desmondhaynes writes "Is Linux ready for the masses? Is Linux really being targeted towards the 'casual computer user'? Computerworld thinks we're getting there, talking of Linux 'going mainstream 'with Ubuntu. 'If there is a single complaint that is laid at the feet of Linux time and time again, it's that the operating system is too complicated and arcane for casual computer users to tolerate. You can't ask newbies to install device drivers or recompile the kernel, naysayers argue. Of course, many of those criticisms date back to the bad old days, but Ubuntu, the user-friendly distribution sponsored by Mark Shuttleworth's Canonical Ltd., has made a mission out of dispelling such complaints entirely.'"
>and we've known it for a long time...
Not really. If that was the case, what was the necessity of Ubuntu? Ubuntu has definitely made Linux easier to install and use which was definitely not the case until like 2 yrs ago.
Ubuntu (7.10) still has its own shortcomings in configuring things like Bluetooth or Wifi which I hope will not not be there in 8.04 release.
If you've bought laptops that many times and tried Linux on all of them, then why haven't you just picked a laptop with supported wireless hardware at some point? I mean - Intel brand wireless that *works perfectly* is a required part of the Intel Centrino(tm) platform - it's not like it's rare or anything.
Seriously, it's like you're punching yourself in the face and complaining that it hurts. I'm not feeling much sympathy here.
Geeks aside, why would anyone install over an MS box?
What we do see, however, is that devices like EEE PC are making people aware that there is a choice and that Linux is real. Here in New Zealand we can buy laptops preinstalled with Ubuntu in regular retail shops http://www.dse.co.nz/cgi-bin/dse.storefront/48067b6603694d34273fc0a87f3b067e/Product/View/XC5822 [dse.co.nz]. These have been quite popular. They are still quirky: for example setting up wireless is a bit messy (not as slick as windows) and the power management sucks a bit.
I run HH on one of these laptop that came installed with GG. For the most part, I don't think that HH vs GG is much of an issue for adoption. What is important is that distros like Ubuntu are very easy to use/update and that devices like Eee PC are exposing more people to the option. Soon people will be asking for Linux preinstalled on higher spec laptops and we'll see more choice.
I used to use linux as my primary desktop but next time you think linux is ready for the masses I want you to go to a slightly above average windows user and.....
1.) Explain why their pda will no longer sync with their calendar, mail client, or transfer files
2.) Explain why they can't just plugin more than two monitors and just get it to display without editing config files
3.) Explain why they can't use that one application they NEED for work that only runs on windows.
4.) Explain why they can't play [latest high end game]
5.) Explain why [latest high end hardware] doesn't work in linux at all.
6.) Explain why their cheap no name printer doesn't work with linux out of the box.
7.) Explain why the pptp linux client is such a pain in the ass to use.
Before you go into some detailed explanation about how the evil M$ empire is preventing interoperability or how linux is so much more secure and stable remember your average user doesn't give a damn. They want to work/play and they can either do it right away or they can't, excuses and explanations don't matter.
Excuse me? Ready for the masses? Where? I've been working in IT for years and tinkering with computers for about 15 years now so I'd say I've come across my share of problems and I've mostly been able to solve them myself or with the aid of, then, AltaVista and google.
That being said, I tried to install Ubuntu a month or two ago. Well, it appears that the graphical installation is shot. Whatever I did, it wouldn't run on my now at least one year old machine. So I had to download the text install version.
I have two SATA Harddrives in there. One houses XP which I won't get rid of until Cedega actually manages to run ALL my effing games without 'minor problems'. Did you know that I've been partitioning with the likes of fdisk and cfdisk back in those days? Did you know I've been able to do a dual boot as a sixteen year old kid back in those days with an ancient version of SuSE?
Well, don't go believing I was able to partition the disks the way I wanted with Ubuntu because Ubuntu is made for the masses and the masses obviously don't have a need for partitioning more than one drive because the drive I wanted to partition just didn't show up.
What did install eventually was Mandriva. And it worked... mostly. Except I have two monitors with different resolutions... Man, THAT was unpleasant but after days of scouring message boards and trying to get familiar with xorg.conf I managed even that. My scanner isn't supported in linux it seems, so there goes that idea.
Frankly, perhaps it's just me but on every damn try I run into stupid little problems which take me hours or even days to solve. As long as that remains the case, Linux for the masses remains a myth. As long as we don't have doubleclickable install files that guide us through software installation, as long as we have to set up repositories and work with dependancies that go beyond "you need Java!" Linux is definitely NOT ready for average desktop users.
And to those who'd like to mod me a troll, I'm the first person throwing a party the day I can just replace windows with linux. But at the moment I don't have the time to spend hours tinkering with my box. I need that damn piece of equipment to just work.
Oh for crying out loud, how long ago was that? You've been bitching about that for YEARS. I don't even know how you managed to brick your system, I've put GRUB on the primary MBR of dual boot systems hundreds of times. I just did it with the new Ubuntu with a test server here in my office. No problkems. Last week I told my boss's boss how to help his kid do it. No problems.
I've read and followed the new Ubuntu dual boot instructions, a blind chimp could do it, you just clicky along 'till it's done, taking the defaults. It even resized my original windows partition with no problem.
There are many issues with the grub boot loader and it is well documented. It is actually quite easy to mess up your system and make it appear to be bricked.
The most common version of this issue has to do with when a new kernel update occurs during a NORMAL ubuntu update. You click the orange star, choose update, let it download and install, then reboot and voila...no more access to any hard drive. It happens to my machine every single time.
I have to get out my liveCD boot with it, mount the main HDD partition, go into the/boot/grub and edit the menu.lst to change everything back.
If you have customized your menu.lst you will also have problems the next time a kernel update happens as the update will wipe out your customization, so if you have modified the menu.lst file to make change the order in which the menu displays your choices and which os is the default, that will be wiped out and you could loose access to one or more of your partitions (hence OSes). I have see this repeatedly, and in the latest situation I have had to turn off all updates so it didn't brick this retired gentleman's system.
On my system it changes the hard drive number and I have to either boot with the livecd or remember to modify the menu.lst before I reboot the computer. Total pain.
Now I'm not supporting the idea that the installer bricked his unit. It didn't. I'm saying that making this sort of error and letting it stand for years without being addressed and then tossing it back into the face of the user (who just might be a retired friend who knows little about computers) is not the way to go about marking your product.
Now I'm not supporting the idea that the installer bricked his unit. It didn't. I'm saying that making this sort of error and letting it stand for years without being addressed and then tossing it back into the face of the user (who just might be a retired friend who knows little about computers) is not the way to go about marking your product.
It worked for Windows, which just eliminates the previous MBR without asking any questions at all.
Somehow, Ubuntu is being flamed for this, even though it puts a lot more effort into playing nice with other OS's than Windows - which nobody seems to criticize here at all.
You're changing the wrong parts of grub's menu.lst. Next time have a read through the instructions at the top of the file, just under
### BEGIN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST
And.. don't change anything between:
## ## End Default Options ##
and
### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST
Feel free to put additional definitions after the end of that block, and to change the way the other definitions are defined, adjust the 'comments' above the block.
Then, once you've done that, run 'grup-update' to apply your changes and see if it was what you were after. I usually make one change:
I change #howmany to #howmany=2 (that way I still have one history in case the new kernel doesn't work).
'Bricking' is when you fubar your BIOS upgrade, or touch a hot wire to some random contact on your motherboard. It means the whole thing is totally and utterly up a creek and it can't be rescued at all.
Rendering your system unbootable however is something else entirely. Although you may have screwed up the data on your hard drive to the point of no (or really expensive) recovery the system as a wholeâ"and even the driveâ"are/is still 100% usable with a little bit of work; mostly/all in software.
The most common version of this issue has to do with when a new kernel update occurs during a NORMAL ubuntu update. You click the orange star, choose update, let it download and install, then reboot and voila...no more access to any hard drive. It happens to my machine every single time.
Why not set the kernel-related packages to 'hold' status? Then, they won't be automatically updated (the updater will say "package X has been held back" or something to that effect).
When you're in the mood to update the kernel and perform all the liveCD booting that entails, you can manually update that package (unhold, install new version, hold again).
Meanwhile, you can still leave automatic update on to get all other updates automatically without fear that you might be in for a surprise dose of liveCD booting and MBR fixing (which I agree is very annoying if you had stuff to get done when it happens).
If they try to install Windows on their Ubuntu system, Windows will destroy their access to their Ubuntu partition with no questions asked.
Maybe it would be a good idea to suggest those things in the manual, but its not big enough of a deal for Ubuntu or Windows to do it.
Either put up with the (admittedly horrible) norms of reliability in the computing world, or improve it yourself. There is nothing to gain by bitching about it for so long.
How the fuck do you actually brick a PC by installing an operating system? Maybe if the OS is evil and directly fucks with the flash memory on your BIOS (which Grub does not do). I would suspect that something else went wrong, and you're dealing with proximity in time (and yes, I've had that happen to, having a hard drive crash just as I was rebooting after installing a service pack in Win2k, and spending an hour thinking the installation had fucked up).
Perhaps you could point to where newbies can easily find out how to fix the MBR when Windows screws it up. My point is that the minute you decide on an install/reinstall beyond the sort of recovery disk methods you get with a lot of brand name computers, there's a chance it can cause exactly what happened to you. Generally people who don't understand this probably shouldn't be doing any OS installs on their own, period. Everything installs 95%+ of the time fine, but even consumer-friendly products like Windows can get really fucked up, and it doesn't even take an install, I've seen failures because a service pack didn't install properly. There's a point at which someone who doesn't know enough should either not be doing it, or should be prepared to call for help (potentially having to pay $$$).
Does it still require you to edit a configuration file in any situation?
Right.
It's getting better, but it's not ready.
Umm... I was a Windows power user for awhile... and on countless times I was forced to hand-edit the registry, as well as a number of other files.
Does that mean Windows (XP) isn't ready for the desktop?
Quite frankly, I don't want to use the same operating system as someone who refuses to edit any configuration file... Leave Linux to the power users and the server market.
No. Leave *SOME* Linux distributions to power users and the server market. But Windows users have the right to an alternative.
The point isn't that a user refuses to edit any configuration file. The point is that the user SHOULDN'T HAVE to edit any configuration file in the first place! Not to mention recompiling packages, building your own rpm's, solve dependency problems, have to complain about drivers not working out of the box...
Since I moved to Linux half a year ago, I've had to do a lot of stuff that the ordinary user shouldn't have to. I would love to just click here and there, and WHILE STILL having options, not have to worry about messing around with the configuration.
Tell me, why the heck are you afraid of ordinary users? Musicians, artists, graphic designers, hardcore gamers... they want something that just works. What do you have against that, and what are you afraid of? If you don't want dumbed-down distributions, don't use them and keep your own distro! Linux uses the GPL license for a reason.
I don't mind using the same operating system than an elitist zealot uses - just not the same computer.
Quite frankly, I don't want to use the same operating system as someone who refuses to edit any configuration file.
Marketing Linux to the average desktop is a bad idea. Leave Linux to the power users and the server market.
Just because I'm not afraid of editing a config file doesn't mean I want to. I like that in a modern Ubuntu distro I can get everything working with a minimal amount of fuss, and don't like the parts that don't work automagically so I have to go mucking about with config files.
You know what the best part about it is, though? The "it works automagically don't worry" part and the "oops didn't work but don't worry you can fix it with text-editor-fu" part live in perfect harmony. Linux is getting better in the usability department, without sacrificing its "power user" roots. I can't see anything to complain about.
If you want to be an elitist about it, go use Slackware, or any *BSD. You can still consider yourself superior to the poor slobs whose Linux distros don't require config file editing, for whatever that's worth.
Oh, and I may be a power user, but I'm also a gamer, and I want games that run natively on Linux. Besides a tiny subset of games, that's not happening until Linux is the average desktop.
Does Windows have a GUI for configuring all the buttons of a multi-button mouse, or a GUI for configuring touchpads? AFAIK you'd need 3rd party software to do those things.
Oh man, not these tired old arguments again. I have mod points and I was going mod this down, but I'm in a charitable mood and feel like feeding some trolls today.
Want to use your favourite software (photoshop, dreamweaver, GTA 4 etc: nope, that's for windows and/or mac only.
The Linux software ecosystem is rife with applications that perform the same task as their popular proprietary counterparts. Some of them aren't quite up to par (Gimp), some are roughly equivalent (OpenOffice), and some are leagues better (Firefox). There are more and more proprietary applications being ported to Linux all the time.
If your argument is that there are specific software packages that can't run on Linux, well, the same is true for both Windows and Mac. There are many Mac applications that you simply can't buy for Windows and we all well know that the reverse is true.
Neither Mac or Windows come with a system where you can browse from a catalog of over 10,000 applications and install any one of them instantly, for free, with the click of a mouse button.
Want to buy new hardware... well you can if you scour the internet for days finding out if it's compatible; you can't just pop down pcworld one saturday afternoon and pick something up and know it'll work.
This hardware myth really needs to be put to rest. Linux supports a wider variety of hardware [lwn.net] than any other operating system on the planet. True, there can be a delay between the time that a new device is released and the time that a common Linux distribution supports it. It's also true that some hardware vendors refuse to release their hardware specifications or even cooperate in any way with open source developers but these are very much the exception these days rather than the rule. If you think Windows supports hardware any better than Linux then you have either not used Vista yet or have somehow managed to be the only person on the planet who has never fought with Windows over printer, video, or wifi driver issues at some point.
Want to install some software... sure... if you broadband no problem...
Ubuntu and many of its derivatives will ship you a copy of their OS on CD at no charge. No media fees, no shipping and handling. Free. Most of the software that you can install afterward is not at all too large to pull down via a dialup modem. Windows and OS X cost hundreds of dollars each. I would say that I put my money where my mouth is, except that I don't have to spend any of it on Linux at all.
oh, but it might install the software anywhere on your system... good luck learning to grep it.
Not sure what you mean here. On KDE- and GNOME-based distributions, a shortcut to every installed application gets put into the applications menu. Which, by the way, is sorted by the software's function so everything is easy to find. Contrast with Windows where each application goes into its own folder or a folder named after the company that distributed it. Install enough applications and the Start menu becomes large and unusable. Contrast also with Mac, where you have to dig down into a special (and also unsorted) Applications folder to find newly-installed apps.
Fat chance if your friend has just given you a cdrom with software on it!
Why, you don't have any friends?
Okay, unprofessional personal attack aside, Linux-using friends are more likely to give you a URL than a CD-ROM. If someone's giving you a CD-ROM with Windows or Mac software on it, there's a good chance it's warez anyway unless they're in the habit of giving away their legitimate software.
want to play games.... err... well... no.. not really, but hey we've got solitaire!!!
There is, admittedly, a noted lack of high-profile games natively available for Linux. However, there are some good ones [linuxgames.com] available. Recent versions of Quake and Unreal Tournament run fine natively.
But, unfortunately, it's far from perfect. Ubuntu is and has been good enough for my completely non-computer-literate roommate to use when the system is up and running. But there's no way he could have gotten the wireless working on his own (even in the 8.04 beta, I still had to download and install drivers, then muck around with/etc/networking/interfaces file to make it work).
Now hold on a second. Would your friend have been able to get wireless working in Windows if the driver didn't automatically install? It frequently doesn't, you know? I can't count the number of times I've done a clean XP install, and had it fail to install sound drivers, video drivers, ethernet controller drivers, or wireless drivers. (But it does helpfully offer to look on the internet for such drivers. How it plans to do this with no connectivity is anyone's guess.)
Every time this happens -- which is often enough to be annoying -- I have to go hunt down individual drivers from individual manufacturer's websites, since half of them seem to need to be propietary to work at all (the generic Broadcom driver for a Dell laptop, for example, would not install, but the one from Dell's site did). Then I have to burn them to CD, take them to the afflicted machine, and load them that way.
Ironically I usually end up doing this from my Ubuntu laptop, where everything -- absolutely everything -- worked out of the box. Even on Broadcom chipsets, the only thing I've ever had trouble with in the past when it came to Linux, Ubuntu just threw a message box that said something like "Check this box to enable the restricted wireless driver," and presto.
My point, I guess, is that I've never understood why people criticize Linux because Your Mom wouldn't know what to do if something goes awry. While true, it isn't like Your Mom knows what to do when things go awry with Windows either, so what's the difference?
I would say it's quite possible, but until Ubuntu got something like widespread availability as a pre-installed on computers for purchase, then it won't matter how ready it is because few people in the masses will have any experience.
Right now, with a few exceptions, it's the geeks advertising it to others. There's not enough of us really to make an impact (and not all of us are evangelists). Ubuntu or an equally-suitable disto NEEDS to be pre-installed on a larger number of machines than we currently have. Simple.
Also regular linux users that do not have time for tinkering.
I run a Gentoo workstation for work, where I set up things exactly the way I want them, but this is quite time consuming.
I also have a "media center" type box with ubuntu that the family uses to get and display multimedia content. This box is almost maintenance free, no virus, no problems. A Windows machine would have given me a lot more work and it would have turned me into a pirate:-)
Normal people don't install operating systems, they buy a machine in a box at the computer shop. While I agree that Ubuntu is the distribution that is closest to being ready for mainstream desktops, it has to get pre-installed on those machines in order to really break into the mainstream market. So far, it hasn't. Dell went with Ubuntu, but they aren't exactly pushing their Linux offerings. Asus chose Xandros for their Linux machine. HP have chosen Suse (Novell). Their machines are or will be on sale at the local computer shop. I don't think it's any coincidence that both those companies signed patent agreements with Microsoft. I imagine Microsoft's legal team can be pretty scary if 99% of your business is based on selling hardware to run their software.
Some distributions do provide that, such as Linux Mint. Also, the Dell machines that ship with Ubuntu include DVD support, and mp3 support with Ubuntu is just a mouse click or two away when you try to play your first mp3 file.
As much as i hate games, and hate to admit it, until you can go down the street to your local big box store, buy a game and it 'just work', its not ready for "the masses". "the masses" want to surf porn, buy stuff from ebay and play their stilly computer games.
For actual useful work, in a company with an IT staff, Linux and BSD have been ready for a while now.
It depends on which masses you refer to. Linux covers about 90% of the Windows world, and it's definitely the most importnat 90%. People can and do switch desktops to Linux. Maybe not as often as you'd like, but they do it.
The problem is that the other 10% is crap like Clippy and Activex that no one on Linux wants to have or implement, but makes a certain number of computer users more comfortable. Windows does so much hand-holding by default, and that's one of the things Linux users hate about it. But it's necessary for a number of people who can never remember the difference between business and friendly letters or for people who are to afraid to even click Settings... let alone dick around with it a bit.
It doesn't help that Linux is mostly marketed by the community as being "Almost-Windows" or "Free Windows", instead of as a product that stands on its own.
People have said as a joke that OpenOffice.org or similar programs will take over once they have their own clippy, but may a true word is said in jest.
Ubuntu gets better with each release. When I first put Dapper on my Toshiba laptop, I had to fiddle around with the boot menu to get it to work correctly, and I had to remember to do this everytime a new kernel was installed, otherwise the laptop would stuff up on its next reboot. Subsequent releases didn't require this switch though.
The BIGGEST fix they've provided (and I'm sure everyone agrees with me on this) is the failsafe mode if X screws up. Who remembers about a year ago when XServer was updated and it killed the desktop? They quickly remedied the situation but for a lot of people I imagine that it either made them reinstall or switch back to Windows. Luckily I managed to downgrade my version because I hadn't cleaned out my archives in a while.
Yes, but no more so than Mandriva 2008.1. I installed it this past weekend and it is about as slick as I have seen any Linux installation thus far. Everything just "works", and works well. It is gorgeous, fast, easy to use, seamlessly knit together, simple to update, loaded with helpful admin tools, and full of packages.
It is nice to know there are many decent choices for a high quality Linux desktop experience!
In no way do I want to disparage the efforts of all people working on various Linux distributions - especially not Ubuntu, who have probably put in more than anyone in recent times - but it seems to me that the mob that has done the most to bring Linux to the masses is Asus with their eeePC laptop.
1) They've put it on a desirable, useful, practical, cheap ultra-portable laptop that people want for its size and neat-ness (and low cost)
2) They've made it simple to use and focused on the core applications and best parts of Linux
3) They've made it open source (well, maybe not by choice) and accessible for developers
4) They've solid millions of them, in a single stroke bringing Linux-to-the-desktop to more users than (I would guess?) ever before.
5) Probably most importantly, they've scared the living SHIT out of Microsoft who are now scurrying around trying to get a lightweight version of XP together to match it, which is almost 100% the opposite of what they're trying to do everywhere else (ie, make people buy Vista).
No, no, no. Did OS X work perfectly on this random Dell that you tried to install Hardy on?
Seriously. When you first started using OS X, you bought a new machine that was specifically built to run that OS. Comparing that experience to trying to install Ubuntu on random hardware is absurd. If you want to compare your OS X experience to anything, compare it to a Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed.
Why would I spend hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring people and setting up the facilities to create a product that is probably not going to make me enough money to cover said expenses?
What the hell does that have to do with whether you have open source drivers or not?
Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's easy, and we've known it for a long time: Yes, and yes.
Convincing the masses to actually install it, now, that's the trick.
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really. If that was the case, what was the necessity of Ubuntu? Ubuntu has definitely made Linux easier to install and use which was definitely not the case until like 2 yrs ago.
Ubuntu (7.10) still has its own shortcomings in configuring things like Bluetooth or Wifi which I hope will not not be there in 8.04 release.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've bought laptops that many times and tried Linux on all of them, then why haven't you just picked a laptop with supported wireless hardware at some point? I mean - Intel brand wireless that *works perfectly* is a required part of the Intel Centrino(tm) platform - it's not like it's rare or anything.
Seriously, it's like you're punching yourself in the face and complaining that it hurts. I'm not feeling much sympathy here.
Parent
Very few will install over MS (Score:4, Insightful)
What we do see, however, is that devices like EEE PC are making people aware that there is a choice and that Linux is real. Here in New Zealand we can buy laptops preinstalled with Ubuntu in regular retail shops http://www.dse.co.nz/cgi-bin/dse.storefront/48067b6603694d34273fc0a87f3b067e/Product/View/XC5822 [dse.co.nz]. These have been quite popular. They are still quirky: for example setting up wireless is a bit messy (not as slick as windows) and the power management sucks a bit.
I run HH on one of these laptop that came installed with GG. For the most part, I don't think that HH vs GG is much of an issue for adoption. What is important is that distros like Ubuntu are very easy to use/update and that devices like Eee PC are exposing more people to the option. Soon people will be asking for Linux preinstalled on higher spec laptops and we'll see more choice.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
1.) Explain why their pda will no longer sync with their calendar, mail client, or transfer files
2.) Explain why they can't just plugin more than two monitors and just get it to display without editing config files
3.) Explain why they can't use that one application they NEED for work that only runs on windows.
4.) Explain why they can't play [latest high end game]
5.) Explain why [latest high end hardware] doesn't work in linux at all.
6.) Explain why their cheap no name printer doesn't work with linux out of the box.
7.) Explain why the pptp linux client is such a pain in the ass to use.
Before you go into some detailed explanation about how the evil M$ empire is preventing interoperability or how linux is so much more secure and stable remember your average user doesn't give a damn. They want to work/play and they can either do it right away or they can't, excuses and explanations don't matter.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said, I tried to install Ubuntu a month or two ago. Well, it appears that the graphical installation is shot. Whatever I did, it wouldn't run on my now at least one year old machine. So I had to download the text install version.
I have two SATA Harddrives in there. One houses XP which I won't get rid of until Cedega actually manages to run ALL my effing games without 'minor problems'. Did you know that I've been partitioning with the likes of fdisk and cfdisk back in those days? Did you know I've been able to do a dual boot as a sixteen year old kid back in those days with an ancient version of SuSE?
Well, don't go believing I was able to partition the disks the way I wanted with Ubuntu because Ubuntu is made for the masses and the masses obviously don't have a need for partitioning more than one drive because the drive I wanted to partition just didn't show up.
What did install eventually was Mandriva. And it worked... mostly. Except I have two monitors with different resolutions... Man, THAT was unpleasant but after days of scouring message boards and trying to get familiar with xorg.conf I managed even that. My scanner isn't supported in linux it seems, so there goes that idea.
Frankly, perhaps it's just me but on every damn try I run into stupid little problems which take me hours or even days to solve. As long as that remains the case, Linux for the masses remains a myth. As long as we don't have doubleclickable install files that guide us through software installation, as long as we have to set up repositories and work with dependancies that go beyond "you need Java!" Linux is definitely NOT ready for average desktop users.
And to those who'd like to mod me a troll, I'm the first person throwing a party the day I can just replace windows with linux. But at the moment I don't have the time to spend hours tinkering with my box. I need that damn piece of equipment to just work.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Interesting)
That's certainly "very interesting".
It's not as if Linux hasn't had to play nice with other OSen since before 1994.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Funny)
I've read and followed the new Ubuntu dual boot instructions, a blind chimp could do it, you just clicky along 'till it's done, taking the defaults. It even resized my original windows partition with no problem.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Informative)
The most common version of this issue has to do with when a new kernel update occurs during a NORMAL ubuntu update. You click the orange star, choose update, let it download and install, then reboot and voila...no more access to any hard drive. It happens to my machine every single time.
I have to get out my liveCD boot with it, mount the main HDD partition, go into the
If you have customized your menu.lst you will also have problems the next time a kernel update happens as the update will wipe out your customization, so if you have modified the menu.lst file to make change the order in which the menu displays your choices and which os is the default, that will be wiped out and you could loose access to one or more of your partitions (hence OSes). I have see this repeatedly, and in the latest situation I have had to turn off all updates so it didn't brick this retired gentleman's system.
On my system it changes the hard drive number and I have to either boot with the livecd or remember to modify the menu.lst before I reboot the computer. Total pain.
Now I'm not supporting the idea that the installer bricked his unit. It didn't. I'm saying that making this sort of error and letting it stand for years without being addressed and then tossing it back into the face of the user (who just might be a retired friend who knows little about computers) is not the way to go about marking your product.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Informative)
Somehow, Ubuntu is being flamed for this, even though it puts a lot more effort into playing nice with other OS's than Windows - which nobody seems to criticize here at all.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Informative)
### BEGIN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST
And.. don't change anything between:
## ## End Default Options ##
and
### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST
Feel free to put additional definitions after the end of that block, and to change the way the other definitions are defined, adjust the 'comments' above the block.
Then, once you've done that, run 'grup-update' to apply your changes and see if it was what you were after. I usually make one change:
I change #howmany to #howmany=2 (that way I still have one history in case the new kernel doesn't work).
Hopefully that makes life easier for you...
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Informative)
Rendering your system unbootable however is something else entirely. Although you may have screwed up the data on your hard drive to the point of no (or really expensive) recovery the system as a wholeâ"and even the driveâ"are/is still 100% usable with a little bit of work; mostly/all in software.
Unbootable != bricked.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Informative)
Why not set the kernel-related packages to 'hold' status? Then, they won't be automatically updated (the updater will say "package X has been held back" or something to that effect).
When you're in the mood to update the kernel and perform all the liveCD booting that entails, you can manually update that package (unhold, install new version, hold again).
Meanwhile, you can still leave automatic update on to get all other updates automatically without fear that you might be in for a surprise dose of liveCD booting and MBR fixing (which I agree is very annoying if you had stuff to get done when it happens).
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Informative)
If they try to install Windows on their Ubuntu system, Windows will destroy their access to their Ubuntu partition with no questions asked.
Maybe it would be a good idea to suggest those things in the manual, but its not big enough of a deal for Ubuntu or Windows to do it.
Either put up with the (admittedly horrible) norms of reliability in the computing world, or improve it yourself. There is nothing to gain by bitching about it for so long.
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Then.. Umm... It wasn't bricked. If you can fix it from software, aka without having to pull the bios chip off the motherboard, it's not bricked.
Broken, sure. But we have a term for that, and it's not "bricked." It's "broken."
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:No, and No (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:No, and No (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Xorg (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
I agree (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:No, and No (Score:5, Insightful)
No. Leave *SOME* Linux distributions to power users and the server market. But Windows users have the right to an alternative.
The point isn't that a user refuses to edit any configuration file. The point is that the user SHOULDN'T HAVE to edit any configuration file in the first place! Not to mention recompiling packages, building your own rpm's, solve dependency problems, have to complain about drivers not working out of the box...
Since I moved to Linux half a year ago, I've had to do a lot of stuff that the ordinary user shouldn't have to. I would love to just click here and there, and WHILE STILL having options, not have to worry about messing around with the configuration.
Tell me, why the heck are you afraid of ordinary users? Musicians, artists, graphic designers, hardcore gamers... they want something that just works. What do you have against that, and what are you afraid of? If you don't want dumbed-down distributions, don't use them and keep your own distro! Linux uses the GPL license for a reason.
I don't mind using the same operating system than an elitist zealot uses - just not the same computer.
Parent
Re:No, and No (Score:5, Interesting)
Marketing Linux to the average desktop is a bad idea. Leave Linux to the power users and the server market.
Just because I'm not afraid of editing a config file doesn't mean I want to. I like that in a modern Ubuntu distro I can get everything working with a minimal amount of fuss, and don't like the parts that don't work automagically so I have to go mucking about with config files.
You know what the best part about it is, though? The "it works automagically don't worry" part and the "oops didn't work but don't worry you can fix it with text-editor-fu" part live in perfect harmony. Linux is getting better in the usability department, without sacrificing its "power user" roots. I can't see anything to complain about.
If you want to be an elitist about it, go use Slackware, or any *BSD. You can still consider yourself superior to the poor slobs whose Linux distros don't require config file editing, for whatever that's worth.
Oh, and I may be a power user, but I'm also a gamer, and I want games that run natively on Linux. Besides a tiny subset of games, that's not happening until Linux is the average desktop.
Parent
Re:No, and No (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Yes, and yes. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Ready for the masses indeed. (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Yes, & yes = NO & No (Score:5, Insightful)
Want to use your favourite software (photoshop, dreamweaver, GTA 4 etc: nope, that's for windows and/or mac only.
The Linux software ecosystem is rife with applications that perform the same task as their popular proprietary counterparts. Some of them aren't quite up to par (Gimp), some are roughly equivalent (OpenOffice), and some are leagues better (Firefox). There are more and more proprietary applications being ported to Linux all the time.
If your argument is that there are specific software packages that can't run on Linux, well, the same is true for both Windows and Mac. There are many Mac applications that you simply can't buy for Windows and we all well know that the reverse is true.
Neither Mac or Windows come with a system where you can browse from a catalog of over 10,000 applications and install any one of them instantly, for free, with the click of a mouse button.
Want to buy new hardware... well you can if you scour the internet for days finding out if it's compatible; you can't just pop down pcworld one saturday afternoon and pick something up and know it'll work.
This hardware myth really needs to be put to rest. Linux supports a wider variety of hardware [lwn.net] than any other operating system on the planet. True, there can be a delay between the time that a new device is released and the time that a common Linux distribution supports it. It's also true that some hardware vendors refuse to release their hardware specifications or even cooperate in any way with open source developers but these are very much the exception these days rather than the rule. If you think Windows supports hardware any better than Linux then you have either not used Vista yet or have somehow managed to be the only person on the planet who has never fought with Windows over printer, video, or wifi driver issues at some point.
Want to install some software... sure... if you broadband no problem...
Ubuntu and many of its derivatives will ship you a copy of their OS on CD at no charge. No media fees, no shipping and handling. Free. Most of the software that you can install afterward is not at all too large to pull down via a dialup modem. Windows and OS X cost hundreds of dollars each. I would say that I put my money where my mouth is, except that I don't have to spend any of it on Linux at all.
oh, but it might install the software anywhere on your system... good luck learning to grep it.
Not sure what you mean here. On KDE- and GNOME-based distributions, a shortcut to every installed application gets put into the applications menu. Which, by the way, is sorted by the software's function so everything is easy to find. Contrast with Windows where each application goes into its own folder or a folder named after the company that distributed it. Install enough applications and the Start menu becomes large and unusable. Contrast also with Mac, where you have to dig down into a special (and also unsorted) Applications folder to find newly-installed apps.
Fat chance if your friend has just given you a cdrom with software on it!
Why, you don't have any friends?
Okay, unprofessional personal attack aside, Linux-using friends are more likely to give you a URL than a CD-ROM. If someone's giving you a CD-ROM with Windows or Mac software on it, there's a good chance it's warez anyway unless they're in the habit of giving away their legitimate software.
want to play games.... err... well... no.. not really, but hey we've got solitaire!!!
There is, admittedly, a noted lack of high-profile games natively available for Linux. However, there are some good ones [linuxgames.com] available. Recent versions of Quake and Unreal Tournament run fine natively.
Parent
They're doing great (Score:5, Insightful)
But, unfortunately, it's far from perfect. Ubuntu is and has been good enough for my completely non-computer-literate roommate to use when the system is up and running. But there's no way he could have gotten the wireless working on his own (even in the 8.04 beta, I still had to download and install drivers, then muck around with
Still, the progress is outstanding.
Re:They're doing great (Score:5, Interesting)
Every time this happens -- which is often enough to be annoying -- I have to go hunt down individual drivers from individual manufacturer's websites, since half of them seem to need to be propietary to work at all (the generic Broadcom driver for a Dell laptop, for example, would not install, but the one from Dell's site did). Then I have to burn them to CD, take them to the afflicted machine, and load them that way.
Ironically I usually end up doing this from my Ubuntu laptop, where everything -- absolutely everything -- worked out of the box. Even on Broadcom chipsets, the only thing I've ever had trouble with in the past when it came to Linux, Ubuntu just threw a message box that said something like "Check this box to enable the restricted wireless driver," and presto.
My point, I guess, is that I've never understood why people criticize Linux because Your Mom wouldn't know what to do if something goes awry. While true, it isn't like Your Mom knows what to do when things go awry with Windows either, so what's the difference?
Parent
Possibly (Score:5, Interesting)
Right now, with a few exceptions, it's the geeks advertising it to others. There's not enough of us really to make an impact (and not all of us are evangelists). Ubuntu or an equally-suitable disto NEEDS to be pre-installed on a larger number of machines than we currently have. Simple.
Not only casual computer users (Score:4, Interesting)
I run a Gentoo workstation for work, where I set up things exactly the way I want them, but this is quite time consuming.
I also have a "media center" type box with ubuntu that the family uses to get and display multimedia content. This box is almost maintenance free, no virus, no problems. A Windows machine would have given me a lot more work and it would have turned me into a pirate
Re:Not only casual computer users (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
TYoLotD (Score:5, Funny)
(Not like all those other years -- those were totally different.)
People buy computer systems not operating systems. (Score:5, Insightful)
take some risks (Score:5, Interesting)
Stop playing it safe and force Fraunhofer's hand. Make them come out as bad guys and demand you remove mp3 support.
I understand there are scary legal reasons for not having mp3/dvd support.. but as a user, I don't care what they are.
Re:take some risks (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Commercial Gaming (Score:4, Insightful)
For actual useful work, in a company with an IT staff, Linux and BSD have been ready for a while now.
lol @ the targeted ads at the top of the page (Score:4, Funny)
In-depth 3rd Party Analysis Linux & Windows
www.microsoft.ie/getthefacts
My Dad uses it. (Score:5, Interesting)
He's been on the previous release of Ubuntu LTS for years now and he hasn't a clue how the machine works, which is exactly how he likes it.
All I had to do was hook up his FIOS and tell him to always accept the patches when the OS asked him for permission to install them.
It Depends (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is that the other 10% is crap like Clippy and Activex that no one on Linux wants to have or implement, but makes a certain number of computer users more comfortable. Windows does so much hand-holding by default, and that's one of the things Linux users hate about it. But it's necessary for a number of people who can never remember the difference between business and friendly letters or for people who are to afraid to even click Settings... let alone dick around with it a bit.
It doesn't help that Linux is mostly marketed by the community as being "Almost-Windows" or "Free Windows", instead of as a product that stands on its own.
People have said as a joke that OpenOffice.org or similar programs will take over once they have their own clippy, but may a true word is said in jest.
Just keep asking (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that the fact that this question keeps coming up on
Ubuntu on a laptop (Score:5, Informative)
The BIGGEST fix they've provided (and I'm sure everyone agrees with me on this) is the failsafe mode if X screws up. Who remembers about a year ago when XServer was updated and it killed the desktop? They quickly remedied the situation but for a lot of people I imagine that it either made them reinstall or switch back to Windows. Luckily I managed to downgrade my version because I hadn't cleaned out my archives in a while.
It's taken a while, but Ubuntu's getting there.
Yes, it is ready, but not just because of Ubuntu (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, but no more so than Mandriva 2008.1. I installed it this past weekend and it is about as slick as I have seen any Linux installation thus far. Everything just "works", and works well. It is gorgeous, fast, easy to use, seamlessly knit together, simple to update, loaded with helpful admin tools, and full of packages.
It is nice to know there are many decent choices for a high quality Linux desktop experience!
the eeePC is (Score:5, Insightful)
1) They've put it on a desirable, useful, practical, cheap ultra-portable laptop that people want for its size and neat-ness (and low cost)
2) They've made it simple to use and focused on the core applications and best parts of Linux
3) They've made it open source (well, maybe not by choice) and accessible for developers
4) They've solid millions of them, in a single stroke bringing Linux-to-the-desktop to more users than (I would guess?) ever before.
5) Probably most importantly, they've scared the living SHIT out of Microsoft who are now scurrying around trying to get a lightweight version of XP together to match it, which is almost 100% the opposite of what they're trying to do everywhere else (ie, make people buy Vista).
Re:Yahoo suggests, yes, it is... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:No and No. I fought it earlier today. (Score:5, Insightful)
So did that detect your RAID array and Wireless card when you installed it on your machine?
Parent
Re:No and No. I fought it earlier today. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, no, no. Did OS X work perfectly on this random Dell that you tried to install Hardy on?
Seriously. When you first started using OS X, you bought a new machine that was specifically built to run that OS. Comparing that experience to trying to install Ubuntu on random hardware is absurd. If you want to compare your OS X experience to anything, compare it to a Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed.
Parent
Re:No and No. I fought it earlier today. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm no expert, but....
Parent
Re:The masses are not the limiting factor (Score:5, Insightful)
What the hell does that have to do with whether you have open source drivers or not?
Parent