Time to Try a Linux Desktop? 848
bigbadwlf writes "EWeek has an opinion column, posted yesterday titled, Isn't Now the Time to Try a Linux Desktop? Quote: 'The crackers currently have the whip hand over Windows, and Microsoft's assertion that Internet Explorer is now part of the operating system shows its flawed reasoning. Worried sick about the latest rash of Internet Explorer security problems? I have the perfect solution for you, one that's even better than switching to Mozilla, Firefox or Opera. Switch operating systems: Go to Linux.'"
not yet (Score:3, Interesting)
Not to necessarily dispute... (Score:1, Interesting)
Well factored code (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, if Microsoft factored their code properly there would be almost nothing to Internet Explorer -- a few high level calls to standard libraries and that would be that. Agreed, this isn't what they've done (although they might be fooling themselves into thinking this is what they've done) -- but it isn't an inherently bad thing to say that Internet Explorer is "part of the operating system" so much as saying the "operating system" itself should be nothing but a nanokernel. Even Linux fails in that regard.
Basic Assumption is False (Score:3, Interesting)
In the meantime, I use Firefox for Windows which is nicely patched (and quite quickly patched at that).
It's about damn time! (Score:4, Interesting)
All I want to say, is that I've been using Debian Linux for about 5 years now, and just switched from using the "ultra-elite" Fluxbox WM to Gnome 2.6 since it got uploaded to Unstable, and I have had absolutely 0 problems. It JUST WORKS. It's easy enough for my mom's boyfriend to figure out. Even the horridly cryptic "gconf-editor" is easier to get around than regedit. I don't see why anybody in their right mind would still fend for Windows when they have a completely usable, prettier, faster alternative with 99% of applications able to do what Windows apps can already do.
SWITCH TO LINUX!!
It Happens (Score:5, Interesting)
He wanted me to walk him through installing Linux, right then and there -- over the phone. So I did. I said, "Well, what I recommend is you get your feet wet, first". I Asked him how he used his laptop; What were the applications he couldn't live without; What were the ones he liked but could live without, etc.
Then I said, "You know, all the applications you mention are ones that will run on both Linux and Windows. Why don't you download and install them, first on Windows, get to know them and then switch all the way to Linux, once you've adjusted?".
He agreed to give my recommendation a try, and that was it. Storm calmed. About an hour later, he called back to say he'd found the file containing his address book and had "reconnected it to Outlook". Problem solved.
Seems like, recently, I've run into more and more awareness of (at least the word) Linux. It's becoming a great "save" me" point when clients get frustrated with Windows. They just want to give Microsoft the big heave-ho! And, though I and everyone in my home and office have been Microsoft-free since 1998, I find myself talking people out of taking the plunge.
I wish there was a distribution that gave me the confidence I need to recommend it. Since all I know is DEC, Solaris and RedHat/Fedora, perhaps I should buy a copy of Linspire and try it out -- for clients' sake. Any other suggestions for helping people transition?
Why switch? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Does it make much sense, though? (Score:3, Interesting)
1.) Keep their anti-virus up to date
2.) Stop clicking on email attachments from people they don't know
3.) Run spybot/ad-aware to clean up their computer
4.) Run windows update once every six months
Then how can you expect them to learn the linux operating system? I do all of the above and more and my system has never had a worm or trojan (and I dont use anti-virus software to boot, i just watch what runs on my computer and keep it patched). It took me weeks to get my dad to write his email NOT in the subject box. Trying to get his spyware infested box over to linux? UNPOSSIBLE!
Perfect Opportunity! (Score:2, Interesting)
What am I getting at? It's simple: this *isn't* the perfect time to switch, and neither will the next exploit, nor the one after. There's are reasons (although, granted, few) that Windows won't go away. It's fine and good to set up a linux box for Grandma and hand over the controls when you're done padding the floors, but try getting Grandma to install Linux herself (just about any version here, folks), or Dad, or Mom, or Sis, or anyone else who hasn't been playing with Linux to begin with. Have fun (and make videos!) of them trying to admin their systems or set any options more advanced than Desktop Resolution in their DE. There's an idea as well: let's see them try to install and setup their windowing system as well.
Before your shouts of "Check the docs, newb" get too loud, let me point out that this is exactly why the "lesser beings" are slow to switch: they don't need the docs for Windows.
Now, don't get me wrong, we are headed in the right place. Gentoo and RedHat are decent examples of where administration and/or ease of installation/usability should be going. But don't turn a blind eye to the fact that we ain't there yet.
I just switched to Lindows (Score:1, Interesting)
We are now surfing safely. However, it should be said that [1] the Mozilla-derived browser crashes regularly and unreproduceably. [2] In KDevelop, the wizard-generated "Hello World" program won't link (make) or run. [3] "Network Connection" program goes into 45-sec. loop, then crashes because the same entry is repeated several times in /etc/resolv.conf. Huh?
Still has a loooong way to go...
Not True IMO (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Year 2004 is the year of Linux desktop! (Score:3, Interesting)
Because they read Slashdot and the MS defect of the week, and think that millions of people run around in a panic desperately trying to patch their system. They think it should be bonehead obvious to all of us Windows users that we should switch, even though they don't consider the idea that we don't rate security as high as they do, especially when we know switching to Linux will disrupt us in unpleasant ways. (Games, anyone?)
The reality is that us Windows users aren't scurrying around like that. Even the less techinically inclined users are running anti-virus and the sort. That handles most of it. Maybe a few running Zone Alarm. Even got a group of people that have no idea, and they're sending out worms like crazy. But since worms etc can't do much damage if they kill their hosts, they're not losing their data.
Viruses aren't going to be what moves people to Linux. Additionally, treating Windows users like they're stupid isn't going to make them switch heither. You want us to switch? Appeal to our sense of "we're getting something new and cool!" not "we're restricting you to lower software compatibility and not-so-ease-of-use so that you can have unlimited up-time and better virus protection even though what you have now isn't so bad and you still have to maintain Linux anyway."
Re:It's about damn time! (Score:3, Interesting)
Some people seem to have big problems with Windows, but Linux has plenty of big ugly warts itself.
Linux or Windows? (Score:2, Interesting)
After hearing so much about Linux, I figured I'd give it a try. I read quite a bit, and decided I'd go with a distro that would be easier to use. I couldn't make up my mind, so I tried SuSe, Mandrake, and RedHat. The installation was a breeze, far from being easier than Windows, but even a child could do it.
Once each was up, I played around with it, tested what it could do. It was a major pain in the ass to get my video card and sound drivers (Epox 8rda+ and an Nvidia MX440.)The packages didn't install right, no sound, no hardware 3d support, no onboard LAN. So I had to go about compiling and tweaking. I eventually got it to work, after putting a different NIC in, and reading up on how other people got it working. There was no short supply of forums detailing how to make the Nvidia drivers work. From there I went on to try Slackware, and of course, Knoppix. I stuck with Knoppix - on CD of course, and went back to Windows.
I've gone back with each major release, just to check the progress. I've seen enough changes, but it still lacks a 'user friendly' environment, which Windows has. Certaintly a lot has been sacrificed to make Windows easy to use right out of the box. The average user won't know what to do if their hardware doesn't work right after the installation (and a lot of the time it doesn't). At this point, I can't honestly say I'd reccommend the switch to Linux unless it's someone who will be truly dedicated to the task. It's like being in a completely new, and different environment. One day Linux may take a large share of the market from Microsoft, but it can't be forgotten this 'market' is mainly comprised of people with only a basic understanding of computers.
Re:Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)
>"Well, IE had a security exploit so it's time to
> switch to Linux!"
No, you tell him that the design of windows itself is flawed and linux is ready, so it's time to switch.
>the lack of a single binary
>installation/uninstallation API
i fail to see where the problem is. Every linux distro has all those api's and they are installed by default. Do you have a problem with disk space or something? You don't need more than a gigabyte of disk space to install all of them. You install all those "backwards compatibility" dll's in windows and a whole "backward compatible" operating system in macs, and you complain that you have to install both gtk and qt?
>Can you still run a Red Hat RPM you got in 1997?
Yes. But even if you couldn't why would anybody run a linux application from 1997? Unlike other systems, in linux the latest versions of the applications are actually faster, better and cost less (if they cost anything).
These problems just don't exist in the open software world. Why you think backwards compatibility is such a big issue is beyond me. I *NEVER* needed an old application in linux.
>(the fact we're still using X11 is embarrassing)
why is that? make no mistake, if X11 were not good nobody would be using them. The truth is that despite some drawbacks, there is nothing better out there. X11 functionality is still not matched by either windows or macintosh *or* terminal server solutions.
Re:What if I run FireFox and OpenOffice? (Score:3, Interesting)
Then again, I blame that fact on Linux not being able to install on that machine. Any distro I've tried. Mandrake, Gentoo, and SuSE all lock up during install. It's strange.
and once you figured it out it will just keep on w (Score:3, Interesting)
Linux is harder but once it works it works. I always waste some time if I have to install a linux system on getting it right, it even crashes a couple of times. But once I finished it just stays up and works. I never had linux go tits up on me.
Of course this is my personal experience. Yours may differ. Currently my windows game machine in windows explorer when I click on a folder in the right pane it opens search. I can't change the default action in the file options and basically am just stuck with no option but a reinstall. In 4+ years of linux use and 8+ years of unix use I never done a reinstall. EVER. (perhaps this explains why I need more time to install linux then windows. In 95/98 days I could do a windows install blindfolded.)
So for me the article is total nonsense. I long since switched and am loving it. Linux is like a willis jeep and windows is a BMW AND (and this bit is important) I AM A FULLY QUALIFIED MECHANIC. The jeep I can fix with basic tools. The BMW just has to be towed to a garage if something goes *bleep*.
Re:irrelevant (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow, that is a convincing argument. Switch from Windows XP to the equivalent of Windowx 3.1.
Re:To truly compete... (Score:2, Interesting)
Its even worse than that. Take for example my Epson Stylus CX5400 MFD (Printer/Scanner). It was listed and WORKED in Suse9, it doesn't in SuSE 9.1. I had an ISDN card that worked in Mandrake 8 but didn't in 8.1 but did again in 8.2. What the hell is all that about? I do an update , which so happens to include a newer kernel, and all of a sudden my graphics card doesn't work and I'm left at CLI cos X won't load!
Linux hasn't a cat in hells chance of taking over from Windows as a "home" OS until it gets its hardware support act together.
How the hell you can compare Linux to the usability of Windows when you have to re-install drivers, if they're available or "build" your own if they're not, just because you ran "update" is beyond me.
Re:Finally (Score:3, Interesting)
KDE: Eye candy that gnome might lack.
Maybe this is part of the problem with you guys. You really think KDE is 'eye candy'? :/
This probably doesn't matter to a whole lot of people, but i'm a huge interface person. It's not as superficial as some people seem to believe -- i need my computer to look good to be able to get something done. Maybe it's an obsessive-compulsive thing. If it's ugly, i tend to focus on the ugliness, and i'm not as productive (or, at least, not as comfortable).
The Linux GUI* is, firstly, ugly. There are two or three semi-decent skins/themes for it, but that leads us to the second problem: Even if there was a decent skin or theme for it, everything is so completely fragmented in its design that it wouldn't matter, because it wouldn't look the same anyway. e.g., if i run kterm in Window Maker, it looks completely different from most of the other applications i have running in Window Maker.
I know i'm probably missing some distinction there (because Linux has like seven-hundred levels of GUI, from X to window managers), so there's probably a valid reason for that, and maybe there's even a way to fix it. But i shouldn't have to fix it. Everything on my computer should look the same, by default.
* I use the term 'GUI' loosely. I know there are different window managers and desk-top environments and all that jazz.
Re:irrelevant (Score:2, Interesting)
That you for starting out with an insulting tone.
you don't need to scour through various sources of documentation to change diapers
I had to have someone show me how best to go about it. I would have liked documentation if I'd gone about a dry run - so to speak.
or what commercials
You say people find documentation annoying and won't be able to put up with it, I'm countering with an example of people putting up with an annoyence if they find the end result worth it.
once you know how, it's easy and no problem.
Which is also my point! Most things are easy once the learning curve is overcome.
in linux, everytime you want to do something new, you have to read through documentation.
How many new things are there going to be? I've given instalation disks to a handfull of people, and it's never taken more than fifteen minutes to get them up to speed. Most of it just comes down to using synaptic, rpmdrake or whatever, and showing them there's somewhere different to get to the control panel. As long as the hardware is all supported Linux these days dosn't have to be rocket science. It's just getting used to a different place to point and click on the little mail icon.
Who cares what OS you use? (Score:1, Interesting)
Certainly not me. I have never understood why zealots want everyone to be like them. It doesn't matter which linux flavor-of-the-month is being pushed since people will use what suits their needs.
Linux certainly isn't the end-all to operating systems. Anyone that has used it knows what I mean. Those same people who have security issues with M$ will have far more problems in trying to use a free OS.
Do you really want those kinds of users? I say no. I'll not be spending my time teaching and hand-holding. Let them wallow in their misery.
After all, what will you get out of pushing Linux? Absolutely nothing. The commercial linux tag-alongs peddling their "latest" CDROM or club might make a few bucks, but you won't.
Don't get me wrong, I use and have used unix (not linux) for years and won't ever use M$ again. If you use it and it works for you, that's great. But this constant preaching and zealotry won't get you anything. Spend your time doing bug-fixes or writing new applications to do the things you need to do. You'll have a lot more to show for it at the end of the day.
Re-evaluate your priorities here. Think of why are you using what you do and then go do that. Whether or not someone else is using what you use shouldn't make a bit of difference.
Lets bury this dead horse.
Re:Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)
That doesn't mean that there won't be a program developed, using the network tranperancy of X11, that allows joe user to easily and securely bring up his work desktop at home (ala GoToMyPC).
Right now, the open source X world is going through a Big flux. xorg has a developer base that is working on, and will feed back pretty little UI improvements as they become stable and mature (X Server [freedesktop.org]). That will come. Several projects have tried to come up with an alternative for X, and very few have gained popularity for one reason or another. The activation energy required for a whole new UI system for *nix has shown to be a damn hard hill to climb.
Re:Linux? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's like saying that I should build my own car and tune it myself to go 150 MPH. While it would be nice for me to learn about the mechanics of the internal combustion engine, and to get the power that comes with learning how to painstakingly tune it myself, I have no desire to put forth the effort. I know how to check, fill, and change fluids, check my tire pressure, keep an eye on the idiot lights. I just want to get into the car and have the bloomin thing work. It gets extra points if it's a comfortable ride, and I wouldn't complain if there was some extra power behind it, but I basically have the minimum information needed to use the car to get to places where I will do more enjoyable things.
Joe User is the same way with his computer. Make it work without much effort, make it look nice, and let it be fun once in a while. He probably only uses it until he's done what he needed to do today, and then he moves on to what he *really* wants to do.
Re:Ask yourself (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you ever seen an 8 year old keeping a windows machine secure? My daughter would click on every attachment she got in here inbox. I would have to reinstall windows on a weekly basis just to remove the crud.
I finally got sick of that and moved her machine to Linux. She thought she got a new computer because it looked so much better (kde) and had more games. The best part is she can be an average "Windows" user and NOT destroy the system, or get infected every other day.
Re:Ask yourself (Score:3, Interesting)
Let me give the examples you mised:
"Why it doesn't come with as many of these as Windows"
Word processors:
Windows - MS Word - $$$
Windows - Open Office - free
Windows - Word Perfect - $$$
Linux - Open Office - free
Linux - KWord - free
Linux - Abi Word - free
Linux - LyX - free
Games:
Ok, you got me there, the windows platform does have more games than linux. But how many do you actually play?
"why it doesn't have this"
Viruses: (cheep shot:)
Well linux does have vunerablilities found. The biggest difference is when they are found, fixes are released quickly by the maintainers. Then, shortly after that fixes for specific distros are released by the distro maintainers.
"why it makes you do this"
"login as root to change simple settings (ie network)"
One word, security. Windows left the security to the user and the one thing that this has showed, the user cannot be trusted to be secure. Therefore it is best to run as a user with restricted rights. (I bet you don't run everything as Administrator on Windows XP)
"why it looks like this"
Like What? Windows XP: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=
Like Mac OSX:
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?co
Or something completly different:
http://www.kde-look.org/
"After spending 40 minutes trying to figure out how to compile properly"
What site did you get the drivers from? Didn't they have installation instructions? Did the package include a README file? Did you actually read it? What type of card was it?
"And those are relatively stupid examples"
I agree with you there.
"There are some things that you can't help, like the RPC exploit."
So, without any form of security (apart from your common sense) and with a known exploitable bug on your system, you still go on the net. And do you have sex with prostitutes without a condom as well?
Re:Does it make much sense, though? (Score:1, Interesting)
You're not alone, but you're in a smaller minority than you seem to realize. Corporate IT departments hate patching. For that matter, so do most home users, since it's an annoying chore that doesn't always have obvious benefits.
Re:Ask yourself (Score:3, Interesting)
Now there are about 5 different ways to install things in "Linux", of course usually you would use the one for your distro, but how does the average user know which one that is? Also, many of these aren't point and click.
I download a staticly linked rpm for SuSE, click on it. I get to extract it - ok so far. Then I go and click on the extracted file. Nothing. If I click on it inside of Konqurer I get a choice to install with YaST. OK that doesn't seem to do anything. The readme says to type make install blah blah
make not a recoginized bash command? Ok.
Anyway, I honestly think Linux needs to grab the moderate power users from Windows. The people who like to install other software to try it out or whatever. But the install will pretty much need to get down to click the installer, next,next,put it in
And using online update isn't the same, what if what you want to install didn't come with your distro, and isn't on their servers?
Many windows people (moderate power users) go along seeing interesting software, download the installer to a temp dir, and after awhile try and install it. I honestly think the huge difference in installing software in Linux vs Windows is one of the main things that slows down migration. Probably right after the lack of specific software running.
Re:Isn't it a little early... (Score:2, Interesting)
Firstly, every distro needs a bundled windows emulator. And they need to be better too.You see, my ISP requires a windows program to go on the internet.This is Australia's Telstra, which is the DOMINANT ISP. Yes that's right, if you want broadband, you need windows. I had to completely reinstall windows so that I could download Wine. Burned wine onto cd, booted up linux and ran the setup for this internet connection program. Now wine can't run the install wizard for this program. I repeat, an install wizard. Linux needs to be able to run install wizards.
Secondly, it needs easy interaction with NTFS and FAT partitions (also bundled). This would have saved me several CD-Rs and Reboots. Luckily, after I copied the program directory this internet connection program actually worked and I could use the world wide web.
Thirdly, I hear this is just a mandrake thing, but why can't I use the browser to do things as root. I can't interact with an NTFS drive in browser, because it requires root access which you can only get command line. Now I know it feels cool when people see you using a command line to do stuff, but it is incredibly slow, especially when files are named stuff like Wine1.3.4.0.i386.tar.gz
Finally, (not so important) was speed, or lack thereof. Although you might say it's a sacrifice for stability, it was still taking over ten seconds to load simple programs eg. Kwrite/ konqueror. Also just a mandrake thing but all the libraries should be on the first cd, and be installed by default. Otherwise it's dependency hell.
I would say these are the only things holding linux back from being far superior, even for new users. Once developers of soft/hardware start supporting linux the win emulator can be dropped of course.
Re:Why not Mac? (Score:3, Interesting)
You equate Linux and Mac as both having to learn new systems, but fail to mention any sort of learning curve. The learning curve on Mac is much shallower than Linux or Windows (assuming they've not used it.) Computers were introduced to make people more productive. With a shallower learning curve and features that can actually make a user more productive (e.g. native office support, a good clipboard), I don't understand why anyone would have trouble spending a little extra money to make employees more productive.
That said, I'll be happy when there's a Linux GUI as good as either Windows or MacOS. I'll also be happy when MS writes a good kernel and releases it gratis/libre. Guess which one has a better chance of happening?
Re:Linux? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, I'm a long time Windows user, but certainly not a zealot. My family is the same, and we really have a hard time with Linux, specifically SuSE for installing things and generally doing more than oohhing at KDE 3.2 and playing the included games. I think we are too used to the way things work in Windows, and many things are very non-obvious to us. I hate to recommend making the desktop more like Windows, but I can't really justify spending days and days learning the simpler things about using Linux like installing NEW games when I can already do that and more in Windows.
Yes, this is somewhat my problem. I'm apathetic. So is most of America. To get these people to change I believe they will need to not only be able to do what they can in Windows, and I mean all of it, but actually be able to do MORE. And they need to be able to do this without investing more than a day or two learning it. Otherwise I believe that many, myself included, just don't think it's worth the effort.
What hardware are you using? (Score:3, Interesting)
This is not the case for my computer alone but also my wife's computer and my home server. Linux came up with everything configured and running.
As far as the "fragmented" thing, I'm beginning to wonder if this is the newest Microsoft FUD. Linux is NOT as fragmented as you make out. Most programmer's write using either the KDE or the Gnome libraries. I use KDE and all of my applications have a consistent look and feel. Programmer's can make their programs look and feel different if they want to but this is the case in Windows as well. Most don't most use one of two APIs. There are a few applications that don't follow any standards. Gimp is one of them and for a long time I hated it! It's a very powerful graphics program but it's not intuitive for me. However, this is an application and does not reflect on the operating system. There are some non-intuitive Windows programs as well.
And although KDE and Gnome don't look like XP, that's not necessarily a bad thing and definitely not "hideous."
I've said it once and I'll say it again (Score:3, Interesting)
Hear me out on this.
Better game support = more kids knowing about Linux = more parents curious about linux = more companies being aware about Linux.
Better game suuport also = no need for dual boot = wider use of Linux = a wider testing base.
Better game support also = more hardware vendors writing drivers for Linux = benefit in software categories other than gaming.
More kids knowing about Linux also = More potential Linux only users = a wider pool of future OSS developers.
There seems to be only ONE hardware vendor that has recognized the importance of gaming to Linux and that's NVIDIA. I applaud them for that. They will reap the benefits when more and more people buy NVIDIA cards not just because of their performance, but because there are drivers available for Linux.
The sooner software gaming companies recognize this fact, the better. The nice part is that it is too late for any company, including M$ to keep them from writing games for Linux. The Linux market is starting to take off and it is in their interest to wake up and smell the coffee.
Re:LET IT DIE ALREADY! (Score:3, Interesting)
You made my point. FreeBSD and Unix in my opinion are far supperior architecture wise but I am sick of trying to convert the world.
You and me have some experience coding and doing interesting things with our systems. 96% could not care less and want to get work done or goof off with surfing/IM/games/spreadsheets, etc.
I just can not justify Linux/Unix to non programers or administrators? It never was designed to be a perfect be all os. It was made by hackers for hackers and yes its not easy to learn.
The software in Windows is better and it is now reliable. The system I gave my gf ran Windows2000 and NT4 for the for year with only 1 blue screen from 1999-2003! No joke.
It was this horrible DOS/Windows3.11 code that shared memory and no dll management is what made it buggy. The NT kernel is a great way to start over with modern OS features.
I guarantee you as a pc ( not server ) it will last alot longer than 18 months. Windows 95 is a different story.
Terminology (Score:3, Interesting)
While the article doesn't speak about GNU/Linux, it does call people who break into computers crackers, not hackers, and that's a good thing. Let's hope it's a trend :-).