The Ultimate Linux vs. Windows Competition

[heatlesssun]

So I’ve been reading all these great things about Ubuntu, Fiesty version 7.04 came out last week. Plus I’d seen a YouTube video of LinuxMCE. It looked intriguing. I’ve been using Windows Media Center since it came out and really love my HTPC’s. So I thought it time to try the Penguin again! I sort of got up to speed about six years ago with Red Hat Linux, when it seemed that Linux was going to replace Windows. I do business software development primarily on Microsoft platforms; I was worried at the time that I needed new skills.

So I spent a fair amount of time getting up to speed. I was able to get around for the most part, but still was FAR from competent. The more I got into Linux, the more I began to realize that there was simply no way Linux in 2001 was going replace Windows, at least on the desktop. Why? TOO COMPLICATED!!!! Sure Windows has its weaknesses, but generally speaking, all one has to do is double click on an install, and the app will generally install and run. Linux was never that simple for the most part. Extract and build scripts, error after cryptic error, little decent support. I simply said the heck with it and got up to speed in .NET. Good thing I did as its provided a great career path so far.

So back to 2007. I’ve got an Athlon 64 3400+ Socket 754 system that has a hard drive enclosure and I simply swap out hard drives for the different OS. Good for testing stuff. Set up a Vista Ultimate 32bit install on a drive and have been liking Vista overall. Setup an install of Ubuntu two days ago and I must say that the install went very smoothly. Sound and video worked with no problems. But down hill from there.

I wanted to try to LinuxMCE. Well that doesn’t work with Fiesty. Read in a few posts that one guy got it to work by replacing libraries from the previous version of Ubuntu, Edgy. Yeah, that sounds like it’s not going to be a headache. So VistaMCE will have to do me for now I guess.

A neat, simple, and free shoot’em up FPS called Sauerbraten just came out. Its multiplatform (Windows, Linux, Mac) so I thought, hey this would be a cool way to gage Vista vs. Linux performance! Exactly the same hardware running the game (just swapping out EIDE 7200RPM drives). So tried it on Vista, and yeah, it er… operates. Runs would imply that I couldn’t draw the frames in crayon faster so I won’t use that term. OpenGL has problems me thinks in Vista. I’ve got 2GB of RAM and an X1950Pro AGP in this puppy (which actually runs FEAR on Vista okay BTW) and there’s no way this game sucks up that kind of power. Well , just for reference sake I tried the game on the sig rig and scaled dog is an understatement. Its old school and fun I think when it runs like that!

So next I try Unbuntu. Still trying. The build script is failing and I haven’t gone back to mess with it. Heck the game runs great on my Windows XP MCE so I’ll play it there.

So, the point of this rant is where is all this good press about Ubuntu’s usability coming from? All I wanted to do way play a game and oh my god! I NEED LINUX TRAINING TO RUN A STUPID GAME!!!!!!

I like FOSS stuff. GIMP is a great tool. Heck Ubuntu isn’t half bad from what I’ve seen. Lots of stuff that you can install easily from the app management tools built in. Not much that I don’t already have 30 versions in Windows already however.

I think the Linux community really needs to stop with the hyperbole. Linux simply can’t be a replacement for Windows for most people, not like this. It’s simply too complicated for the average person to do the simplest of things. I’m not saying that it’s junk or anything like that, just too complicated.

So flame away. Maybe some Linux guru can tell me how to get LinuxMCE working. I really want to; I just don’t want to spend endless hours doing it.

 

[MrGuvernment]

This is nothing new and why Linux has yet to replace Windows.

it does have a learning curve especially when people are used to Windows, people dont like change and tend to fight it (why people have vista over xp even)

Linux does require some patience.

 

[heatlesssun]

This is nothing new and why Linux has yet to replace Windows.

it does have a learning curve especially when people are used to Windows, people don't like change and tend to fight it (why people have vista over xp even)

Linux does require some patience.

The thing is that the IT has just been totally glowing about Ubuntu and Kubuntu, especially about there ease of use. I really expect a lot more. Red Hat 9 was just as easy to use as Ubuntu. I know that a lot has been done under the hood, but at the same time, Linux die hards just are seeing the big picture I think, if they really expect people to use this platform on a daily basis.

In some ways it makes since. If you just want to surf and use basic office tools, yep, its all there. But that's like 1995. Gaming, running neat tools, video editing, digital entertainment, stuff that most people are taking for granted is completely forgotten, at least to mere mortals.

 

[duby229]

Use the package manager... Thats all I'll say. Stop expecting it to work like windows... The way windows installs applications is very, very, very, very, very, very, very flawed... (hint, hint, nudge, nudge)

If a program or game exists, then a package exists... Learn what repos are available and use them.

 

[Stellar]

If LinuxMCE only runs in Edgy, why not just run Edgy?

 

[Stellar]

Use the package manager... Thats all I'll say. Stop expecting it to work like windows... The way windows installs applications is very, very, very, very, very, very, very flawed... (hint, hint, nudge, nudge)

If a program or game exists, then a package exists... Learn what repos are available and use them.

you mean the Windows installer? how is that flawed? not all applications for Windows install using the Windows installer

not all applications for Windows even need to _be_ installed

it's funny, people who use Linux primarily are so fond of the command line, yet somehow fail to realize the command line is also useful in Windows

there are quiet install switches for Windows installer files that will skip user interaction, among other options - one need only do as much research into it as one does for anything Linux-related

you can also quietly install a single program onto all machines on a windows domain/workgroup from the command line if the installer is an .msi file

 

[duby229]

I'm not saying anything bad about the act of installing or even the interface used by the installer. I'm all for GUI's, I personally think Synaptic is the bees kneees...

Instead the problem is distribution. Plain and simple. That easy, nothing more, nothing less. People are so used to going to a web site and downloading a program installer to the desktop, and then running the installer loaclly... Then they falsely fall into the belief that Linux must be the same way, and since Linux is largely command line driven it must be done with the terminal.... Then they go to the web site see a source package and try to install it, then give up in fuss....

When all they had to do was fire up synaptic and select the programs they want from a list, and if the program you want isnt in the default repo, simply add a repo that does have it....

Then by the time you tell them it was that easy they call you a Linux *!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!, becouse they have already given up, and dont want to try and do it the right way.

 

[nigerian_businessman]

The thing is that the IT has just been totally glowing about Ubuntu and Kubuntu, especially about there ease of use. I really expect a lot more. Red Hat 9 was just as easy to use as Ubuntu. I know that a lot has been done under the hood, but at the same time, Linux die hards just are seeing the big picture I think, if they really expect people to use this platform on a daily basis.

I think the miscommunication comes from the fact that these are IT guys who know how to navigate Linux writing these articles. Their gauge of easy is how much command line crap they have to do to get things up and running. In that light, Ubuntu is incredibly easy. But for the average person who's never used it before, it's very intimidating and if something goes wrong, on top of the problem at hand, they're in an unfamiliar environment with no way of counting on previous experience to guide them through it.

And to be honest, most reasonable Linux guys don't expect people to be able to install it with no problems. But a lot of us are more than willing to help if you encounter problems along the way. If you see some Linux guru saying "this is good enough for grandma (isn't it always a woman?)" what he really means is "if I install it for her and hide everything but the web browser and email client".

In some ways it makes since. If you just want to surf and use basic office tools, yep, its all there. But that's like 1995. Gaming, running neat tools, video editing, digital entertainment, stuff that most people are taking for granted is completely forgotten, at least to mere mortals.

Ubuntu is making strides that very few other distributions are making in this area. You can do video editing, you can do digital entertainment, and to a small extent games (although the limits on gaming have more to do with crappy closed-source video card drivers and commercial developers not porting games to Linux). It's not as easy as everything else, but people are trying. And free of charge, by the way.

Linux is not for everybody, hell, its not even for a majority at this point. But it is a viable alternative if you can be compelled to learn something new. And for your trouble you will be rewarded with free as in beer software and free as in speech software, the stability and security of a *nix based operating system, and a new skill subset that you can build upon.

 

[MrGuvernment]

When all they had to do was fire up synaptic and select the programs they want from a list, and if the program you want isnt in the default repo, simply add a repo that does have it....

Then by the time you tell them it was that easy they call you a Linux *!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!, becouse they have already given up, and dont want to try and do it the right way.

And this is the issue, people dont want to have to add things to something else to make it work, they do want to click and go.

like it or not for Linux to work for mom and pop and become main stream, it is going to have to work by going to a website, download a file, click and go, people dont want to go into terminals and command prompts and use switches to install some new little program, they just want it to work with as little effort as possible.

 

[nigerian_businessman]

And this is the issue, people dont want to have to add things to something else to make it work, they do want to click and go.

like it or not for Linux to work for mom and pop and become main stream, it is going to have to work by going to a website, download a file, click and go, people dont want to go into terminals and command prompts and use switches to install some new little program, they just want it to work with as little effort as possible.

You're not getting it. Going into Synaptic is easier than searching for something on the web.

You go into Synaptic and search for the package you want. And by package you can think of that like a zip file or an installer. You don't even need the name of the package, just a roundabout brief description. Like for instance, when I was looking to add NTFS read/write support, but didn't know what it was called, I searched for "ntfs" and found it. Try that on Google. Anyway, you search, then you click on the package and click "install". It's very straightforward and simple. In fact, it's more straightforward and simple than searching google and jumping through download link hell to get something.

Where people get intimidated is by the fact that explaining "click here, click here, open this, click click click" takes longer and leaves more room for error than simply saying "open your terminal and type in sudo apt-get install package". This opens up the misconception that the command line is the only way to get things done, which isn't true. There are GUI apps available, not in all cases but in most. You can, if you so desire, go to a website (the Ubuntu software repository website, etc) and download the .deb installer packages and double click them to install if you're so set in your windows mentality. It will just take longer.

 

[serialtoon]

I'm not saying anything bad about the act of installing or even the interface used by the installer. I'm all for GUI's, I personally think Synaptic is the bees kneees...

Instead the problem is distribution. Plain and simple. That easy, nothing more, nothing less. People are so used to going to a web site and downloading a program installer to the desktop, and then running the installer loaclly... Then they falsely fall into the belief that Linux must be the same way, and since Linux is largely command line driven it must be done with the terminal.... Then they go to the web site see a source package and try to install it, then give up in fuss....

When all they had to do was fire up synaptic and select the programs they want from a list, and if the program you want isnt in the default repo, simply add a repo that does have it....

Then by the time you tell them it was that easy they call you a Linux *!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!, becouse they have already given up, and dont want to try and do it the right way.

So THATS how you do it...i was wondering....still, i think on the Windows OS its alot easier to double click an installer and let it do its thing....i cannot see how much "harder" this is than Linux. But thats just me.

 

[-Sean Casey]

While Linux has been improving over the years, it just isn't there yet for MOST users. I like Linux, there are plenty of cool things about it. However, when preparing for a recent desktop refresh at work (we are a mix Windows, OS X, Solaris environment) I was not yet to a point of being comfortable giving it to the masses. So for the time being it is still Window's for mainstream and primary servers, OS X in our graphics department, and Solaris where it is needed because that is what the app was written for. Heck I still have two DOS boxes!

Linux right now is an unknown software to many people and people HATE change unless they see immediate and direct benefits. Until Linux provides this in an obvious manner to TYPICAL end users will be remain in its current state. Heck even with all of the backend improvements in Vista the difference was not obvious enough for MOST endusers to really grasp the change.

My thoughts is that MS will end up at 85-90% market share with Linux at 9-13% and the remaining measurable share being Mac OS.

 

[MrGuvernment]

You're not getting it. Going into Synaptic is easier than searching for something on the web.

You go into Synaptic and search for the package you want. And by package you can think of that like a zip file or an installer. You don't even need the name of the package, just a roundabout brief description. Like for instance, when I was looking to add NTFS read/write support, but didn't know what it was called, I searched for "ntfs" and found it. Try that on Google. Anyway, you search, then you click on the package and click "install". It's very straightforward and simple. In fact, it's more straightforward and simple than searching google and jumping through download link hell to get something.

Where people get intimidated is by the fact that explaining "click here, click here, open this, click click click" takes longer and leaves more room for error than simply saying "open your terminal and type in sudo apt-get install package". This opens up the misconception that the command line is the only way to get things done, which isn't true. There are GUI apps available, not in all cases but in most. You can, if you so desire, go to a website (the Ubuntu software repository website, etc) and download the .deb installer packages and double click them to install if you're so set in your windows mentality. It will just take longer.

Thanks for the clarification, i had thought it was a program you install, and then it basically takes your download, and wraps it in a purdy installer to install it

 

[nigerian_businessman]

Thanks for the clarification, i had thought it was a program you install, and then it basically takes your download, and wraps it in a purdy installer to install it

No problem at all. I know it can be very confusing. It's a totally different way of doing things, and a lot of the time it goes in the complete opposite direction of the conventional Windows PC way, which makes a lot of people (including myself at one point in time!) scratch their heads and say "WTF??!"

Rest assured, it is getting better. Anyone who attempted to set up a PPP Dial-Up connection in the early days of Linux can attest to that.

 

[moetop]

....... Anyone who attempted to set up a PPP Dial-Up connection in the early days of Linux can attest to that.

A-MEN!!!

 

[eeyrjmr]

No problem at all. I know it can be very confusing. It's a totally different way of doing things, and a lot of the time it goes in the complete opposite direction of the conventional Windows PC way, which makes a lot of people (including myself at one point in time!) scratch their heads and say "WTF??!"

Rest assured, it is getting better. Anyone who attempted to set up a PPP Dial-Up connection in the early days of Linux can attest to that.

Hell YER!!! got that working using my mobile phone using some early Redhat, fantastic 28k/s. Admitidly it took pretty much the first semester of my final year (the time I really got into using linux) to not only get it working, but get it working via just press teh button

kids these days are spoilt

 

[eeyrjmr]

you mean the Windows installer? how is that flawed? not all applications for Windows install using the Windows installer

not all applications for Windows even need to _be_ installed

it's funny, people who use Linux primarily are so fond of the command line, yet somehow fail to realize the command line is also useful in Windows

there are quiet install switches for Windows installer files that will skip user interaction, among other options - one need only do as much research into it as one does for anything Linux-related

you can also quietly install a single program onto all machines on a windows domain/workgroup from the command line if the installer is an .msi file

Think of a windows installer (be it a setup.exe, a *.msi or some other automatic installer) like a RedHat *.RPM file or a Debian *.DEB file

These induvidual files have every thing needed to get a program working
and this is where the difference ends...

To install program x on windows... you goto their website and then have to find the download section and download the installer, you may have to download some dependancies (however.. windows programs tend to package up alot to make it so you don't need to... have a look at the inkscape working directory.. GTK and python in the working directory.. even tho both runtimes are on my XP system)
you then install it and go though on average 6 questions just to install the program (some may need a reboot... more a flaw with how Windows handle file location w.r.t. unable to replace a file that is open... thank god for inode referencing!!!)
You carry on using said program.
How do you update? you have to check for an update and then goto said site and download the update (some programs might have an auto-updater... but do you really want 100 little programs that are running on yr system that always check for updates? check yr startup list... I know I have to prune it quite often in windows). The old version must be un-installed (sometimes if you are lucky the installer will uninstall the old version for you)

To install program y on Ubuntu you just startup the local package browser, locate it in the list (with very good seach capability) and click install. And that is it (it goes into the correct system location and all configuration is done at runtime, not part at install time).
What do you do for checking for update? nothing... the distro at first boot will check it all for you... so rather then 100 little progs, one prog does the checking and auto-updating for you

it has got to the state where my linux system is what I use to check for updates for my gentoo system. Gentoo's package manager pulls in a new version of pyGTK automatically (well ok a bit manual for gentoo ), so I Manually download the windows version


What about drivers? for windows you gotta check an update exists, download, unistall old driver (you should then reboot), some cases you need to clean out the drivers, install new drivers and finally reboot

Linux? nop package manager will auto-update for you and that is it. With the likes of GFX drivers you don't even have to reboot, just restart X
Sure a new kernel will need a reboot, but new kernels are every few months, most device drivers are released as modules thus no reboot is needed.

I wouldn't say the windows method is flawed... it is dated, severly dated. Sure WindowsUpdate sorts out patch's for the Operating system (and office) but that is it, nothing else.

 

[heatlesssun]

eeyrjmr,

Is the local package browser you're referring to here Synaptic? I'm going to see if there is a package for Sauerbraten tonight. Is there one for Beryl?

 

[heatlesssun]

I wouldn't say the windows method is flawed... it is dated, severly dated. Sure WindowsUpdate sorts out patch's for the Operating system (and office) but that is it, nothing else.

Actually, Windows Update pushes out updates for drivers as well. Also, almost no application needs to actually reboot Windows application these days, though a lot of times the installer tells you that anyway.

Yes, nVidia and ATI drivers for Windows require a removal and a reboot.

The idea of a central installer is nice and all, but in reality it would be a bear to maintain every Windows application in a central repository. Is very Linux application maintained in it? No.

Here's where I think that some in the Linux community miss the point. Is the central repository a great thing? Sure. But at the same time, all I wanted to was play a game. And its taking several hours now to try to figure that out. Not fixing an error, just trying to figure out how START the install process properly.

Maybe the Windows system is dated, but all I had to do was double click an icon, confirm the install location (on Vista I has to allow it to install) and I was playing in a few minutes. And yes, I know Linux is not Windows, but I wouldn't have this problem with a Mac, which has an OS that's more like Linux than Windows.

Sometimes the simplest solution is best.

 

[duby229]

Actually, Windows Update pushes out updates for drivers as well. Also, almost no application needs to actually reboot Windows application these days, though a lot of times the installer tells you that anyway.

Yes, nVidia and ATI drivers for Windows require a removal and a reboot.

The idea of a central installer is nice and all, but in reality it would be a bear to maintain every Windows application in a central repository. Is very Linux application maintained in it? No.

Here's where I think that some in the Linux community miss the point. Is the central repository a great thing? Sure. But at the same time, all I wanted to was play a game. And its taking several hours now to try to figure that out. Not fixing an error, just trying to figure out how START the install process properly.

Maybe the Windows system is dated, but all I had to do was double click an icon, confirm the install location (on Vista I has to allow it to install) and I was playing in a few minutes. And yes, I know Linux is not Windows, but I wouldn't have this problem with a Mac, which has an OS that's more like Linux than Windows.

Sometimes the simplest solution is best.

The simplest solution is emerge -va sauerbraten, unfortunately some people need a GUI, and that would be where Ubuntu and synaptic comes in. The only reason you had trouble is that you want and expect it to work like windows... That aint gonna happen ever. Get used to it. If you had come it to it expecting a different interface, you'd a figured it out in less then 2 minutes becouse Ubuntu holds your hand....

 

[eeyrjmr]

Actually, Windows Update pushes out updates for drivers as well. Also, almost no application needs to actually reboot Windows application these days, though a lot of times the installer tells you that anyway.

Dated drivers.
My soundcard works pants with the one MS pushes and my wireless is really crap with the one update tries - these still require a reboot

The idea of a central installer is nice and all, but in reality it would be a bear to maintain every Windows application in a central repository. Is very Linux application maintained in it? No.

Not that hard really. Not every single possible app is "maintained" but an extreamly large amount compiles,patched and hosted at the main repository and that is only from the official sources. You then have the secondary repositories that fill in all the blanks.

Can't talk too much about other distros, but Gentoo (the one I have) has a massive database with all apps checked out by the dev's (the shear size of it is what has landed gentoo in a developer problem and a QA problem). Don't underestimate the size of the repository
http://packages.gentoo.org/archs/x86/
This is a weblink to an online version of the local portage list that get's update with emerge --sync just try searching for things. Gentoo also keeps older version's of packages (to a certain level)

Here's where I think that some in the Linux community miss the point. Is the central repository a great thing? Sure. But at the same time, all I wanted to was play a game. And its taking several hours now to try to figure that out. Not fixing an error, just trying to figure out how START the install process properly.

Yer I game as well...
I want to play UT2004 and I aint installed it yet. I type emerge ut2004 (I could use porthole, the portage GUI and just click on it) and it asks for the CD AND also get me all the patch's and bonus packs without me hunting for them as well as putting a nice entry on my GNOME menu for easy start

Also say I want to play W:ET I just type emerge enemy-territory and it will just download and install it for me, with a nice entry in my GNOME menu when finished to start playing

Maybe the Windows system is dated, but all I had to do was double click an icon, confirm the install location (on Vista I has to allow it to install) and I was playing in a few minutes. And yes, I know Linux is not Windows, but I wouldn't have this problem with a Mac, which has an OS that's more like Linux than Windows.

Sometimes the simplest solution is best.

Its easier in linux, rather then searching the webby for the installer, or the CD, you goto yr package manager and search there (CD-based games can be installed from there by double-clicking on the equiv installer btw ). The benefit is it comes under the management of the package management, thus update's are applied without you even knowing there is an update

I have said it many a time but here goes... Linux isn't for everyone just like windows isn't for everyone. There are parts of windows that piss people off just like there are parts of linux that piss people off. Linux isn't hard it is just different, windows isn't easy it is just 2nd nature.
Things really have come a long way from the early days of linux, package management has ment installation is soo easy (no rpm-hell) and updates are easy. You may not like the idea but once you have had to update GIMP on windows a few times and had to track down GTK to install before GIMP, and then get both of them when an update occurs you come to apreaciate the shear power that is a modern linux package-management system

 

[heatlesssun]

The simplest solution is emerge -va sauerbraten, unfortunately some people need a GUI, and that would be where Ubuntu and synaptic comes in. The only reason you had trouble is that you want and expect it to work like windows... That aint gonna happen ever. Get used to it. If you had come it to it expecting a different interface, you'd a figured it out in less then 2 minutes becouse Ubuntu holds your hand....

I'll try that. Thanks.

It's not that I was expecting to work like Windows. I followed the install instructions that came with it, so I didn't know what to do at that point. Most of the time the instructions are supposed to work.

 

[eeyrjmr]

You're not getting it. Going into Synaptic is easier than searching for something on the web.

You go into Synaptic and search for the package you want. And by package you can think of that like a zip file or an installer. You don't even need the name of the package, just a roundabout brief description. Like for instance, when I was looking to add NTFS read/write support, but didn't know what it was called, I searched for "ntfs" and found it. Try that on Google. Anyway, you search, then you click on the package and click "install". It's very straightforward and simple. In fact, it's more straightforward and simple than searching google and jumping through download link hell to get something.

Where people get intimidated is by the fact that explaining "click here, click here, open this, click click click" takes longer and leaves more room for error than simply saying "open your terminal and type in sudo apt-get install package". This opens up the misconception that the command line is the only way to get things done, which isn't true. There are GUI apps available, not in all cases but in most. You can, if you so desire, go to a website (the Ubuntu software repository website, etc) and download the .deb installer packages and double click them to install if you're so set in your windows mentality. It will just take longer.

qft.

 

[heatlesssun]

How about a DVD codec?

I'll play around with this when I get home. Once again thanks for the info!

 

[eeyrjmr]

How about a DVD codec?

I'll play around with this when I get home. Once again thanks for the info!

yup

 

[nigerian_businessman]

The simplest solution is emerge -va sauerbraten, unfortunately some people need a GUI, and that would be where Ubuntu and synaptic comes in. The only reason you had trouble is that you want and expect it to work like windows... That aint gonna happen ever. Get used to it. If you had come it to it expecting a different interface, you'd a figured it out in less then 2 minutes becouse Ubuntu holds your hand....

Not trying to come down harshly upon you, so don't take it that way please. However, I just wanted to say that a lot more good can be done for the Linux community through patience and hand holding than elitism. A lot of Windows users do want and expect Linux to work like Windows. And that's not an unreasonable thing, and in fact there are distributions working towards creating that kind of environment in Unix. Ubuntu in many ways is one of them. There's no need to talk down to someone who's having a problem understanding Linux. "Get used to it" doesn't help someone solve their problem. We were all noobs at one point in time or another.

 

[duby229]

Not trying to come down harshly upon you, so don't take it that way please. However, I just wanted to say that a lot more good can be done for the Linux community through patience and hand holding than elitism. A lot of Windows users do want and expect Linux to work like Windows. And that's not an unreasonable thing, and in fact there are distributions working towards creating that kind of environment in Unix. Ubuntu in many ways is one of them. There's no need to talk down to someone who's having a problem understanding Linux. "Get used to it" doesn't help someone solve their problem. We were all noobs at one point in time or another.

I can understand your point of view, however it does nothing more the reinforce this behavior, and doesnt solve the problem. People need to change there ideas, and by telling people that they are doing it right, when in fact they are not....

Well I'll just stop while I'm ahead.

 

[Hypernova]

No matter how complete repo's are they simply won't be able to cover EVERYTHING out there. One major issue I think is that most authors offer their apps in source only since many distros needs their own compiled binaries. While Joe average won't have a problem with finding stuff on repo's (and as time goes on would probably prefer it that way) when he encounters some random app on the net that he would like to try (malware or not) he ends up with a tar ball of source files that he won't have a clue what to do with. Where as on Win32 it's a click and go.

IMO if your are going for the central management route might as well go for the full course. A perfect system is probably one like wikipedia which offers easy upload access and free processing power (or create something like compile@home?) to auto compile the source for most distros out there. An author offers the source on his own site have something like repo://blah link that linux would recognise and use it to go to the right repo's to fetch the matching binaries for the distro in use.

I know I'm trying to herd cats here but one can dream...

 

[jimmyb]

Yeah, my only complaint with the repository system is that you have to learn how to install programs in two different ways (as opposed to in Windows or OSX, where it is usually quite consistent).

 

[heatlesssun]

Okay Linux guru's, someone hear mentioned using the emerge command to install. I'm running Ubuntu 7.04 and from a shell running emerge gives me command not found.

Is there something I need to install? Thanks!

 

[Stellar]

emerge is a Gentoo command, i'm not sure why he mentioned it

i'm not even sure the package he mentioned is available in any Debian/Ubuntu repos

 

[XOR != OR]

you mean the Windows installer? how is that flawed? not all applications for Windows install using the Windows installer

not all applications for Windows even need to _be_ installed

it's funny, people who use Linux primarily are so fond of the command line, yet somehow fail to realize the command line is also useful in Windows

there are quiet install switches for Windows installer files that will skip user interaction, among other options - one need only do as much research into it as one does for anything Linux-related

you can also quietly install a single program onto all machines on a windows domain/workgroup from the command line if the installer is an .msi file

Oh, you are funny. I'm giggling right now, but I'm not sure if it's because of what you say or the madness of working on unattended installs finally getting to me.

Some MSIs will install quietly. Most do not. Most require an MST ( or appropriate variables ), which is difficult to make. Some of those won't even install quietly, or they'll mess up when you try.

And that's just MSIs. There are a whole slew of installers people use; Installshield is the other big one. None of them are fun to attempt to repackage, and most won't work for an unattended install. This is where linux has windows beat; Which is funny, because with the experience MS has in the corporate environment you'd think they'd have this down.

 

[Stellar]

Oh, you are funny. I'm giggling right now, but I'm not sure if it's because of what you say or the madness of working on unattended installs finally getting to me.

Some MSIs will install quietly. Most do not. Most require an MST ( or appropriate variables ), which is difficult to make. Some of those won't even install quietly, or they'll mess up when you try.

And that's just MSIs. There are a whole slew of installers people use; Installshield is the other big one. None of them are fun to attempt to repackage, and most won't work for an unattended install. This is where linux has windows beat; Which is funny, because with the experience MS has in the corporate environment you'd think they'd have this down.

i did not say one is better than the other - i asked to expound what is "flawed" about the way _windows_ installs applications

i will say that we have no issues whatsoever repackaging all of the apps we use in our enterprise for quiet installs using Altiris RapidInstall

actually, it's a joy to work with - it will be even more of a joy when we go live with SVS, which I have yet to come across anything similar in the Linux realm

my problem in particular is in the Linux realm you have so many different ways of deploying software between distro-specific package managers, distro-specific packages, tarball'd source packages, shell scripts, and executables

in windows even different installer applications are straight-forward and there are generally no dependency issues to speak of

 

[XOR != OR]

i did not say one is better than the other - i asked to expound what is "flawed" about the way _windows_ installs applications

Well, how about by default most window installs don't come with a quiet way of installing them? Or the way some of them overwrite dll files that other programs depend on. Or how there are about half a dozen major installers out there, and a bunch of piddly little installers ( all this for one OS mind you ).

Compare this to say, CentOS. Assuming it's in the repo, it's a simply yum command away. Can be done completely transparently too, scripted and everything. Debian has it's own methods as well, which I will not comment on due to my lack of experience with.

i will say that we have no issues whatsoever repackaging all of the apps we use in our enterprise for quiet installs using Altiris RapidInstall

I am envious. I have zenworks and..uh...well, I have zenworks.

my problem in particular is in the Linux realm you have so many different ways of deploying software between distro-specific package managers, distro-specific packages, tarball'd source packages, shell scripts, and executables

Which is why you choose a single distro and go with it. Where a lot of comparisons between linux and windows fall down is that they compare windows to ALL distributions of linux, which really isn't a valid comparison. A more accurate comparison would happen between windows and a specific distro.

in windows even different installer applications are straight-forward and there are generally no dependency issues to speak of

MSI need their engines installed. This has gotten me more than once; 9.0, 10.0, 10.5, 11.0. Installshield is actually easier to work with most days than msi, but you lose the handy features of an msi ( repairability and integration into the OS ).

 

[general]

"Instead the problem is distribution. Plain and simple. That easy, nothing more, nothing less. People are so used to going to a web site and downloading a program installer to the desktop, and then running the installer loaclly... Then they falsely fall into the belief that Linux must be the same way, and since Linux is largely command line driven it must be done with the terminal.... Then they go to the web site see a source package and try to install it, then give up in fuss....

When all they had to do was fire up synaptic and select the programs they want from a list, and if the program you want isnt in the default repo, simply add a repo that does have it...."

Yes, and when the people who make the distros pull their heads out of their backsides and do things like Mac and Windows in this regard people will start using linux. Synaptic shows you a ton of packages, you don't need many of them and you also have to mess around with making sure that your package manager is pointing in the right place. There's no reason why you should need something like Synaptic for this.

You should be able to go to the web, find a program you like, download and install it. I shouldn't have to leave my browser for this. To say that I have to research it, leave my browser, start a package manager, find the package (if I'm lucky) and then install it is just backwards.

Were this the better way to do things, you'd see Apple and Microsoft moving towards this since they'd make money off of it.

"Well, how about by default most window installs don't come with a quiet way of installing them? Or the way some of them overwrite dll files that other programs depend on. Or how there are about half a dozen major installers out there, and a bunch of piddly little installers ( all this for one OS mind you )."

I use that OS on a daily basis on a few machines and can't say that a Windows install of anything has caused my any problems in years. I'm fully capable to bitch about MS, but difficulty installing programs is not an issue.

The OP has a very good point and it echoes my sentiments when it comes to things like Ubuntu. They're great if you just want to use the basic functionality that is built in. Barring any hardware compatibility issues, the install is easy. It's doing things that are not built in from the get go that makes the OS just not worth it.

 

[djnes]

I hope this isn't derailing the thread, but here goes. Is there a website that gives a listing of what's available through the different packages and repos for Ubuntu?

 

[Langford]

I hope this isn't derailing the thread, but here goes. Is there a website that gives a listing of what's available through the different packages and repos for Ubuntu?

See if this has what you are looking for: http://packages.ubuntu.com/

 

[ScYcS]

I said it in the past and i will say it again:

The biggest strength of Linux is choice! The biggest weakness of Linux is choice!

Distros using different package management systems, different desktops and different repositories as well as different GUIs are what makes Linux great because of the choices you have. It also makes it almost inaccessible for someone looking to switch OSs easily.

 

[djnes]

See if this has what you are looking for: http://packages.ubuntu.com/

That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks.

 

[drizzt81]

The thing is that the IT has just been totally glowing about Ubuntu and Kubuntu, especially about there ease of use. I really expect a lot more.

In a corporate environment, users do not install stuff. As their term implies, they are to USE software that someone else installed for them.