digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at theunixgeek.blogspot.com

Why I switched back to Ubuntu

theunixgeek.blogspot.com — Ubuntu is sometimes thought of as the beginner's distro, something that more advanced users don't care about - they think if you're advanced, you need Slackware or something where you have to build it from scratch ... etc, but that just takes up time. Of all the distros I've tried, Ubuntu is the fastest, most reliable, and most compatible.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Philluminati, on 03/19/2008, -11/+138Linus Torvalds once spoke about "Desktop Inertia". It's a feeling of comfort at your desktop. Above all other reasons, it's the reason Linux's uptake is so slow. People don't often stick to Windows because 1 piece of hardware or software doesn't work in my opinion...they'd run VMs, or dual boot. The reason they don't switch is because they are just happy with XP. They know how it works and what the intricacies are.

    I feel it's exactly the same thing across different distributions of Linux as well. All these new Ubuntu users...are Ubuntu users. When something easier comes out (and some say it has with PCLinuxOS) they won't switch because they are happy with Ubuntu. It's just at the right level for them. Whilst I can appreciate Ubuntu, I'm a fedora guy. What can I say? I just like working with rpms. Let's all spread the love!
    • TheZorch, on 03/19/2008, -2/+18I love Ubuntu. 7.10 has been the best so far and according the Ubuntu group I am a part of who are testing 8.04 its going to be even better and more user friendly than ever before. I can't wait until its released. Also, Wubi will be the default installer for the OS so you can either install it the traditional way by repartitioning your drive or you can install it using Wubi to test it out to see if you like it. This is the best thing that's happened to Ubuntu since moving to Compiz Fusion.
      • rockwellpa, on 03/19/2008, -3/+9Wubi is great, works great for me in Virtualbox. However, once you really get into Linux (regardless of distribution), you'll realize windows is obsolete.
        • RAdams, on 03/19/2008, -12/+6Until you need a .NET framework application that Mono can't support, or want to play many PC games.

          I'd love Windows to be obsolete, I have to support it @ work 8 hours a day 5 days a week. But it isn't there yet. For some people, yes. For many others, no.
          • DarKnight90, on 03/19/2008, -4/+3You want to be out of a job?
          • eviltandem, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2I develop .NET applications for a living on Ubuntu. Virtualbox ftw. It's nice to be able to completely alter the windows environment at the click of a button. I can change database types, configurations, libraries, and many other things by simply loading a different box.
          • int19h, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1You can play many PC games on Linux.
            At least 2204 games are waiting for you: http://www.happypenguin.org/test/search
        • mossblaser, on 03/19/2008, -4/+10"Until you need a .NET framework application"

          Until then I'll be free of shoddy code and poorly performing applications.
        • Kamujin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Did over 10 years of c/c++ developments. C# is the evolutionary winner in my book. Yes, its a Java rip-off. I don't care.
    • Dylan47, on 03/19/2008, -4/+18Gentoo represent
      • drlog, on 03/19/2008, -1/+9I used to be a gentoo guy for about 2 years - I switched to ubuntu about 8 months ago.

        They are all good distros! Spread the love :D
      • Chakat, on 03/19/2008, -1/+23Sorry, they can't. They're still busy compiling firefox.
        • GMorgan, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3Most Gentoo users I know run the precompiled binary of Firefox (mainly so you can get flash on x86_64). Same goes for OOo.
        • kazamx, on 03/19/2008, -2/+4What you didn't mention is thats Firefox 1.0. Dam compiling takes ages :-p
      • kburk, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Ya, sure compiling takes time, but it only has to be done once. ;) Plus since everything is installed from source, you have the option to build specific support into each package (mysql, ssl, etc) and Being a gentoo user myself I love the package management system (emerge). It's all personal preference. Does anyone else notice that it takes forever to open the package management system in ubuntu (maybe having 4 repositories is too much?).
        • int19h, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3"Ya, sure compiling takes time, but it only has to be done once" = the best reason for using Ubuntu over Gentoo, since all packages are compiled once per package instead of once per user. Think of it as a Gentoo compilefarm that compiles your packages for you.
          • kburk, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Exactly, Ubuntu uses binary packages (already compiled for the users) where as Gentoo packages are installed from source. The real difference is that the packages installed from source are built to that PC's specific configuration (depending on the flag settings in make.conf). Basically allowing you to choose specifically what support you want built into your packages. Either way, it's all personal preference... Ubuntu is a great desktop distro. I personally prefer gentoo for a server setup.
          • int19h, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Yes, I agree with kburk. Sometimes you might want different compile-time options from what the Ubuntu developers have chosen. However, you can still compile those one or two programs yourself while still using Ubuntu, so it's not really an advantage with Gentoo. And, there is a server-edition of Ubuntu, that should work very well as an os for a server.
    • AceTracer, on 03/19/2008, -2/+8If this is the case then why do people happily switch to Mac OS X? I'm not making a fanboy case here, it's a valid question. Usability is a major factor, and people will switch if they are switching to something they perceive to be better. People as of yet don't switch to Linux because it's easier to use.
      • netdroid9, on 03/19/2008, -2/+6The majority of people don't. They just use what's preloaded on their computer, which is on Apple PCs is Mac OS X. If there was a bigger marketing push for Linux by big corporations like Dell we'd all be using Linux, but most people don't even want to consider messing with their operating system. If something goes wrong when they switch, they'd either have to fix it themselves (which they don't know how to do) or pay someone else to do it (which is what they're afraid of).
        • Tenoq, on 03/19/2008, -9/+5No, I don't think so. People are often happier switching to OS X because the interface IS so easy to adapt to, and requires little if any instruction. Linux however goes the other way - it's even more customisable than Windows, but in being that it's also a lot more complex and difficult to setup/configure. AceTracer is right in that the usability is not on par with other OSes.
          I'm not saying it hasn't improved in recent years (it's infinitely easier than it used to be) but it still hasn't caught up, IMHO.
          • CarzorStelatis, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1His point though was that people don't install operating systems - they use whatever came on the machine. They'll buy a Macbook, for example, because they've heard that 'Macs are easy to use'. Similarly they might buy a Walmart gPC because it's cheap. They won't decide "hey, I don't like feature X of my operating system, I'm going to install a different operating system!"
        • moresheth, on 03/19/2008, -7/+8I actually bought a Macbook Air recently (it's nice hardware), and I figured that I could get used to OSX after using Windows for a long time and Ubuntu for about 6 months. The last few days I've been looking into installing Ubuntu on it (there are instructions online), since Ubuntu does everything out of the box in a much better fashion, and I have control of how it does things. Just getting OSX to do the things I needed it to took several days of playing with the Preferences and installing third-party software.
          • weizilla, on 03/19/2008, -8/+7ubuntu does everything out of the box better than mac os x???? mac os x is the pinnacle of a combination of software and hardware that does everything out of the box. I just got a mac a month ago and have been using windows and linux for the last 2 years and it is by far the easiest os to get up and running and use.
        • itchyfeet, on 03/19/2008, -4/+9Several DAYS of playing with the preferences? you have GOT to be joking. No offense, but, are you a retard or something? Ubuntu is a -wonderful- operating system (I run an Ubuntu server), but it's SEVERAL orders of magnitude more difficult to use than OS X. If you can't use OS X, maybe you should stick to an abacus.
          • moresheth, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2No, sir, I am not a retard, and it could be called an exaggeration to say it was several full days. It wasn't until about 3 days after I got it that I got it setup to my liking, which was probably around 5 hours total. I attribute most of that time to my unfamiliarity with it.
            However, the largest thing that frustrated me about it was the inability to mount my webservers and ftp servers in the filesystem. After installing a few things, and trying different settings, I stumbled across MacFusion, which mostly works, and was free. There were a few small issues, mostly due to Apple deciding for me what I wanted.
          • Innovator9, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0I think I know what your trying to say, moresheth. I'm typing this via OS 10.4. Although it's my overall favorite OS of the three that I work with at home (includes XP and Gutsy), I actually found it HARDER for me to make the transition from Windows to Mac than to Ubuntu afterward. I spent more time reading up on OS X prior on stuff like installations, and the way app/window switching works. I remember being so frustrated for a minute as I was trying to figure out how to get programs to run at startup. After some googling, I was surprised to learn that all I needed to do was select it from a secondary click on a dock item! Prior to owning a mac, I found the way the menubar works to be somewhat perplexing until I spent quality time with it in an Apple Store. As a long-time Windows user, I found Ubuntu's interface to be more familiar. Bottom Line: It's best to try an OS for yourself in order to learn all the ins and outs.
      • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7Linux may not be easier for desktop users, but it's certainly easier for power users. The Linux terminal is often more efficient than using a GUI. This doesn't make it better for everyone but it makes it better for me.
        • Sprung, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Exactly.

          I've gotten over having to have Linux be everything to everyone. It's the nuts for me.
      • eviltandem, on 03/19/2008, -2/+3I bought a mac back when the intels first came out. The problem for non-windows has always been applications. With osX you get all the benefits of not running windows (large pool of applications is for pussies) without all the cool open-source stuff.

        Ubuntu is basically the same thing, only with all the open-source libraries and applications. With osX you are constantly trying to find the version of this tool that works with it, or having to compile your own.

        Then there's apt-get. I loves me the apt-get.
        • Sprung, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Not a Mac guy, but in all fairness you can compile quite a bit of POSIX compliant open source software on OSX. You can even run X and assorted desktop environments, etc.
          • eviltandem, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1Exactly. You can absolutely do that.

            ...or you can apt-get it and have it in 2 seconds...
    • millerftw, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5The only thing stopping me moving to ubuntu was sound issues, i loved my expreience with ubuntu everything else was a breeze.
      • mossblaser, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3Well depending oh whats going on with Pulse Audio (and what your problem was) then the next release might be a goer (try a live Alpha CD).

        I had 3 things that prevented me going to Linux, Sound being unreliable, Lack of Applications (at the time Flash Player and Photoshop) and glitches in graphics driver installation. Since the end of the year before last all of those issues were fixed (though the photoshop one mainly by my switch to inkscape + gimp - a much better tool for the job I was doing, as it turned out).
        • theaceoffire, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Wine is being paid by Google to get better Photoshop support, and has made great strides.
        • Mothity, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2Power? How can a music player have power? They just play music.
          • Mothity, on 03/20/2008, -1/+1Oops, feel free to bury these comments.
      • millerftw, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Pulse audo actually fixed all my issues, once its out of beta 8.04 will probably be my main os.
    • 6minuteabs, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3I just installed a dual boot of ubuntu on my laptop and it really does work flawlessly. The only criticism I have (if you call it that) is thereś not much that transcends windows for me. The different workspaces is pretty cool, but is that enough for me, 3 months from now, to pick Ubuntu over XP at the dual boot menu? I´m not so sure.
      • kazamx, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3Check out Amarok for your music too.
      • mossblaser, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5Things I use linux over windows for:
        Music tools (Amarok for power or Rhythmbox for insanley ease of use + still quite some power), Installing things - flawless, Massive intergration of tools from the first boot (right click ISOs to burn and similarly cool and useful things), able to run 64 bit without a sudden loss of drivers and applications, speed!, ability to make things work and look how *I* want, KATE (a brilliant match between usability and functionality in a world of editors like Vi or notepad...) and lots of other little programs that are just better on linux.
      • int19h, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3The long term benefits are great. You can change your entire system while keeping your configuration and files. You can upgrade all installed programs in one operation. It doesn't collect lint in the system over time and you'll never be vendor-locked-in.
      • thepxc, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1If you're at all a power user or into customization, give the KDE desktop a whirl. I miss it terribly when I'm on Windows, from the big things, like KIO slaves (think GnomeVFS but a bit more mature/well-supported) and Konqueror to the little window-management features (alt+click to move window, alt+rtclick for resize, etc) that it shares with most other Unix WMs. I'm actually reasonably happy with my Windows install right now, but that's largely because I have andLinux and WinMover installed. Both systems are stable and I've not had either crash or get infected with any kind of virus yet. :-)
    • RandaII, on 03/19/2008, -24/+1No its you guys are a bunch of ***** fanboys. Ubuntu isn't faster at all. Fist off you ***** fanboys need to ***** understand that ubuntu isn't as fast as other distros. so ***** you fanboys. learn to respect other distros. Becuse if it wasn't for the other distros ubuntu would never be here. Just so you understand.
      • Sprung, on 03/19/2008, -0/+14Ya know Randall, and I might add that I'm saying this because I care...

        They make decaf blends now that are darn near as tasty as the fully caffeinated blends. Check it out!
      • eviltandem, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4There's something to be said for an operating system working over pure performance. Yes if I take a day and tweak and compile all my stuff myself I may coax an extra few milliseconds out of something.

        To be honest I don't care. In exchange for not having to spend the hours finding libraries, checking dependencies, and then waiting for hours for something to compile I may lose an extra 1/2 second when loading firefox.

        It's hard to imagine how I survive!
      • frazw, on 03/19/2008, -2/+3Your message of respect and anti-fanboyism really struck a chord with me.
        /sarcasm
      • Happy_Phantom, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Thanks DEBbie
    • gkwillie, on 03/19/2008, -3/+4PCLinuxOS was such a great introduction to linux. I'm still taken aback by how simple the damn thing is.
    • P373Y, on 03/19/2008, -4/+6fedora ftw
      • pcghost, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Red Hat Linux 9 FTW! Sorry, if it has to be rpm, it has to be RH9. It was a great distro.
      • Happy_Phantom, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1CentOS
    • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1Feisty was great, but I've had so many problems with Gutsy, that I prefer to use Etch now.
      • int19h, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1I agree that Feisty was a really good version of Ubuntu. I expect Intrepid to become to Hardy what Feisty was to Edgy.
        • zwaldowski, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Weird, because Feisty would be to Intrepid+1 what Dapper is to Hardy. :-D

          Dapper (LTS), Edgy, Feisty, Gutsy, Hardy (LTS), Intrepid, Intrepid+1
      • Darkhacker, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1You could have just stayed with Feisty. A regular release is supported for 18 months. The problem with Debian is the long release cycle. Good for servers, but not optimal for desktops unless you don't mind using testing or unstable.
        • zwaldowski, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Gutsy did have improvements over Feisty and, more importantly, software you honestly couldn't use in Feisty. Even though I would love to put Feisty on my laptop, it couldn't run because of how new it is, so I run Hardy.
    • joeanon, on 03/19/2008, -2/+4The reason people don't adopt is the same as it's ever been. WIN32 has such a large developer base and the overall the best programs.

      It's hard to sell any OS on the premise that it runs all those Windows programs you need almost as well as windows.

      With so little money in both Mac and Linux it's also hard to catch up, but Mac is doing well since they went with BSD and adopted and more open model. Linux is doing nearly as much in my opinion.

      The problem with Linux it's and OS built by programmers and they all work on the projects THEY want because it's usually a spare time thing.

      Instead of writing the KEY apps that would strengthen the platform and get money over to it causing an avalanche of investment and the developer attention then need. Mac has, in less time, ported their entire platform to NIX and perfected the KEY apps that people use and standardized an interface. It's paid off.

      Without profit Linux has little direction or motivation. People use it for what they want, and that's cool, but it doesn't serve the average user as well as an OS developed around THEM, not around power users and programmers needs.
      • int19h, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5"The problem with Linux it's and OS built by programmers and they all work on the projects THEY want because it's usually a spare time thing.".

        This could be viewed as a problem, on the other hand it's what made Linux in the first place. And, applications really are better when developers love what they are doing.
        • Philluminati, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2This is where businesses have an opportunity with Linux. They can pay people to write the boring software so that everyone has a well rounded platform.
      • Sprung, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2"The problem with Linux it's and OS built by programmers"

        I'd imagine an OS not built by programmers might have even bigger problems...
    • multitude, on 03/19/2008, -2/+5I'm a long time Redhat user, but I'll probably install ubuntu on my next machine. It's as polished, or more so than Fedora, and I like the fact that it uses apt rather than rpm for package management. I don't agree that hard-core linux want a do-it-yourself distribution... I do all of my development on linux, but just give me a distro that works so that I can spend time on the projects that I really care about. But, different strokes for different folks I guess.
      • Philluminati, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1I work with Linux guys who have over 10 years experience. They are the definition of hardcore in my eyes and they prefer RPM / APT over installing from tarball anyday. Firstly, RPM and others manage versions, dependencies and update tools manage security for you. They see the benefits vastly outweighing the gains (which I guess is speed or having the absolute cutting edge version).
      • zwaldowski, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Actually, Fedora is much clean and well-organized. It had new, better stuff faster than Ubuntu. It's only problem is that RPM bites.
        • tylerwylie, on 03/21/2008, -0/+0Yum and rpm have made vast improvements in Fedora. I say it is very simple to install packages and to use the CLI to interface with the package manager.
  • kingofpenguins, on 03/19/2008, -56/+43Why I will never switch back to Ubuntu again:
    1) It is not binary compatible with Debian. It used to be that if you had a .deb, you could install it on any Debian (based) distribution without having problems. Because of Ubuntu and other distros based on it (Mint), this is no longer the case.
    2) Little attention to KDE. Let's be honest, Kubuntu just sucks. And with all the problems with Gnome and Mono, I do not want to be using a distribution that gives too much attention to Gnome and not as much (enough) to others like KDE or XFCE.
    3) N00bs everywhere. Any time I would enter #kubuntu, that's all I would have to deal with. No one would read any documentation and would ask the stupidest questions.
    4) Release schedule. I like having rolling releases on my distribution. The 6 month schedule doesn't cut it for me. I could dist-upgrade the entire system every six months when a new version is released, but there are just too many stories about people's systems breaking beyond repair. (This is a problem/disadvantage to most distributions, not just Ubuntu.)

    Go ahead, bury me. It doesn't matter for me. I still use Linux on my desktop. I tell others the benefits of using Linux and switch others to it from both Windows and (sometimes) Mac. I just won't recommend Ubuntu to anyone and will not use it myself.
    • rebotfc, on 03/19/2008, -29/+11We'll I'm not gonna bury you but i think your atttitude is why Linux will NEVER gain any traction as a home OS. Home users don't give a monkey's about these technical concerns that dog linux development.
      • andycr512, on 03/19/2008, -6/+4What did that have to do with"technical concerns that dog linux development"?
      • Remmy, on 03/19/2008, -3/+19I think what you said is the problem. You are unconcerned about how Linux works and therefore are only in it for yourself. You have no desire to give back to the community. A community that is giving you an entire Operating System, that is both Free and free. In return, you could care less on how it works, just that it does what you want. It's a selfish attitude.
        • yunus, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4Some would argue that Microsoft has a lower cost of ownership if everyone followed your theory. You pay Microsoft money and get to have the attitude of I don't care why it works so long as it does what I need. But in Ubuntu you have to spend time which is more valuable than the cost of XP to many people.
          • andycr512, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Though it isn't that you -have- to spend time or donate in any way - just that it would be nice if you would. Money (a donation) is certainly an acceptable alternative to time, as well, in which case it's the same as Windows.
      • paradigmx, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3Ask any dedicated linux user, its not about drawing in new users and market share, it's about having the right OS for the job

        Frankly, I could care less if linux is 5% marketshare or 50% marketshare, as long as it continues to function and grow as it has so far. I give back to the community when I can, but I rarely concern myself with what new users need.

        besides, if linux gained too much marketshare, virus' and spyware would target linux and, while linux is more secure than windows, it isn't perfect and then we'd have to deal with malware regularly
    • Ademan, on 03/19/2008, -2/+171. Binary compatibility with debian has NEVER been a priority, and if it has ever occurred, has simply been an unintended side effect. (Why does this matter anyways? Not to mention, most packages seem to work anyways, and with the prevelance of non-native packages (python, perl, mono based, etc etc) this matters even less. As an ubuntu user i have NEVER ran into a problem where binary compatibility would have solved it (maybe as a debian user that would be a problem, but that doesn't make a good case for not using ubuntu)

      2. I personally don't care for KDE, and part of the reason is my only experience is with Kubuntu, Kubuntu IS utter crap, it recieves almost no attention from the devs, this IS a problem.

      3. Believe it or not, the "google it first" mentality isn't a rule to everyone, many people don't even know where to start, it may be annoying but it's hard to hold it against them, and no one is making you help those people anyways...

      4. I sorta agree with you there, I think the "rolling releases" can be nice in some cases, but in others the set release schedule is superior in my opinion.
      • kingofpenguins, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6Maybe I should explain why binary compatibility with Debian is important.

        Ubuntu is basically doing the same thing to .deb packages as Mandriva (Mandrake back then) did to RPM. When you go to some website and download a RPM binary, a RedHat or Fedora RPM is _not_ the same as a Mandriva RPM or a Suse RPM. And because of this, RPMs are sucky now. (RPM Hell anybody?)

        Before Ubuntu, it used to be that if you had a Debian package, just install it. No problem. Now with Ubuntu so popular, websites often post an Ubuntu package, but nothing else.

        This is fracturing Debian, and should be stopped/fixed/reversed within Ubuntu, less Debian packages become just as bad as RPMs.
        • frazw, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4I take your point and I don't mean to be mean about it, but the lack of debian packages is not the fault of Ubuntu devs or packagers, it is the fault of Debian devs and packagers.
          Same goes for the RPM situation, but I must say when I used Fedora (3-5) I rarely had a problem finding the rpms unless it was fairly niche software but that sort of thing often required compiling anyway.
          I understand that you feel something is being stolen from you but unfortunately this is a side effect of the OSS structure of Linux and the way new distros come into being.
          I feel for you but I find it hard to lay blame at the feet of anyone but the Debian community.
    • jfowler27, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1As a Ubuntu user I agree, for the most part. I think the "N00bs", as you put it, are going to be commonplace no matter what. You're going to have a certain number of people who are going to hear about Ubuntu from their friends or family and decide to try it out and think that somehow everything will work as though the OS can read their mind. If you want people you adapt to Linux, you're also going to have to accept the bottom rung of them that comes along for the ride. As for the release schedule, I haven't had any problems with that thus far, but I know people do have problems with every new release of any distribution.
    • Dylan47, on 03/19/2008, -2/+61. how many other distros are binary compatible with debian? hell why not just not like it because you cant run windows apps (stably)?
      2. Let the people you switch decide weather they want kde or gnome, you cant diss gnome because of your personal taste.
      3. Of course there are inexperienced users.. what do you expect? it simply the popularity of the distro not its quality. You say you don't like the irc because people ask stupid questions, did you want harder ones? I don't get it.
      4. meh suit yourself.
      All your points are about personal preference that you shouldn't be imposing on your "convertees", they can make up their own opinions.

      I started on ubuntu, used it for a year or so, then experimented with other distros before settling with gentoo. I think that gentoo is the best for me, but for anyone just switching i always recommend ubuntu.
    • SniperSlap, on 03/19/2008, -5/+31) What do you mean by "Binary compatible"? You show how little you know about Linux and distributions in general right there. Do you mean a.out binaries? ELF? Ubuntu does those - it kinda has to. So this argument makes so sense. If what you're saying is that it is not package repository compatible (to resolve dependencies), then I'm not even sure your argument holds swing there either. Many .DEBs will install. Check out getdeb!
      2) Kubuntu does suck, you're right. The developers are trying to mimic Ubuntu without the entire methodology backing it. Also remember that KDE isn't very good to begin with.
      3) What the hell? People need help sometimes and you can't blame them for it. I hate IRC for the very reason that people like you are there to make people feel bad. You're probably one of those guys who just sits there bragging about how he never has a problem. Needle dick. I always help people with their problems - big or small - that's the TRUE spirit of Ubuntu.
      4) You just don't get it at this point. You're so off in high level user land it isn't even funny.

      Stop trying to talk about things you barely understand yourself.
      • earlycj5, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4KDE isn't very good to begin with? What the heck are you talking about?????????

        Just because you prefer X over Y doesn't make Y not very good to begin with. I prefer e17 or KDE over Gnome, thus it must not be very good to begin with.
        • SniperSlap, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I've been using KDE since it was first released and it has always suffered from clutter issues. Especially context menu clutter.

          The latest release looks refreshing, but it isn't getting nearly the same support as gnome under Ubuntu is. Kubuntu still has issues with being a stable and well supported desktop. Let's say one order of service magnitude removed from Ubuntu.
      • Dylan47, on 03/20/2008, -1/+1what he means by binary compatible is that he can download packages (dep, rpm, etc) made for other distros and use them on his ubuntu/whatever.
        • SniperSlap, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1If you re-read what I said:
          "If what you're saying is that it is not package repository compatible (to resolve dependencies)..."

          You think I don't know how people get so stupid? :P
    • eviltandem, on 03/19/2008, -0/+31) I don't really care. Your complaint is that Ubuntu is popular, and hence well supported? Since when is that a reason to not like something?

      2) Obviously nobody cares enough to do it. If you prefer KDE why not offer to help them? I could complain about a hundred interfaces they don't have. They had to settle on something so they had a standard to build on. Based on the number of people using it Gnome can't be all that bad.

      3) People like you drive me nuts. Years ago you were a noob and somebody had to explain to you about man pages and a host of other things. Now years later you think this experience has somehow endowed you with god powers. Get over yourself. Not everybody lives their lives for their operating system. I couldn't fix most the things in my car, but nobody calls me a car noob when I get help using/fixing it. The whole reason the ubuntu message boards are there is to help people learn to use the operating system. Blasphemy that they use it for it's intended purpose...

      4) I don't even understand why this matters. Release schedules are your friend.
  • weizbox, on 03/19/2008, -15/+8FTA:'...or something where you have to build it from scratch, rewrite or add parts to the kernel to make it more compatible to your system, write your own drivers, etc, but that just takes up time.'

    It does just a tad more than just take up time, or else I don't think people would be doing it :) And this guy calls himself a 'Unix Geek'? ha :)

    • reddcell, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6Oh people would still do it. Most of the people I know do unnecessarily difficult tasks like those listed on their OS just to say they did. Boredom of the geek.
    • SPThom, on 03/19/2008, -1/+10If Ubuntu is good enough for his needs, than why is "saving time" a bad reason to stick with it?
    • Harbinger67, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5I saw that and immediately stopped reading the article; it clearly wasn't for me if it was including the viewpoint that Ubuntu is "beginner" stuff.

      Who the ***** would ever want to write their own drivers?
    • Schmich, on 03/19/2008, -2/+1"It does just a tad more than just take up time" I'm not that good at English and had to read this part quite a few times. Still I'm not sure if you meant if it does or does not take up a great deal of time.
  • oobuntu, on 03/19/2008, -8/+119Ubuntu snobbery is completely uncalled for. If a distro becomes popular, that shouldn't be a good enough reason to knock it.
    It's a shame that KDE hasn't had the attention that Gnome has, but maybe there will be an extra effort when KDE4 gets good next year. I for one have started looking at Gnome as a stopgap whilst the KDE 3.5.x line has stagnated while resources are poured into KDE4.
    Remember everybody was a noob once. Everyone was an excited teenager once. Some of those enthusiastic guys are tomorrows developers/testers/sysadmins so don't knock them too hard.
    • LightPhoenix, on 03/19/2008, -9/+25As an Ubuntu user, I can tell you exactly why I avoided KDE/Kubuntu - the stupid naming practices. It's not cute putting a "k" in the name of every bloody program, and eventually all the names started running together. So when I first started using Linux, and was looking at options, I chose the option that seemed the most serious. There are other reasons I thought Ubuntu was serious about being an actual user-friendly desktop, but that's why I chose Ubuntu over Kubuntu.
      • thecheatah, on 03/19/2008, -2/+9I have always liked kde over gnome and thought that it was the more 'serious' one. This was mostly because of kde's modular design. Konquror is amazing at what it does and I havn't thought of anything I would wish it could do which it couldn't.

        I guess its your opinion of how you judge things to be "serious". I judge them by the way they work, you judged them by its name. (if not, then care to explain?)
        • steelclash84, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2You can install Konquror in Ubuntu, if that is the only thing that is keeping you from liking Ubuntu.
      • vertexoflife, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3That was my biggest thing about KDE too, but the quality of the GUI eventually just got me to switch over from Gnome.
      • Shananra, on 03/19/2008, -3/+5And it is cute to name your release "Gutsy Gibbon" or "Hardy Heron?" or am I missing something.
        • drlog, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4Nah, thats different! Thats just a SINGLE name. Its not written all over your desktop.

          I understand it is the "K desktop" but its just too much K for my liking.
      • drlog, on 03/19/2008, -0/+12I kompletely agree!

        hang on...
      • mossblaser, on 03/19/2008, -3/+3GNOME has the same problem though they put G's or "GNOME" in front of everything, the difference is that ubuntu (and most pre-configured gnome desktops) name them sanely and not by their real names, also gnome apps don't tend to refer to themselves by name, but rather by their function, which is a good step.
        • CoolGoose, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4What did you smoke ? Not all of gnome's apps have a G in front. Totem, Rhythmbox, Vinagre, Anjuta,.. wtf ?. The only names with g that i can say are important are gnumeric and gedit.
      • int19h, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Ubuntu = Kubuntu, just with different packages installed with apt, or am I missing something?
    • classhelper, on 03/19/2008, -0/+12Ten year Linux user and programmer here, using Ubuntu 7.10 on AMD64. A lot of us "more experienced" (you could just call me old) guys use Ubuntu for serious computing; I write web/database apps and use Debian and CentOS for the server side.
    • skyshock1, on 03/19/2008, -4/+2"It's a shame that KDE hasn't had the attention that Gnome has, but maybe there will be an extra effort when KDE4 gets good next year."

      "WHEN" KDE4 gets good? I don't think you should assume that it _will_ "get good" based on current incarnations. KDE is headed in the wrong direction IMO. It's becoming a DE that instead of innovating, tends to adopt the same stagnant UI practices that Vista and OSX have been implementing the past couple years. No thanks. Gnome while perfectly plain and uninspiring in its current form still lends plenty of room for innovation, and that's why I think the Ubuntu developers use it as the standard desktop environment. Personally I use Fluxbox but I don't think any of the desktop environments are 100% awesome yet.
    • 1timeuser, on 03/19/2008, -1/+10Actually, I used to be all about kde... but Gnome has slowly grown on me. KDE just feels gimmicky whereas gnome just gets to the point. I'll reserve my judgment on KDE4 for when the 4.1 release comes out since it wouldn't be fair right now.
      • jemmrich, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5Ive been a linux user for quite a few years now, and thinking back about my first experiences, i clearly remember the day i picked gnome over KDE. Like 1timeuser said, I too felt KDE was gimmicky and flashy. It also felt cluttered to me and hated the menu bar, animations etc etc. Ive always been a minimalist i guess so im sure thats why ive been a gnome user almost from day one. It just seems to be clean, and just right.

        Off topic from the reply to comment on the "stigma" that ubuntu seems to cast on its advanced users... I think its pretty rude and insulting for people judge you by the distro of *your* choice. I dont expect everyone to respect others as much as i do to others, but a little courtesy and encouragement would greatly improve anyones beginning experience. I would say im upper intermediate user and when the "elite pro" users that think they are king ***** decide to come back from AFK just to insult you or say something that does not further the convo, just adds even more intimidation to an intimidating operating system for beginner users and increases frustration.
        • actionscripted, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1KDE : Vista :: Gnome : Mac

          (heh, whatever)
    • banmaster, on 03/19/2008, -9/+2"Ubuntu snobbery is completely uncalled for."

      Says the snob with an Ubuntu logo for his digg picture.
    • BobOki, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1Snobbery? Oh no, they must really be mac users in drag!
      *sigh*
      • Happy_Phantom, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1That's kind of funny. Mocking snobbery with a snob comment.
  • tvanwyk, on 03/19/2008, -8/+26The criticisms of Fedora don't even make sense. Not having advanced enough graphics card to play some stupid Linux game or run desktop effects? That's because Fedora can't include the good proprietary drivers for copyright issues (I'm not entirely clear on the copyright status of Ubuntu). In Fedora, enable Livna, run "yum install kmod-nvidia," and shut up. That's about all there is to it. Fedora and Ubuntu alike are pretty slow out of the box on default installs, but once you strip down services they're snappier.

    So much of this is a "YMMV" issue - Fedora gets all MY hardware working out of the box (excepting the #$&* ATI card, but I use kmod-fglrx from Livna for that and problem solved), including the wireless card.

    "Slackware or something where you have to build it from scratch ..."
    Uhh... you don't have to build Slackware from scratch. That's a misleading statement. Linux from Scratch is from scratch. Slackware is a distro... the point of a distro is so that you don't have to build "it" from scratch (granted Slack takes a lot of compiling if you want to add software AFTER the install, but the distro itself is ready to install a compiled and runnable system from the install disks... like all the other distros.)
    • daveisfera, on 03/19/2008, -1/+17Isn't that the guys point? That the Ubuntu distro "just works", and it doesn't take random knowledge of commands and such to get things to work.
      • r4ge, on 03/19/2008, -1/+6I am still looking for an OS that just works.
        • weizilla, on 03/19/2008, -5/+2mac os x
          • theaceoffire, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4You got money, we got answers.
            I love the mac idea: If your computer is slow, buy a new one.
        • cawpin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4While you're a douche, you are more correct than most. I bought a MBP last month and love it so far. The only thing that bothers me is having to pay for apps who's equivalents are free in Windows.
    • zmjone2992, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1I've had quite the other problem. My gpu is too new to be recognized by ubuntu.
    • tvanwyk, on 03/19/2008, -2/+4@cacoe
      Look out! Queue the Thriller music, because the command line may come in the night and eat your braaaaaains! Seriously... simple tasks? Come on. Sometimes a few commands and arguments from Bash or another CLI are the most simple (in user friendliness and KISS-wise) ways to get things done if only people would give the CLI a chance. "Simple" does not necessarily equal "GUI-based," and "command line based" does not necessarily equal "difficult" or "hard."

      @daveisfera
      Sure, that may be his point (my point about YMMV is still valid, I think). And in fairness Fedora is sort of "development Redhat" and not really for people who have been trained by Windows to be CLI-phobic. But the fact remains that it's really not that tough for somebody who knows how to use Google to figure out how to do this stuff... from the CLI, with confidence. And if one is Google-phobic, you could probably find a Fedora forum where the regular posters (like me) are more than happy to pass along help in the form of links or "random" commands.
      • AncientPC, on 03/26/2008, -0/+1Listen, I'm all for CLI but Ubuntu gives you the option of using CLI or GUI. It's user friendly to the point that I can modify xorg.conf settings through GUI. The same can't be said for a lot of other distros.

        Some people prefer GUI over CLI, one editor over another, one DE / WM over another. I thought using Linux was all about choice.
    • YamiJim, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3plz dont feed the trolls, kthxbai
    • ahvi, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1sudo
  • BigManOnCampus, on 03/19/2008, -7/+26Slackware is old and busted.
    Arch is the new way for ground-up-assemble-your-os-as-you-like distros. It has package management that is just as slick as Ubuntu. It just doesn't have the gigantic repositories that Ubuntu does. I'm using it for a MythTV box and it has been awesome so far. On install, Arch recognized my PC-HDTV5500 capture cards, which are rather obscure as expansion cards go.
    • greywolfexcel, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2Excellent. I got tired of not having to learn anything beyond the basics of linux with Ubuntu, having all the GUIs thrown in my face and decided to force myself to take on a challenge; I've never looked back. Also, I believe pacman is definitely as good as or better than apt. :)
      • Ademan, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5:-/ apt is considered to be the best package manager around. Either way, no one is throwing GUIs in your face in ubuntu, i'm an ubuntu user, and i spend 80% of my time in terminals, ubuntu isn't constantly minimizing my terminals and popping up GUI replacements for me...

        unless you're trying to say "ubuntu doesn't FORCE me to learn the underlying architecture" then you really have no point, and personally, I think it's insane to force people to use the terminal anyways.
    • mintcoffee, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4Arch is incredible. It's definitely a geek's distro, but it does it so well.
    • CaptNemo, on 03/19/2008, -6/+3You're a moron.
      Slackware is far from "old and busted". It is mature but, it's also pretty current. As for gigantic repositories, you obviously have not used any of the various Slackware package sites that allow you to D/L plenty non-official packages.
      As far as your fear of "./configure;make;checkinstall", have fun relying on other people to make packages for you...
    • computergod, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5Please don't diss slackware, it was the distro that got this all started after all.
      • BigManOnCampus, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1Why are people so religious about these things? I wasn't really saying Slackware sucked (that comment was more tongue-in-cheek), I was just pimpin' my favorite geek distro.
  • bluegene, on 03/19/2008, -37/+12don't care
    • samurimaster, on 03/19/2008, -2/+26Then dont read it
    • ScottoGato, on 03/19/2008, -2/+6Can we get these people an account at stumbleupon or something then? Get the ***** off of digg.
    • tuxisawesome, on 03/19/2008, -2/+2This comment is spam
    • computergod, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5Then add ubuntu to your filters list.
  • Soldierboi, on 05/09/2008, -5/+76I just switched back to Oscar Meyer hotdogs the other day
    • Gonthim, on 03/19/2008, -3/+14I prefer Ball Park Franks. The juicy qualities and meaty texture are far superior.
      Ball Park Franks: They plump when you cook 'em!
    • inbred, on 03/19/2008, -4/+36Hebrew National FTW
      • skyshock1, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2They answer to a higher calling. Hot Dogs from Yahweh.
      • PRlME, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2honestly hebrew national is some good fuqin hot dogs
      • Gerbil_Juice, on 03/19/2008, -0/+12I affectionately call them Jewdogs.
        • cawpin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3While the joke was completely expected, I think you just won Digg for today.
          • Gerbil_Juice, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1It wasn't even a joke. I really do call them that. My family and friends know what I'm talking about.
      • absurdist, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7They're made from only the finest, cleanest, best fed Palestinians.

        ...god, I am SO going to hell...
      • saikyan, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Hell Yes.
    • computrius, on 03/19/2008, -1/+17I dont know, oscar meyer hotdogs just arent as easy to use as ball park franks.. Most people dont have the expertise to put them in the microwave and hit the start button manually. Ball parks also come with much more in depth installation instructions.
    • expatcatalyst, on 03/19/2008, -1/+12Thank goodness, a post I could understand and relate to. Thanks!
    • barktwiggs, on 03/19/2008, -0/+15Nathan's hotdogs are way better...until everyone else starts eating them. Then I'll find a more obscure hotdog to eat.
    • 1timeuser, on 03/19/2008, -1/+8Nathans is the best. You are all n00bs. Whats next? Pepsi better then Coke?
      • banmaster, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5Wash your mouth out!!
      • cawpin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+11timeuser - I really hope you're kidding. I've had exactly 1 Nathan's hotdog in my life and it was the smallest nastiest hotdog I've ever eaten. They are terrible.
        • 1timeuser, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5Whatever... at least now we are having an argument about the stuff that matters.
        • redneckblues, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1That's what she.... aw, hell.
    • Wonderama, on 03/19/2008, -0/+7Hebrew Nationals are like the open source of the hot dog world. The specs are published, readily available, and at 5000 yrs old, it's a relatively stable environment.
      • redneckblues, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Frankly, I'd rather not compile my own hotdogs.
        On a more serious note, how much better are they?
    • Ouze, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4I work with this guy, who is known to us as Hot Dogs. The reason for this is he has some kind of problem - i don't know what it is. But for some reason, when he belches, the whole work area smells like rancid hot dog water: and he belches often. The pungent scent of hot dogs often wafts into our area, grossing out all who are caught in it. At first, it was so potent, and he was so far away from my workspace, when a co-worker told me what that smell was, i didn't believe it was that guy. I didn't think one person could generate that much heavier-then-air reek, I was sure someone had left out their lunch or something. But then, I had to work right next to him, and wow. Wow. It's like a mutant ability, almost. If the X-Men ever need a guy who can make a 40 foot square radius reek of hot dogs for 8 hours, they will sign up this guy. It's really that bad.

      Anyway, that's why I won't probably ever eat hot dogs again.
  • SmellyFingers, on 03/19/2008, -20/+5so i herd u liek spammin ur blog
  • VikingoTJ, on 03/19/2008, -19/+12I use Mac and Ubuntu. Windows kicked the bucket with me 2 years ago. I got sick and tired of the bugs and processes that bog down my computers.
  • DnH500, on 03/19/2008, -7/+60Personally don't understand the whole "ubuntu is for n00bs" distro snobbery. Its like windows users sneering at gnu/linux users.
    • boester, on 03/19/2008, -20/+2UBUNTU IS FOR NOOBS!
    • skyshock1, on 03/19/2008, -2/+4I think it's because they circumvent traditional tried-and-true unix practices in favor of making it idiot-proof. For instance replacing the traditional mount point of /mnt with /media. I mean, it kinda makes sense, but then why bother having /mnt still? Most Linux users are used to using /mnt, so this is the de-facto standard. Introducing /media is completely Ubuntu specific, but if they're going to do that, they shouldn't include /mnt at the same time. (unless there's something here I'm overlooking)
      • gahal, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2link /mnt to /media
        I know that does not answer your question, but it does (mostly) solve the issue.
      • pooptaster, on 03/19/2008, -0/+11It's not Ubuntu specific, it's Gnome and KDE specific moreso.
        Things that are mounted in /media will show up on their desktops, and things in /mnt won't.
        Removable media is mounted at /media so it will be easily removable in KDE / Gnome.

        Why Ubuntu mounts ALL extra partitions there I don't know, and don't care since I don't use it.
        • skyshock1, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Ah thanks for the clarification then!
      • smartazz, on 03/19/2008, -0/+9openSUSE also uses the /media convention
        • Sprung, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5As does Fedora. Kinda messed me up at first.
      • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1I always disable automounting and set up my fstab so that it doesn't mount anything more than the "/" partition. If I want something mounted, I'll do it myself. I also mount to /mnt or /mount (if /mnt is already mounted) directories, and sometimes delete the /media directory so I can autocomplete to /mnt with just "m"
    • mmmiiikkkeee, on 03/19/2008, -2/+4I would guess that they left /mnt since older code/guides might relay on it existing for some purposes. but seriously if I mount some thing manually i put it in /mnt I did not know I was 'suppose' to mount to to /media(I am a ubuntu user). WHO cares where you mount a file system to!!! thats so petty; it should be transparent any ways as far a desktops go...
    • RandaII, on 03/19/2008, -8/+1No it is. Ubuntu is only for noobs want something more use any other distro. If anything Ubuntu is for snobs. I hate the user base they completely lack respect for other distros and have I use ubuntu so I am better then you attitude. IF anything ubuntu gives real linux users a bad name.
      • theaceoffire, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2"I hate the user base, they completely lack respect for other distros"
        If I had to guess, I would suppose that you lack respect for Ubuntu as well.
        • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1You shouldn't assume that's true with all Ubuntu users. Many people on ubuntuforums.org use other distros in addition or instead of Ubuntu.
    • computergod, on 03/19/2008, -2/+1Yup, that /media thing gives me the same icky feeling as when I see the windows simplified control panel.
    • ahvi, on 03/19/2008, -3/+1sudo
    • saikyan, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2People attach their egos to their opinions. The result is that people take others' opinions way too personally in a quest for self-validation. That's how this happens so widely.... Ubuntu vs Gentoo, Linux vs Windows vs Mac... Chevy vs Ford, American Cars vs Japanese Cars... Christianity vs Judaism vs Islam...
  • shadowmoose, on 03/19/2008, -12/+20I recently tried to switch to Ubuntu just so I could learn how to use linux but the transition from XP to linux is a rough one. I know how to do pretty much anything in XP but when I loaded Ubuntu it's like everyone was loling away at my expense calling me a noob. The only reason I got as far as I did with Ubuntu was because I have prior knowledge with computers, but if you out of the box new to it even Ubuntu won't make you feel as welcomed as XP does.
    • reddcell, on 03/19/2008, -9/+4What couldn't you figure out that you could so easily resolve on a XP box? Are you sure it wasn't just intimidation of something new getting in the way? Also, Google and Ubuntu forums can answer ANY problem you have. 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999998% of the time.
      • benchwarmer, on 03/19/2008, -1/+17It appears you have a rounding error somewhere in your code.
      • mmmiiikkkeee, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7yes it can answer my questions 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999998% of the time but some times the anwser is: (A) comlicated set of directions to solve your task or (B) Another perons with the same problem asking for help too...
        • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1As much as I love Linux and ubuntuforums.org, many of my questions there are unanswered.
    • ricree, on 03/19/2008, -9/+3I'm really not seeing how you could have a problem. Ubuntu is extremely friendly, and while you might occasionally have to delve a bit deeper into the configurations and settings, it mostly works fine without any issues. I just don't understand how someone reasonably computer literate could find Ubuntu to be "rough". Could you elaborate a bit please?
      • classhelper, on 03/19/2008, -1/+11The tone of your comment wasn't very helpful. Speaking as a 10 year Linux/BSD user (mostly software/database development, but my home machines run Ubuntu as well), your reply to shadowmoose's comment is probably a good representation of the negative treatment he's been getting from the community. The last sentence of your post would have sufficed.
      • gudnbluts, on 03/20/2008, -0/+0When fundamental bits of hardware don't work, and you spend hours trying all kinds of different suggested things, and they still don't work, you start to call the experience "rough". Honestly, look at the HP laptop page on the laptoptestingteam's pages, and click on any of them. They all have hardware compatibility issues, and mine isn't even on their list.

        So you go back to XP, and it works out of the box (screen driver and suspend/hibernate in my case).

        I'll keep trying ubuntu as new releases come out, but am not making the switch till important bits of hardware work without going through all that pain.
    • KloroFormd, on 03/19/2008, -1/+16I recently had a female friend of mine install Ubuntu herself. She has experience with nothing but Windows, had never installed an OS, couldn't troubleshoot virus/spyware issues... and she installed it without assistance.

      Only issues she's had is her webcam and scanner not working. Webcam is some off-brand and she gave up on me as soon as I gave her instructions on getting the device ID, and the scanner is supposed to be supported but has hideous image distortion and quality. These 2 issues weren't enough to drive her away, she's still loving her Ubuntu install.

      She decided she really didn't need this stuff working, it was more of a "wonder if it works" kinda thing. She's been using nothing but Ubuntu for 4 months and doesn't regret her decision to install it a bit.
    • classhelper, on 03/19/2008, -0/+14I'm sorry to hear you're catching a bunch of flak from the community in response to your inquiries. Please feel free to hit up ClassHelper.org and contact me anytime with questions. There *are* helpful people in the community; they're just somewhat hard to find sometimes.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/19/2008, -3/+7Windows is designed so that 99.999% of users don't need to ever use the command line.
      • mmmiiikkkeee, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5Not really I had a problem the other day where i had to use the windows command line to solve it. and tech support places ALL use the command line to some problems.. I think u are confused. Its NOT 'designed' that way its just so mainstream that users are less likely to need to....
        • banmaster, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5Still equals the same thing, and something that would REALLY help linux .
      • jocknerd, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6I love the command line. I'm old school Linux. I use it on my Mac. But I HATE going to the command line in Windows. Its a piece of crap.
      • theaceoffire, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1"Windows is designed so that 99.999% of users don't need to ever use the command line."

        When Ubuntu fails, you are dropped down to the equivalent of safe safe mode, the command line. The next version of Ubuntu (8.04) will drop you to a safe mode like windows as WELL as the option of going to the command line.

        When Windows fails, you can sometimes boot to safe mode... if you did something SLIGHTLY bad. Any major issues and you won't even get that far.

        The Ubuntu method allows you to fix things without having to do the Window's re-installation method.
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1You can boot the computer with the Windows CD or DVD, and using a GUI perform repairs, or a reinstall.
          It also gives you the option of using a "Recovery Console" which is even more limited than the command line.
    • YamiJim, on 03/19/2008, -1/+9you expect to go from something you've used EVERYDAY for 5-10 years to something totally new and not have any learning curve?
      Little naive, no? Don't fear the CLI it is your friend....Stick with it, you'll get it. And you'll never have to put money ion MS's pocket ever again.

      Free your computer.
      • vyralinfection, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4"Don't fear the CLI, It is your friend" I'm getting that on a tshirt
    • balaknair, on 03/19/2008, -0/+7I'm sorry to hear about people loling away at your expense and calling you a noob, but in my experience the community at Ubuntuforums was very helpful and considerate, and while I got a bit of RTFM and was called a noob at some forums like Gentoo(I played around quite a bit with various distros before settling with Kubuntu) I never encountered that at Ubuntuforums. The community is IMHO one of the best *features* of Ubuntu.
      Moving from Windows to Linux can seem pretty challenging if you've been using Windows very long(I've used Windows since Win95>98SE>2K>XP>Vista>XP over the past 12 years, and I consider myself pretty competent at fixing most issues with Windows). But it's not that hard, and for me it was totally worth it. The only investment I put in was time- took me around a month to get used to Kubuntu, but now I find it far easier to use than Windows. As for the arguments about the CLI, I have not yet come across a situation where I've *had* to use it, in most cases I used it because it was easier to use the Command Line than the Graphical mode. I've used cmd.exe in Windows too for certain tasks, usually network troubleshooting, so it wasn't that big a deal for me, but I do find that the excellent community support makes learning the CLI in Ubuntu much easier.
      All said and done, I found Ubuntu to be the best OS I've ever used.
      • cawpin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3Exactly, the Ubuntu community is where the strength of the distro lies. They are great at answering questions and, generally, a quick search will give you the answer you need without having to post anything.
    • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Yeah, you'll experience some problems with Ubuntu most likely. It took me a long time of experimentation with Fedora and other distros until I understood it. It's all worth it, I think. But it's not for everyone.
  • digitallysick, on 03/19/2008, -5/+21ubuntu is great, mostly because of so many users on the forums. I spend a lot of time there helping people of all the Linux forums I've used it contains the least amount off asshole unlike the gentoo forums...
    • tehjarvis, on 03/19/2008, -1/+6Gentoo has excellent documentation and it's wiki is outstanding, which is why the forum users will come off assholeish to stupid questions that people won't research. Don't get me wrong, the ubuntu forums are awesome, but the one thing I hate is seeing the same problems over and over again by people who don't search before typing out a half-description with no terminal output for their problems or naming the hardware they use.

      • thrasher6670, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4I do like the Wiki... however i run it :) sorry for the recent down time guys
    • RandaII, on 03/19/2008, -4/+5you also get rude and snobby people on ubuntu forms as well.
      • theaceoffire, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3Hate to tell you, but the world isn't full of only nice people. Even XP, Mac, and Car forums tend to contain a few bad apples.
      • newwatch51, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2Yeah it happens. It's not too bad there though.
    • computershack, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3I must say that on ubuntuforums, it's the only place I've been where you can say "If I want to do X I do Y in Windows, how do I do it in Ubuntu?" and someone will reply with a decent answer telling you how to achieve the same unlike many distro forums where it ends up being a 100 windows bashing post thread.
    • MontyPython, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3tehjarvis couldn't have said it any better...

      You really have to RTFM when it comes to Gentoo Linux because the documentation, forums, and wiki really are superb. Having used Gentoo since its infancy, I can only remember a handful of instances where a little research in all of the available resources couldn't answer my questions. In those few instances, my posts were always answered within a few hours or twenty-four hours. No one was ever an asshole to me.

      I feel like the biggest issue is the poster. I have seen countless forum posts where the person gets defensive, doesn't give the full problem, or thinks they are superior to those who are trying to help him/her. A person with that sort of mentality will get ignored because the other users have better things to do than try and help a user who doesn't want to be helped.
      • akurashy, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1That doesn't really explains why the helper must act like an a-hole..

        I used gentoo once, I dislike their community I think the Gentoo OS is more user-friendly than the people in the boards...
  • anteyekon4myst, on 03/19/2008, -25/+6Everyone knows:

    Windows is for lazy people who want to work
    Mac OS# are for people who are distracted by shiny things
    Ubuntu is for people who want to look pretentious
    most other Linux distros are for people who actually are pretentious and have too much time on their hands.
    UNIX is for people who want things to work...so they can shoot ***** off into space

    • 3vno, on 03/19/2008, -8/+1osx works great for me, and it built on unix so it works.
    • skubiszm, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4I used to work for a large defense contractor and Unix has definitely taken a backseat to Linux. The project I worked on was putting a real-time Linux distro on a satellite. Unix is just way too ***** expensive.
    • computergod, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2z/OS is for people who... Well if you can afford it you are a big company, not a person.

      /saw some unix "hackers" with access to something runnng VM/ESA, the poor souls didn't even know enough to use a 3270 emulator.
  • iNONYMOUS, on 03/19/2008, -28/+8title should be "why i'm gay"
    • TheZorch, on 03/19/2008, -1/+13You are?!
    • saisumimen, on 03/19/2008, -2/+3HEY EVERYBODY, DID YOU HEAR THAT? "iNONYMOUS" IS GAY!
    • 1timeuser, on 03/19/2008, -2/+3Seriously, if you dont have anything intelligent to say... Keep your mouth shut.
      And good luck with the whole being gay thing. I'm totally support your decision.
  • 3vno, on 03/19/2008, -19/+10This is lame.
  • snotrokit, on 03/19/2008, -1/+14I use a bunch of distros from Ubuntu/Fedora/SuSe/RedHat/BSD/etc. Each one has its strong points. My Zimbra box runs on Ubuntu, my app server runs RedHat and a crapload of Xens, my desktop is SuSe. I like em all, some more than others. I don't buy into this snobbery BS. Hey, at least they are not running Vista.
  • smackieattk, on 03/19/2008, -14/+72Nerds! Nerds! Nerds!
    I am a Mac user that is distracted by shiny things.
    • smackieattk, on 03/19/2008, -4/+5JK - I just wish I could keep up with the discussion!
    • EwMo, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7I laughed. Dugg.
    • anteyekon4myst, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5atleast some one appreciated my comment..
    • UNCCEJ1010, on 03/19/2008, -2/+8'I am a Mac user that is distracted by shiny things."- but you repeat yourself
      • MrTea, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5You mean to say he was being redundant, right?
    • nickert0n, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1lol I also chuckled, here sir have a dig
  • ricoboy24, on 03/19/2008, -3/+4i switched back because of Playonlinux.
    • whyufail, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2When its not completely hit or miss as to if a game is going to run, then call me. Short of several years of mainstream native Linux distros being out there, Linux still remains in the realm of anything but gaming.
    • nickert0n, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Shut up Old Man Windows
  • Regbooker, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7Ubuntu is fine, but, to be honest, I see Sabayon as a far superior distro. I really hope it'll become more popular because it's very well thought and, as a plus, it's based in the Gentoo core. And if Gentoo is synonymous to something that is stability.
    • andycr512, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3To me, Gentoo is synonymous with two things - speed and lots of work keeping the system updated without breaking it (though I hear my 2-month trial run was in the middle of some nasty update issues, so perhaps that is why).
    • tmalloy, on 03/19/2008, -0/+6That's a joke right? Gentoo is synonymous with speed and customization. The packages in portage are usually ahead of other distros.
      • Regbooker, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1No, I'm speaking from a personal experience here. I've used Gentoo to administrate a 10 TB disk farm plus 10 servers for a college project during almost 2 years and its stability was remarkable. Almost perfect I could say.
    • classhelper, on 03/19/2008, -0/+10Debian is synonymous with stability. Gentoo evokes thoughts of speed and customization.
      • MrTea, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2CFLAGS JUST KICKED IN YO! VROOM VROOM!
        • OptimismPrime, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2If Gentoo was a Car, it would be one of those Ricers with purple Neon Lights underneath and a Spoiler on Top.....
        • cawpin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2....all installed by the ***** owner so you better not follow it down the road.
    • tehjarvis, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Portage is just extremely awesome, I love it way more than apt...I wish more distros would utilize it.
    • reddcell, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2Gentoo is synonymous with "Portage went way down hill years ago"
    • stix213, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1I thought Gentoo was synonymous with "time consuming." Leaving little time to actually use the OS to get anything done.
    • eatbeefjerky, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Gentoo is synonymous with "know exactly what is in your system", but also with "the tradeoff being that some things are a huge PITA to get working". Sabayon is synonymous with "Gentoo based bloatfest". I do love my Gentoo install, but if you're going to do it, do it properly using the minimal install CD. It isn't meant to be user friendly - stick with Ubuntu for user friendly. Not that I don't have a soft spot for Ubuntu.
    • R3yDigg, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1The portage repos went from good through the course of the year I used Gentoo, we're talking stable packages being hard-masked for upwards of 3 months after their release (since the package managers weren't getting the tests done), popular legacy packages being removed, and other packages just plain being neglected. After suffering though various portage issues, and being tormented by endless conflicts when trying to update my system (yes I was using masked packages, because they weren't being unmasked fast enough) I quit, and landed on Ubuntu.
  • WatchDragon, on 03/19/2008, -0/+19Use what makes you happy, isn't it as simple as that?
    • 1timeuser, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7Apparently you dont know how the linux community works.
      • OptimismPrime, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5Though it's easily explained.
        Linux vs. OTHER OS is like a war.
        Linux in and of itself is a CIVIL WAR. ;)
    • rouge568, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Whooo!
      Freedom of Linux FTW!
    • snotrokit, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Yes. Yes it is. Dugg.
  • blizzok, on 03/19/2008, -0/+7I got my start with Mepis way back when, when ubuntu was still in some of it's first release cycles. I moved to Ubuntu after hearing a bunch about it, but i was experimenting with a bunch of other distros as well. A friend of mine introduced me to Gentoo, and it became all i used for the longest time. I use Ubuntu on my main desktop now, and Gentoo on my servers, laptops, and my companion box (another monitor + synergy). Ubuntu usually "just works", but when it doesn't it can be a serious hassle. Gentoo, on the other hand, is a pain to set up but works like clockwork after everything is compiled.

    I've gotten past thinking about distros and OSes as being better or worse, and i just look objectivly at what I have at my disposal. I dual boot with XP SP3 on my main box, and I carry a MacBook around. Learn to use every tool available for whatever job is best.
  • TheG2, on 03/19/2008, -11/+17Oh good, another article about how someone switched to another OS. How exciting! Seriously, the front page needs at least 20 more of these. I'd almost rather watch Fox News then read more of this crap again.
    • gahal, on 03/19/2008, -3/+7All you have to do is not click on the link.
    • platypibri, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2I know, it'd be a dream job for a lot of us, but really, there is no such job as "professional bitcher", so no need to keep auditioning.
  • EwMo, on 03/19/2008, -12/+27You switched to Ubuntu, loved it and posted something about it on Digg. Why don't you go have a seat over there?

    I'll probably get buried for this, but honestly, how many times will Ubuntu get FP'd? It's great, but really; come on.
    • theaceoffire, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2Expect at least 3 stories every April and every October.
    • oshu, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1You said it!
      This guy is a tool. Yes, Ubuntu is a fine distro. However, this guy considers himself advanced and yet his solution to a video card not working in 3d right after install is... wait for it... install another distro! Sorry, NOT advanced. If you don't think he's a tool, read the rest of his "linux" posts, like his nonsense QT vs GTK article.
  • Codes02, on 03/19/2008, -16/+2n00b. gentoo owns all of your a$$es

    I tried to update ubuntu the other day, and it has completely crapped out. Just to update. Gentoo craps out every now and then, but at least it doesn't drop you on a non-booting system just for trying to update your x server to the newer version.
    • andycr512, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7You're the stuff stereotypes are made of.
    • wangeyes, on 03/19/2008, -1/+3My first an only experience with Gentoo:
      Installed it. Updated it, and ended up with a completely broken system.
      That WAS about 5 years ago though, I presume things have improved.
    • pooptaster, on 03/19/2008, -0/+2How can upgrading X stop you from booting?
      • Sprung, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1I know, right? Google "runlevel" and then come back and pretend you are some kind of Linux expert.
    • stix213, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1I don't believe you at all. The only time I've ever had an Ubuntu system fail was when I was running my own custom bleeding edge RC kernel, a custom video driver, and custom Compiz-Fusion, and then I thought I wouldn't have problems upgrading from Feisty to Gutsy with the machine like that. I just couldn't get the Gutsy restricted nVidia driver to work after the upgrade, but the machine still booted.

      That wasn't even Ubuntu's fault, as I can't expect the upgrade to be tested in that configuration.
  • janyu86, on 03/19/2008, -9/+4he should change his username to "the unix n00b"
  • kaeppler, on 03/19/2008, -1/+6I have been using computers for the better part of my life and I studied computer science for about 4 years (I am about to finish this year). I use Ubuntu since its second incarnation (Hoary Hedgehog? don't quite remember) and I still prefer it over any other distribution or operating system I have used so far, and I used many.

    My point simply is that I think I can say as someone being proficient with computers and having to use them day in and out, my demands are quite high: Usability, stability, tool availability (can't stress this enough as a developer), performance, whatever.

    Ubuntu simply delivers in all areas where I might use a computer for, with the exception of maybe gaming. Other people's mileage may vary of course (I could imagine that designers or audio engineers may prefer a Mac or a Windows machine), but I think this certainly proves that it's unfair to sign off Ubuntu as a beginner's only distribution. It certainly also caters to professional users.
    • FuzzyCat, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1Although I now user openSusE, I did try out ubuntu a while ago. My biggest problem was that the kernel sources came out long after the compiled one was released. Ordinarily not an issue, unless of course you use vmWare which needs recompiling... well you know the rest.
  • MrViklund, on 03/19/2008, -22/+6Ubuntu is crap!
    • tuxisawesome, on 03/19/2008, -1/+2Good for you!
      • MrViklund, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1The fan boys didn't like that I said that I see. Well, I don't mind. Nothing better then a little bit of controversy. I still think that it's too much hype around Ubuntu and it gets an amazing amount of Inc for nothing. Like every Alpha is posted to Digg and dugg just for the sake of Ubuntu... I won't bow to the popularity pressure. Totally over hyped.
  • gcauthon, on 03/19/2008, -7/+5Dudes, I'm super serious. Ubuntu boots way faster!
  • TomKarpik, on 03/19/2008, -5/+7Ubuntu? Fastest? Author needs to put down the crack pipe, and bust out something like Slackware or Arch.

    Ubuntu is a hog. It's a slicker hog than most of the other distros out there, but like most modern desktop-oriented Linux distros, it's still a resource hog.
    • mrmacky, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1I've gotta agree. I tried Arch on an older machine of mine and it runs just beautifully, Ubuntu 7.04 on that same box was pretty much unusable and 7.10 wouldn't even boot after installing from an alternative CD.

      Point being Ubuntu is starting to get a bit bloated. Truthfully I'd prefer something in between Arch and Ubuntu. Barely anything to start with, but enough drivers to get you going, and maybe a bit more then a CLI thrown at your face on first boot.
    • Kamujin, on 03/19/2008, -0/+3Doing desirable things != hog.
      Wasting resources == hog.

      IE, your distro of choice is not faster because it does less. It just does less.
  • benchwarmer, on 03/19/2008, -3/+12How did this make the front page... Has anyone else looked around the blog at all? It's just a collection of teenage ramblings.
  • Smegzor, on 03/19/2008, -0/+4The little penguin on the side of the article holding the sign is broken. It said I'm using a Mac and running Safari.. um no. I'm using Ubuntu and running Firefox on non-Apple hardware, but it was close!
  • bootup, on 03/19/2008, -1/+7I think Ubuntu has done allot of things right. The main things they did right revolve around integration. If you need something like a codec, a flash plugin, etc it informs you of this and then proceeds to download it. You don't have to worry about viruses as the verified supported repository takes care of this. The additional unsupported packages are in repositories others are reasonably taking charge of and supporting. The other good thing is that packages also work easily enough. I have never seen a functional RPM distribution run this well. I have never seen a desktop DEB distribution so well integrated. The one thing Ubuntu lacks at the moment are commercial productivity applications and games. Linspire had a decent commercial software repository despite having allot to be desired with 5.0. Unfortunately they managed to screw it up (Disclaimer: I still use the latest Linspire & Freespire which is basically Kubuntu). I still don't understand what is so great with PCLinuxOS or Fedora that people use these distributions and recommend them. Not to put them down or anything I just don't get what people like about these two. I'm not a user of Slackware or Gentoo and yet I do understand what those distributions offer. They are right for a certain niche crowd. It is sort of like Redhat Enterprise edition is right for some companies in need of server operating systems.
  • samurimaster, on 03/19/2008, -0/+5I think I have a solution for all these distroA vs. DistroB snob/flame wars. Just stop it where just giving more fuel to the MS/Apple fanboys I though where better than that
  • KaJuN4, on 03/19/2008, -12/+5Installing a program on Windows XP: Download the installer and run it, click a few 'next' buttons, use program. Scale of difficulty: PB&J sandwich.

    Installing a program in Ubuntu: Hunt for the program in one of several directories, download it, find out you have to have admin privileges to install, Google like crazy to find out how to get it installed, join a forum and make a post to get a straight answer, get lectured about how Ubuntu is awesome and you're an idiot, finally just give up on the whole damn thing. Scale of difficulty: building your own moon rocket.
    • kaeppler, on 03/19/2008, -2/+6sudo aptitude install (program-name)

      nuff said.
      • Amiga500, on 03/19/2008, -3/+2Couldn't find any package whose name or description matched "kaepplers brain"

        Not used to thinking outside the box, eh boy?
    • mmmiiikkkeee, on 03/19/2008, -2/+6Installing a program in Ubuntu:
      1) open package manager
      2) select what you want to install
      3) click install
    • ukblacknight, on 03/19/2008, -1/+5Whilst your linux install theory is way out, you're also missing a few points in your Windows one too.

      Installing a program on Windows XP: Hunt for the program on google, find the website, then try and find the free version. Download it. Double click, click next, next, next, untick all the options about adding toolbars, intergrating into your start menu and explorer menus, click next, click finish. Reboot your system. Windows then tells you you have new programs installed (no *****) and when you look at the programs menu, it's made a mess of your neat folders that you spent 15 minutes organising.

      Installing a program in Ubuntu (Gnome): Click Applications, Add/Remove programs. Look for the program you wish to install, tick it, click install. Bob's your uncle - the program is in the category in the Appliations menu.
      -OR-
      Open terminal - sudo apt-get install [program-to-install]
    • CGA1, on 03/20/2008, -1/+1Except that far from all the programs are in the repos.
  • Auzy, on 03/19/2008, -11/+6 Why I switched back to Microsoft..

    1) My brand new computer doesn't work on ubuntu (crashes)
    2) I need to wait for the new version of ubuntu for it to work (already tested the 8.04 beta, it works)
    3) I'm not going to buy out of date hardware to make it work
    4) Nobody on brainstorm wants to improve driver support mechanisms like easily loading modules off a CD during install so I can install, because it promotes "closed source"

    • gplpark92, on 03/19/2008, -7/+2I only see Linux useful for old machines, which Linux can give new life to; especially for specialized jobs (for example, my old 300mhz PII 128MB is a print server)

      the reason we ditch old PC's is beacuse of new OS's which run too slow, right? So then get a lighter OS! Xubuntu works very smoothly on my old 650Mhz 256MB P3, and all the software is new (so its just as useful as any new computer today running XP or Vista).
    • mmmiiikkkeee, on 03/19/2008, -2/+6So you took 1 issue "driver support" and turned it into 4 issues? Sorry your hardware does not work. hardware venders need to make it easier to use there hardware on computers. I wish the hardware venders would publish more specs so that its easier for developers to write software for there hardware. and yes this makes Ubuntu look bad but really what can they do about it?
    • iRelinquish, on 03/19/2008, -3/+5you act like you paid for it, STFU
    • RetepNamenots, on 03/19/2008, -1/+1You could just upgrade the kernel. That's what I've done; using Gutsy with the 2.6.24 kernel; now my wireless works properly (which it didn't with previous versions).
    • stix213, on 03/19/2008, -1/+4You forgot the last reason:

      5) Because I already let MS ass pound me for my cash when I bought the machine, so I might as well use Windows cause I paid for it even though I was going to try a free OS
  • wolferz, on 03/19/2008, -6/+15FTA "Ubuntu is sometimes thought of as the beginner's distro, something that more advanced users don't care about - they think if you're advanced, you need Slackware or something where you have to build it from scratch, rewrite or add parts to the kernel to make it more compatible to your system, write your own drivers, etc, but that just takes up time. Of all the distros I've tried, Ubuntu is the fastest, most reliable, and (most of the time) most compatible."

    Woot perhaps there is hope for Linux yet.

    There is this weird sense in among Linux users and a large part of the open source community that easy is bad. Ok ok not bad... just lame. That if you can't do it the hard way then you suck. Actually it's more like if you DON'T do it the hard way, you suck. There is also the issue that Linux users are predominantly techies... people with significant computer skills to begin with. What they consider ease the average non-techie places in the same category as calculus. So when some one points out that something should be simplified the responce "Why? I have not problem doing it that way" inveitable comes up as an excuse for why it shouldn't be made easier.

    But here is the thing. Easy and hard isn't about whether or not something is cool. Easy and hard is about time. As some one who has become extremely proficient with Windows and am well on my way to doing the same under Linux I find that, while it is fun to have to occasional challenge, there are times when I jsut want things to work and to do so smoothly. I don't care if the computer itself is fast or slow. I can get up and fix myself a drink and come back. At least it isn't wasting MY time. What ***** me off is when I want to do something that, if i was using windows it would be a 30 second task, and under Linux it turns into a 3 hour affair.

    There have been occasional instances where the reverse has been true. Doing something in Windows took far longer than it would have in Linux. However, assuming what I want to do is even doable under windows, as a general rule it can be done faster or only marginally slower than in Linux. I'm not talking about long drawn out calculations like video trans-coding or 3d model rendering. I'm talking about sharing a folder over the network, installing a web browser, changing the dns servers being used. I have had occasions where everything I just mentioned took me more than 2 hours... ether because of a bug, shoddy documentation, lack of proper tools, distro specific quicks, things like that.

    What's more is the things that take longer in Windows are generally things that no one saved a half crazy power user or computer tech would even consider doing... such as trying to move the entire profile folder (C:Documents and Settings in windows xp) seamlessly to another hard drive. I did it with some fancy junctions and console commands. Took about an hour to wrap my head around the limitations and quirks involved, and about 7 more hours to actually do it on my vista machine (commands in windows vista console are really freaking *****, and not at all made for effecting multiple files and folders at once. The permissions commands are particularly atrocious).

    By comparison the times I run into such stuff in Linux are almost always something simple. Something the average user would want to do. Installing a program for example. Granted it has gotten a lot better recently... but it still sucks. Want to install the latest ATI drivers from AMD under Ubuntu? too bad. Last time I checked they still aren't in the repositories. You can dl them yourself from AMD like you would for Windows... but then you need special tools to modify the .deb files.. which aren't even visible in the Ubuntu package manager. You have to drop to the console, sudo apt-get it. Of course all that after an hour of research. Then you STILL have to configure Xorg which involves the use of command line tools. Want to turn on file sharing? Sucks to be you. Depending on what version of Samba you have the graphical tools for it may not work right. If they do work you still have to have an understanding of basic networking concepts. What? NFS? Still sucks to be you. The gui tools for that outright suck ass. Console? Gotta learn commands and syntax' for the conf files.

    Yes I could just use nVidia cards, yes I could get open source drivers, yes I could have some one set it up for me. That's not the point though. The point is in windows... I wouldn't have to. I don't really HAVE to now but, honestly, I got more important things to deal with. I want a clean simple setup that doesn't ask me what to do. I tell it what I want to do, and it figures out the details for me without me even seeing what details are being figured out. I CAN spend lots of time with Linux and make it work. I just would rather not.

    The average user outright can't though... and they are the ones who are most hurt by the open source communities continuing trend of putting their heads in the sand and pretending that these aren't problems. Just a little heads up, when some one says something it a problem telling them it isn't is the wrong answer, ESPECIALLY if you are right. Telling some one what they think is a problem isn't a problem is the methodology of a politician. Saying, honestly, that you will look into it and see what can be done is the methodology of a businessman. If Linux is ever going to realize it's full potential and really and truly become better than Windows in the eyes of people who don't give a rats ass about "freedom" from corporations or how "evil" Microsoft is (ie the average Joe and people who have more pressing matters to worry about) the open source community needs to realize that if some one complains about it the fact that some one is complaining is in and of itself a problem. No writing off concerns about ease of use as user error. No getting defensive when some one points out a problem. No down with Microsoft rhetoric. And most importantly all, no falling behind the crutch of "well since it's open source people who have problems with it can fix it themselves." That last one onely works for people who actually WANT to spend time on such stuff. Most people complaining aobut usability issues are complainiing about them because they DONT have time.

    In the end it isn't really about how easy something is or isn't, it's about how much time it takes to accomplish. Then again, the easiest way to make something take less time, is to make it easier.
    • MuntediusBiffon, on 03/19/2008, -4/+0With this comment "and about 7 more hours to actually do it on my vista machine" you lost me. It takes three clicks. Highlight personal folder > right click > click move then select the move location. And amazingly this works...
    • ChanM, on 03/19/2008, -2/+0Long post but a good one. It's true I tried us