Is Linux nearing XP usability?


I prefer:  

407 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

llbbl

I agree installation could use a nice GUI system instead of command line because average users are used to a GUI installation. I hate to see everyone voting for windows =(. Only reason I use it is for gaming and I definately preffer Linux!

Link to post
Share on other sites
REM2000

I would say that XP and Linux is even, been using windows for years. I prefered the NT line, thought the 9x (apart from 95) was a load of money making crap, i could feel the unstability rising when using them.

I would say it was since SUSE 9 era that Linux really came into it's own. I installed 9.1 on a PIII 667 the other day, and it went on like a dream, and worked really well. It's amazing to see the difference between 9 and 7, which don't have that much time differnence between them.

I am a massive Fan of OSX, and would like to see some more polish in linux of some small things.

Things i would like to see in Linux is

Install and uninstall like OSX, just drag a icon onto the hdd and the program is automatically installed, drag to the recyc bin and the application is uninstalled.

Move the GUI KDE/Gnome onto the 3D card, like OSX. I think this is the future of GUI design is pushing the gui onto the 3D card, which should allow for lot's of cool effects/graphical representations, whilst not straining the CPU. I know this is a big option (Apologies if they (KDE / Gnome) are / have already done this)

Stop trying to be the same as Windows XP. It may be the most used OS on the planet, but i have never been a fan of the design since it's release, it looked plain ugly. Being a heavy computer user for a number of years i want my UI with the computer to look professional , not something from toy town.

The start menu was a good idea year ago, but it's design is starting to show it's age, when after installing a number of applications the start menu covers the screen. Yes you can put these into sub folders but it's a lot of messing about.

The task bar which runs along the bottom is good, and the OSX dock is another good idea of how to approach the way to show running applications.

It would be nice for linux to have a killer app / piece of functionaility. With OSX spotlight was a good attension raiser. With longhorn 3D effects of the desktop and new Games layer (directx replacement) also look really interesting.

It would be nice to have something to look forward too on the linux platform like the above, which would grab the attenion of people, although don't ask me what the killer app/functionaility could be, as i can't think of anything :(

I would like to see people working on the gaming aspect of the linux platform, i think what could really help linux is a DirectX type layer. DirectX is an excellent bit of coding, allowing any hardware configuration to dealt with by the OS, allowing the game developers free to worry about the level of directX to support (v8 / 9). Currently i know we have openGL, but as far as i know this only deals with video, it would be nice for linux to have a layer to deal with 3D, 2D, sound, input devices (joysticks etc..), this might pull over some developers to start writing more linux games.

This is also where the OSX platform is let down, simply relying on OpenGL to provide the graphics, with it being written on a BSD it would be nice if Apple & the linux community could work on a shared gaming platform which would be of benfit to both.

As the common argument for both platforms, is that i need windows for games, of course in an ideal world DirectX would be more open, so apple and linux could adopt the platform, and make directx compatible layers.

So to sum up yeah i think Linux is as user friendly as Windows XP, but i would like linux to develop it's own style away from windows. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
mr_demilord
I agree installation could use a nice GUI system instead of command line because average users are used to a GUI installation.

586201505[/snapback]

That ain't a linux problem it is distro thing, SuSE for example uses YaST2 for the installation and fully a gui install process

Link to post
Share on other sites
mr_demilord
You forget that the everyday average user has no idea how to find a driver sometimes, I deal with many of these idiots all the time, but thats what they have me for ;)

Anyways these people would prefer something that worked right out of the box.

586193006[/snapback]

Lol even with windows not everything works out of the box, Me for example has to install 4 drivers like videocard, soundcard printer and scanner. <Windows XP>

With linux one driver <Videocard> everything else is supported right of the box, and the videodriver is easy to install with 3 clicks and a password with YaST2 online update <SuSE Linux 9.3>

Link to post
Share on other sites
mr_demilord
Install and uninstall like OSX, just drag a icon onto the hdd and the program is automatically installed, drag to the recyc bin and the application is uninstalled.

Nice feature

Move the GUI KDE/Gnome onto the 3D card, like OSX. I think this is the future of GUI design is pushing the gui onto the 3D card, which should allow for lot's of cool effects/graphical representations, whilst not straining the CPU. I know this is a big option (Apologies if they (KDE / Gnome) are / have already done this)

There are programs to do that with the gui. Just google ;)

Stop trying to be the same as Windows XP. It may be the most used OS on the planet, but i have never been a fan of the design since it's release, it looked plain ugly. Being a heavy computer user for a number of years i want my UI with the computer to look professional , not something from toy town.

The start menu was a good idea year ago, but it's design is starting to show it's age, when after installing a number of applications the start menu covers the screen. Yes you can put these into sub folders but it's a lot of messing about.

KDE doesn't try to be the same as windows xp, it's the other way around ;)

With the "Start menu" it's called kicker if you talk about kde is fully customizable diferent colour, transparency hiding etc.. you can do anything to change the kicker.

It would be nice for linux to have a killer app / piece of functionaility. With OSX spotlight was a good attension raiser. With longhorn 3D effects of the desktop and new Games layer (directx replacement) also look really interesting.

Linux doesn't need a directx replacement, linux is fast Out of the box, linux also supports 3D sound.

at me even some games runs faster on linux than on windows so I doubt it is needed.

I would like to see people working on the gaming aspect of the linux platform, i think what could really help linux is a DirectX type layer. DirectX is an excellent bit of coding, allowing any hardware configuration to dealt with by the OS, allowing the game developers free to worry about the level of directX to support (v8 / 9). Currently i know we have openGL, but as far as i know this only deals with video, it would be nice for linux to have a layer to deal with 3D, 2D, sound, input devices (joysticks etc..), this might pull over some developers to start writing more linux games. 

You must be living under a rock, SuSE 9.3 supports all of the above hardware like I told I doubt it is needed, Quake 3 and the Unreal serie runs flawless on my box with Geforce 4 440MX card, while unreal runs terrible on my win box. 3D sound works without a problem with my onboard sound, but never have been a fan of it. Even Doom 3 runs on linux.

http://www.tuxgames.com/

This is also where the OSX platform is let down, simply relying on OpenGL to provide the graphics, with it being written on a BSD it would be nice if Apple & the linux community could work on a shared gaming platform which would be of benfit to both.

It isnt the fault of linux.

But there is a too small percent of people that uses linux and a small percent who plays games on linux so it will only costs money for the developers to make the games compatible for linux. linux doesn't need "directx"

Edited by mr_demilord
Link to post
Share on other sites
mr_demilord
its a whole new kernel. 2k was nt5 xp was 5.1 and longhorn is 6.0 so people that thought the move from 2k to xp was at all dramatic and seeing how it was only a point release. longhorn is a whole new kernel and will be totally different from other windows os's.

thats what microsoft wants to make believe the people, it's just the same kernel as windows NT/2K/XP/2K3, only updated like bugfixes and new features, MS won't trash the XP kernel and rerwite it all over. :pinch:

the problem is alot of kiddies are judging the os while its just peaking into beta 1 status.

:sleep:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Knight'

My only two gripes with Linux is Sound and Speed:

Sound, because dmixing sucks; I'm not a sound buff, and don't have the interest to read up on it, and consequently the scripts I've been using to get my card to dmix propperly I only half follow. I wish there were an easier way to do this, maybe, even done for you by ALSA.

Speed, because Linux IS slower on the desktop than Windows. Apps generally startup slower than Windows, though Linux copes better under heavy load than Windows. For example, I've had three large files compiling on a P3 1GHz 256MB RAM, with a full X server / GNOME 2.10, and a CD ripper, the system is still useable. You couldn't do this with Windows, explorer would just load and go "Not responding". ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
bush

linux will be nearing windows usability, when i will be able to download any software for linux and install it using the "nextnextnextfinish" method or just unzipping it into a folder and running.

can linux actually be usable if there are hundreds of them? what's the point?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sjobbe

Linux is great on a public PC. No apps, spyware or viruses can get to it...

I've set up an "Internet PC" just for surfing the web and if I would have installed Windows on it, it'd be full of sh*t right now and probably unusable. I looked at the log of what people have downloaded and it wasn't pretty... (stupid people trying to download windows .exes ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
mr_demilord
linux will be nearing windows usability, when i will be able to download any software for linux and install it using the "nextnextnextfinish" method or just unzipping it into a folder and running.

can linux actually be usable if there are hundreds of them? what's the point?

586202139[/snapback]

You can in SuSE.

Go to http://rpm.pbone.net/ search the file you want.

When you've downloaded it double click on it and follow the instructions.

There are also programs wich you only need te extract and double click on it.

Or use YaST2, wich you can choose 10.000's of apps from p2p till media players games etc... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Knight'
Linux is great on a public PC. No apps, spyware or viruses can get to it...

I've set up an "Internet PC" just for surfing the web and if I would have installed Windows on it, it would be full of sh*t right now and probablu unusable. I looked at the log of what people have downloaded and it wasn't pretty... (stupid people trying to download windows .exes ;)

586202211[/snapback]

Try PCBSD, it's got a Windows like system of installing software.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sjobbe
Try PCBSD, it's got a Windows like system of installing software.

586202232[/snapback]

Why would i do that? I DON'T want people to install ANYTHING on it...

Link to post
Share on other sites
ichi
Stop trying to be the same as Windows XP. It may be the most used OS on the planet, but i have never been a fan of the design since it's release, it looked plain ugly. Being a heavy computer user for a number of years i want my UI with the computer to look professional , not something from toy town.

The start menu was a good idea year ago, but it's design is starting to show it's age, when after installing a number of applications the start menu covers the screen. Yes you can put these into sub folders but it's a lot of messing about.

The task bar which runs along the bottom is good, and the OSX dock is another good idea of how to approach the way to show running applications.

If you don't like the "Windows" aproach then just don't use KDE or Gnome. There're lots of window managers out there to try (enlightenment, fluxbox, blackbox, xfce...).

Anyway KDE is far ahead WinXP desktop's functionality and technology.

Currently i know we have openGL, but as far as i know this only deals with video, it would be nice for linux to have a layer to deal with 3D, 2D, sound, input devices (joysticks etc..), this might pull over some developers to start writing more linux games. 

That does already exist: SDL.

linux will be nearing windows usability, when i will be able to download any software for linux and install it using the "nextnextnextfinish" method or just unzipping it into a folder and running.

Selecting the desired software in the package manager and clicking "install" isn't easy enough?

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen
linux will be nearing windows usability, when i will be able to download any software for linux and install it using the "nextnextnextfinish" method or just unzipping it into a folder and running.

can linux actually be usable if there are hundreds of them? what's the point?

586202139[/snapback]

God... I am so tired of hearing this. :rolleyes:

Look over this post I made earlier (and I have made this same post several times over the past year).

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...#entry586110347

Screw the googling, downloading, double-clicking the installer, and next/next/next-ing. Synaptic is much eaiser, plus it can keep your whole PC updated. Now, that's something that Windows cannot touch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BajiRav
Install and uninstall like OSX, just drag a icon onto the hdd and the program is automatically installed, drag to the recyc bin and the application is uninstalled.

The start menu was a good idea year ago, but it's design is starting to show it's age, when after installing a number of applications the start menu covers the screen. Yes you can put these into sub folders but it's a lot of messing about.

The task bar which runs along the bottom is good, and the OSX dock is another good idea of how to approach the way to show running applications.

So to sum up yeah i think Linux is as user friendly as Windows XP, but i would like linux to develop it's own style away from windows. :D

586201767[/snapback]

The install/uninstall of OSX is not as clean as it sounds since program preferences are stored in /Library and/or ~/Library. Still it is a very easy way of doing things. And some programs on Windows already offer such choice. (IrfanView & FileZilla come to mind). But when there are per user settings, such stray files will remain.

Additionally all major apps like MSOffice, Adobe PS still depend on old style copy everywhere & anywhere idea of installing.

Start menu is still doing good, its inevitable that after you install 50 programs, you will end up with 50 shortcuts. XP includes a Games folder in start menu, how many games actually install there ? OSX faces the same problem. drag & drop 50 apps in /Applications folder and the folder is suddenly crowded.

Its actually taskbar which is showing its age and needs major overhaul (or replacement).

Linux already has its "style" thats why many of us (including me) find it difficult to use at first :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
VLR

No, just no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Professional

I would say it still has a little ways to go for massive usability. I went from redhat back in the 7.0 days to a year or so ago windows xp (mostly for school and entertainment reasons) and now im on a dual 2.0 G5 and I am more then happy with OSX. If the linux community can get there act together with installs (which for most of us are easy i know) to something similar to appls dmg then I think it would take off alot better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Professional
God... I am so tired of hearing this. :rolleyes:

Look over this post I made earlier (and I have made this same post several times over the past year).

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...#entry586110347

Screw the googling, downloading, double-clicking the installer, and next/next/next-ing.  Synaptic is much eaiser, plus it can keep your whole PC updated.  Now, that's something that Windows cannot touch.

586202427[/snapback]

Just saw that, very nice I see that they are almost there now, maybe Ill pick up a mini and try out some yellowdog

Link to post
Share on other sites
darkhooda

Day-to-day use is pretty much fine, but some of the apps are still worse in functionality compared to their Windows commercial counterparts, such as GIMP vs Photoshop (only my opinion). Linux lacks the highly funded and wide range of commercial applications that Windows does.

I'm not saying open source is bad, but more cash from those commercial companies going into the programs will help. Also, the setting up for some of the distros are somewhat hard. Ubuntu is certainly a step in the right direction. Tweaking your system at the beginning is also a bit hard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mr_demilord
Day-to-day use is pretty much fine, but some of the apps are still worse in functionality compared to their Windows commercial counterparts, such as GIMP vs Photoshop (only my opinion). Linux lacks the highly funded and wide range of commercial applications that Windows does.

There are enough commercial apps, to name a few, Nero Burning Rom, Adobe Reader, Real Player 10 , and if there is no commercial app there is a open source program instead for it, sourceforge freshmeat or icewalker has great projects and only sourceforge has more then 100.000 projects so there is enough choise. And you don't have to pirate ;) , btw what do you mean commercial, I think Mozilla is pretty commercial... IMO I find K3B much more powerfull then Nero and K3B is fully GPL, and you can customize it add plugins so it can convert videofiles to dvd format etc etc..

I'm not saying open source is bad, but more cash from those commercial companies going into the programs will help. Also, the setting up for some of the distros are somewhat hard. Ubuntu is certainly a step in the right direction. Tweaking your system at the beginning is also a bit hard.

I think you underestimate the open source community.

IBM Sun university's Novell Fedora Ubuntu are all big corporations and helping the community to write excellent programs and supporting them.

Setting up distros is easy like suse mandrake and fedora. You cannot blame linux for this it's the choise of the distro, server distro's doesn't need a easy setup the main factor of server distro's is that it must be stable and has as many options as possible.

Linux is the most easiest OS to tweak IMO all you have to do is edit files with your favourite editor. it's a bit diferent then the windows registry but with linux there are no limitations. you can even tweak the source code! ;)

Edited by mr_demilord
Link to post
Share on other sites
ichi
Day-to-day use is pretty much fine, but some of the apps are still worse in functionality compared to their Windows commercial counterparts, such as GIMP vs Photoshop (only my opinion). Linux lacks the highly funded and wide range of commercial applications that Windows does.

586203402[/snapback]

The Gimp isn't a replacement for Photoshop in a profesional enviroment, but for the home user it's probably more than enough powerfull, and afordable. Same goes for Blender.

On the other hand look at CinePaint: opensource app based on The Gimp that's being used in Hollywood movies.

But linux isn't only about opensource apps: Maya, MainActor, Shake, Softimage xsi, Houdini, Matlab, Smoke, InstallShield, Nero, Tripwire, Kaspersky, Symantec...

Link to post
Share on other sites
markjensen

This just came up in a Google News search (though it is a bit over a week old). Asa Dotzler (a Mozilla developer) posted in his Blog that he believes Linux to be "not ready for the desktop"

Full Blog: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/008499.html

Some quotes:

Regular People may be willing to take a look at Linux, but as long as all of their data and settings still lives in Windows, they're not going to stay very long -- no matter how appealing it might be.
Regular People shouldn't have to (guess or learn enough to) choose between Gnome and KDE when they're installing your product. Regular People don't need 15-20 mediocre games in a highly visible Games menu at the top of the Applications list. And what is a Regular Person to think when confronted with a choice between Helix Player, CD Player, and Music Player? Does the Music Player not understand CDs? What's "Helix" mean?
Linux must feel comfortable to Windows users. Most people using computers today have been at it for a while now and they've been at it on Windows. Don't mess with their basic understanding of how things work. Regular people do not know what it means to "mount a drive" and they shouldn't have to. Regular People don't want their OK and Cancel buttons reversed -- tossing out years of finely tuned muscle memory. Regular People shouldn't have to learn what /home means or how it differs from My Documents.

I disagree with him on many fundamental issues (nor do I care if Linux is ready for his or anyone else's desktop - it is ready for mine). But he does show a valid example of how Windows users tend to see Linux.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ichi
Linux must feel comfortable to Windows users.

No, it doesn't. I mean, is he really talking about Linux being ready for the desktop, or about Linux being ready to stand as Windows clone?

Link to post
Share on other sites
jtchange

i believe that linux is usable for the desktop...if everything works...on my current machine, it's a dualboot(xp,NLD) and in NLD, i have yet to get online :pinch: so i gave up about 2 months ago and now it just sits on my hard drive because i don't wanna go through the hassle of removing it...mandrake worked, but NLD just didn't want to work with my internet i guess...but other than that, linux is great

i love how well linux runs on low speed machines, making them USABLE again and able to do things that they were never able to do with windows..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Crimson Behelit

'Beginner distros' do a great job at mimicking the Windows environment imo. Specifically, Ubuntu, Mandrake, and Suse surely are very familer to Windows users (keeping in mind most Windows users who are interested in trying Linux are aware Linux is a different ball game and therefore expect to at least experience something wholely different).

That being said, I believe non-explorative Ubuntu users (for example) aren't using Linux at all... rather a Windows-friendly GUI :|

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.