What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, "Time for Miracles" view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
126 Comments
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -11/+63"RPM hell"? Ubuntu doesn't use RPMs. How about the hell you experience with millions of applications under Windows, each application with its own redudandant library, sucking now megabytes of disk and memory needlessly. Ubuntu's package manager(and even RPM does this, less well some say), keeps track of dependencies so that applications share dependencies nicely and you can upgrade the dependencies without fear of breaking applications.
To the people saying, "...but ntfs".. Yeah, what about it? Load the gui package manager, search for ntfs-3g and install, you can now read/write ntfs mounts. Linux isn't ready for joe shmoe user yet, although ubuntu takes us closer there. But at least make sure your gripes about linux are up to date or even valid. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+66 I found that out over a year ago after running Windows for over ten years.
I'm so glad I switched. - powatom, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Yours is a common mistake, aura.
The people who generally try Linux out (at the moment, anyway) as people who consider themselves technically competent (not the same as 'Windows competent'!). It's not the rule, but it's certainly a trend. The main group of people who give up on Linux after a few annoyances, are...wait for it....Windows 'power users'. Just because you're good/great/expert at Windows, does not mean you are going to 'get' Linux instantly. If anything, it makes it harder for you, because you have to unlearn the Windows stuff, and then learn how to do the same stuff in a completely different environment. When you realise you're out of your depth, you throw up your hands, and say 'If I can't do this, how can a novice do it?!'. Well, the answer is that a novice doesn't have any (or only a few) habits from their previous OS, which inhibit their learning of Linux.
If you want to really try Linux out - you have to approach it with an open mind, and realise that much of the stuff you do in Windows is done completely differently here.
Of course, if you just don't like Linux, then nobody's forcing you to use it. All I'm saying is that many 'expert' users don't give it a fair trial, and think that their bad experience will be repeated for anyone less technically competent. It's just not like that. - xyphur, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21Good for you. Want a biscuit?
- aussieNickuss, on 10/12/2007, -14/+28Ok.....I like the Open Source movement and the fact that you can get a powerful operating system for free, but I have been playing with Ubuntu Feisty for the last week or so, and its not that easy. I'm relatively tech savvy, but the problem I'm finding is that each time I want to install something, it's usually requires a trip to terminal to get the things going. I just don't think that is an option for most computer users (eg....the ones that have to be constantly reminded which mouse button to click.....left or right). Some software you can download comes in a .deb package which is a bit like your average .exe/.msi/.dmg/.app etc, but most software you have to get through Synaptic or terminal which can be quite challenging. Most newbies expect things to be a double click away, which unfortunately just isn't the case on linux.
- aura, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21Linux _is_ for geeks. I consider myself a very competent Windows user, and when I started using linux I was way out of my depth, and I gave up. (Back then it was mandrake then SuSE)
I only got into linux + ubuntu properly when I started working for a totally linux driven company and had to learn and most importantly had the support there so I could ask stupid things like "how do I start apache" and "why won't apache2 start" and "how do I install Postgres" and all the basic stuff that I can do using the shell now.
Linux is good, but for basic users I believe it's harder to use than windows. - coredump0x01, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20"but most software you have to get through Synaptic or terminal which can be quite challenging."
What is so challenging about entering some keywords in a search bar, checking off a checkbox, and clicking apply changes? There's no longer a specific need to use apt-get in the terminal unless you are doing something particularly different. IMO it's more challenging and frustrating to scour the web for various obscure .exe's to install drivers under Windows, then needing to check and make sure what you are about to execute is not malicious (the clincher for most non-tech users), THEN proceeding to the install process. Sorry, but having all the software in one consolidated and trusted place is just better, simpler and safer. - admirabumblebee, on 10/12/2007, -17/+27What are you talking about? You can customize themes on XP "out of the box" just fine.
- gfnw, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10This is true. A lot of the Linux advocates I see give advice to newbies often say things like "It's easy, just type x command in the terminal" or "simply add x line to the config file".
The problem is, to the everyday computer user, they don't want to to type commands and edit files. They want to click buttons, and have things walked through step-by-step in dialogue boxes. This is STILL something that most Linux distros fall short on, and is a major issue if you want mainstream users to take up Linux on the home desktop. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14After using Windows for about 10 years, I decided to give Ubuntu a shot. I used it for about a year or so, and overall I thought it was great. My biggest issue was when I wanted to install software not in the repository. Dependency hell. I'm no stranger to the command line and have experience with UNIX, and I was still annoyed - I could imagine what a total newbie must feel. When you're trying to do actual work, nothing is more annoying than chasing packages and trying to decipher obsure command line errors.
I use my computer for audio and graphics applications, and while Linux has some great tools available (especially for audio and MIDI sequencing) a lot of those programs are not in the repository, or the repo is limited to old versions. Eventually I gave up and bought a Mac. - Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13You should worry less about using the terminal and more about getting malicious viruses from email.
- Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12@waxoff
What do you mean by RPM hell. Did you use 'yum'? What where you trying to do?
You must have been using something else as Ubuntu does not use RPMs - boza111, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I am using windows xp for most of the time . i have also got ubuntu on dual boot since probably half a year now. I am an experienced computer user with windows.
Digg me down if you want to for saying this . This is not a criticism . This is a suggestion how to make ubuntu (or any linux OS ) better.
1. Installing Files - It is such a pain to install programms of the internet . Every time i installed a programm i had to read the online descriptions . For almost every program i had to do something different. Users want an OS which is easy to operate without having to read manuals all the time. Maybe this could be fixed
2. UI - I must say the user interface is very nice in ubuntu !! infact it propably has the nicest out of all OSes. Especially Beryl. This suggestion ties in with suggestion 1 . It is hard to get Beryl , widgets and docks to work for an average computer user.
These are my two thougts to boost the popularity of linux. What do you guys think . And for you geeks , try and imagine what you would need to learn if you only had basic knowledge.
what do you guys think ?
oh and i hope dell will preinstall Beryl. :D - maybeway36, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@ccaazz
If they took out the terminal, I would stop using it completely. A terminal is absolutely necessary to have in any system. Even Windows has one. (cmd.exe) - ffejrey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@chrismgtis
When I got a manual car and didn't know how drive it, I learned how! Although I have never had to put a car (or Linux) together "bolt by bolt" I have learned how to work on both. You do raise valid points...but you have to be able to get your hands dirty a little bit....that's half the fun! - abid786, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11"makes me spend an hour installing an ntfs driver just so i can access my old windows files"
Umm... read the DESCRIPTION on this story:
http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/Feisty_Fawn_has_stable_read_write_NTFS_drivers
"Are you a Windows user trying out Feisty Fawn? Point and click to access your Windows files within Ubuntu in under a minute." - Frost9999, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11I'm not a windows fanboy, but my main workstation is WinXP only because I need Photoshop, bridge, and lightroom. So even though I have Ubuntu running on an old laptop... it's useless to me. So I still don't feel like I have much of a choice. When I upgrade my workstation next, it will likely be to a Mac Pro simply because that is the best option for my work-flow at the moment.
- luvkit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Don't be afraid, Linux isn't just for geeks"... it's for supervillains.
http://www.ubergeek.tv/article.php?pid=54 - pogfreak, on 10/12/2007, -3/+91998 err 1999 err 2000 I mean 2001... errr surely 02 but wait 03 looks like nope 04 I bet 05, nope 06, wait its gotta be...
2007 IS THE YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP!!!! For real this time guys!!! - oojamaflip2006, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I see the real future for desktop Linux for people who _aren't_ tech savvy (and man are there a lot of them) because, lets say mom & pop just want to surf the web, read emails, type letters and maybe do their accounting; they can do all of this really easily with Ubuntu without getting mired in the dreaded terminal. For these basic users, Linux is a really good alternative to windows.
I would also like to see public libraries, schools and universities use Linux as it offers real incentives over a windows desktop in such environments. The same could be said for web cafes and other public use computers. - cmiller1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6stimpack: you DO realize that OS X is a full unix just like linux and if you want to run it like linux it is fully compatible with X.org or Xfree and the window manager of your choice, right?
- specialK16, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5dugg because I didn't know you could use KDE or Gnome on OS X.
- Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@frost9999
It's true that Linux does not have the same amount of commercial software that Windows has. There are alternatives but your probably used to/trained in the software you use so its a pain to learn new software. I have been using Linux for over 15 years now so I have always encouraged the dual boot option for people who still need the Windows software. It's great in terms of getting your work done and having time and fun learning another great operating system. The more time that you spend in Linux the more you will advocate for it because once using it for awhile it dawn on you like "WOW" this is a neat concept.
Another thing that helps is to advocate to get the commercial companies to distribute their software on Linux. At my job, I already use part of my purchasing power to donate to the open source community because some of the projects/software they have made is truly well thought out. When they got a forum for it, they are usually much more helpful than calling a commercial company, waiting on hold (with horrible music) and getting a guy with an accent that is not understandable.
When getting tech support on forums there are a few guidelines to follow. Always look through the README (if available) and read the FAQ. Read the manual and documentation if available.
Linux is superior to Windows in many ways and though there are a few things that need to be rounded off and cleaned up, it's a very good system. If you don't use it for work, as least keep a system around or dual boot with a Linux system because it's not going away and you will be glad that when it really takes off, you will be well on they way to already knowing it. - myke2007, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Dell make a lot of money from Microsoft by having a contract to use their operating system. (You might find some of the hardware contracts must be run on Microsoft as part of the deal, who knows). Offering Linux from a company like Dell will really annoy Microsoft (now they have a clear competitor) and it will be interesting to see what happens.
- flag564, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10"Ok.....I like the Open Source movement and the fact that you can get a powerful operating system for free, but I have been playing with Ubuntu Feisty for the last week or so, and its not that easy. I'm relatively tech savvy, but the problem I'm finding is that each time I want to install something, it's usually requires a trip to terminal to get the things going"
And that's why Linux isnt going to get anywhere with the larger public. While you dont need the terminal to install everything, you almost always have to use it to configure your system or to figure out why the program you thought you installed isnt working.
That has to be changed. Linux doesnt need Beryl so much as it need the existing rough edges smoothed out. - tybris, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Sorry, don't have the time to maintain a linux box. I use linux at work, but windows at home.
- srg13, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"I won't be using ubuntu anytime soon until the terminal is phased out"
Funniest thing I've heard all day!
Seriously though, where does this stuff come from? You can do everything with a GUI these days if you want.
I use it a lot though, because it lets me do things faster, and it really is easy to use if you spend 15 minutes learning how to use it. Like Maybeway36 said,
"If they took out the terminal, I would stop using it completely. A terminal is absolutely necessary to have in any system. Even Windows has one. (cmd.exe)"
"nstalling programs in windows ( i hate to say this) is much simpler, easier and more graphical, and thats why people like it - the average user can use it without much trouble."
Applications -> "Add and Remove Programs". Search for application. Check the box. Click install. Yeah, really hard.
Your points were true five years ago, but not anymore. - emailingRob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Who else felt stupid because they've been pronouncing Ubuntu as "oo-bun-too" and not "oo-boon-too"?
- crazybrit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Admirabumblebee: You can only customize a couple of details on XP, while you can customize a lot more on GNOME (and even more on KDE).
- coredump0x01, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"And just who is going to configure those applications, email settings, etc for those people? Hm?"
Their kids. The same way it's been done for years even on Windows. - ckSubs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6He obviously means that they're not SOLELY now offering Linux on their computers. Windows is still an option.
- yoblin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4To summarize, is Linux (and esp. Ubuntu) ready for primetime?
Not quite. Linux has come a long way in hardware support and not having to go to the terminal. The average user CAN sit down and start using ubuntu and after a couple hours not need XP/Vista.
However, two things ARE holding linux back, and will for quite some time. The install process is all luck. Maybe all your hardware (printers and scanners too!) will work great, maybe it won't. And secondly, when things break such as x.org spitting out gibberish after a kernel auto-upgrade, how is the average user going to know how to fix it? And comparing that to a bluescreen isn't valid; use xp in the last few years? Short of hardware failure or virii, the operating system is actually pretty stable. - brundlefly76, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4As a longtime Linux user, I am really interested to see how Dell handles laptop modems and wireless.
Currently the most popular new wireless chipset the Intel 3945abg, is very poorly supported under Linux, and I have had a lot of issues with it with many laptops. (See the 'ISSUES' file that comes with the driver). Amoung the known issues is that your wireless will crash if 'too much data is transferred at one time' - (?!) Indeed, if I surf the internet with it, its *usually* fine, but if I transfer a file locally, I lose it completely.
Staying connected in general is also much less reliable then windows or my mac, and the settings even under KDE Network Manager are much less forgiving then under the other two.
This could be a really big support issue for Dell. - Azimuth1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The actual crux of the article is that Linux *isn't* for average folks such as your parents.
- michelebot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I disagree. I shifted my 70 year old mother to Ubuntu about 6 months ago. She (and my brother) use it every day and my support calls have gone down 90%. No more calls about updating spyware programs or firewalls. She knows that when the little orange asterisk shows up on the panel, she needs to click on it to update her system. Very simple.
- Smeed, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I really like Linux, they just need to get vendors to develop drivers (or release the code) for newer hardware, faster. Throw me the biggest/latest games and Ill switch in a heartbeat.
- chrismgtis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3And just who is going to configure those applications, email settings, etc for those people? Hm?
- NuPagady, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I installed Xubuntu 7.04 on my laptop today. It offers better performance than regular Ubuntu (Xubuntu comes with xfce desktop) and I was really surprised how good everything works. I had Ubuntu a year ago and it was a nightmare for me - skype was working painfully slow, I had problems with higher quality videos and so on. I had to get rid of it. But now. Did I experience any problems watching videos, browsing online, chatting via skype? None. All my hardware is working great even though I don't even know how to install drivers yet - everything was installed for me. Video codecs were downloaded and installed automatically. It looks like Ubuntu (Xubuntu in this case) will stay with me for long this time.
- strabes, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5@stimpack: $3000 for shiny graphics? No thanks.
- CGA1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Well i'm a Windows sys adm trying to get into Linux. I've been at it several times before but gave it up after a while. Atm i'm trying out Mepis and must say i'm pleasently surprised. But, and thats a big but, software installation has a long way to go. Beeing a software junkie i was totally trilled when i found kde-apps.org. I can safely say i've been trying to install about 50 apps from source i have managed to install about 2 of them without trouble (dependencies and a nice bunch of unsorted command line errors). If i'm lucky i might find a deb package and then my success rate at best reaches 50 %. Mind you i always try to install the software from the repos first but contrary to what Linux advocates may lead you to beliave, there's quite a lot of software that's simply not in there.
- glide256, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3At least you didn't say that if your car breaks down you would just start it back up again...
- DonCarcharo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3CentOS, Debian and Fedora work well in a server environment. Ubuntu is nice enough on the desktop. But there is no way that I'd EVER suggest that installing applications on Linux is easy. If fact it's easily the most arcane way of installing apps I've ever seen. Just two days ago I spent four hours and thirteen consecutive install attempts just to get Plesk running on my Ubuntu box. What I was doing should have been straight forward enough. On my Windows box it involved double-click, next, next and done. However on Ubuntu, due to the horrible way GNU/Linux handles application libraries and dependencies, I had to repeatedly run through the install fixing one dependency at a time. Even worse every other install it'd hose synaptec requiring a sudo-apt get update -f.
Face it. To even suggest that Linux's method of handling application dependencies is better than OS X's "self contained" method or even Windows' method is just silly. Give me fat, bloated and self contained any day over efficiently self- defeating. - threemonkeydust, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Not me. As a Brit, I think U-bun-tu sounds better, but that U-boon-tu suits the Americans better.
Doesn't really matter, we know what we're talking about!
Not sure where Unbutntu, Unkbutnu or the other bizarre typed variations come from though... - jopsen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3#sid0
A lot has happend since 6.06, suspend2 is AFAIK default in Ubuntu...
#aussieNickuss
Installation doesn't require use of terminal, most guides you find online tells you to open the terminal and type: "apt-get install mplayer" to install mplayer... But you might just as well open synaptic and search for mplayer, check it of and apply changes to your system... It's completely the same thing... Online guides, like the ubuntuguide.org, just uses terminal because it's simpler to tell the user...
When using synaptic or on of the many other frontends to apt-get, all you do is to have apt-get download and install the .deb for you... Furthermore apt-get downloads and installs needed dependencies... Not even Windows Vista can to that, nor can OS X...
Note: ubuntu comes with a very simpel add/remove software application, even easier than synaptic, it's also just a userfriendly frontend to apt-get... And if all repositories are enabled, you should have plenty of software there... Just search for it... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4 Having used Linspire,and later freespire,I never used the command line except to ping yahoo.
For those complaining about installing,once CNR.com is officially launched it will support Ubuntu 7.04 and eventually other distros as well.
- specialK16, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"@ccaazz
If they took out the terminal, I would stop using it completely. A terminal is absolutely necessary to have in any system. Even Windows has one. (cmd.exe)"
Both you and ccazz are right. The terminal is necessary but not indispensable. Look at OS X, the terminal is rarely needed. I already got used to having a terminal window all the time, but for non-tech users using the terminal isn't a very pleasant solution. - mightyzug, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2yes of course it is
i have a dual boot vista / ubuntu and i had no trouble with the install, update, or install of any of my software... even my wireless worked just fine
i can do everything that i can in windows just as easily as i can in linux, and under linux it performs better. - maybeway36, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The universe repository not being enabled by default annoys the heck out of me sometimes. There should be a thing when you start up the package manager that gives an explanation of what "universe" is and asks if you want it turned on. It should also say how to turn it on/off later if you change your mind.
- digitalarcanum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have to disagree with the title of the article especially when it comes to the state of laptop hardware incompatibilities in linux. Dell is more or less right now is sending a peace offering to the linux zealots. The whole dell linux thing is just a trial offer, and as far as it's concerned I will be very suprised if it takes off, because if it does, they have a ass ton of work to do as far as linux drivers for their laptop hardware goes. I'd give anything for native support of their broadcom wireless mini-PCI cards. Last time I attempted to install the linux nvidia drivers and ndiswrapper on my laptop running FC6, I got IRQ conflicts and lock-ups upon system boot. not pretty.
- specialK16, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@chrismgtis:
worst analogy ever made.... -
Show 51 - 100 of 126 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is