What is Digg?67 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15I never understood why the Linux community came to rely on package managers. How does this make sense at all? I mean, sure, it's probably much easier to implement than something like InstallShield on Windows, but how does this concept make ANY sense AT ALL?
Only your standard, well-known Linux applications are listed by these package dabatases. Sure, this means several hundred pieces of software of almost any category you want, but it still limits you. If some random guy on the internet wrote a piece of program, there's no way you'd be able to install that if you're not at least partly familiar with software programming. You can easily install something like Firefox or some new media player, but can you just as easily install "my-silly-pong-game.1.7.4-beta.tar.gz"? No, you can not.
Treating "users" as if they were "programmers" is a HUGE mistake. The only reason this mistake continues in the year 2005 is because most established Linux engineers got their computer science education in the 70s and 80s, when the term "user" really DID mean "programmer", and they refused to adopt to a changing world as things usually tend to happen (how many of you, who were born in the 50s or 60s, enjoy rap music?).
All that needs to happen for Linux to be ready for the desktop is to start treating users like normal people of different backgrounds, and not think of them as those who are somehow involved in the technology industry. Just because someone wants to use Linux doesn't mean that they read Slashdot. - astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's really great, but it's 8 years overdue.
It's a shame that there's so much great technology being developed for the Linux desktop but when considered collectively it's an unfocused mess, like a chicken without a head.
X11 (or at least Gnome and KDE) up to this point has just been a nursery for developers to figure out what how GUI applications should work, which is fine except that the problem was already solved fifteen years ago. It's time to put egos aside and make a decision, and it's time to focus on users, Linux users, and what they use their machines for. (Hint: if you bury the Terminal three levels deep inside a start menu you have no ***** idea who your users are. If you don't provide an option for mapping caps-lock to control, you have to ***** idea who your users are. If you don't provide a keyboard shortcut for *every* single operation or command, you have no ***** idea who your users are.)
As toolkits go, Gnome and KDE are great and Linux is stronger for having both of them. Windows and Mac each have a number of different toolkits, too. The difference is that the developer's choice of toolkit on Windows or Mac has little impact on users. On Linux, however, the developer's choice of toolkit has a fundamental impact on users, and until that changes the Linux GUI will continue to be relegated to the desktops of college kids who want to play in the GUI nursery. - balkce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The fact of the matter is that a lot of Windows users that think of using Linux as a working environment are mostly people with some sort "programming" background. If not, well, is pretty hard for them to know that Linux actually exists. Frankly, after having some time using Linux, Windows, OSX, etc. I've come to realize that Linux is really not built for a normal user and not the way that it should be thought of (by the way, a programmer is not a "normal" user? so freaks are we eh? jeje, kidding).
If you begin using Linux, you need to familiarize yourself with the type of machine you're using and what it's doing... for me that was a huge part of the Windows-to-Linux switch experience, and I'm grateful for it. So yeah, if you're not reading Slashdot while using Linux, you should be; that's why is Freeware and Open Source: it's there to be understood without any limitation, and to understand it it's to know how it's installed and working. Using Linux thinking that it's going to work right out of the box and that it's going to feel comfortable with a nice GUI it's a good Marketing strategy and it's a good thought if you want more people using Linux as a Desktop Environment, but it's that really what it's all about? More people using it? I thought that it was to make a f***ing awesome OS.
If we begin treating every piece of software "installable" by just double clicking IMO we are taking the liberty of the user, any user, to state how it wants it to be installed down to the smallest detail: every installation software that I know limits the information of what libraries, config files, etc. to use and where to get'em. We are also taking out the fact that the program can be compiled in your box making it work more efficiently with the resources your box has, not one binary file compiled in a box hundreds of miles away: that's a huge effort from the Open Source community that would be taken from granted it this is done. And yes, both of these processes (installation and compilation) require some type of computer knowledge (like typing what the INSTALL file tells you to). And it may be seemingly harder than the double-click stuff, but, in all fairness, every project that I have installed from a .tar.gz has always had a website to find documentation from, a forum full of people to find answers with and an email to write to for specific problems, and frankly that is something that is not that common on the Windows side (try writing the author of MS Word for a bug report).
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that these people want to join efforts to make a better Desktop Environment (hell, is part of making the OS even more awesome), and frankly I don't think is overdue: is good for people to work their asses off separately, gain experience from it, and then come together and share their opinions. Actually, an understated fact of all of this is that all of'em realized that they have a lot of stuff in common, and that their efforts will be a lot more inclusive and thoughtful of each of these opinions because of this... "Portland's goal is to make it possible for desktop software developers to write to the Linux desktop without having to worry about whether the distribution or user is using KDE, GNOME or a more obscure Linux desktop" and that is what I think it's all about. - Lung-Dart, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The whole point of Linux is not to have one application do everything, but have many packages that all do one thing well, then you can make applications which utilize said packages. The problem of course is package dependency. What they need to work on is getting developers all packages in one or more repositories, and application developers to do the same. In my opinion going into a program and clicking on the program you want from a category is much more user friendly then finding the .exe file on the Internet and then double clicking.
We just need an easy way for developers to get there packages on a repository. some sort of a test bed rep. would be nice, then after the bugs are kinked out it gets promoted to a "application" or "package" repository. With the ability for anyone to submit to a test bed repository. - DewayneSmith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1...Today in Portland at a Linux conference the participators all started a riot by fighting over which desktop environment was better. Details at 11.
//random - xerox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"double click install and real games then you'll get my attention. I dont like spending all day trying to install something, I have better ***** to do."
I guess you've never used a package manager? - lordfoul, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The simplification of integrating linux apps into the desktop, whether it be Gnome or KDE or other X Window system based desktops, is one step closer thanks to The Portland Project and for that fI am gratefull. This is clearly the right development path. Good on'em.
- astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Double click. Wow that was easy.
- axessterminated, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Install Shield is nothing like a package management system. Install Shield does not calculate dependencies or actually install anything. Install Shield simply protects your system and provides an automatic uninstaller.
I also happen to prefer to be able to customize my system to the point where no one else can use it. And I do this with Gentoo (+ the almighty Portgae!), and Fluxbox or FVWM.
If you want easy Linux, that just works, get anything debian-based, but even more so get Ubuntu/Kubuntu. Ubuntu for the Mac-Addicts, and Kubuntu for the Windows users.
They both have a very nice package management system called "apt".
And just so all of you know, Windows is learning from Unix, not the other way around. 99% of the new features in Windows Vista have been available in Unix for years, such as its package management system. I prefer one source, like packages.gentoo.org, for everything, then having to hunt down someones EXE on an unstable and spyware-packed webserver.
A_T - madcat87, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It is more like:
1.Double Click
2.Scrolling 5 minuted until you reach the end of the License agreement.
3.Marking "I agree"
4.Click Next x5
5.Marking "No i don`t want Program for Weather Forecast" (you are actually installing a video player)
6.Marking "No i don`t want information from my Computer to be Send"
7.Marking "No i don`t want xxxxxx IE toolbar"
8.Clicking Finish
9.Waiting for restart :)
Wow that was Easy :) - OneAndOnlySnob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You guys who want easier installation of programs: You guys are out of the linux loop. I've not compiled a single program from scratch on my current install. I just click on what I want in Synaptic, and it downloads it, along with all the dependencies, and installs it. It's easier than Windows.
I'm not going to lie, there are a few programs I miss from the Windows world, but we need developers to hop on board and write them. If you're a programmer, and you're complaining about the state of linux, I suggest you consider trying to fix it. Otherwise, complaining is good too, because sometimes it provides insight into what is left to be done. - jerry2a, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A lot of people don't seem to understand the real power of Linux - or any UNIX for that matter. It's strength is not as a desktop system for the masses like Mac or Windoze - as an OS for server applications it's fast, stable, easy to manage remotely, and it doesn't need to use a ton of cpu and ram to boot up a stupid gui that you're never going to use on a server anyway. Fixing Win boxes remotely is a major pain and it's slow unless you're on a fast link - maybe on day MS will figure that out, though it's not likely since they still haven't figured out how to make a stable OS. I do happen to like Linux for desktop use, and I will continue to use Blackbox/Fluxbox regardless of whatever fancy resource-consuming desktop comes out next, but I can also live with using Windoze for desktop apps. Servers are another story.
- GiggleByte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Just look at the OS's people used five years ago and look at them now. What have you noticed changed? Nothing. The windows people are still using windows. The mac people haven't given up their Macs; and the programmers are still using some flavor of UNIX.. It's a market economy and microsoft made theirs tv-presentable. So on the desktop, despite everything we've accomplished, linux never really had a chance.
- carguy84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Gdjrptryjg said
So no-one buys ice cream, because there is too many flavors?"
That's an awful analogy.
I don't know of any ice cream that's not compatible with a spoon or a bowl. I know many linux distros that aren't compatible with sound cards, video cards, dvd burners, multi monitor displays, games, apps...
Linux to ice cream would be more like, ok, here's your milk, a freezer, a blender and your choice of berries, chocolate, bubble gum, m+ms or receeses pieces....oh you want peppermint, no problem, drive to Whole foods, search every aisle until you find the peppermint, skip checkout, maybe, go to the parking lot, find your car, get in and drive home. Get home, open then peppermint...*****, how the ***** do I open this?....Finally got it open, but now all my ice cream is melted, shiiiiiiiiit. pull trigger, end of story. - madcat87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I personally like the Package Managers`Idea more.I just won`t replace Portage for anything else.
- talishte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you buy a Pre instaled Linux PC you will only need that and a internet conection, but if you buy a windows based pc you will need Antispyware, Antivirus, etc. you can waste a lot of time trying to close a banner with a Cassino sign or lost all your WORK with a simple virus, in the corporate area you will have with a Linux the best tool. If in your home you wanna have this kind of problems is your problem y wanna save my pictures for ever in my /home directory
- MWWLSE, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Remember the car Homer Simpson designed? Hmm...
- WalkaWalka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0
On the topic of package managers.
An intersting take on a soaring information problem.
I'm not sure of the ancient Russian Calculus or Algebra that SQL is based on, but it seems very very similar to the information problem package managers try to solve.
The problem is changing too.. in the old days we kinda optimized for small memory and disk speed.. the limitations of the hardware then.. and tossed in a modicum of self questioning.. how long will a user wait? compared to how long a native program from the OS vendor takes to install.. before cancelling an install and declaring it a failure.. whether they got feedback or not.
Then we did try to "control" or "manage" the user with frequent screen updates, teasers of what the software will do for them (Microsoft really elevated this to a full fledged Advertising Campaign dancing across your desktop while you wait)..
Then we lapsed to threat tactics "don't touch my power cord or I'll eat your BIOS throw up over your children and take your bank acount with me to Hell".. I was never a big fan of the Exorcist Firmware updates theatre.. or was that Extorsionist?
Kinda reminds me of the Sony Godfather DRM rootkits saga we've been seeing..
Someday.. I think we'll actually get behavioral psychologists polling the comtempary population attention span.. and the market they are targeing within that group.. and actually breaking some software installs up into "cheap but slow manual installs" and "flashrom plugins" not unlike gaming cartridges which extend the the OS literally as a physical memory chip.. maybe even a memory chip plus a few processing chips.. did I hear "V-the chip series returns?" or
Invaders from Raiders of the Sixth Sony DRM Dimension?
Buckaroo Banzi might have some competition in them thar futures.. - astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Re: Package managers
I think that NeXTSTEP (and now OS X) provides pretty compelling evidence that Application and Framework bundles are a far better way to abstract the filesystem than Start menus + installers/uninstallers/package managers. - thechitowncubs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Good idea, QT and Gnome apps need to have some common ground so the user has more freedom. that would be awesome.
- bytefoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hopefully this is not too late, and hopefully this will amount to more than just talk. The Linux desktop environment needs some serious changes before it becomes widely accepted.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Linux is not always as easy as veterans like to make it seem.
I've used a number of distros in the past years, and for the last two weeks I have been using Ubuntu 5.10. Luckily, I have some experience, so I sort of know what I am doing. But the thing is, the average person would find a terminal prompt daunting. Its not that its hard to learn, because it isnt, but that the average Cindy, Joe, or Sam would like to double click an installer icon, click Next through a few prompts, place an icon on the desktop and the start menu, then run the program.
The first distro of linux I used was SuSE 8.1. At the time, I believe it had a half-broken package manager, so I was doing most of my application installing myself. This meant I would literally spend hours trying to get the program installed. I am not kidding. I had no idea what cd, ./, make did.
SuSE 9.2 was a huge improvement, with a more functional package manager, but sime weird quirks now and then. Still, I would run into much trouble installing some peices of software.
Ubuntu 5.10 has been mostly a dream. Its package manager is great. Still, my biggest gripe was when I was trying to get a podcasting client to work. I downloaded around 5-7 different programs, being unsuccessful in installing them. I later found iPodder in the package manager, but the fact that it was difficult to install any of the other podcast clients shows that there is still work to be done. - patonw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Next best thing to peace in the Middle East? I kid, I kid.
- TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0 """"If not, well, is pretty hard for them to know that Linux actually exists.""""
That is the problem. Linux isn't really that easy. I gave linux probably 20 hours all together and I couldn't get it. There is very little out there for absolute beginners.
Eric Wilson - barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Linux = $45
WinXP = $2
okay yeah your insane. since when do blank cds cost $45? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Linux = $45
WinXP = $2 - barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0you're
- NastyButler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I have never tried to install Linux and I have never used Linux for more than just writing text files and browsing the Internet, but I have downloaded several Live CDs and not a single one works with any of the three PCs that I have :( Hopefully this will be addressed.
- pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0But really bout time they started to work together IMO.
- pingviini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've gone through five or six linux's (lini?) before finally settling on gentoo. All of the distros worked and I felt were functional, but gentoo just fit me. How many versions of windows xp have you used?
On the topic, I only hope KDE doesn't become fugly like gnome is. - barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's funny how so many people here are saying "Linux didnt work for me, so it must not work for anyone." Do you actually think that's true? My girlfriend can install anything she wants on her desktop with a password and a couple of clicks.
My point is, just because you don't like it, just because it's not like windows, just because x variable didnt work for you, that doesnt mean that someone else might not like.
that was for the windows / osx fanboys
for the linux fanboys
yes linux is great, i've used it since 1998, if windows users want to use windows let them, dont try to convince them it's better. if you have to convince someone something is better, its probably not in most peoples minds. Just stick to your guns and improve on the projects we have. make them so diabolically good that no user could resist having it. - Gdjrptryjg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@carguy84
So no-one buys ice cream, because there is too many flavors? - frontbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>Re: Package managers
>I think that NeXTSTEP (and now OS X) provides pretty compelling evidence that
>Application and Framework bundles are a far better way to abstract the filesystem than
>Start menus + installers/uninstallers/package managers.
There is a project (I cannot recall the name or URL now) that I saw once that is working on a more intuitive (distro-independant) install system for linux, right now the .package files using an install wizard type method, but I remember reading on their site about what the end goal was and it mentioned the NeXTSTEP concept of dragging and dropping a single icon that represents the software would probably be the most intuitive. I would agree with this, I think this system works very well. - trilliji, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Be real, the question here is commercial success. I'd be happier if gnome 1.4 was ported to gtk2. KDE and Gnome continue to get farther away from doing anything I want it to. Disunite and provide more choice and innovation, imo unification will produce a tasteless sludge.
It seems to me that people are trying to capture users they are never going to get, and disgust the happy users they have. - Gdjrptryjg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@curmudgeon
First install "chocolate" or "vanilla", if you don't like them then try something more exotic (mango?). - curmudgeon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Gdjrptryjg said "@carguy84
So no-one buys ice cream, because there is too many flavors?"
It's a bigger deal if you install the wrong distro than if you pick the wrong ice cream. - archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ilyag: if a random programmer creates a Linux app and puts it on the web, it's HIS responsibility to package it for others to install it, just like it would be HIS responsibility to package it for Windows (using InstallShield or whatever).
There are a variety of ways he can package it:
a) make RPMs, DEBs or other standard packages for the major distributions (RedHat, Mandriva, SuSE, (K)Ubuntu, Debian, etc.)
b) use an installshield-like graphical installer such as the Loki Installer (used by Codeweavers for Crossover Office)
c) use Autopackage, which will install on a variety of Linux distros
d) use Klik, which is an equivalent to AppDirs or similar "drop'n'run" installs such as what you use in Mac OSX.
It's the developer's choice, don't blame Linux distros for it. Mind you, if the application is any good it won't take long for it to be available in repositories.
loveandrockets: I'm puzzled as to why you didn't use Synaptic to add the repository, it's easier than editing your sources list. And why do you say you need to update PATH? As far as I can tell this isn't necessary. Look at the bright side: once you've added a repository you don't need to do it again (I imagine you had to install something from "Universe" or "Multiverse"...) - binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Can someone spell, waste of time, bad idea, and.. wheres that article "Why smart people defend bad ideas?"" - walkawalka
Anything to unify the linux community is great. A lot of powerful minds are going in opposite directions. You may have a beef with committees, but isn't that a bit prejudice? How can you guarantee this will spell doom and misfortune? Just a little "glass is half empty" are we? If we focus all these powerful minds to act as one, we can focus on what is important, not simple inner bickering on what ui is better than who's. Get to grips. - WalkaWalka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Can someone spell, waste of time, bad idea, and.. wheres that article "Why smart people defend bad ideas?"
Anything by committee is doomed to failure.. remember CDE?
I think there's a social rule somewhere that personal interests defeat the unified goal, its called "poker" or something.
Gaming theory isn't my forte.. but someone will always collude to pursue personal or fractional personal interests and that leads to just a fork.
Don't get me wrong.. I think public photo-op's probably do wonders for egos and the the paparazzi.. and those motivate people to do something.. and something usually leads to spinoff splinter groups that demonstrate good ideas.
But in the end.. rather than a formal XYZ development organization, it seems individuals are better at chunking and customizing an environment for the common user.. Windows didn't exactly end up getting used the way the designers intended.. remember Bill Gate's "spacebar" icon.. probably not.. but it is on every windows user interface cross platform.. whether you use it or not.. some comittee somewhere thought it was a good idea.
Rather I think good software development is like good gossip.. it spreads by word of mouth.. and has it attractors and detractors.. and repulsive moments. - binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Cool, just registered www.theportlandproject.com
This is exciting. I'm glad everyone is coming together. I've hated the gnome fights.... (fluxbox is the way to go... call me a nader fan)
Anyways.. I'm wanting to donate this domain to the project free (mins the $2.99 it cost me to register) Anyone have any contacts with anyone? Email me binaryjunk(at)gmail.com - diggnationdevon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In my opinion I don't find linux a good OS for mainstream use, I just see it as a secure OS. To me, theres a Windows-PC and a mac; so basically linux is barely 'alive'
- Kiba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Package manager in my opinion is easy. Compile from source just required a bit more steps but still easy. So what to worry about?
Linux should not copy window in the way of just clicking the executing button and install. I want to have the power of my operating system, not be limited by silly installer. - crapiolio, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Let the penguins march on!
- NidStyles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Can we say about friggin' time? I hope it's as well done as OS X though.
- toasterwaffle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"Double click. Wow that was easy."
More like:
Double click. Click. Agree I guess. Click. Click... No I don't want third party software. Click... - tomciob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0good luck.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"Umm.
tar xzf my-silly-pong-game.1.7.4-beta.tar.gz && ./configure && make install
(the middle step may be omitted if the developer is smart)"
Nope! Sorry! BZZT! Wrong! This is only applicable to the 2% of Unix programs that are self-contained, with all libraries included. What about the other 98%? Frankly, I don't remember the last time I went looking for a program on the web, only to have to go through several pages of instructions and dependancies that the program requires, each of which has yet more dependancies, and only SOME of which are available through a package manager.
Unfortunately because of the nature of Linux (programs are composed of little pieces that interact with each other, most of which are not included with the core program itself), this will likely continue to be Linux's Achilles Heel.
Most people don't care, however. It's quite sad. The biggest problem with any kind of a fundamentalist is that they simply refuse to accept the simple FACT that there are both POSITIVE aspects as well as NEGATIVE aspects to EVERYTHING. - lord2800, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"If some random guy on the internet wrote a piece of program, there's no way you'd be able to install that if you're not at least partly familiar with software programming. You can easily install something like Firefox or some new media player, but can you just as easily install "my-silly-pong-game.1.7.4-beta.tar.gz"? No, you can not."
Umm.
tar xzf my-silly-pong-game.1.7.4-beta.tar.gz && ./configure && make install
(the middle step may be omitted if the developer is smart) - firehydra2k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Hope it kicks Windows' Ass!
- Gdjrptryjg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@Moose_Head
You are just testing if Linux equals Dead. No need to hurt you. ;) -
Show 51 - 66 of 66 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