Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business Operating Systems Software Linux

4 Linux Distros Compared To Win XP, Mac OS X 729

Morf writes "The Australian Consumers? Association has evaluated Xandros, Linspire, Mandrake Discovery and SUSE personal and compared them to Mac OS X and Windows XP in its latest Computer CHOICE magazine. The article is very much focused on "mums and dads", and concludes Linux is just about ready for consumers, although installing new software could pose some problems for those who aren't really computer savvy. The report is available free for a short time."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

4 Linux Distros Compared To Win XP, Mac OS X

Comments Filter:
  • Hope again (Score:4, Insightful)

    by randallpowell ( 842587 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:10AM (#11548815)
    If Linux distros could enhance their drivers, use a standard package installer (like apt), make it easy for gandma yet her geek grandson could use it as a PHPBB server for a weekend, and advertise it on TV so people will know that it exists, we'd have more converts from the Darkness of Microsoft.
  • by cgranade ( 702534 ) <cgranadeNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:12AM (#11548824) Homepage Journal
    Think of Joe and Jane Blow... do they know how to use the command line? No? Didn't think so. They know that they download an application, and it runs and installs. Unfortunately, this level of transparency is dangerous for security purposes, but it is almost needed for usability. So which is more important? Is there a good graphical interface for these for installing packages? They shouldn't even be told what dependancies are being fetched unless they ask. (Make a giant More Info button.) That information confuses. Anyway, I don't know the solutions, but I know that man and portage aren't among them. They're great tools... for developers, sysadmins and other power users. Nor for Joe and Jane Blow.
  • by Danimoth ( 852665 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:12AM (#11548825)
    This artical is reviewing if Linux is ready for 'Moms and Dads' can you honestly expect John D. Computeruser to know that when he wants to install his new tax software he needs to sure ./configure? or even that man exists? NO. Frankly this is knowledge that is gained through use of Linux, and anyone first trying to get started withit would not have the first clue where to look. This is verymuch like OS X or WinXP where its the simple doubleclick the install file or even autorun from cd.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:16AM (#11548846)
    Christ you are dense. Instead of accepting valid and constructive criticism and using it to identify weak areas and improve them, you and many others seem to think that instead it's perfectly valid to flame the reviewer.

    Don't shoot the messenger you idiot.
  • We have tested... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by michalf ( 849657 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:18AM (#11548854) Homepage
    We have tested the following pieces of food:

    1. a snickers
    2. a jam of pure honey
    3. an apple
    4. a carrot

    We found out that snickers is the best food because:
    1. it comes in a nice wrapping
    2. has many calories and can give you an energetic boost
    3. its taste is supreme to others

    Some people say you need vitamines, you should not spoil your teeth etc. But for an end-user what matters is the ease of use! And the snickers is the ultimate winner here.

    Although an apple and a carrot keep quite close they have a long way to go.

    best regards
    michal
  • by rich42 ( 633659 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:22AM (#11548867) Homepage
    > Linux has much much more software available for free than the other OS's, and if its too hard to run ./configure and make install, then download portage Ya - I was telling my dad that just last week. Didn't know what portage was, or where to get it.

    Told him to google it and figure it out on his own. I mean - all the info is there in the HOWTO's. I think he's just lazy.

    He told me to come back over and re-install Windows XP Home or he was writing me out of the will.

  • I am sure they did (Score:4, Insightful)

    by myom ( 642275 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:25AM (#11548881)
    'man' is absolutely not the solution.

    The pages are outdated, archaic and written in a way that takes too much time to find out anything useful and of course teh few existign exampels vaailable in Unix and Linux documentation are totally irrelevant.

    I do not want to read a cool example of how to use a potato as a galvanic element in order to create a serial connection to a tomato - I want to find out how to use my serial modem to connect to Internet.

    Most people don't want to read gibberish, or manuals at all. If Linux can't be made as easy to use as Linux, at least the instructions should be made usable.

    When I build together a IKEA furniture I rarely look at the instructions, and when I do it is for a quick reference. I do not wish to read a 10 page book describing the philosophy behind the use of screwdrivers and cool things you can do with a screwdriver, like using it as a throwing knife on the cardboards that the furniture came wrapped in.

    The elitistic attitudes and documentation does nothing but harm Linux and delays its introduction to the mass market. And it doesn't make you that cool either to point out the 'man' command.

    man how do I connect to to Internet?
    No such page.
  • Interesting quote (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Craster ( 808453 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:28AM (#11548896)
    "We'd also like to see inbuilt antivirus software in all operating systems"
    Yeah, then we'd like to sue for anti-competetive practice, and make them strip it out again.
  • by _Hellfire_ ( 170113 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:28AM (#11548900)
    Here Here.

    I installed Ubuntu on my gf's grandmother's laptop, a Toshiba Tecra A2. Setup was a breeze. It detected everything right down to the wireless eth card.

    I also stuck a "My Documents" shortcut on the Desktop so the other Windows people woulnd't get lost and in addition made it boot straight into her profile with no password.

    That was a few weeks ago, and I saw her the other day quite happily looking at photos of the grandkids and playing a mpeg clip with mplayer. Keep in mind she's 80 odd and has never used a computer before. She wanted to play some games also, so I stuck shortcuts on the desktop to Solitaire and minesweeper.

    After using Ubuntu, my gf's dad now wants it on his computer because he says "Windows XP is too hard to use" and he "really likes it how everything makes sense on Ubuntu". Hmmm a logical desktop OS where everything Just Works(tm) is the exact reason I use Ubuntu on my desktop.

    Is Ubuntu ready for the desktop? You bet your ass it is.

    PS If anyone's interested you can read the blog entry here [cr0n.net]

  • Re:Hope again (Score:2, Insightful)

    by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:28AM (#11548902)
    The thing is, to make a distro usable by grandmas, you need to dumb it down to a point where I wouldn't let it within a mile of my servers.

    A man page usable by grandmas is a waste of disk space for me, and conversely, a man page I need is utterly incomprehensible for the grandma.
    There is no way to fix this except by having two completely separate sets of documentation. This could by possibly done by putting the files next to each other, but I quite fail to imagine any good way of integrating that into a single distribution.
  • Re:"Consumers?"? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by js7a ( 579872 ) <james AT bovik DOT org> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:30AM (#11548911) Homepage Journal
    Hm, I think it's supposed to be an apostrophe, meaning that the association isn't necessarily composed of consumers, but certainly belongs to them.

    Someone tell the Australians that the rest of the English speaking world avoids apostrophes in titles and proper nouns.

  • by __aamkky7574 ( 654183 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:30AM (#11548912)
    Oh lord, is someone bringing up "man" again? Let's ignore the total lack of features that any other help system have, and concentrate on the dense text. From a past post of mine:

    --

    Just as an illustration, try "man find". It took me years to figure out that "find . -name {file_name}" would find all files matching {file_name} below the current directory - which I imagine is the usage of 99% of users.

    Check out the description of the tool:

    "find searches the directory tree rooted at each given file name by evaluating the given expression from left to right, according to the rules of precedence (see section OPERATORS), until the outcome is known (the left hand side is false for and operations, true for or), at which point find moves on to the next file name."

    Do you imagine that most users would know what on earth that meant? Why not at least prepend it with "This tool enables you to find files"? Then give one or two examples of common usage? _Then_ by all means bombard them with the myriad of possible parameters.
  • by TapeCutter ( 624760 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:31AM (#11548916) Journal
    Nothing that 20 million people do is a big deal to US readers but Choice magazine has been around for a long time. A heap of (particularly older) people pay for a subscription and it carries a very good reputation.

    They may not be as enthusastic as your average slashdotter but the fact that they even did this comparison means Linux is getting consideration by people who are very quality sensitive. Also retirees who like to fiddle with PC's and photo's but don't have heaps of cash will read it next year in the doctors waiting room.
  • Ironic (Score:2, Insightful)

    by adderofaspyre ( 800203 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:37AM (#11548941) Homepage
    Windows XP was the only operating system that couldn't recognise and open an imported Excel file
    How about that? Everybody has better support for Microsoft's products than they do. Not that it's unexpected, but still...
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:38AM (#11548946)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:44AM (#11548972)
    You are right.
    Clicking on the software you want to install in the graphical software management tool that comes with every distro targeted at "normal" users is soooooooooo terribly hard, isn't it?

    I mean searching the web for the software you want, downloading it, uncompressing it, running the installer and then having the application write its files to some arbitrary places in your filesystem is simply so much more convenient.

    And don't get me started about updates. Having a single update manager that updates _all_ of the software installed on your system is just pure hell, whereas keeping track of every bugfix and security update for all the software you installed by hand and by searching the web is just so much more convenient.

    You're right, linux is hell on earth.
  • No live CD? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bert64 ( 520050 ) <bert@[ ]shdot.fi ... m ['sla' in gap]> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:46AM (#11548986) Homepage
    They noted "No Live CD" as a negative point of Xandros, but this isn't listed as a negative point for windows or osx, since these don't include a livecd either...
    (MacOS9 used to include a livecd, infact the installer involved booting to a full macos desktop from which you ran the installer)
  • Re:Hope again (Score:3, Insightful)

    by wolverine1999 ( 126497 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:51AM (#11549006) Homepage
    Make two distributions then with a common base perhaps? The base distribution being a normal one for those who are "advanced" users, and the extended one with lots of dumbed down explanations and extra guiding GUI stuff for grandmas... and everyone can be happy.
  • by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @05:57AM (#11549028)
    I just don't get this "software is hard to install" crap. I use xandros and let me describe the process for those who don't.

    There is an icon on the desktop, it says "get software"

    You click on it and there is a list of hundreds of pieces of software. Each software has a description along side it. SOme have pictures too. Most are free, some you have to pay for.

    When you want something you just click on install and it does, the icon shows up in your menu when you are done.

    This is far easier then anything else including mac and windows. All the software that is compatible with your system is in one place. It's right at your desktop. 99% of it is free. It installs with one click.

    None of this hunt the web sites, download something, unzip it, install it, click a licence agreement. Just click and install no problems with dependencies or anything.

    How much easier could it possibly be?
  • Re:I disagree (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mOoZik ( 698544 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:00AM (#11549035) Homepage
    I know this is slashdot and bashing Linux will get you instant karma, but _please_ could you elaborate why knowing both OSS and Microsoft and favoring OSS is considered biaised, while favoring and knowing only Microsoft is not ?

    I did not say that, but rather that we must be skeptical of both sides, not only the side which we (collectively) dislike, i.e., MS. Truth is, I don't know. My post was supposed to get people to think about who this association represents (besides the "consumers") but sadly it has been moderated negatively.

  • No! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tanveer1979 ( 530624 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:02AM (#11549042) Homepage Journal
    I have been using linux for about 5 years now as my primary system, and i disagree with the report. There are certain subtle nuances which need to be taken care. For example on my system if i have the flash plugin in the plugins dir of firefox compiled from source, it crashes, but works fine with firefox binary, but the firefox binary did not support java. After some downloads compiles etc,. etc, i got it to work. But your average Joe user is going to turn away. I could not get sound to work with amarok. It would not play. Freenode had me solving the problem after half an hour effort, but the average user does *NOT* want to edit files.

    I know there are going to be posts saying that everything is fine on my system etc., etc., but the fact is everything should work on almost any common system. In case of XP all you have to do is run an exe files and you can watch videos etc.,. Yes it is insecure, virus are a problem blah blah, but the mindset of the avg user is that "Its okay if there is a virus, it is expected behavior" but its not okay if my xyz media file does not work, or my xyz camera phone does not connect. Moving people to firefox from IE is a very very trivial thing. Moving an entire OS is something totally different.

    What does linux need? Well independence from scripting. The user should not have to edit any config file, and helpful support forums. Scaring away and abusing a newbie asking stupid questions isnt going to win any users. Remeber you were a newbie once. As far as the eye candy and user desktop environment is concerned, it is okay.
  • Re:WTF (Score:2, Insightful)

    by triclops ( 788331 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:03AM (#11549051) Homepage Journal
    Sure it might be written for the technically inept. It might be light on content and what might be considered as quality research. It may even be wrong at points, but no matter what is wrong with it, it does represent more publicity aimed at the masses for alternative operating systems besides Microsoft Windows.
    You don't need to convince geeks to use Linux or OSX, its the mums and dads, everyday people, that need to see that there are other viable options out there, and a comparison like this is a good way to build such awareness.

    Surely this sort of publicity is worth a mention on slashdot.
  • by aug24 ( 38229 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:06AM (#11549061) Homepage
    I'd like to see inbuilt antivirus security in all operating systems first. Then let's have medicine for the trojans and other socially spread stuff.

    J.
  • by kamagurka ( 606506 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:09AM (#11549074) Homepage
    ...what they are talking about:

    "We'd also like to see inbuilt antivirus software in all operating systems -- the tested operating systems don't currently include a virus checker."

    I might as well read an article on the relative merits of the Eurofighter written by a polish tractor mechanic.
  • by ErroneousBee ( 611028 ) <neil:neilhancock DOT co DOT uk> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:19AM (#11549100) Homepage
    We would like to see all food come with a full ingredients list, only the snickers listed its ingredients. The other three foods must do better in this regard.
  • by beelsebob ( 529313 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:31AM (#11549138)
    Is ubuntu ready? No - the point is that *you* installed it... *you* set it up... a geek was needed to get this beast working smoothly, and that shouldn't be the case. It may work wonderfully now, because you've set it up and got everything where they expect them to be, but what would have happened if you'd handed them the install CDs and said get on with it? (ok, other than your gran telling you she wasn't going to bother because it's too confusing to put a CD in the drive ;) )
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:36AM (#11549158)
    This is not entirely fair, is it?
    Try to hand a WinXP install CD to a non-geek and watch him suffer.

    While I'd agree that windows being bad is no excuse for linux in general being bad also I'd simply dispute the fact that installing linux is that hard for non-geeks. Ubuntu is in fact a good example for this. Granted, it doesn't come with a nice looking graphical installer, but the install is pretty straight forward and all you have to do is click yes a few times and you'll end up with a working system.
  • Too much choice (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Digital Pizza ( 855175 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:45AM (#11549179)
    Expecting "mums and dads" to do ./configure; make; make install is really out of touch with reality.

    'Mums and dads" want to go to Target, pick up Hallmark Card Studio, and Blues Clues for the kids, pop in the CD when they get home and have it all install and work automatically. They can get that with Windows.

    There's too much choice in the Linux world for "mums and dads" to deal with: which distro, which user interface? People don't like choice, unless is about a topic they're really interested in. And "mums and dads" aren't interested in their computer's OS; they just want things to work. You pick out a name-brand PC (depends on which store you go to and what the salesman tells you) with Windows XP Home on it; you know that you can pick up any game or program and it'll just work, no major decision-making required.

    Back when the choice included IBM PC, Macintosh, Apple ][, Commodore 64, Atari, I knew a LOT of people who complained that there were too many kinds to choose from. Why, oh why couldn't there be just ONE type of computer that'll run any program I buy? Now they've got what they wanted and they're happy, even with the virus/spyware problems. Linux, however, is all about choice.

  • Re:No! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Skinny Rav ( 181822 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:50AM (#11549192)
    The user should not have to edit any config file, and helpful support forums.

    Yeah, right, like I've never had to go to support forums while I still was using windows - and even more now when my friends call me and ask what to do when something goes wrong in XP. And instead of editing well commented text config files I have to edit this bloody registry.

    And are you sure MacOS X is that much better? I was considering buying a Mac Mini and an iBook, but when I went to the shop to play with MacOS X a bit, I've noticed that finder is not localised (I am Polish). As the shop was crowded I decided not to wait to ask shop assistants but returned home to do some googling. O my goodness!! There is a plenty of Mac forums all crowded with users having problems!! And sometimes not trivial ones ("How do I eject CD?") but much more troubling (like safari spitting some weird errors or keyboard layout returning to US English again and again instead of just sticking to chosen Polish, or Software Update being fucked by localisation and so on and so on). So support forums and bugs are not just the Linux thing.

    And by the way, I have dual booting Win-Lin machine and it was Windows XP that had problems with my perfectly ordinary GeForce card, not linux, no hardware acceleration, and no, download from nvidia didn't help, I had to... guess what? Browse support forums!

    but its not okay if my xyz media file does not work

    Yet another thing: compare pleasure of using Xine or Mplayer happily playing any known video format (albeit not-so legally sometimes ;-) ) to this nice info from WMP that codec was not found.

    Wow, that was a long one :-)

    Raf

    P.S. And no, probably I am not going to by an iBook, cause if I pay 1000 Euro I expect it to work perfectly in my local language, like KDE happily has been doing since 1.x releases :-)
  • by Chordonblue ( 585047 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:06AM (#11549254) Journal
    "Freedom of choice is what you got. Freedom FROM choice is what you want."

    There is such a thing as having too many options and I think you've hit this on the head. People have too much to think about than configure computers. Most of us here have difficulty understanding that since this is the very thing we enjoy doing!

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:09AM (#11549263)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Re:Hope again (Score:4, Insightful)

    by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:35AM (#11549343)
    What I need is a distro that is fit for me. A moderately skilled programmer/sysadmin with an inability to talk to non-technical users and a badly overgrown ego.

    I need usable man pages. I need all that complex docs. I'm not a wizard who already knows everything by heart. I want documentation, not dumbed-down text asking me if the computer is turned on.

    What those Joe Schmoe users need, is a clickable interface with anything that could make them shoot themselves in the foot carefully hidden. What I need, is a system that allows me to shoot my own foot if I tell it so. A system that doesn't try to pamper me, but does what I say -- without standing in my way. It needs to provide some examples and documentation that is not completely opaque -- and that documentation would be too dumbed down for those more skilled than me.
    In general, my goals are opposite to the goals of Grandma Jill. I, being selfish, can't stand if I get hurt due to someone trying to make it easier for grandmas.

    I, a technical user, need a system fit for technical users.
    Grandmas need a system that's dumbed down.
    It's hard to have both in a single system, so any compromise will hurt both sides.
  • by waterbear ( 190559 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:44AM (#11549366)
    I still don't understand how typing apt-get install PROGRAMX is complicated.

    That is not where the problem lies. The additional problems in ascending order of size are --

    1 -- (for the non-geek mum/dad user) getting used to the CLI

    2 -- (for quite a lot of others too) figuring out what to do if
    apt-get install programx
    coughs over a dependency issue and shows up with screeds of error messages.

    I'd be quite interested to read your simple advice to get over problem 2!

    -wb-
  • by jesterzog ( 189797 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:45AM (#11549367) Journal

    These 'Linux is ready for the desktop' stories have been piling up for quite a few years now, but will it really happen?

    I really don't think that users being able to administer their systems should be considered a serious problem when considering linux on the desktop.

    In recent months I've come to believe that Linux, and many other unix-like systems for that matter, are not only ready for the desktop and have been for some time, they're near perfect for it. The major catch (apart from that whole software compatability thing, perhaps) is that they're only perfect when someone who knows what they're doing is adminstrating the system.

    I administer my own home linux system, and I like it that way absolutely, but I wouldn't reccommend it to any of my friends. Sure, I could get them set up and rurning, but every so often they'd want to change something and would need help.

    At my university, we run a department network of NetBSD machines, and they're administered brilliantly to the point where new students who are used to Windows can get started in using them for many things without a lot of problems. The security's locked down to a reasonable extent so it's hard for any badly written software the seriously break any of the workstations, but if we want something changed then there's a responsive team of administrators who'll look at providing what's needed. Most importantly, the workstations are reliable and they're looked after by experts who know everything that's on them inside out. Just like my home machine, unixes very rarely break or collapse if they're administrated well.

    My point is that Linux is very ready for the desktop, but people shouldn't be expected to administer their own systems. Luckily, though, Linux has several other very handy things going for it:

    1. It's reliable: Switch it on and do things, and it'll usually stay up... even if applications crash here and there.
    2. It can be locked down from the users to prevent a lot of things from going wrong. When the user is prevented from doing certain things to their PC, they're less likely to break things.
    3. Due to the lock-down, a lot of software (such as spyware) will have a much more difficult time embedding itself in the system in a way that can't be cleaned out by an administrator.
    4. It's very accessible for remote administration. Someone can log in remotely and, with the appropriate but usually ubiquitous tools, have direct and immediate access to anything administrative that's required.
    5. High speed connections are becoming more and more common.

    What surprises me is that nobody yet seems to have seriously jumped into a potentially great business opportunity of offering remote linux administrations for home users. Essentially it'd be linux by subscription, ironically enough.

    I really do know lots of people who use Windows because they're afraid of everything else, and they only even try to administer it and understand the issues because they have no other option. Really they'd rather concentrate on actually doing things with their PC, and would often be happy to pay someone else to administer it if the price were reasonable.

    The business would be in providing a remote service which, once a customer's home PC had been set up in an appropriately standard configuration, would offer the service of administering the PC remotely. For instance, if the customer wants new software, they phone up and ask for it. An admin logs in, installs the package, and sets up any appropriate configuration. Perhaps every so often, administrators come along and upgrade whatever software is installed, probably (usually) keeping the configurations within bounds that are known to work on a large scale. Perhaps they even provide conversion services for things like Word files, in cases when something like OpenOffice simply won't handle it properly.

    On occasion

  • OSX Installation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bert64 ( 520050 ) <bert@[ ]shdot.fi ... m ['sla' in gap]> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:55AM (#11549392) Homepage
    I can't believe they consider windows to be easier to install than OSX, OSX must be one of the easiest installs, easily easier than windows or any of the linux distributions.. asidefrom that, windows doesn't even support serial ata out of the box, so installing it on modern hardware os a HUGE pain in the ass, especially if you dont have a floppy drive to load the driver from, and even if you do.. its far from intuitive
  • by Bert64 ( 520050 ) <bert@[ ]shdot.fi ... m ['sla' in gap]> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @08:07AM (#11549445) Homepage
    There's actually no need to enable the OSX firewall by default.. The purpose of enabling the windows firewall by default is to prevent access to services which (stupidly) you cant disable.. On OSX it's possible to disable everything from listening on the network, and this is the default, so the firewall being enabled wouldnt actually stop anything.
    On the flip side, on all systems, having the firewall enabled often hinders legitimate uses of the system, such as dcc send/chat on irc, or p2p apps etc, so having the firewall enabled by default on osx would actually cause problems while not providing any benefit.
  • by mangu ( 126918 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @08:10AM (#11549452)
    Several others have pointed out that XP is really harder to install than any Linux distro today. And I must add another point here: device drivers. Distros like Mandrake or Suse will correctly recognize most of the hardware and install the drivers out of the box. For any MS operating system you must get drivers in separate CDs or even diskettes.


    Worse still, XP will not work with some older hardware. For instance, I have an Adaptec SCSI card that will blue-screen XP, but runs flawlessly in Linux, I can even install Linux from a disk controlled by this card. Under XP I can't even install the OS, the mere presence of the card in the computer makes the XP install CD reboot endlessly.

  • pwned in 30 days! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by randalx ( 659791 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @08:31AM (#11549528)
    I'd like to see a comparison between the OS'es regarding time to get hacked with default installations when in use by an "average" user.

    My friend just got a Windows machine for X-Mas as is now asking me why his computer is getting slower and what's this bargains.exe process he can't seem to get rid of.

    How can they keep saying that Windows is ready for the desktop when this stuff happens after 1 month of use. Windows is not ready for the Aunt Tilley's.
  • by Long-EZ ( 755920 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @08:42AM (#11549568)

    Forget the help files. People want an OS that doesn't NEED help files. I'll agree that the review had some glossed over areas that suggested their testing wasn't very rigorous. I've been exclusively using Xandros for my small business for over two years (it's very good), and noticed the following issues with the review of Xandros:

    They reviewed Xandros 2.5 even though 3.0 has been out for over a month.

    Difficult to view digital photos? You plug the flash card in the reader and drag and drop in Xandros File Manager, which provides little preview thumbnail images, and double clicking the file produces a larger version. There's a dedicated digital photo manager (or three) if you want a dedicated application.

    Difficult to burn DVDs? If they had reviewed 3.0, they'd have seen it's drag and drop from the Xandros File Manager, just like burning a CD.

    Internet Explorer? You've got to be kidding me. Just because you can run IE (like all big MS aps and most Windows programs) using the included CrossOver (commercial version of Wine), does not mean you should use IE. Mozilla is the default installed browser. FireFox is available from Xandros Networks if you'd prefer it and will ship as the default on future versions of Xandros.

    Apparently, the other OS candidates must have been as poorly reviewed, because Xandros still beat all the Linux distros overall and was a very close second to XP and OS X. It received the highest marks for the ease of installation.

    My own personal recommendation? If you're sick of Windows BS and want a secure OS that's still easy to use, try Xandros. It's great, and it's getting a lot better. It's THE Linux OS for Windows refugees.

    You'll love being able to go to Xandros Networks and install a lot of different software with a couple of mouse clicks. None of the hassles, EULAs and rebooting of Windows. And the package manager automatically tracks all library dependancies. When you uninstall an application, it won't ask you if another program is using a DLL. There's no registry to corrupt either, so there's no Registry Rot. Your Xandros system will remain fast and stable.

    In a world where hardware and software is created to work with Windows, Microsoft has a huge advantage. They are the de facto standard. Xandros manages to be easier to use on this unfair playing field, which indicates exactly how much these guys have the Right Stuff. Do yourself and the world a favor and buy a copy of Xandros [xandros.com] and let's get away from Windows spam spewing zombies and spyware.

  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @08:52AM (#11549594)
    Sure Linux is rather easy to install when you have all the information. You know the name of your distribution, you know how to use your package manager (Different on every distribution). Lets say you want Yahoo Messager. First you will need to know the name and version of your distribution if you happen not to have Red Hat or Debian you will need to know which one your distribution may support. (that would stop most newbees right there) But if they did get the right run then they will need to follow the directions on the site on how to install the software (If they remember seeing it and didn't close there browser) So the muddle threw and install the package. Now where is it? There is no Icon on their desktop No Icon in their Dock, or in the menu structure. So you will need to call up some linux expert and find one who isn't a jerk and tell them to type in rm -rf / as root, because to any linux user it is obvious that it is in /usr/bin or maybe /usr/local/bin there is a chance that it could be somewhere is /opt or ~/usr/bin or ~bin. so they finally find the product now that is assuming that they know the file name is ymessager not like ytalk or some other utility that are cluttered in the bin directory. (depending on the windows manager) they may not be able to drag that icon to the dock or to the menus they will need to do some funky right click combination to find the and retype and refind this file again.

    Yes to people who have been using linux for over 10 years like myself the process is very quick I know where to look and what to look for and how to manage different windows managers. But for a newbie this is a incredible process that is way to much work. And most of them will just go screw it I will just use windows and face problems with bugs, crashes, viruses and spyware because I rather take my chances and be able to install the apps I want.
  • by argent ( 18001 ) <peter@slashdot . ... t a r o nga.com> on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @08:57AM (#11549609) Homepage Journal
    I stopped reading one paragraph in to the second page:

    "Mac OS X could have more comprehensive help files and we'd like to see the inbuilt firewall switched on by default."

    Anyone who thinks a default client-based firewall is anything but an admission that the OS developers couldn't figure out how to make any network services secure by default simply has NO BUSINESS even commenting on security issues.

    I suppose that excludes most of the pundits online and in magazines, but that's always been true, all the way back to Jerry Pournelle (after his friend Maclean died, anyway).
  • Zero Sum Game (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CristalShandaLear ( 762536 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @09:16AM (#11549684) Homepage Journal
    Why, oh why couldn't there be just ONE type of computer that'll run any program I buy? Now they've got what they wanted and they're happy, even with the virus/spyware problems. Linux, however, is all about choice.

    The problem is they don't have what they wanted and especially not at the cost they want. Typing "M$" is old and busted but it came about for a reason.

    Use your own analogy to really hear what any user really wants: Why oh why couldn't there just be ONE type of DVD player that'll play any DVD I buy?

    It sounds absurd doesn't it? It sounds just as absurd as Joe Six Pack buying ANY computer off the shelf and being able to load Mircosoft Office and the iLife Suite on that same off the shelf computer with no compatibility issues whatsover.

    Think about that for a second and if you aren't still LYAO, read the rest.

    It doesn't matter that those may not be the best choices for the consumer or that Star Office is a perfect foil for Microsoft Office. It's about giving consumers what they want.

    That's why you don't see people running to Linux in droves. Because it does no better at bridging the gap for what people REALLY want to do on their PC's.

    Give people what they want and they will buy from you in droves. What the average person sees, and they're not far wrong either, is a glorified geek pissing contest between Microsoft, Apple, Linux and any other OS out there if they're even aware that there are others.

    What they don't see is anyone really giving a damn about what they want and how they want to work. It may not be true, but perception is everything.

    Until that changes, no one wins.
  • by Understudy ( 111386 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @09:33AM (#11549765) Homepage
    Here is a review of of several operating systems. That are suppose to complete several functions. However being that I actually bothered to read the article I noticed a few things that bugged me.
    We installed each of the Linux distributions side-by-side with Windows XP
    We installed Windows XP and Mac OS X without partitioning the hard drive. Both operating systems include partitioning software that deletes your existing operating system and data.

    So basically they installed MacOS and WinXP on a entire hard drive and then did a dual boot setup with Linux. They mention how certain versions of Linux will partition the hard drive and certain versions won't. They however don't give the same break to Linux. Try installing Linux on it's own hard drive. Windows and Mac software are more than capable to delete the exisiting software, well hell I can do that also with Linux.

    Xandros was the only Linux distribution that didn't come with a LiveCD. Windows XP and Mac OS X aren't available on LiveCDs

    Yet this is the only place they mention that live cd issue. Why is it not in the bad column under the bullet points for WinXP and Mac.

    Easy-to-access software updates and security patches and fixes can save you time and hassle. Mac OS X and Windows XP automatically check for new updates and patches at specific times as long as you're connected to the internet. You can change the default settings if you wish. None of the Linux distributions offer automatic updates, but you can either download patches and updates from each manufacturers' website, or by using Linspire Click-N-Run or Xandros Networks. SuSE Linux and Mandrakelinux offer to look for updates during installation.

    That is so you don't just throw a patch in there and have it create more problems. I still remember WinNT sp6 and the Lotus Notes issue and several others.

    Unlike Windows XP, the Linux distributions and Mac OS X also let you restrict a program, such as ICQ, to a single user account. Additionally, in Linux and Mac OS X, the administrator is the only account with access to universal settings and files.

    This is a good thing remember that.

    Windows XP was the only operating system that couldn't recognise and open an imported Excel file -- the included office software is very basic so you need to install Microsoft Office or another more advanced program.

    Even Linux distro's require Open Office or other software to be installed to read an Excel file the difference is that you can usually install them right after you install the OS. It may be included in the box set on one of the CDs or you can download it. Either way you don't have to go out and spend more than you paid for the operating system.

    The difficulties with installing new software using a linux-based operating system arise when you want to install software from elsewhere.

    I won't disagree here, extracting tarballs, unpacking an RPM, trying to have apt-get install a program can be a bit of a bear. Making sure you have all your dependincies. The difference is that if something goes wrong you can at least look into it. If the .exe doesn't install properly you are pretty much screwed. Now with FreeBSD you can install your programs from the ports tree with "make install distclean" or a package from the cd or ftp sites with "pkg_add -r foo". The dependincies will get installed automatically.

    I understand the joe average user need. The thing is if joe average has worked with windows before coming to linux they will find things they don't understand and are very likely to get frustrated. The same applies in reverse take a *nix user who hasn't been with windows ever or since windows 95 and throw them into that enviroment. Watch them pull out their hair. While Linux (distros), OSX, and WinXP are operating systems they are very different and trying to find similarites isn't always going to be fair. If you have only ever driven an automatic car, driving a car with a manual tr

  • Re:Hope again (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @09:46AM (#11549837)
    But nobody will want the home version. Everybody i know has all the professional, or enterprise versions of all the microsoft software installed, even though the home versions would do fine. Mind you, they never actually paid for them, but they still won't use Windows XP home. Even though the only difference is a web server they don't even know how to write web pages for.
  • Re:Hope again (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tolan-b ( 230077 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @09:48AM (#11549841)
    Why on earth is it hard to have user freindly documentation *and* man pages? It's not as if text takes up that much space, and anyway, if you don't want the grandma doc sthen just don't install grandmadocs-1.1-3.. Where's the problem? What am I missing?
  • Re:Hope again (Score:5, Insightful)

    by b-baggins ( 610215 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @10:02AM (#11549930) Journal
    A man page usable by grandmas is a waste of disk space for me, and conversely, a man page I need is utterly incomprehensible for the grandma.

    You, my friend, need to find a good technical writer.

    It's called inverted pyramid writing and goes something like this:

    1. Summary
    2. Non technical end user level information
    3. technical end user level information
    4. hard core geek level information


    You simply provide a sidebar nagivation in the summary page that takes you to the level you want.

    The "dumb down" argument is nothing more than the desperate flailings of ego trying to still prove to the world that it is justified.

  • by dfj225 ( 587560 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @10:31AM (#11550135) Homepage Journal
    Gnome does seem to have a simpler GUI than XP, although I haven't used it extensively for some time. For me, I tend to focus on the GUI's associated with the applications I use more than the os specific functions. If I spend all day using Firefox, that experience is going to be fairly similar on almost all major operating systems. One thing that I have noticed about Linux is that many applications differ greatly from the appearances/layout of things in the GUI. Especially ones that are written for a different window manager but get run using something different. For instance, applications written for X11 usually feel much different than native Gnome apps. This problem also affects Windows even though all applications are written for the same window manager. I think the only operating system that I have used that keeps a fair amount of similarity to the UI between applications is Mac OS X. At least, as an example, for that system, I know that the prefernces should be located in the same menus for each application. This isn't always true, but I think most developers try to follow Apple's guidelines.
  • by pboulang ( 16954 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @10:33AM (#11550161)
    Try handing a non geek a Mac OS X install CD and watch them be greeted by a nice shiny screen, and get on with setting it up.

    In direct opposition to TFA, but nevertheless completely correct.

  • Complete crap (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fitten ( 521191 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @10:51AM (#11550284)
    Well... I had to stop reading the Linux/OSX propaganda document when I read things like:

    You can't restrict applications to only one user account.

    and basically the complaint that Excel isn't bundled with Windows but the other distributions of Linux/OSX have OpenOffice or something bundled with it that can read an Excel document. Microsoft always gets blasted for *bundling* apps (ooo...ooo... the beeg eval monopoly!) -and at the same time- blasted for not bundling apps (ooo...ooo... basic functionality left out!).

    That "report" is nothing more than propaganda to further someone's agenda. It's garbage.
  • Re:Documentation (Score:3, Insightful)

    by koreth ( 409849 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @11:02AM (#11550380)
    Maybe it's time that all the linux zealots stopped posting on slashdot so much and helped out....

    Given the writing quality of a lot of Slashdot posts, I'd prefer they stayed far, far away from the end-user documentation.

    "Mommy? Why does the computer always spell 'lose' with an extra O?"

  • by Deeze ( 854182 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @11:11AM (#11550458)
    Well, I guess there could be 2 catagories here, "tech savvy" grandmas (I might fall into that catagory, as I am old enough to be a grandma, female, over 40 and 20+ years in the comp industry), and "user" grandmas (they use the "intarweb" and exchange recipes with other grandma's via email). I'm assuming we are talking about the latter type, of which "my" mom would fall into (over 60 and 0 years in the comp industry).

    Most Linux systems that would be used by "Grandma" would likely be set up in a way that is very simple to use, by someone that *does* know how to read a man page. All they need is a button to access the WWW, a button to access email, and a button to access solitaire (lol), with everything else locked down and out of sight. This is easy to do. For the most part (in my experience), older people that are inexperienced with computers are quite scared to mess with anything they don't understand, because it might "blow up" their "cpu". They do not admin systems, they USE them, and usually in very limited amounts (yes, there are exceptions). I still don't why some people say how hard it is to use Linux. How is it harder than using windows? You click on a "button" and the program runs. Wow, really takes a genius to do that hehe. Now setting up and admining a system is different. I would no more hand the task of installing and configuring Linux to my mom than I would have her try to install and configure windows. She could do neither. People that aren't tech savvy simply buy pre-configged machines. Linux or windows, really doesn't matter, *using* either one should be a trivial matter for anyone that wishes to do so.

    Personally I have no problem whatsoever that Linux may be harder to install than windows, as it tends to scare off those that would not be able to properly config the machine for security (haven't we all seen instances of someone being an ignoramus running root?). This is a two sided blade though, as those same people don't think twice about installing windows ("Oh look, a '98 cd." click-click-next wizard users), although in general they *still* don't know how to properly secure their machine, hence millons of owned zombie machines freely roaming the net.

    Disclaimer: This is not a bash at windows users, it's an observation of *clueless* windows users.
  • by Retired Replicant ( 668463 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @12:00PM (#11551017)
    This is the very reason I never bought into all of the "monopoly" whining and MS bashing of competing companies like Netscape, Sun, Apple, AOL, Real, Adobe, etc. The average Joe likes his new computer to come with essential software built-in, and dosn't give a hoot which company's software it is as long as it works and isn't a hassle. When you buy a car, would you like it if you had go and buy the steering wheel, tires, and headlights separately?
  • by drsquare ( 530038 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @01:25PM (#11551971)
    You click on it and there is a list of hundreds of pieces of software. Each software has a description along side it. SOme have pictures too. Most are free, some you have to pay for.

    Hundreds? There are more pieces of software than that. What are the chances of this Xandros having all the programs that run on it in the world in one place? The odds are 0. Also this doesn't account for software that comes on CD, or only in source, or a newer version has been released but isn't in the Xandros depository. What if you don't have a direct link to the Internet, but can download to one computer and move it to another via disk/keydrive, can this be done as easily as moving a .zip around?

    Also how easily does it download? If the download is broken can it be resumed? Does it happen automatically? What if the software is already on your computer, can you install it without even knowing that a command line exists?

    No dependencies? So the libraries are statically linked, i.e. massive downloads and massive memory usage? Or are all the dependencies that have ever been made, and ever will be made, already on the system?

    What happens when your depository is down? Can you not install software anymore? When you download a software from a third-party site, does it install easily?

    There are a lot of questions regarding software installation, and there is no magic solution, least of all one which depends on single source for all your software.
  • by poot_rootbeer ( 188613 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @02:46PM (#11553065)
    'Linux fell short on common tasks such as installing new software.' This is the most important point.

    Installing new software is a common task? I would have assumed most people, once past the initial setup of a system, spend their time USING software, not installing it.

    But the point stands. In OS X, installing new software is usually just as easy as copying it to the Applications folder. Why do Linux and Windows make it so much more complicated?
  • Re:Too much choice (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Lachek ( 584890 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @06:43PM (#11555896)
    Mums and dads seemed capable of doing it when the instructions were:

    1. Insert floppy in floppy drive
    2. Click on "Start"
    3. Click on "Run"
    4. Type "A:\SETUP.EXE"
    5. Follow the instructions on the screen

    Or even worse, when software came on CD and wouldn't autorun - then they had to figure out which drive letter represented their CD-ROM drive!!

    Yet they seemed capable of doing it, back then. What has changed, exactly? Are forward-slashes somehow harder to understand than backslashes?

  • Re:Too much choice (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Digital Pizza ( 855175 ) on Wednesday February 02, 2005 @07:10PM (#11556223)
    People (in general) are getting lazier from being spoiled. Companies compete to provide their customers instant gratification, and people have come to expect it.

    People are still capable of using the "run" menu option if the instructions tell them what to do, but they won't be happy about it. And the example you gave is still a lot easier for non-computer-types than what usually has to be done in order to install software on Linux that didn't already come with the distro, or as part of an online update.

    I know a lot of people who aren't into computers all that much, but need to deal with them; I've seen this firsthand. They don't care how it works, as long as it does.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...