Biggest Gripes with Linux?


Recommended Posts

Southern Patriot

I think I asked about three or four times by now what file to click in that extracted folder. Still no answer

Someone did answer you a few pages back. You simply double click on the file called firefox.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TemperingPick

Someone did answer you a few pages back. You simply double click on the file called firefox.

Yes, I did.

firefox

Link to post
Share on other sites
Southern Patriot
firefox

There's the answer to your question .neo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
MR_Candyman

There's the answer to your question .neo.

Yes, which has been repeated every time he complains he doesn't know what to click on

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

I've downloaded the Firefox and Seamonkey tar files many times and I've always been able to open the applications by clicking on the app name in the folder. The only time it wouldn't work is if there is a dependency problem. Then I ran it from the terminal to determine what was missing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
nub

Every time I want to do just about anything out of the ordinary I have to bring up the console and type 5 thousand commands

Installing applications is terrible also

Linux is ugly

Its not user friendly at all

Link to post
Share on other sites
sw1tch..

While I do have some gripes with Linux I do not believe after customization it is ugly in any way.

Below is just one of the many beautiful themes you can use. Each to their own I suppose.

65762329.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gerowen

Every time I want to do just about anything out of the ordinary I have to bring up the console and type 5 thousand commands

Installing applications is terrible also

Linux is ugly

Its not user friendly at all

Try Ubuntu, the latest version, I have a feeling you'll retort on all of those statements. I have yet to need to bring up the command line to do anything unless I just wanted to. Installing applications is easier than in Windows, because having all of your software come from an OS repository lets you update everything all at once with one program instead of each individual piece of software installing its own background process to keep tabs on updates. The GUI being ugly is all about personal preference and what your OS defaults to. The default theme of Ubuntu 10.04 is rather nice in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Neowinuser1991

My biggest gripe with linux is no hardware acceleration oh wait thats not linux's fault :p.

Wish Adobe would improve flash on Ubuntu :pinch:.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr aldo

Why don't I care much for it?

Interface. It just doesn't seem right. I remember previously in Ubuntu there were two bars, one on the top, one on the bottom. Why? What's the point? That just takes up more room. I want one bar to rule them all! :p Though idk if like Microsoft patented the start menu or something, lol.

So I will be honest, in reality I don't like it because it isn't Windows. It just doesn't feel right, it doesn't feel like home.

I remember KDE on Kubuntu from 7.04 or 7.10, and it was very nice. One bar, very small, but it had everything you needed there, but then KDE 4.1 or whatever came out, and it was hideous!

Another one of my gripes is the number of distros. I get it, not one version is right for everyone, but we don't need hundreds... Some really just need to band together, and work together, not work against each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TokiToki

My biggest gripe with linux is no hardware acceleration oh wait thats not linux's fault :p.

Wish Adobe would improve flash on Ubuntu :pinch:.

I'm assuming you're talking about GPU Flash h.264 video acceleration, since we have VDPAU for video acceleration on Nvidia cards (Not sure about ATI/Intel support)

For accelerating Flash h.264 videos, you can try Gnash which has support for VA-API.

Link to post
Share on other sites
James7

A lot of the gripes here seem to be down to a lack of knowledge as to the current state of things.

I think those making those gripes could be convinced that they have been remedied if they spent ten minutes with someone who regularly uses Linux.

It'd be cool if there were Linux Stores, like there are ones for Apple. But my advice would be for the curious to visit a meeting of the closest Linux User Group (LUG). Basically you just need to google "linux user group [your city/region/area here]".

The people there are always happy to help clear things up. Once you get the basics, Linux rules! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
S550

The problem I have with Linux is that I grew up on Windows, I bought a mac before ever really using one and knew 75% of what i needed daily in under 8hrs and after a week I was very proficient and could do a lot of basic trouble shooting. I took a college class in Linux that lasted a whole simester and STILL don't under stand how the OS works.

Every time I decide to try it again I still have problems trying to find out why my hardware doesn't work or what Apps I need to replace the ones on Win or OSX and before I can even find out if they are good replacements I get so ****ed off trying to install them that I give up on Linux before I even get a chance to TRY the software.

With Windows and OSX I can just install the OS, run the updaters then install the apps I need and I'm done. There is no hassle, not frustration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
James7

The problem I have with Linux is that I grew up on Windows, I bought a mac before ever really using one and knew 75% of what i needed daily in under 8hrs and after a week I was very proficient and could do a lot of basic trouble shooting. I took a college class in Linux that lasted a whole simester and STILL don't under stand how the OS works.

Every time I decide to try it again I still have problems trying to find out why my hardware doesn't work or what Apps I need to replace the ones on Win or OSX and before I can even find out if they are good replacements I get so ****ed off trying to install them that I give up on Linux before I even get a chance to TRY the software.

With Windows and OSX I can just install the OS, run the updaters then install the apps I need and I'm done. There is no hassle, not frustration.

I had tried Linux a few times before it stuck. I would find I couldn't get some bit of hardware working, and then I'd give up. In 2007, I tried Fiesty Fawn Ubuntu, and it did just work on my laptop. Of course you can try Ubuntu in Live mode to see if all works before you even consider installing. But the easiest move (probably one you don't want to take, if you're happy with your hardware) would be to buy a computer with Ubuntu on it from Dell or

As for apps, I found lots of resources available. Linux App Finder is a good one to start with, to find equivalents.

Sometimes I have to use Windows, which I grew up on, and OSX, and they are fine, but I have got used to Gnome as a desktop.

As for Ubuntu, it's even easier than both Windows or Mac, once you know the programs you want. Updating is easier as well, as all the programs you install are updated automatically along with the OS itself. Again, a visit to a Linux User Group near you could help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Omen1393

Since I just installed Ubuntu 10.10 I'll talk about the gripes I have with it.

So about an hour ago I installed Ubuntu 10.10. The first thing I noticed is that my keyboard doesn't work every time Ubuntu starts, so during the first restart in the install I was forced to boot into Windows 7 since the keyboard did not work. Second, I was quite disappointed to see that Ubuntu did not install my graphics drivers automatically. Of all the arguments I've heard Ubuntu users make, the most prominent one was that you don't need to install any drivers manually after a restart. So far I've found this only true for Windows 7. Being the Neowinian that I am, I decided to check out Neowin while the drivers were installing. Of course one of the posts linked to Youtube. Of course, I was prompted to install flash which is understandable, you even have to install flash on Windows after a fresh install. I followed the think to install Flash for Ubuntu 64-bit it took me to an unofficial preview page for 64-bit flash. I downloaded the file and then from there I was confused about what to do with the Flash add-on. I kept trying different things to install flash to Firefox but I failed miserably. The installer finished installing the drivers but it required a restart. Once again, I was surprised because another argument for Linux is that you do not have to reboot as much as Windows, yet Windows 7 does not require a restart after Graphics Card drivers are updated/restarted. I restarted the computer and since the Keyboard didn't work, I had to boot into Windows and restart again to select Ubuntu. I still had to install flash so I thought that maybe I should just install Chromium since I heard it comes with flash. I went to the Ubuntu Software Center, installed Chromium and went to Youtube. I still had no Flash. When I clicked on the link to install Flash, the website told me that Chromium came with Flash installed so I didn't need to install anything. Well that didn't help. I then checked the Ubuntu Software Center again and searched for Flash. Sure enough, flash was there. I installed flash and opened up chromium sure enough, Youtube worked! I then opened up Firefox and Flash simply did not load at all. After a couple of restarts on Firefox it worked fine though. Installing flash should not be that much work for a nooby like me.

So after I had everything set up I just asked myself. "Now what?". Because quite honestly there is nothing I want to do/can do in Ubuntu. Silverlight and Flash doesn't work well with Ubuntu, Office 2010 doesn't work for Ubuntu, and I can't play any games without having to hack it together in Wine and even then it runs worse in Wine. I guess the problem isn't really Ubuntu, it's that companies don't really support Ubuntu.

Another gripe I found is that after you select "Extra" Visual Effects the windows get a ton of screen tearing with the rubbery effect.

In short, it is too difficult to set things up mainly because nobody cares about Ubuntu, not companies at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
nub

Try Ubuntu, the latest version, I have a feeling you'll retort on all of those statements. I have yet to need to bring up the command line to do anything unless I just wanted to. Installing applications is easier than in Windows, because having all of your software come from an OS repository lets you update everything all at once with one program instead of each individual piece of software installing its own background process to keep tabs on updates. The GUI being ugly is all about personal preference and what your OS defaults to. The default theme of Ubuntu 10.04 is rather nice in my opinion.

Ubuntu is pretty much all I HAVE tried.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hell-In-A-Handbasket

my only gripe is its slow as crap compared to when i had XP on the same system ( yes i know the 10yr old OS compared to a new OS thing, but Linux is hailed as doing just that, running fast on non current hardware ( processor is AMD XP 3000+ ), and Ubuntu removed all but basic drivers for my Radion X800, im limited to basic visulizations and the whole system lags out with 3 web browser tabs open.

i put XP on it, and i can kick Half Life 2 Ep 2 with max settings, Put Ubuntu on it and i can barely run the GUI

was on 10.4, installing 10.10 now

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

my only gripe is its slow as crap compared to when i had XP on the same system ( yes i know the 10yr old OS compared to a new OS thing, but Linux is hailed as doing just that, running fast on non current hardware ( processor is AMD XP 3000+ ), and Ubuntu removed all but basic drivers for my Radion X800, im limited to basic visulizations and the whole system lags out with 3 web browser tabs open.

Try Peppermint OS, base on Ubuntu 10.04. It's using all lite weight tools and is blazing fast. I use the Ice version currently and I am very impressed with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo

This has been answered every time you have asked, even by the guy you just quoted to say that!

You extract the .tar.bz2 and then you go into the folder and double click (or single click depending on your preferences) firefox.

Honestly, I can't believe so many people have problems figuring out their way around the UI. My dirty blond girlfriend who is not a geek by any means figured it all out on her own in a week and never needed help.

There's only one Firefox file there which I can click until the second coming and still nothing would happen. Imagine my confusion with the answer being given.

screenshot20101011at145l.png

How is that any different than Windows, OS X, iOS, Android, or Windows Phone? I could easily list examples of excellent and horrible applications on pretty much any platform.

So far I haven't been able to find a Office suite that is even remotely as advanced as either iWork or Microsoft Office. I really can't replicate the presentations I make with Keynote in OpenOffice's presentation application simply because none of the effects are there. Even the way 3D graphs look reminds me of Office 2001.

Like really basic functionality is there, but I don't have to think the end result will make people go "wow".

Link to post
Share on other sites
8666

- Hardware problems. When I've got a new laptop and wanted to switch completely to Linux I took Ubuntu. Wireless was not working, ATI card support was bad. It took 2 years to get a fix for this. Now I notice that there is no 5.1 sound, only stereo. It either works out of box or there is very small chance that you (or anyone else) can do to fix it. Probably it is best to choose the hardware before going to Linux

- Software. I actually use Open-office/Firefox/Thunderbird in Windows too. There are huge amount of average user that will never switch to Linux as there is no adequate software for their profession under Linux (AutoCAD, PhotoSHOP, CorelDRAW). You can find a way to do it but keep in mind that you need to swap files with your colleagues. There are lot of hardware systems that need Windows to run their propriety software (Time and Attendance, Video Surveillance systems, Lighting calculation... etc)

+ This is a plus: I love the GUI consistency. If you change a theme or icon set, all programs will start using the same icons. This is probably best practiced in OS X (but there is only one icons set?). In Linux I love the Tango theme but it sucks when there are not enough replacement icons. Its a waste of time to have 300 incomplete icon sets. In Windows there are lot of programs that do not accept the windows theme (most anti virus software) or use their own icons.

Testing other OSs is a good practice and you can learn a lot. In general what is most important from the OS is the hardware support. All GUI stuff is changeable in almost all OSs. Second is the application suites. Thats why I am still using Windows XP and will probably use it for some more years. But I took the best ideas from the all OSs and implemented in my XP which is far more different from plain out of the box XP.

1. I use Windows classic theme (Win 95 style) and I love the simple design. No animations.

2. I use Tango theme for icons (My XP is patched with the famous Turbo Tango pitcher + weeks spend on tangofying other applications and other XP dialogs)

3. I use PStart as application launcher. It shows "start menu" in the middle of the screen, wherever is the cursor (seen in some linux desktop manager)

4. I use freeware and open source software that is portable. It does not write **** around and keep all their stuff in one folder. I have this XP for 3 years without any formatting.

5. I implemented a popup notification in XP like Glow in OSX and the one in Ubuntu as it is great, I also have the remainder that I need to take a break from the PC, Expose like tool for switching windows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AJerman

There's only one Firefox file there which I can click until the second coming and still nothing would happen. Imagine my confusion with the answer being given.

*picsnip*

Okay, I don't know the entire history on this conversation, but I did read back through a few of your replies and I can't say I understand what you're having trouble with or trying to do. You're comparing how easy it is to install an application, Firefox in this case, to Windows or OS X? Being a Windows, OS X, AND Linux user, I can tell you that Linux is probably the easiest to install on, not that any of them are hard. You do, however, have to take a few seconds of your time to realize that it's a new OS and you may have to learn new things to become proficient on it. This isn't something bad about Linux, it's just different. Just like you have to learn how to do things different on a Mac vs a PC.

Now, what I don't understand is why you have an extracted folder from Firefox that you're trying to use to install with. This is, indeed, the hardest possible way to install Firefox on Linux. In fact, I can't think of any reason you'd do it that way unless you were a power user of some kind.

In order of hardest to install to easiest to install:

1. Windows: Go to Mozilla's site and download the installer, double click the installer exe, run through several install screens, done.

2. OS X: Go to Mozilla's site and download the installer, double click the installer dmg, drag Firefox into the Applications folder, done.

3. Linux, Ubuntu specifically as noted from your screenshot: Open a terminal, type "sudo apt-get install firefox", done. (Though you should run a "sudo apt-get update" first)

Now, if you have some reason that you absolutely don't want to use the terminal even though it's the easiest way to do it, then you can go into Synaptic Package Manager and do the exact same thing with a GUI front end, though your clicks will probably take longer than just typing sudo apt-get install firefox.

You can also install beta versions of Firefox through Synaptic (sudo apt-get install firefox-4.0 I believe, but I can't remember exactly as I'm on OS X right now), and if you need to be even newer than that, you can install the Mozilla nightly PPA source and use that to install from as well, all of the above through Synaptic though and never once having to move files yourself.

Remember, just because you don't want to take the time to learn something new, doesn't mean it's hard. You had to learn everything you know about Windows or OS X at one point as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
James7

Okay, I don't know the entire history on this conversation, but I did read back through a few of your replies and I can't say I understand what you're having trouble with or trying to do. You're comparing how easy it is to install an application, Firefox in this case, to Windows or OS X? Being a Windows, OS X, AND Linux user, I can tell you that Linux is probably the easiest to install on, not that any of them are hard. You do, however, have to take a few seconds of your time to realize that it's a new OS and you may have to learn new things to become proficient on it. This isn't something bad about Linux, it's just different. Just like you have to learn how to do things different on a Mac vs a PC.

Now, what I don't understand is why you have an extracted folder from Firefox that you're trying to use to install with. This is, indeed, the hardest possible way to install Firefox on Linux. In fact, I can't think of any reason you'd do it that way unless you were a power user of some kind.

In order of hardest to install to easiest to install:

1. Windows: Go to Mozilla's site and download the installer, double click the installer exe, run through several install screens, done.

2. OS X: Go to Mozilla's site and download the installer, double click the installer dmg, drag Firefox into the Applications folder, done.

3. Linux, Ubuntu specifically as noted from your screenshot: Open a terminal, type "sudo apt-get install firefox", done. (Though you should run a "sudo apt-get update" first)

Now, if you have some reason that you absolutely don't want to use the terminal even though it's the easiest way to do it, then you can go into Synaptic Package Manager and do the exact same thing with a GUI front end, though your clicks will probably take longer than just typing sudo apt-get install firefox.

You can also install beta versions of Firefox through Synaptic (sudo apt-get install firefox-4.0 I believe, but I can't remember exactly as I'm on OS X right now), and if you need to be even newer than that, you can install the Mozilla nightly PPA source and use that to install from as well, all of the above through Synaptic though and never once having to move files yourself.

Remember, just because you don't want to take the time to learn something new, doesn't mean it's hard. You had to learn everything you know about Windows or OS X at one point as well.

This is a nice post. But, if you're not a power user, you don't have to worry about the terminal at all. And I mean by "power user" someone who has to have the latest thing, regardless of problems that may arise.

I am not, I gather, a power user, for my sins. I just install Ubuntu and let it tell me when things are needing updating. As you know, Firefox is part of the default install on Ubuntu. As far as I'm concerned, I'm happy to wait until (oh dear, a week or so from the next release?) the Ubuntu team have sorted out how to package Firefox for their mainstream users (I guess I'm one of those normal users!).

I don't have to think about it at all. It just appears on the updates. I can set the updates for "check once a day" all the way to "check once every fortnight". (This is cool for me, but awesome for the people I have to support computer-wise.)

Whenever I set it to check (once a day or once every fortnight or so), it will get me the latest "Ubuntu-approved" version of Firefox or whatever program I've got that comes from the repos (more than 20,000 potentially), and install it without my having to give it a second thought.

You can, of course, get bleeding-edge software by setting up the relevant sources, but my view is, why bother? I think I can wait a couple of weeks for each of my programs to appear updated in the Ubuntu repository and to download automatically for me from there.

With the repo, I'll get what I know works, up-to-date and sorted, after it's been approved by the repo-managers (Ubuntu, in this case). I'll get it without having to even think about it. It'll just be in the next round of updates. It's almost brainless, but then that is not a bad thing at all either!

This is indeed NOT what it was like when I used Windows, where I had to update individual programs on their own manually. That is also what happens on OSX. I have a Mac notebook, and it's always down to updating each program when it says it wants to be updated, or when I happen to use it and it informs me of a new version being available.

There is no way around it: if you want a clean, up-to-date system, the best way to go is with one of the Linux variants out there (how, I wonder, can you feel liberation until you've experienced it?). It's too easy. Windows and OSX just can't provide that sort of service, because they don't have the kind of control over software that you get with a FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) system.

Spread the Ubuntu LOVE :D ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
.Neo
You can also install beta versions of Firefox through Synaptic (sudo apt-get install firefox-4.0 I believe, but I can't remember exactly as I'm on OS X right now), and if you need to be even newer than that, you can install the Mozilla nightly PPA source and use that to install from as well, all of the above through Synaptic though and never once having to move files yourself.

So long story short: If I want to install Firefox 4.0 I still need to go through Terminal? Or is there a way to simply get it from the Ubuntu Software Center?

What I understand at this point is:

- Downloading and installing software like you're used to on Mac OS X and Windows is next to impossible on Ubuntu (as in website > download > run setup (PC) / move app to folder (Mac))

- If you want to install software the easy way using the GUI you have to use Ubuntu's Software Center or something similar

- If you want to install software that isn't in the Software Center you have to go through Terminal

Remember, just because you don't want to take the time to learn something new, doesn't mean it's hard. You had to learn everything you know about Windows or OS X at one point as well.

The big difference between Windows / Mac OS X and Linux is that with the first two I was able to find out most stuff on my own with no help from the internet at all. Case in point: Installing applications that aren't visible in Ububuntu's package manager.

I'm also looking for presentation software that is more up to par with Apple's Keynote or Microsoft PowerPoint, but I'm guessing that doesn't really exist? The reason I ask is because I have a netbook and was seriously looking into running Ubuntu full-time on it. But if OpenOffice is the best option I've got that isn't going to happen. :/

There is no way around it: if you want a clean, up-to-date system, the best way to go is with one of the Linux variants out there (how, I wonder, can you feel liberation until you've experienced it?).

I can assure you my Mac OS X installation is both clean and up-to-date. That includes all the third-party software I have installed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Subject Delta

There's only one Firefox file there which I can click until the second coming and still nothing would happen. Imagine my confusion with the answer being given.

screenshot20101011at145l.png

So far I haven't been able to find a Office suite that is even remotely as advanced as either iWork or Microsoft Office. I really can't replicate the presentations I make with Keynote in OpenOffice's presentation application simply because none of the effects are there. Even the way 3D graphs look reminds me of Office 2001.

Like really basic functionality is there, but I don't have to think the end result will make people go "wow".

I think what you need to launch is firefox-bin

Link to post
Share on other sites
AJerman

So long story short: If I want to install Firefox 4.0 I still need to go through Terminal? Or is there a way to simply get it from the Ubuntu Software Center?

What I understand at this point is:

- Downloading and installing software like you're used to on Mac OS X and Windows is next to impossible on Ubuntu (as in website > download > run setup (PC) / move app to folder (Mac))

- If you want to install software the easy way using the GUI you have to use Ubuntu's Software Center or something similar

- If you want to install software that isn't in the Software Center you have to go through Terminal

No, terminal is just the easiest way to do it, power user or not. That's what I meant by taking the time to learn a new system. When I can type "sudo apt-get install firefox" without having to find the download, open the files, and install, it's the easiest way to do it. So what if it's in a terminal?

And there are two different apps actually. Ubuntu Software Center is more of the pretty storefront type app to find everything. You can use that for anything you want to install as well, or you can use the Synaptic Package Manger which is literally just a front end on apt-get. That way if you don't know a package name you can type it in search and find it. Anything that is in the repos and could be installed with apt-get is in the GUI. Now, if your app isn't in the repo and you have to download it manually, that can be a little more difficult depending on if you have to compile, have an install script, or have to move the files manually, but that's the same as every other OS. Most apps you'll need are in repos so you don't have to worry about it.

So, yes and no, it's not possible to install EXACTLY like you do on Windows or OS X, but that's because it isn't Windows or OS X. Just like you can't just drag a single app file to install it on Windows. Different systems work differently, it's not a bad thing, it's just something you have to learn about whatever system you're using. There are some Linux apps that install just like Windows apps, but for the most part the apps would just be in the repo to install with the package manager since that's the easier way to do it on Linux.

Take a look at this link for a little more explanation on how it works. You just have to understand that a LOT of times people will tell you to do things through terminal in Linux, not because Linux is primitive or something, but because it's frequently the easiest way to do it. Using a terminal isn't a bad thing. It's a big part of Linux so if you have something against using a terminal just because you don't want to use one, then Linux probably isn't the best choice for you. They make GUI front ends for a lot of things, but half the time it takes longer to use the GUI versions.

The big difference between Windows / Mac OS X and Linux is that with the first two I was able to find out most stuff on my own with no help from the internet at all. Case in point: Installing applications that aren't visible in Ububuntu's package manager.

I'm also looking for presentation software that is more up to par with Apple's Keynote or Microsoft PowerPoint, but I'm guessing that doesn't really exist? The reason I ask is because I have a netbook and was seriously looking into running Ubuntu full-time on it. But if OpenOffice is the best option I've got that isn't going to happen. :/

I don't understand why you can't search and find most things on your own on the internet with Linux too. Look for linux apps online, then search for them in Synaptic to install them. If they aren't in the repo, they will probably have step by step instructions on how to install them on their website. It might be a little more complex, but I trust that if you can handle talking on message boards on line, you can handle installing an app. Hell, like I was saying earlier, a lot of apps that aren't officially in the Ubuntu repos have their own that you can add very easily and still install and update through synaptic.

I can assure you my Mac OS X installation is both clean and up-to-date. That includes all the third-party software I have installed.

But unless you have checked every app manually, or have something like MacUpdate, then you never know that. His point was if you install app your apps through Synaptic/apt, when newer versions are uploaded to the repos, Synaptic can see updates for every app on your system installed using it. Neither Windows nor OS X have a central installer system like that that gives you one spot to see updates for all of your apps on your system. It's similar to an iPhone App Store/Android Market type thing.

I think what you need to launch is firefox-bin

Well, you're right, you would launch firefox-bin to run Firefox, but unless you're a power user that has some reason to be messing with the actual files for Firefox, then you should just be installing with Synaptic and it'll be in the menus so you don't have to worry about it.

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.