OT: Is Linux too hard?

[raskren]

So is this a troll or do you just have a fetish for outdated software?

I gave up on Linux after this.

lol, there is no Red Hat 9.1

I'm looking at the 3 installation discs right now.

[markwolfe Veteran]

raskren, there never was a Red Hat 9.1, but I understand the point. ;)

Winmodems and NTFS are Microsoft-designed items that are not "open". There is no tech data that Open Source programmers can use to write compatible modules. Sad, but true.

NTFS read is a non-issue. NTFS write is not recommended. Use Windows to do that safely (if you aren't concerned about safety with NTFS writes - I am not)

The commandline items are just a feature of Linux at this point, and will likely always be there. If you have an aversion to it, there is Xandros and Linspire.

Skinning KDE, Gnome and any other Window Manager in Linux is 100% supported by Linux. Hell, you can even change the source, if you were so inclined and had programming ability. This is far more ability that Microsoft gives their users. Any other complaint in this department is purely a matter of aesthetics.

Yes, Windows can be easier to do some things. It is good to be the 95% market leader. You get all the hardware manufacturing minions to do your bidding and write their own drivers for your OS. ;) Linux doesn't have this luxury. At this point is is a simple fact, and a mild irritation to Linux users who have hardware that isn't fully compatible.

[markwolfe Veteran]

Try installing Firefox on a Windows PC and see the steps it takes, and compare it to Linux

Uhhh... uh huh. Thanks for making my point. Windows = download Firefox installer, click Next, Next, and Next and you're done. Linux = download the latest .tar, extract, install, and run. If it's included with the distro, make sure that the "package manager of choice" has the latest security updates available (sometimes weeks later, I've noticed). Yeah.

586108920[/snapback]

Can you tell me why you would refuse to use a package manager, unless your intent is to distort the reality that apt-get or synaptic exist? :no:

Knock off the deliberate distortions.

[MrA]

Based on my experience with RedHat 9.1:

I can't use my $20 winmodem without cobbled together, unstable drivers.  I have to buy a $70 modem.

I can't use the latest hardware.  I have to *wait* for *someone* to write a cobbled together, unstable driver.  I've never been able to get any Linux distro to boot from my ICH5R RAID array.  It is cake with Windows.

I can't reliably read and write to my NTFS disks.

I can't understand the multitude of software package formats and command-line switches

I can't understand the (seemingly circular) package dependency problem.

I can't understand no matter how much I skin KDE or GNOME they still appear to be ugly.

I can't understand nerdy Linux programmer naming schemes.  If I know what and how I need to do something, I'll be damned if I can find the software to do it.  "Let's make an audio player comparable to Winamp and call it "J".  Yeah, just the letter J.  Let's make an email client and call it PINE.  Email = PINE trees, genious!"  How about dropping the cryptic ackronym naming schemes.  This disk cleaner is called HONEY.  This IRC cllient is called MELANIE.  This web browser is called MILESTONE.  This makes it incredibly difficult to determine what an application actually does.  In Windows if you want to "play media" you open Windows Media Player.  If you want to explore the internet... 

----

I can add new functionality to Windows without cobbled together hacks (kernel patches) or recompiling the kernel.

I can run a machine without having gigs of source code or a compiler installed.

I can plug in a USB device and it just works.  No going online to search for hacks.  The manufacturer gives me a Windows driver on CD rom.

I can play damn near any PC game I want and at full frame rates.

586108861[/snapback]

A few problems there. Firstly, why are you bitching about RedHat 9.1? There is no 9.1 (the closest was 9.0.93, aka severn. A complete piece of crap)

You can't use a winmodem because it's a... winmodem. The drivers are only available for windows. Anywho, you can't blame lack of driver support on linux. Blame the hardware makers.

The ICH5R chipset is fully supported on the 2.6 servies of kernels. So any modern distro should work.

You can't write to NTFS partitions because microsoft hasn't documented the NTFS filesystem. Blame MS, not linux.

I don't think you can get easier package management than with linux. apt-get, yum, emerge, etc make installing programs a breeze.

As for circular dependencies, I only know of one. And that's when compiling the ada frontend for gcc.

KDE and GNOME have come a long way since the version of redhat you used. Granted, KDE still looks like krap :p but GNOME looks very professional with the default theme.

You find linux confusing, I find windows confusing. To each his own.

[raskren]

raskren, there never was a Red Hat 9.1, but I understand the point.

You're right. These are Red Hat 9.0 discs. I also have Mandrake 9.1 around here somewhere.

Overall, I feel Linux is too hard to use because I can pick up another OS and feel comfortable with it very quickly. Case in point, Mac OS 8, 9, 10. I now manage an OS X server and work on both Windows Xp and OS 10.4.

I don't know for sure but I'd bet there are more Linux installs out there than OS X yet Apple puts out software of higher quality than what I've seen from the Linux community.

[Mike Douglas]

That is exactly what most people using Linux fail to see - who said anything about needing a GUI?  Your response is typical and is the reason Linux will stay largely as a "toy" for me.  A GUI is usually faster and more "user friendly".  Plain and simple.

A GUI is only faster if you have absolutely no idea what you are doing. Don't get me wrong, all the basic stuff should be covered under the GUI (and mostly is) but if you want to play around with how your modules are loaded, the interface is the least of your problems. 90% of GUIs are unscriptable making them horrible choices for system configuration.

Go through the hassle and setup an SSL compatible newsreader in Linux and you'll know what I mean -- Thunderbird excluded (at least, it supports SSL in Windows so I'm guessing it does in Linux... just haven't tried yet).  Stunnel was a pain.  Windows = works right out of the box.  Linux = alot of hassle to do something as basic as enable SSL in my newsreader (KNode or Pan).

If Thunderbird can do it in Windows, it can do it in Linux.

Uhhh... uh huh.  Thanks for making my point.  Windows = download Firefox installer, click Next, Next, and Next and you're done.  Linux = download the latest .tar, extract, install, and run.  If it's included with the distro, make sure that the "package manager of choice" has the latest security updates available (sometimes weeks later, I've noticed).  Yeah.

What distro were you using :unsure:

I've never seen a security update go that long, many distros have security lists so they can fix them the day of.

[johnl404]

586108920[/snapback]

Can you tell me why you would refuse to use a package manager, unless your intent is to distort the reality that apt-get or synaptic exist? :no:

Knock off the deliberate distortions.

I'm guessing that you've completely misunderstood me... Yes, package managers exist. Yes, they work great (for the most part). Can you use them to install every piece of software available for linux? No. Am I distorting the facts, no. That's a simple fact. In time, packages are added and then it's not a problem but the problem that I'm describing is how you cannot use any package manager that I've ever come across (apt, yum, portage, YaST, etc.) to get the latest software and install it without any hassle.

On that note, one of Linux's strengths (one of many), is that the package managers can keep packages updated -- not just the ones directly released by that distro (ex: Microsoft only updates Microsoft's software).

And on that note, I'm done. It's clear that there are Linux trolls abound on here and people with any rational sense of direction have long since left. Companies like Linspire exist for the very purpose of bridging the gap between "haves" (technical people that can comprehend and handle tweaks necessary to their systems) and "have nots" (ie: my parents and grandparents).

[sanctified Veteran]

Apart from gaming, name one thing I cannot do in Linux that you can do in Windows?

586107476[/snapback]

Install ATI drivers with ease.

Have a proper design software without the need of emulation and all the compilation and tricks I need to do to run it and not a its full speed.

Modify, change, alter, and whatever synonim you choose without recompiling.

Seamless OS updates.

Should I go on?

And before you call me a troll. I can asure that I have used tons od distros. I know linux.

[raskren]

A few problems there.  Firstly, why are you bitching about RedHat 9.1?  There is no 9.1 (the closest was 9.0.93, aka severn.  A complete piece of crap)

You can't use a winmodem because it's a... winmodem.  The drivers are only available for windows.  Anywho, you can't blame lack of driver support on linux.  Blame the hardware makers.

The ICH5R chipset is fully supported on the 2.6 servies of kernels.  So any modern distro should work.

You can't write to NTFS partitions because microsoft hasn't documented the NTFS filesystem.  Blame MS, not linux.

I don't think you can get easier package management than with linux.  apt-get, yum, emerge, etc make installing programs a breeze.

As for circular dependencies, I only know of one.  And that's when compiling the ada frontend for gcc.

KDE and GNOME have come a long way since the version of redhat you used.  Granted, KDE still looks like krap  :p but GNOME looks very professional with the default theme.

You find linux confusing, I find windows confusing.  To each his own.

586108956[/snapback]

Yes, it was Red Hat 9.0. That was the last distro I used other than Knoppix.

It is supported in 2.6 because the 875P chipset is old now. i've learned that Linux likes old hardware. Hell, at the time my old Radeon 9700 Pro wasn't natively supported. I was on the 2.4 kernel and had to wait to use Linux. This in no way would enhance my opinion of the OS. I had a Windows driver in hand the day the hardware was released.

NTFS: This question in this thread was name one thing you can do in Windows that I can't do in Linux... So, again, I can't reliably read and write to NTFS drives. Period.

Again, you helped prove my point. Package management is not easy because of the myriad of tools and formats. apt-get, yum, emerge, all cryptic names nothing describes what it does and all have different command line switches and formatting. Thanks for that Linux.

I said "seemingly" circular dependencies. Great, now I know it can actually happen!

[markwolfe Veteran]

I don't know for sure but I'd bet there are more Linux installs out there than OS X yet Apple puts out software of higher quality than what I've seen from the Linux community.

586108967[/snapback]

I am not an OSX user, but I like what Apple has done with it.

However, since they dictate that OSX will install on an extremely limited subset of computers, where they specify the components, and Apple also makes their software writers adhere to strict UI requirements, of course it will come out in their one consistent vision.

Linux does not have that luxury. It is made to run on PPC, x86, SPARC, ALPHA and numerous others! The concept of Linux is freedom. The concept of OSX is almost dictatorial control. They have a nice product, but they have a bit of an advantage in their limit of scope.

[Prosidius]

Seamless OS updates.

586109018[/snapback]

That is a big If. Using apt-get and portage, upgrading is easy.

[sanctified Veteran]

That is a big If.  Using apt-get and portage, upgrading is easy.

586109029[/snapback]

apt-get and portage dont make things easy all the time. Proof of that its my very first point.

[markwolfe Veteran]

I'm guessing that you've completely misunderstood me...  Yes, package managers exist.  Yes, they work great (for the most part).  Can you use them to install every piece of software available for linux?  No.  Am I distorting the facts, no.

586109001[/snapback]

My complaint was your untarring of Firefox.

And, yes that is a deliberate distortion. Any attempt to claim otherwise is a bold-faced lie.

[Mike Douglas]

but the problem that I'm describing is how you cannot use any package manager that I've ever come across (apt, yum, portage, YaST, etc.) to get the latest software and install it without any hassle.

Not all distros are ment to be bleeding edge. There is a reason GNOME 2.10 isn't in Debian Stable. If you really want to track unstable, there are distributions like Debian Unstable and Ubuntu Unstable.

[markwolfe Veteran]

Install ATI drivers with ease.

Have a proper design software without the need of emulation and all the compilation and tricks I need to do to run it and not a its full speed.

Modify, change, alter, and whatever synonim you choose without recompiling.

Seamless OS updates.

Should I go on?

And before you call me a troll. I can asure that I have used tons od distros. I know linux.

586109018[/snapback]

Oh, there are certainly things that Linux (or Windows, or OSX) cannot do that the others can.

But in this thread, suddenly I have people focusing on crappy details like "Linux can't read/write NTFS". What kind of crap is that? :crazy: So, does the fact that "Windows can't read/write ResierFS" suddenly constitute a good counterpoint?

These are meaningles details (perhaps to a meaningless question?).

However, I find updating a Linux box orders of magnitude better than trying to manage updating a Windows box, so I would remove that item from your list. ;)

Edit: Arrgh... The "]" in your name breaks quotes. Replaced with "|". :p

[j.r.l.]

I think swaret with the slackware-current sites work extremely well. "swaret --upgrade -a" to upgrade everything to the latest or even swaret --install keyword to install something. You don't even need to go to the apps site and download then go through an installer clicking yes yes yes until you find out the app comes with a bunch of spyware... But that's just for me.

[Mike Douglas]

Install ATI drivers with ease.

$ sudo apt-get install xorg-fglrx-driver (or just double click on the name in Synaptic).

Have a proper design software without the need of emulation and all the compilation and tricks I need to do to run it and not a its full speed.

http://www.ribbonsoft.com/qcad.html

http://www.tech.oru.se/cad/varkon/

http://www.pythoncad.org/

Those are just the Free Software versions available in APT. I quick google shows many more non-Free packages available.

Modify, change, alter, and whatever synonim you choose without recompiling.

Not sure what you mean here.

[sanctified Veteran]

$ sudo apt-get install xorg-fglrx-driver (or just double click on the name in Synaptic).

http://www.ribbonsoft.com/qcad.html

http://www.tech.oru.se/cad/varkon/

http://www.pythoncad.org/

Those are just the Free Software versions available in APT. I quick google shows many more non-Free packages available.

Not sure what you mean here.

586109092[/snapback]

So, in your point of view, the entire design industry reolves around autocad? :huh:

[Crimson Behelit]

The only thing as a Linux user I honestly miss from the Wintel camp is the fast and snappy response time from the OS (for example launching programs) after a fresh install...

I don't miss cracking programs which one would expect to be included in the OS for free (for example a fully functional compression/decompression client) nor do I miss maintaining spyware and virii...

Yes, if you're a Windows user any other OS will seem foreign, including Linux.

[insurektion]

My Ubuntu install sees 16,885 packages of software right now. I think I'm covered.

A basic configuration can be done through the GUI tools given by most distros. And, truthfully, if you need a GUI to configure it, you probably shouldn't be editing it.

586108691[/snapback]

can you post your respositories? or pm them to me :)...

[Mike Douglas]

So, in your point of view, the entire design industry reolves around autocad?  :huh:

586109100[/snapback]

Hah, sorry, by design I thought you ment drafting :blush: Were you referring to programs like Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop?

[sanctified Veteran]

Hah, sorry, by design I thought you ment drafting :blush: Were you referring to programs like Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop?

586109156[/snapback]

Yeah! And you could add QuarkXpress to the list ^^

[Mike Douglas]

can you post your respositories? or pm them to me :)...

586109147[/snapback]

I just have the Ubuntu repositories (main, restricted, universe, multiverse) and Debian Marillat.

I follow the developers branch a lot of the software I use isn't ment for end users, but if you PM me I can still give you the sources.list.

[YBG]

Well this post is coming from a Windows to Linux back to Windows person.

I didn't abandon Linux because it was too hard or anything, I had to do some googling and some IRCing to learn a lot of things, but I liked it for the most part. However, I found myself booting back into Windows more and more for things I just didn't have the patience to figure out to do in Linux, as I were a little more pressed for time during school. Now that I'm on summer break I think I might dip back into Linux and try it again. Again, it's not that it's harder, it's just unfamiliar and different.

I know I'm not exactly practicing what I preach here, but patience is they key with Linux. And if your distro comes with X-Chat (Like FC3 does), you can use it to your advantage. People in the IRC rooms can be REALLY helpful.

[Mike Douglas]

Yeah! And you could add QuarkXpress to the list ^^

586109166[/snapback]

Adobe Illustrator's closest equivalent would be Inkscape.

QuarkXPress (which if my memory serves me is a DTP) resembles Scribus.

The closest thing to Photoshop is, of course, GIMP (though for image editing, GIMP won't be getting CMYK support for another few months).

If you're missing an important feature, or if you're a professional designer, you should probably check out Crossover Office. Its not emulation btw, its an alernative implementation of the Win32 API.