Why Linux is so far behind...

[guru369]

Hey Neowins.

Let em start by saying this is the first post I wrote about this and it might not look like a professional post I still feel I have to say it and get your comments.

My romance with Linux has started over 2 years ago. Most of the time it has been a love and hate relationship.

I must says that always I had the WinXP installation close by to be used whenever I got annoyed by Linux.

I started with Ubuntu. Great Distro with Great potential. Debian Based great package management and a big community that keeps growing.

But.. And here is the But:

1.The applications although free are very beta feel like. (Even if its released)

2.Customaization is wide and big but the sharpness colors are not like Windows/ Mac. (Just look at Febeary Desktops and Nix Desktops and you'll see what I mean.

3.Performance, Well this is debatable. Some say that using the console for running apps and doing day to day work is very fast. And I would agree, But an regular end user uses GUI to do stuff and the look and mainly the feel is very sluggish in Linux.

4.Ease of use: Well no matter how big the comunity will be and how many HowTos will exists there is still a big difference in the ease of use in windows and in Linux.

The distros I checked were:

1. Ubuntu.

2.Suse 10.0

3. Mandriva.

4.Gentoo (Which I must say made a great conterbution to my linux knowlege)

5.Xandros.

6. Many more live CDs (Slax, Knoppix, Damm Small Linux etc..)

Dont get me wrong, I love linux just by the fact that its free and is an monument to the people desire not to be controlled. But becasue of this love I am saying what I am saying.

I think a change should take place in the open source community. Dont ask me what I still am thinking about it.

Maybe the comunitiy should form some kind of organization of standards that will be a guideline to any application that is developed. will collect customer (end clients) requests rate them and select developers to execute.

Anyway, Dont flame me. I still have 4 dual boot system running (Ubuntu, Mandriva , Gentoo and XP) But mainly working on XP.

I will be glad to hear some comments. :rolleyes:

Guru

Edited February 21, 2006 by guru369

[kjordan2001]

Well, there are several HIG (human interface guidelines) out there, such as the ones for KDE, the ones for GNOME, and others such as the Tango Desktop Project. Problem is when you run a KDE app in GNOME or the other way around, it clashes, both in style and layout.

Some distributions are trying to add more config apps like Ubuntu is, but it's difficult to get a GUI config out there for every piece.

On the overall interface, it will be better once XGL and stuff take hold.

[wicker_man]

I think I would have to agree with you on that one.

I would put the blame for some of the frustrations on the lack of proper drivers from hardware manufacturers (say, installing an upgraded driver that supports WPA on my ageing Tosh under Windows was far easier than about 3 hours I spent on the forums and messing with ndiswrapper abd the like under Ubuntu). Same goes for Bluetooth and IRDA (which as far as I know doesn't have a trusted stable solution even now). Even video drivers would give you some pain on certain systems (go configure SAX from the command line, Joe Shmoe!)...I mean come on nVidia and ATI!

The GUI is not as snappy as Windows one on the same Tosh (Celeron 2.2 Ghz, 512 RAM) - yes I know all about *nix love for memory, but still...

Funny thing is, no matter how much people might disagree etc. thos eare still valid points and as much as I want I wouldn't like to attempt installing Linux on one of my customer's desktops or migrating our small company to it. That would just mean more work for me and who needs that? Again, don't get me wrong, as I dual-boot that Tosh (XP and Ubuntu), but as long as some major advancement is made, I will be sticking to my Mac...

[matt74441]

Well I'll work down your list.

1. All applications, no matter what they say about them, are never finished. Microsoft didn't get Office right on the first go, thats why they're working on version 12 now and there are multiple fixes and service packs for existing versions. I'm not sure what programs you're talking about, but applications like amaroK, OpenOffice, Evolution, etc are very polished applications and are in some cases better than their Windows equivalents.

2. Customization is the big thing in Linux. You can pretty much do whatever you want in any Desktop environment and modify whatever you don't like. If you don't like modifying something like GNOME or KDE, start with one of the Boxes and build your desktop from that (rezza kicks ass at this). Sharpness colours? I don't even understand what you mean. I think that there needs to be more consistency between GTK and QT applications, because pure GTK and QT desktops look great on their own, but horrible together.

3. Performance I guess depends on the user and what you're using the system for. For everyday use (web, email, word processing), I imagine you won't notice the difference in Windows or Linux. I find that my Linux system can take a little more abuse than my Windows installation on the same computer (which doesn't exist anymore). I find that I can run more applications simulatenously and not notice any overall slowdown on the system. As for using the console for everyday use, again, that depends on what you're doing. I find that file management is faster on the console as directories list faster, and I have handy things like shell scripting to do things like batch renaming or moving large numbers of files. Gaming is still somewhat of an issue for some people, including me. But ATI and nVidia have made a lot of progress with their drivers, so I guess its only uphill from here.

4. Ease of use isn't a big issue for most people. I can put pretty much anyone is front of GNOME and they can pretty much use it hassle free. All I ever have to do is show them the "Start" button, and they're set. Obviously if I throw someone in front of my Openbox desktop, they'll have some issues.

Linux distros, or GNU/Linux distros as they should be called exist because everyone has different needs and different views on what should be included, what package manager should be used, what DE is included, etc. There will never be just one distro that exists, guaranteed. The only thing that they can really do is maintain consistency between distros. The POSIX standards pretty much guarantee that every distro operates the same (on the command line at least), and there are groups such as freedesktop.org that get GNOME and KDE to work together to maintain compatibility between desktops (menu entries (*.desktop files), the system tray).

I think one of Microsoft's big anti-Linux arguments a while back was a lack of a Roadmap for Linux in general. I used to think of it as a bit of a weak argument, but there is some truth to it. I suppose the open source community in general just does there own thing and it has worked fine up until now. If it ain't broke, don't fix it?

I understand why you feel this way about Linux. My first experience with it was back with Redhat 6 and I didn't use it for long. I installed Gentoo last July and haven't turned back.

Out of curiosity, do you really need 3 versions of Linux installed on the same machine? Do you actually use them each enough to justify them being there?

[Barney T. Administrators]

Ahhhh yes......... another Windows vs. Linux thread...... :rolleyes:

I think my short answer is that whatever OS suits the user is the one for them. That being said, I stopped using Windows long ago after I spent time learning Linux and growing to love it's stableness and freedom from all of the restrictions that MS had on all of their systems. It felt odd at first to use Linux, but after a short while, I loved the quickness, interface, and programs that Linux had to offer. I found that there was little that I couldn't do.

Now that I'm running a 64-bit system, I am even more pleased. Quickness, freedom form malware, very frequent updates, customability, and many choices of programs for tasks I need to do makes Linux the choice for me.

I agree that there are many fundimental differences in these two operating systems........... but it is a lot like omparing and contrasting a BMW with an Lexis...... each is different, yet they both accomplish the same tasks. It is all a matter of preference. I also feel that lots of issues are directly related to hardware and vendor driver support, not Linux itself. Of the Linux boxes that I have built, I have made sure that the hardware is compatible and that there are known drivers for each piece. All of these machines (including the laptops that I have) work very well.

Barney

Edited February 21, 2006 by barneyt

[guru369]

Well I'll work down your list.

1. All applications, no matter what they say about them, are never finished. Microsoft didn't get Office right on the first go, thats why they're working on version 12 now and there are multiple fixes and service packs for existing versions. I'm not sure what programs you're talking about, but applications like amaroK, OpenOffice, Evolution, etc are very polished applications and are in some cases better than their Windows equivalents.

2. Customization is the big thing in Linux. You can pretty much do whatever you want in any Desktop environment and modify whatever you don't like. If you don't like modifying something like GNOME or KDE, start with one of the Boxes and build your desktop from that (rezza kicks ass at this). Sharpness colours? I don't even understand what you mean. I think that there needs to be more consistency between GTK and QT applications, because pure GTK and QT desktops look great on their own, but horrible together.

3. Performance I guess depends on the user and what you're using the system for. For everyday use (web, email, word processing), I imagine you won't notice the difference in Windows or Linux. I find that my Linux system can take a little more abuse than my Windows installation on the same computer (which doesn't exist anymore). I find that I can run more applications simulatenously and not notice any overall slowdown on the system. As for using the console for everyday use, again, that depends on what you're doing. I find that file management is faster on the console as directories list faster, and I have handy things like shell scripting to do things like batch renaming or moving large numbers of files. Gaming is still somewhat of an issue for some people, including me. But ATI and nVidia have made a lot of progress with their drivers, so I guess its only uphill from here.

4. Ease of use isn't a big issue for most people. I can put pretty much anyone is front of GNOME and they can pretty much use it hassle free. All I ever have to do is show them the "Start" button, and they're set. Obviously if I throw someone in front of my Openbox desktop, they'll have some issues.

Linux distros, or GNU/Linux distros as they should be called exist because everyone has different needs and different views on what should be included, what package manager should be used, what DE is included, etc. There will never be just one distro that exists, guaranteed. The only thing that they can really do is maintain consistency between distros. The POSIX standards pretty much guarantee that every distro operates the same (on the command line at least), and there are groups such as freedesktop.org that get GNOME and KDE to work together to maintain compatibility between desktops (menu entries (*.desktop files), the system tray).

I think one of Microsoft's big anti-Linux arguments a while back was a lack of a Roadmap for Linux in general. I used to think of it as a bit of a weak argument, but there is some truth to it. I suppose the open source community in general just does there own thing and it has worked fine up until now. If it ain't broke, don't fix it?

I understand why you feel this way about Linux. My first experience with it was back with Redhat 6 and I didn't use it for long. I installed Gentoo last July and haven't turned back.

Out of curiosity, do you really need 3 versions of Linux installed on the same machine? Do you actually use them each enough to justify them being there?

Thanks for your comments.

The only reason for having 3 different distros on my machine is that fact that I am a bleeding edge freak. :D

I love testing out new software and new ideas. My main use with my PC today is:

1.P2P.

2.Movies

3.Music.

4.Distro and Beta testing.

Once I will feel that one distro is filling my 3 first requirement as well as windows is I will format that NTFS drive. :p

I know there are lots of replacments. (amule,xmule bitorrnado Azureus etc..) But none seem to work and look as good as the original emule or other bitorrent client on windows (Beside azureus maybe as its in Java)

Regarding your reply to my list:

1. Yes there are some great application out there that exceed windows apps in functionality. But I feel there's not much.

(OpenOffice is the best one (I just wish they will include an email client as well in the future)

2. Yes, The customization part is much more advanced in Linux. But you have to know really well to customise your nix box to get it to a point it can really compete with windows or mac. (Again no standards for customization)

GTK & QT: Whats up with them? why not join forces??? why not do a better job in working together?

3. Performance. Its not just on what a user do, I mesure my performance by feeling the mouse clicks and windows interactions.

For example: Fire up firefox on a newly installed Windows Machine and one on A newly installed Ubuntu machine. (You will feel the difference.)

Also the window redrawing is sluggish in the feel on linux.

4. Ease of Use: You mention the use for console for doing lots of scripting. I am sure it works like a charm, But be honest: before you knew scripting langauge you wont touch it.

Over all. I like Linux in General And I like the "Geek" feeling it gives me when I manage to configure something like a mail server in Linux.

(Its just not the same when you install a mail server in windows .. Next Next next)

My post was mainly my opinion and I will surly continue to monitor and check any new idea that will come. and help suggest any new feature that might be handy to the overall community.

Guru

[Barney T. Administrators]

Actually, you do not need to know scripting language to use the command line.......

I use it for RPM deployment and URPMI. It works fine for me. Knowing a few commands gets me info (like typing in "free" to see my memory usage) but that is hardly learning script..........

Barney

[Joni_78]

I've been wondering why it's so far behind too. I't has such a BIG potential to become someting like OS X and crush Microsoft in the OS field.

[guru369]

Actually, you do not need to know scripting language to use the command line.......

I use it for RPM deployment and URPMI. It works fine for me. Knowing a few commands gets me info (like typing in "free" to see my memory usage) but that is hardly learning script..........

Barney

I know, My reply was to people who uses command line for renaming files, searching.. managing proccess etc..

Guru

[Barney T. Administrators]

Back in the earlier days of Windows, many users ( actually most users) had to learn DOS in order to accomplish many things. In some cases, computer users had to use DOS completely to execute programs and perform routine computer tasks. It was all command line input. It was expected (at that time) that if you wanted to be proficient in Windows, you needed to have a thorough working knowledge of DOS.

Today, this is not the case. However, Linux still has this capability (to use the command line). It is one aspect that Linux users can use, but (in most cases) there are distros that can totally take the user away form it. Using Synaptic, RPM Drake, YaST, or other GUI interfaces means that there is no real interaction with the command line.

*Sorry to be so long winded*.

Linux is truly an OS for those who like it. I had terrible problems when I first started using RedHat 7 years ago. I told myself that I would never use Linux. After a while though, the challenge came back to me and after I learned a bit more and stuck with it, I found myself drawn more and more to it. Now, I couldn't do without it.

Barney

[ichi]

I think linux is far from windows in some aspects, but not in a behind/ahead fashion but more like in a distant parallel field.

There're lots of things that are so different that depending on the user they might stand on the positive or negative side.

Eg. take the command line issue: some users want to control their box through GUI apps as in windows, and therefore find this to be a problem on linux. On the other hand, some people feel more comfortable using the CLI to configure stuff and they see Windows severely lacking in this aspect.

Regarding desktop responsiveness: my desktop is really smooth, and could still be faster if I used prelinking. Your mileage might obviously vary, but the point is windows being smoother that linux is not an absolute truth.

GTKvsQt... well, the thing is (as of now) linux is about choice, but that doesn't mean every possible option will be available, Eg. mixing different options doesn't always bring the expected results.

I think the idea is to not put excessive control over development of non critical parts of the OS, so all this evolves through natural selection.

[markwolfe Veteran]

I read your post, then got to this point:

I will be glad to hear some comments. :rolleyes:

Wasn't sure if you picked the wrong smiley, but it makes you seem extremely insincere about your desire to hear comments.

[CaKeY]

Ya. Like... markjensen is soooo smart :rolleyes:

markjensen is soooo smart :laugh:

markjensen is soooo smart :no:

markjensen is soooo smart :blink:

markjensen is soooo smart :hmmm:

markjensen is soooo smart :hump:

[guru369]

I read your post, then got to this point:

Wasn't sure if you picked the wrong smiley, but it makes you seem extremely insincere about your desire to hear comments.

Sorry. I certainly am sincere about me wanting to hear other opinions.

As I said in the beginning of the post, ...This might not be a professional post...

I am affraid I am not a veteran in forum postings..

Guru

[mr_demilord]

1.The applications although free are very beta feel like. (Even if its released)

No software is ever finshed, look at windows, ther are updates every month.

I never have problem with software on nix.

2.Customaization is wide and big but the sharpness colors are not like Windows/ Mac. (Just look at Febeary Desktops and Nix Desktops and you'll see what I mean.

Check the colour-tdepth of x.org it probably is set to 16bpp.

3.Performance, Well this is debatable. Some say that using the console for running apps and doing day to day work is very fast. And I would agree, But an regular end user uses GUI to do stuff and the look and mainly the feel is very sluggish in Linux.

Thats not a Linux problem but a distro/hardware specific problem.

4.Ease of use: Well no matter how big the comunity will be and how many HowTos will exists there is still a big difference in the ease of use in windows and in Linux.

No one every said linux is easy. you cannot compare linux with windows, Linux is a totally diferent OS.

Linux is a do it yourself OS, althrough Linspire is making a big change on that.

If you wanna learn linux, get rid of windows and start using it on daily use, otherwise you keep comparing windows with linux and we keep getting these postings :no:

[Aaron Veteran]

For the most part I feel that the only area in which Linux adoption is being stymied is by the lack of really polished applciations. GIPM, OOo, yeah they are "good enough" but not really comparable to the Windows equivalents. I wonder if they were competing in a capitalistic market that development would be able to progress? I think so and I know that I'd certainly buy software for Linux if it was available (notably Fireworks).

I just installed Ubuntu on my desktop for the first time (always been only my laptop). The desktop is as you'd expect much more powerful than my laptop and I was floored by the performance - much faster than XP for me. Opening filesystem browser, launching a preferences dialog, applying the changes, so much faster to me. It is just a chicken and Egg conundrum - no applications, no platform adoption; no platform adoption, no applications... etc...

Edited February 21, 2006 by Aaron

[Barney T. Administrators]

Ya. Like... markjensen is soooo smart :rolleyes:

markjensen is soooo smart :laugh:

markjensen is soooo smart :no:

markjensen is soooo smart :blink:

markjensen is soooo smart :hmmm:

markjensen is soooo smart :hump:

Ha! That is such a classic. :|

Barney

[guru369]

No software is ever finshed, look at windows, ther are updates every month.

I never have problem with software on nix.

Check the colour-tdepth of x.org it probably is set to 16bpp.

Thats not a Linux problem but a distro/hardware specific problem.

No one every said linux is easy. you cannot compare linux with windows, Linux is a totally diferent OS.

Linux is a do it yourself OS, althrough Linspire is making a big change on that.

If you wanna learn linux, get rid of windows and start using it on daily use, otherwise you keep comparing windows with linux and we keep getting these postings :no:

- Software: I am refering to general application, Not OS updates that M$ release every day. For example: Totem Movie player, Alsa sound architecture that crash sometimes on my PC.

You can imagine my embaresment when I want to see a movie with my GF and suddenly have problems with my media player or sound and needs to start debugging it.

- Color Sharpness. (X-org support only 24Bit as I remember and beleive me this is what I use.) I just say that for my eyes clearlooks windows border and font smoothing looks to me much better on windows.

Also if you already mentioned Febuery Desktop thread (See how much in Windows and How much posts in Nix) Also I am aware that the number of nix users is also a factor.

-- Performance: I was waiting for someone to claim the HW spec claim:

I run a P4 3.0 Prescott with 1 G DDR 400Mhz and a Gainward G-Force FX 5900 256DDR.

I think its a preaty good machine to run Linux. (Without that many apps installed.

Also I have used Gentoo which is highly customizable and performance tuned but still (Even though I loved this distro) In windows I feel more smooth.

Last, I agree to your last statment, But I am affraid or dont have the *** to do it.

I think I will do it in the future.

Thanks,

Guru

[xxdesmus]

By far my biggest knock on Linux (and this applies to any distro) has got to be the horrible wireless support. Wireless internet is hugely popular now. I've installed linux on both desktops and laptops with very different experiences.

Ubuntu, Suse, and Madriva on my desktop (with a wireless card) did great with autodetecting and getting me up and running. The same can not be said for Fedora, Xandros, Gentoo live, or even straight Debian 3.1

On my laptop ...well that is an entirely different story. I have yet to find as distro that will "just work" with my laptop's built in wireless.

That is the breaking point for me, if Linux won't "just work" then it's still an inferior operating system IMHO. I know there are ndiswrappers and other such ways of getting the wireless working, but my point is...I shouldn't have to hack the system into recognizing my wireless when it is a fairly modern laptop (only about 6 months old).

And FYI, I have tried my share of Linux distros so please don't give me that excuse...Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, Madriva, Suse, Xandros, Gentoo, Mepis, CentOS, Slackware, Zenwalk, Arch, RR4, Redhat, Kate OS, and some *BSD's...

Just my $0.02

Edited February 21, 2006 by xxdesmus

[fudgetunnel]

by far my biggest knock on Linux (and this applies to any distro) has got to be the horrible wireless support. Wireless internet is hugely popular now. I've installed linux on both desktops and laptops with very different experiences. Ubuntu on my desktop (with a wireless card) did great with autodetecting and getting me up and running. The same can not be said for Fedora, or Gentoo live. On my laptop ...well that is an entirely different story. I have yet to find as distro that will "just work" with my laptop's built in wireless. That is the breaking point for me, linux won't "just work" then it's still an inferior operating system IMHO. I know there are ndiswrappers and other such ways of getting the wireless working, but my point is...I shouldn't have to hack the system into recognizing my wireless when it is a fairly modern laptop (only about 6 months old).

just my $0.02

Thats not the fault of linux, it's the fault of the hardware vendors not playing nice with driver and hardware specifications. Some vendors will, some won't. I feel your pain, since I too have had driver woes with wireless cards. Only advice one could give would be to decide with your wallet and support those vendors that do support open-source alternatives.

While I also have a love/hate relationship with linux that has been ongoing for the past ten years or so, the old adage still holds true; linux is only free if your time has no value. I would love to use linux full-time, but unfortunately, since the majority of my systems use fairly current hardware setups, linux is left to be a hobby OS. I simply do not have time free to spend making things work.

[markwolfe Veteran]

Sounds like the biggest complaints about "Linux" is that

• not enough hardware vendors release drivers and/or specifications for the Open Source community to write drivers, and
  
• not enough software vendors release commercial apps for Linux
  

I agree with both points.

But neither of these are a big problem for me, as my hardware works, and the software I use does a great job covering my needs.

[vincent]

Sounds like the biggest complaints about "Linux" is that

• not enough hardware vendors release drivers and/or specifications for the Open Source community to write drivers, and
  
• not enough software vendors release commercial apps for Linux
  

I agree with both points.

But neither of these are a big problem for me, as my hardware works, and the software I use does a great job covering my needs.

As long as one has an Nvidia card in their rig, they should be fine, however, i do not know if Ubuntu Dapper Drake will be supporting the new x-fi by creative via Alsa. It sure would be nice.

[fubz]

Hi I don't mean to flame or troll, but I think the author of this post should read this and get a grip.

Cheers

[NullPointerException]

I have to say that i seem to hear more and more these days about the wireless support on Linux. What fudgetunnelsaid is completely true, but leaving that aside, i think that if you want to try Linux you have to be prepared to get your hands dirty and this is what is all about, this is where i found the magic to be in that OS. The same applies for the CLI someone said a few posts back and i am almost sure that i have read that driving things through the command line is faster than doing it from a GUI (i think it was on the HCI module in university but feel free to correct me on that one). I like using my bash shell to get things done, it feels faster and more satisfying not to mention the fact that going through all those configuration files i get some understanding of how the OS works. After all if *nix OS's where to become the same as windows, what is the point of having the choice ?

[guru369]

Hi I don't mean to flame or troll, but I think the author of this post should read this and get a grip.

Cheers

Hey fubz,

You didnt ment.. But it came out as a small flame.. :p

But thats ok, Let me correct some miss interpertetion that may be with why I started this thread:

I am not trying to compare windows to linux just for having linux be windows.

I am just trying to get a discussion going on in order to make Linux better for everyday use.

Concider this as a marketing meeting at a very big company.

Having the choice is great and this is why I keep on trying.

Sorry if it seemed otherwise.

Guru