Submitted by “Recently a blog post entitled ‘Why Desktop Linux is its own worst enemy’ has come across my feed-radar a few times. It’s yet another in the long line of ‘Linux ain’t ready yet’ jeremiads and it doesn’t really say anything new yet it got on my nerves. Why?” Ryan Cartwright at Freesoftware Magazine is on fine form with this wonderfully splenetic broadside. Read the full tirade at FSM.
It’s a good article / rant, but even as I migrated from Windows I was aware that Windows != Linux. They are a completely different experience and mindset. Linux has never existed to be a corporate or a consumer operating system (although certain flavors attempt to market themselves as such, which is fine). Honestly, I believe if Linux was a single flavor, and focused on money / consumers, it wouldn’t be even as successful today as it is. Linux’s success grew from being free to redistribute and modify it, and gave home tech monkeys something wonderful to tinker with and build.
“GNU/Linux cannot be measured in the same way as a proprietary OS”
As someone who works on the inside of a “real” data center I can say we are replacing Windows servers with Linux servers “and” Windows desktops with Linux desktops or OS X.
Yes, there is still a multitude of Windows XP and several Vista machines. Most of these came with the pieces of plastic or steel they were boxed in.
As someone who works in another “real” datacentre and supports the infrastructure at the O/S and app level, I can say that we’re not moving away from Solaris and Windows any time soon.
“Real” data center all use GNU/Linux in some capacity.
It’s probably starring you in the face but you don’t know it’s running GNU/Linux.
I think the article is correct that GNU/Linux is about having Free as in speech tools to build OSes with. That’s way different than selling one OS in a box. To get GNU/Linux capabilities in Windows you have to be a close partner of Microsoft and sign your profits away.
I think OSS software in general is moving into the mainstream and with that comes expectation that “anything” people download will be of high quality. Regular people generally don’t pay for software… accounting departments do or it just “comes with it free”, a few get stuff from those “free” places on online but most don’t bother with the hassle. The funny thing is that most of the vocal opponents of Linux will spend hours on Pirate Bay hunting for cracks for “expensive” better software but won’t spend a little time and money to make a linux system work.
It’s fine to not agree with someone else but ranting about it doesn’t help, unless you feel better doing it.
The point is (repeatedly) taken that what you get in a Linux distribution is the work of volunteers, and possibly a few professionals.
If you’re using a Linux distribution in the office, it’s not a problem. In fact, they’re likely better than using Windows for the most part.
Home usage is where it falls (a bit) short, depending on distribution. My point-and-click experiment with Ubuntu has left me interested but hoping for some reality to creep into the big picture.
Yes, I know that they’re volunteers but I still want things to work properly and so does the non-technical buyer who would be thrilled to save hundreds of dollars on a computer pre-loaded with some distribution of Linux.
I can forgive the volunteers for not being able to do certain things, but in the end, it has to work. Apparently, the author doesn’t see that.
Actually if it generates discussion (as it has here and in other places) then it does help somewhat.
Not true. The original blog post I responded to rattled on about mp3 playback “not working out of the box”, I pointed out that there are plenty of GNU/Linux distributions whee it does. Some others deliberately do not include it for reasons of freedom. If you disagree with the stance of the latter the former is available at no charge.
The thing I don’t like to see is that rather than educate (and thus assist) the end-users we hear that we should make the interfaces more dummy-proof. It’s like people want Star Trek-like computers and they forget the problems Picard had getting a cup of hot tea.
Sorry if some people didn’t get the cultural reference there.
cheers
Crimperman
If everything worked perfectly on Star Trek, each series would have lasted only one season. “If you keep going like that, you’re going to overload the thing.” type of statements were necessary to see how long people would watch. If it was boring who would care?
It’s true that, because of licensing and legal issues, Canonical/Ubuntu has withheld certain pieces as shipped. Free software has limitations.
However, a non-technical user doesn’t care. They want it to work and they don’t want to stare down 12 boxes (or downloads) which all say Linux, attempting to understand the differences.
Linux is good, but there has to be a clear leader in usability to get it past the corporate setting.
But there kind of is – to the consternation of many perhaps, that seems to be Ubuntu. I really have a difficult time anymore accepting that distribution confusion is a major factor in anything other than how to archive/distribute commercial software.
Prospective newcomers to Linux are most likely going to use Ubuntu if they don’t want to read about different distributions and if they read, then the choices open up to what, 4 or 5 total? (Mandriva, SuSE, maybe Fedora? Even though Debian is a breeze to install, no one’s going to because the same stupid ideas about it from like 1998 – OMG FOR GEEKS ONLY – persist until today.)
There have been several comments and articles lately commenting on (or bemoaning the fact) that increasingly people equate Linux and Ubuntu. I’ve argued before that this is not a bad thing.
I have a hard time seeing this as a major issue anymore. Whether it’s a good thing or bad, or whether people like it or not, Ubuntu is going to be what people probably try if they really can’t decide or don’t want to.
I argue that users of all distributions ought to be down with this, install Ubuntu in a VM (if they don’t run it) if they’re going to be offering support and then in 3 to 6 months, have a conversation with the user in question about what they like or don’t like about Ubuntu, and if they’re unhappy, discuss alternative distributions with them (translate this to “evangelize your own distribution!” if you’re that type of person.)
I seriously doubt that particular storyline was written for that purpose. Aside from that the point is that people seem to want computers to do everything for them but then forget that a computer will not be able to read their mind and so when asked for “tea” it will respond with a request for less ambiguity.
Actually , you are the one who is ranting.
Your the one who seem to have problem with making it work and get your work done on it. For reason and details unknown your unable to.
I tend to disagree with this article.
The author is complaining that Linux is being compared to Windows and OS X.
But isn’t that what many Linux advocates have been doing for years ? I can’t count how many times i’ve read Linux bloggers compare their OS to Vista or XP for instance.
Of course in the case of linux bloggers, Linux always gets the upper hand.
On another note 95% of the desktop market is a consumer market. That old chesnut about educating computer users, user participation etc is wrong. The majority of computer users want a computer product (incl the os). They don’t want to be computer enthusiasts.
It is perfectly normal to compare available products from a user/consumer perspective even if the philosophy being Linux is radically different.
End users might care more about what they get (user experience) than about a very broad concept like free (as in speech) software.
This is the typical “something for nothing” attitude that’s so prevalent in the Linux community. You think that hobbyist developers owe you something, and that it’s your responsibility to bitch about it when it doesn’t meet your expectations.
This is exactly why I never try to sway users over from Linux to *BSD. Most Linux users are demanding and thankless. They think that if there’s a feature missing somewhere, there must be a lonely programmer itching to solve it for them. They feel that “the Linux desktop” is close, but not quite there. If only those lazy [Gnome|KDE|Xfce] developers would get off their ass and give them more free code.
Me, me, me. Greedy users.
I wholehartedly agree.
I, for one, would like Windows and ESPECIALLY MS Office to be uncopyable.
I know, a real copy protection is not doable, but one can dream …
Then Microsoft can cash in for every copy of MS Office, and lots of people will find out that other alternatives are much cheaper, but still up to the task.
Unfortunately MS Office is not like Windows, it does not REALLY need patches, at least not as badly as an operating system.
Actually , it’s your BSD lies and bullshit.
Let’s look at the Linux kernel , it’s highly funded and manned with many Free Software volunteer and Free Software funded pro developer. Let’s look at all the BSD offers … Nothing that remotely compare even do they are older.
Let’s look at the X server , again the GNU/Linux user’s distribution and company are the majority.
Let’s look at the Desktop , Again Funded by GNU/Linux.
Let’s look at individual software projects again GNU/linux.
Let’s look at BSD device and hardware official support : NOTHING.
Most of the BSD user’s work at GNU/Linux company because no one pay for BSD work and no one funds it.
The majority funder and donator on ALL BSD Projects are GNU/Linux company and user’s.
When a community doesn’t pay it don’t get support :
AMD/ATI don’t fully support BSD
Intel Don’t fully support BSD
Apple don’t support BSD at all.
Sun don’t support BSD.
Microsoft don’t acknowledge or support BSD.
Via …
Dell …
HP …
Lenovo …
It’s clear that in reality it’s the BSD who are typical “something for nothing” and mostly demanding and thankless.
You don’t carry your weight in code , you don’t carry your weight in developer , your documentation is an absolute joke or copy of GNU/Linux , you don’t carry your weight in software , you don’t carry your weight in funding , you don’t carry your weight in support. ETC …
Your code is not even certified legal.
Either you’re a troll or an idiot. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the former.
I stand corrected.
LOL, ain’t that the truth? Linux pundits will compare it to Windows all day long, so long as it suits their agenda. They talk about how insecure/bloated Windows is, DRM hell, proprietary, etc.
But as soon as you flip the script and start talking about disadvantages of Linux as it compares to OSX and Windows, then suddenly it’s an ‘apples to oranges’ kind of thing and they can’t be compared.
WorknMan,
I think that they trying to say that GNU/Linux it’s not comparable to Mac OS or Windows because GNU/Linux it’s not about market share it’s about users being free.
Of course advocates always makes GNU/Linux vs Mac OS vs Windows statements, articles and rants trying to show users the advantages besides of being free.
I could be totally wrong as there are many GNU/Linux advocates.
and thats done because the freedom side of free seems to always be lesser important then the other side of the word.
microsoft, apple and the rest could have stuffed the apps so full of tracking code that people would have to have supercomputers to run then as long as they gave it away.
or maybe its a case of, as its free it cant be as good as that what comes with a 1000$ or more pricetag. sure, most download it of some torrent. but as the original price is higher then zero, it must be good…
sometimes i wonder if i could sell compost at 1000% profit as long as it sprayed it with gold paint first…
Simple answer is : NO.
Long answer : We are not the one comparing at all , or crying about the lack of certain company software on the OS , we are studying the competition or providing information to those who don’t know what’s available.
GNU/Linux user’s welcome real disadvantage , it means there is a problem and it need fixing. The reality is GNU/Linux is superior to Windows and Mac OS X , but it lacks the same availability and service support the other two have.
Not that it’s inferior , but there is no need for a corner GNU/Linux repair shop as the thing usually is not corrupted or broken down every day unlike the other OS. It either work or it doesn’t. It’s also legally and gratis from many source and vendor on the internet.
Why it can’t be compared ? Because all GNU/Linux software run on Windows and Mac OS X and any other OS that take the time to compile them ( BSD , Solaris , Open Solaris , OS/2 , etc … ).
– Mac OS X only run on Apple hardware.
– Almost all Apple software don’t run on other OS
– Most Microsoft software don’t run on other OS.
– Most Microsoft software don’t run on Microsoft OS
Thr truth is this : GNU/Linux is better , you just refuse to accept reality. Your also not forced to discuss it or listen to it’s user , you can’t accept reality that your incompetent and un-qualified and unable to make it work without help from expert , your also not mature enough to set your god like ego aside and learn where you make mistake. Hence :
“GNU/linux is crap because I ( insert coward name of the day here ) can’t make it work”.
Unlike you I welcome honest comparison or when people show real problem that need fixing. This on any OS.
I’m sure you have a point in your long rant or should i say the thing you call your long answer sadly it’s well hidden.
Don’t even bother with your usual sad puny insults they wont work as usual.
You do claim you don’t have a problem with a honest comparison and yet you make your usual bs noice when someone points out why people like you like to compare linux to windows.
Care to tell what MS software fails to run on a MS OS?
What can I say it’s not written in hamster speak …
So obviously your not getting any of the point being made. To be insulted you would have to be a person first …
DirectX 10
All DOS
all 64 bit Vista software
All windows 3.11
All windows 85
All windows 98
All windows 2000
most older games made by Microsoft and for Windows.
The newer software don’t work on older OS.
Most of the older software don’t work on newer OS.
How I know ? I got them , legally.
You disagree ? Let’s meet in court and settle your problem with reality once and for all …
Just wanted to let you know I hit the report abuse button for that tirade. Please stop the personal insults moulineuf.
Thanks , I hope you like your temporary ban for abusing the report system.
It’s Moulinneuf BTW , my real life name …
My problem with reality..? I’m sorry to say so but it seems to be you who have a problem with reality as usual. I have yet to see any MS software that can be run on a MS OS…
//Most Microsoft software don’t run on Microsoft OS //
That is the all-time dumbest thing I’ve ever read on OSAlert. Thanks, freetard, for making my day.
What people should be comparing here are preinstalled versus raw computers. I maintain many BSD and GNU desktops and servers and the users usually don’t have the slightest clue what they’re using. Nobody is complaining about “the desktop experience” or “the OS”, but they probably would if they had to install anything by themselves. And the choice of the operating system doesn’t have anything to do with that; it’s about users and their culture.
Many people here have done a mistake by buying something that they can not manage. I suggest next time you plan to throw away some cash consult a real expert first, geeks
Your the one complaining here , you can’t make it work for you , so it become everyone else can’t make it work.
Who’s really comparing ? The Mac OS X and Windows
people in order to reassure them self of there choice , that they made the right expense and investment.
If you can’t count that explain why you consider Mac OS X and Vista and XP superior. Your not honest anyway.
GNU/Linux as the upper hand in reality , we just reply to the same lies in order to debunk your usual lies and bullshit and point people who are interested in the available solution in the right direction.
What you compare is a Download you made and an installation you made vs an Industry OEM rescue DVD and or complete turn-key solution.
It’s not GNU/Linux user’s who have a problem with the lack of Adobe , Microsoft and Apple product on GNU/Linux. It’s the Windows and Apple users.
GNU/Linux is an industry. We offer more desktop solution in more diverse offer in more country in more language , on more hardware and device.
Excellent artical
It should also be mentioned that there is no OS where every application works flawlessly. There are always incompatibility issues, configuration issues. Mostly there are user issues. In the past ten years I have found that more often than not the issue is with the user.
In the end non technical users want something where they don’t install it or even think about it. Just want the product/ solution / OS installed for them and configured for them.
The one thing that keeps a lot of my customers using Windows is applications they have used for years like accounting software. They don’t want to learn a new product so they don’t. This means sticking with Windows and just having to pay for excessive amounts of maintenance each month. I wouldn’t be the only one who benefits from this. I would imagine there would be many others making a living because of this fact.
In cases where company’s haven’t been tied to Windows due to an ancient application moving them to using Linux has been fast and painless. Several times I have had these same company’s do the leg work for me in talking other businesses into both using our services and moving to Linux.
Well I got off track but good artical, well thought out and well written.
heh, one wonder how many there are that make a living out of rebooting gray boxes around the world…
and yes, force of habit is strong.
sometimes i wonder if people would be better off going back to cartridge loaded systems.
From the article:
Show me any modern OS that installs in 15 minutes (best I’ve achieved is 18 and I’ll assume live CDs are not allowed here).
Ok, so I know he said “modern” but I’ve got a good feeling that Haiku will keep the same super-fast install and boot times as BeOS before it. I remember being able to install BeOS in under 10 minutes on a fast machine, and booting in around 20 seconds.
If Haiku ever comes to fruition the way I feel it will, there will be a definite change in the free software world.
Edited 2008-07-12 05:02 UTC
TinyXP installs pretty fast. As does PCLinuxOS 2008 minime, although, as you said, Live CDs aren’t allowed.
I guess he meant that running a live-CD doesn’t count as a form of installation. I think most distros today as available as installable live-CDs, and I see no reason for them to not count. So PCLinuxOS 2008 minime does indeed count if it can be installed in under 15 minutes.
OTOH, measuring installation time in minutes is only meaningful if the kind of computer is also specified. IIRC, the Linux From Scratch installation times are measured in number of glibc compilation cycles rather than in minutes, so that they are hardware-independent.
Actually I meant I assumed that running a LiveCD didn’t count. Installing from one would be fine as long as you start timing from after you’ve successfully booted the LiveCD. BTW this isn’t my “rule”, I’ve assumed the original blogger (who complained that average users want to install an OS in 15 minutes) wasn’t thinking of them running a LiveCD.
cheers
Crimperman
Well, that’s exactly what I was trying to say, but it seems my wording was not clear enough.
Nice article
Yeah you’re right. Sorry, it was late and (raises hand) I am guilty of not reading your post properly. The second bit though (about whose rule it was) is valid
Thanks
I install Debian and FreeBSD servers in less than 15 minutes.
I guess you are not doing anything special with the system. There is installing the OS to get it running then there is installing to to get it working the way you want.
And the article is specifically about Desktop Linux, so what is your point exactly?
Oh, I forgot to mention that I install the 32 and 64 bit PCBSD in less than 15 minutes.
Wow, you must have a large penis.
Of all the rants and discussion this one was actually one of the better ones.
I do however still have a major problem with it. He goes on to tell that there are so many Linux distributions because they fill a need. Fine – any piece of software should be created on the basis of a need.
But the same goes for Windows or Mac OS X. Some people don’t care about the underlying technology and just wants to get the job done without spending much time learning it. And some people are just rather computer lillterate and dont get their curiosity stimulated by software. Which is quite OK actually.
I am sure mechanics would find me totally oblivious to the innter workings of a car, chefs would think that I am terrible at cooking and accountants would shudder at the way I deal with my personal finances. But there is only so much time available in life.
So just don’t call people lazy or stupid because they have no interest at all in which software to use and how to use it.
(this is not to say that there aren’t lazy or stupid people around – but using it as general moniker is wrong).
I am really getting to old for this “my software” is better/different from “your software”.
Think about how people you describe handle their computers!
You will come to the conclusion, that the first time they run into a glitch which cannot be solved by going to the graphical system configuration panel, they are lost.
They then will ask a friend for support, or buy a new computer. And it does not matter if a Linux distro sits on their system or a Microsoft OS.
My mother is like this. As I am more familiar with Linux, I set up a Linux system for her. Once a year or so she runs into a problem, and I have to solve it. With Windows she would run more often into a problem, but would more likely be able to solve it herselves. I estimate that the number of calls for my support would still be higher with Windows, partly due to less inherent security of Windows, partly to my being better able to do everything right on Linux.
It’s very true that downloads don’t reflect the install base. I know that when I download an Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, or CentOS CD, it gets installed on a minimum of a dozen systems.
The company I work for has been phasing out windows servers wherever possible, and getting away from other proprietary solutions like checkpoint. I’ve taken down the amount of Windows servers from about 8 to 4 since I’ve been at the company. I lost count of how many linux servers we have a long time ago. About half the company runs linux on their primary workstations/laptops, another quarter dual boots or has a mix of windows and linux boxes.
Granted, we are an odd company, since our product is linux based, whole dev team has to run linux, and the support department has to have linux boxes as well. Companies really do love it when you can save cash by not needing pay the microsoft tax. I got my last 3 jobs from knowing linux. The corporate world is starting to realize what a valuable skill set knowing linux is now, since it helps the bottom line.
One thing I’ve noticed whenever an article trots out everyone’s favourite phrase, “Linux isn’t ready”, is they either give no reason, or that reason is just as applicable to Windows. People say it’s a pain to install media codecs in Linux, and it’s often a pain to install them in Windows too, unless you know about the Combined Community Codec Pack or something similar. They say there are some things you still have to do from the command line in Linux, and claim you can do everything through the GUI in Windows. Try telling that to someone who wants to import a registry hive file. Every time I tried it through Regedit in my IT class a few years back, it killed half the registry by replacing everything below it, whereas when you add one with the command line it fits into the existing registry keys. Wanting to theme Windows beyond the default packaged themes requires a hacked themeui.dll (I think that’s its name), but Gnome just requires you to drag and drop a .tar.gz file into the appearance dialogue.
In summary, if reviewers applied the same scrutiny to Windows XP (my experience with Vista is limited, though I’ve just started work at an internet cafe where every machine is running it), they would probably say “Windows isn’t ready”.
I agreee with the article writer. Free software means money to be spend elsewhere. I allways get a childlike joy when i notice a new book is publiced on a subject that interests me.
To be honest, the original article makes a lot more sense than this rebuttal. For example, the original article says:
“The average consumer just wants to be able to pop a CD into his optical drive, wait 10-15mins and have a working operating system.”
I would say that is exactly what Joe Average wants. He won’t get it, and he knows he won’t too, but this is still what he wants. As an aspiration it’s a eminently sensible one. If all operating systems installed themselves on this simple basis, we would indeed have made some progress.
The only reason desktop Linux seems odd or “not ready” is that it doesn’t hold, say, a 40 per cent market share. If it did, it would be “ready” ipso facto and perfectly familiar enough not to seem strange.
All this is aiming at the wrong target anyway. The bedrock that drives Microsoft’s monopoly is their grip via licensing on OEMs and huge corporate accounts. Control the market for pre-installed operating systems and arguably you control the market, period. Arguing about “ready” or the quality of help docs is a sideshow.
We hear a great deal about desktop Linux because it is free and open – that is, it is prepared to be examined and criticized. We hear next to nothing about Microsoft’s private licensing deals. Oh no, not a word. Were, say, Dell’s contractual terms with Microsoft to be made fully public – fully, including side letters, marketing spends, threats et al – I am sure folks would have a great deal to say.
“The average consumer just wants to be able to pop a CD into his optical drive, wait 10-15mins and have a working operating system.”
The average user wants to open the laptop and have a working operating system. If they have to install it themselves, you’ve already lost.
On the topic of the help documentation in Windows vs that of Linux, Windows’ help documentation and troubleshooting wizards are utterly useless, but the “man” command in Linux tells me more than a chapter in a textbook ever could. When my sound card wasn’t working in Windows, I went to the trouble of going through the help wizard to try and get some more information. The wizard wasn’t wrong, but it’s amazingly intelligent answer was “Your sound card isn’t working”. Yeah… Real helpful…
Did anyone actually read the article – or just merely skim it? this is what he said further down (around 3/4 the way down):
“I say that as a part-time Perl monger”
A person, even with the title of ‘I say that as a part-time Perl monger” is above the knowledge of 99% of end users. The fact that is above the knowledge of the average user puts his ‘rant’ out of touch with what the regular user wants, needs or understands (in terms of knowledge).
Secondly, this ‘rant’ is a jump all over the place, first he talks about mp3 play back, then jumps to installation, then to something else. Its a jumbled mess. He has no consistency in what he is trying to express – to me, it sounds like a rant that has been fired off with very little structural proof reading to ensure coherency.
Take the mp3 play back; the simple fact of the matter – it isn’t included ‘out of the box’. Even Windows has mp3, wma and wmv playback and encoding out of the box. If he wanted to make a point then why didn’t he say, “if you need those out of the box, then a boxed distribution such as TurboLinux would provide all what you need” – that is the whole point of paying for a distribution. Not just ‘support’ but the final product that ‘just works'(tm) out of the box.
Regarding 7 versions of Windows – there is no evidence to prove that its either good or bad. If we want to split hairs then what about Red Hat and their numerous versions of Red Hat according to their ‘requirements’? what makes a workstation version different than a desktop one? Most people get what they’re given – the OEM makes that choice for them, and 9/10 the laptops I see, if they’re low end/el-cheapo, it’ll have Vista Home Basic, if it is high end, it’ll be Vista Home Premium – and on the rare occasion, Vista Business. Given how disappointing the ‘extra’s’ have been for ultimate users, I guess its a small mercy that more people haven’t been sucked into the promised of ‘Windows Vista Ultimate’.
As for the different flavours; there is a difference between distributions who focus on a niche area, and a distribution that simply exists because the the founder of that distribution used to work on Fedora but since he didn’t like the hair colour of the lead coder, he went off and made his own distribution targeting the same niche (not that it has happened, but most forks are based on something immature). The worse part, nothing is actually achieved through that split – if it were something major like what happened with XFree86, then sure. Alot of the time the split is over trivial things that don’t even register on the chart of valid reasons.
As for applications, if I hear one more “Linux has thousands applications”, I swear, I’ll scream in their face. When people say, “I want applications”, they want good quality applications that aren’t, “not yet finished, riddled with bugs, and the lead programmer has run off in a tissy fit because a contributor dared to question the roadmap”.
Grab a Mac, use Office 2008, use iLife suite of applications, try out Roxio Toast. I remember trying to rip music under Ubuntu into aac, using gstreamer. The cd ripper couldn’t rip certain cds because it estimates the last track the wrong size (because it is a mixed data/audio” cd). Video playback was either jerky or unsupported. The office suite, OpenOffice.org is a horrific train wreck when it comes to templates and features for university and resume/CV construction. Don’t get me started on printing – I have a ML-2010, and trying to get that printing; good lord – hell hath no fury like kaiwai’s scorn.
This post will be marked down to -20 – because there are too many people here precious about their operating system. The simple fact of the matter when you look at what is on offer, Mac OS X for some is either an unknown thing, or they’re looking at it, or all they know is Windows and go for it. For Linux, even if it were on offer, customers would go for it, find they can’t run their applications they want. They have card making software, encyclopedia’s, photo touching applications, budgeting software – the moment they can’t run it, they’ll say it sucks.
That is the reality out there. The reason I like Mac OS X over Linux is simply this. I get all the power of UNIX whilst at the same time able to sit back, run Microsoft Office, syncronise my music to my ipod, download photos off my camera with an easy to use iPhoto, make videos for youtube using the built in eye sight – and the quality is great when compared to the hacked up job that is usbvc/v4L and its list of unsupported features.
Edited 2008-07-12 11:40 UTC
This post will be marked down to -20 – because there are too many people here precious about their operating system.
People might see your post as off topic.
Grab a Mac, use Office 2008,
I would rather grab one if the prize is on par with a EEEPC. and spend the rest of the money on tech books. The joy of newly gained knowledge is far more important to me that any stylish box or software.
That is the reality out there.
Whose reality?
and the quality is great when compared to the hacked up job that is usbvc/v4L and its list of unsupported features
I’m quite happy with kradio and kdetv which make use of v4l.
Allthough i could certainly be productive with OSX. But i don’t like fink. The applications you mentioned mean nothing to me. All i need is the cli and vi while i’m listening to some rock station via streamtuner or kradio.
But I’m happy for you..
One of the best comments I have read here in awhile kaiwai
I recently got into a big discussion with a friend of mine I convinced to buy a macbook pro. He really loves both OSX and his laptop, but he is always complaining about the lack of free software on the platform, and talks about that as this big weakness.
So I brought my laptop over with a hacked OSX partition (i have an iMac at home in the living room that is frequently used, just couldn’t justify the cost to performance for a macbook myself), and showed him all the phenomenal apps I use regularly that are far beyond equivalents on any other platform (dragthing, transmit, textmate, etc). It was like opening his eyes to a whole new world, sure, these things are 15-20$ each, but thats the price of eating out for lunch, or going to a movie.
It boggles my mind when linux fans rave about app quality on linux.
He is right, there are limited numbers of free applications – but the free applications that do exist are quality. Adium X, a gorgeous application which exploits the power of opensource whilst at the same time, ensuring that the application fits into the whole Mac OS X experience.
The applications that are available are small in price (as you mentioned) – I mean, lets be honest, iWorks can be picked up for under $100; Office 2008 can be picked up for $200 and can be installed on three computers. There are numerous little applications for $15-$20.
People rant about how great Linux software is, and yet ignore the amount of abandonware out there; imagine you’re using an application and find yourself high and dry because the developer has lost inspiration – you’re screwed as an end user. Inkscape is practically a zombie in terms of development – appears to have life, but not much happening. Passepartout, another dead application that never livd up to the hype. Pan, great Usenet, too bad it was abandoned.
The list goes on and on. Free and opensource software is useless without someone to maintain and develop it. I’d sooner pay for software and get it developed than being left high and dry because someone has lost their drive to develop.
I was surprised when I saw this line. Maybe you mean some other similar project? I can assure that Inkscape is VERY busy, and is one of the more active projects on Sourceforge. It has many contributors, and is currently one of the fortunate participants in GSoC. Right now, it is going through huge changes, now that the big change from its internal rendering library to Cairo has finally started.
Possibly it only seems quiet now that it has begun using Launchpad for issue tracking rather than SF.net.
I hear you, and I partially agree.
I even used OS X for about one year, but in the end I went back to Linux.
While it is true that OS X has quality apps (but sometimes I find it lacking in basic ones), at the end of the day I prefer Linux because of its enormous flexibility.
And hey, at the end of the day, that is choice. But that doesn’t change the fact, though, that the author of the article has knowledge that far exceeds that of the average user – thus, making what he says out of touch with reality. its like me saying, “yeah, I could do that with a shell script” – but is the end user going to find it easy just because I find it easy? of course not. That is where the problem lies with the author of the article.
Actually, although you complained that everybody else skimmed the article, you seemed to have missed a huge point of it: you can’t measure the success of Linux in the same way you can of Windows. There. That’s it! That’s all!
Who cares if Linux gets 99% market share? What does a Linux developer gain from it? Microsoft makes a ton of money, OSS developers don’t. Is that difficult for you to understand?
Most OSS developers enjoy getting feedback for their applications, but obviously prefer constructive feedback over bitching and complaining. If they have 99% market share, what’s the point of having most of the feedback read like a twelve year old, whether its “Hi thx 4 teh softwares!” or “U f!@# it doesn’t work the way I want it to!” Leave those comments for the people getting paid.
Linux succeeds when it gives smart people a useful tool, and even more when they contribute back. Tell me why people do things for free, like:
– Document a cool thing they did with their car.
– Endlessly discuss a topic with others (online or in real life).
– Write software.
As soon as you begin writing code (or perform any of the actions above), chances are you’re spending more time than you’re saving. That means it’s being written in the hope that it will appeal to like-minded individuals. If they provide feedback about how useful it was to them, how it had a slight problem, etc, it’s really nice to know. Who has the patience to spend all that time and then have someone rip the software to pieces?
And, as an aside, you will continue to see huge strides in Linux usability. In addition to the steady progress on actual infrastructure by regular developers, there are companies with vested interests in having free software for a variety of reasons:
– Not having to license proprietary software.
– Not having to staff in house developers that work on something completely outside of the core business.
– Linux already does most of what they need and can be modified to perform the extra steps rather than building something from scratch.
I’m sorry if Linux makes you feel left out. You have my sympathy if you just want to ‘Get things done’ and Linux doesn’t fit your use case. I apologize if a developer was a real jerk to you. I guess that means the community didn’t live up to your standards, I guess I understand if you’d rather use Windows, but maybe someday we’ll get there for you
Good to see that your OS suits your needs.
Fortunately mine does suit my needs too: I can sync my music with my mp4 player, download photos off my camera with konqueror, make videos for my psp/mp4/youtube with avidemux either getting the video files out of my cellphone or my video camera, adjust subtitles and sync audio/video on the fly with mplayer, create pdf documentation for clients at work, create and test bash scripts to extend our products functionality, automatically fill mp3 tags from their audio footprint and grab covers for my mp3 library while also fetching lyrics and wikipedia info using amarok, selecting albums to burn straight from amarok’s collection, plug my scanner and start adquiring images with xsane right away without installing any driver, rip my CDs with grip, burn anything with k3b…
Not to nitpick your comment or anything, but I also have an ML-2010, and it has never taken me longer to get working on Linux than it is taking me to write this post. The cups drivers are there, and it has always simply autoconfigured with the KDE printer setup for me.
Then try to do anything more than typing letters and watching movies. I have been there, tried it, and frankly, it sucks. Besides a non-functional functional gprof, the lack of Valgrind (yes, I know leaks et al., it’s not nearly on par), and JDK6 ages after the rest of the world, I have experienced:
– On 10.5.1 printing stopped working after printing a few pages. Only a full restart solved this. (Off the mill Laserjet 5M, no odd drivers.)
– With 10.5.1 wireless worked pretty ok. The 10.5.2 upgrade broke things big time. Where things worked (although not perfect) on 10.5.1, I sometimes had to try reconnecting 15 minutes to a full hour to get connected with our university’s WPA-protected network. A friend, who has Ubuntu on his laptop never had any problem connecting. Imagine shutting the lid for a few minutes for a break, and then repeat this procedure for another 15-60 minutes. An additional downside, it’s all closed source, hidden behind facades, you can’t even see what is going on, and where it fails.
– With 10.5.2 OS X started having shutdown problems, it just froze, and that’s it. No clean shutdown.
– Then you though 10.5.3 was going to bring some relief. But no, 10.5.3 slows the system down randomly to turtle speed every few minutes. That persists about 30 seconds. It’s so slow that you can’t even switch windows.
– The video drivers for the Santa Rosa Macbook are slooow. Where the Mac Mini with an older GPU does the GUI effects smoothly, there’s a lot of flickering on the newer Santa Rosa chipsets. Not too much fun.
– Every few times that you insert an audio CD, OS X doesn’t notice. Both iTunes as the GUI “don’t show the CD”. And since Macs don’t have CD drive eject buttons, you have to launch the disk manager (normally used for partitioning) and eject it there.
Geeh, they can’t even get things working properly on the hardware they nail down themselves. Not surprisingly, I am back to GNU/Linux, which has mostly worked fine for me since 1994.
No it’s not. The reality is that some people have bad experiences with GNU/Linux, some with OS X, some with Windows. There is no magic bullet, and OS X is certainly not it.
Not that I use it a lot anymore, but Microsoft Office works fine with CrossOver Office as well. Oh, and that is with VBA.
Never had any problems doing either on GNU/Linux.
But all those don’t represent the average user. When the average user I hear talk about valgrind with their mates over a cup of coffee, then you can say it is relating to the average user.
Never used one of those printers before, and considering I don’t have your configuration, I don’t know what caused it either.
The problems *I* experienced were in issues in areas where Linux doesn’t do well. I expect to be able to do everything I can do on the Mac, with the same applications (or similar quality) on Linux. The simple fact is, none of it can be reproduced.
Iphoto for instance is a gorgeous application. From how it works to how it operates; its top to bottom a fabulous applications. Quite frankly, using this computer is a joy – its no longer something I cringe to use as I did with my PC laptop when it ran Linux or Windows Vista. I’m no longer going, “gee, I hope I can put off using the computer for as long as I can”.
Never said it was. I’ve always said that all operating system suck; some suck less than others. MacOS X is definitely a Windows replacement when compared to the alternatives that exist.
Why would I want to run Windows applications using a dodgy unreliable hack? if I am going to run Office, I want a native version of Office.
Try using the hackware that is gtkpod and find ones whole library becomes corrupted -never mind the tags on the aac files becoming corrected and the subpar quality of the aac encoding on Linux.
i just inserted an audio cd, and it shows up in itunes, it started (i think) ripping it for me and played it automatically. what is your problem? i think you have really broken hardware. do you have a real mac or did you do some osx86 crappy install? mac’s don’t have a eject button on the cd drive but on the keyboard. it’s the top most right button.
but more on topic, the author does not seem to realize the target audience for osx and linux is different.
this indeed sums up nicely the difference in attitude between apple and gpl developers.
He has real Mac hardware. I know him. And he says so in his post. Besides your irony doesn’t cut: Daniel de Kok is a respected developer (Libranet among others), has written high quality documentation for several OSS projects…
Being a Perl programmer does not make one out of touch. Particularly if your day job is an IT manager for around 140 end-users (as is the case here). It also helps if you support around 15-20 relatives and friends of varying levels on a variety of systems and have been doing this successfully for a number of years.
Hmm, did you read the bit where it said this was a response to another blog? The order used in this one is the one used in the original. If it’s a mess then it shows up the original one as such. As for proof-reading it was drafted twice before submission and professionally edited before publication.
Hmm you really didn’t read it that well did you. Particularly where it said “If playing MP3s out of the box is your thing try one of the distros that comes with that feature out of the box: Linux Mint, PCLinuxOS etc.” Some distro’s *do* include such things out of the box (and you don’t have to pay for all of them), others don’t – choose the one that suits your need.
That was said in response to the many complaints about there being too many Linux distributions and the confusion it causes. The point being that even Windows has multiple versions and causes confusion. So – as you say – there’s no point bringing it up on either side really.
Okay you’ve lost me here – where did it say anything about how many applications Linux has?
Other than the MS Office bit (which I don’t even try to do – by choice) I can do all this with my Linux system.
You’ve accused most people of scan reading but you’ve taken remarks out of context, made incorrect assumptions about the author and missed the whole point of the article. Which is? That it’s *futile* to measure the success or failure of free software in proprietary terms. Free software doesn’t exist to appeal to “consumers”, it exists to make the lives of _users_ better through the application of particular freedoms. If fewer people use it this year than last, it carries on. Sure some GNU/Linux companies are in the business of competing against Microsoft and Apple but the OS and the community behind it? No they’re not interested in that little tussle really. Sure there are plenty of people who see GNU/Linux as a way to kill Microsoft but believe me that’s not really the point of it either.
To respond to another post on here. Yes plenty of Linux “advocates” will compare it with Windows but the side of the fence you are on does not make the comparison less futile.
BTW if at any time during this you’ve found yourself wondering why I know so much about the author and the submission of the article, you might like to check my avatar and compare it to the author’s one. :o)
What – did you think I didn’t read other sites?
cheers
Crimperman
Having knowledge that is far higher than the average person does make you out of touch, no matter how much contact you have with the ‘little people’. Simply working with people doesn’t give you any insight on how they think or why they think in a certain way.
Then you would know that Linux isn’t a drop in replacement for Windows. I have nothing against Linux, but when you have articles complaining that Linux is compared to Windows and MacOS X and yet, harbour ambitions for the desktop – it is inevitable that your operating system is going to be compared to the incumbent.
People don’t want just the same widget, they want a better widget. You as a Linux advocate have two choices, you either stop trying to push Linux onto the desktop or continue pushing onto the desktop and accept the fact that it’ll get compared to the status quo.
You could have expanded on a few points, or re-organised the reply into key components.
Getting back to the average user, how will the average user even know which is ‘right’? hell, this hypothetical average user thinks his operating system is Microsoft Office. Again, if you’re going to aim for the desktop, you operating system is going to be compared to the status quo of the day.
Simply screaming, “think different’ isn’t going going to address the short comings of Linux that exist.
True, and there are only really 3 distributions worth thinking about these days; OpenSuSE, Ubuntu and Fedora; Ubuntu being out in front. For the average end user, if there is a choice – its going to be one of those three.
I’ve snipped the rest because I have addressed the rest in other replies to other people.
Edited 2008-07-13 05:25 UTC
Simply screaming, “think different’ isn’t going going to address the short comings of Linux that exist.
You mean the abandoned Apple “Think Different” slogan?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Different
Think Different meaning, “we at Apple think different” – it doesn’t mean, “we want special concessions because we can’t compete on merit alone”. What the person who wrote the article is demanding is special concessions for his operating system to be reviewed to a different standard. That is demanding, “think different” about our operating system – “don’t try to compare us with Windows or Mac, think different”.
Apple has never demanded that people who review their hard ‘think different’ when comparing to the status quo. Infact, they’re made their best growth my saying that Apple does it better than Microsoft Windows.
No, honestly, I’m not. I am saying something along the lines of : There’s really not a lot of point comparing proprietary OSs and a free software OS because they operate and have been developed under different principles. If the original article had ripped into the commercial offerings of say Redhat or Novell it would have been understandable as those companies are trying to compete in the Microsoft world. But GNU/Linux itself is not. There is no one entity making decisions about direction, features or what should or shouldn’t work. It’s a huge collaborative and almost organic work.
Now that may be a disadvantge in the Microsoft world but the fact remains is that to say “Linux is failing” in that context is not really valid because “Linux” is not a single thing and in that way cannot be trying to compete with Windows. As said if they’d said RedHat, Novell or even Canonical is failing I would have understood where they were coming from but it was a typically poorly-researched and ill-thought out rant with which I disagreed. I guess in that way you ( appear to ) have a similar opinion about mine – that’s fine as long as we are prepared to back up our views – which it seems we are both prepared to do. So that makes it a discussion and that is a good thing.
Sorry (replying to my own post), I’ve just realised which bit you were talking about and I think you got me out of context there.
The reference to the number of applications was not about how many browsers there are or how much “better” GNU/Linux is because it has “thousands of apps”. By applications I was (poorly) referring to the tools and utlities that add to the Linux kernel to make up the basic GNU/Linux OS. Most of these present as shell commands but they are written by a whole host of people and each usually has its own documentation.
I was questioning what documentation the original blogger was referring to in her gripe.
cheers
Crimperman
Who the hell in a University field or Engineering or any other hard science field chooses OpenOffice Writer to publish their serious works?
LaTeX/XeTeX/TeX and all that TeXLive offers drawfs others in such endeavors. Hell, writing Novels is a pleasure in LaTeX. The learning curve is steep and enjoyable–it’s a pleasure to learn and figure out how to make a quality piece of publication that is consistent in it’s presentation, from start to finish.
Call me a sadist, but when tools like LyX, Kile, TeXMaker, TeXShop and others finally add that elusive DTP Graphics layout tool to aide in publication the world of TeX/LaTeX won’t be seen just for academics or specialty fields.
OpenOffice 3.0 has some very nice features on it’s way. The added macro capabilities will go a long way in it’s adoption from the traditional MSOffice mavens.
If and when OpenOffice can do what Borland Quattro Pro did back in the day then it’ll be an even more attractive suite.
Office is used everywhere in the university, in every department. Mac users have it, Windows users have it. It is the de-facto standard for office suits – for better or worse. When you have actually used the features of Microsoft Office, then I think you would appreciate why it is so widely used.
For general office processing, correct. For publishing dissertation, research projects and more you’d be hard pressed to find it being used other than to get your writing started and later moved to LaTeX/XeTeX/TeX to be submitted to stuff like Springer Verlag, Addisen Wesley and more.
Great post. For some fun reading, surf over to http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/
… but we have idiots for Vista.
Really just joking, sorry if anyone feels offended.
This can’t help but remind me of filmmaker Kevin Smith’s commenting that his movie “wasn’t for critics” when Jersey Girl was poorly reviewed.
Edited 2008-07-12 15:13 UTC
I don’t understand the dummy proof comments…
Linux IS dummy proof…
If your a dummy, you can’t use it… What’s the problem?!?
People can make comparisons of anything they want. At the end of the day, use what you like and don’t worry about what other people think. End of story.
I agree with many points in the article, but not all. I think that Linux should be compared to other OS’s and that users should expect smooth experience.
Majority of people would not agree to “don’t ask what an OS may do for you, ask what you can do for OS”. They will ask “what an OS can do for me” in the first place. If they need to pay for that, they probably will.
I have posted one question here a couple of times. Who should use Linux ? Is it for everyone or just for “what can I do for my OS” people. If it is reserved for “chosen ones”, then large base of Linux users is not to be expected.
DG
The true problem is that no Linux-distro is a true hybrid between win32 and linux. Say you don’t have the linux driver for a specifik thing? take the win32 and install it in filemanager .
It can be done since both wine and reactos are opensource.
The hate for windows along linux developers makes linux fade away , no wonder windows 7 will include crappy unix/linux support that works worse then existing linux systems ,but some linux users will switch to that anyway bacause of hardware reasons. Linux users must absolutely reinvent the wheel everytime a driver needs to see the light of day .Despite that in the long run its much less work to bring win32 drivers to the linux platform if they just think outside the box.
Edited 2008-07-12 19:52 UTC
Uhm, why would you want to bring a closed source “win32” driver over to Linux? That’s part of the instability most of the time with Windows in the first place, not to mention that Win32 drivers would only ever work with a 32 bit OS. Or the fact that Linux supports a whole lot more architectures than Windows does.
The only thing I’ve ever seen that works the way you are suggesting is the ndiswrappers for wireless cards, and from everything I’ve read about that, it stinks and rarely works 100%
Linux should stop this petty trying to get the desktop market. Just as Apple should keep away from the server market. It is not that it can’t function well as a desktop (just as OS X server can function well as a server) but there many design issues.
1. XWindows all the GUI in linux is done via Xwindows. Granted it has improved in both features and play very well with the big dogs. The is still the fact it is a server based graphic environment. There is overhead from the fact that there is a networking component for remote access that hardly anyone uses. If you did use it over the network you’ll find it slow compared to using a web app for most apps.
2. UI Even the mighty Ubuntu Distribution isn’t quite there there are a lot of things that are incorrectly setup I try to install a printer and I am asked for Root access (being an company laptop I don’t have root access) Or just changing to advanced setting so I can get the Cool UI features requires root. Many of these are a throw back to server based thinking Changing a UI requires a kernel level module so you need more access to do this, and the extra CPU for this feature could effect a running service. Or the printers shouldn’t be haphazardly added and deleted as it could be part of an important background script. This is server level thinking not desktop level thinking.
3. Additional software installation. I am still not happy with software installation. RPM’s get you into Dependancy hell. Ubentu/Debian apt-get will only allow you to run “blessed” software or find someone else willing to run an app server. OS X normal install method of drag the icon to the app directory and everything is self contained while disk space intensive (current disk prices are less then $0.50 a gigabyte) and there is a problem with updates of the same library. However for desktop use it makes running and uninstalling the app a breeze. The current ways are really good for the server mindset. You need to know what is running on your system and if you need to upgrade something you can update a shared library and the rest of your system is secured.
4. Command line dependence. granted I work on the command line all day and I can do a lot of stuff with it. However most if not all Linux distro’s including Ubentu always fall back to the command line as the spot to fix anything more complex then grandma level stuff. There are saying I got my Grandma to use linux and other people who are considered equally less computer savvy and very tech savvy IT Professionals can use it. However there is a gap between the middle for the mostly tech savvy professional who knows how to do the tasks on the computer mostly by themselves however need a GUI to allow them to navigate properly via menu’s as command lines even with a good help screen often get to cumbersome.
5. No key competitive advantage on the desktop. Ok I will start sounding like an MBA for a second here but hear me out. “Free as in Freedom” isn’t that much of a advantage for most desktop users (at least in the short run) as the freedoms granted benefit second party programmers and developers. But not the bulk of the desktop users. Free as in Beer, still isn’t much of an advantage as when you buy a PC or Mac you get the OS for free with free updates – major versions which often means it is time for a new computer anyways. Linux’s stability and security isn’t that big of a deal and is often exaggerated (I have seen more problems with Linux then with Windows and Mac OS X) Windows 2000, XP and even Vista run fairly Stable when properly secured. OS X is more secure then Windows and runs very reliably. Many of linux reliability is not the developers fault it is the fact they have a hard time getting good drivers. However good or bad people a crash is a a crash and they lost the work they were working on it doesn’t matter who’s fault it is. Now don’t get my point wrong Linux has great competitive advantages in the area of servers, appliances, and imbedded systems. But those advantages don’t translate well to the desktop for most users.
False metric — and just plain wrong. Consumers don’t install operating systems. OEMs do. Therefore, the only metric that has any meaning is the number of copies of an OS that are shipped on OEM machines. By that standard, both Windows *and* Linux are losing market to Apple.
Sorry, but it’s ridiculous that all consumer-oriented distributions of Linux don’t ship with MP3 playback capability. This isn’t 1995. If you want to quibble over whether it should be in the default install, fine, make it an optional package. But put it on the freaking disc. Anything else is lame beyond belief.
Consumers don’t need to care about which of the “seven different versions of Vista” are installed on their machine, because OEMs preinstall a particular version by default. So, this is a red herring.
The proof is in the pudding. OEMs are shipping PCs with Vista on them. Obviously, Microsoft is working with OEMs to make this possible. Not so with Linux.
Here, he has a good point. The original author that this article referenced
was smoking crack, if she thinks that a typical consumer wants to (or cares about) install an OS.
It’s a good point; however, since nobody — meaning OEMs — is driving the consumer desktop market, it means that consumers have NO FREAKING CLUE about which distro to choose. Not so with Vista or Mac. OEMs preinstall a particular OS version on the hardware. The user has to actually go out of her way to select an alternate operating system.
Seriously, WTF. Not every person who uses software wants to be invigorated with a “child-like hunger to learn”. Some of us just want to play games, or do our books, or work from home, or just browse pr0n in peace…
“Hey, Bob. Check out this c00l pr0n that I downloaded. Doesn’t Linucks display it inspirationally?”
You’re wrong. The Mac is about as close as it gets.
Because you obviously don’t understand (or don’t care) how the world really works. There is no such thing as a GPL for television/radio. People like to get paid for what they do in the real world. Hence, advertising ain’t going away.
This is the biggest pant-load that I’ve heard in quite a while. Seriously, WTF. Makes consumers participants? I want some of those drugs. WTF does that even MEAN? The fact that a user got particular software from people who donated their time (or folks from companies such as IBM and Red Hat and Sun who are paid for their time) doesn’t imbue it with magic fairy dust.
Edited 2008-07-14 05:27 UTC
Do you really expect someone from FSF to understand ordinary users?
They want to “educate” users to think that this or that is wrong and that the Free Software approach is better.
This is like initiation in a sect-like organisation: you should forget what you have learned and “relearn” it OUR way.
Seriously, this is getting really annoying. Usable software is what counts! This is something the FSF fanatics will never understand.
Easy mistake to make but this was on Free Software Magazine (FSM), not in any way related to the Free Software Foundation (FSF). I’m not a member of the latter (but I do find myself in agreement with several of their viewpoints).
So don’t read it then. Seriously one reason I wrote the article was because I too am a little fed up of the way the fanboys on both sides rant without substance. I tried to do better, some have agreed, others not but in the end my point remains that no matter what side of the fence you are on comparing of GNU/Linux with prorprietary OSs is pointless because the two sides operate out of an entirely different set of principles.