Back from the depths of Linux

Printable View

03-02-2005
SpEcIeS

Back from the depths of Linux

For the last few weeks I have been engolfed with linux. Right up to my ears. ;) What a journey that was.

Even though linux is very nice, and powerful, I still enjoy the simplicity of windows. Linux offers so much in terminal compared to M$, but windows is a far better GUI than any of the ones available for linux, in my opinion. It would be nice to see linux have the same control of GUI that windows does, but at the same time windows should have the same terminal power as linux. The two combined, without emulators or exterior environments, would be a real thrill. :D
03-02-2005
Perspective

I couldnt disagree more about the windows GUI being better than linux ones. The problem that most windows to linux users have with the available linux GUIs is that they are NOT windows... well, they are not supposed to be windows. After spending a considerable amount of time using GNOME, i find the windows GUI horribly unusable (simply because im so familiar with the gnome features that windows doesnt have)

In short, its all a matter of what your used to and your willingness to learn a new tool. At first a different environment will seem less usable simply because your not familiar with them (whether it be going from linux to windows, or from windows to linux). With time, as you adapt and learn the strong points of one windowing system, the other seems to be less usable. Its all relative.
03-02-2005
SpEcIeS

I totally agree with you on that, but I have used linux for some time now and I find it very hard to choose, for lack of a better word, between the two. The pros and cons of GUI. :D

For an number of years I ran SuSE 8.1, and really enjoyed it, but I am finding that Debian is better. Simply because it is totally free, while SuSE is needs to be upgraded much like windows. Unless you are skilled enough to apply the distro upgrades, which I am not.

In theory the SuSE distros should be able to be upgraded using apt, but when I did it my system was rendered screwed. Mostly likely my fault, nevertheless I am not purchasing another linux distro. The usage of the free distros like Debian and Slackware have my total attention.

Gnome is a wonderful envronment, but my preferance is KDE. Fluxbox is nice and fast, but still I found KDE the most enjoyable, however gnome had smoother graphics, or so I thought.

Most of all I loved the terminal interface. Being an original DOS user from way back this brought me comfort and much more power. Linux is so very powerful in terminal, command prompt does not compare. :cool:

To sum this up, I just run both now. On one of my hard drives I have Windows XP Home and the other has Debian 3.1 Sarge. It is so hard for me to pick, so I just toggle back and forth pending on my mood. :D

Thanks for your interest and expressing you thoughts regarding this topic. I thoroughly the insight of others. :)
03-02-2005
Brian

Linux, simply put, is not ready for desktop in its current condition.
03-02-2005
major_small

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian

Linux, simply put, is not ready for desktop in its current condition.

any thoughts as to why? IMO, linux can be perfect for a desktop environment. For now, Windows will continue to be the dominant force because when mom buys a dell, it'll have windows on it. because linux is for the hackers.
03-02-2005
Scribbler

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian

Linux, simply put, is not ready for desktop in its current condition.

On what do you base this assumption? My home desktop PC hasn't seen MS Windows boot up in well over a month (and if I count the days, it may be closer to 2 months), and my office PC doesn't even have windows installed.

College campuses, corporate networks, and home users alike are successfully running linux desktops.

[edit]and it's not because I'm some techno-geek who can keep my system running smooth. I have two nieces (9 and 10) who successfully use their linux desktop on a daily basis, along with my sister who's area of expertise is definately not one that could claim geek status.
03-02-2005
Brian

You can't give joe blow linux because it simply isn't up to the task of doing what he wants to do without him having to try to decipher man pages or look through arguments about which window manager, which calculator, which text editor is the one he should use. It is better suited for servers or nerds.
03-02-2005
Dante Shamest

Warning: I've only used a few Linux distros, and mainly SUSE. The following post may be FUD.

One problem with Linux is that it has no useful defaults across distros. Take the user interface: GUIs across distros may use GNOME or KDE or some other obscure window manager. The only thing that's guaranteed to be consistent between desktop distros is the existence of a terminal, and the learning curve for new users is high. I pity the fool that works as a helpdesk technician at a company using multiple Linux distros.

No Linux distro I've used works completely out of the box. Some can't play DVDs, some have audio problems and most of them can't play the latest computer games (an important market factor when purchasing desktops). So why not just download the drivers, use WINE, etc? Because if you want to conquer the desktop market, these things have to be built-in as early as possible during the purchasing phase.

I think the only thing that will supplant Windows on the desktop is the Mac. They're doing everything right: they've based their computers on a stable Unix-like system, they have the best GUI, they control the hardware.

But most importantly, Apple has the best salesmen and marketing department in the tech world. Linux companies should stop pandering their wares solely to the geek/nerd audience. They need to make it cool and sell it to the hip/trendy group (of which many are females). Personally I think the IPod is an overrated expensive plaything, but it's cool to own one.

10 years from now, Linux users will probably still be saying "Linux will pwn the desktop soon!". :rolleyes:
03-02-2005
Fordy

WARNING

If this turns to one of those ubiquitous “Linux V Windows Trollfests”, then this thread will be closed.
03-02-2005
SpEcIeS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fordy

WARNING

If this turns to one of those ubiquitous “Linux V Windows Trollfests”, then this thread will be closed.

Hey guys lets not quibble about the differences. It would be easier to just admitt that they are two different worlds. :)
03-02-2005
Scribbler

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian

...without him having to try to decipher man pages or look through arguments about which window manager, which calculator, which text editor is the one he should use.

As a desktop workstation (which is what the typical windows user is) there is no need to go delving into man pages. Man pages are ony used for OS commands, they have nothing to do with the GUI desktop environment. Just like in windows, it's a rare creature that actually opens a terminal window. Joe Blow doesn't concern himself with dos commands. (Not to discount the power of the console window by any means, I'm just dumbing down hypothetically for your typical workstation users) Both Gnome and KDE both provide help pages similar if not identical to typical Windows help pages. There is no argument about which window manager to use, which calculator or even which text editor. Each distro provides a default destop environment, (typically gnome or KDE) which in turn provide all those tools for you.

2 years ago it was not feasible, but today it most definately is. All the horror stories told around the www about the difficulties of linux are the result of geeks who can't resist the temptation to poke, prod, and tweak their systems. Or those who can't sit idly in their seat unless they have bleeding edge experimental versions of all their software installed.
03-02-2005
caroundw5h

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian

Linux, simply put, is not ready for desktop in its current condition.

you are right....and wrong as well. Linux is more than ready for the desktop. And i say this even though i'm on windows and use it mosty.
The problem with linux is ppl keep forgetting its only a kernal, and the apps are what makes the distrobution.
Put a few software packages for some task and throw in some personal tweaks and you have a desktop. that is what Suse, mandrake and the very succesful red hat does. Even you can make your own distrobution, but then you face the next problem.
Marketing. microsoft has the market cornerd on this, in that they have been around longer and has a stronger word of mouth adverising. But linux is coming up still.
What needs to propel linux distros into the desktop/laptop market is an agreed on software packages - and i suppose the most popular will win - and a little more driver support on the vendor part.
who knows some little compant ACME in idaho but just be getting togather a strong distro with aggresive marketing and targeting waiting to put linux where it should be - and BSD for that matter. :)
03-02-2005
Maragato

I agree in some points like that a user hardly ever will open man, also is true that most crap happens when we are tweaking and trying new things. Ive used so far:
Slackware 9.1 (great teacher)
Debian SARGE (painfull installation)
Ubuntu Hoary (debian installation made right)
And now I'm running (well trying) Gentoo, (I still need to enable 3D acceleration for my GeForce), going across this distros except from ubuntu that was really great about auto-configuration, I allways had problems to set something, could be sound, internet, and specially X / XORG, everybody uses that crap and they still cant make it run out of the box, printing in linux is another easy thing made hard, IMHO printers must be plug 'n play. But MAN is a great thing specially if you are programming, about games, I dont expect people to play as much as it was usual some time ago, games are expecting for insane hardware to run things that IMHO lack of creativity (like doom III) so at least for me linux is funnier than games. :)
03-03-2005
B0bDole

>ubiquitous

I thought u were trying to say ambiguous, then I realized that ubiquitous is a word.