Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Polaris

Linux


Recommended Posts

Sure Zacker, but once again we come back to the incentive of using Linux for someone not interested in all the tweakery: an average user. Being free obviously isn't flying as otherwise it'd be a lot more popular than it is. :cool:

I'm not trying to put down Linux or even criticise it, but after hearing dozens of "lol windows" comments and whatnot from Linux users over the years (not necessarily you guys) I've about had enough and want them to stand their ground. Put up or shut up as they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'd like a copy of Linux please"

"Which distro?"

"You what now?"

"You know, Redhat, Ubuntu, *goes on for hours*"

"Ok...i'll take a copy of XP thanks."

Regard:

1. Linux is just the Kernel, the core of the OS. The distribution, is the stuff around the kernel. Like, Shell, Window System (X), Desktop Environment/Window Manager, Office-Suite etc. Built on top of a package management (r'not^^).

2. When you ask someone "Can i have a copy of Linux" the guy will either explain you, that Linux is only the core and the other parts of the OS, are shipped with a distribution, so he will recommend you one (eg. Ubuntu, Suse, or whatever) or he will laugh about you.

3. There are maybe hundrets of Linux-Distros. But there are only some suitable for common desktop use. When you ask in a shop about a (commercial) Linux-Distro, they'll give you either a Suse or a Ubuntu Package, with InstallCD, Manual and maybe a LiveCD.

Wfr, Sindwiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, yes, for the sake of clarity let's simply assume that those talking about Linux in this thread mean "Linux-based OS". :oops:

No. Just say "Linux" when you mean Linux generally. When youre talking about a specific distro, say the distro name. :D

Wfr, Sindwiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should I? Linux users rarely offer the courtesy of saying "Windows XP" or "Windows 2000" when talking about Windows. I hardly get the impression there's that much distinction between the different distros anyway.

But to backpeddle a bit, yeah, I agree with Ginger in that the multiple overlapping distibutions simply adds to the confusion and makes the end user experience of working with Linux complicated in yet another way.

The fact is that Linux is far less inviting for average users than Windows and OS X, to the extent where even its freeness cannot save it. Until Linux comes up with some kind of killer draw that isn't security or its price, it's forever destined to be restricted to enthusiasts and servers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is that Linux is far less inviting for average users than Windows and OS X, to the extent where even its freeness cannot save it.

Thats not a fact, thats a illusion.

Thats the same thing like before: Someone writes stuff like "in Linux, you need much to tweak/configure yourself etc." and you buy this. You trust negative reviews more than positives. Or, it doesnt seem that your opinion is affected by the number of ppl and the number of posts here, who have a positive opinion about Linux and share that too (eg. me, leile, Zacker, Section_Eight).

Wfr, Sindwiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it an illusion? I said that it isn't an inviting OS, and it isn't. Replace 'inviting' with 'appealing' if it helps you to understand what I meant.

To elaborate, there are a number of distros which as Ginger has just demonstrated confuses many people. None of them have any particularly attractive features that lure people in, and even when directly asked you guys have failed to give any.

Also, has Linux ever actually innovated itself? I mean I see no end of people saying things to me like "It can do X, just like Windows/OS X!", but I've never had someone tell me something Linux can do that's unique. Doing what someone's OS can already do isn't an attractive selling point.

I once again repeat that I'm not putting Linux down, but am instead pointing out that there's simply nothing going for it that's going to ever attract average users in its current state. It might be a solid OS, but it's not a special OS.

Its lack of widespread success isn't because people only listen to bad reviews or because they're ignorant; it's because Linux has nothing striking. It's just an alternative, and in this world that's not good enough — even if free. That's why it's not managed to become anything more than an enthusiast platform in the last decade or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll switch to linux the day that I can't get every version of windows from home to corporate for free.

Until that day I will enjoy the mainstream luxuries of windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lot of good points here. Linux is great for a number of things. From many points of view, it's better than Windows. Sadly, it has no support for wireless (the fact that is the fault fo the people who make the cars is of fuck all relavance to Joe Average). Secondly, it's command line tacular. In the distros I've looked at, if you want to do anything remotely interesting then it's config files ahoy. Fuck me, it's been around for years on end and there's still no standard for this shit, even within distros, yet alone cross distro.

The selling point of Linux is customization, geek factor and security. Otherwise, there is no point in using it. I tried it 6 years ago and the things that bugged the fuck out of me then are still there when I tried it a few months ago. I played with 6 different distros, but none of them were adequate and did what I wanted.

Linux is not a mainstream OS. Regardless of what many people think, they are mainstream. Linux has and most likely always be a niche. Sad, because XGL is lovely to look at and the OS itself has many good ideas, but you're not gonna do shit while Gates has a chokehold and Windows runs everything desktopy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, that was 6 years before. That was the beginning of KDE and the concepting of GNOME. *lol* Since then, much stuff changed. There are very nice configuration frontends for KDE, GNOME and XFCE. Also some universal ones. You dont need to config around. Sure, you still need to mess around with the bash when you want advanced configuration. All basic stuff can be done by those frontends. Like, internet connection (yes, WLAN works now!), graphics-driver, printer and stuff. Ubuntu has even a lovely frontend called Synaptic for his package-manager APT.

When you dont believe me. Compare:

KDE 1.0:

http://kde.org/screenshots/images/large/matthiase1.jpg

KDE 3.5:

http://kde.org/screenshots/images/3.5/03-kicker.png

Wfr, Sindwiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew one of these days the good old David vs Goliath conversation would make its way to these very forums. But what surprises me is that both advocates for either side prove to each other why one side is more or less worthless then the other. I think we can all agree that the linux operating systems have their fare share of issue. I work with it everyday both at work and at home and I can say while I enjoy the freeness; I also enjoy the idea of it just working, which is something linux does not always provide. While this same argument could be made for windows. But since we are not talking about windows I shall just make a few minor points in regards to why I have issue with linux.

I work with about 16,000 HP server class blades that all run Red Hat Advanced Server 4, I also work with about 40 or so other machines that run Ubuntu Server. I have worked with Cent OS, Gentoo Debian, Suse, whatever they can mandrake now, a SElinux variant, knoppix and if you want to include the mac OS X backend that as well. To me they all suffer from the same issue and the reason why I will not be switching to linux anytime soon. First off the open source world prides itself on standards and seems to take a pot shot at those who go off and do there own thing. I mean a great example is IE, or the browser in general. We see all these open source browsers just because they feel that Microsoft and their IE browser was not standard compliant. Well because of this whole standards issue this creates my first bitch about linux. They can’t make up there damn mind. Its like every distribution you install has a different browser, every distribution you install has a different method of distributing their applications, we Yum, Rug,apt,yaste and many many more and they all use a different standard way of going about obtaining there files. I just feel that for an OS that is so big on standards you would think that they could at least figure out a common way to get updates to there applications. I mean Microsoft does not have 800 ways to update the OS we have ONE way aka windows update and we can choose whether we want to update or not.

Second thing that pisses me off, Desktop, we have KDE, we have GNOME, we have blackbox, we have all the damn Desktop managers that when it comes down to it OFFER THE SAMN DAMN THING. Its not like going to one or the other provides me anything new or spiffy, no they could all provide the same thing. So I ask you linux folk to explain to me why is it every time I install a new distro I have to figure a new Desktop manager. On top of having a new Desktop manager, every distro customizes theirs because its free and open and everything is different and not in the same spot on every OS…hmm with windows I do not have to deal with this pain. One Desktop manager, one location for everything, the same fing control panel dialog boxes I do not have to re-learn my OS every time I install it.

Third and final thing, I have to ask WHY WOULD I WANT TO COMPILE EVERYTHING ???? I mean explain this to me, I am developer I compile stuff all the time. Why would I go home and want to compile more; my browser or my document editor. Well because then you will optimize it for your system, and my question to that is… SO WHAT. Unless I am using some task that requires a huge optimization to my system why the hell should I give a rats ass about compiling my word editor or my browser.

My final thoughts, now sure these maybe some harsh rationalization of the OS and here again I use the Linux OS’s everyday and I enjoy using them but these are a few of the issue that I think will prevent me and others from migrating. I do a lot of development on linux systems. I understand why its there and what purpose it serves but in my opinion it has spawned a lot of bloat software, pretty UIs and that’s about it. It has not saved me money, it has not saved me time or heartache. It has not improved my computer using by any large amount. The only think I can say I have learned from it is the vim shortcut keys since that’s the only worthy tool that comes with linux, well that and SCONs and GCC but I can get that for windows as well. So how can all you pro-linux people get on your horns and preach the words of free when your OS suffers from many of the same issues the non-free one does. And finally LONG LIVE THE AMIGA, AMIGA DOS PWNS YOU ALL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wtf? You talk shit, dont you? No, honestly.

Second thing that pisses me off, Desktop, we have KDE, we have GNOME, we have blackbox, we have all the damn Desktop managers that when it comes down to it OFFER THE SAMN DAMN THING.

Maybe the same damn thing but in a different way. Or, how do you want to install KDE or GNOME on a low resource system? KDE or GNOME would work extremely jerky on a 500 mhz machine. Get XFCE or get a simple Window-Manager like Blackbox, Fluxbox (my favorite) or IceWM.

So I ask you linux folk to explain to me why is it every time I install a new distro I have to figure a new Desktop manager.

We dont. Or is the KDE who is shipped with Suse not the same KDE who is shipped with Ubuntu? Or RedHat? What shit are you talking about? Not every distro customizes the Desktop Environment anyway. Maybe you mean some system tools who are only working under APT or RPM. Or Package-Managers, like Synaptic.

Third and final thing, I have to ask WHY WOULD I WANT TO COMPILE EVERYTHING ????

1. You DONT need to compile everything. Good distros got packages for everything.

2. You are talking about Linux like you would only use Slackware or Gentoo. What the hell should that mean?! Never heard of binary based Distros or what?

Wfr, Sindwiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

last week my roommate installed the latest version of kubuntu on his brand new machine with one of those free cds you can get from the site. To install video drivers he had to go through a rough procedure of config files, console commands and asking questions and help on some irc channel. This is why linux will never be popular. It's great for enthusiasts and servers but it'll never go mainstream if it stays like this... and i'm afraid this will always be one of the negative side effects of open source, no standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

last week my roommate installed the latest version of kubuntu on his brand new machine with one of those free cds you can get from the site. To install video drivers he had to go through a rough procedure of config files, console commands and asking questions and help on some irc channel.

???

sudo apt-get install nvidia-glx

nano /etc/X11/xorg.conf

Change driver from "nv" to "nvidia". Thats it. Or when youre talking about the ATI-drivers, you need to know that the ATI-drivers suck ass.

Wfr, Sindwiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...