differences between Windows and Gnome?

Re:Your Citizenship Has Been Cancelled

Let's stop the attack and look carefully at his points and address them if necessary.

I agree 100%. Ubuntu is a great system, I use it daily and my teenage non-geek daughter replaced Vista on her laptop with it. The only big snag was that the speakers did not cut out when the earphones were plugged in, and the audio did not go to the earphones. This required the supremely geeky solution of hunting down a specific version of the ALSA driver, compiling it, and installing it, with the potential of having to do it again each time the drivers get updated in the repositories. My daughter was neither amused nor favorably impressed by this, and it marred an otherwise happy transition to Linux. Unlike Mossberg, she was perfectly at ease using the Synaptic Package Manager to install things once she was shown how. Also, there are several good, user-friendly books on using Ubuntu.

Ubuntu is definitely most of the way there, but the remaining roughspots are serious and definitely discouraging to new users. It would be wisest to work towards GNU/Linux distros that are so polished and integrated that Mossberg can't find fault with them. Don't criticize the guy. To most educated people, he is a tech god whose word is law. If he is leveraged as the pass/fail criterion for Linux, there will be an avalanche of new users.

I don't know if this was part of Shuttleworth's plan or not, but it may well be a brilliant strategy to quickly get Ubuntu ready for prime time. If Mossberg raves about it, everybody will rave about it.

Re:How far we've come

I'd say for hardware support Ubuntu is way ahead of where Win2k was in 2000 or 2001.

That's great, but it's 2007 now.

Re:How far we've come

That's great, but it's 2007 now.

Good point. We should be talking about Vista not XP.
And I can assure you a whole HOST of stuff needs Vista drivers, many of which simply do not exist or are horridly buggy.

From cdma/1x/evdo or gsm/edge cards to older printers, faxes, modems, scanners, to cutting edge graphics cards.

Re:How far we've come

Does that mean that Vista should really be renamed Windows 1999 ?

Re:He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu

He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu at all.

I think his point is that he shouldn't have had to.

Re:He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu

If the computer isn't running, it's awfully hard to Google anything. Mossberg's column is for end-users, not techies. It's for harried businessmen who are thinking, "should i jump to this Ubuntu thing my geeks keep telling me about, or wait another six months?"

Complain to Dell about the Automatix oversight, as he took what he would have bought from Dell and tried to use it, without having to become a guru first.

Re:He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu

idiotproof GUI.

You obviously have not worked with people before. There is no such thing as idiotproof. You show me an idiotproof anything, and I will find you a dozen idiots to prove you wrong. My fellow software developers out there will easily vouch for that.

Re:He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu

Sure he can. He (and 99% of the world) does not care about OSS. He loaded what was billed as a fully featured OS. These days, what part of what a fully featured OS is assumed to provide is default support for a wide range of multimedia. If it doesn't work out of the box, it should be seamless. If Windows or OSX is fed a video or audio file it doesn't support, it goes looking for a codec and often has it installed before you know anything it wrong. If Linux doesn't do this, should he care why?

Does Linux need any of this? Only if it wants to come out of the server room.

Re:He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu

He didn't even mention Automatix or Easy Ubuntu at all.

Of course he didn't. Dell doesn't ship those. Read the article, he's reviewing as shipped by Dell.

Re:To be fair ...

Anything not working is a legitimate complaint. Period.

It doesn't matter if the issues are legal or technological; if something doesn't work, it's an issue.

Re:Your Citizenship Has Been Cancelled

What does Walt Mossberg know about Linux? He's a Windoze writer.

For the purposes of the Article, not knowing Ubuntu or any Linux distro is a plus. Remember the point of the Article was whether or not Ubuntu was ready for release to the "masses." The simple answer is, it's not.

I would love the average user to be technically savvy enough to install and use Linux, any distro. It would eliminate a lot of problems we all face. The technically savvy user would be able to keep their equipment cleaner from mal-ware and would be a lot more vocal about quality control of software products.

These kind of articles are what the Linux community needs. We need to have non-enthusiasts evaluate the distro, and then correct the problems. It's amazingly easy to get into the habit of understanding that an issue, or a kludge exists, work around it, and have it become so ubiquitous that we forget it's even there.

On the other hand, if we want to remain the elite minority, it's easy. Flame these kinds of articles and ignore the wants and needs of the non-elite majority. We'll stay Elite, holier than them, and a minority.

Perhaps he Should Avoid Windows, as well.

I just used a friend's Vista laptop, and I also had problems with the touchpad doing stupid things to me. I understand that many other people are also having problems with it's sound support, and it takes a $45 software add-on for people to view commercial DVDs on XP (haven't tried on Vista) -- which is more expensive than a low-end set-top hardware DVD player.

But open source is a two-edged sword. While it draws on smart developers from many places, nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product, . . . [[TFA]]

and he has obviously never read Microsoft's EULAs.

LEAVE LINUX USERS ALONE!!!!!

What did Linux ever do to you!!? Why do you people have to be SOOOOOO MEAN!!!!!?? LEAVE LINUX USERS ALONE GODDAMMIT!!!! They're just human beings exactly like you are!! And Walt Mossberg has to do and get all mean all over Ubuntu for what?!! Why does he have to be so mean!!? Leave Linux Users Alone!! Linux developers didn't even have to write the kernel, base apps and GUI for you. You're even lucky Linux exists! Just leave Linux users alone! Anyone who is going to diss and hate on Linux is going to have to deal with me first!!! Leave Linux Users Alone!!!

Re:To be fair ...

#3. Playing mp3's - learn the legal issues, we've been harping on that for YEARS.

You're missing the point. Average users shouldn't have to go to law school to figure out why their software doesn't work. Legal issues concerning codecs are irrelevant to users. Either the product works, or it doesn't. In this aspect, the product does not work.

Re:The point is that Free is Free (not free).

See, that's still a problem. He doesn't care that it's Free or not, just that it doesn't work as it should out of the box. Much in the way that democracy (or communism, or whatever) is both a political ideology and a form of government, Linux is both a social movement and a family of Operating System products. The thing is, he's taking the position not of the marching, banner-waving revolutionary in the street, but of the average citizen who doesn't care what that ruckus is, just that the busses run and his water's on. It's a sad fact, but that's all the vast, vast majority of people want.

Windows supports MP3!

What versions of Windows don't include MP3? It's certainly been in Windows Media Player for many versions. Back to Win98?

Re:How far we've come

I think a lot of people are already calling Vista a POS.

Re:How far we've come

It sounds like the man has forgotten what a problem it used to be to install Windows NT, 95, 98, 2000...hunting for drivers, reconfiguring everything, trying to get your desktop out of 640x480x8....

None of which typically applied to a brand-new out of the box computer with Windows Pre-installed. What Walt was reviewing was a laptop provided by Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed by Dell. All of us Linux fans have been saying that the only fair comparison between Windows and Linux would be on machines with the OS pre-installed. We now have that situation, and Walt has some very valid criticism. Although I don't think the need to download new CODECs is all that severe, the poor video performance, problems with the touchpad and the crashing volume control applet are absolutely unacceptable for a pre-install.

Re:To be fair ...

The problem with the review is that in his mind, he's comparing it to his normal windows PC which is already configured and working. To have a fair comparison, you have to install a new Ubuntu and a new Windows (or buy them) and then get them both working from that point.

The main thing is the codecs in my opinion. Ubuntu needs to have a $10 version that includes non-free codecs that they can then sell to Dell for installation in pre-installed computers, because spending hundreds on a computer and not being able to play an mp3 is just retarded.

Re:To be fair ...

So he has TWO legitimate complaints and one minor problem. He's an idiot.

Is this a fancy way of saying he's an average user? Your average user isn't going to know anything about the legal issues surrounding codecs on Linux. All they know is that on Windows and OSX their media files play fine right after installing the OS. The habit of calling new users idiots and blowing them off saying "RTFM" is one of the things that's stunted Linux adoption on the desktop.

By his "logic", Windows is not ready for anyone. Try getting an iPod to work on it without installing software.

An iPod comes with software and instructions that make it ready and easy to install on Windows/OSX. I certainly doubt there are any instructions in an iPod box that deal with installing it on your favorite Linux distro. Which means of course that you end up online searching Google for how to use your iPod with Linux. This is one of his (legitimate) gripes. In fairness it's not a gripe with Linux so much as it is with the lack of manufacturer support, but for users this is one in the same.

Re:How far we've come

He wrote that he is an average joe with strictly no technical skills...It probably means that he has used only pre-installed OSes.

How many people around you know what a CODEC is? How would they react if the operating system warns them that the program about to be installed may dammage their installation? What would they say if they can't sync their Ipod with their PC? Why would they say if the volume controller crashes each time the screen saver appears?

We all know the reality...The weak support Linux enjoys amongst manufacturers but consumers simply don't care, don't understand, don't want to know. It has to work period.

The Ubuntu founder recognizes that his product isn't ready for the mass-market yet (see the article).

I'm using OpenSUSE on my desktop for 10 months now. I don't have enough words to thank of all of us who have contributed to free software. Such a beautiful development environment (Eclispe, MonoDevelop, to name few) but...If you ask me If it is ready for my nephew and his Ipod, my sister in law and her pictures, or my brother fond of DVDs, I'd probably say no. I don't want to spend hours/days/weeks doing technical support for the whole family for such dumb things like syncing a Ipod, transferring pictures or print them.

Re:To be fair ...

When you buy windows, you pay for licensing the required codecs to play MP3 and video files. If Dell thinks this is a big issue that customers can't play MP3 files (and I think it is), then they should work out some kind of deal whereby they pay for licensing for these codecs, so that people can play the files they want to play. Also, it seems that Dell has really bad execution of this product, and that it's not really Linux or Ubuntu's fault. The machine should come working, out of the box, and if it doesn't, then Dell shouldn't be selling it.

Re:shocking!!

seriously, if you are a columnist who is supposed to act as the gatekeeper to new technologies for mainstream america and you can't make ubuntu work... then mainstream america needs a new gatekeeper.

Normally, I'm all about the end user and understanding the plight of the non-computer literate. But seriously, just about every problem he's mentioned is fixable and just a Google search away.

Computers are not a magic, mind reading, fix everything in one click device. This guy expects everything to work out of the box perfectly and to his specs.

Not even windows machines do that. In comparison, it takes a fair bit of configuring out of the box to even get a windows machine ready for safe internet access.

Electronic puzzles to tinker with?

If you refuse to think, why even use a computer?

Because computers are supposed to think FOR you, and not viceversa? What drives me nuts is that linux fanbois still think as computers as "electronic puzzles to tinker with" instead of "tools that make your life easier".

The other day I saw a youtube video about Apple's intelligent agent (this video was made around 15 to 20 years ago). The agent, an AI "buttler" asked you questions about what you wanted to do, so you described the problem to him and he presented you the answers about finances, math, even making correlations on demand. You asked the agent to teleconference you with another person (and present graphs), etc.

Windows is much closer to that goal, simply because (yes, yes, I know, it's been said a gazillion times) "it just works". The implementations are still in the stone age, but at least they got the idea right. Linux fanbois are still stuck in the "hacker" way of thinking.

Let me remind you this: Users are NOT hackers!.

As long as Linux is released from the chains that tie it to the commandline (and the ./configure-make-make install nightmare), it'll never become a mature desktop OS.

Re:If you refuse to think, why even use a computer

While what you say is correct, the truth of the matter is that from a computer-literate point of view, many end-users (probably the majority of them) completely refuse to read, think for themselves, or even lift a finger to accomplish simple tasks.

For most people, computers are a magic box that should 'just work.' With Windows being invasive and ubiquitous, that ideal _appears_ to be achieved for most people, for a while, regardless of how broken and smelly the guts of the system are. After three years or so, viruses, bugs, and bloat lead to unstable Windows installations so people dump their systems and get new ones. This isn't how things should be, it's how they are.

In that sense, Walt's review was right on the money.

Re:To not admit...

"To not admit that Windows and OSX are easier to operate, far more user friendly is just ignorant."

Well, I've only been using Ubuntu (and linux) for a few weeks, but I find it FAR EASIER than XP (I haven't used OXS, or Vista) in most respects. I can look up new software and install at a few clicks. When one beta I installed screwed up, it didn't kill the whole system. It un-installed as easily as it installed.

Most importantly, Ubuntu seems to be have a more intuitive and better organised desktop, was much faster than Windows which seems to get slower and sloooooowwwwer (thought time will tell) and I have to say, a lot easier overall which is surprising given how much more familiar I am with XP. Compatibility is still an issue, but to say Windows is easier? Maybe in some areas, but certainly not from what I've seen so far.