What is Digg?117 Comments
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38http://ubuntuforums.org
That should help, there are lots of friendly people willing to give you a hand. - trogdoor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32""Worth bookmarking if I need to give someone a quick starter guide."
See, here's the problem with Linux as it is today. (I'm ready to be viciously modded down and that's fine)
Ubuntu is supposed to be one of, or even the most user friendly distros from what I'm told. Why does it still need to have a guide showing how to install anything?
An OS is a platform for running applications. Installing applications on that platform should be self-evident or the OS has failed in a very important and meaningful way."
I hear this argument a lot, that installing applications should be intuitive, and the claim that it isn't in Linux. But what would somebody completely new to each OS think. What would they think is more intuitive?
New to windows:
They see an "add / remove software" tool but can't figure out why it doesn't seem to actually be used to "add" any programs, and rarely used to remove them either, one of their friends tells them they need to open the browser, go to a website... Open the browser ?!? why would I use the browser to install applications? Is that really intuitive? So they are told to go to the website of the company that makes the software ( and if they don't know it off the top of their head, which they won't, they have to use google to find it AND be able to tell the malware site results from the legit sites ) they download the .exe double click it and install ( this last step is how most windows users claim software is installed totally forgetting / ignoring the many more steps to get that .exe installer in the first place )
New to Linux ( gnome ):
Right when they log in they see an "Applications" menu at the top of the screen, they click on it, and at the bottom there is a menu item labeled "Add / remove..." and funny thing, it is actually used to add and remove software! They see the search box, put in the name of the application or any key words like " word processor " and they get a list of results, they double click the application they want and it installs.
Honestly, which seems more intuitive to you? - chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21quick guide:
rpm packages - get alien and then use "sudo alien -i (package.rpm)
debian packages - just double click!
tar and tar.gz/2 - unpack with archive manager then:
cd (directory of unpack)
./configure
make
make install
that's it. - OttomatiK420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19@heavyal
Way to be a dick. - TomFrost, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Chicken, thanks :). It's refreshing to see people being genuinely kind here. For what it's worth, I clicked your thumbs-up button a few times.
- neko, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21A nice guide with screenshots, rather than the easier-to-explain-but-daunting-to-users commandline. Worth bookmarking if I need to give someone a quick starter guide.
Really, the hardest bit about installing stuff in Ubuntu is that you don't do it The Windows Way. You don't need to be a little web-searching monkey and Next> click slave.
Although it doesn't have everything in there, it does have more software than most people install in their lifetime. - pixelmixer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16sure it can, if you run it under wine you uninstall it the same way basically.
- TomFrost, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14You missed step 3.. the complex one that reads "Type in your CD Key during install. Be informed that you've used your key to install Vista too many times before, and that you'll have to drop another $300-$400 for another key, for software you already bought, because we're assuming you're a criminal. Say '***** that' and install Ubuntu."
- saska, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Well, I missed it the other two times.
Some of us would rather link people to an article like this than spend time explaining it or, god forbid, do it for a friend/relative/coworker and thus initiate a parasitic relationship with a new user. - thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@jasontate
Why are you blaming Linux for the shortcomings of the software you run? If anyone needs to take the blame, it's Adobe for not supporting the Linux platform.
Have you considered running a VM (virtual machine) of Windows inside of Linux for those programs you need? Perhaps not the most elegant solution, but it should work. VMware Server is some awesome, free (price), and decently easy to use to get a virtual machine setup. Decently fast too. Google it and take a look. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12 Ah, but apps will soon be as easy to install as falling off a log!
CNR is coming for your distro.
http://forum.linspire.com/viewtopic.php?t=427697 - TomFrost, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10First: Two programs does not constitute "often".
Second: You're approaching Linux with a Windows mentality. If you can actually write webpages by hand, there are so many more coding tools than Dreamweaver on the Linux platform. If you need that visual aid, there are two or three really, really good web authoring packages in that direction too. Use google, look around a bit. Don't expect to use the exact same software on an entirely different operating system. - subxero37, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Ubuntu is great at program installation, due to things like apt and GUI frontends for it (synaptic, adept, things like that.) However, installing other things shouldn't need a guide - I think that, for an operating system to be really 100% useful, a command line should never be *necessary.* It really intimidates many users, especially when most command-line guides always mention the command "rm -fr" and tell about how it'll hose the system if you do it as root. Most users won't know what "root" is, and if they see that a six-character command will hose their system, they won't touch the command line at all, and their Linux life will be made more difficult.
Thing is, I don't wanna compile my whole kernel (or any of it, for that matter) or manually edit my fstab or my X.org configuration file to get some small things working here and there -- or even for bigger things, like Wi-Fi cards.
The command line is an incredibly valuable tool, that people should discover on their own. It should not be mandatory. (Alright -- many times the command line isn't necessary, but for so many installs, it really is, and things should be made easier for those people with weird hardware. They didn't *choose* to have weird hardware.)
Anyway, things like installing fonts isn't readily obvious on Ubuntu. The Linux file system hierarchy intimidates a lot of people too -- who would think that fonts are in /usr/share/fonts? What is /usr/share? Isn't anything in /usr already shared? Why is there /usr/bin, /bin, and /sbin? What about /lib, and /usr/lib? Those are the kind of questions I get most often about Linux when I introduce people to it. It's very confusing as to *where things go* and why they go there.
Sorry, this turned into too long of a post. Ubuntu is, no doubt, a major leap in the right direction, but until well-written guides are built into the local help system (local disks are, logically, much faster than remote disks), and the command line isn't mandatory, it will not be a substitute for Windows (for everybody, that is). - TomFrost, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9No, it's not more complicated. It's different. So with the raft of Windows-switchers we're getting on the various Linux platforms, there's a whole lot of people saying "Help I can't find exe files!" because they thought they could click right past the window that lets you click on software to have automatically downloaded and installed. Also, quit being a troll. These reactions are seriously old.
- reedreeder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The guide says "Having problems installing something on your new Ubuntu operating system?"
I really don't think there should be any confusion about whether the writer actually means install any application, regardless of OS. - thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@SLH06
What's wrong with repositories _or_ 'weird tar.gz' files? Repositories are really about the most efficient way to distribute free software across a certain platform. Without repositories (or at least packages), you'd have to recompile for each platform (the tar files). That _can_ get messy. Thus, repositories are awesome.
You're expecting Linux to act like Windows/Mac. Guess what, it isn't Windows and it isn't Mac. Yup. That's right. It's different.
What's wrong with the terminal? If you spent a little time with it each day, you'd find that it can be an extremely useful tool. Why can't Windows have a good command line? I'm sick of clicking through random menus to change settings. (See where this is going? Again, the OS's are different.)
As you've seen, Linux is a different OS. As a Mac user, I'm surprised you don't have more tolerance and understanding that things are done differently under different platforms. Different isn't inherently better of worse... it's merely _different_.
@a7bat
Ugh... can you stop mimicking an arrogant Linux attitude? We aren't all like that, y'know.
First point -- it isn't Windows but we want to convert Windows users. I'd say this is accurate for most users, mostly because that's where we came from. We've been there, but we've found something that we think is better -- something we believe in. Why _wouldn't_ we want to share that with those we can best relate to (in an a kind/understanding way, of course)? It only makes sense to at least introduce those who you think can benefit from using Linux and be available and helpful in the transition. I would've _loved_ having someone who knew more about Linux who could help me out... but I didn't and I learned most everything I know on my own with the help of those online. Sure, I likely learned more that way, but it was a more painful struggle to get there.
Next point -- sure, you can tinker your Linux box to death, but I have barely done any major changes in months. It's an extremely robust system, requiring little maintenance once set up. Ubuntu really doesn't take a whole lot of effort to set up once you know what you are doing. I'd say that I can setup an Ubuntu partition a lot faster than a Windows partition and have it in good everyday working order. I'm capable of doing a lot more in Linux than Windows. - chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Try booting up the live cd and pressing f6, you can change parameters this way. Trying typing in "acpi=off". It helped boot up ubuntu on my old laptop.
Hope that helps. - MaHaGoN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Lets just go through the comparison of installing in Windows from installing in Ubuntu (and deb based distro)
Assuming you know what you need to install, these are the steps you follow in each operating system
Windows
Open up a web browser and search google for the correct version of your program
If you happen to find a decent source you then have to download it saving it or opening it after the download
Then you double click the exe, not necessarily knowing what you are getting as an added "bonus" ala registry hell and all the extra programs that get installed, possibly even viruses
Deb based distro
Open a terminal and type
sudo apt-get install "name of program here"
And if you ever want to uninstall, oh man... thats a whole different story. So why people say that installing things in Windows is easier, I have no idea. No one needs to install from source, and even then, its imo easier than taking a gamble with an exe installer. At least I know what it is doing to my system. - Barlo_Mung, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9"Worth bookmarking if I need to give someone a quick starter guide."
See, here's the problem with Linux as it is today. (I'm ready to be viciously modded down and that's fine)
Ubuntu is supposed to be one of, or even the most user friendly distros from what I'm told. Why does it still need to have a guide showing how to install anything?
An OS is a platform for running applications. Installing applications on that platform should be self-evident or the OS has failed in a very important and meaningful way. - 311chaos, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9This will be helpful if I can ever get Ubuntu to install in the first place. I am very curious about Linux but I haven't ever been able to get it installed to test it out.
- selectodude, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I have Photoshop CS2 installed perfectly in Linux. You're not trying very hard.
- TomFrost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5And if the thought of using the command line turns you off, each major desktop distro incudes a graphical program that lets you read down through the available software, what each one does (you can search this if you're looking for something in particular), click what you want, and hit the install button. It takes care of finding the right version, it takes care of downloading it, it takes care of installing it. The topic link shows just one of these programs, after all.
- Toshibi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm an Ubuntu (well Xubuntu on an old P2 and Kubuntu on my "main computer") and I had to drop into command line a few times in the beginning. Once you have it where you want it, the correct repos, etc. you really don't need to mess around in Command line if you don't want to. I use Adept/Add Remove Programs and it's all good. Seriously, very little mucking about on the command line. Other programs like EasyUbuntu or Automatix make life easy as well.
I have Windows XP Pro and Kubuntu on this machine right now....I haven't booted into Windows in over a month. If I want to make a Web page I use Nvu or Quanta, for video I have Kino or Pitivi. Music, I have Audacity. Graphics I have The GIMP, Blender, Krita, and so on....and I didn't have to drop to command line for any of them. Very easy to install.
The main difference is in the way you think....if you approach it like Windows then you'll get confused. Go into it fresh and expect to learn. - subxero37, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I understand that Linux is not Windows. But the industry uses Windows for so many things, that other operating systems should logically adopt some of the more useful practices of Windows. I love Linux. I use it every day, without fail. Anyway, to quote you, "Most users, if they already have had their system setup, don't need to wander much/any out of their home directory." That's what I'm getting at - users shouldn't need someone else to set up their system. It should be easy enough for a user to do it themselves, or at least for them to try without being scared or intimidated by it.
I'm not bashing Linux, and I'm not bashing you. You make good points, I think I make good points. I'll leave it at that. - jasontate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Really? Hmm -- can you tell me how to install Dreamweaver 8 or Photoshop CS 2, please? Because it seems to fit inside the "doesn't work at all" category.
- thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It takes work to keep all those packages up to date. Besides, bleeding edge package compilations aren't usually the most stable things in the world.
I'll take some _slightly_ dated software in exchange for the convenience of quick and easy installation/removal. If it really bothers you to have 'OLD' software, you know that you can usually compile it fairly easily...
Personally, I've found a lot better 'support' in the Linux world than in Windows world. Your mileage may vary. - mbthompson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This has got to be one of THE MOST useful articles I've ever run across on digg.
- pixelmixer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Nah... dont bother with the iso if you dont know what it is...
Ubuntu has a free DVD program you can get to on their website. They'll mail you a bunch of DVD's with Ubuntu on them for free. (This is one reason why i use ubuntu and many of my friends use it now)
http://www.ubuntu.com - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6A guide to install ANYTHING in Ubuntu:
[Read gigantic tutorial so long that it has a ***** table of contents]
Here's how to install ANYTHING in Windows:
1) Download installation file of your choice, from any location your heart desires.
2) Double click on the file and press "Next" a few times.
Regardless of intuition, which of these do you think is actually EASIER and is more likely to get a newbie to understand it? - cynicist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Instead of thinking that installing software on Ubuntu absolutely requires instructions, I prefer to think about how much easier it must be for new users to have them. Imagine sitting down in front of three computers, one with OSX, one with Windows, and one with Ubuntu, and not knowing how to install software. Which do you think would be easier to use? An OS that requires you to find an application installer using a search engine and then interact with it in some strange way or one where after finding the add/remove programs shortcut all you have to do is type a keyword, select the app you want, and click on the install button? (My point is that you can make a logical assumption that add/remove programs must add applications and that install must install your software, but how (besides word of mouth) are you supposed to figure out where to get installers from for the OSX and Windows platforms?)
Arguments like "it can't play my favorite game" make some sense to me but saying software installation is too much effort is ridiculous. You couldn't figure out how to install software for OSX and yet you say that any operating system that needs instructions for software installation "just hasnt got a good enough UI". I would agree with you if you actually meant that no UI's today are intuitive, but somehow you managed to imply that Ubuntu's UI is inferior to the others. I am a fanboy (archlinux to be specific) but I didn't digg you down for bashing linux, I dugg you down for making a bad argument. - mbthompson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Tried that with TeamSpeak?
- covertgeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Another site to check out is http://www.ubuntuguide.org/. They've got a really thorough guide for practically everything you would want to do with Ubuntu.
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Aha. I remember when they Open Source CNR, just after introducing Freespire. Hopefully Lin[dows|spire] won't charge anyone. Repositories should be indepedent from CNR as an OSS module.
- SLH06, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I'll never understand why it's so difficult to install programs on Linux. I've tried Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and a old copy of red hat linux 7. You have to either have to go to the respotories or download some weird tar.gz file from the web and see if you can figure out how to get it installed from the command prompt. Why can't you just download what ever Linux app you want and double click and its starts a installer, or better yet just drag and drop the app into your applications folder like the Mac. Oh and why is it that you have to go to the command prompt so often? I use a Mac which is also Unix based and I've never had to open the terminal app! Guess I'm just another spoiled Mac user. :-)
- n0xie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think most people prefer to use the command line once they get used to Linux. For starters it's MUCH easier to explain to someone who is new to Linux how to configure stuff using the commandline. Instead of going through all those windows (click there, then there, then there, no not there but there etc etc) you just let them type two or three commands, and you're done. There can't be any miscommunication when using the command line.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I find that CNR was great when i first used it in linspire, but, the package manager in ubuntu is about the same?? it gets everything your missing (for the most part) and even has star ratings for apps and games. I see no difference really? But its nice anyways
- DoodlesMcPooh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@jasontate Crossover Office will run both of those no problem.
- thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Umm... the guide is for newer users. Newer users should not be using a 64-bit kernel... at least not without a forewarning of the potential headaches and problems forthcoming.
- BassJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I agree with Trogdoor, it is quite odd how the "Add/Remove Programs" in the Control Panel on Windows doesn't actually let you add any programs except those extra bits you don't get by default with a base windows install!
As for Ubuntu it is fairly straight forward, as Trogdoor stated. On the occasions that what you want to install isn't found via Synaptic it does involve a certain amount of web searching, but most times you can get the .deb package for the program you want to install and that is about as straight forward as installing a .exe on windows, with you only having to sort out any dependecies - which can be likened to getting things like the .Net Framework of VB Runtime files on windows! - jasontate, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Well, my mentality is not: Let's do everything humanly possible to not get the result I want. My mentality is: Let's use the programs I know how to use to be the most efficient. This is the problem with linux -- they expect people to sacrifice for the product, and that's not something I'm willing to do.
Those are the only two programs, period, that keep me from using Linux. Nothing else comes close, and I've looked around - installed a few things, and came to this conclusion.
The point is: I should be able to expect to use the same software on a different operating system. Especially if said operating system is going out of their way (forming coalitions and the like) to get me to use it. Furthermore if entire "tutorials" are created to make the system "easier to use" and therefore hoping to bring the masses to the system (I assume this is the goal), they're going to need to be able to feed the consumer. Call me selfish (I am) and close minded (also true), but the Linux system (hell, any operating system) needs to adapt to my needs, not the other way around.
On a tangent: but I want to use Linux, I really do. I have it installed on my system (dual boot), but I simply can't stay with that OS because of my constant need to use the aforementioned two products (I run a website for a living). And yes, I'm taking the mentality that the OS world revolves around me; however, I think my "problems" with the OS can be applied to the masses with very little effort. - SimonGray, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, my host screwed up so I released it all to the public domain:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=343257
Do you people realise this is the fourth time this is on digg.com? :-p - motang, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@schestowitz I am pretty sure it's going to be free.
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS4018009574.html - DoodlesMcPooh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2check google you can find all the roms you need in less than a minute.
- thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@subxero37
Ok. I see what you are getting at... but full on support out of the box isn't here yet -- from Windows or Linux (reinstalling Windows can get pretty messy)... and I'm not really keen on mimicking many Windows functions (particularly the mess they call 'installation'). Can Linux improve how it works though? Sure. I don't think there will come a point where you can't improve on any OS -- innovations keep things exciting and moving forward.
I really do think that Linux does many things better than Windows (thus, why I'm using it), and the reasons for that are inherently the differences -- if Linux were just a clone of Windows, it wouldn't be anything special. Its choosing to be different is one of its greatest strengths, but along with that comes the difficulty of a learning curve, deterring those from using it. That is hard to get around, and why I suggest it being setup for someone, at least, initially.
Linux really has the potential to grow as a grass-roots movement if we can individually introduce it to those we know who could benefit from using it, setting it up once they decide to try it, and helping them through. Without those steps, it'd be hard to convert most of the population, regardless of how 'easy' it is to setup and use (though, that'd certainly help).
I'm not disagreeing with you here; I'm just throwing out some food-for-thought of what I have learned thus far. - CircleFusion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I love how important details get skimmed over to make the actions seem simple.
- what naming convention for "name of software" do you use?
For example, to get photoshop setup with WINE, would I just do this...
sudo apt-get install adobe photoshop cs with wine
Of course not. You left out some details. It's obviously not that simple for everything.
More questions that a NEW user might have in relation to your simple steps...
- what the hell is a repository?
- how do you turn on the repositories?
- how do you add more repositories?
- where does a NEW user find the answers to these questions?
- how do you get to the command line?
Remember, this is all about NEW users. If you assume too much about what makes sense to the user, then the point gets overlooked. - cynicist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ Barlo_Mung
No, the problem is your perception. Do you consider launching a browser and searching google for software intuitive? Well maybe now you do, but there was a dark time long ago when you didn't know how to do anything in windows. So how did you manage? You had to learn. It's even easier in Ubuntu, because the learning is completely taken out of the equation. You can click on the applications menu and go to add/remove programs to install software. Type in something like "cd burn" and you find several suitable applications. So I ask you, how could it be any easier? - drummer1189, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2for support you hit the mIRC chats, i found some of the most helpful people on the planet at #ubuntuforums on freenode
- lpcustom, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"but the one that has all the packages isnt installed by default - freaking *weird*
The packages managers don't contain the packages....they manage the packages that are listed in the repo package lists and allow you download them. You have one file that lists what repos these package managers should check. EACH PACKAGE MANAGER WILL LIST THE SAME THING. They will show the exact same packages. - jlebrech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ok!! Everything? How do I install emerge on Ubuntu?
- smackit, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I know ill get dugg down by the linux fanboys on here (which on digg is probably around 99%!) but Id like to suggest that any operating system that requires instructions on how to do something as basic as installing software just hasnt got a good enough UI. Ubuntu, like practically every other linux distro, just doesnt cut it yet when it comes to useability. Im a mac user mostly and i like that, in fact it was so easy - drag drop install i couldnt fiugure it out, but i dont think thats about as hard as it should get. Windows installs nearly always offer a guided installation with easy to follow GUI and words like "click next", but the whole linux thing is just too much effort.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 117 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is