Dan Gillmor Reconsiders Linux on the Desktop 487
Cyrus writes "Influential San Jose Mercury News tech columnist Dan Gillmore has reconsidered his stance against Linux. He now says it's rapidly converging to a viable desktop OS
for the masses. "While I wasn't paying sufficient attention, the proverbial tortoise has been playing some serious catch-up.""
Wireless (Score:3, Offtopic)
Happy Trails!
Erick
Re:Wireless (Score:5, Informative)
FWIW, I suggest using external WiFi bridges for desktop systems where internal cards are troublesome, and sticking to known-functional WiFi cards for laptops.
Of course, I try to avoid WiFi for my networks 'cause even its encrypted modes are not very secure...
Re:Wireless (Score:3, Informative)
SSH..... don't tell anyone, but my secret is...
SSH..... don't tell anyone, but my secret is...
The real joke is that some folks think that their WIRED ethernet is secure. Now, you'll have to excuse me if I wax ethereal for a second....
Re:Wireless (Score:3, Insightful)
With wireless, some guy in his car parked in front of my house could snoop in on everything.
That's what people refer to when they say wireless is unsecured. Get it?
WARNING (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wireless (Score:3)
Most of the blame is on the distros side... They fails to provide proper information and they fail to support hardware that is widely used (even if a GPL driver exist).
Re:Wireless (Score:3, Informative)
Wireless insecure (Score:2)
Re:Wireless (Score:3, Interesting)
There are other areas to work on imo like sound support etc.
Though I haven't been running Linux since last summer, but will as soon as school is over and have some time to tinker with my windows box.
--Joey
Re:Wireless (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wireless (Score:4, Insightful)
Then, I put it in the laptop while booted into Win2K, and it goes through that damn hardware wizard. I try a half dozen drivers, from the card vendor, the chipset OEM, and other similar cards.. and none load. The cards are officially supported on WinCE devices, but there is no reason they shouldn't work on Win2K. I eventually get it working in one laptop, I'm still not sure how. But, I never did get it working in my Sony VAIO. Like most Windows things, I can't get any low level information about why it's failing.. it just doesn't work.
BUT.. Once a card is working in Windows, the software is generally pretty good. I can see available Access Points, configure them - and the software remembers WEP keys, etc.
On Linux, it's a highly manual process, entering WEP keys on the command line.. using seperate tools to scan for access points.. This part totally sucks in Linux today.
The Zaurus has some half decent GUI tools for setting keys & stuff like that, but it is nowhere near as good as WinXP, WinCE, or MacOS X. This is what's needed to have a usable wireless connection.
Well duh. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you seen KDE3.2? It is more elegant and much easier to use than any versiion of windows IMHO
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, that's why people use Windows. It's UI is tight. All the apps work the same and look the same. After learning one application, you can use any of them. Unfortunately that's not the same on linux. Lots of various different ways to make graphical apps means not every app looks and behaves the same. That lack of consistency turns people away.
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Insightful)
But all the KDE tools work the same and look the same as well!
It's just non-KDE programs that look differently, but so do non-MS programs.
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Insightful)
If anything, KDE does a better job there.
Re:Well duh. (Score:2, Insightful)
I consider myslef generally technically able (I can troll around on a Unix term), but it is a bit intimidating for a first tim
Elegant and ease is the key (Score:5, Insightful)
Elegance and ease is the key to an effective OS for the masses. It needs to become as elegant as M$ and OSX (or better) to go completely mainstream. If it's not then the average user, like my parents, won't give it a second look.
Re:Elegant and ease is the key (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Elegant and ease is the key (Score:3, Insightful)
1) you must stick to either kde, *box, gnome, etc. which users are not going to want to do
2) distributions must have a SINGLE standard window manager
and beyond that, the choices the users and distributions have to choose from must be up to par with windows & os x.
Re:Well duh. (Score:4, Insightful)
For example, if I could just install linux and have it autodetect my wireless nic and work properly with my scanner then I would be all for it.
I am pretty sure this will come in time.
Fundamental desktop flaws (Score:3, Insightful)
They also won't understand the "file is a device" thing--strictly a UNIX programmer idea--because they see files as real documents. Complete confusion.
There's more, but I won't go into
Re:Fundamental desktop flaws (Score:3, Insightful)
Normal people don't understand either the MSWindows File Hierachy nor do they understand any version of MacOS. (MacOSX is a distant relative Linux File Hierachy.) The Home directory in Linux is an eaier concept than the User account folder in Windows 2000/XP. Starting at "/" is just as arbitrary as starting at "C:\". Everything is a file concept is something for advanced users to grok, normal users don't need to know about
Typically, y
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well duh. (Score:2)
At any rate, you mention Gentoo and easy, you must mean Stage3 ;)
I just got done install a Stage2, its great stuff, now that I've ignored the comment in fstab about using notail for reiserfs, that was a mistake, thing was slow as hell. Now my only problem is Alsa and trying to get VMWare to install, vmmon is being a pain in the
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Interesting)
RedHat Fedora
Mandrake
Suse
Java Desktop System
I actually tried the most recent Fedora and found it to be useless. They refuse to ship NTFS support, MP3 support, or NVidia support. On top of that, my MS Intellimouse keeps locking up. That problem has been there since RedHat 8! What have these people been up to?
That leaves Mandrake, Suse and JDS. Of those three, only JDS is GNOME based (actually quite nicely GNOME based). Thus KDE seems to have won the day.
Re:Well duh. (Score:3, Insightful)
USB Mouse Problem Solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Fedora Core 2 test 2 works fine will my USB mice, and I've found it overall the ea
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Insightful)
They ship with no MP3 support because MP3 format is also not free software. You have to pay a royalty or something retarded to write programs to decode it. Granted most programs we use that decode them never payed such royalty, the law is still there. Even if everyone refuses to obey the law, it still exists.
Finally, they ship with no nvidia support because the nvidia driver from the company is not open source and therefore does not fit the GPL's definition of free software. You can still use your nvidia card using the nv driver, sans opengl.
Call this open source zealotry if you wish, but that's why they do it.
Re:Well duh. (Score:3, Interesting)
Besides, a few distros exist for the explicit purpose of shipping entirely Free systems; Debian is the largest, and Fedora seems to be one as well. If you don't agree with their policies, then don't install them, but don't criticize them for sticking with the
Re:Well duh. (Score:5, Insightful)
But, with my experience, Linux on the desktop is MUCH more elegant than Windoze in every way. Under Linux, I have fewer crashes, better performance, and my choice of window managers. On Windoze, I have Windoze and a series of for-pay "hacks" to make my system look different.
As far as ease of use, that's coming. With my system (Fedora Core 1 + Apt-RPM using Synaptic) I can install new software and upgrades at the click of a button. No downloads, no need to check dependencies, not even a need to uninstall the old versions of the software. Under Linux it just works...
There's a quote in someones signature that goes something like "To really screw up Linux you have to work at it...To really screw up Windoze, you have to work ON it..." I think that sums up Linux on the desktop pretty well...
Re:Well duh. (Score:3, Insightful)
KDE / GNOME have always, IMO, been as easy to use as Windows. It was the configuring of the system that was a problem. Seeing as many people install a system (well, it comes installed... whatever), and never even change the screen size (probably no one here, but my mom, for example does this), the configurablity is only an issue in the initial install.
Linux and engineering elegance (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess that depends on your definition of elegant.
If you mean elegant as in "refined", then I would agree. But in engineering there is this definition, which is more befitting to Linux:
adj. [common; from mathematical usage] Combining simplicity, power, and a certain ineffable grace of design. Higher praise than `clever', `winning', or even cuspy.
The French aviator, adventurer, and author Antoine de Saint-Exupe'ry, probably best known for his clas
I don't know ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I don't know ... (Score:3, Funny)
Let's talk about that tortoise analogy for a sec. (Score:5, Funny)
How about this...
Just as the tortoise has crossed the finish line, the hare, waking up and realizing he's lost the race as a result of his own indolence and brash overconfidence, files suit against the tortoise for infringing on his intellectual property, foremost of which is the hare's exclusive rights to using one's legs for forward movement.
The tortoise, facing mounting legal bills and declining support from the other animals, nearly all of whom think the hare's claims are overly broad and invalid but are afraid of being similarly targeted by the hare's legal campaign for the use of their own legs, is forced to settle out of court, concede defeat in the race, and to pay a nominal licensing fee to continue using his own legs.
The hare, and his lawyers, win the race after all.
Re:Let's talk about that tortoise analogy for a se (Score:3, Funny)
Hey, are you her?
You BITCH!
I want my records back!
I WANT MY RECORDS BACK!
Too much attention (Score:2, Interesting)
Winning the desktop has nothing to do with who has the best technology of user interface. It has all to do with lever
Re:Too much attention (Score:5, Interesting)
What's wrong with the old UNIX systems? Solaris still boasts of some functionality that Linux will probably take a few months
Linux is just as capable of becoming corpulent and lazy as the dominant OS provider. And competition also keeps our security stance strong. There's a place for Solaris, and AIX, and yes, even Windows in the computing market.
Re:Too much attention (Score:2)
For large systems, with lots of concurrent processes and users and large amounts of SAN and other I/O, Linux is totally unfit compared to the real thing.
Sure you can run Linux fine on a small desktop Sun box or even on a small server, but try it on a medium to large size machine and you're just wasting your expensive hardware.
What makes you so sure that Linux has reached the level of Solaris and the like? Do you know it? Have you
UNIX and Linux should be allies (Score:5, Insightful)
To take solaris as an example, but most of the same could be said about AIX and HPUX: almost all open source software running on Linux also runs on UNIX, just the same. It offers the same user environment. And in most cases it offers more mature threading and scaleability. Linux is still trying to catch up with UNIX. It has come close in many areas, but don't try to run it on an E10000.
The only advantage for Linux over UNIX is price (both of the software and of the hardware).
Of course I like switches from UNIX to Linux better than switches from UNIX to WinNT. But I would like switches from WinNT to UNIX or Linux much better. The only thing that counts is UNIX/Linux against WinNT.
Remember, the UNIX world (of which Linux nowadays is a part) suffered because of divisions and internal disagreements. It is important to cooperate and stand united against the enemy now. If this sectarism continues it will damage us all (including Linux). Today it is Linux against UNIX, tomorrow it may be XY-Linux against AB-Linux or whatever.
I don't say all UNIX & Linux variants must assimilate and become the same, but they should strive for the same common goal and together create an attractive platform to fight the real enemy.
Re:Too much attention (Score:5, Insightful)
Ummmm... I'd say it is doing exactly that - witness what's happened to Sun and SCO, both of whom are getting hurt badly by Linux. Microsoft is in a nip-and-tuck battle for server share too - their sales have grown, but not nearly as quickly as Linux has.
Winning the desktop has nothing to do with who has the best technology of user interface. It has all to do with leveraging corporate power. Once many corporations are united with Linux on the server side, their corporate power will allow linux to take over the deskop, regardless of how good the software is. Apple has shown that it doesn't require a Herculian effort to make a usable desktop on a UNIX variant. Why are we wasting our resources?
Understandable, but I think keeping the LotD issue in the forefront is taking a page out of BillG's business strategy book. That is:
- Linux's core market is servers.
- Microsoft trys to muscle in on that market, so Linux says "OK, buddy" and attacks Microsofts core market, the desktop.
- Now, Microsoft must split resources to defend thier core market as well as advance on the new one
- If Microsoft pushes to hard on the server front, they could lose thier huge dominance of the desktop market. Very bad for them.
- if they defend the desktop market too strenuously, they won't make the headway they want on the server market. Still bad for them, as thier share price is predicated on huge growth.
Microsoft has used this strategy before - they almost buried Novell this way. Novell had WordPerfect Office, so Microsoft ramped up Windows NT server development and took on NetWare.
Turn about is fair play. Let's see how Microsoft handles a credible threat to thier core business that they can't just buy, bury or wish away.
Soko
Re:Too much attention (Score:4, Insightful)
First, pushing others out of the market. Why? I think the main reason for working on open-source software should be to improve that software. Since most developers work without (sometimes even against) commercial incentives, I don't think killing alternatives comes into play anywhere. On the contrary, having competitors means we can learn from them.
As for Linux on the desktop, there are a number of issues to consider here. I am bored by the discussions whether Linux is or isn't ready for the desktop. It's on _my_ desktop, and I welcome any improvements to my desktop experience. That said, I don't think the desktop should be a priority. The beauty of the anarchistic model that open-source enables is that everyone can do his own thing. Some people improve server performance, others write drivers. Everybody wins.
LINUX hasn't changed... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:LINUX hasn't changed... (Score:2)
I think the biggest advancement in the Linux Scene over the past couple of years is the installation process. It's funny to think of it that way, since it's such a minor issue. But most people will get frustrated enough on the installation process alone to dismiss Linux as a viable competitor on the desktop wars. A good portion of his article focused on the installation. All his hardware was detected on install, and that left him very little to 'hack' into place l
linux on the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)
Do we even want that kind of functionality? (Score:2)
Most of what you describe above are administrative tasks, and frankly I'd rather keep that bit a bit arcane, if only to keep people from being accustomed to "su and say."
Automation of these tasks, certainly. auto-apt looks like it's going in the right direction at the application level, it'd be interesting to see i
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:4, Insightful)
No, MS did not do it, because MS installers do not do a lot of things that rpms or debs handle - take dependency, for example. In Debian, that's solved.
In Windows, it is not. There's no way to know within the borders of the "packaging system" if MFC42xy.DLL is installed, what version is, and if it is needed, there is no way to automatically install the newest version from some repository.
In fact, Debian's packaging system is WAY superior to Windows' one. Perhaps the interface is not that friendly to some users, but the underlying system is lightyears ahead.
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:3, Informative)
I do agree that maintaining software on my debian server is much easier and more fullproof than Windows. Instead of clicking through multiple dialogs, signing EULAs, and sometimes rebooting, just apt-get install (program)
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)
I see that as sad, personally. The ability to install software easily has become the #1 differentiator between distros. As long as everyone picks the same distro, this works great. Otherwise, it makes software developers' lives hell. Joe wants a RPM, Jack wants a DEB, Jill wants an Emerge, and others want an autoconf-based tarball that includes all the dependencies for easy source installs. Cripes.
So while you marvel at Debian's simplicity, I'll pull my hair out learning several different packaging formats and trying to maintain them all. Furthermore, to make binaries, I need to have access to each of those distros! There is supposedly some LSB-compliant binary builder, but I haven't figured that out yet... And yet people expect developers to make more effort to support Linux while Linux vendors (and OSS developers) just keep adding more complexity to the whole thing? It just seems like a case of continually re-inventing the wheel rather than getting together and coming to a solution.
When distribution vendors can get out of the software packaging business (except for the core OS), it will be a great day for developers and users alike. Standards need to be adhered to, and people need to realize that a filesystem designed for optimizing command-line use (i.e. everything on the Path or in "special" folders, easy-to-type folder names vs. easy-to-understand) is no longer a very good choice for today's increasingly complex GUI applications, some of which can have hundreds or thousands of files. Linux has some solutions, but nothing is self-contained, and NOTHING is easy to understand without reading a bunch of docs scattered around the web. I don't need to read 50 pages of documentation to learn where to put my files on Windows/Mac.
If Debian's packaging system is somehow going to resolve all this, let me know. Otherwise, I'll probably stick to Windows and Mac packages at the moment, both of which are simple to put together and just work.
cat /dev/clue | xpyr (Score:3, Insightful)
Dude, you're lacking in the "how an OS actually fscking works" department. Also in the "I think KDE = Linux" department. The OS has nothing to do with the applications on it. Don't like it? Sorry, stick to Windows. There's no necessary link between applications and the OS. Consequently, there's no DLL hell, where if you upgrade IE, your other applications die because you hosed some internal HTML rendering library. If your OS (including kernel, system binaries, and libr
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:3, Insightful)
Just look at Knoppix for example, which provide an reasonably good configured system in no-time, just insert CD and boot, the code is there to do all the autodection, but it helps me nothing for the distribution I use for daily use, Debian in my case. Knoppix can make my soundcard work in a second, in Debian it still ca
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:3, Informative)
This how installing apps work for most applications on RPM based distributions (Redhat, Mandrake, etc). There are even GUI tools for RPM. I could be wrong, but double-clicking on a RPM (in Gnome or KDE) will launch it.
I say most applications because of course not all developer make RPMs for their apps. But most do these days.
lets see the linux way (Score:4, Insightful)
apt-get install packagename
apt-get remove packagename
Gentoo
emerge packagename
emerge --unmerge packagename
Fedora
yum install packagename
yum remove packagename
Redhat
up2date packagename
rpm -e packagename
In all of the install cases here, the packaging system installs the software package along with any of the dependencies that are required. In the case of debian and especially gentoo, almost every package you need is available through the packaging system. Apple and Windows aren't even close to providing that level of packaging support. Although fink is probably the first thing i install on a virgin os x machine.
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:linux on the desktop (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have your Debian on CD and the application is in the Debian archive you don't need to download anything. That's the point of Debian - to package up Free Software and make it easy to install (plus do it properly).
Also, you say "you can't have everyone adding their apps to apt, since it is an online service.". These facts are not connected. The reason you can't have everyone adding t
How should I mod Dan? (Score:5, Insightful)
traffic light journalism (Score:4, Insightful)
A well thought out opinion is boring.
We said this years ago (Score:5, Interesting)
The innovators have spoken, and they like what they saw.
Now the volume will pick up, as more people take notice, and the ease-of-learning continues to grow in leaps and bounds. As businesses start deploying Linux on the workstation for cost competitive advantage and security competitive advantage, there will be more demand of open-source integration - and more open-source programming jobs.
Then come the hordes that are the mainstream users and late adopters. Oh how I hope the Linux community is actually ready for this.
It's here. (Score:3, Insightful)
Innovators? This is your next door neighbor, joe six packs, talking. Free and open software are not just cheaper and better, they are now easier to get. What you are seeing is the water flooding down stream. The innovators cracked the damb, comerical softoware companies slipped through the cracks and the Microsoft monopoly damb broke. Big companies and private contractors have been making big $$$ with free software. Now it's hitting the desktop
Re:We said this years ago (Score:3, Insightful)
In order to be credible to business users like these people, a Linux desktop has to support those core products. That won't ever happen, at least to anyone's complete satisfaction, because Microsoft will make sure that it is as difficult as possible to run its Office products on anything other than a Wind
Disguised Ad (Score:3, Insightful)
This article reads as nothing more than a Linux-oriented Macintosh advertisement.
From the opinionated comment "if you want to use wireless with a laptop, buy a Mac" to his conclusion, his writing suggests buying a Macintosh to escape desktop troubles and attain nirvana.
I'm not bashing the Macintosh as my first computer was an Apple II+, Macintosh 128K (the original), Macintosh 512K, Macintosh SE, Macintosh Centris 610. I love the ease-of-use of the Macintosh and believe that Apple creates the best interfaces. (The "Dock" notwishstanding!)
He is short on specific elements that are better implemented in other OSes than Linux. That is the key to why Linux will dominate: It gathers the best of all possibilities unto itself.
Not as much of a victory as we might think. (Score:2)
Enter SCO
"Hmm, so they like and agree with this article. Then they are admitting that they use our super secret SCO code! Have at thee!"
Maybe I've just had too much coffee this morning.
And what to expect in future? (Score:3, Interesting)
Star Office 7.0, the latest and most impressive version of Sun Microsystems' low cost alternative to Microsoft Office.
Okay. I'll believe that things have gradually gotten better and better on the Linux desktop.
So, then, now, how much incentive does Sun have now to push OO.o and Star Office further into this key part of Microsoft's bread and butter business?
Yes, yes, ... sigh, yes. (Score:5, Informative)
Xandros is probably the best of breed, and they are starting to make it available at no cost via channels like Linux magazine covers.
But even so it's well worth the money (and my firm has bought dozens of Xandros licenses) and comes highly recommended.
Re:Yes, yes, ... sigh, yes. (Score:3, Insightful)
And you won't hear anything until your mother either receives some cute Windows-only program in her email from one of her friends or attempts to run some off-the-shelf software, like a Genealogy program (old people love them), or Turbo Tax or something like that.
"Son, why can't I r
Re:Wow (Score:3)
Red Hat anyone? (Score:4, Insightful)
Converging (Score:2)
Converging. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
New Desktop (Score:2, Insightful)
I just upgraded my desktop from slackware to SuSe and it was very easy. I couldn't see how it would be hard for anyone installing it. The only problem was that I accidently screwed up my windows partition because they made the partitioning aspect to easy. I seemed like it would resize and move my partitions around and allow me to keep my home partition and my windows partition but when I did it, it died, probably by human error. Anyhow, I degress. The point is, if I wasn't trying to do anything fancy, it
SuSE picking up steam (Score:5, Interesting)
I know that I, for one, will be switching in May from RH9 to SuSE 9.1 Pro, and will be recommending it to others in place of the other major contenders (RHEL, Fedora, Mandrake, "Java" desktop, etc.)
--
Wireless comments (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish your Linux wireless experience had been as painless as mine was.
I bought the $20 Belkin PC-card at surpluscomputers.com. It uses the Atmel wireless Ethernet chip, and there's a well-packaged Linux driver on Atmel's site. I got the "wireless-tools" package for my Linux distribution and dropped Atmel's driver into my kernel, and I have Wi-Fi! Very easy, no blind alleys. This stuff used to be hard. Either I'm getting better or Linux is getting easier.
To the non-geek, here is what this paragraph might mean:
Atmel wireless Ethernet chip: I have to install a chip? Oh great, where do I buy that?
well-packaged Linux driver: Who cares if they send it to you in a nice package? My Windows came in a very colorful box, and I still had troubles with it!
kernel: You mean corn kernel? Or are you spelling Colonel wrong? Huh?
Either I'm getting better or Linux is getting easier: You are stupid because you don't know Linux speak. Keep using MS Windows, it is less intimidating.
Just some thoughts on how far some of the stuff for the Linux desktop still has to go. If you want to beat Microsoft, you are going to have to make things easy for the non-geek (duh). I certainly don't mean to belittle the poster. But is sure does highlight the fact that what we geek types think has become easy is still very, very hard for the average user.
Corporate VPNs (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm primarily a network design/security/ops geek, if I can't open a Visio doc I'm screwed. Also, if I can interface with that horrific beast that is our Ex
Linux hasn't suddenly caught up, Gilmore has (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not? What was missing then that has now suddenly allowed Gilmore to use Linux and on his relatively old Thinkpad? Were the desktop distributions really so horrible one year ago? Were StarOffice 6 and Xandros 1.x so undeveloped that a Thinkpad released in 2000 couldn't handle simple office tasks and networking?
I don't think it's Linux that has suddenly caught up, but Gilmore. He seems to want to make it sound as though he was right both then and now, rather than admitting that his previous appraisal of desktop Linux was lacking.
Speaking as one of the masses... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think Linux has come a long way.
When I bought my home computer (about 3 years ago), I tried to get into Linux on the advice of my friend. I bought the $45 book-and-CD with the Penguin on the cover, but it was just too overwhelming (command-line what?!?) and I never gave it a fair shot.
Fast-forward 3 years: While trying to get an old (12MB-hard-drive old) laptop going, I heard that Linux was good for older hardware and went to the local LUG meeting where somebody gave me a copy of Knoppix (Psst... over here...Yeah, you... Try it, you'll like it!...The first one's free... all the cool kids are doing it...You wanna be cool, don't you?!?!). Less than six-months later, I use Linux almost exclusively at home.
Critical factors for the Linux switch made by my non-technical ass:
That's my experience. Every day Linux becomes not only a truly viable option for more people, but also a truly attractive option for more people.
The Dalai Llama
keep your damn command line - I want pretty colors, lots of nifty boxes, and everthing should be accessed through pretty little buttons that look like shiny pieces of candy...
Linux on the Laptop? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been looking at linux on the laptop objectively lately, and the situation is really pretty bad from a user-friendliness standpoint. Most of the bits I've gathered for getting peripherals and power conservation features on my laptop to function are scattered to the four winds. It's all arkane little tweaks and twiddles handed down through web forums and kernel mailing lists. None of it is cohesive, and all of it is perfectly opaque to the average end-user.
Additionally, a lot of the tools are simply incomplete. The Longrun utility doesn't support all of the features of the Crusoe chips. ACPID doesn't come with a SysV service script. And while the new laptop_mode project is coming along, it seems to be focussing on kernel tweaks to reduce disk utilization, which in my limited experience isn't the lion's share of wasted power on a laptop (for instance, on my laptop, spinning down the drive only reduces power usage by 5%). It also has no facilities for Crusoe processors as of yet.
I'm actually working on contributions to the respective projects to address my primary concerns, so this isn't a normal case of sour grapes. However, I fear that my improvements may only amount to a drop in a very large bucket. It's a big hill to climb, and it's getting taller with every quirky new laptop model that comes out.
Open Letter to these Tech Authors: (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's what I think about linux:
1. Installing a program isn't any harder. Windows install.. insert CD, click OK and Next a bunch of times and it's done. Linux install.. do an emerge, apt-get, swaret, etc, sit back and wait. Yeah, Linux is hard. One command to me is easier than navigating to a webpage, filling in some stupid personal info questions, downloading an executable, navigating to that executable then double clicking.
2. Something doesn't work right? Windows way... call your manufacturer or a geeky friend to help out. Linux way.. search on linuxquestions.org or your distro's forums. 99% of the time your answer is already in those forums. Some program throwing out some weird error? Search online, you'll find a ton of fixes. Yeah, Linux is hard.
3. Recompiling a kernel? It's really not that hard. There are a ton of walkthroughs on the internet.
4. Hardware support. Windows has plug and play which is really great... when it works. How many times have you tried to install a piece of hardware where Windows didn't correctly recognize it, or didn't recognize it at all? Me, probably at least a dozen times. In Linux every stock kernel I've seen a distro supply has just about everything compiled as a module. The only reason I've ever had hardware not be autodetected and set up is when that manufacturer explicitly wouldn't allow for OSS support (D-Link + series wireless cards with the TI chip).
So in summation, stop with the whiny articles about Linux isn't ready for the desktop. It is. Many people use it for both home and production machines. If it's not ready for people to use then why are there 78,919 projects hosted on sourceforge.net? That's an awful lot of software for such an unusable OS. If you want to complain that Linux isn't ready for the mass desktop to be used by Joe Doesn't_know_jack_about_PCs_user then I say neither is Windows.
Re:Open Letter to these Tech Authors: (Score:5, Insightful)
emerge what? where do I type this? I just type "emerge" and my program on my CD installs? What tells me how to do this? I put the CD in, then I type emerge, or do I type emerge then put the CD in?
. Linux way.. search on linuxquestions.org or your distro's forums.
How do I find linuxquestions if I can't connect to the Internet? What's a distro? What's a forum? Where do I find distro forums?
. Recompiling a kernel? It's really not that hard. There are a ton of walkthroughs on the internet.
A kernel of corn? I thought we were talking about computers? What's "recompiling"? Why do I have to do this? Where do I find instructions? How often do I do this?
You are 100% out of touch. Leave your parents' basement and talk to a real person. They'll have no clue what you're talking about.
Don't be ridiculous. (Score:3)
How would you explain to the same person to fix their Windows registry?
Or that a printer does not work for a lack of a new driver?
Or that they need to upgrade the firmware of a hard disk or a computer motherboard?
The lingo of the profession is complicated and arcane, any attempts to make this appear as a feature of Linux is dishonest and disingenious.
Two types of distributions (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd say the same applies to linux. If you want a standardized version that's easy to use with a defined upgrade schedule use Xandros, Lindows, Lycoris.If you are knowledgeable and want more options use Debian, Slackware, Redhat, SUSE, Gentoo, whatever.
There will always be the lack a unified desktop,packaging system, look & fell, etc among "pro" distros. If you want that go with the home version"
Don't complain that it's hard to change the GUI in Xandros, because it's not aimed at you. I'd say the majority of windows users have the default desktop minus say the wallpaper.
Linux on Joe User's desktop won't become a reality unless there's one look, one place for configs, etc. I don't think the average Slashdot user want's that...
How bout a default desktop install that is the same across all distros. Power users will always be able to change their desktop to icewm,fluxbox,gnome,kde. The vast majority of users will get a nice desktop that looks and ACTS the same at their house, their parent's house, and their friends house.
proverbial tortoise (Score:3, Interesting)
Go read Clayton Christensens book Innovators Dilemma [businessweek.com]about disruptive Technologies and you will realize that the Improvement trajectory of Linux is much steeper than Windows.
As a matter of fact this is the crux of the problem for Microsoft.
They WILL loose even on the desktop as they are can only move up but at a slow rate. Linux and their MS' predatory practices has foiled them on the lower end, like Handheld and Mobile phones. Sony has then checked on the Entertainment / Game avenue. They have nowhere to go
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
XP and Xandros have the same costs... (Score:3, Interesting)
From the article...
I could have installed Windows XP, the current (and, I will acknowledge, far and away the best) Windows operating system to date, plus new applications. But that would be expensive.
This more expensive claim is bogus. Dan says he installed Xandros Desktop OS Version 2 - Deluxe Edition which costs $89, the same price that Windows XP Home Upgrade costs.
The recommended system requirements for Xandros [xandros.com] and XP [microsoft.com] are almost identical.
So why hassle with Xandros when he could have just upgraded to XP and he would not have had to reinstall any applications, plus Star Office (not free) runs on XP. He could have avoided the hardware problems too.
Of course this would not have made for such an interesting article and this is must be Dan's true motivation...
Besides, it would feed a beast I'd rather not make any bulkier.
I don't think Linux IS ready for the desktop, yet. (Score:3, Interesting)
This morning, I needed some files off the Linux partition, so I booted to Linux. Only, when gdm attempts to start X on the box, my LCD display at home can't handle it (the settings weren't right for it). Is there a way to correct this? Does it drop down to the lowest common denominator so I can fix the problem? Nope! Being a geek, I fortunately KNOW that Ctrl-Alt-F1 will switch me to a console... I'd hate to think what Grandma would do.
I tried modifying XF86Config (being the geek I am) to put in more reasonable sync values. This didn't seem to work though. Redhat also conveniently got rid of xf86config, and the data file containing sync settings for most monitors.
All this, so I could go in and use the GUI to set up my new wireless network card (sorry, I never learned the command-line commands and files to edit to set this up manually).
I never did get that to work. Fortunately, I know the "mount
And this system is supposed to replace Windows and OS X for the masses? Don't get me started on setting up dual-headed displays under Linux at work...
I love Linux, especially developing under it. However, it is NOT ready as a Windows replacement. Gnome and KDE are fine, but some of the lower-levels such as X are still an issue.
John
its all about simplicity, consistency, and a... (Score:3, Insightful)
Average users want an interface that is consistent so they don't have to re-learn things constantly. They want simplicity so they don't have to struggle with figuring out how to accomplish simple tasks. They want a little bit of eye candy to make using their computer pleasing to the eye and enjoyable. They also want tools for basic functions like email, internet, word processing, a little gamage, chatting.
Linux has all of these elements, but the plethora of choices in each category is, in itself, a source of confusion (see simplicity).
The one huge issue that keeps me from tossing XP is the hardware driver/compatibility issues that are ever-present with Linux. If we could just see some more headway in that department then the barn doors will be open for the desktop assault.
Linux needs supporting software like Quicken, Adobe Photoshop, DVD playback software (not the hack-and-crack DECSS you can download), and other titles for sale in Best Buy and Walmart next to the boxes of Linux OS.
Really people don't care what OS they use to interface with their computer, but they do care how easy it is to use and what they can easily do with it. Windows just happens to have won the title of "McDonalds of the OS world". Give the masses another similar choice for cheaper and they will flock to it (assuming all things mentioned in the 1st couple paragraphs above being relatively equal to the Windows world).
***this is just my attempt to provide helpful insight into average folks' expectations for a desktop experience***
The proverbial tortoise (Score:3, Informative)
George Carlin would love this. There is no proverb involving a tortoise or a hare. There's a fable, but no proverb. As such, there is no "proverbial tortoise".
Linux "readiness" for desktop is realative (Score:3, Insightful)
Total Novice: Like my mom (who actually used to operate a punch card computer for the NAVY), who only uses computers to look for a couple recipies and may be check e-mail can very easily use Linux
Novice: People who only recently bought a computer and are just getting used to how Windows works. These users could easily use Xandros. All they need is easy setup with basic applications right there and good support when required.
Power Users (as MS calls them): This is a type of user who has been with Windows since 3.11 days and only knows how to "work" Windows and Windows only. This type of user does more advanced tasks him/herself and doing similar things on Linux is both very different and often much more complicated.
Science/Edu: Most scientific/edu users could easily use Linux and never look back. They have no ties to regular Windows applications and anything they write in house to scientific reseach can be easily ported to Linux.
Corporate/Business: Perhaps, the most difficult group to deal with. This is the area where MS is strongest with MS Office (especially Excel and Access), MS Echange etc. Also a lot of software used in coporate world is built in house (for security and narrow specification purposes) and porting it to Linux may be diffiult or very expesive. The compnay I work for uses a lot of in house software + Excel/Access
Desktop Publishing/Design/Photo: In this area Linux is years behind! A lot of people mention Gimp whenever this comes up. Gimp (aka Photoshop replacement) is only a very small part of the deal. It is much better then it used to be, but is still lacking. Professional grade applications such as Quark/InDesign, good color management, argg Linux handling of fonts are still missing.
My recent experience with Xandros 2.0 (Score:5, Informative)
Here is my experience, so far:
1) Install was very easy. Answer a few wizards, and off you go. I chose to install as a dual boot with my Windows 98 system, which is very easy with the Xandros installer. It recognized almost all of my hardware, right off the bat. Easier than installing Windows, if you ask me. It found but didn't utilize my Comcast Surfboard modem, which is connected via USB, rather than Ethernet card(long story). I found the fix for this in the Xandros forums, which was a _one line_ addition to a configuration file. Worked perfectly after that.
Using the system has gone pretty smoothly. I can use Open Office to open and edit my Microsoft Office files (have only tried spreadsheet so far), and the preinstalled Mozilla browser works fine.
On the downside, the fonts are pretty darn ugly, and I am constantly having to increase the font size in Mozilla, as it defaults to too small of a font on some web sites. Not sure why. Also, a good portion of web pages print out really tiny. Not sure why.
To increase the size of the fonts in Mozilla, I tried monkeying with the video card settings and the font sizes in Mozilla, but I didn't have much luck. Pretty confusing.
The system has been *very* stable, and no spyware or viruses in sight. The included media player is much more stable than the Windows Media Player or Divx, which were constantly crashing under Windows 98. The file browser is brilliant--I can see my Linux partition and my Windows partition.
Overall, I have to say the system performance is about 30% less slower than Windows 98. It's just a lot less snappy to browse the web or open the Open Office programs (maybe 20-30 seconds in Linux).
I should mention my system is an old Dell 5100e laptop, 600 MHz, so that plays in here. May not matter much on a modern machine.
Another downside is the availability of software. It may be sacrilege around Slashdot, but I don't mind paying for a decent user interface, a proper manual, and software support for things like accounting software, etc. Packaged software seems like it's a non-starter for Linux--I just don't see any.
On the other hand, for most users, Xandros includes Open Office, and email reader, and a web browser, so this may fulfill some user's needs.
I intend to keep my dual boot setup, in those rare cases I need to run software that isn't available for Linux. Quickbooks and Kazaa, for example.
Xandros makes setting up a dual boot system quite easy for non-technical users, and it's very stable. I can imagine that for a lot of home users, this will be all they need.
If you're fed up with spyware and viruses, and don't want your data locked in the Microsoft Office file format dungeon, nor want to be locked into the constant upgrades that are a part of the Windows world, then Xandros has what you need.
I can be reached at my junk mail account, gregory underscore close at hotmail.
Cheers,
Gregory
Re:Good grief. (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, the name IS correct in the title.
It's wrong in the article text - the man is called Dan Gillmor :-)
Re:Easy is what people want (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Easy is what people want (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Easy is what people want (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah. Recompiling the kernel should be easy, just like it is in Windows.
Re:Desktop Linux isn't Linux (Score:2)
Re:nowhere near (Score:3, Informative)
Installing packages on Slackware: swaret --install packagename
Installing packages on Gentoo: emerge packagename
Installing on windows:
- go to store
- buy software
- go home
- pop CD in and run installer
- reboot computer
Which is easier?
Re:nowhere near (Score:3, Insightful)
Installing packages on Slackware: swaret --install packagename
Installing packages on Gentoo: emerge packagename
Installing on windows:
- go to store
- buy software
- go home
- pop CD in and run installer
- reboot computer
I'm not sure what side you are taking here
Everybody knows how to do each of the individual steps you list to install a Windows program. Most would perceive that as easier than learning how to bring up an xterm, type in su, update t
Re:nowhere near (Score:2, Informative)
Uh, I do it every day on several different distro's. With RH, for example, rpm is NOT that hard to use. Certainly not for removing packages. Debian's apt-get (and Kpackage for gui tool) is easier yet.
"Linux is basically nowhere near ready for the average user."
We have new 'average users,' small kids, non-tech folks, etc, using Linux, AND LIKING I
Re:nowhere near (Score:2, Insightful)
Win:
Searching the web or finding a cd with an exe-file, no quality-testing, no testing of stability with the rest of your system, no control on where it put its files, no way to know if the uninstaller removes it all afterwards.
Linux (Debian, could just as easily been any other decent distro.)
apt-get install package, then apt-get --purge remove pacakge when you want to remove it, too hard for you?
And why do linux-security board
Re:nowhere near (Score:2)
Select Yast from menu, type root password, select "Software", select the packages you want to install/deinstall, press Ok.
Now, in which way is Windows easier than that?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)