Is it easy to install new software on Linux yet?


Recommended Posts

I did say 10 years ago, but yeah I've been playing with computers since my dad's first Dynalogic Hyperion with 256kB of RAM when I was 3!  

 

RPMs existed back then, but from what I recall they were kinda new, and only the biggest software developers offered them, like nVidia graphics drivers.  I didn't see any obvious easy way of installing small software, like VLC or games, back then.

 

And what are you doing checking my age?  Check to see if I'm single, too? ;)

 

Linux graphics drivers? Now we know you're making things up. :laugh:

 

FWIW, it appears nVidia didn't release a graphics driver until 2001, right around when Synaptic was released. Although things didn't always go perfectly back then (and it was possible someone just chose not to release a package), Synaptic is the precursor to Ubuntu's Software Center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Linux graphics drivers? Now we know you're making things up. :laugh:

 

FWIW, it appears nVidia didn't release a graphics driver until 2001, right around when Synaptic was released. Although things didn't always go perfectly back then (and it was possible someone just chose not to release a package), Synaptic is the precursor to Ubuntu's Software Center.

 

I'm pretty sure it was nVidia, maybe it was Voodoo I can't remember.  I just remember trying to download and install software onto RedHat was a pain, and only the most popular software was offering RPMs.  Synaptic and APT may have been around, but there was certainly no obvious way to get at them, or even know that they existed, in the noob-user GUI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a Mint fan personally. I'm a strong believer that all versions of Linux will still require you to get your hands dirty every now and then. Also, being that under each distro the base Linux OS, most software can work on just about any distro. Just depends on if there's a pre-compiled to make it easy and all that. So to call any Linux a "beginner" Linux doesn't at all mean it's not powerful, it just may come with a prettier installer and more base apps to help you with the typical stuff. I run Mint on my HTPC because I don't want to have to screw around with a more complicated or bleeding edge distro. I'm pleased with the way they have it set up, and I'm a fan of Cinnamon over a lot of the alternatives, which is what lead me to try Mint. Sure it could be installed on others, but I didn't need a highly customized build, just something for XBMC and some web browsing. The nice thing about Ubuntu (and Mint since it uses Ubuntu's repos) is that it's popularity means there's a lot of software pre-compiled for easy install like you're looking for.

 

Download some Live CDs and give them a try, see what you think. If you find a distro you like, move up to a VM to have a more permanent install to play with, and if you're still good, go for the full install. That way you don't have to worry about losing anything or having regrets and wanting to go back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And what are you doing checking my age?"

When you mentioned something as old school as RH before RPM, wanted to see if you were in my age bracket.. I recall playing with it when it came out - but didn't really start using it until 4 came out couple years later 96.

But then my youngest son is your age (jan 25 vs your feb 11) ;) It's a limited older crowd around here ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of misinformation in this thread. Package managers have been around since the very early days of Linux distributions. As others have pointed out, Red Hat was an early pioneer of packaged software with their Red Hat Package Manager (RPM). Similarly Debian's Advanced Package Manager (APT) was originally implemented in dpkg (which still takes care of the core logic) as a simple Perl script written by Ian Murdock which shipped with the first release of Debian. Package management has been the key feature of Linux distributions since the very early 1990's.

 

I can definitely understand the difficulty a Windows or OS X user has adjusting to the paradigm shift required to understand GNU/Linux. The open-source world does many things differently than proprietary operating systems, notably software management. I had trouble with the same thing when I first decided to try Linux. Although Mandrake had a package manager, I didn't know it existed and therefore never used it. I had trouble installing software. Unfortunately when I googled "how to install software on Linux", I was directed to articles explaining how to untar, compile, and "make install" that software. It was a pain, especially with my relatively limited understanding of operating systems at the time. I concluded that software installation on Linux was awful, and thus ended my experiment. It wasn't until years later when I entered college and started working in IT that a coworker interested me in Ubuntu, explained package management, and started my journey to a Windows-less world.

 

Unfortunately although front-ends for these package managers have evolved to become very polished and easy to use, many Windows "power users" get stuck at the same place I did years ago. The problem is often perception. They expect things to be "the same", but somehow better. Learn how to use the package manager for your distribution. Expect things to be very different. Don't be afraid to ask for help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude "Mandrake" that is OLD school as well, happy to see you youngins playing with stuff when you were just babies..

Mandrake changed its name to Mandriva back in 2005 or so -- you were what like 15, so if your calling it mandrake you must of used before then.. So just a little preteen playing with linux distro's

Gives me hope for the future!! ;) It won't be just sheeple standing in line to buy the next ipod model..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude "Mandrake" that is OLD school as well, happy to see you youngins playing with stuff when you were just babies..

Mandrake changed its name to Mandriva back in 2005 or so -- you were what like 15, so if your calling it mandrake you must of used before then.. So just a little preteen playing with linux distro's

Gives me hope for the future!! ;) It won't be just sheeple standing in line to buy the next ipod model..

 

I used the very last version of Mandrake (10.2 beta) before the company bought Conectiva and merged the two distributions to become Mandriva. I used the very first release of Mandriva (2005) too, but that was about as far as my experiment went. I mainly installed it because a friend-of-a-friend who knew more about computers than anyone else I could think of (he could write Batch scripts!) told me it was the distribution I should use. I had just built my first desktop, was using Windows XP, and thought I knew a lot about computers. Mandrake showed me that there was a lot I didn't know, but rather than trying to learn more about Linux I just decided it was "too complicated" because none of my games would run and I had trouble following complicated instructions online for compiling and installing new software. I now regret that I gave up so easily.

 

I approached the subject very differently in 2009 when a coworker who I highly respected introduced me to Ubuntu 9.04. It was very different than what I knew - and from my previous experience with Mandrake and the Red Hat 9 installation that some grey-beard who I didn't really know had setup as a web server for my Dad - and I liked it. I certainly didn't know everything instantly, and made several beginner mistakes like installing the NVIDIA binary driver for my GeForce 6600 GT directly from the binary blob on the company's website rather than through the repository, but my coworker roughly guided me as I began to learn. I was much more knowledgeable in computers at the time and slowly learned the right way to do things in Ubuntu. As I became more comfortable with the terminal - and eventually came to rely on it - I tried many other distros as a more informed Linux user and eventually settled on Debian 6 as my distro of choice.

 

Learning how to "think in Linux" was immensely helpful to me in my IT job. It taught me how to break out of my paradigm, question assumptions about "how computers work" that I had previously taken as fact, and even learn more about the inner workings of Windows and OS X. I learned how to better diagnose operating system issues, work with cross-platform software, and to always search for the right tool for the job rather than dogmatically using only what I was already comfortable with. Even though Linux itself is not the right choice for everyone, I believe that it would be extremely beneficial for everyone involved in IT, software development, or hardware development to learn how to use a Linux distribution. Dig deep. Learn how things work below the GUI. I regret that I did not take Linux seriously sooner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a stack of about 40 CDRs behind me of various old linux distros including mandrake haha.

Heck even got the official RH9 CDs :D.

But yes, when you use RH it would have had RPM build it and no you didn't have nvidia drivers in RPM :)

 

There was nothing quite like trying to install white box enterprise linux using their broken ISOs and having to patch in the proper files from their FTP on windows, those were the days!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, Mandrake.

 

Not counting a quick Debian install (back in a time when I didn't know what to do with it after I got it installed) my first actually productive Linux desktops were RH first and then Mandrake.

 

Both were kinda rough, and I later learned that I had timed it perfectly to pick among the worst respective releases of each of those distros  :/ I don't remember the exact version numbers... Mandrake 8.1 maybe.

 

It was sort of fun though, recompiling the kernel to get my Audigy2 to work... and getting it working with only a slight idea of what I just had done.

I didn't even have a reliable internet connection to look for guides, back then. It seems almost unreal now that we managed to get any work done without Google.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of misinformation in this thread. Package managers have been around since the very early days of Linux distributions. As others have pointed out, Red Hat was an early pioneer of packaged software with their Red Hat Package Manager (RPM). Similarly Debian's Advanced Package Manager (APT) was originally implemented in dpkg (which still takes care of the core logic) as a simple Perl script written by Ian Murdock which shipped with the first release of Debian. Package management has been the key feature of Linux distributions since the very early 1990's.

 

I can definitely understand the difficulty a Windows or OS X user has adjusting to the paradigm shift required to understand GNU/Linux. The open-source world does many things differently than proprietary operating systems, notably software management. I had trouble with the same thing when I first decided to try Linux. Although Mandrake had a package manager, I didn't know it existed and therefore never used it. I had trouble installing software. Unfortunately when I googled "how to install software on Linux", I was directed to articles explaining how to untar, compile, and "make install" that software. It was a pain, especially with my relatively limited understanding of operating systems at the time. I concluded that software installation on Linux was awful, and thus ended my experiment. It wasn't until years later when I entered college and started working in IT that a coworker interested me in Ubuntu, explained package management, and started my journey to a Windows-less world.

 

Unfortunately although front-ends for these package managers have evolved to become very polished and easy to use, many Windows "power users" get stuck at the same place I did years ago. The problem is often perception. They expect things to be "the same", but somehow better. Learn how to use the package manager for your distribution. Expect things to be very different. Don't be afraid to ask for help.

 

awesome post, thanks for the info!

 

Dude "Mandrake" that is OLD school as well, happy to see you youngins playing with stuff when you were just babies..

Mandrake changed its name to Mandriva back in 2005 or so -- you were what like 15, so if your calling it mandrake you must of used before then.. So just a little preteen playing with linux distro's

Gives me hope for the future!! ;) It won't be just sheeple standing in line to buy the next ipod model..

 

Hey, I wanna be cool too!  I've heard of Mandrake!  I've never heard of Mandriva!  I'm a good boy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with my brief experience with Lubuntu LXDE and Mint Cinnamon, no, no it is not as easy as Windows yet.

 

Oh sure, it's real easy to download and install programs, but actually RUNNING them?  That's another story.  So I download VLC thru Synaptic.  It says 'done'.  Where's my 'open' button?  Have I been spoiled by Google APK, Apple Store, and Windows App Store so much as to expect the package manager to be able to run the program it just installed?

 

Okay, fine, I'll just run it from the (for lack of a better word) "start menu".  What's this?  It isn't automatically added in the start menu?  Okay, that's fine, I'll just launch the desktop shortcut.  Oh, so it doesn't make desktop shortcuts automatically either?  Allright, I'll make my own desktop shortcut.  What the hell do I point it to.  There's no "Exe" in Linux.  Okay, I'll just put "VLC" in the target field, but surely that couldn't possibly WHAT IT WORKED?!  Yay!  Now I have a shortcut to VLC on my desktop!  But it's got this ugly-bum placeholder icon of some gear or cog.  I want my VLC pylon icon!  I have to download the icon, resize and crop it, and then manually assign it to the shortcut?

 

F*ck this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Now I have a shortcut to VLC on my desktop!  But it's got this ugly-bum placeholder icon of some gear or cog.  I want my VLC pylon icon!  I have to download the icon, resize and crop it, and then manually assign it to the shortcut?

 

When that happens I usually just restart (or log out-log in) and the icon fixes itself. My first interaction with Linux was a BeoS live floppy that came on a Maximum PC CD-rom back around 2002 or so. Then I tried Ubuntu 5.x. It was a shocker coming from Windows, but I was curious enough to play around a bit. left it for a while and jumped back in when Ubuntu was at 10.04. My how things have changed! I've got 13.04 running full on an old Inspiron 530 and  in a VM on my main rig. Beside the odd issue, installs are pretty swift, updates automatic and getting stuff from the software center is almost problem free. Compared to 10 years ago, Linux has become very user friendly, the only things keeping it from going mainstream is the fragmentation among distros, support from software makers (without wine) and people's general unwillingness to learn something new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well whaddya know, a reboot later and VLC showed up in the "Video" section of the start menu!  Having to reboot/restart after every software install is a fair compromise, considering the speed at which Lubuntu boots on my netbook.

 

But supposing I don't know which start menu category my newly installed program is, how would I find it without checking all of them?  And is there any way to automatically make desktop icons of newly installed programs?

 

In Windows, I could easily find the newest installed program, because it would be at the bottom of my start menu, or the end of my list of desktop icons (both sorted by Date).  Is there any way to get a list of recently installed programs (which Synaptic can happily do) and run them from said list (Synaptic for some reason cannot run things)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First time I tried Linux was around summer 2003. I interned at this company and the MIS manager gave me a copy of Knoppix which I was able to boot to test out without installing. That same MIS manager gave me another Linux distro to test out, Redhat 7.3 (circa 2002), which I believe is a 4 disc set inclusive of documentation (still have it) I was not able to test it out until the next year because I heard about the bad experiences Linux could cause attempting to dual boot with Windows at the time. I do remember attempting to install on my PC at home (Zenith GT Workstation 1996). It just would not install, even after I select text based setup, so I gave up. The only other computer I had at the time was a Dell Latitude 840c and I was sure as hell not going to install it there since my dad also used it for his work.

 

Eventually, we got a new computer in March of 2004, Dell Dimension 8300 with 512 mbs of RAM. I setup Virtual PC and installed it there. I had problems during the install, I remember you had the option to choose between server, workstation or laptop. Some of the packages prevented the installation from being successful so I had to carefully go through and unselect the packages it indicated were not compatible, I believe one of them was 'yum' something or another. Eventually, I got it to install and to be honest, it was underwhelming, the desktop was bare bones, graphics were cheesy, icons tacky, it had Mozilla web browser, some basic Office apps, it was not even OO.org. I just didn't like it. It was like Windows 95 and Mac OS 9's love child. I end up giving my old high school teacher a copy because she had developed a strong hatred for Microsoft.

 

The next Linux I tried I believe was a beta of Novell Linux desktop which had some nice graphics and was actually nice to use, this was around 2005 I believe. It still just could not compare to Windows XP at the time. I have since dabbled with a number of specific distros, both on physical hardware and VM's. I remember installing Ubuntu 8.04 back in 2007 I believe on a custom desktop I had built and I actually liked it and was impressed with its compatibility, plugged in my HP 840 printer and it worked. At the time though I was swayed by Vista's graphics (AERO) and Microsoft Office, so Windows still won out. Also, I was experimenting with OS X x86 on the machine and end up wiping it out. That same year, I did a one year course under CISCO IT Essentials and we were exposed to Linux. Redhat Advanced Server I believe was used as part of the training. It was old and had just as much problems as my 7.2 copy with packages. Installation and learning the command line were part of the requirements to past the class. Along with learning how to create groups, user accounts, move files, make directories and add permissions. To be honest, I had a hard time with it.

 

This girl she seemed to breeze through it so easily, first time using Linux too, she knew how to add some numbers to determine a permission and all that sorta stuff, I was impressed. The only thing I probably remember from that class is CD.. to change directories or go up one directory and init5 which I believe is to shutdown. Windows has spoiled me and I can't blame it.

 

 I have continued to experiment, I had Ubuntu 12.10 installed on a machine at work, but it was so darn buggy, especially installing apps and just staying connected to the Network, I formatted it and installed Vista on the machine. The machine was so slow with Vista that when Windows 8.1 preview came out, I did a custom install over it. The machine has been operating just fine since. In fact I use it each day side by side with my Windows 8 RTM install on another machine. I even used the 8.1 machine in preparation for creating some ceremony programs in Publisher along with certificates. It did just well, its actually being productive.

 

Ultimately, Windows still wins out over apps and just general stability and even performance. Ubuntu was just horrendous on the machine, you clicked an app in the launcher and it would sit there. A well used Windows 8 install with accumulated data and installed apps still beat it in boot time and reaching the desktop. I am sure Linux is a great server OS but for me, its not polished enough for the desktop and this for me personally (if it works for you, great). There is just something about Windows, you install it and its ready to be used. Of course, you have to install apps on it, but that can be done within 10 mins, I simply mount the Office 2013 .ISO and install. Ubuntu, I had to download restricted codecs just to play videos and listen music. Its just still some work required with Linux. I like playing with it though, but I believe its for a virtual machine environment where my personal systems are concerned.

 

I do plan on installing Redhat or Fedora just to improve my IT skills and make my self more marketable in addition to getting myself certified since Linux pros are in demand lately. You look in the Sunday news paper career section and you see it: Wanted: LAMP skills. I will certainly say this though, If I had to choose between Linux and UNIX, it would be Linux. I have Solaris in a VM and its not only difficult to install, but also difficult to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with my brief experience with Lubuntu LXDE and Mint Cinnamon, no, no it is not as easy as Windows yet.

 

Oh sure, it's real easy to download and install programs, but actually RUNNING them?  That's another story.  So I download VLC thru Synaptic.  It says 'done'.  Where's my 'open' button?  Have I been spoiled by Google APK, Apple Store, and Windows App Store so much as to expect the package manager to be able to run the program it just installed?

 

Okay, fine, I'll just run it from the (for lack of a better word) "start menu".  What's this?  It isn't automatically added in the start menu?  Okay, that's fine, I'll just launch the desktop shortcut.  Oh, so it doesn't make desktop shortcuts automatically either?  Allright, I'll make my own desktop shortcut.  What the hell do I point it to.  There's no "Exe" in Linux.  Okay, I'll just put "VLC" in the target field, but surely that couldn't possibly WHAT IT WORKED?!  Yay!  Now I have a shortcut to VLC on my desktop!  But it's got this ugly-bum placeholder icon of some gear or cog.  I want my VLC pylon icon!  I have to download the icon, resize and crop it, and then manually assign it to the shortcut?

 

F*ck this.

You should not have to do any of that. For me installing software always creates a proper icon in the menus. And in ubuntu for example with the ubuntu software center for it even automatically pins an icon on the launcher for you. I don't have much experience running lubuntu or mint cinnamon, perhaps its some kind of issue with those two distros. In the various distros I've used I don't usually have any problems like that.

 

I will make a screencast later installing VLC in ubuntu, and on my other laptop with xubuntu, and I'm 100% certain it will show a different experience than what you see here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is something grotesquily wrong with your install if you need to reboot after installing software for it to appear in your menu or on the desktop. Even back in the gnome 2.x days, install something and once gnome finds the new .desktop file it adds it to the desktop/menu right there and then, usually right away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vibe I got from Linux forums when I went for help for issues was;

 

If you can't perform every single task in Linux inside the Terminal, by memory, blindfolded with one arm behind your back. You are a pleb who doesn't deserve to use Linux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If you can't perform every single task in Linux inside the Terminal, by memory, blindfolded with one arm behind your back. You are a pleb who doesn't deserve to use Linux."

 

So you understand then?  But who said anything about use of body parts, you have to use mind power only to press the keys - if your still using your hands, you are a noob...  You can use linux, but please don't join in any conversations until you get your skill set up ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a ton of posts missing from this thread.  I have no idea where they went, so I'm going to reply to the records from my email:

 

 

 

xorangekiller - I think the Lifehacker article you liked is a little misinforming. Although Lifehacker often has a lot of good information, their articles have a tendency to gloss over rough spots while lauding the advantages of the technique the author is championing. That certainly seems to be the case with your article. Take Lifehacker articles with a grain of salt. If you are unsure of some advice you were given, Google the task or ask here rather than boldly charging ahead with nothing more than a single article and no support line.

 

Well I know now that the article is misinforming.  But they did mention several rough spots of Lubuntu in their article.  Either way, I did take it with a grain of salt, and I googled Lubuntu, and read their own message: " Lubuntu is targeted at "normal" PC and laptop users running on low-spec hardware. Such users may not know how to use command line tools, and in most cases they just don't have enough resources for all the bells and whistles of the "full-featured" mainstream distributions. " - They also have something called a "netbook session", although I never tried it out: "* A new session (Lubuntu-Netbook), which launched lxlauncher. You need to logout, select Lubuntu-Netbook session instead of Lubuntu, and enter login "ubuntu" without password."

 

So I figured googling it would be enough.  I would have asked here too, but so far, the people on these linux forums have been real jerks.  Saying things like "get it through your thick head, synaptic package manager cannot run programs" and "why on earth did you choose LXDE? That's the worst choice evar!".  

 

The point I'm trying to make, is that when Linux noobies like me (based on my experience with friends of mine trying Linux, as well as a few noobies forum posts here) go searching for a Linux Distro to try out, they do just that, search for a Linux distro.  We don't search for a Linux GUI.  I kind of think of the two as the same, because coming from Windows and Mac, you don't think of "Windows - Running the Windows GUI" and "Mac - Running the OSX Gui", so I do the same with Linux.  I didn't think "I'm settling on Lubuntu with the LXDE gui", I thought "I'm settling on Lubuntu.  LXDE=Lubuntu".  Now I've learned that this is the wrong way to think, that really I should be paying attention to both the kernel AND the gui, and that I have to find the best combination for me.  But when you're a newbie, that point is far from obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vibe I got from Linux forums when I went for help for issues was;

 

If you can't perform every single task in Linux inside the Terminal, by memory, blindfolded with one arm behind your back. You are a pleb who doesn't deserve to use Linux.

 

The biggest issue Linux has are it's zealots!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest issue Linux has are it's zealots!

 

My biggest mistake was expressing my frustration in the Linux forums.  Clearly no one here has ever been frustrated by trying to switch to Linux.  I mean, I know some people have been with Linux since the beginning, but everyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vibe I got from Linux forums when I went for help for issues was;

 

If you can't perform every single task in Linux inside the Terminal, by memory, blindfolded with one arm behind your back. You are a pleb who doesn't deserve to use Linux.

 

This is what popped into my mind immediately when I first saw this thread. However, everyone who has replied to the OP has been helpful and respectful. Shame not everyone can be like that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what popped into my mind immediately when I first saw this thread. However, everyone who has replied to the OP has been helpful and respectful. Shame not everyone can be like that.

 

 

I think you're talking about some time ago.

 

My experience has been vastly different. I totally switched totally to linux months ago and every support forum I've visited has been very supportive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.