30 days with Linux @ [H] Consumer

Saist said:
Impressive...

There are some other problems that were not mentioned in the article that may affect those looking to switch:

First, Gnome isn't that friendly to users learned in Windows. I must admit that I am impressed that you would stick with Gnome. Anyways, for those who want something a little closer to home, using the KDE desktop will provide a more familiar environment.

Second, ATi card users are going to be in pickles.

Radeon 8500 cards haven't been officially supported since driver version 8.29. The Ubuntu Dapper Drake fglrx driver is version 8.25, in which OpenGL support for Radeon 8500 cards is broken.

Radeon 9500 - Radeon x1900 series users will find that the Fglrx drivers do support their cards and Avivo. However, AIGLX is NOT supported by the official ATi drivers. That means that if you want to run Compiz / Beryl on an x1x00 series card, you would need a distribution using Novell/Suse XGL.

AIGLX is supported through the X.org Radeon Driver which also supports Direct Rendering / OpenGL on R100, RV200, R200, R300, and R400 cards. So you can get Beryl and Compiz on X.org. However, the performance is anywhere from 100-450% lower than the official Radeon driver... and no Avivo supporteither.

***

Not that Nvidia users have it any better. Installing the Nvidia driver invariably requires dropping to RunLevel 3 and running dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg.


***

Personally though, I'd recommend HardOCP readers interested in switching to Linux, or trying it, download both Ubuntu and Mepis.

Reason being is that while Ubuntu uses Gnome, Mepis uses KDE.

Between the two, Ubuntu and Mepis share about 75% of the source software, which makes it easier to keep track of the background software.

For those who do take a look to Mepis, keep in mind that there multiple support sites available:

http://www.mepislovers.org

http://www.mepisguides.com

http://www.mepis.org/docs/en/index.php/Main_Page
Click to expand...

great the Mepis is what i use :) an recommend to my customers an almost all of them like it an have told others about it. i have not had windows on my computer in over 5 yrs. i like the feeling of being able to use my computer with out the worries of virus or the other junk that comes with using windows
an most nvitia cards set up with little to no probs an with the new Mepis you can set up the Nvidia card on the install an it works on the live cd .:D i use the pci express 7300 256MB card
 
Nice article, and informative. I think you hit the target [H]ardOCP reader square in the nose judging from the responses. I read it all the way through and there were many things that I have found lacking and I agree with your conclusions.

I conducted an experiment two months ago after seeing how nice Kubuntu and the Adept repository manager were getting in 6.06. I burned the 6.1 ISO to a disc, put an older 1.8 GHz P4 machine on the workbench, and told a 16 year old female student with no real computer skills at all to install it. I gave her a windows machine beside it on the same KVM to use for research and questions, instructed her how the KVM works ("push the button for the computer you want to control..."), and in three hours she was running at the KDE desktop and doing package updates. The young lady in question is a student at the school where I work, is not a relative, and is not a rocket scientist. She is simply a kid with a desire to learn and a knack for trying. THAT'S what I was waiting for in all the times I have tried Linux, and it shows just how far this has come to be that easy to install and use.

I need to get better at a few things myself, and unlocking the universal repositories for Adept was a must, but once I figured it out we were cooking with gas (so to speak). Since then she has brought her old dell in and we put it on that one also for her use at home. She uses Kubuntu every day both at school and at home, surfing, typing papers, YouTube, etc. VLC, Firefox, and Flash were the only real things we had to install to get it running for basics, and she was so proud to have done it. I would like to applaud the linux developer community and Ubuntu for all their work. If gaming got better and there were better print options, this would truly be world class, but that isn't anyone's fault but the producers of said items.

On a side note, said female also installed Fedora Core 6 on another identical machine and preferred Kubuntu overall.

My only problems were that there were issues with Intel built in graphics on an 845G chipset. Why, I have no idea, but it wouldn't install until I put in an older nvidia TNT2 AGP card. Then it booted into the live CD and went like butter!:cool:
 
Getting Slashdotted? Cool.
Getting Dugg? Awesome.
Getting Dugg twice for the same article? Happy Dance Time.
 
I don't doubt they are out there TRS-80 its just finding them and then the dreaded compiling!

I looked at one of the packaged your suggest and it looks like it only comes in source (I could be wrong) I don't want the hassle of compiling, I don't see the need for it for most things either.

I don't have a gripe with one distro or the other, I think its just things in the general linux community that would need to be improved to make things more acceptable for users. At the same time the x86 crowd is very set in its ways, even MS can't get way from supporting archaic ways and programs.
 
For a little bit of a different perspective, I'm one of the much more pragmatic linux advocates you will find. I'm not completely hung up on the idea of free software, but I do firmly believe that in the case of an operating system, the open source model produces better code. To give a little background, I consider myself an amatuer linux hacker. I use it as my primary os, and I'll submit the odd patch to whichever project has my fancy that particular day, but I'm not claiming to be Larry Wall, Torvaldes, or any of the other real movers and shakers of the OSS community.

I think a lot of the anti-linux-desktop posts on here have missed the point about linux and us developers in particular. Obviously I can only speak for myself, but I really don't care about market share, I really don't care weather or not you use linux, I do it for me, and for people who think like me.

I work in and on linux because I prefer freedom with responsability to bondage with convenience, and make no mistake, I've read Microsoft's liscensing agreements, bondage is the correct term for what you are agreeing to when you click that "I Accept" button.

The linux community is about just that, community. We are not a business out to make a profit. We don't have a hidden agenda to take over your desktop. We are out to better ourselves and our experience with technology. The reason that the linux community is successful in its application of the communist model of contribution and reward is because the nature of the internet allows for people to reap unlimited rewards from linux, contribute nothing, and at the same time, take nothing from those who do contribute. Not exactly, Karl Marx's dream, but I'll take it. (by the way, I am not advocating communism, I'm the biggest capitalist you'll find anywhere, I just think his ideas happen to apply when describing the OSS community dynamic)

Linux isn't going to go away just because they only have a 5% or even .05% market share. Those of us working on it will continue to work on it for ourselves.

Also, if you want to see the real future of personal comuting:
http://news.com.com/2100-7345_3-6163015.html
 
TLDR most of it... but from the 3 pages I read, it seems like a very good article.

My suggestions for those wants to try out is to put it on a separate box... like your previous old PC or something.

I understand gaming still have ways to go, but it's improving. I used to be a gamer... too old and have very little time now.

I run Arch Linux 0.8 beta (my fav. distro) on laptop (Turion+ATI) and at work (X2 5000+ATI) and Ubuntu 6.10 stripped server install at home (ubuntu-minimal) and installed the things I want by myself. All running Pekwm WM (pypanel+conky), no desktop icons.

For me, as a sysadmin, it's quite sufficient. I also use *nix as a hobby OS. I've tried out Vista for few months now... and frankly I do like Vista's speed.

U/Ku/Xubuntu is a great to start out if you are new to Linux. When you got comfortable with *nix, then move onto something else better! My motto for people is "Use whatever works for you. Use what gives you the most productivity." My .02.
 
eggrock said:
You might have gotten the picture by now but... great article. Outstanding.

I haven't used linux in years and it gave me a good idea of how far it's progressed, at least in the Ubuntu flavor.

No, that's a lie. I use Linux (rather, FreeBSD with Linux libraries) but not for general desktop use. Just webserving and some perl stuff, mostly. I don't consider Linux ready for real world Desktop use--I have a LOT of better ways to spend my time than dicking around trying to get 1920x1200 working on my monitor.

But.. It's getting there. Outstanding job with APT--that's a real 'selling' point. I'd imagine that things will progress from here, and eventually start pushing hard against vendors and Linux support.

Very, very well done article.
Click to expand...

This 1920x1200 problem is on a DVI cable with a Nvidia PCI-E board, right? If it's the case, bash Nvidia for it cause it worked on previous releases but does not work now (out of the box, there are workarounds). It's something about it not being able to read DVI timings and then checking resolutions with the wrong assumption of a 1280x1024 limit. What Linux has to do with it, please tell me cause I failed to understand.

If that's not the problem just open xorg.conf on any editor and write "1920x1200" on the start of the line that already contains something like "1024x768" on it. Ex: before -> "1280x1024" "1024x768" ... after "1920x1200" "1280x1024" "1024x768" ... Maybe there is even a way to do it graphically, I just don't bother to find it. Make sure the correct information about monitor limits (horizontal range in KHz and vertical range in Hz) are right and that's just the "extremely difficult" thing to do to get 1920x1200.

Now about your comment: who cares if it's ready or not for general desktop usage? I don't. I do use Linux (gentoo) cause it works for me. Average Joe can get his pre-installed Vista computer and to whatever they want, including getting loads of spyware before he/she even think about buying an antivirus and a spyware blocker/remover and whatever other software they need to fix the flaws of his system. It's his choice (lack of?) but it does not affect me. Linux do not need to win over Windows it just needs to have a sufficiently wide acceptance to convince this retarded manufacturers that their hardware may sell more if they just support Linux or even just tell the guys that make the drivers how to do it, they are just asking for documentation, not any secret plan to invade Ihran. If I buy a graphic adapter I just want to be a graphic adapter and that the software do use it to do the work ON THE HARDWARE. So, why can't I have the documentation of how to work with the hardware? (enough with my rant :) .

Linux does not need to REPLACE Windows, it doesn't matter if the user uses Windows AND Linux or whatever combination you can think. We can just coexist or even compete based on competence. Windows is the one that gets worried cause now they need to offer better things to compete. In the end, Linux can be Windows' user best friend even if he/she never uses Linux cause if forces Microsoft to offer a better product instead of just cosmetic/minor upgrades.

I wish it would be the last time to say it but I doubt: "Use whatever OS you want, Linux does not need to destroy Windows, it doesn't care. It is your freedom to choose that matters. Choose whatever you want, we just recommend you do an educated choice"
 
TRS-80 said:
Sabayon can do that because it's a source-based distribution - since source is free speech in the US, and source by itself doesn't actually decrypt DVDs or whatever, there's no restrictions on distributing it. You the user end up compiling the source into the binary, which you might not be able to redistribute. Binary distributions OTOH have to worry about this and hence can't distribute pre-compiled DMCA-infringing software. However, people in other countries can - see http://debian-multimedia.org/ for libdvdcss packages (I haven't kept track of where the Ubuntu ones are).
Click to expand...
hamm3rhead said:
Sabayon is a newer distro if you take a look at http://distrowatch.com/ you'll see Ubuntu is the top dog.. As previously stated certain functionality can be included in source based distributions that cannot legally be included in binary form. To be clear what that means, source based distros like gentoo compile packages as they are installed making them "slower" to install. There's a lot of back and forth on which is better but it comes down to a matter of user preference. Sabayon is obviously not a pure source or pure binary distro it's a convenient mix made for tons of functionality whether booted from dvd or from a hard drive. Things like ati or nvidia 3d drivers only come in binary format which pisses off the OSS crowd greatly so they are not generally included in the big boy distros. To each his own.. I have spent a lot of time running servers and desktop machines and ultimately I use whatever gives me the best support at the time.
Click to expand...
thanks for the explanations guys

i guess ubuntu can include the "source" as well and compile as you install (that'll save the effort of using automatix or whatnot) oh well can't have everything :eek:
 
notanatheist said:
Before getting to you shooting yourself in the foot I'd like to second the motion by the Nigerian on commending SSmiths post.

Now, having shot yourself in the foot... See that IP? Is that the IP that your computer has? Not likely. If you have a DSL modem or a router then you likely have a 192.168.*.* address and not a big fat wide open IP that the rest of the world sees. If you don't have a router and you are silly enough to plug a Windows box directly into a cable modem then I'll be cleaning malware off your computer sometime in the future.

So, if I go to the above website it'll tell me my IP is 67.171.***.*** but my computer is 192.168.*.***. Armed with that information I can decide what ports to open or forward on my router to my internal PCs. Don't forget to put a bandage on that hole before you get blood all over the floor.
Click to expand...

I don't have a router, use a cable modem, Windows XP, and I have never had an issue with malware. Thats never, not occasionally, not just that one time. I mean literally never. But then again I don't open anything without virus scanning it first and I have scheduled preventative measures set up to run every day. A well tuned firewall program and a little common sense go a long way.
 
Commander Suzdal said:
Ohh, that's a toughy--hmmm...

Click Start
Click Network Connections
Double-Click Local Area Connection
Select Support Tab

Gee, whaddya know? There's my IP address... wait--it took me 3 seconds and my hand never left my mouse to reach for my keyboard. That can't be right, can it? Don't I have to use a CLI? Hmmm, guess not...;)
Click to expand...


Hmm..
Open command prompt
type ifconfig (yes.. it's ifconfig)

and there you go...

Oh, and going that route in windows is going to take you more then 3 seconds unless you already have opened them before in the same session.. A faster way would be to right click the icon in the notification area, choose status, then go to the support tab :p . Of course you would have to have the "show icon in notification area when connected" box checked in your network properties.

Either way, it's such a trival matter with the 2 systems that I don't think it's worth while comparing them that way
 
I use Suse 10.2 on my laptop (this thing I am typing on right now)

I have to be honest its free so I can't really complain but it is a pain to setup just how you like it.

For example, getting my wireless card to work was a real headache and to be honest with 256mb RAM and a Celeron M 1.5GHz CPU it can be dog slow at times (slower than XP would be)

Right now I don't really like any OS!
 
bigstusexy said:
I don't doubt they are out there TRS-80 its just finding them and then the dreaded compiling!

I looked at one of the packaged your suggest and it looks like it only comes in source (I could be wrong) I don't want the hassle of compiling, I don't see the need for it for most things either.
Click to expand...

No compiling is necessary - they all come in Ubuntu - Tomby by default, glipper and gnome-launch-box are in the universe repository. Once you find a program on the web you can use apt-cache search or packages.ubuntu.com to find which package to install - it's hard to believe the power and breadth of apt-get until you've used it. gnomefiles.org is another place with applications categorised so you can find what you want.
 
Ok.... I can find and download 6.06 but can't find a WORKING! link to dload 6.10??? anyone have a WORKING linky they could point me to so I can try this out? and if so when installing does 6.10 give option to install a dual boot setup??? TIA :confused:
 
I'm a minimalist. I run either four desktop icons or none at all, so all this Beryl fascination means nothing to me. Screensavers are for kids and grandparents. My monitor blinks out after five minutes of disuse and the HD's spin down after ten. My PC desktop is a lot like my butt - I know it's there & I'm glad it is but I hardly ever see it.

Interesting article, which made me realize to what extent most users really are caught between a rock and a hard place. Simply put, everything OSwise is majorly inadequate to end-user needs/desires. We are painfully compromised which ever way we turn.

why software sucks http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,241578,00.html
 
Unit44 said:
Ok.... I can find and download 6.06 but can't find a WORKING! link to dload 6.10??? anyone have a WORKING linky they could point me to so I can try this out? and if so when installing does 6.10 give option to install a dual boot setup??? TIA :confused:
Click to expand...

You could always try torrentspy or isotorrent. I'm still seeding the 6.10 I downloaded ages ago.

But coming back to the article. It was nice reading a balanced and honest review about linux in general and Ubuntu in particular. Its easier now for as an Ubuntu user to explain the advantages and pitfalls when wanting to switch to Ubuntu to other Windows users.

But while I use Ubuntu for almost everything (thankfully GIMP is more than adequate for my use), there are still things that I find Ubuntu lacking in for which I dual boot - Quickbooks Enterprise for which there is no equivalent and gaming. Hopefully that'll change with newer versions of WINE.

Installing Ubuntu on my Dell XPS M1710 laptop with the 512 MB Geforce go 7950 GTX was really painless. After an insanely quick installation of 15 minutes, everything worked out of the box so to speak. Wired LAN connected to my home network and I could read/play files from my windows desktop PC without any configuration. My home wireless SSID was detected but I needed a quick search in ubuntuforums to help enable WPA passkey and that was done. The gorgeous screen resolution of 1920x1200 worked straight out without needing any adjustments. Sound, Mediakeys, fn keys, SD slots everything worked without needing any additonal drivers or inputs.

I'm sure everyone knows how many hoops you will have to jump when you install Window for the 1st time?

Ubuntu / Linux on the other hand is extremely simple to install and use and can be EVEN easier if only hardware manufactueres get their act together and start supporting it. For example, my Logitec G5 mouse. Its detected, I can enable the extra thumb keys but obviously I can't set it to certain tasks/shortcuts because I don't have the setpoint software. Same problem with the sonyericsson sync suite.

Other than those two, I have no problems with linux. Beryl with its fancy but very useful windows effects worked by running one script - helpfully written by a user at ubuntuforums. I've enabled read and write access on my NTFS drive so changes I make for example to the ID3 tags on my mp3 files are saved. No problem implementing that either. Despite having a gazillion windows open with mp3s and movies playing, not once has there been even a stutter from the system.

Oh and did I mention that that 15 minute installation also included OpenOffice (a competant office suite but not comparable to Office 2003 I know). I could open every single application I have and RAM usage is never above 400 MB, SWAP usage is 0-5% and CPU usage never above 45%. Even with Beryl effects.

The problems I'm having with using linux is not due to the OS but with the lack of support from device manufacturers.
 
Danith said:
Hmm..
Open command prompt
type ifconfig (yes.. it's ifconfig)

and there you go...

Oh, and going that route in windows is going to take you more then 3 seconds unless you already have opened them before in the same session.. A faster way would be to right click the icon in the notification area, choose status, then go to the support tab :p . Of course you would have to have the "show icon in notification area when connected" box checked in your network properties.

Either way, it's such a trival matter with the 2 systems that I don't think it's worth while comparing them that way
Click to expand...

plavacek's question was implying that Windows users shouldn't complain about command lines because they have to use them sometimes in Windows. My response was simply meant to correct the false premise of his example--you don't have to open a command prompt to access that information in Windows. The speed note on my part was just to highlight how simple it is, for the sake of those who argue that GUIs are slow and cumbersome compared to CLIs.

Let's step back and look at a more Big Picture issue. Many of those speaking on behalf of Linux have said that its distinctive asset is freedom to compute on your own terms. I wholeheartedly agree and I understand the joys of tweaking and customizing that go along with that.

However, one kind of freedom that ranks high on my list is freedom from complexity. Ultimately a computer is a tool. The more a tool gets out of your way and lets you use it, the better a tool it is. When I have to stop what I'm doing and reconfigure my tool in order for it to do what I need it to do, that is unwelcome. Sometimes it's unavoidable, but the less I have to do it the happier I am. Fortunately for the future of Linux, it's apparent from their comments that the Ubuntu and Wine people understand this.

I also understand those who are pointing out that Linux doesn't have to care about market share vs. Microsoft, and therefore does not have to cater to Microsoft's typical customer. I don't want Linux to better service ordinary desktop users so that it can "win" and Microsoft can "lose." My reasons are simple and selfish--I want the option of using Linux myself as an ordinary desktop user. Keeping in mind my tool concept above, I won't do this until Linux offers me freedom from complexity. I'm too much of a cheap !@#$% to keep paying Microsoft's prices, but I'm too much of a lazy impatient !@#$% to learn how to make Linux do things the hard way. I could do it--you haven't lived until you've made a PCMCIA network card and a TCP/IP stack work on an Amiga 1200, believe me. I just don't want to screw around with that crap any more. But that's just me.
 
ftcsm said:
If that's not the problem just open xorg.conf on any editor and write "1920x1200" on the start of the line that already contains something like "1024x768" on it. Ex: before -> "1280x1024" "1024x768" ... after "1920x1200" "1280x1024" "1024x768" ... Maybe there is even a way to do it graphically, I just don't bother to find it. Make sure the correct information about monitor limits (horizontal range in KHz and vertical range in Hz) are right and that's just the "extremely difficult" thing to do to get 1920x1200.
Click to expand...

Figured I'd chime in on this bit, since I had a similar problem when I was setting up my Viewsonic VX2025WM with my 7900GS. Keeping in mind I run FC6, and this display runs native at 1680x1050... replacing the Modes section under screen with "nvidia-auto-select" instead of the set numbers worked beautifully for me both on this system, and the one sitting next to me with a Syncmaster 932b.

Modes "nvidia-auto-select"

Hopefully not too off-topic :D

Charlie
 
Danith said:
Hmm..
Open command prompt
type ifconfig (yes.. it's ifconfig)

and there you go...

Oh, and going that route in windows is going to take you more then 3 seconds unless you already have opened them before in the same session.. A faster way would be to right click the icon in the notification area, choose status, then go to the support tab :p . Of course you would have to have the "show icon in notification area when connected" box checked in your network properties.

Either way, it's such a trival matter with the 2 systems that I don't think it's worth while comparing them that way
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't see much of a difference between ms and linux in this respect...

Linux (X):
<alt><f2> (brings up "run" dialog) xterm<enter> ifconfig -a<enter>

Linux (without X):
ifconfig -a

Windows:
<windowskey><r> (brings up "run" dialog) cmd<enter> ipconfig /all<enter>

Of all three, linux without X is the easiest to do.

I really have to ask everybody WHY ARE PEOPLE SO SCARED OF THE COMMAND LINE? Not everything in the world needs to be "click this, click that". The command line is more precise and powerful than any graphical tool can ever be. I tried to use synaptic to install some software on my test ubuntu install and damn near lost it. Scrolling down the lists looking for the particular packages I was looking for was infuriating. I gave up and dropped down to the command line and got what I needed done in under 30 seconds total installation time:
apt-get install irssi lynx

Inexperienced users may prefer a graphical tool to perform tasks. I may prefer a text based tool to perform tasks. Each have their strong points, but at least in linux *BOTH* are available. Try installing some tools on your vista box via a command line console over ssh.

...my $.02
-q
 
qfour20 said:
I really have to ask everybody WHY ARE PEOPLE SO SCARED OF THE COMMAND LINE? Not everything in the world needs to be "click this, click that". The command line is more precise and powerful than any graphical tool can ever be.
Click to expand...

People aren't 'scared' of the command line. People simply find the command line to be a lame and outdated way of operating a PC. They don't want to remember commands which need to be typed at the command line. They don't want to be bothered looking them up because they don't remember them.

Most people nowadays drive automatic transmission vehicles. Most people nowadays prefer GUI computing.

Know what? Most people only ever use, at best, two command line commands in the course of their computing activity, and then only ever for following troubleshooting tips:

msconfig
regedit

And for most people, even that is going too far!

I'm sure you'll find, too, that most people will also acknowledge that the command line can be a more powerful tool than the GUI. But their reluctance to use it isn't fear. People simply don't want it intruding on them, is all.
 
Catweazle said:
People aren't 'scared' of the command line. People simply find the command line to be a lame and outdated way of operating a PC. They don't want to remember commands which need to be typed at the command line. They don't want to be bothered looking them up because they don't remember them.

Most people nowadays drive automatic transmission vehicles. Most people nowadays prefer GUI computing.

Know what? Most people only ever use, at best, two command line commands in the course of their computing activity, and then only ever for following troubleshooting tips:

msconfig
regedit

And for most people, even that is going too far!

I'm sure you'll find, too, that most people will also acknowledge that the command line can be a more powerful tool than the GUI. But their reluctance to use it isn't fear. People simply don't want it intruding on them, is all.
Click to expand...

most people? THAT is a very arrogant and narrow-minded statement
fyi Automatics are EXTREAMLY rare in Britain and Europe.

While with automatics you can just sit back and do your thing, manuals are far more flexable and you have the ability to get the most out of your system.

as for the command-line... it is alot quicker for me to type
emerge --sync && layman -S && emerge -uvDp world

then it is to startup porthole and go through the menus to start the sync and set USE flags. Sure for day to day tasks and with a good GUI pretty much all can get done. BUT it is when you go outside that that things get harder

Take hidden files... what steps do you have to go through to list a directory (in explorer or nautilus) if you suddenly decide you want to view hidden files? for the command line I just have to append -a and all becomes seen

Likewise why run a X-envionement when a machine is a server? it is a waste of resources (RAM and CPU), make it headless and SSH in. Without knowledge of the command-line you are stuff.

Likewise what if a program just fails to start? how do you know why?
start from the command-line (in linux at least) and it will be very verbose to any error it encounted during starting and the majority of the time there are very precise to the error enabling a quick google for the solution

An Ubuntu user really doesn't have to goto the command line BUT it exists if he needs to. There isn't much that can be done in X that cannot be done in a terminal (even colour net browsing).

The biggest mistake Microsoft did was to severly hamper the cmd to make it such that pretty much everything must be done from the GUI (what if the GUI crashes?)
So please answer me this then Catweazle IF the command-line is soo "Lame" and "outdated" then why did MS invest time and money to produce a shell which has the flexablilty of BASH?

answer that


likewise the command-line is a proven method of MMI, just like the wheel is a proven means of moving things, just because it is old doesn't mean it still doesn't do its job

we are still burning fuel to move, something the Brit came up with a couple of centuries ago
 
eeyrjmr said:
fyi Automatics are EXTREAMLY rare in Britain and Europe.
Click to expand...
A fact I wasn't aware of. Thanks for that.

The rest of my comments stand. I drive vehicles with manual gear changes. I drive a command line pretty well too. Joe Average doesn't want to and doesn't need to, and I respect his choice and the reasons for it.
 
Catweazle said:
A fact I wasn't aware of. Thanks for that.

The rest of my comments stand. I drive vehicles with manual gear changes. I drive a command line pretty well too. Joe Average doesn't want to and doesn't need to, and I respect his choice and the reasons for it.
Click to expand...

and that is true, and as stated you really don't have to use the command-line much BUT it is there

Likewise Jo-Average doesn't want to mess around with Drivers. Oh wait Vista has some driver issues. So does that make Linux ready or not for Joe-Average or Vista ready or not for Joe-Average?
 
eeyrjmr said:
Oh wait Vista has some driver issues. So does that make Linux ready or not for Joe-Average or Vista ready or not for Joe-Average?
Click to expand...
Whilst I don't really want to pursuethe Linux v Windows hate-fest, that comment deserves to be challenged.

What driver issues?

I bunged Vista on my system Joe-Average style. I do that, because I write stuff for Joe Average to read. Out of the box Vista didn't present a single 'issue' at all, really. It didn't have a native driver for my onboard audio, but spat me up a url where I could get one from the audio chip manufacturer. It didn't have native drivers for my printer and scanner, but the Upgrade Advisor had already prepared me for that. Epson and Canon provided me with those a few days after Vista's retail release.

I've definitely been pissed off with Nvidia since, because of their tardiness in providing drivers which give me better than basic productivity functiuonality, but that isn't Vista.

The Joe Averages who are having driver issues are the ones trying to run Vista on systems which weren't built with Vista in mind. The people making the most noise about driver issues being Vista issues are those people on boards just like this and who want the whole world to turn Linux, IMO.
 
Catweazle said:
What driver issues?
Click to expand...
...

Catweazle said:
I've definitely been pissed off with Nvidia since, because of their tardiness in providing drivers which give me better than basic productivity functiuonality, but that isn't Vista.
Click to expand...

so no driver issue then LMAO!!

but this isn't a linux vs windows thread.
This is a how capable is linux for the desktop thread and likewise replying to how useful/dated is the command-line
 
/me notes mentions of Joe Average, consumer that happens to own a computer, and me not making the references...

Go figure. :D
 
jag0 said:
"until Linux does it simple like every other OS, there is no point in using it."
Click to expand...

Here is some food for thought. Simple is a relative term. For some, the command line is the simplest way to do something. For others, they prefer a GUI approach. It has more to do with what you are accustomed to using.

I started out with DOS and Win 3.1 for my real entrance with computing. Previously I had used a C64 as a child. Anyway, I hated Win 3.1 with a passion. About the only thing I used it for was Cool Edit and Goldwave. I did just about everything else via DOS and it was much faster for me. My first PC was a Packard Hell with the previously mentioned OS and GUI shell setup. By default it was set to load Windows. It wasn't long before I edited the autoexec.bat file to remove the command "win" from it.

I remember going from DOS/Win 3.1 to Win 95. I still used the CLI a lot. I also found the GUI to be cumbersome for a lot of tasks and it took quite a bit of learning on my part to get accustomed to where MS put things in Win 95. This was a major reason why I kept using the CLI for a long time. The GUI was unfamiliar.

And don't get me started on the move from easy to use .ini files to the POS known as the registry. Talk about a screwup.

It seems the vast majority of people I run into that complain about a CLI are the same people that have never really used one. They have no idea how powerful it can be and how quick it can be. In most cases I can get to a directory through CLI a lot faster than I can through a GUI.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a CLI is the best tool for every job as it isn't. There are a lot of things a GUI can do easier and/or faster than a CLI.

Linux doesn't need to look just like Windows. It doesn't need for everything to act like it does in Windows. If that's what you are looking for, then use Windows. Linux is different. OSX is different. They aren't replacements, they are alternatives. The only thing that needs to be like Windows is Windows. Everything else is supposed to be different. What's the use of making Linux into Windows? At that point, it would just be Windows with a different name.

 
And Joe Average is most certainly not excluded from the article under consideration here. An earlier post in this topic suggested that the article was aimed at the [H]ard user, but that's not the case.

But in today's landscape, how viable is that statment? Is the threat to switch to Linux an empty one, or is it entirely possible? Linux on the desktop has been viable for years, especially for programming gurus who can solve their Linux problems by simply writing new software. It also seems to be viable for “Mom and Pop” end-users who just want a machine to write letters, send email, and browse the Web (although, admittedly, a guru will probably have to set it up for them).


But what about power users, such as the typical audience of HardOCP - those who know how to build their own computers, but not compile their own programs? Or people who may not know how to do something, but aren't afraid of taking the time to figure it out? Is Linux truly an alternative? Can they do everything they did in Windows? The truth is, we didn't know, but we very much wanted to find out.
Click to expand...

'Mom and Pop', who really only want email, letter-writing and web-browsing, is specifically excluded. But that group is nowadays so much of a rarity that I personally now call its members the 'Granny users' rather than the 'Mom and Pop' users.

Joe Average quite distinctly falls into that group of people who want to try to get things working nowadays. He does quite a bit more with his (or her) PC than just typo out letters, send mail, and browse the web. A reasonable amount of his time is pent working out how to do stuff. A fair amount of the time he has to because he often uses software he gets for free.

But he doesn't yet choose an OS which he can get for free. And he won't. Not the 'average' Joe Average, anyway. The 'average' Joe Average too commonly falls into that other group of people mentioned in the article's conclusions. Those people who are 'easily frustrated', that is.
 
Since the cost of the OS is folded into to the cost of the PC for Joe Average, consumer that happens to own a computer but is thinking about getting a newer one, it is free for all intents and purposes - at least as free as buying a computer with no OS on it then putting some Linux distro on it. Same end result - pay for the PC, put an OS on it yourself or have it done at the factory - little or nil cost on top of the hardware itself.

Obviously, people need to stop bringing cost into this discussion in any way, shape, or form - Linux has been free since day 1 and it hasn't really helped make a dent. It's still free, and nowadays we've got a helluvalot more distros and choice than the Slackware that started it all for the Linux community, and it's still basically right where it's always been:

Not on Joe Average's computer.
 
Diagree. In the context of this discussion cost is a very valid consideration. What is under discussion here is the prospect of trying an alternative. To many people, right now, Vista will be an alternative to try which costs. A Linux distro will be an alternative to try which doesn't cost. Not in dollar terms, anyway.



Edit: Besides, the opening words of the article under discussion are:

Many people, daunted by Vista's hardware requirements and product activation issues, claim on various boards how they plan to "switch to Linux." We spend 30 days using nothing but Ubuntu Linux to find out if this is truly a viable alternative for the consumer.
Click to expand...

I guess cost in this context is not only relevent but also the primary motivating factor ;)
 
The whole idea is to try Linux - not try Vista, so I disagree and say cost isn't relevant as people keep using the concept.

And nice CYA there at the end... ;)

EDIT since you edited yours just as I posted mine:

The quote you just used from the OP doesn't say anything about cost because that's not what prevents people from trying Vista - the F.U.D. about it is what's holding people back, fear of it not working, fear of it not being compatible, fear of it not running fast enough, etc.
 
In the interests of "you've both made your points and there's nothing more, really to say" I suggest cooling down a bit on the "Vista vs. Linux," "Joe Average vs. Mom & Pop," "Free vs. Proprietary," "CLI vs. GUI" stuff. Last thing I want to do with this article is provoke ill will and a flamewar.

Save it for that next "30 days" article that Jason hinted about.

What is it on? 30 days of Amiga? 30 days of Wii? 30 days of tap dance lessons? 30 days of disco?

You need to be prepared for any eventuality so I'd save up those flamewarrior muscles for the next one!
 
Can we stop the bickering in a [H] Consumer thread please.
 
The real "Joe Average" probably isn't thinking about Linux, but again, this article wasn't targeted to "Joe Average". Joe doesn't read HardOCP either. Joe might read PC Magazine or some other Joe Average publication that compares hardware based on price and Sysmark results.

Who on this forum really gives a fuck what Joe Average does or doesn't do with their computer, besides you?
Click to expand...

Just my two bits, but Joe Average doesn't even do that much homework. Normally Joe Average buys whatever's on sale at the big box stores.

Since most of us in this forum are in the IT biz, yeah, most of us care about (or at least tolerate) the 'needs' and education of hundreds, if not thousands of Joes.

Plus, no need for swearing, it just feeds the trolls.
 
If you make the move to Linux full time, you are not required to give up those Windows only apps so quickly. While I am not good enough with graphics to tell the difference between the Gimp and Photoshop, I am a Linux and Network Engineer who needs Visio. (Anyone who says to use Kivio or Dia, please stand in the corner with your dunce cap on... they are poor substitutes on their best days).

I just switched to Ubuntu about 2-3 weeks ago, and so far LOVE it. I have used mostly Debian and RedHat/Fedora systems, but was using SuSe and hated it. Thought I would give Ubuntu a try. I also thought I would try to eliminate the dual boot or traditional VM environments (VMware, Qemu, etc) I used to get to those occational Windows programs.

Here is how I run Visio from my Ubuntu (Edgy Eft) laptop running on a Dell D620 (Dual core w/2GB ram, so this is a fairly beefy laptop).

1) Install VMware server (its free, trust me, go look)
2) Install Windows into a VM. I installed XP into an 8GB VM image, 512M ram
3) Install 2x App server into Windows, you can export upto 5 apps for free
4) Install Visio, I have tried this with 2003 & 2007 trial versions
5) Configure 2x to export your visio program
6) Install the 2x app server client in Ubuntu
7) Use the command line to run the client to work out the exact params
8) Create an icon on your desktop.

The VMware server keeps Windows running in the background, and will export the applications one at a time to your desktop. The program actually runs in windows, but you never need to deal with the windows desktop. In VMware, I configured windows to run its networking "host only" so Windows has no access to the internet, only my Linux desktop (the ONLY way to run Windows securly, lol)

This is not trivial to set up, and I do have a few issues with it (Visio is a little slow to respond to the mouse, and all popups show twice -- one on top of the other -- and it only likes to be maximized) but nothing that really breaks functionality, or usability.

Give this a try for your Photoshop.
 
Lothar the Lotharian said:
Just my two bits, but Joe Average doesn't even do that much homework. Normally Joe Average buys whatever's on sale at the big box stores.
Click to expand...

I would somewhat agree with that... But when my mom inquired about Linux, I knew Uncle Bill's utopia just had a 10.0 earthquake.

The problem with the OPs original statement is not about the amount of homework they are willing to do or not do. More and more the "Average Joe" is asking their favorite geek questions. That geek reads things like HardOCP.

Where articles like this hit the "Average Joe" is that they don't want to spend a lot of money, and we (the geeks that will be answering the neverending questions) would like to have them set up and fairly bullet proof. Windows is moving away from that easy to use world (Vista has more hardware incompatabilities than Ubuntu does) and Linux is getting more user friendly. I know when people that keep relying on me to keep their system running, I am considering Linux more and more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top