Why must Linux be so frustrating?!?!?

[Ji@nBing]

Seriously. Every time I try and use it, I feel like banging my head against the desk. I try it every few months, in hopes that it will be usable, but it's always the same.

This time I tried Kubuntu because I LOVE the look of Oxygen (even replaced all my icons and made a custom theme for my Win7 install). Well it didn't pick up my video card (integrated Radeon X1200). So I went to the install programs thingy, did a search for the xorg ati drivers, installed, and rebooted. Still nothing. Went to the ATI site and downloaded the latest set manually. Tried to double click it to install, and it just opened in Kate instead. So I right clicked and told it to open with the package installer. Then it just sits there for about 15 minutes, doing nothing. So I head over to the Ubuntu forums and search and it seems I have to run some commands in the console (which is really f'ing lame about Linux BTW, I don't want to sit there typing away just to install something). I followed the instructions, and it says something like "invalid command" in the console.

At this point I'm too frustrated and decided to give up on the video drivers for the time being. So I went into the system update to make sure everything is up to date. it finds something like 168 updates. Started updating, but it seems for whatever reason my wireless drops out every few minutes in Linux, so it kept on failing. Now, before you blame my wireless, I've never had any problems with it whatsoever on Windows. In fact I'm downloading something right now and it's working perfectly.

So, my question is why does Linux have to be so frustrating? Why can't everything just work out of the box like it's supposed to? I really want to like it and use it, but I go through this kind of crap every time I try and use it.

[surrealvortex]

^^ I commiserate with you. I have also tried to make the transition several times, but don't have the patience to persist. I guess it is my fault really, bcos once I put in the effort required to setup everything, I doubt there will be problems.

[Laurë Veteran]

.....

This time I tried Kubuntu because I LOVE the look of Oxygen (even replaced all my icons and made a custom theme for my Win7 install). Well it didn't pick up my video card (integrated Radeon X1200). So I went to the install programs thingy, did a search for the xorg ati drivers, installed, and rebooted. Still nothing. Went to the ATI site and downloaded the latest set manually. Tried to double click it to install, and it just opened in Kate instead. So I right clicked and told it to open with the package installer. Then it just sits there for about 15 minutes, doing nothing. So I head over to the Ubuntu forums and search and it seems I have to run some commands in the console (which is really f'ing lame about Linux BTW, I don't want to sit there typing away just to install something). I followed the instructions, and it says something like "invalid command" in the console.

....

"Invalid command" probably means you had a typo in there.

Working within a terminal gets much easier when you learn the ropes. Things like tab completion, for example, where you type the first letter or two then press tab and it fills out the rest of the file or directory name.

The arrow buttons usually allow you to toggle through things you've already typed in. So if I got that error I would have pressed an arrow button to get the command I typed back up, then double check and correct it.

I find it strange, also, that you didn't follow the installation instructions from the start. Most things I ever download have instructions on the website or within a README file included with it..

..

So, my question is why does Linux have to be so frustrating? Why can't everything just work out of the box like it's supposed to? I really want to like it and use it, but I go through this kind of crap every time I try and use it.

Are you sure it's meant to work out of the box?

Personally I think your biggest mistake is expecting Linux to be another Windows. When you come to Linux without any presumptions about how it "should" be or "should" do things but ready to learn a new way and do some research, it's much easier. If you just want it to be Windows with a different look or name then you are probably better off sticking with Windows :)

[bjoswald]

That's the thing with Linux: it works great if your hardware is supported. If not, it's "plug 'n' pray".

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Most of the time when dealing with Linux you'll have to bit the bullet and

There is no way around it if you are serious about dabbling with Linux. You mustn't be frustrated by having to resort to the command line either. In many cases it is still the most efficient tool. (Which IMHO is the case for OS X and Windows as well.)

If you want everything to work right out of the box - buy a Mac.

[Prince Charming]

Buy a mac.

[Miuku.]

Sorry for your frustration but the biggest problem lies with the ATI drivers - the fglrx (ATI proprietary drivers) are total and utter crap - even after years of development they're still mostly unuseable by "normal folks" - additionally burdened by the fact that distribution manufacturers cannot legally include these drivers as part of the operating system makes it a pretty awful mess overall. nVidia is pretty much the only way to go currently.

On that note, on the upcoming openSUSE 11.2 (November) the RadeonHD (open source Radeon driver) driver has improved quite a lot which should make at least using Linux with ATi drivers slightly easier "out of the box", including native support for 4850/4870 cards.

Edited October 16, 2009 by daPhoenix

[Serulean]

Buy a mac.

Don't be silly. ;)

[Nick Brunt]

Buy a mac.

That's quite funny. HAHAHAHA.

I'm not amused.

[Barney T. Administrators]

I understand your frustration, however, Linux is not Windows. People who wish to try it need to understand that there is a learning curve and it takes some time to get the hang of it. Also, different distributions are not the same. Each has it's strengths and weaknesses. Some are more "noob-friendly" than others. Some drivers and wireless set-ups take time to get straight, however, I have always been able to work through these situations using Google, forums, or the like.

I am also sure that when you started with Windows for the first time, it took some getting used too....... it is all in your level of interest in learning Linux, or sticking with Windows......... no one should try to change your own decision... (Y)

[Volatile]

I think I can describe your frustration with one word. 'Different'. I have gone through the same serious of try, try myself. I have lasted on linux for months now and will not be turning back. It took me many attempts at screwing the system up, format, reinstall to gather knowledge of how to use the system efficiently and effectively. But guess what.. I had to do the same thing with Windows. The only difference is, I've been working with Windows for nearly 15 years. The key is to stick with it and of coarse what was mentioned READ.

I have used Windows, Mac, and linux and so far I have enjoyed the freedom that linux brings. Those who attempt to "make a switch to linux" do so because they are tired of looking at the same old windows, not because windows won't work well for them. Linux definitely gives you that freedom to customize, you just have to educate yourself and be patient with the learning process. You can't just wave your hand and expect everything to fly into place.

[i_was_here]

Linux is not Windows:

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

And if thats what you expect, I can only imagine that's why you're frustrated.

[BajiRav]

Linux is not Windows:

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

And if thats what you expect, I can only imagine that's why you're frustrated.

How is that even relevant? OP just said why things are difficult?

[White Cuban]

That's the thing with Linux: it works great if your hardware is supported. If not, it's "plug 'n' pray".

lol? from my experience, ubuntu has better driver support than windows 7 (which im using right now, i just rolled back after a realtek automatic update messed up my internet)

[Electric Jolt]

Lol, an article that states Linux is not Windows, and says if you want a UNIX OS switch to a Mac. Well wait, Mac OS came from Linux. It's not very complicating, so I think it's not accurate. They should've said a paid OS is different from the free ****ty *nix OS.

Seriously, *nix OS get nothing done for you, they care about nothing but themselves! All day long they brag constantly about errors and tell you you're doing it wrong or sorry no support for Office or anything that visually looks nice to other people. Seriously, when *nix OS get over themselves and care to look visually nice and help you out and plug-and-play instead of telling you you're doing everything wrong and not tell you how then *nix OS will be nice. You gotta admit, it's a terrible epic fail.

[ViperAFK]

Seriously. Every time I try and use it, I feel like banging my head against the desk. I try it every few months, in hopes that it will be usable, but it's always the same.

This time I tried Kubuntu because I LOVE the look of Oxygen (even replaced all my icons and made a custom theme for my Win7 install). Well it didn't pick up my video card (integrated Radeon X1200). So I went to the install programs thingy, did a search for the xorg ati drivers, installed, and rebooted. Still nothing. Went to the ATI site and downloaded the latest set manually. Tried to double click it to install, and it just opened in Kate instead. So I right clicked and told it to open with the package installer. Then it just sits there for about 15 minutes, doing nothing. So I head over to the Ubuntu forums and search and it seems I have to run some commands in the console (which is really f'ing lame about Linux BTW, I don't want to sit there typing away just to install something). I followed the instructions, and it says something like "invalid command" in the console.

At this point I'm too frustrated and decided to give up on the video drivers for the time being. So I went into the system update to make sure everything is up to date. it finds something like 168 updates. Started updating, but it seems for whatever reason my wireless drops out every few minutes in Linux, so it kept on failing. Now, before you blame my wireless, I've never had any problems with it whatsoever on Windows. In fact I'm downloading something right now and it's working perfectly.

So, my question is why does Linux have to be so frustrating? Why can't everything just work out of the box like it's supposed to? I really want to like it and use it, but I go through this kind of crap every time I try and use it.

By default ubuntu should have the opensource ati drivers installed which even have 3d support for your card all out of the box, you shouldn't have needed to install any drivers.

Also ati's proprietary linux drivers only support hd2xxx cards and up which is probably why they didn't work...

Your wireless problem is simply **** wireless drivers, not really linux's fault.

Edited October 16, 2009 by ViperAFK

[bolerodan]

Lol, an article that states Linux is not Windows, and says if you want a UNIX OS switch to a Mac. Well wait, Mac OS came from Linux. It's not very complicating, so I think it's not accurate. They should've said a paid OS is different from the free ****ty *nix OS.

I hope you were joking, or thats a typo, but you clearly have your facts wrong (in my bolded portion of the quote), which then led me to not take the rest of your post seriously.

Sorry.

[.Neo]

I don't think the TS is expecting Linux to be the same as Windows, however he is expecting that you don't have to fiddle around in Terminal anymore.

[Electric Jolt]

I hope you were joking, or thats a typo, but you clearly have your facts wrong (in my bolded portion of the quote), which then led me to not take the rest of your post seriously.

Sorry.

Well I meant many parts of Mac OS is what also made up Linux. Well not exactly that, but, NeXTSTEP comes from Unix and source code from BSD Unix. FreeBSD comes from BSD Unix, which can be configured to run Gnome, and that's whats on most *nix OS. So really, Mac OS is very similar to Linux, now of course not anymore, Mac OS X Snow Leopard is very different from *nix, it is nothing close to what *nix OS are like. But I hope you understand what I meant. I did not mean Mac OS just came from some random distribution of *nix like Ubuntu.

But still the article is targeted at Windows.

[White Cuban]

Well I meant many parts of Mac OS is what also made up Linux. Well not exactly that, but, NeXTSTEP comes from Unix and source code from BSD Unix. FreeBSD comes from BSD Unix, which can be configured to run Gnome, and that's whats on most *nix OS. So really, Mac OS is very similar to Linux, now of course not anymore, Mac OS X Snow Leopard is very different from *nix, it is nothing close to what *nix OS are like. But I hope you understand what I meant. I did not mean Mac OS just came from some random distribution of *nix like Ubuntu.

But still the article is targeted at Windows.

your self contradicting,

OS X is essentially a *nix OS

[bolerodan]

Well I meant many parts of Mac OS is what also made up Linux. Well not exactly that, but, NeXTSTEP comes from Unix and source code from BSD Unix. FreeBSD comes from BSD Unix, which can be configured to run Gnome, and that's whats on most *nix OS. So really, Mac OS is very similar to Linux, now of course not anymore, Mac OS X Snow Leopard is very different from *nix, it is nothing close to what *nix OS are like. But I hope you understand what I meant. I did not mean Mac OS just came from some random distribution of *nix like Ubuntu.

But still the article is targeted at Windows.

I see what you're trying to say, and I did not imply that you ment that Mac os X came from a distro of Linux. I am however saying, there is 100%, no relation in Mac OS X code to Linux code. Making it not come from Linux in any fashion.

And yes Mac OS X is classified as being a Unix-like OS, it is also POSIX Compliant within the UNIX Family. Wether you like to believe it or not, Underneath is a UNIX Core, with a apple proprietary interface on top. I think you are confused with terminology or distinguishing between UNIX Technologies, and UNIX interfaces / similarities of Unix systems.

Edited October 16, 2009 by bolerodan

[azure.sapphire]

I see what you're trying to say, and I did not imply that you ment that Mac os X came from a distro of Linux. I am however saying, there is 100%, no relation in Mac OS X code to Linux code. Making it not come from Linux in any fashion.

And yes Mac OS X is classified as being a Unix-like OS, it is also POSIX Compliant within the UNIX Family. Wether you like to believe it or not, Underneath is a UNIX Core, with a apple proprietary interface on top. I think you are confused with terminology or distinguishing between UNIX Technologies, and UNIX interfaces / similarities of Unix systems.

I think a major difference between the two is that Linux is a code rewrite of a Unix like OS and Mac OS has a foundation of Mach (though not a micro-kernel) and BSD at its base.

I am not disagreeing with anything you said.

[bolerodan]

I think a major difference between the two is that Linux is a code rewrite of a Unix like OS and Mac OS has a foundation of Mach (though not a micro-kernel) and BSD at its base.

I am not disagreeing with anything you said.

Right, Linux is a rewrite of Minix - a UNIX like OS. I also am not disagreeing with anything you have said either. Heh.

However I feel like because if Electric Jolt was to sit at two computers. One with Linux, and one with say FreeBSD, because they both visually look the same to the user (BASH, CLI, GNOME etc)does not make them related or similar at all. I'm talking about the Technologies here. Not the user end experience he is confusing him self with being a direct representation to the powerful technologies in their kernels. Essentially, im being nit picky with his usage of "Linux" and *nix like operating systems and how *nix like systems are "sh*tty" when essentially the technology behind it is very powerful, something the user does not see.

Essentially, what the user visually sees between different operating systems does not mean they are similar, or even NOT similar.

Just because Mac OS X has a pretty interface on top, where no other unix like OS has, doesnt mean its NOT unix-like. This stuff gets complicated, haha.

Edited October 16, 2009 by bolerodan

[Growled Member]

I can sympathize with you. I have been running Linux for nearly four years and I still get very annoyed with it. I'm in a very annoyed stage right now and I'm not even running it. I get so tired of something always not working right or worse yet, work for hours to set something up and then do an update and it screws up something else.

I am looking forward to openSuse 11.2. It's one of the few Linux distros that is done right. I like Ubuntu but I've never had good luck with it for long.

BTW, the Radeon X1200 is now considered a legacy card in Linux and the new 3D drivers won't work with it. You have to use the open source drivers. I have a X1300 and am in the same situation. The only distro I know that still uses the old 3D driver is PCLinuxOS.

[dreamz Veteran]

i understand what you're saying. i've been thinking about making the switch, too, but some things just hold me back. (i may switch one day.)

1. commands. i have no problem following instructions to use the command line, but it's a bit overwhelming sometimes to have to use it. it's not easy to learn all the commands. 'chown'? 'chmod'? 'useradd'? 'shutdown -h now'?

for new users who don't know very many commands, it can be difficult at times to troubleshoot or to get things going. how are you supposed to learn the commands? is there an encyclopedia of commands? which commands are universal and which are distro-specific?

e.g., when i'm setting up a user account, i have to type 'useradd -m -G users,audio,lp,optical,storage,video,wheel,power -s /bin/bash [username]'. i can never remember what to type, so i constantly have to check the wiki.

2. file organization. in windows, it's fairly easy to know where the programs are: the program files directory. but in linux, they're all over the place. bin, sbin, etc. where do the program files go? what's /etc? what's /mnt?

3. obscure error messages. i had some trouble a while ago with ntfs-3g. i couldn't mount my ntfs partition, and i didn't know why. the file manager produced some strange error. it turns out, all i had to do was create the directory first in /mnt. but i didn't know that, and neither the wiki nor the error message instructed me to do that.

4. programs. it's hard to find equivalents in linux. e.g., foobar2000. also, i have complicated documents that don't get converted properly in either koffice or openoffice, which means i have to load up a vm or dual boot in order to work on my papers.

5. overwhelming documentation. there's an abundance of good information out there, but it's not always easy to follow. wikis help, but sometimes there are multiple pages on one topic with conflicting information. am i supposed to do this one thing or this other thing?

and if i can't connect to the internet (for whatever reason), i can't check the wikis. but this means that i have to print out some of the guides. i end up with a big stack of papers just to get everything working properly.

sometimes, there's simply too much information. pages upon pages of information detailing how to set up a wireless network, for instance. it's too much to read.

this makes it difficult to solve problems. as much as i love to tinker with computers, i just don't have time to waste. my time is better spent doing readings, working on essays, attending lectures, etc. than reading wikis, troubleshooting, testing, etc.

6. no real reason to switch. my windows system is set up nicely, i have all the programs i want and they work perfectly, and there are no issues. i'd love to switch, mainly because i want something different. but i haven't yet convinced myself that it's worth it.