Is Linux nearing XP usability?

[ZZOOzzoo]

When I first installed Ubuntu I had a horribly hard time installing softwares.

Until I discovered that there were such thing as Synaptic Package Manager. :pinch:

[Barney T. Administrators]

My opinion...... for what is is worth, is that Linux works as well an Windows and is much more stable and secure from the standard viruses, spyware, and evil-doers. While I undertstand that XP is much more stable than previous versions of Windows, I still read hundreds of posts (many right here) about hijacked browsers and viruses in XP. I do not think that I've read one post in the Linux forum about these issues in Linux. And, the updates and installs of Linux are becoming so simple,. they are just as easy as Windows.

The other great thing about Linux is that their updates, they update everything on the computer... not simply the OS. All of the programs get the newest releases and patches. And quickly too. No waiting months for releases. And let's not mention the "product activation and verification" Big Brother approach.

On the down side, Linux is not as intuative for the beginner. It requires some effort to learn a new system and to tweak it to the users liking. People who are unwilling or too lazy to learn how to work with Linux should just leave it to those wanting a new experience. When Windows first made the scene, people had to learn it too... and DOS....... so there really isn't that much difference. People just forgot the learning that took place. Now that XP doesn't really require DOS to work, life is simple for XP users. Too bad. I think having ultimate control over computer functions is really important.

So............ I think in areas, Linux has it over XP hands down. In hardware management and some driver manipulations, Linux needs to become more "user friendly". I suspect Linux will really win over the hearts and minds of lots of folks in the near future. Especially when MS cranks up their "Big Brother" approach to their customers....

Barney

[kyro]

i want to say something but i am going to say it in a thread created by me long time back.

here is my reply.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...ost&p=585383035

Edited January 30, 2005 by kyro

[easternBrain]

i want to say something but i am going to say it in a thread created by me long time back.

here is my reply.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...ost&p=585383035

585382978[/snapback]

I read your post, good for u for posing it in your own post as half of it dint belong to this post anyways..

But the other half can be posted here.. anyways i am quoting the relevant part from your post

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...#entry585383035

i just saw a poll asking is linux usability matching with XP?

i am like humm.. .depends who the user is .. if its "total newbie to linux" then NO (sometimes yes) and if its revisitor to Linux then YES.. linux is almost matching ( repeat "almost" ) XP usability.

what i think is Linux Developer community is busy porting different apps for same task and not doing a collective effort ( i know as there will be different developers on OSS this is the only way things will happen ) let me explain what i want to say with , with a example case .

a hypothatical scenario:-

lets say on messenger platform different groups start building GAIM, AMSN, KOPETE.. soon GAIM finds popularity and acceptance from user base.

Now i feel some distro shud get all three app developer team, match their codes and get best CODE out of all of the three application and develop a SINGLE SUPER messeneger ( and pay the three teams too , though its open-source and free ).

EVERYBODY wins .. BUT .. THIS DOESNT happens..

all the DISTRO owner does is script-out a bootloader, pull a package manager collect all popular open-source software, compile with name , label and logo in ABOUT and put ISO's to download.

[kyro]

I read your post, good for u for posing it in your own post as half of it dint belong to this post anyways..

But the other half can be posted here.. anyways i am quoting the relevant part from your post

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...#entry585383035

585383215[/snapback]

no problemo.

[Slimy]

windows xp can also have 3 free browsers and 2 free office suites :huh: lame way to put it...

windows will continue to be popular mainly because it's used around the globe.

[EduardValencia]

i've been thinking that the ephitome of linux is something called "shell programming". This means writing code that a command shell executes. Example : " bash" among much others.

for this reason linux users have freedom,but from other perspective this represents a backwards for common users lacking any knowledge about this.So linux by nature was designed for people who know about systems,yes it's a good OS,yes it's highly customizable,yes it's free.But it has huge problems to be widely used.

For this reason the gap isn't narrowing,except in the market server of course,as a normal user my preference goes to windows over linux.

[markwolfe Veteran]

i've been thinking that the ephitome of linux is something called "shell programming". This means writing code that a command shell executes. Example : " bash" among much others.

585383432[/snapback]

You do realize that there are such things as Linux distros where you never have to see or use the command line, right? ;)

And using these systems isn't significantly different than using XP.

[Aaron Veteran]

I feel that the only thing keeping many from switching is the level of applications available for the platform. There are many alternatives tha tis for sure, but GIMP < photoshop, Planner < Project, Dia < Visio. I know these have not been developed as long or as well funded, that is not my point. The point is that they are not the same level of quality and that (at least for in those three examples) has kept me from 100% switching.

[iron2000]

The last and first time I touched Linux was last year.

My friends are doing a project on the Linux OS.

I got a chance at the seat and started downloading and tweaking Firefox and changing themes.

Pretty user-friendly.

But my friends struggled with the console-thingy trying to install something.

They said Linux is troublesome(rpm install...need the OS install discs....).

I think maybe Linux is ok if your not doing serious projects with it.

[markwolfe Veteran]

But my friends struggled with the console-thingy trying to install something.

They said Linux is troublesome(rpm install...need the OS install discs....).

I think maybe Linux is ok if your not doing serious projects with it.

585383791[/snapback]

Obviously they didn't know how to use Yast, yum or urpmi if they were dealing with .rpms directly. Nor do you need (or want) to use the CDs once you have your system loaded. You will want the current versions available online in the repositories.

Installing can't be much easier than yum install celestia. Your friends' methods weren't very practical.

[easternBrain]

Obviously they didn't know how to use Yast, yum or urpmi if they were dealing with .rpms directly.  Nor do you need (or want) to use the CDs once you have your system loaded.  You will want the current versions available online in the repositories.

Installing can't be much easier than yum install celestia.  Your friends' methods weren't very practical.

585384009[/snapback]

agree.

have the same answer here.....

[easternBrain]

Obviously they didn't know how to use Yast, yum or urpmi if they were dealing with .rpms directly.  Nor do you need (or want) to use the CDs once you have your system loaded.  You will want the current versions available online in the repositories.

Installing can't be much easier than yum install celestia.  Your friends' methods weren't very practical.

585384009[/snapback]

agree.

have the same answer here.....

[g-n-t]

The last and first time I touched Linux was last year.

My friends are doing a project on the Linux OS.

I got a chance at the seat and started downloading and tweaking Firefox and changing themes.

Pretty user-friendly.

But my friends struggled with the console-thingy trying to install something.

They said Linux is troublesome(rpm install...need the OS install discs....).

I think maybe Linux is ok if your not doing serious projects with it.

585383791[/snapback]

so rendering major movies and running a good part of the interweb are not serious projects?

[iron2000]

I mean for the majority computing folks.

[easternBrain]

Where Microsoft wins is in the User Interface department. Take installing software which on Windows is as straightforward as double-clicking the installation file. In Linux often it involves going to the terminal (or "command line"), an alien concept to many users, then typing in ./ install. Before that you must make sure you are in the right directory either by cut-and-paste or by manually typing it out. Heaven forbid if you don't then come up against some dialoge asking you to choose the directory to put it in and that is confusing in itself, with choices like "/ust", "/var", and other nonsensical labels, or some dialgue asking you for an administrative password. In Linux when you want to uninstall software you have to hunt down the application folder and find the uninstall file. In Windows you can just go to the control panel then add/remove programs and click "remove" on the application you want to uninstall.

The complexity of this process befudles many users. Many of these choices should be made automatically (such as installation location) like in Windows.

I feel once installation of new applications is made much simpler then Linux will

585381031[/snapback]

Thats one of those problems ppl whom I recommend Linux (for various reasons) complain about....

We have a LAN and connect thru it to internet, now DHCP is on but before that I had to manually do or over phone calls expalin ppl how to configure their network.

Trust me it was a headache. In XP its just a click-click process.

Therefore XP wins over Linux on various aspects to begin with.... UI, the ease of use..

[ZZOOzzoo]

Last saturday I wanted to install Opera browser, because Firefox is just not for me.

Well, apt-get didn't work, so I downloaded a folder from Opera, and then I was completely stuck.

At the end, I found the answer at the Ubuntu forum, which I can't remember now.

So I copied the command from Firefox, and then closed Firefox, just like what I would do in WindowsXP, and when I went to Terminal, the command in the clipboard was gone. :o

Now I'm happily using Opera (I still miss my IE :cry: ), but issues like installing applications and clipboard will certainly seem unfriendly to ex-Windows user like me, and it's just another example of why WindowsXP is better for n00bs.

Not that Linux is worse than WinXP, I love my Ubuntu, but there's many things that I wish to be fixed or enhanced.

[Ifoow]

Obviously they didn't know how to use Yast, yum or urpmi if they were dealing with .rpms directly.  Nor do you need (or want) to use the CDs once you have your system loaded.  You will want the current versions available online in the repositories.

Installing can't be much easier than yum install celestia.  Your friends' methods weren't very practical.

585384009[/snapback]

yum install celestia!!!!!wow amazing it's so simple and intuitive. If I would use a computer for the first time I would immediately think of typing 'yum install celestia' to install something!!! great thinking.......geek

[hornett]

So I copied the command from Firefox, and then closed Firefox, just like what I would do in WindowsXP, and when I went to Terminal, the command in the clipboard was gone. ohmy.gif

This annoys me so much!

But the problem can be solved for Gnome using Gnome-Clipboard-Daemon

Why is it not installed as a standard part of Gnome?

[ZZOOzzoo]

This annoys me so much!

But the problem can be solved for Gnome using Gnome-Clipboard-Daemon

Why is it not installed as a standard part of Gnome?

585389212[/snapback]

That looks great! Thanks!

Though it looks like I'll have hard time installing this.... :p

[markwolfe Veteran]

yum install celestia!!!!!wow amazing it's so simple and intuitive. If I would use a computer for the first time I would immediately think of typing 'yum install celestia' to install something!!! great thinking.......geek

585388931[/snapback]

First off, any personal attack is really uncalled-for. :rolleyes:

Secondly, it is a different way that Windows. And, yes, once you start to think in that way, it really does make managing your system easier.

I can install all sorts of third-party apps like this without having to find their websites, go to a download page, and find and click the EXE and accept the EULA. Plus, if the application I selected requires some other third-party library (for special 3D rendering, as an example) the Linux managers will get that for you, too. No need to go to that other web site and go through thier download and install process.

And, it gets even better. The Linux package managers will not only update my kernel, OS and built-in utilites, but also any other apps (like the celestia example I used) for me. I don't need to check for celestia updates, plus firefox updates, plus gftp updates, plus..., plus... You get the point. Seamless full-system updates without having to reboot. Amazing, isn't it?

And, get this! If you have such a phobia of a command-line, the whole thing can be done through a GUI.

Stop trying to interject an ill-informed opinion into a thread where you obviously have no experience.

[ichi]

Another advantage of package managers such as yum (any linux package manager for that matter) over the Windows' installation process is you are using 1 single method to install everything, which means there's 1 single app managing what's installed on your system.

That way installing and uninstalling stuff is much cleaner as you don't have to guess what all those 3rd party installers actually did (new dlls in your system folders, new registry keys... all that stuff that stays even after desinstalling the software).

[dotRoot]

Another advantage of package managers such as yum (any linux package manager for that matter) over the Windows' installation process is you are using 1 single method to install everything, which means there's 1 single app managing what's installed on your system.

That way installing and uninstalling stuff is much cleaner as you don't have to guess what all those 3rd party installers actually did (new dlls in your system folders, new registry keys... all that stuff that stays even after desinstalling the software).

585389924[/snapback]

To add to that:

Even if you did use more than one package manager, its all kept in a single database that they share. So if one repository has what you want and the other doesn't then it still won't have any future conflicts when updating, installing, or removing an app from either package manager.

[+dave164 Subscriber¹]

Linux is nasty, tried it for a while (2 differnt distros) and they both were horrible, if they make it so that you dont have to know all the commands, then sure i'll use it, but at the moment NO

[Schmoove]

It will get nasty when your Linux OS doesn't do what you want. It's a disaster that you have to edit textfiles, that can be found all over the place, to make things work. Also APT (for example) doesn't always help, because applications are not always installed in a certain place, some apps can be found in place 1 where the other application will be installed in place 2.

Consistency is a bit of a problem in my opinion. Windows isn't always consistent, but they arranged it better then Linux does (by default an application is installed in C:\Program Files for example).