Rise of the 'Consumer' Linux Distribution 549
Hodge writes "Newsforge has an article discussing the potential for 'Consumer' Linux distro's, i.e. ones aimed at regular users rather than the Geek Elite. It's quite an insightful article, recognising that the vast majority of computer users just want a system that works and don't care about issues of open- or closed-source and don't even want to know about dependencies."
Not earth shattering news is it? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've only been saying this since I started using Linux in 97/8... Think, but can your DAD use it?
Re:Not earth shattering news is it? (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyway, even though that's been something that's seemed secondary to many of us, there are a few (redhat lindows, and probably others) that have realised that and taken some pretty good steps towards it.
If I didn't have so much code that's linked to closed source msvc style libraries, I wouldn't even have a reason for windows anymore. Since most of the tools I use are open source (aside from that environment). Heck even gaming under linux isn't impossible anymore
Re:Not earth shattering news is it? (Score:3)
You're absolutely right! We've been spending too much time with the average user and it has been dumbing us down.
Or perhaps we spent too much time away from english class.
Dad and the other desktop users... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or have we in geek culture spent too little time away from the average user to recognize this ourselves?
If you look at the desktop experiences of one advanced user who isn't a developer [glowingplate.com], I think it's safe to say that this is an ongoing problem.
A viable desktop operating system is more than a kernel and associated utilities; it's dependent on applications which *do what the competition does* and which look good and work well.
After all, to Joe Sixpack, the computer is a tool, not a toy.
The threshold which developers have to cross before we, as a community, can say that Linux is ready for the desktop, is one where the developers stop thinking about stuff as being "cool", but start to think of useful features, common interface guidelines for everything, and color schemes which don't make ordinary users wince every time they start a given application.
(Don't argue to me that you can easily adjust the color schemes in the preferences, you *know* most idiot users can't figure out how to do this.)
Features? Examples:
Note that I'm comparing a *CURRENT* version of OpenOffice unfavorably with a *6-year-old* Microsoft product. That's not something we want to brag about - "The leading office suite for Linux has most of the features of a 6-year-old version of Microsoft Office!"
I've only been saying this since I started using Linux in 97/8... Think, but can your DAD use it?Thank you. It's good to hear an increasing chorus of voices who're worried about this, especially as we reach a point where, on the surface, it looks like Linux is a viable alternative to Windows on the desktop. Those ordinary users who make the switch now will be dissatisfied very quickly, and will become staunch Microsoft proponents and purchasers for years to come, even when all the current problems with a Linux desktop have been addressed - public perception changes more slowly than the feature lists of open-source software.
As for Dad, no. He's 63 years old. If I were to install a really locked-down version of Linux on his machine, I'd have to place "Internet Explorer" and "Outlook" icons on his desktop. If I were to change the location of the Send button in Outlook, he'd never figure out how to send an e-mail, let alone swapping him into a whole different program on a whole different operating system.
He called me up and asked me why he couldn't get to a website that someone told him to check out. The URL was all-revealing: blahblah@domain.com. The difference between an e-mail address and a website address is apparently too much for him.
Re:Dad and the other desktop users... (Score:2)
What do I have to do to get OO to launch xine and seemlessly play a video file in my presentation?
Oops. "seAmlessly". Sorry.
Re:Not earth shattering news is it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Interesting you should bring that up... I installed Linux on my Dad's home PC a few months ago. His use is web (and email via web interface).
The main affect? I don't get much email from him anymore even though KDE in windows compatability mode is pretty darn close to Windows.
Intuitive === Familiar.
It's not just Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
Case in point:
I'm sitting in a University computer lab right now. There is a long line of individuals waiting at the door for a chance to use a computer. The thing is, the lab isn't full. All the Windows computers are full, but there are two Apple G4's running OS X beside me here waiting to be used. I regularly here people complain that they don't know how to use a Mac so they wait in line. Reality of the situation is, for all they're using it, the differences between a Mac and PC are nominal. They all have Word and Excel and everything else. Just the interface is different.
Down the street is another lab that has Red Hat 8.0. It's for the Mathematics and Engineering departments. Most of the undergrads that use that lab probably have no clue about what Red Hat is, but they can log in and find an icon for MatLab or whatever it is they're looking for and they're off and running.
My point is, it's not that hard! The problems are usually with the user's own preconceptions. No matter how well you design a system, people are still going to gravitate to whatever they are familiar with and if it so happens they first learned on VMS, then that will feel more user friendly that Windows or OS X. So recognize that it's not always the problem of us geeks writing bad UI's. And in the end, I would hate it if everything looked like Windows simply because that's what everyone is used to. I love the choice and differences that Linux distros and window managers offer.
Re:Children (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, but this isn't really going to apply to you. There'll be some other technology that your children think you will have trouble coping with.
Look at the history. My Dad had no trouble whatsoever mastering the TV and remote control. That's because he grew up with the technology (maybe not the remote). But when VCRs came out, I was the only one in the family that could set the clock. (Dad learned when I left for College). He can use a computer as long as nothing goes wrong. As soon as there's a problem with it, he's at a loss. I, on the other hand, have no problem using and fixing computers. It's just a necessary evil. I fully expect that there will be some other new technology that I just can't grasp, which will seem simple to my children. I'll just have to have my son come over everytime the fusion generator needs to be reset or something like that.
Re:Children (Score:2)
I'm also old enough that I have friends who have children old enough to read
So perhaps I shouldn't use 'dad', it's just an example of someone near to me who woudn't have been capable of using Linux a few years ago, who now probably would.
Oh no! (Score:2, Funny)
Mass hysteria! Cats and Dogs living together!
I agree. (Score:4, Insightful)
Opposite reaction (Score:5, Informative)
Funny, when my manager hears "Linux" and "Open Source" (mainly from me), he gets immediately defensive. To him it means "unfamiliar", "different", and "not approved by Corporate". Makes my stomach turn.
It makes me sick when we have to sit in meetings and work around delays and problems caused by licensing issues imposed on us by software vendors. "Oh, we can't install that environment, we don't have enough licenses. We'll have to wait for the PO to go through on it before we can proceed." We have to budget in licensing that we may never use, but we will sit on licenses that we have paid for because we don't want to give them up. It's too hard to get them back, and we have the money in our budget already. Argggh. It is stupid and wasteful.
Most users don't give a damn about the philosophy behind the software.
They probably do more than they know. People get copies of Windows and Office and games from their friends all the time. They do it because they can't pay $$$$ for it, yet they need it. Managers and IT people want software that is reasonably priced without licensing hassles. (except in my case I guess) I'll bet that a lot of people would like the Open Source or Free Software philosophy if it was explained to them. They probably won't fight for it, or pursue it, but they would choose it. But even if they don't, or are never given the opportunity to, I am damn glad that *I* can choose it. It just needs more support from the people who make software so that the end user can get the programs they want.
Re:I agree. (Score:3, Insightful)
On the Microsoft's radar article recently, someone else argued that people that think free(beer) is important are somehow clueless, because the true objective is free(speech).
My objective is usability and efficiency for me. I do my own cost/savings ratios. From these, I see I sometimes waste time on inefficient tasks, and I REGULARLY get paid lots of money for my time, when I could have more cheaply bought a solution. I've learned to not question it when I'm told to do so, since it's usually fun and interesting work.
I think the reason for regularly getting told to do something inefficiently rather than buy a solution, is because it 'seems' more expensive to buy a fix since they'll be paying me either way. With that in mind:
- Sure, most people pick 'Free' rather then spendy. TCO requires mental discipline or attention to details.
- Causing microsoft's price to drop is a good thing on so many levels. It diminishes an exhorbitant markup ratio (99%?) which silences FUD marketing, puts money back into consumer pockets so they can spend it on me (hey, I can dream!), and if we're lucky, it'll slow down Microsoftian feature creep and let us develop for stable API's and start acting more like engineers and less like ballerina's and egotistical artiste's.
- More users means more of a market in Linux. That means the stuff I like that hasn't ported over from windows *might* get ported. There's always something. Right now, it's TaxCut (die, TurboTax, die!).
- More attention means better code on linux-side.
So... do most people overlook the pseudo-progressive leanings of FSW and just think 'free as in beer'? Sure. Am I ok with that? A helluva lot more ok than I am with spending money on you-know-who.Re:I agree. (Score:2)
Re:I agree. (Score:2)
MS Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
Just another paranoid thought, brought to you by
-theGreater.
Re:MS Linux - won't happen (Score:2, Informative)
I don't think they can though. (Score:2)
Re:I don't think they can though. (Score:2)
I don't think there could be any legal agreement to keep MS from Unix business. The only legal thing I can recall about it would be Unix trademark (now own by SCO as well). But I don't think that the trademark will restrict some specific company (MS) of using it (legally!) in a same way as other can.
The only thing I recall about any restriction for MS from using Unix is the public claims of MS itself swearing of not using it. But that belongs to M$ and M$ is the only one who is capable to change it :)
Buffalo News. (Score:5, Interesting)
Odd to see this stuff getting so much mainstream attention. I especially liked how the author of the Buffalo News article went out of his way to point out how much cheaper a computer is without MS Windows.
Free software won't be taking over the world any time soon, but its definitely getting more and more mindshare every year.
--saint
Re:Buffalo News. (Score:2, Insightful)
Depends on how much of that time is spent unlearning the habits formed by Windows use.
The interfaces for these newer desktop Linux distros, like Lycoris and Lindows, seem to me to be just as intuitive as the one Windows XP has. Obviously there are differences, but it seems to me that starting from a blank slate, a new user can learn Linux just as easily as they can learn Windows or Mac OS.
(Then again, I use Windowmaker on FreeBSD, and like it - it's certainly possible that I'm unable to see these things from the perspective of a new user, since it's been so long since I had to approach a computer problem without having any inkling of the solution. So please take this with a grain of salt.)
--saint
Re:Buffalo News. (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, we wouldn't want anyone to "waste" their time learning something, now would we?
This may sound elitist, but there is some value in having an educated userbase.
Even more so considering the bazaar style development of OSS.
millions of users that don't know jack about computers may buy us better hw-support and more commercial software for OSS platforms, but it wouldn't bring much advantages to the actual developers, and in the bazaar, the developer is king (for better or for worse).
I don't see any problem with OSS being easy to use, but "easier than Windows" may not be a goal worth aiming for.
Neither may world domination, at least not for it's own sake.
Make a big split (Score:2, Insightful)
But, the biggest hurdle is UI familarity. That massive windows base cares naught for tech, just that File->Open C:\ whatever LOOKS THE SAME.
Why do we always come back to this (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft use the "repeat until people start to beieve it" marketing method which make people think that windows is some revolutionary concept that make computers easy to use. Then when they get people on the windows they lock them in with proprietary file formats like Word doc.
If microsoft started to market Linux today they could make the peoples think it's easier than anything else aftera a matter of time too, it's all in the marketing. Linux will never ever have a consumer success on desktop until they understand this. But you watch the FreeBSD learn this since they are really OSX. they will be the ones to make consumer success, not Linux.
Re:Why do we always come back to this (Score:2, Insightful)
beieve it" works for Apple too.
When will the Apple mouses have more than
one button? Do not answer that you can plug
any usb mouse.
Re:Why do we always come back to this (Score:2, Interesting)
If Apple had ever tried to compete on price and not charge two times what their computers are worth and also use faster more modern chips then they could have been the microsoft.
But hindsight is the 20/20 I know.
Re:Why do we always come back to this (Score:3, Insightful)
Agree.
Windows has never been much more user friendly than Linux on desktop
Strongly disagree. I'd say, Windows has been yards more user-friendly. From visual appeal* to standardized installation techniques, to a reasonably standardized look-n-feel (that apps can break if they want to), to a standardized help system... oh, the list goes on and on.
Of course, the Linux community is unlikely to acknowledge this anytime soon -- for them, anyone who buys Windows is either a drone or a hapless victim of MS' evil monopoly. Guess it's much easier to play victim.
* Gnome2 with decent fonts (e.g. RH8) is a huge improvement. But try running OpenOffice on RH8 and you'll want to puke.
"Consumers" are cheapskates (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure, you can argue that not everybody does that. But the point is, the *majority* are cheapskates.
[1] Selling for little money or for free introduces other problems. Like "It's cheap/free, so it must suck"-prejudgements.
[2] About the "Linux users are cheapskates"-stereotype: that's not true. *Consumers* are cheapskates.
Windows Activation (Score:2)
Sure, some people will find a crack for it, but Joe Blow can't hand it off to his co-workers without additional work.
I'm only talking about the US. In China where illegal software is usually sold, I'm sure it will be a cracked version that's sold.
Re:Windows Activation (Score:2)
And downloading a crack really isn't that difficult. It's quite easy actually.
Most people you know. (Score:2)
I know in the past, corporate america was notorious for making copies of Windows and handing it out to co-workers. Throwing in a crack is enough work and adds enough uncertainty that I think it's slowing these sort of copiers down.
Re:Most people you know. (Score:3, Funny)
They are just 15-16 year old kids.
Re:"Consumers" are cheapskates (Score:2)
In all honesty? None. You get Windows when you buy a PC; very few people bother upgrading otherwise. Besides, you have to contact Microsoft to activate XP, so casual piracy is not so easy.
There are still fundamental problems to solve (Score:5, Insightful)
I've evangelized a few friends to run SuSE 8.1. It's easy and slick to install. Nice KDE desktop. <list of good things omitted>
Still, I get questions that point out obvious deep problems not solved yet. "How do I change the resolution of my monitor?"
Obviously, you don't just go to the Display control panel, change it, see the change take effect on the screen with your windows and icons automatically adjusting. Not to mention useful help such as if the display doesn't appear just press ESC or wait 15 seconds.
What I'm getting at here is that different high quality software projects such as KDE and X windows are not deeply integrated. While I commend these and other projects, it is still not Mac or Windows easy to use. KDE has done a wonderful job of putting some system configuration features into their control center. But I suspect some additional technical features/api's in X would be necessary in order to achieve the seemless resolution changing ala. Mac or Windows.
This is but one example, although perhaps one of the worst ones. High level gui control panels seem to already do many things well, such as configuring your PPP or other low level things.
Re:There are still fundamental problems to solve (Score:5, Informative)
I guess you've never heard of XRandR. It allows on-the-fly resolution changing and screen rotation. The extension will be included in XFree86 4.3. Both KDE and GNOME are working on support for XRandR.
Re:There are still fundamental problems to solve (Score:2, Interesting)
Only problem that I have with Suse is they don't install all the needed dev utils for when I want to compile things myself. Such as MythTv, or Mplayer.
Re:There are still fundamental problems to solve (Score:3, Informative)
Re:There are still fundamental problems to solve (Score:4, Insightful)
Theres a good reason for this. Its called:
Lack of Standards (tm)
If we had one standard packaging mechanism, standardized desktops, and windowing environments, Linux would be doing much better. Rather than looking at the differences between distros and KDE and GNOME, developers would make simple but important things like the resolution changer. If they can get the guarantee the API will remain constant across distros for the window system, paths will not change etc, they could build layers that integrate tigher.
But alas the Lack of Standards (tm) will remain and Linux will be much weaker than Microsoft, MaxOSX and BEOS in desktop strength. I dont see these layers standardizing anytime soon, and they will divide the precious developer pool.
Re:There are still fundamental problems to solve (Score:3, Insightful)
We did have a standardized windowing enviroment: it was called CDE, and was generally hated.
Diversity builds strength. How many advances were made only because Red Hat or Debian or Mandrake could do it, so we had to do it? Gnome and KDE have been playing off each other quite nicely, and allow the exploration of different routes. I run Linux because there is choice, and because there isn't one true way. I suspect many of my fellow Linux desktop users run Linux because they can adjust it to be exactly what they want. Throwing out your current market to get another market is almost always a bad idea.
Linux will be much weaker than [...] BEOS in desktop strength.
Weaker than BeOS? In what sense? BeOS is dead, because it couldn't get a market. Linux works for more people as a desktop then BeOS ever did.
I dont see these layers standardizing anytime soon, and they will divide the precious developer pool.
Divide the precious developer pool? There are some 400 developers in Debian, and we can't use more, even if Red Hat and Mandrake all disbanded and made Debian the one true distribution. Konqueror and Mozilla build each other up; as each one adds an great innovation, it gets processed, the problems fixed, and added to the other. That wouldn't happen if all the people were working on one browser.
In any case, Microsoft and MacOS ignore the developer pool; if they aren't paying you, you aren't touching anything of any importance. There's always a place for a new developer in Linux, and if it's reinventing the wheel, well, I doubt you still drive on crude stone wheels.
Linux is heading in the right direction (Score:5, Informative)
People don't have to know how to build an enginer to drive a car. They know that being able to open the hood and fiddle with the engine is dangerous if you don't know what you're doing, and to lock the car when you are away from it, that's common sense.
This common sense should come to computers as well. Locking them when you are away and not fiddling under the hood. However the option SHOULD be there for people who know what they're doing.
If Linux can bring that option and reduce the cost of new operating systems to a reasonable amount, THEN it will have achieved a respectable goal.
If more people use it because it is clearly the best choice, depending on distro, then Linux will be where we want it to be. Those of you who only use it as an OS because it's different, you will have an excuse to move on to bigger, better things.
Never will (Score:3, Insightful)
It would be nice... (Score:2)
$99? What? (Score:3, Informative)
Bite the bullet - It's easier to use Openoffice than support a MS Office-on-linux solution. Joe Blow has a hard enough time with Office on Windows, let alone some hack (as neat as it may be).
And you can find 2000/XP at thhis price point as well. Win2kSP3 with OpenOffice is a better value than these distros. At $30, Redhat with OpenOffice is unbeatable, even for newbies, 8.0 is _easy_. For the rest of us, Debian isn't going anywhere.
Ditto for engineers! (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm an experienced software engineer, and I don't care either! I want to work on developing my products, I don't want to be a full-time system administrator, constantly having to fiddle with things. And I don't care about open vs. closed in most cases either; I'll go with the better product.
Re:Ditto for engineers! (Score:2)
Yes and no. I agree with the first poster - I want my main development box to turn on, and just allow me to work - I don't want to fiddle
Ditto my main home box
Those boxes are for WORK - they are utilities, not for fiddling with. I want them to be configured the same way, EVERY TIME. I've run the same desktop colors and photos for, oh, 8-9 years now - my icons and menus haven't change in a year or two, and match on both system - heck, I buy the same keyboard and mouse for both
Now, for PLAYING around, I'll either multiboot, or have a different system - THAT is where I play, tinker and learn
It's sort of like cars (or like cars back in the day you could actually work on them). When you don't make your living with your car, you can afford to have your car down/being upgraded. Then comes a time in your life when you depend on the car being running - every morning. Eventually, if you have the cash, and you like to tinker, you may buy another car to "play" with. It doesn't really matter if it's out of service for a day or two - It's not your main means of transport
Lack of Responsibility (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Lack of Responsibility (Score:2)
The US consumer (And while I am Canadian the Canadian consumer is no different) demands to be bottle-fed it's conveniences and the whole art science and culture of marketing exists just to do that.
This is how Bill made his fortune, and many other before him, and many others since.
When was the last time you adjusted the fuel-air ratio and spark gap on your car?
The get-your-hands dirty crowd will ALWAYS be a niche elite. The niche elite from whom all wealth springs, but a niche elite.
Re:Lack of Responsibility (Score:2)
Right, but there are different levels. With most OSes these days, you have to understand way more than you should. Too much nonsense is exposed that could be handled automatically and cleanly. Currently, it is helpful for users to be able to know this stuff, but it's horrible that they have to in the first place.
Get over yourself (Score:4, Insightful)
As has been said many times before, for most people a computer is a tool not a toy. It is a failing on the part of the software developer not the consumer if the technology is not used to its fullest potential.
Yes you have to take classes to drive. Thats because a car can kill people. When was the last time you heard of not knowing how to print your MS Word document leading to a 41 car pileup on the highway?
When the day arrives that Artificial Intelligence is good enough to allow anyone to get what they want and need out of their computer without taking one class or reading one tiny word in their manual will you still be angry at these people? When AI lowers the status of the average geek to that of a cockroach what will your snobbery have gained you?
Will you still look down on everyone as if you are better then them just because you are a computer obsessed geek?
The fact that you believe this phenomenon is limited to Americans further reinforces how close-minded and unaware of your global surroundings you are. Its kind of funny that a tool you spend so much time with, the Internet, has failed to properly broaden your horizons and help you mature into the mature person we all have the potential to be.
Well there was that one time (Score:3, Funny)
I was trying to print a "Warning : ICE" sign for the highway...
Re:Lack of Giving a Rats Ass (Score:3, Interesting)
What a joke... (Score:2)
I think it's akin to checking a book out of the libary when you need something done - sure, the information is free, but you still have to pay someone to implement it, that is, to actually solve your problem. Of course, the idea is that once you've solved the problem, you add your solution back to the library, so it takes the next person less time to do it.
Drive Letters (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Drive Letters (Score:2)
Most users have no idea what the drive letters are for.
And I think the concept is bad, especially for a network OS. The whole network "drive mapping" process has always seemed like a work-around to me. At my office it has become so tangled, with different people using different letters for the same server, that I have taken to just using the "\\" network path in my office communications. We have a few applications that need the drive mapping defined, and it is pure hell to straighten it out for all users.
A "power user" should understand the basic concepts of Unix anyway.
But the consumer can't buy a Windows-less PC (Score:4, Insightful)
What I'm getting at is that however "easy" it is to install a Linux distro, it's far easier to get going with Windows because your PC's already got it.
The non-geeks won't even think of using a real easy distro. Whilst making the distros easy is part of the war, the first battle is to get Linux pre-installed on consumer-spec machines as a matter of course. Until then Linux disto-makers will be swimming in a tiny puddle of geeks whilst Microsoft has the ocean of normals to itself.
Rob.
Possible Market for Dell? (Score:2)
Linux is great, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's simply not nessicary to have stuff be this difficult. Sure, it can very easily be learned, and there's documentation out the wazoo for the majority of the topics I, and I'm sure many others have had problems with, but installing a new video card should not, under any circumstances, turn into an 8 hour battle with a configuration file, and unless your a hard core geek, that could happen very easily. This is the core problem with linux, and why the consumer wont use it until fixed. My parents and friends have problems running windows XP...do you think they could handle some of the even semi complex tasks of running a linux box? Highly doubtful at best.
Until linux can match the ease of use of windows (gawd, I can't believe I'm saying this), it's going to remain a niche OS for the geeky, mostly the geeky w/ lots of free time on their hands to bicker and fight w/ their computer when things go wrong.
Flame on!
Re:Linux is great, but... (Score:4, Informative)
These "problems" cannot be "fixed". Windows and Linux are general-purpose operating systems. It is impossible to make them easy for every single person out there without at least some education.
Tadaaa, that's where preinstallation and preconfiguration jumps in!
Complex tasks? What complex tasks? I setup a Linux box for my parents to surf the web. All they have to know is how to press the On/Off button, how to doubleclick on the icon of their account and how to use the browser.
That's it, no compiling, no editing configuration files: it just works.
The solution is not to make (semi) complex things easy, but to preinstall & configure the system to their needs so they don't have to do (simi) complex tasks in the first place.
Repeat the magic words: preinstallation and preconfiguration.
Re:Linux is great, but... (Score:2)
Linux is aimed at Windows 2000 Windows XP professional. both of which give massive fits to the users. W2K needs an expert at the wheel for maintaining it. Xp professional does also. same with linux.
the only way to make linux = to winME and XP home is to remove all the security and protection parts just like how microsoft did it.
Re:Linux is great, but... (Score:5, Funny)
I've got another box running as a server with SuSE and KDE/apache/mySQL etc etc. That does a fantastic job for me, and there's no way I'd run windows for that task. The linux box stays up, is reliable and I trust it much more. But ease of use? I installed a DNS server the other night (djbdns - very cool app), but it's simple 5 step install process took me about 4 attempts and 2 hours to get working right (including configuration). It had me manually creating directories, adding users, untarring, compiling, installing. Then when it appeared to be happy but just didn't run, I poked around until I figured the 'make' had to be run as root - it didn't say that. The damn thing even came with it's own process manager (who wants init or cron or any of the other standards?) which required installing as well. Don't even get me started on installing USB devices - my DSL modem is USB and it works now, but I ended up sending SuSE fixed FAQ entries for that one, and still there I was adding rows of hex numbers to some config file.
None of these problems have anything to do with security - linux is not more secure because you have to manually edit config files. In fact, I'd suggest it's less secure because of that, as it makes it easier to make a mistake when configuring it. Sure the install had to run as root, that's a good thing, but it should have told me. Windows would have done ("You need admin priviliges to install this").
So please don't take this as a pro-ms rant, it's not that. Linux has come a long way and is in many ways a far superior O/S to anything else out there, but the "ease of use" arena is one place where it just can't compete IMHO.
Linux does have one big thing going for it (Score:2)
Re:Linux does have one big thing going for it (Score:2)
Another 50% thinks: "It's cheap so it must suck."
Price is a double-edged sword.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Price doesn't matter. Value does. You can give me this great whiz-bang piece of software for free, but if I can't use it, it has exactly zero value for me. On the other hand, if I can spend $100 and get a tool that I can use to get work done, that tool has value. MS understands this. OSS types never will. They're focused on price, which is irrelevant.
Xandros (Score:2)
Consider Apple... (Score:5, Insightful)
That level of quality, reliability and integration is a tremendous achievement for Apple. However, it's a fairly large organisation that cross-subsidises its software costs with sales of hardware, unlike most of the linux disto companies - so far.
If RedHat, MandrakeSoft, Lindows or whoever could produce a product with this level of finish I'd buy it in a heartbeat and bear the susbscrition costs with joy.
Apple have at least shown what can be done and raised the bar quite significantly.
I'm optimistic that, bit by bit, the better linux distros will at least catch up.
But in the meantime here I am, wallet out and still waiting...
the subscription model (Score:2)
which raises the obvious question on if this is the direction commercial consumer oriented linux should go in.
I consider myself more than a consumer and... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm currently using SuSE but I'm starting to hate it. I used to love it. I've tried yast, apt4rpm and fou4s and I still run into dependency hell.
(Still can't get the latest version of gnucash on my 8.1 laptop!)
I tried switching to gentoo but I couldn't get the sucker to compile.
I guess I'm going to try debian next.
Me too! (Score:3, Insightful)
It just shows the flaw in Linux (Score:2, Interesting)
Half-geek response (Score:5, Interesting)
If there was a Simple Linux, I'd switch and bring my friends and family with me, and could very well bring my employer too (because I provide the tech support there). The current distros of Linux simply are not worth that effort.
Re:Half-geek response (Score:2)
That is EXACTLY what happened to me
It's bliss, really. Part of my job used to be Windows tech support, and while I knew it, trying to get a family member/friend/neighbour to do what they wanted on windows was horrible stuff. I wasn't doing something I enjoyed
I use linux and macs mainly, now. The macs that relatives have work simply and do what they need. the linux support is quite a bit less, but more often than not the people I know using linux are cluey enough to only need a poke in the right direction, instead of handholding through hours of crud. (yes, thats what I find crud. I know other people don't have a problem with it, but I'm just like that)
It's about apps, not the OS/distribution (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps the average consumer does not need more than a web browser and a word processor, but much of business requires specific applications. My industry, architecture, can not use the computer without CAD software. Thus our choice of operating systems is restricted by the offerings of CAD. (And since AutoCAD currently reigns supreme in this industry, we're stuck on Windows for a long time.)
All this talk about Linux distributions is child's play, what we really need are apps, then we can discuss suitability of distributions. I can not understand why no one seems to realize this. Enterprise level CAD and accounting software would swing huge numbers of users (personal or business) to any flavor of Linux. (Like the construction industry, maybe 5 percent the total US GDP.)
(BTW, if anybody is interested in starting a GPL, GTK+ CAD project, please drop me a line... I'm not an experienced programmer but I can do graphics, documentation, HTML, whatever, to help a serious effort. You can check CAD on Linux [mindspring.com] for more on me and my (admittedly old) research into CAD on Linux.)
Linux Acceptance (Score:2, Interesting)
Funny this should appear (Score:2)
Over the course of 2 years, I had swapped hard drives, video cards, and internet providers. I had gone from Win98(1stEd) to Windows XP now... and boy, was I in for a treat.
First off, the COMMAND.COM eqiuvalents in Windows ME & later do not support the processor mode flags that allow programs like LOADLIN to swap in the kernel. I had to go on the web for a Dos6.0 floppy disk image (even though I had Dos6 on my hard drive, you can't SYS it because of version problems) and make myself a boot disk. Once I was in Dos6 again, I could boot...
Except now I had swapped hard drives. The bootup scripts were expecting all of the partitions to be on
But now, how does one edit a file on a computer without emacs, since up to this point everything went to X11 (and run xedit like a normal person)? VI. Yay. So, imagine trying to learn syntax after 8 years of non-use. *Obviously* the Edit mode command is (ESC)-A, from there I could remember
So now everything starts up ok, and I get to the terminal. Log in, and it's time for X11. Of course the settings for my old Voodoo3 don't apply any more, I need to get it to work with an NVidia GForce3, and when you try to run X11, it craps out to a garbled video buffer, definitely not mode $80. Had to reboot just to get the text termal back.
So now I browse the web, and I find an XFree86 binary just for NVidias, so I'm happy. I copy it over, reboot to Linux, mount the drive, and try to run it... no go, it has GLIBC 2.1.3 & 2.2 dependancies. Back to Windows to scan the net for files, and finally found them in RPMs in the redhat 7 & 8 distributions... and that's where I left it, after 4 hours of tooling around. And I still have to look forward to eth0 working with DHCP before I can even get on the net..
Now explain to me how an "modern average" user is supposed to figure this all out? Linux needs SOMETHING to configure itself!
Crisis of understanding (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's what we do. Choose the 2.4.18 kernel from LILO, boot to runlevel 5, start XFree86 4.2.99.3, start a KDE 3.1rc6 session, pull up a command prompt and start phoenix& (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021207 Phoenix/0.5).
Here's what the rest of the world does. Start Windows. Click on the Internet thingy.
A "consumer" package has no choices, and no real options. You get support for all your hardware, one app for each job, and no apps that you don't need for email, browsing, word processing and playing solitaire. You get a one button, idiot proof method of updating your system. You don't have to know what kernel you're running, or what a package is.
That's what a consumer OS is, and that's what KDE and GNOME are moving towards. Whether we want Linux, GNU apps or XFree86 to be used as the basis of such a system is another question entirely.
Geek Elite == Consumer (Score:5, Insightful)
The Linux community will be much better off when geeks realize that there is no difference between a geek and a consumer. All of the things that make "consumer" Linux easy should be placed into the Geek distros. If they shouldn't, then there is something wrong with the feature. Let me provide a scenario:
I went to a Linux Users Group meeting, and one of the Windows geeks posted the question "What do you guys do with your computers?" The answers were amazing - none of them did word processing, or craeted graphics, or music. None of them were math geeks, or biology geeks, or programmers. None of them were homemakers, or fire fighters, or teachers... they were all sysadmins. To them, an "applied" use of a computer was adding users and scanning for viruses. These types of geeks aren't qualified to determine what should be in an OS since they don't even know for themselves what they are using their computers for. It's like those guys who have 3 cars in the backyard, tuned and customized, but they would never think to run them on the road. So they don't know that the new super-duper engine they just installed dies after 3000 miles. :-)
Let me tie this into a quote from the article:
Most distros I have seen come with multiple web browsers, multiple MP3 and video players, several window managers, and more text editors than I ever knew existed. The result is the exact same crime we claim against Microsoft: bloat! Installs in the multiple gigabyte range. It becomes difficult just to browse the web or play an MP3. We need geeks who have a real use for their PCs to be deciding what goes in a distro. This is good for geeks, and it is good for consumers.
There's nothing that stops someone from whipping open extra CD #7 and installing the obscure browser and mp3 player they like. But it is better of to start out clean and nice and pretty, and let someone customize it, than to start out bloated and force users to trim things out.
Cut to the chase (Score:3, Interesting)
People don't realize that MS Windows has been "free" for years. I am sure that MS did this intentionally, but how many people have actually gone to the store and paid for a copy of any flavor of Windows since Windows 98 came out? People got the OS because It is either packed into the PC they bought or they got it from a buddy whose PC came packed in with it (copy protection was non-existant before Windows XP).
When you buy a new Dell, WinXP Home is a default option that adds little to the final price to the PC. This is why Linux is facing an uphill battle. It has nothing to do with Interfaces, command lines , or GUIs.
It's the trinkets in the stores that matter IMHO. (Score:2)
When the thousands of products out there say "PC/Mac/Linux compatible" rather than "PC/Mac", then things may change. (And if we trust "Linux compatible" - at least one network card claimed this but came with an out-of-date kernel module for the wrong chipset, and the multi-channel digital audio card pointed to a German enthusiast's web site for the drivers which was only 404-enabled.)
In the meantime, I'll keep my three Linux servers doing the good server-type stuff and dual-boot a laptop into Win98SE for actual desktop computing.
$99seems to be the new price point... (Score:5, Interesting)
Incidentally, Windows XP Home's undiscounted price is $99 as well. And it comes with Windows Update for *free*. Add on OpenOffice for Windows and one's all set: very usable OS, lots of apps.
Given that an Office suite is the only chink in it's armor, I'd wouldn't wonder if an office-suite-lite was bundled into the OS soon. Three cheers for competition!
Top 5 reasons to avoid Slackware (Score:2)
5 -- You'd rather trust a large company to run your servers than some flannel dude with a 1987 ThinkPad
4 -- You'd like to spend time debating politics and religion on #debian rather than actually learning about your computer
3 -- You prefer reds, oranges, yellows, greens, blues... well, let's just say you're a Mac guy at heart
2 -- It's best to shy away from any operating system that can still be installed using a couple floppies
... and the number 1 reason to avoid Slackware
1 -- You can barely write a Slashdot post without errors, yet alone a 200 line video card configuration file
Check *nix.org [starnix.org] out -- free blogging 24/7/365
Even more to it (Score:3, Insightful)
This is true, but the average user also wants what everyone else is using.
If Joe User can't figure out how to do something, he wants to be able to call up one of his buddies who knows and ask him how to do it. He doesn't want to deal with "I dunno, Joe. I never used Linux. Sorry"
If his buddies have Macs, he'll be inclined to get a Mac. More often than not, his buddies have Windows, so thats what he wants too. His buddies dont have to be computer geeks, just someone whos used $APPLICATION before and can give him a hand.
Chances are good if he knows someone who runs linux, they are of the 'technical elitest' movement, and wont help. They'll stick their noses in the air and say "you should run Windows or get a Mac, Linux is too complicated for you".
There's an air among many of the 'in-the-know' computer geeks that they wont share information. Even Free with a capital F information, when it comes to linux. Whether its a feeling of power they get by knowing more about something than someone else, or whether they cant be bothered, or it's just a lack of social skills, it doesnt matter. They like to call themselves Gurus as if they have some mystical power and you should beg them to use it for your benefit.
It's not every linux user who behaves like this, but a large enough portion of them that it will continue to slow it's growth on the desktop.
If you want to help linux get accepted, help the users who need it.
Eg, a friend of mine has an old Compaq that he only uses to print invoices and work orders for his small business.
After about 12 times reinstalling his printer for him after Win95 kept mysteriously 'losing' the drivers, he asked if maybe he should upgrade to WinXP. I convinced him that he could do the same thing for free with Linux, and helped him get it all set up. He was wary of all the free software, because there'd be no tech support line to call. I asked him "did 1-900-tech support get your printer running for you?"
He hasn't had any problems yet, but if he did, he'd call me up, I'd come over and we'd have a couple of beers and straighten it out.
(and it's quid-pro-quo, when my furnace died on me, he came over and helped me get it firing again)
Anyhow. If you want linux on peoples desktops, put it there. And don't be an elitist shithead if they need help.
where it starts (Score:3, Interesting)
"hey, i need to finish to project at home, can i borrow your linux cd."
"well certainly, how 'bout i just burn you your own cd".
or when joe employes needs to finish up work at home and then just brings the cd home.
windows is not easy. windows is not user friendly. neither is a bicycle. windows is what most people sort of know. but that can change.
The day I knew Linux was ready (Score:5, Interesting)
One simple step and a fuller desktop than the default windows quickly loaded up. Open office documents, play mp3s, divx or even some games, all within minutes of putting the CD in. I think someone nervous about computers would actually have an easier time with this stystem than any of the windows flavors. Configuration tools were about the only thing really lacking, and KDE seems to be moving to including beefed up tools anyway. When KDE 3.1 comes with knoppix, and with a few font changes, I really think it will have surpassed windows for user friendliness to those with little computer experience. With a a little tool for automated hard drive installs, I'd almost start handing this thing out to people at christmas.
Linux - almost great (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Being useful on the desktop means that packaging methods, configuration files etc need to be standardized. The way to get Linux in the door for desktop use is in simple needs corporate desktops or kiosks, and for those to be supported at a lower cost than Windows, standards are needed to minimize the time spent.
2) Consistent, thorough and up to date documentation for programs. Everyone likes to say RTFM, check the newsgroups or what have you. To that I say useless. Half the time you do that the manual is for three revisions previous and in the newsgroups you have no idea of the person actually knows what they are talking about.
3) Number 1 and 2 will help in the other major stumbling block. Support for hardware. Getting some hardware to work under Linux is a painful procedure.
And for all those of you who are saying that you don't want it to get to this point, fine. You like your choices and spending hours upon hours in text config files that is great.
One word of caution though is that while Linux is trying to make improvements to make it onto the desktop, Windows is improving on servers.
I constantly see people here putting down Windows uptime and reliability. That is not an issue since 2000. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know that they are doing. On good hardware and with good drivers Windows 2000 can run just fine for months at a time. I dislike Microsoft and their licensing as much as anyone, but Linux's biggest strength - reliability - isn't as much a factor now.
Predition... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Installation (Score:5, Insightful)
Dual Boot?
Operating system?
If you're talking about actual end-users you're dealing with people who think that AOL *is* the internet. They aren't interested in dual booting, or installing the operating system. They're only interested in their computer coming on when they push the button and doing what they want it to do without them having to think about it. I know that at some time you've installed an application on Windows.. Double click, click next three times voila --- icon on desktop = installed program.
If they're serious about having a true user friendly Linux distro that's where they're going to have to be.
Re:Installation (Score:2, Insightful)
And further more, for the least common denominator, they want to click on some media content on a web site and it just do whatever it's supposed to do. That means flash, sound, mp3s, midi, pictures, movies, whatever. Then they usually want to edit a few documents, maybe print some Xmas cards and look at photos from their digital camera. Email should just mysteriously work for them with little setup.
Linux has to overcome the video codec problems (lack thereof), and get some games before the average joe's needs are met. Till then the easiest install won't satisfy-- but it's a step in the right direction for these folks.
Re:Installation (Score:5, Insightful)
That's 3 steps too much for a "typical" user...
Re:Installation (Score:3, Interesting)
I am a fairly advanced end-user. I've used Macs and a variety of different Windows machines in my life. On one of my boxes, I even used Partition Magic to create a dual-boot system with Windows XP and Windows 98. I kinda know what I'm doing, but not really.
On the other hand, I don't have a lot of time or patience to sink into mastering Linux. About a year ago, I attempted to install Mandrake 7 on my dual-boot machine. I got pretty far. I was able to get it up and running and make it work. I couldn't get the Internet to work, however. I spent a couple of hours at it, doing research, reading manuals, etc. But I failed. And I gave up. The Linux partition has just sat there for the last year, unused. No internet, no point.
I'm getting a new computer (arrives Thursday!), and I'm going to take the old dual-boot box and wipe it clean, and attempt to install the latest version of Redhat. I'm hopeful that I can get it to work this time. If it does, the next step is to network it with my new Windows box. I hear Samba's a bitch, but I'm going to give it a try.
If I can get it to work, then maybe it will prove that there is a group of users out there that are somewhere between Joe Longneck and Linus. I'll bet we're a significant percentage of the population, and if there's a Linux distro that can make us happy, then maybe Linux can start to see some real penetration.
Bring enough of us early-adpoters along, and maybe someday even the late-adopters will be able to join the ride.
I don't agree (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't agree (Score:2)
Heavy work with parted and NTFS, or kernel work enabling boot from a loopback filesystem on an NTFS volume would go a long way for those 'on the fence', or wanting to change, but can't just dive in until they figure out how they can get their necessary things done in Linux.
Re:I don't agree (Score:2)
Even windows 9x supported unattended installs, and any sort of company which wasn't run by joe sixpack knew about it and used that feature.
And with windows 2000/xp and unattended install/sysprep scripts, its as easy as setting up a single workstation, running sysprep, and then multicast ghosting an entire lab full of machines. I've never had to do more than select install partition on any windows 2000 or XP install because I have unattended setup files for things such as "generic install" or "server" etc that I just put on a floppy, boot off the windows install CD, select install partition and come back in 20 minutes to find it installed. You are going to tell me installing any (recent or old) linux distribution is as easy as this?
Which brings me to another point, do any of the "corporate" distributions even support any sort of scripted / unattended install? I've seen interactive installs of some (not too recent) distributions and it seems like a large company doing massive installs of linux on their desktops would want to automate most of the process.
Re:I don't agree (Score:3)
Who cares how easy it is to INSTALL the opperating system. It is once you are up and running and you want to install new hardware/functionality/programs that don't come with the distro or are not default.
One of the reasons I think most Linux distro's come with a TON too much (and often repetetive) software is because they know that if an average user was to try to compile/configure/install it themselves, they would pull out thier hair. RedHat/SUSE/Mandrake/Whatever all have Gigabyte installs because they have not found a solution to software installation issues. And don't get me started when it comes to upgrading things. Try upgrading xfree86 or GCC or Glib or a number of other stuff. Most people just upgrade thier Linux distro before trying to upgrade stuff like that. It is just not a friendly opperating system. In Linux one still need to know how to edit a make file, too much about various config files (which have no standard syntax), be comfortable reading cryptic man pages, and just more patience than the average person who just wants to USE thier computer.
Re:lose the command line... (Score:2)
Personally I don't even install a GUI on my Linux boxes, so I'm not one to talk about making things more friendly.
How about integrating the command line with gui? (Score:2)
How about making all applications based upon a system where all functionality is handled in the application's libraries, and merely called by the executable.
That way, the GUI apps can be built right on top of that, without sacrificing functionality either way.
The power users still have their interface, and grandma has her point and click.
Re:How about integrating the command line with gui (Score:2)
I've been looking for something similar for windows for a while but haven't found anything this powerful.
Re:Is this a good idea? (Score:2)
dont bitch about Linux not being popular, but then want to resrict it so the average Joe doesnt want it. You cant have it both ways
Re:the thing is.. (Score:2)
Why do you even go to forums or IRC channels?
What do you do when you have a problem? You call your distributor's helpdesk! For professional quality support.
After all, you DID pay for your distribution, right? Right?
You've got a good point. (Score:2)
I guess I'm glad they didn't call it Photo Image Manipulation Program... (PIMP)
Sometimes commercial products have equally stupid names, but at least their consistently stupid.
Re:Set a realistic goal (Score:3, Informative)
It's because you are not comparing apples to apples. KDE is resource intensive as XP. And XP wouldn't run on that P/75. If you want to run a GUI on a P/755, try something more suited to it like fvwm or icewm.
-Brent