Why Linux is so far behind...

[markwolfe Veteran]

Linux is free if your time has no value.

I have heard this before, and my response is the same: Yes, I spent time learning Linux, but with my system all set up there is no struggling or maintenance. My wife and oldest kid have XP machines. Now those PCs constantly need attention. I would put forth that Windows starts off "not free", plus is takes an inordinate amount of effort to keep a configured box running.

Next thread.....

Ahhh, you jumped in to post that wonderful comment, then left. Goodbye.

[alsheron]

Not to dis your post, but have you ever tried Ubuntu or another noob friendly distro lately? It is JUST as easy as Windows. Sure, some of the places to "click" are different, but the learning curve is not as difficult as you make them out to be.

You really can be as simple or as complex a user as you want to be...

Barney

Yeah..... i tried Ubuntu, but why bother using Ubuntu if it's just like Windows....... The reason i tried linux is because it's different...... I found out that it's just incredibly involved, so taking the time to learn about it wasn't my thing..... Maybe one for the future.

[Mathiasdm]

Linux struggles for many reasons. On the technical front, it's because:

1) Kernel is bloated and poorly architected. Poor threading implementation. Not a good multi-tasker, especially for desktop/multimedia uses. Improved significantly in 2.6, but still behind its desktop competition.

2) UI is unoriginal. Everything in KDE/Gnome is a copy of Windows or the Mac. Enlightenment and others copy NextStep, but are generally not user-friendly.

3) Reliability is not there. Linux is extremely high-maintenance. Significant stability problems when used for desktop/multimedia purposes (ie. not a server).

4) Generally poor hardware/software support. Yes, it's better than it used to be. A lot better. But it's still playing catch-up in the desktop arena.

1) No idea, I don't read kernels :-P

2) Unoriginal? You have tons of different GUI's for Linux. And don't tell me Windows and OS X don't rip each other (and Linux) off!

3)Let's see... You say Linux for the desktop is unstable? So... You must mean some applications are unstable (seeing as everything works fine on servers).

There are enough buggy applications on Windows as well.

4) Correct.

[Stunna]

skinnylegs' date='Feb 27 2006, 04:02' post='587248789']

These people represent less than 1% of computer users. Linux is an exercise in mental masturbation. Linux is free if your time has no value. Next thread.....

LOL :)

[Barney T. Administrators]

Yeah..... i tried Ubuntu, but why bother using Ubuntu if it's just like Windows.......

My post stated that it was as EASY to use most noob distros as it is to use Windows, not that it was just like Windows.

On a different note, I do not understand why (it seems) so many Windows users want to use disparaging remarks about Linux and to Linux users. I assure you that Linux users could care less about what choice in OSs Windows users make. So why all the fuss the other way around?

I do not see much of Linux users "pushing" everyone into using Linux.......... see the below article:

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

Barney

[markwolfe Veteran]

I do not see much of Linux users "pushing" everyone into using Linux..........

Oh, but there are a few obnoxious people like that.

I really don't see them much here on Neowin. But a lot of people new to Linux that like it tend to go through a phase where they want to tell other people about it. Some get rather annoying about it.

[Phixion]

Actually turns out it was a problem with the "software RAID" controller on the motherboard. When I moved the hard drives to non-RAIDified IDE controller it worked.

I've now spent all day getting essential software installed.

In a couple minutes i'm going to be installing ubuntu on the second hard drive, and in a shorter process i'm going to get an up to date system with -more functuniality- than the Xp install i've been setting up for the last 5 hours.

Then I suggest you learn how to setup Windows XP :p a full base install takes me no longer than 45 minutes with a full format. Then I'm on to installing the programs I need: foobar, Ventrilo, VLC Player and I'm pretty much done.

You can't blame Windows for something like that, it sounds like a problem your end not with the Windows installer itself.

We ALL know that using an emulator like Cedega or Wine reduces performance and it still doesn't give you 100% guarantee that the games gonna work.

I have NOTHING against Linux, like I said if I didn't play alot of online games I'd use Linux. As it stands... ill stick with Windows :) Maybe when I buy a new HD I'll dual boot, I really can't stand partitions.

Edited February 27, 2006 by Phixion

[mpa]

I was going to read the thread from the first page all the way to the last when I started to get the feeling that the original poster is either trolling around or was simply having some placebo effects.

For example he stated that he feels the color in Linux' Desktop is less sharper. Except that it is exactly the same color depth as in windows, X Window says it's running under 24 bit, Windows says it's running at 32 bit. Both are the same, when Windows says 32 bit, it really meant 24 bit color depth 32 bit video mode (I forgot where I first learned about it, so I googled around and found this http://www.scantips.com/basics11.html )

Okay, so it's the SAME COLOR DEPTH, anyone care to explain how the original poster feel icon and window look smoother in Windows :-)

This make me wonder whether the beta-feeling of softwares in Linux is just another placebo effect. Although for this one I highly doubt it, after all important stuff like GStreamer or Udev ARE still in beta. So yeah your amarok or totem might crash pretty often if you use GStreamer as the backend. This is just how linux work, these guys labour under the philosophy of release quick and release often. It is by hackers and for hackers, if it crashes, we usually expect you to tracedump it and then file it to Bugzilla (well after all, if you have time for some unproductive whining in forum...:-)

But then again that is not where linux' strength lies, those stuff are after all very very new, still early in development. Linux' advantage is the shell (Bash,csh, ksh, tcsh, etc) and various GNU utilities that you can chain like energizer. Chain and chain and chain... grep, cat,sed and friends are some of the big guns of linux (well GNU Linux I suppose).

Networking utilities are also very very good. I think overall network utilities in Linux or *BSD are of higher quality that their Windows counterparts. After all, in networking you are likely to want maximum customization.

Anyway if you just want to play movies and download torrents, I doubt you would notice any advantage in switching to Linux. On the other hand, if you also want to run FTP, SSH, HTTP Server, running your computer under high load with many different processes running in addition to watching movies on your 'puter. Or if you want to learn programming or even OS programming then Linux / BSD is the way to go.

Without perseverance and the will to learn born from needing a Unix-like OS you will never understand why Linux is good, you'll never get the benefit from switching to Linux.

In other words you just need to understand that some people need max customization, other want open source, some prefer stability over features, yet another think third party support is very important. We have many Operating Systems, use one that fits your need the most and you will find there's no need to troll around in order to justify your choice....

[Barney T. Administrators]

Oh, but there are a few obnoxious people like that.

I really don't see them much here on Neowin. But a lot of people new to Linux that like it tend to go through a phase where they want to tell other people about it. Some get rather annoying about it.

Yeah... I guess that I am mostly talking about here on Neowin..... :yes:

Barney

[jaqian]

If you wanna learn linux, get rid of windows and start using it on daily use

Easier said than done. I've recently installed openSUSE 10 on my laptop and I'm having a hell of a time getting my printer, scanner & mp3 player set up. Configure. RPMs. Give me an *.exe anyday.

I'll keep at it but for the moment IMO, windows is the easiest to use. At the end of the day everything comes down to - can you install remove programs easily. This is where Linux has to improve so any newb can use it. Sorry to say but windows is newb friendly and Linux isn't.

[fudgetunnel]

I think this should be stickied somewhere, in bright red flashing text. It's from the link barneyt posted, which I'd read before, and found this portion particularly valid;

Before you decide you want to switch to Linux, ask yourself "Why do I want to switch?"

If the answer is "I want an OS that puts all the power in the hands of the user and expects him to know how to use it": Get Linux. You'll have to invest a substantial amount of time and effort before you get it to where you want it, but you'll eventually be rewarded with a computer that works exactly the way you want it to.

BUT. . .

If the answer is "I want Windows without the problems": Do a clean install of Windows XP SP2; set up a good firewall; install a good anti-virus; never use IE for browsing the web; update regularly; reboot after each software install; and read about good security practices. I myself have used Windows from 3.1 through 95, 98, NT, and XP, and I have never once had a virus, suffered from spyware, or been cracked. Windows can be a safe and stable OS, but it relies on you keeping it that way.

If the answer is "I want a replacement for Windows without the problems": Buy an Apple Mac. I've heard wonderful things about the Tiger release of OS X, and they've got some lovely-looking hardware. It'll cost you a new computer, but it'll get you what you want.

In either case, don't switch to Linux. You'll be disappointed with both the software and the community. Linux is not Windows.

Two of those options require effort on the users part. They must learn. Learning is good. But the choice in an operating system isn't a cure for ignorance or stupidity.

Anyone reading threads pertaining the recent OS X worms could see that. :whistle:

[markwolfe Veteran]

Easier said than done. I've recently installed openSUSE 10 on my laptop and I'm having a hell of a time getting my printer, scanner & mp3 player set up. Configure. RPMs. Give me an *.exe anyday.

Printer and Scanner could be hit or miss. In my case, my scanner (Canon IX-4015) works in Linux, but not in any current Windows - supported ended with NT.

MP3 should be easy to enable (some distros don't include this by default due to potential patent issues/litigation).

As for RPMs and .EXEs, you aren't doing it right if you are getting headaches. Don't try to manage RPMs like you did with Windows and EXE files. Use your built-in package manager! YAST/yum/urpmi/apt-get and so forth are your package managers. They take the headaches out for you. Using them you no longer need to maintain every installed app individually. They will update your whole system for you, and you don't have to worry about running an out-of-date app. I would never go back to the Windows system of installing/removing apps. :no:

If you give Linux an honest effort, and learn some new ways of managing a computer, you will find it to be extremely capable. (of course, in your case, hardware operation will take precedence)

[Aaron Veteran]

Who says people that use windows are the lowest denominator? I don't consider myself to be and im sure many others don't as well. If you know what linux is id say your half way there.

I didn't say that. I said that the grandmas and grandpas and other non-techies are the lowest denominator with respect to technical knowledge. Linux isn't for them, nor should it strive to be. It should be something different. I use both Linux and Windows XP and have use for both systems depending on my task.

[markwolfe Veteran]

I didn't say that. I said that the grandmas and grandpas and other non-techies are the lowest denominator with respect to technical knowledge. Linux isn't for them, nor should it strive to be.

I could put forth the suggestion that grandparents would find that a set up Linux box would be perfect for their emailing, web browsing, and grandkid-picture-looking activities. They can even keep more secure without having to worry about antivirus, etc. (not saying that Linux viruses don't exist, just that they are not a practical threat if you aren't running a server)

It would not take a powerhouse (or expensive) PC to do these basic tasks, either, as they are typically on limited incomes.

I would not ask my grandparents to install Linux, though. :pinch:

[CaKeY]

I've had my mom (58 years old now) running Mandrake/Mandriva since version 8.1. Assuming someone installs it, Linux is GREAT for the casual user.

[Barney T. Administrators]

I would not ask my grandparents to install Linux, though. :pinch:

LOL :rofl:

You got that right!

Although.... with Gentoo as a Live CD............ just kidding.....

Barney

[dwntwn]

Ugh...

Why not just end on this thought?

Windows is how almost all computer users start with. There for most computer users are only familiar with Windows. However, some people want to venture further and try some new stuff (*nix, etc)..

Once the switch is done, some realize that there is too much effort and too much work for them to invest for their computing needs. Whereas, others who tried to switch realize that the time and investment may pay off greater dividends for their computing needs and the contunie to plug away at it.

The original post of this thread was a person who was sitting on a fence, trying to decide if he should spend the time and effort.. or go back to another operating system that he was most familiar with.

Now, this is not flaming *nix or Windows. Considering that the market penetration for Windows far exceeds that of *nix in the desktop market, it is no wonder that without some background information, the new people who try to switch expect the same from *nix as they did with Windows.

So in closing, if some one has to search for reasons why to stay with a *nix OS vs a Windows OS they have to ask themselves..

1.) Do I want to learn a whole new world of computing? (Let's face it, how many new users remember DOS and the DESQVIEW and how to use a CLI?).

2.) If I want to install linux first, wouldn't it be a good idea to see if my hardware is supported? (Hardware-HOWTO

3.) If I do not have the hardware support and I do not want to learn a new operating system, perhaps, Windows isn't that bad?

Done. We can sit here forever and pass the ball back and forth between flaming Windows and *nix. But here is a thought...

If there wasn't any alternative to Windows, Mac, *nix.. neither of the operating systems would be as developed as they are today. The world of operating systems is a very fragile sybiotic relationship of improving on each others ideas.