Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Debian Software Linux

Making the 'Best' Desktop Linux System 355

Posted by michael from the debian-all-the-way dept.
NorhLoudspeaker writes "Michael C. Barnes gives DesktopLinux.com readers an in-depth analysis of the technologies that make open source a great alternative to proprietary operating systems. Examining the various components that constitute a complete system, Barnes provides practical advice and instruction on how to improve your desktop experience and productivity with freely available software. He reviews desktop environments, communications using voice-over-IP, common applications, and more."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Making the 'Best' Desktop Linux System More

Making the 'Best' Desktop Linux System

Comments Filter:

  • The best will be a mix-and-match (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Taco John ( 771912 ) <tacojohn AT gmail DOT com> on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:07PM (#10676276) Homepage
    The best Linux desktop system will take advantage of the flexibility of open source and combine the ability to use any number of options.

    • Re:The best will be a mix-and-match (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Not only that, but automate it as well. Users should not be expected to know much beyond the basics.

      • Re:The best will be a mix-and-match (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Taco John ( 771912 ) <tacojohn AT gmail DOT com> on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:22PM (#10676353) Homepage
        Exactly. Imagine booting up a computer with multiple, automatically configured desktop environments for media, internet browsing, productivity work, etc. Shove everything that's not needed away from the user to make using a computer as easy as using a TV. Microsoft has started in this direction. But Linux could blow them away if a few issues of protected content would be resolved.

        • Re:The best will be a mix-and-match (Score:4, Interesting)

          by flackrum ( 824364 ) * on Saturday October 30, 2004 @11:04PM (#10676768) Homepage
          Call me crazy, but I think open source alternatives to commonly used Windows apps will turn the tables eventually.

          My fiance and I have replaced MS Office with Open Office [openoffice.org], Outlook Express with Thunderbird [mozilla.org], Internet Explorer with Firefox [spreadfirefox.com], etc.. All of which *also* run on linux.

          If these apps required a chunk of cash to use, more people would have second thoughts on even trying them, since most users already purchased apps (Windows-only often) to meet their needs.

          Once I can fulfill my computer needs on Linux I'll switch (yes gaming=needs).

          Until then, I'll tweak WinXP to my liking and make good use of my firewall and antivirus software.

        • I think that would work out on some of the simpler, newbie-targetted distros like Linspire. You could have login 'sets', where a user would initially be given a choice of 4 options: internet/email, multimedia, gaming, or office. Once a choice is made, a desktop (probably KDE) will pop up with category-related desktop icons and menu items.

          Ultimately it'd be cool to see KDE with live menu generation. Click the office button on the taskbar and the icons and menus magically change instantly to reflect the en

    • Disagree 100% (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:52PM (#10676495)
      Mixing desktop environments, with the resulting incongruities, overlap, etc is exactly the wrong way to create a coherent environment. At that point I would tell an arbitrary user to use either KDE or GNOME, but not "both".

    • Re:The best will be a mix-and-match (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The most important factor for most people for using a desktop operating system is office software. For a Win XP Pro workstation and Office Pro this is about $700. I believe that Linux could make significant inroads if they focused on this fact with KDE or GNOME with OpenOffice. The flexibility of open source is not strong enough to overcome the superior marketing of closed source. Something similar to Firefox's advertising should be done.

  • Quite interesting..... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by KublaiKhan ( 522918 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:07PM (#10676280) Homepage Journal
    ....and I'd say it provides useful arguements for converting people from Windows and Mac platforms to Linux...but sadly, most people I try to convert use the "but this does what I want already, and that's more work, and I don't really see the benefit" excuse. It seems that people tend to suffer with what they have, if it works at all, rather than put in a little effort and change something to be much better.

    Then again, I've always been a lousy salesman, so it may just be me. *wink*

    • Re:Quite interesting..... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:40PM (#10676442)
      How is that an excuse? It sounds like a valid point to me. If people are comfortable with the system that they use, how can you deduce that they are "suffering?" Just because you can't stand using Windows, doesn't mean that it can't be a perfectly enjoyable enjoyable experience for the rest of the users.

      Nine out of ten people I know who use Windows aren't suffering because of it. They'd be suffering more by spending a rediculous amount of time learning how to use Linux when the truth is that they just don't need to be.

      • As much as marketing is despised around here..... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @11:19PM (#10676826) Homepage
        A little bit of basic marketing will tell you that there's something called "market pull / technology push". The first is when the consumers seek certain qualities (e.g. GHz numbers). The second is when technology pushes new qualities (e.g. dual core systems).

        The first one, you really only have to satisfy. The second, you need to market. You need to actively go out and explain to them why this would be better (on the ex facto assumption that it is, that's another discussion). Linux is very much a technology push. If you don't market it, people will not know that a better alternative exists.

        Ever had one of those features/services, that you never requested (that is, up front you wouldn't be willing to pay for that feature), but turned out to be wastly superior to old ways of doing things? Because of that, it is right to market Linux despite there being no market pull.

        Of course, that is under the assumption that Linux is better. If you look at general usage, I'm not entirely convinced. Remember that most people have *one* PC. If you come to a situation where "Uh oh, Linux does not support this (at all)", we would run it on our Windows box. They would wipe Linux and install an OS that does what they want (less EULAs and DRM, oh well).

        Kjella

      • Re:Quite interesting..... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lachlan76 ( 770870 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @02:06AM (#10677400)
        Nine out of ten people I know who use Windows aren't suffering because of it

        No, but then they require other people to come and do the other stuff which has to be done (virus cleanups, spyware purges, etc. etc). And when it has to be done manually, it is not a pleasant experience.

    • Re:Quite interesting..... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      ... people tend to suffer with what they have ...

      I've tried Linux several times, and each time I've suffered greatly - no drivers for all sorts of hardware - nics, displays, cameras, etc. Sure, you can get Linux "to work" if you stick within the bounds of what all the propellerheads are using but most of them aren't using high end gear so there aren't drivers for a lot of nice hardware. And no, I (and most user's) don't want to code or support our own driver implementations, thank you. That's another thi

      • Re:Quite interesting..... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Aglassis ( 10161 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:23PM (#10676625)
        Wow! I've been using Linux for 9 years now and I've only had a few driver issues (most of which I was able to work around). Of course, one of the main things that I recognized about Linux is that it is best suited for small servers (using modest, common hardware). Once you get to the uncommon, high end hardware you are going to have problems with most operating systems (as the hardware developers narrow their audience). This hardly makes Linux inferior. The developers of Linux can hardly be expected to write drivers for every piece of hardware ever designed. When you want to go high-end with Linux the key is: RESEARCH! The fact that Mac hardware works with Mac OS X should not be bragging rights. Thats the design audience (and it would be insane if it didn't work).

        If you use Linux for small servers with modest, slightly older hardware, you will rarely have a problem.

        If you use Linux for high-end servers and research before you install, you will rarely have a problem.

        If you have uncommon high-end hardware and install Linux there very well may be a problem. But its not Linux's.

      • "small" problems in Linux can be showstoppers (Score:5, Informative)

        by KWTm ( 808824 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @09:54AM (#10678681) Journal

        I've tried Linux several times, and each time I've suffered greatly

        YES! Same here, so let's expand on this more; I think it's important to recognize exactly what it is that turns off people who actually make an effort to switch to Linux but get repelled.

        On paper/in writing, Linux is great. People say lots of good things about it, it has ideological advantages, installation and hardware support have improved by leaps and bounds, etc. So what's the problem?

        It's not easy for geeks to understand; it still isn't easy for me to understand, even though I was the one going through it. In the end, I did emerge triumphant from the guts of my computer, and said, "See? I did it! What's so hard about that?" Then I thought to myself, "Hey, waitaminnit, I just spent seven $#*$#ing days trying to install something that should only take 30 minutes. How can I say that it was easy?"

        In fact, it was so hard for me to answer such a simple question that I started keeping a diary while I was installing. (It's in bits and pieces on various Linux forums; someday I'll post it in one big piece.) The answer is this:

        When installation/use of Linux goes well, it goes very well. When something goes wrong, everything goes to hell in a handbasket.

        Example: I install a Linux distro; it autodetects my monitor hardware and sets the resolution. It's wrong. After installation, I boot up and the monitor is wonky --I can't see anything.

        What I should have done: press Ctrl-Alt-Plus or Minus to step to the next monitor resolution to get the screen to appear, and then I can use the GUI to permanently set the resolution to the correct value. Or press Ctrl-Alt-F1 to get to a text screen, and then manually set the XF86config file.

        What the newbie would do: nothing. What can a newbie do? Call his friend over and get him to reinstall Windows. What else can you do when the screen is wonky?

        But notice what I, as a geek but Linux newcomer, will do. I search the Internet from my other computer, find the solution, and correct it. I realize: "Ah! I clicked the wrong choice when I installed Linux --I thought they meant 'desired resolution' when they really meant 'maximum supported resolution'." If appropriate, I reinstall, this time clicking the correct option, and everything goes well.

        And I discount the problem that I just encountered.

        "It was my fault," I say to myself. "My mistake caused this installation problem with Linux. See, the second time I chose the correct option, and everything went well! Linux is so easy to install!" And besides, those people at Mandrake/ Fedora/ SuSE/ LibraNet/ MEPIS put so much work into making this a nice-looking distribution. "It would be a pity to just ignore the excellent interface and all that F/OSS on the desktop just because I couldn't install it properly! Let's mark it down: this is a nice distribution."

        But you know what? If the newbie encounters a problem, it's a showstopper. If you can't see the monitor, who cares if Firefox has tabbed browsing or OpenOffice.org can export MS Word documents to PDF?

        This, I think, accounts for the wide discrepancies between people's experience with Linux. Even in the comments for this very Slashdot article, we have people saying, "I had big problems with Linux!" "What are you talking about? I had zero problems!" It's because, when there *is* a problem everything comes to a grinding halt.

        We Linux supporters have to work on this: make sure problems are not showstoppers for newbies. When there is an error message, tell the newbie where to go next. Make it work in degraded mode instead of not working at all. Make it easy to recover. Example: I can't write to my addressbook in KMail. The problem? "Can't write to addressbook" is the message. Like, thanks a lot, KDE! Can you be a little more obvious? Example: in Ogle, it can't identify the sound device

        • I think you summed up the issue nicely.

          When changing a monitor resolution, Windows gives the user 15 seconds to decide that wether that res is good. If the user does not say 'yes', it reverts to the previous. There is no Ctrl-Alt-Plus (Which I for one never heard of...)

          The difference between Linux and Windows on this is that Windows will use the device in a generic mode if it doesn't have the correct driver, Linux will not use it. Moreover, noone recompiles the Windows kernel, while I know people that d
    • Linux does not run 3ds Max or Photoshop, or programs that come close to their functionality (nevermind the fact that I own legal student licenses for both of these programs and that's a further incentive to get my money's worth out of them). Until it runs graphics software that is aimed at professionals instead of hobbyists and open-source teams making logos for their mp3 player...Linux is not useful to me.

    • The problem with Linux, the Benefits of Windows (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:24PM (#10676628)
      [but sadly, most people I try to convert use the "but this does what I want already, and that's more work, and I don't really see the benefit" excuse.]

      Here in lies the greatest challenge of linux. The general user.

      For me, I am a happy windows user. Now don't be mistaken I am not a windows zealot. I would happily chose Linux over windows anytime if not for its crippling weaknesses.

      Linux is a great operating system but it suffers from what i would call a geek-mentality. Linux is a perfect operating system for geeks it is powerful robust and stable. But for a normal user it is hell. It is hard to configure, and learning to configure it takes ages to find out. The value saved by the free-ness of it is taken back by the amount of time needed to learn to use and configure it. It is hard to configure and can be very daunting.

      Now I see many argue that this is the very essence of geeky-ness or whatever. They say that its power and configure-ability is why so many geeks love it. Thats allright for geeks and all, but to the average user they do not care about such things. Sure they would care about the basic things that can be configured (eg. themes et al) but on the most detailed things they would not want to even bother with them.

      Until such time comes that Linux is ready for mainstream use. I would beg the linux people to not push linux into the mainstream. The reason is the same reason as why it is not good for U2 to have a unfinished version of their song spreading about on the internet. When people have tried it they get a first impression. They would get scared away by linux. If they try it at first they would get confused and be scared away. If ever you try to convince them again to try it they would remember their first experience and would not try it again. First impressions do count.

      So I would like to ask the slashdot crowd. Linux is not ready for use with the general user yet. And until it is ready do not push it down the throat of the general public. It is bad for linux, it is bad for you(since linux would not get the acceptance you desire) and it is bad for them.

      -
      As a personal comment in regards to security, viruses et al., I would say that the amount of viruses, spywars, adwares depend on the market share of the operating system. The greater the market share the greater the amount of viruses, spywares etc. Though I could be wrong. The theory will come about when linux does gain a large market share and is ready for desktop use.
      • We know that's you, Ballmer. Stop posting anonymously.
      • >until it is ready do not push it down the throat of
        >the general public

        nobody is forcing anybody to switch to linux. People are just stating that they think linux is better than windows. from my personal xp, it is. Really.

        A ferrari is not the cheapest, easiest or better suited for traffic jams car. But many people say that it's better than a renault.And it is.
        Many people are happy with their renault. Some people would not prefer the ferrari even if the price was the same. That's ok.
        But that doesn't
    • ...most people I try to convert use the "but this does what I want already, and that's more work, and I don't really see the benefit" excuse

      While I would agree wholeheartedly, give people the oppertunity to see the benefit and their disinterest works in your favor.
      In order to handle some security issues I threw firefox on all machines at my small office. From conversations with my coworkers I gather that ~80% now use it on their home machines. If M$ were to upgrade IE and incorperate those features th
    • But my Mac does exactly what I want now. And if I *want* a benefit Linux can provide, I can install it on the Unix layer.

      Hell, I can even use KDE instead of Aqua if I wanted to.

  • May be its not the software that's broken (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gtrubetskoy ( 734033 ) * on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:10PM (#10676296)

    IMHO the way we stare into a little window and operate things with a mouse and a keyboard is very very limited, and so no matter how hard you try, any desktop will basically suck....

    I want the actual surface of my desk to be the desktop, one very lage touch sensitive screen.

    • Re:May be its not the software that's broken (Score:5, Funny)

      by Chundra ( 189402 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:24PM (#10676361)
      Yeah, so when you rest your hands, arms, or elbows on the desk you'd inadvertently click stuff. Sounds great.
      • Yeah, so when you rest your hands, arms, or elbows on the desk you'd inadvertently click stuff. Sounds great.

        This should be easy to overcome. E.g. to make a window active you have to tap it three times.

        Besides, you don't usually rest your hands on the objects on the desk anyway - it'd be a disaster if I rested my arm on my coffee cup...

        • Uh, tap three times? Adding unnecessary tapping just so you can get a real desktop interface? That sounds counter productive. It might be interesting though I'd say tablet computing would be more useful, and unfortunately, that really hasn't made a big impact either.
    • IMHO the way we stare into a little window and operate things with a mouse and a keyboard is very very limited, and so no matter how hard you try, any desktop will basically suck.... I want the actual surface of my desk to be the desktop, one very lage touch sensitive screen.
      This would turn counter-strike into a very interesting game... There's a terrorist! Poke him!
    • Fingerworks [fingerworks.com] have solved this problem, apparently. They sell a zero-force keyboard/mouse thingo. It will detect keystrokes and mouse movements (dragging the fingers), but will ignore stuff like wrists and palms sitting or sliding on the surface.
      -ReK
    • This doesn't change the fact that Linux is not as easy to set up as a windows system, nor does it have the software library that windows has. It covers the basics but you'll never get anyone interested in creating graphics, using a digital camera, scanner, digital video recording (as in cameras, not DVR), playing games, etc. interested, because it simply doesn't support that. So, in other words, all the cool things that casual desktop users want to experiment with aren't available. It has e-mail, office,

  • All the components are there, in a bag (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChiralSoftware ( 743411 ) <info@chiralsoftware.net> on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:14PM (#10676314) Homepage
    Everything that desktop Linux needs is there: a truly great office suite (OOo), several good PIM/mail programs (Evolution, Thunderbird, Kontact), several great web browsers (Firefox, Konqueror, Mozilla, Opera), the ability to run a lot of MS Windows software (Crossover Office), and many other features. There's no lack of software. The problem is lack of seamless user experience.

    It's pretty hard to explain to a user who doesn't care about such things why the look-and-feel is so different among the KDE desktop, the Mozilla browser, OpenOffice and Evolution. It's hard to explain the maddening complexity of clipboard issues among these apps. "Oh, you can't cut and paste between X and Y because X is a ___ app, but Y is a ___ app." That's fine for those of us who understand the differences among X, KDE and GTK, but ordinary desktop users shouldn't have to be aware of such things.

    Fortunately it looks like there is a project to make OpenOffice fully integrated with KDE/Qt. Also, with both Evolution and Suse now owned by the same company (Novell) hopefully there is going to be some better integration there, too. I was somewhat disappointed when I installed the latest Suse 9.2 that there still is a confusing choice between Kontact and Evolution, and presumably Evolution isn't fully integrated with the KDE desktop, but I expect (hope) these things will be fixed in the next release.

    Think more about seamless integration, less about apps. The apps are there! But the user experience is not.

    These are my observations as a five-year exclusive desktop Linux user.

    • Re:All the components are there, in a bag (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Osty ( 16825 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:44PM (#10676460)

      Ecellent points, every one of them. However, I'd like to add a note of caution. Theming/skinnning is not enough to create a seamless user experience. Sure, that might make buttons look the same across all applications, but if those buttons don't work the same, it's not seamless. If you have one app written in Athena/Xaw, another using Motif/Lesstif (don't laugh, there are still plenty of apps that use that stuff, especially in the engineering and scientific sectors), and a third using GTK/GNOME, no amount of theming is going to make them work the same. Athena/Xaw's scrollbars act completely different than anything you've ever seen, as do Motif's comboboxes. The point here is that Linux really needs a single, standard widget toolkit (a single standard desktop or WM is not as important, but that would be a good next step). Qt or GTK, pick one. Everything else should change to use the chosen one (ie, if Qt is chosen, write a light layer that provides the GTK programming interface backed by Qt widgets).

      • The point here is that Linux really needs a single, standard widget toolkit (a single standard desktop or WM is not as important, but that would be a good next step). Qt or GTK, pick one. Everything else should change to use the chosen one (ie, if Qt is chosen, write a light layer that provides the GTK programming interface backed by Qt widgets).

        OK, I picked GTK. Now, would please all Qt users and programmers please form an orderly line and hand in their Qt-related stuff.

        The point here is, you can't forc

      • Re:All the components are there, in a bag (Score:5, Insightful)

        by NutscrapeSucks ( 446616 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:31PM (#10676651)
        The point here is that Linux really needs a single, standard widget toolkit ... Everything else should change to use the chosen one

        Neither Windows nor Mac use a single widget toolkit. What they do do is theme and provide consistant style guides for applications. I don't hear people complaining that Firefox does not use native Win32 widgets.

        While you guys are off fighting Widget War III (The Chosen One), there are reasonable solutions that could be put in place tomorrow.

        Just implement a centralized settings file or database or -erm- registry. Just dump all the UI / Key command settings there and every application can adapt to using them. (Put MIME types and Default Browser/Mailer settings there as well while you are at it.)

        I could care less if every application has the exact same size buttons. The problem is that every application is a different shade of gray/beige. Also, if I say I want my menus to be Purple 20 point Times Roman font on a Pink background, I should only have to do it once and every app should pick it up.

        • Windows, themed? (Score:3, Insightful)

          by oliverthered ( 187439 )
          Most windows apps, even the ones out of redmond, have well kinda the same UI, but with a weird mishmash of funcationalty and styling.

          Dockable menus, or non-dockable menus?
          does crtl+insert work in this edit box, can I copy that text?
          Try changing you background to something other that white, or deleting a default font and seeing how windows apps cope then windows is just as crap.

          Oh, and take a look here [freedesktop.org].

          What do I think should be done, well, standards need to be written and addeared to, a light xml parser
      • http://gtk-qt.freedesktop.org/ It makes it pretty bareable for me. I pretty much stick to qt and gtk apps though.
    • Nevermind getting OOo in KDE/Qt, what I'm looking forward to is Gecko in all it's incarnations. Konqueror is pretty good for filesystem and some other tasks, but it is nowhere close when it comes to browsing, both interfacewise and renderingwise. Also, integration and interoperation between KDE and the Mozilla products are not very good, hopefully this will also be remedied.

      I want best of both worlds! =)

      You guys who are hacking on this, know that there are people that will call you heroes once you get thi
    • I tend to agree with the parent post.
      (I must admit before continuing, I've never fully swichted to Linux from Windows. And I'm not a programmer. Some reasons follow:)

      Most of the desktop Linux stuff is ready. As soon as I pop in a CD to install Linux the:

      1) Installation on most distros is pretty staight forward. For most of the distros (and as an aside at least FreeBSD too) the most difficult/confusing part of the install is partitioning the drive. MS isn't all there too.
      2) 1st biggest problem is getting a

  • Excellent writeup (Score:4, Interesting)

    by erick99 ( 743982 ) <homerun@gmail.com> on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:15PM (#10676318)
    Damn, but that is well written! I can't think of something better to set in front of a prospective Linux user. It is concise, easy to read, pleasant, and just detailed enough not to make the reader feel like an idiot. I have saved the whole thing to a word doc as well as a pdf to send to friends who are thinking about Linux.

  • For me.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by microbob ( 29155 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:16PM (#10676323)
    I want a desktop that with a browser that supports all the major video streams, right out of the box. I don't want to install, tweak or jack with shit.

    • a. linux has this. b. windows does not.

      • Re:For me.... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by damiam ( 409504 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:09PM (#10676567)
        I don't know where you're buying your boxes, but some major video types (WMV and DVDs, for example) are currently illegal to support under Linux in pretty much any form, except possibly Crossover. Wide format support is possible with Linux, but anyone who sets it up "out of the box" is asking to get sued.
      • Fedora doesn't even come with the ability to play mp3s without downloading and installing a bunch of stuff.

    • Re:For me.... (Score:3, Informative)

      by MobyDisk ( 75490 )
      FYI: You should be aware that Microsoft does not provide such a thing either. (Not that you implied that they did, but readers may assume it). Windows XP SP2 out of the box needs to download a variety of Microsoft codecs, 3rd-party codecs, and 3rd-party players. DVD playback support is not included. Licensing issues play a big role here.

      Now please tell me: Why does anyone want video in their browser? I go through lengths to eliminate this support where it exists. I don't want postage-stamp non-saveab

  • The problem is... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jdhutchins ( 559010 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:19PM (#10676334)
    The problem is that there is no "best" linux distribution. Everyone has a different definition of "best", so how can one be best for everyone? The article praises SimpleMEIPS. Except for the installation, the features he mentions are all available in a stock Debian install (he simple apt-get's the programs).

    In my opinion, the article has a very "look ma, see what I can do" approach. He praises many open-source applications, but they are available the same way in any distro, and manages to knock all other distros in the process. Maybe for a newbie, SimpleMEIPS is a good distro, but it certaintly isn't the "best desktop distribution".

    • Re:The problem is... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I think one of the most overlooked aspects in the article is configurations.

      In theory, any desktop Linux distro would blow XP out of the water right now if it were configured properly out of the box. There are more apps, more features, a more stable backend, etc. But it never works out that way, because something always breaks, especially in the hardware area. If you effectively have two video cards and two sound cards(from integrated), as well as multiple input devices(mouse, tablet, trackball), something

  • Debian troll (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by Nailer ( 69468 )
    I stopped reading when he started pushing that there's no way to resolve dependencies with RPM files, and then went on to compare a packaging system (RPM) with a tool that lives on top of one (apt-get).

    "Ford has an engine - with Holden, you get a steering wheel and comfy seats"

    • I stopped reading when he started pushing that there's no way to resolve dependencies with RPM files, and then went on to compare a packaging system (RPM) with a tool that lives on top of one (apt-get).

      Garr! Don't you know it? If rpm were compared to dpkg they'd be...just about the same.

      That goes for portage, ports, pacman, etc. too--it's just not the same thing as rpm.

      The only thing I hate about rpm is it's "default" method of calculating dependencies is through ldd output--not user friendly, to say

      • Install 'debfoster', which looks for packages that aren't depended on by anything else, and asks you if you want to keep them. It remembers your answers, so you just re-run debfoster after removing or upgrading things to see if there's anything newly-not-depended-on.

  • What about Small Business Software? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:46PM (#10676467)
    The way I see it, is too many small businesses choose to use packages like MYOB and more importantly Microsoft Access and do there own databases. What kind of linux alternatives are there for software like this? I think if this question could be answered satisfactorily, a wide section of the market could more easily be persuaded to linux based systems.

  • Corporate Linux desktops (Score:5, Insightful)

    by soren42 ( 700305 ) * <j@nOsPAm.son-kay.com> on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:55PM (#10676506) Homepage Journal
    I have recently had the opportunity to participate in a Linux Desktop feasibility study at a major corporation. Speaking from my personal experience, this article hits on a few good points -- but apparently was focused more on the home use desktop that the corporate environment.

    What I've found is that the important things for general-purpose corporate users are these:
    • Driver support - One of the biggest problems has always been, as the article mentioned, driver support. It's terrible that after over a decade of this being one of Linux's biggest issues (overall), in this day and age we still have some problems with "mainstream" hardware support. That's going to take desktop Linux moving from early adopters to leading edge stage.
    • Slim down, stable apps - For a corporate user, there's very few apps that most IT departments want everywhere. Those few programs should be highly stable, integrated, well-tested, interoperable, and easy to use. For most users, those applications are an Office suite (OpenOffice and/or MS Office via CXOffice), e-mail program (Evolution or Outlook/Lotus Notes via CXOffice), web browser (Mozilla and/or IE via CXOffice), and file and print - usually provided by the OS or UI (KDE or Gnome). Naturally, every user has additional apps they need, but these were the core.
    • Interoperability - Of course, any corporation of a significant size cannot afford to migrate every desktop at once. One big requirement of a Linux desktop is that it must have the ability to seamlessly interoperate with the existing infrastructure and systems. That means using existing directories (AD or eDir), accessing file shares, exchanging documents, and enabling user collaboration (e.g. IM, shared meeting spaces, etc.).
    There are plenty of more issues and requirements, but those were the big ones. Also, along those lines, I expect a big advance in Linux on the corporate desktop from one of the big vendors very soon -- the existing capabilities appear to be creating "the perfect storm" for just such a release.

    • Re:Corporate Linux desktops (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ComputerSlicer23 ( 516509 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:33PM (#10676660)
      Driver support? Really Driver support in a Corporate environment? For the home PC I could see that. However, for a corporate desktop, what precisely do you mean?

      Who are you purchasing computer equipment from that you have a hard time with driver support. If that truely is the case you should switch vendors. I've got this brand new out of the box HP/Compaq desktop under my desk. Everything worked out of the box.

      I've put Linux on several recent model Dell, Gateway, and IBM models (Dell and Gateway being 2-3 year old desktops, IBM we're several different laptops).

      I've put Linux on everything under the sun. About the only thing you really have to worry about is what type of printer did you get. Get one that isn't a GDI (a window's printer). Everything else just works that I've thrown at it recently. Now, all the strange USB devices might not (USB desktop cameras being the one that comes to mind off hand). A number of scanners don't work under Linux, but that just takes a bit of review before hand to ensure compatibilty.

      I've used scanners, printers, and digital cameras. I've connected up USB and Firewire external drives. I've used lots of sound cards, and more network cards then I want to think about. I've used plenty of different Video cards. I've used KVM's. I've used lots of SCSI and IDE cards. I've used DVD and CD burners. I've even got a TV tuner card. Floppies, Zip drives (parallel and SCSI, but no USB). I've used at least 15-20 different MoBo, and with the exception of one current NForce2 chipset, I could make everything on it work with Linux. Even the NForce2 it works, but I have to use binary only drivers for sounds and network (until I get a distro that has the forcedeth or whatever the open source driver is).

      I never tried to put Linux on the old Win98 only PC. HP used to sell some machines that had propriatary sounds cards and video cards in the late 90's. You couldn't even run Win2K on them. They just didn't make the drivers for them. That was a marketing ploy, because they we're the el'cheapo machines that shipped with 98. If you wanted 2000, you had to pay a premium for those.

      Whose equipment are you running into problems with (if only so I know to avoid them). Serial ATA, printers, and Firewire are the only areas where I know that I need to be careful about what I purchase. Even there, you can make it work if you are paying attention to compatibility. I've used Linux as my desktop for nearly 5 years now at work. It's been a joy (I'm a fairly hard core Linux guy, but after I did the IT work of setting up the computer, it's been a fairly low maintience experience). I'm about to roll it out to 20 desktops at our company for everyone who uses internal applications only.

      Kirby

  • ONE environment, integrated apps (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:56PM (#10676510)
    Either of GNOME or KDE qualify. Both have "good enough" apps across the board. Both are well integrated. The real problem is that you still cannot plug your digital camera in and have something intelligent happen. Devices are the roadblock.
    • The real problem is that you still cannot plug your digital camera in and have something intelligent happen.

      Sure you can. It's just not as easy as it should be yet. You need some tools that aren't in a lot of distros yet (hal, d-bus and gnome-volume-manager). I have gnome-volume-manager set up so that it will automagically mount removable storage devices, and start gthumb to import photos when I plug my camera in.

      I think KDE has something similar in the works, but I don't know how complete it is or how
    • The real problem is that you still cannot plug your digital camera in and have something intelligent happen.


      Funny, I plug in my Kodak DC4330 and it beeps an put a little icon on my destop. I can then double click the icon and work with all the photos on my camera and I did not have to do any funky configuration. This is on SUSE 9.0 running the default KDE 3.1 desktop.

  • SuSE (Score:3, Interesting)

    by santiag0 ( 213647 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @09:58PM (#10676521)
    I have used SuSE for several years, along with other distros - Red hat (gee, they cut us end users off though - sorry, no red hat), Gentoo, Slackware, etc...

    SuSE is hands down the best distro out there for ease of install, ease of use.

    shameless plug? You bet. Any truth behind it? Yes. Try it out. SuSE has some downloads available to try the SuSE 9.2 live cd right now....

    have a great weekend,
    dave

  • Not everything is easy.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:02PM (#10676536)
    Some things are just as easy in Linux as on Mac and Windows. Once you have a system setup with applications you use etc it is not a problem for most users. They just click and run their things. Be i OpenOffice, Word, Mozilla, IE doesn't probabbly matter. IE does have one advantage.

    Internet Explorer is an intuitive name, Mozilla, Epiphany and Konqueror aren't. So it will take a few extra minutes to learn about that for a totally new user. It is expected and nothing to worry about IMO.

    Other things are more difficult. Installing new software for example, or worse, change hardware settings.

    There simply isn't a powerful enough, yet easy to use tool to change hardware things post install. Just adding a new mouse with more buttons is rather difficult for many users.

    There is one field where Linux has a far way to go still. It is for photography, art and painting things. For example there is no colour management and colour calibration support for cameras, scanners, printers and monitors. Those are absolutely nessesary for this kind of work. They exist in Windows and on Mac. This is where Mac has shined for many years....

    oh... just saw that Scribus has some support for colour management :) great!
    • Yup, it's actually an open source library being used by a number of projects, the URL follows:

      http://www.littlecms.com/

      There are a few GIMP plugins which use this as well for e.g. dealing with CMYK images.

  • apt-get (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bohemoth2 ( 179802 )
    For me if it can run apt-get then the version of it's Kernel is totaly irrelevant.

  • Fear Change (Score:3, Insightful)

    by konstantinlevin ( 826665 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:35PM (#10676669)
    I migrated to Fedora from M$ a year ago. I find linux faster and more secure, and I like being able to configure everything. And I like the fact that everythings free. But I've crashed my hard drive three times cuz I didn't know what I was doing when I took the plunge. I still find the shell cumbersome sometimes. In the U.S. anyway, most of the Cheeto-munching, reality-tv-watching, Coors-drinking communications majors are just going to want to point and click.

  • need focus (Score:4, Insightful)

    by earlums25 ( 554918 ) on Saturday October 30, 2004 @10:47PM (#10676704)
    i have been using different variations of redhat for almost 5 years (6.2 - fedora 2). i'm impressed by the advances but none have come close to what i consider desktop ready. the average user doesn't want to think. they want to play their mp3's (not supported in fedora 2?), they want to edit office documents at home (open office is close, but not there and why should they need to know the different programs like abiword and gnumeric?) linux will be desktop ready when people stop supporting their favorite distro and begin to support common software. take the lesson from apple - the less a user thinks or needs to know the happier they are. before you release software do a user test with your grandmother, if she can sit at the machine and browse the web, play music, send email, and use office apps without ever needing to think, linux is ready. until then i'll keep my iBook, i like getting stuff done, not worrying about dependencies, libraries, or if my laptop will see my windows machine

  • Too much choice (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Centurix ( 249778 ) <centurix@gmPERIODail.com minus punct> on Saturday October 30, 2004 @11:29PM (#10676872) Homepage
    There are two issues which I've come across with convincing people to stick with a desktop linux.

    1. Too much choice for an un-informed audience. When you install a distro, you get choices of what you want to use for a task. Which is great, for an experienced user. But when a new user is presented with 4 programs to perform the same job, they tend to get frustrated. There's nothing worse than using something wondering if it's actually the best tools to use for the task. Personally I'd like to see a desktop linux with a select version of each app installed, a single window manager, single browser, single word processor. Once the user gets the hang of it, build their confidence, then they'll look for alternative applications and improve their linux knowledge a little bit futher.

    2. Integration. Make everything talk to each other properly. Fix the clipboard issues between applications. Windows users are used to being able to select stuff in one application, copying, and pasting it into whatever they want. All of a sudden they're faced with the problem of not being able to do this anymore.

    • Re:Too much choice (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Mornelithe ( 83633 )
      1) I just installed Ubuntu on a friend's computer, and by default it comes with Gnome 2.8, which has just about 1 program for any given thing you'd do. I imagine other desktop distributions do similar things. KDE is a bit of an offender in this regard, but a good distribution could strip out redundant programs quite easily (and if they're smart, they do).

      2) What clipboard issues are you talking about? Clipboards work fine in KDE and Gnome and between the two. If you're having problems, you're probably usin

  • Performance (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Knights who say 'INT ( 708612 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @12:28AM (#10677117) Journal
    Now, some things like out-of-the-box suspend to disk are needed, but the essential issue is perceived performance.

    Linux has objectively better performance in things like filesystems (going back to FAT32 is a pain, now that I've switched back to WinXP after a year and a half on Linux only), but the typical Linux desktop tends to be very processor-intensive, screen redraws will be very slow when doing basic stuff like scrolling a long document in OOo, application startups are painful and there's often no hint (even with KDE and app wait cursors enabled) that they're starting, boot up times themselves will be painful, there is no generalized copy-and-paste for nontext objects, etc.

    I really like unix as a concept, I like the power that comes with it, but I actually need to get work done on my computer now. And after getting used to the general pain of being a Linux desktop user, going back to WinXP (a change first triggered by OOo piss-poor rendering of .xls files) was a very pleasant surprise. Sure, it has its quirks, and it's not half as pretty as a KDE desktop, but I manage to get work done.

    Stuff works, already.

    Yes, I tried every single performance hack. I used all kinds of experimental kernels, did all sorts of prelinking combinations, even did a stage 1 Gentoo install. With all the eye candy on (including some really pretty stuff like true alpha blending), WinXP runs cleaner/faster than Gentoo+ion3. I mean, there is something very wrong going on with Linux desktop.

    Part of the perceived difference in performance might be that Linux is very very demanding in processor, and less demanding in memory (maybe Linux coders like doing things the niftier way?), while WinXP is much more forgiving processor-wise, but will take up more memory. As I have relatively abundant memory (384 megs) but a piss-poor processor (a K6-II 500), that might be a significant part of the effect.

    But I've used Gentoo in P4's, and while the bootup times are civilized, many of the performance pitfalls are still there.

    All in all, it was good that I got around to learning how to use a unixlike and saw the pretty sights of KDE/Enlightenment/Fluxbox desktops, but time comes when one becomes an adult.

    And with all its faults, WinXP is a desktop for us adults. (Cue in predictable joke about garish colors in Luna Blue).

  • I think the guy misses a very important point (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tsa ( 15680 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @02:20AM (#10677452) Homepage
    This gut has shown that there are many programs that make a useable Linux environment. That's nice, but I think the main advantage Windows has over Linux is that in Windows it's very easy to transport data from one program to another using the Copy and Paste functions. In this way it's a breeze to copy a picture from ACDSee to Word, for instance. Now try to copy a picture from GQView to OpenOffice. As long as this doesn't work in Linux it will not take off. People need this kind of functionality. On the other hand, we Linux users have gpm which works a lot better for copying texts that the Copy/Paste system in Windows!

  • Wow! Functioning audio?!! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Dr. Mu ( 603661 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @03:51AM (#10677720)
    The thing that impressed me about this story is that sound in MEPIS seems to work right out of the box -- across a full spectrum of apps. I'm using Mandrake now, and I'm still fighting incompatible sound drivers that work with some apps and not with others. I desperately wanted to get Skype working on this box, but no amount of monkeying with the audio driver settings got it functioning. I was getting pretty fed up with Linux audio in general after this experience. Now I read that MEPIS even comes with Skype!

  • Someone seriously needs to polish the linux turd (Score:3, Informative)

    by Proc6 ( 518858 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @04:03AM (#10677750)
    Polish is exactly what the Linux turd needs.

    That and some better names. Linux is missing any sort of refined look and all the names are like "ymmv", "knrk", "ooo". Yeah, thats all great for us geeks and shit, but someone needs to take a few classes in psychology and marketing.

    Firefox is growing in popularity not just because it's a solid browser, but because "Firefox" rolls off the tongue, they have a clean, concise, and very obviously laid out website, and they have a professionally created logo. Simple as that.

    Packaging and catchy names sell. If you want to push your Linux to the masses, package and name it for the masses.

  • KDE isn't "good enough", it's far better (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Richard_J_N ( 631241 ) on Sunday October 31, 2004 @09:31AM (#10678605)
    Personally, I think KDE is way better than XP as a desktop environment. And anything you don't like, you can configure. For instance:

    Multiple desktops, Klipper, Select & Middle-click paste, and if you drag/drop a file, you get a very helpful tool-tip asking whether you want to copy, move, or link it, which is far better than the MS way of:

    if (different disks){
    copy, by default
    }else{
    move, by default
    }
    BUT if (shift){
    do the opposite
    }

    Incidentally, there is nothing so dreadful about the Linux copy-paste system. Just get used to the fact that there are really 2 clipboards. It can sometimes be really useful to utilise this behaviour!

    Also, once Linux is installed, no-one needs to ever use the Shell (my Aunt certainly doesn't!). But it's great that bash is still there - I for one find it can be extremely useful!

Slashdot Top Deals

Whoever dies with the most toys wins.

Close