What is Digg?127 Comments
- Ratteler, on 10/12/2007, -18/+86When will people wake up? The only thing the Linux desktop needs in order to make the jump from geekhobby to mainstream is APPLICATIONS!
No one cares what OS they use. They want to know if they can run the programs they need too.
Once I'm in Photoshop or the other Adobe Suite apps I use, or Lightwave, or Maya, it really doesn't matter what OS or platform I'm using.
Linux WILL NEVER CROSS OVER until the community invests in getting these apps on the linux desktop... or... invests in turning things like GIMP, and Blender into PERFECT and possibly illegal clones of those apps.
The reason Linux has dominated in the server market is not because it's a great OS, but because it provided the tools IT people needed.
When it does that for the desktop, Windows and MacOS will face a slow painful extinction.
Stop worrying about how the icon I click on flashes and concentrate on the program it loads. - loftx, on 10/12/2007, -11/+37Nope - the majority of people don't want applications. They want to perform thier common tasks quickly and easily. How many normal computer users use Maya or Lightwave or even Photoshop? How many care? They just want something which lets them browse the web, play thier music, send email, do their taxes and all the other millions of things most people want to do.
The majority of the applications are already there, but small things make them difficult for people e.g. not being able to open thier openoffice documents on other peoples computers.
IMO people don't care what OS or App thier using as long as it does the job. For example I've put firefox on loads of my friends PC's and some of them haven't even noticed their not using i.e Most - none geeky - pc users don't think "IE" or "Firefox" they just think "Web".
Edit - the exception is games which you did mention, though I don't think this applies to other applications. - Sofa_King_Jank, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32Ratteler, I understand where you are coming from but Linux wasn't created to compete with Microsoft or Apple. From what I've read, they aren't concerned about taking over MS they simply want the freedom to develop and evolve as open source allows. The Linux community isn't really concerned about creating programs and having users cross over.
- Ratteler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13For whatever reason Linux was created, where it's trying to go is the user desktop. That means providing the tools that desktop users needs.
For 90% of computer users that is already met with OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird. All that's left is games and pro applications.
Like it or not, the vast majority of computer users play follow the leader, and those leads are the expert users they know. They trust us like they trust car mechanics... until the car doesn't run.
I have yet to see a single job listing for GIMP artist, but I see people who BARELY know Photoshop get $25 -$30 per hour.
It's those stumbling block applications that are keeping people from moving to a new platform.
Whining about a few bugs that most people wouldn't know if they ran into them is just a waist a of time.
AmigaOS Multitasked in 512K and the Amiga was a graphics and sound powerhouse compared to the PC's and Mac's of the day. What killed it was being off-standard. If Commodore had gotten Adobe on board, the Amiga might well be where Mac is today.
Put simply, the reason I can't use Linux for all my computer needs has nothing to do with a few piddly bugs. It Bugs were a problem, there would be no M$. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11"Why are people so desperate to get people to switch to Linux or whatever other Open Source OS."
simple, if linux has a nice sized market (as it deserves to) then commercial giants will start supporting it.... which means more native games and apps for me.. i believe commercial and OSS can get along quite well together, they each have their vice's and virtues.... and a perfect OS would encourage both.
thats why i care anyway - aplusplus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+910,000 bugs and 2 giant corporations to world domination.
- andreo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I don't understand the need for world domination for a open source OS or application. Linux is in no danger of going away. It has a very strong following with tons of support and new distributions and applications being created all the time.
Microsoft is not trying to wipe Linux off the face of the earth. Yet for some reason Windows has become the enemy of Linux in the minds of some people. I'm happy with both running on my PC. There are things that I can't do in Linux and that's what Windows is there for, and the same holds true with Windows.
I can understand being excited about the OS that you use. And wanting to share that experience with others. But sometimes people are militant about converting others over to Linux. And I think that turns more people off trying Linux out then anything. I also think it casts the community in a bad light since now Linux user = Microsoft hater.
I just don't understand how this turned into a war for some people. - jedeye, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Why are people so desperate to get people to switch to Linux or whatever other Open Source OS. I am quite happy using Linux, because I enjoy it, but why does that make me care about what OS everyone else uses. If all you use your PC for is basic stuff like browsing the web and sending emails, then Windows is perfectly adequate. For most users it is a case of why fix something that is not broken. Why spend the time learning, and getting to grips with a totally new OS, that is more difficult to use, and comes no support from PC manufacturers. What advantages would that have? (And please no one mention less viruses, as that is only true untill an OS becomes popular, as we will soon see with Mac OS im sure)
And for those who do not like Windows, but need to use Photoshop etc, buy a Mac.
Just leave Linux to gradually grow in popularity, and let everyone use the OS they want and feel comfortable with, not an OS just because it is not from Microsoft. - rutty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Ubuntu updates itself in pretty much the same way that Windows can be configured to do so. An icon appears when updates are available, you open the updater and agree. Done. No command line required at all.
- dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13"Drivers must be open sourced and compiled into the kernel in order for you to have successful device recognition"
So since when did nVidia open up their drivers? Answer: They never did, and yet they support their GeForces pretty well with Linux (and FreeBSD).
"Windows can recognized nearly 95.5% of all hardware combinations out there due to that. Linux can recognize maybe 50%-65% and it's slowly losing pace as new hardware is developed and drivers are not being released to support the hardware in a linux environment."
Simply not true. I, for one, never have to insert CD after CD after CD, etc etc after installing GNU/Linux, just so I have sound, networking, a cd/dvd burn tool, etc. Also I haven't seen Windows working natively on PPC, or any other platform Linux supports and Windows doesn't. - mfearby, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@Sottozero: your argument could do with a little polish (but I do understand your need to vent some anger - we've been hearing this "Linux is ready for the desktop" gibberish for years). I agree with the general gist of what you say. Linux is a god-awful mess with god-awful applications and names for same. Pick a frigging GUI, you Linux people, and pick decent names for your crud. There are more letters in the alphabet besides G and K! Oh, and having to run a tiny application in your sys-tray equivalents just so that horrible, uncooperative, programs can share clipboard data is really nasty! Fix it!
- Zedtech, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12Though I agree and disagree with the afformentioned comments, one of the key issues with linux are drivers. Drivers must be open sourced and compiled into the kernel in order for you to have successful device recognition. With windows you have a modular driver system where developers do not have to release source code or "trade secrets" (as some companies such as ATI call it) in order to have the operating system recognize your devices.
Windows can recognized nearly 95.5% of all hardware combinations out there due to that. Linux can recognize maybe 50%-65% and it's slowly losing pace as new hardware is developed and drivers are not being released to support the hardware in a linux environment.
When I can take the current PC I have now (which most linux distros and live installations refuse to install on) and get something such as Ubuntu or even Knoppix to work correctly and recognize all my devices, I wouldn't have a problem using linux as a main stream operating system. Until then, I use it solely for web servers and database servers (and the occasional SSH session when I need to modify or install something onto the system). - thecwin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Unless you're trying to WINE, everything a normal person would like to do can be done without the command line. Even if you're trying to WINE a lot can be done without it...
I installed half life by putting in the disk, clicking the icon that appeared on my desktop, then clicking the installer. - Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Oh god... how many of these are we going to get? [insert foul cursing in a cryptic Finno-Ugric language]
The site's been overdugg btw.
As for taking over the world, it might surprise you that there are people who actually don't mind paying for their software, who like Microsoft's products (Yes, I used the words "like" and "Microsoft" in the same sentence. No, I'm not stoned.) and who use Windows by choice. Ratteler was correct in that people care about applications, not the underlying OS, but failed to take this into account when claiming Windows and OS X will, quote, "face a slow painful extinction". Why would they become extinct if people don't care which OS they use? If Windows works for them, they'll continue to use it. Same for OS X. - Dan100, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Indeed; open source is no holy grail of enlightenment.
People should use whatever gets their job done best, regardless of how it was created. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's called Xubuntu
- bigtomrodney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Hardware support in linux is excellent. Anyone who says otherwise is obviously posting from three years ago. I defy you to plug anything into Suse and not have it recognised.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I don't believe it is a question on whether most people like MS products, but if they are aware of free alternatives. They are taught MS as a standard, and most people that I've talked to have never heard of Linux or didn't realize that it is freely available in a reliable distribution such as Ubuntu. I've started handing out Ubuntu CD's in the dozen, which you can get for free from their website. I've had a few people tell me that they enjoy using it and will consider switching with their next PC.
- Sottozero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Then keep using Linux and be happy with it.
I, for one, look forward to Linux dorks continually asking, upon seeing a cool new app for Mac or Windows, "When will this be released for Linux?"
NEVER. Deal with it. - cluelessgeek, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Wrongo. The bugs have nothing to do with it (if they did, Linux would have wiped Windows out 3 years ago). Linux will never replace Windows as long as Linux is as hard to maintain as it is today. And before all you geeks out there give me the usual blather about how a grandmother can do it, wake up cause you know that's BS. My wife maintains her own Windows machine. She goes to Microsoft's update site and clicks on the link to update her system. She has no clue what Microsoft is doing but she can click on a link. I have taught her to go back to the site and keep clicking until it says no more updates. That's where Linux needs to get to. Clueless Windows users can install apps. All they do is download the installer and double-click it. They have no idea what the installer is doing but they can run an install app. That's where Linux needs to get to. When those clueless Windows users get a new program, they don't worry about what version of software they are installing or what is on their machines already. The program installs and works. Period. That's where Linux needs to get to.
Yes, Windows lets all the spyware crap, trojan horse, worms, viruses, on the machine willy nilly. But that is a design problem with Windows. It's not an ease-of-use problem. You want to know where Linux needs to get to to replace Windows? Just look at the Mac OS. Anything less will be a failure for the masses. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Actually, Maya runs natively under GNU/Linux, and Photoshop 7 can run with Wine. But I agree with above commenter, that there aren't many people who want that.
- jedeye, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Amen.
New users should move to the Linux way, not Linux move to the Windows way!
Linux is not hard once you learn how, but you will never learn if you stick to the comfort of "Point and Click" from Windows.
If you are not interested in learning how, don't move to Linux. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Viruses, trojans, rootkits, spyware, adware....
- jedeye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't think it is the case that KDE and Gnome aren't good things to have, and they do make it easier and more intuitive to use Linux, I for one use Gnome. It is however a fact that most installing and configuring in Linux involves the Command Line, there is no easy point and click configuration or install like Windows. But for those willing to learn, this means you get an understanding of what is going on and it gives you more power, rather than just continually clicking "next".
- midwinter, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Exactly.
I don't care what anyone else is using, Linux is better off with a userbase that actually have a clue anyway. - logic11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3As someone pointed out, it's what come pre-bundled with the PC. If you put a usable linux distro on a machine, the user will use it. If you put Windows on the machine, the user will use it.
I actually remember one sales guy at a fairly disreputable computer store locally who sold a woman a PC with Wordperfect pre-installed (this is in the win 3.1 days) because she wanted to do word processing, and then sold her a second system with Lotus 123 because she wanted to use a spreadsheet. Users don't think about the computer, they just think about how it works for them, and that's about they should be required to think about. For us computer people it is about the platform, the user wants something that works like their car, they get a minimal amount of education and when something goes wrong, they talk to an expert.
Linux hasn't made it there yet, even though it's pretty close. Once it is, a lot of PC makers will probably start including it, because it lowers their cost and allows them to either drop the price (competitive advantage) or increase margins (more money per sale = good). That is why once Linux is to the point it needs to be as a desktop OS, it will probably end up fairly dominant. - akinder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Exactly. Open Source is pretty much an annoying buzzword like AJAX and 'tag cloud'. You see it on every other news story on Digg or /. ( SomeAppName 1.3.4 released! OPEN SOURCE message client! ). Does the average user care? No, no matter how much the OSS crowd preaches about it, they don't care that they, although they have never even read a single line of C code, can download the source in a tarball. What they care about is the fact that it doesn't do X like MSN Messager, or Yahoo, or can't do Y without crashing.
To the end user, they don't care if 50 teenagers wrote it for free on Sourceforge, or if a multi-million dollar company created it and is selling it for $14.95, what they care about is that they can pick up the phone and call someone when it doesn't work properly. - EmileVictor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I, like many of my fellow diggers use Ubuntu as my second OS (although GRUB makes it load first). The only problems I've had with it is that while the support is there, it can take hours to figure out something like a wireless card. And while some people enjoy it (I did), to others it's just a deterrance from the OS. Whoever said applications are imperative is correct. Also, an easier but still secure method of application installation should be added. Although .exe & .msi files can be rather dangerous, at least when they're used right they work. In ubuntu, how many brand-new users are going to enjoy the job of compiling a program from source? Themselves? In front of a terminal? I know, the geek aspect is great - but Linux (particularly Ubuntu) isn't just made for the geeks, it's made for people who can't afford windows, will not pay for windows. Their second audience, while largest, is the geek community, who, unfortunately, are some of the only ones that understand how to use the damn thing. Linux shouldn't be made for geeks. It should be made for moms & dads, idiot-proof and graceful in dealing with errors.
-----------------------
http://www.mediahug.com/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The reason Linux isn't more widely used has everything to do with pretty much every computer coming with Windows whether you want it, don't want it, or don't know what the hell an operating system is or why you should care which one you're using, nothing more.
- dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I think the quote was "Microsoft should get into the vacuum cleaner business, where people actually want products that suck!".
- thisnameisfake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Anyone who wants Linux to have "World Domination" doesn't really get the Linux way. Ubuntu will surely might just be the downfall of Linux. Bringing in new users that don't know enough. Instead of learning they just want Linux to act like Windows.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+310,000 bugs you say? Based on http://digg.com/linux_unix/One_open_source_software_defect_fix_every_six_minutes , that's 60,000 minutes = 1,000 hours = 41.67 days to world domination. Let's do this (oh yeah, and digg that story if you want to promote the virtues of open source development).
- valona, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5A lot of non-techie people are aware of the alternatives, they have heard of Linux, they have heard of the alternatives. The reality is that most people do not care enough to make the switch. Windows comes pre-loaded with their Dell PC. They use Windows to load applications and games that they need. Sure it sometimes annoys them, they get viruses, but at the end of the day, the average Joe Soap doesn't give a hoot. Why should they? They can play the latest game, edit a word document, play their MP3's. They don't need the hassle of first finding out which NIX distro suits them best, how they download it, how they burn it on a CD, how they have to create partitions, how they get their system to dual-boot, how to use apt-get, how to use the command line to move around. It just doesn't matter to them.
Having an OS, with at best 4% of the desktop market, and then fragmenting this market into hundreds of distributions, with incompatabilites and various nuances, is not going to make this a valid alternative any time soon. A single solid distro is needed, with driver support, ease of use, minimal use of the command line, an slim and skinnable interface. To get people to move, it has to look like Windows. The truth may hurt, but that is it.
And you need solid applications. Apps that work as they are supposed to. Apps that don't need a maze of dependencies. Apps that have great support, have great features, and friendly user interfaces. This isn't the case with most Linux software. Again, we have hundreds of various media players, each with their own fragmented communities, most of them lacking a decent UI, none of them with even a proportion of the ease of use of Winamp.
Instead of fragmenting further, major consolidation around a single distro is needed. if that grates, then let the fragmentation continue. But then don't complain about clueless noobs choosing Windows over FedCoreUbuntu 10.3. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Ofcourse those who asked never looked at Synaptic or YaST...
- noteventime, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ubuntu now has network manager in its universe repos with makes networking very easy.
To be totally honest I only partially agree to this topic, Linux IS desktop ready with the release of dapper drake (ubuntu 6.05) as soon as network-manager is included.
The only this stopping it, from what I've seen is bettermicrosoft network integration (which I know is hard) and bug fixes in the auto detection system, although I didn't have to do anything at all apart from installing network-manager.
Linux IS ready but won't take over the market in a few years anyway because to many people, as many have already said, are still ignorant :) - Arevos, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Windows has and always will dominate the desktops."
Just like Atari has and always will dominate the games industry? Just as IBM has and always will dominate the PC industry? Things change, Sottozero, and Microsoft can't afford to take things easy.
I don't really mind whether Linux becomes accessable for the average user, but it would be nice to see some better Windows-Linux compatability in the future. Whilst Linux has so far produced the best desktop for my needs, rebooting back to my small Windows partition for the occassional game is a little wearying. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"why you have to recompile your drivers when you upgrade your kernel" You don't unless you have a very uncommon 3rd party one, or have compiled your own kernel in the first place (which is fine ofcourse :).
- KoZo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4For me, open source or close source is just the same, as long as you created your application in such a way that real people will actually use it with 100% productivity and 0% hindrance. The problem is that most people wants free software, open or close source.
- ordminute, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Ratteler Maya on Linux is an industry standard. Films like LOTR, Shrek, Madagascar, Titantic were all made on Maya for Linux. You can buy it here. http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=6872771
Gimp is a suitable replacement for many, but given that it lacks CMYK support, that will be a while coming. In the meantime join hundreds of thousands of others running the Adobe suite using Crossover office.
For high-end pro video-editing (Shake, MainActor) and 3D modelling (Maya) Linux is a great pro platform. For the desktop graphic designer, it's true, there are a few hoops to jump. - jedeye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Since when has Linux been an OS for people who can't afford to buy a commercial OS. That is not why it was started, and that is not where it should be going. If people can't afford an OS then sure, use Linux, but it is not a replacement Windows OS and in no way should it be treated as one. I think Linux is fine where it is going, Linux as a whole should not change to suit those who want a replacement Windows OS or cannot afford one. If Distros like Ubuntu and Linspire want to make it easier for these people that is up to them, but it should not fall upon the Linux community as a whole.
When Linus started the Linux Kernel, he was not creating it because he wanted to offer an alternative to DOS and Windows users, he created it because he wanted something better than Minix, and made it free to grow and develop (Open Source). Windows was not in the equation.
Why does the Linux community need to chase after "moms & dads" as you put it, when there is a perfectly adequate OS in Windows or Mac OSX, which I am sure suits their needs fine, just so these people get their OS for free! - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Free software is defined as software that respects four fundamental freedoms: (0) freedom to run the software as you wish, (1) freedom to study the source code and modify it to do what you wish, (2) freedom to make and redistribute copies, and (3) freedom to publish modified versions. Only programmers can directly exercise freedoms 1 and 3, but all users can exercise freedoms 0 and 2, and all users benefit from the modifications that programmers write and publish.
(from http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/microsoft-new-monopoly.html ) - CygnusX1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"IMO people don't care what OS or App their using as long as it does the job. For example I've put Firefox on loads of my friends PCs and some of them haven't even noticed their not using i.e Most - none geeky - PC users don't think "IE" or "Firefox" they just think "Web"."
I think you are underestimating MS marketing. Whenever I've performed system maintenance usually to remove spyware, adware, viri, etc. I've always suggested that by putting Firefox on the computer it would lower their risks of repeat infections/installations. Their usual responses are variants of, "can I use it just like Internet Explorer." I've often had to many times rename and re-icon the Firefox shortcut to the familiar Microsoft browser.
I think alternatively consumers know the web as IE, not vice versa. Anyone using the web and the default IE can remember one main thing, that they have to, and probably have been for a long time, click on "Internet Explorer" to get to the Internet.
This extends way beyond just browsers.
Your typical end monkey doesn't want to learn something new. They may not care what application they use, but they do care that the application they use doesn't change the way it looks, feels or operates. They want to know that by clicking 'file', they will get to 'preferences'. If you change that to 'tools' to get to 'preferences' the not so computer savvy get lost and could eventually simply abandon the fix altogether.
It usually takes a user an extended period of time to want a more permanent fix because A) it takes longer than 5 minutes to implement a long lasting fix, B) they will have to reconfigure all their applications and settings and C) they will have to learn something new about the new applications you install. They would rather the aggravation of blue screens and a reboot to get back to normal than spend the above steps to limit those errors. They really only accept the above steps if they can no longer perform their tasks anyways. (System freeze, reboot loops, extreme pop ups etc..)
Now take the typical user described above and chuck them into Linux...
Better make sure they don't know how to get hold of you ever again. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"they dont write any of their own programs"
See this page on Launchpad (which itself is developed by Ubuntu developers): https://launchpad.net/specs/ - TheTankengine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dapper Drake = Ubuntu 6.06
And your ONLY complaint about ubuntu is wifi? If that is the one thing that is missing from ubuntu for mass adoption, it would have happened long ago.
In case you don't know how to do this...
terminal -> sudo apt-get install NetworkManager
alt-F2 -> nm-applet
done! - Petronski, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3One thing that keeps Linux locked in the geek market is the rediKulous GNaming Konventions. Get a Klubuntu, people.
Most folks won't use what they feel silly saying out loud. - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Zedtech, "they still need to be compiled into the kernel"
They don't.
"End users should never have to touch the kernel when it comes down to it."
that's right :)
"Thats what makes the use of the Windows environment so simplistic - you can plug almost any number of hardware combination's in and it recognizes them automatically. When's the last time you had that luxury in linux?"
Umm... last week when I inserted a USB stick. Or do you mean PCI cards? Then last year when I added a network card to my server, and even more interestingly, when I moved the hard drive from one box to another (different chipset, different CPU, different network card, etc etc), it bootted and worked flawlessly. When is the last time you had that luxury in Windows?
Your last argument only stands if the sources would include GPL'ed code. In that case, GPL'ing the particular source tree is a requirement. - Wootery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"although GRUB makes it load first", modify /boot/grub/menu.lst if you're not happy with that.
- FuManchu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"What really needs to happen is every OS needs to be able to easily interact with any other OS. Any program could run on any OS and every piece of hardware could run on any OS."
Comments like this come from people who don't really know what's actually inside that box on their desk.
"It's all jus' WIRES an' things. . . why cant they all just get along with each other?" - dipswitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Even though using the commandline is no strange endeavour for me, I, for one, welcome the ease of the Gnome point-and-click environment. It's kinda like a Mac. After a while Windows seems to do everything really weird and un-intuitive. But the other way around is easy if you have a basic GUI understanding (widgets, windows, focus...), as opposed to "If I click on that spot here I get what I want, and I don't know what everything else does".
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is