Why I'm Switching to Linux.

Haha, dug this thread up looking for MythTV info...

Anyways...

I enjoy Linux for what it is, ideally I would like to have just one OS, I don't care what it is. But I want it to run any program I dersire to have with little hassle, and use my hardware as effciently as possible. I think distros like Ubuntu and Linspire make it easy to try out linux, I would definately choose Ubuntu there, as I used it for a while. But currently I've gone back to Fedora Core 4, and looking at 6. I'm looking at installing Linux mint at home for a second comp, mainly because it's Ubuntu, but reduced some of the long setup steps.

Things that make switching easier: Command line knowledge, apt-get and yum. Things that make the switch harder: Poor driver support and compiling stuff apt-get and yum don't end up being useful for.
 
I have a couple of points to make here:

1. Deviation complicates the support process
2. Windows does more
3. Software installs are easier on Windows

1. When there is standardization, you can greatly reduce the duplicate effort required to support multiple products.

This applies to a lot of things, not just client OS.

Suppose you had many PC's to support... be it a large family and you are the only "computer guy", or you support PC customers at work, it would be a WHOLE lot easier if everybody had the same OS at the same version with the same browser and the same apps. You learn one system and one set of nuiances (every product has them) and you greately increase your efficiency for troubleshooting. For a business, this saves money. At home supporting friends, family, or charity work, this saves you time. Of course, the industry doesn't stay static so you do have to learn the "latest and greatest" from time to time, but that sure beats having to figure out which kernel on which distro with which desktop (xfree86 or knome) with which web browser, etc. My point is the more deviation, the more complicated the troubleshooting and support.

2. Windows just plain does more. Period. While I am sure Linux has increased the number of apps on the platform, it still comes nowhere near what is offered for Windows. I'm sure you can monkey with emulators but they can't possibly work for all apps (especially those requiring hardware access, like CD/DVD burning software, maybe networking utilities, etc.)... even then, I would expect a performance penalty under an emulator like WINE.

I have not evaluated the software offerings for Linux in a while, but last I knew, these were some sore points:

- Linux media editing tools do not rival those offered on the Windows platform. Is there video editing software to beat or exceed Adobe Premiere Pro?
- Map programs. Does Linux have anything comparable to MS Map Point?
- MS Office competitors are a few years behind Office in innovation (this might be propoganda, but would love to see somebody debunk it with facts and references)
- Personal finanance programs? Does Quicken make a Linux version yet?
- PDA sync software. Last I checked (and things could have changed since then..) there was no sync software for my pocket PC and Linux.
- I don't want to beat a dead horse, but game selection
- Some drivers are not as fully featured as their Windows counterparts
- Has the media playing software been improved yet? Can linux play everything Windows can now? I remember .wmv and .wma files would not play, and installing codecs were a real pain on linux... maybe things have changed?

3. Windows is easier. Ok, there is always the person who wants to take the hard route so they can have an extra source of pride... and for those geeks wanting to be the leetest of leet, yeah, you can't beat Linux in the "hard to configure" department. IF Linux did become easier to use, I'm sure some of the hardcore leet-o geeks would raise their nose at it because it was too easy. Reminds me of Porsche 911 drivers who say their car is more "rewarding" to drive because of the extra challenge of a theoretically flawed rear engine, lol. Maybe linux is rewarding because it is hard more than it is better? I like a good challenge too but view the PC as more of a tool that enables me in my hobbies. It should be more about what you want to do, not how you do it.

Relative to Windows, installing drivers and apps are WAY more difficult on Linux. If I want to run a program, I would like to either download the package and run it, or insert media and run setup program. Answer a few spousal questions (just say yes to everything) and boom, you're done. With Linux, you have to download the source code, recompile, and, well, I never got past that step, lol. Just installing programs and drivers is a massive challenge. I would rather find my challenge in a good game than a frustrating computer experience. Time is money and wasting a lot of time just getting a PC to do what you want is a lost opportunity on something else you could be doing. One of my favorite quotes is "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing", lol.
 
Hornswoggler said:
Relative to Windows, installing drivers and apps are WAY more difficult on Linux. If I want to run a program, I would like to either download the package and run it, or insert media and run setup program. Answer a few spousal questions (just say yes to everything) and boom, you're done. With Linux, you have to download the source code, recompile, and, well, I never got past that step, lol.
Click to expand...

I do not use Linux frequently. I currently don't even have an install left to play with. However, Apt-get isn't that difficult to use and I believe to remember a graphical package manager that made installing and removing programs a BREEZE!
 
acascianelli said:
..........and as for software, here's my list of essentials...

GIMP
OpenOffice
GAIM
Firefox
Thunderbird
Gnomebaker
MPlayer
Click to expand...

Now *this* is what I would like to see more of. ;) I use Linux occasionally - tinkered with Red Hat, SUSE, Ubuntu - but not enough to get into it full time (is there ever enough time?). It would be nice if there was a compilation of the great Linux software out there and what it does - and does well. I think that's one of the things that keeps me away from it most of all.

Ax
 
Hornswoggler said:
2. Windows does more
-- Really the only thing windows has/does "more" of is gaming. (for me anyway)

3. Software installs are easier on Windows
-- well yes but Synaptic is VERY VERY easy.

2. Windows just plain does more. Period. While I am sure Linux has increased the number of apps on the platform, it still comes nowhere near what is offered for Windows. I'm sure you can monkey with emulators but they can't possibly work for all apps (especially those requiring hardware access, like CD/DVD burning software, maybe networking utilities, etc.)... even then, I would expect a performance penalty under an emulator like WINE.
-- CD/DVD burning is easy i think (i recently burned vista from an ISO image using K3b)

I have not evaluated the software offerings for Linux in a while, but last I knew, these were some sore points:
-- hmmm

- Linux media editing tools do not rival those offered on the Windows platform. Is there video editing software to beat or exceed Adobe Premiere Pro?
--- im not sure.

- Map programs. Does Linux have anything comparable to MS Map Point?
---Google Earth (im sure there are others)

- MS Office competitors are a few years behind Office in innovation (this might be propoganda, but would love to see somebody debunk it with facts and references)
--- open office does what i need it to do. (Thunderbird for email)

- Personal finanance programs? Does Quicken make a Linux version yet?
--- i dunno

- PDA sync software. Last I checked (and things could have changed since then..) there was no sync software for my pocket PC and Linux.
- I don't want to beat a dead horse, but game selection
--- ya i agree :(

- Some drivers are not as fully featured as their Windows counterparts
--- well sure i guess, but 3D acceleration does work.

- Has the media playing software been improved yet? Can linux play everything Windows can now? I remember .wmv and .wma files would not play, and installing codecs were a real pain on linux... maybe things have changed?
--- I can play wma files no problem
Click to expand...

Just a few notes :)
 
Hornswoggler said:
While I am sure Linux has increased the number of apps on the platform, it still comes nowhere near what is offered for Windows. I'm sure you can monkey with emulators but they can't possibly work for all apps (especially those requiring hardware access, like CD/DVD burning software, maybe networking utilities, etc.)
Click to expand...
This is an excellent point. Until Linux supports CD/DVD burners and networking the average user will never switch over to it.
 
jimmyb said:
This is an excellent point. Until Linux supports CD/DVD burners and networking the average user will never switch over to it.
Click to expand...


So I can't burn DVDs in Linux like I do weekly? Linux doesn't support networking? Man, I wonder where that 1TB of uploads my Linux Fileserver does every LAN is going....
 
jimmyb said:
This is an excellent point. Until Linux supports CD/DVD burners and networking the average user will never switch over to it.
Click to expand...

NeroLINUX is one solution that is or could be pretty widespread as far as a "standard" burning app across multiple platforms.

As for networking, I'll say this much: it's much easier than it used to be. But the biggest problem is that the concept of "Linux" is lost on so many people: Linux is not an operating system, it's a kernel.

Ubuntu is an operating system, Redhat is an operating system, Slackware, MEPIS, etc etc... these are operating systems based on the Linux kernel. That alone would help make things a lot easier if people wouldn't refer to Linux as an OS because that's not what it is. And yes, I understand it's easier to just say "Linux" to most people, but it's very inaccurate so...
 
drizzt81 said:
I do not use Linux frequently. I currently don't even have an install left to play with. However, Apt-get isn't that difficult to use and I believe to remember a graphical package manager that made installing and removing programs a BREEZE!
Click to expand...

Yes, assuming the app you want is packaged in that format. Suppose you want the "latest and greatest" drivers just released, how long does it usually take to be available via yum or apt-get?

Oh, and isnt there some deviation in which packaging format? Last I remember it was redhat's RPM's vs some other standard...

Great tool if they can settle on one standard and have most things packaged in a timely fashion.
 
Dew said:
So I can't burn DVDs in Linux like I do weekly? Linux doesn't support networking? Man, I wonder where that 1TB of uploads my Linux Fileserver does every LAN is going....
Click to expand...

The concept of tongue-in-cheek is obviously lost on some forumites...
 
GOOD GAME READING AND COMPREHENSION!!!

Hornswoggler said:
I'm sure you can monkey with emulators but they can't possibly work for all apps (especially those requiring hardware access, like CD/DVD burning software, maybe networking utilities, etc.)... even then, I would expect a performance penalty under an emulator like WINE.
Click to expand...

I said that WINE might have trouble running certain apps that require hardware access, like CD/DVD burning software written for Windows but emulated using WINE. I was not talking about native CD/DVD burning software, but I would imaging those programs are less featured than their Windows counterparts. Can WINE run Windows-native network sniffers? What about Windows native wireless card utilities?

I did NOT say:
- That linux did not have any native burning software
- That linux did not support networking

While we are on the networking topic, didn't John Carmack say about 5 years ago that he was going to re-write the Linux TCP/IP protocol stack because he thought it was a mess? :p (well, he probably does have pretty high standards... and gets to look at other ppls code, lol)
 
Hornswoggler said:
I have a couple of points to make here:

2. Windows just plain does more. Period. While I am sure Linux has increased the number of apps on the platform, it still comes nowhere near what is offered for Windows. I'm sure you can monkey with emulators but they can't possibly work for all apps (especially those requiring hardware access, like CD/DVD burning software, maybe networking utilities, etc.)... even then, I would expect a performance penalty under an emulator like WINE.

3. Windows is easier. Ok, there is always the person who wants to take the hard route so they can have an extra source of pride... and for those geeks wanting to be the leetest of leet, yeah, you can't beat Linux in the "hard to configure" department. IF Linux did become easier to use, I'm sure some of the hardcore leet-o geeks would raise their nose at it because it was too easy. Reminds me of Porsche 911 drivers who say their car is more "rewarding" to drive because of the extra challenge of a theoretically flawed rear engine, lol. Maybe linux is rewarding because it is hard more than it is better? I like a good challenge too but view the PC as more of a tool that enables me in my hobbies. It should be more about what you want to do, not how you do it.

Relative to Windows, installing drivers and apps are WAY more difficult on Linux. If I want to run a program, I would like to either download the package and run it, or insert media and run setup program. Answer a few spousal questions (just say yes to everything) and boom, you're done. With Linux, you have to download the source code, recompile, and, well, I never got past that step, lol. Just installing programs and drivers is a massive challenge. I would rather find my challenge in a good game than a frustrating computer experience. Time is money and wasting a lot of time just getting a PC to do what you want is a lost opportunity on something else you could be doing. One of my favorite quotes is "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing", lol.
Click to expand...

In relation to 2:
Actually, some programs running in WINE actually run faster than on a regular windows box.
Why would you need to use a windows app to burn cd's? k3b works just as well as any windows burning software.


In relation to 3:
Windows is easier? I will agree that some distro's of linux are harder to configure than others -but honestly - the install for fedora core 6 is easier than windows. Not to mention it installs in about half the time windows does.

Lastly, you are saying that installing hardware / drivers is harder? A lot of linux distro's used package repositories these days. I run gentoo linux and for me to update my whole system; updating software to newest versions, applying patches, removing old version, updating configs - it takes one command:

emerge -uD world

You simply sit back and watch it do it's thing/

Want to install an app? emerge [program_name] - It finds the program in the repository - downloads it and all dependencies - compiles it - installs it and configures it.

I'd have to say that is much easier than windows.

I'll agree that linux is not as desktop ready as windows is - but it's getting much much closer.

BTW openoffice 2.0 I have found to be better than microsoft office.
 
See here's the thing, for what it's worth... I'm sick of this debate on which OS is better, that isn't the point. And yes, Linux is a kernel, not an OS. The kernel is the glory, honestly. For what I believe Linux is meant for, I believe in many areas, it is better. That is the server environment. We're currently running many servers, some Linux, some Windows, some SCO. I don't think the SCO system has been shutdown since I've worked there for 2 years. The only reason we took down our PDC running ES3 was because the PSU died. The other 2 servers running ES3 haven't been down since I've been working there either. Our 2k server comes down once every 6 to 8 months, not really due to instability, but windows updates, and occasionally a service ends and can't be started until a restart.

The other thing is MS AD, I love Active Directory, I went to school for it, even taught the teacher much of it. It's very intuative, fairly robust, and a GUI definately has some great aspects. But, when it comes to adding users and groups, setting permissions and passwords *nix beats it hands down, plus out of the box I don't have to spend a half an hour making sure everything I DON'T want open is such. I can setup a server for mail, HTTP, and file sharing is no time at all, have it secure, and able to work. Then I can just walk away.
 
I'd just like to chime in here...

We seem to have some MS whores in here... Cheering for the savior as it where.

I hate to be the voice of reason, but here goes nothing. In the end it all biols down to perception. In how you view the situation. The simple matter of fact is that the only viewpoint that matters is your own, and no one elses.

Me for example. I think Windows is a piss poor gaming platform... Technically speaking of course. It certainly has a lot more games no doubt about it. But when it comes to Direct3d vs OpenGL.. OpenGL wins hands down in every comparison made ever in the history of rastorization. Period, and here MS is talking about dropping support for it all togethor, and emulating it in it's piss poor wannabe. This is my opinion and the only one it matters to is me.

I also think that Package management is CLEARLY supioror. In every single way that matters. Upgradability, Management, security rollouts, and much much more. For example If i want to update my system completely, all I have to do is "emerge -e world"... Well if that aint about as close to english as a computer can get!? I'll be damned. Simple. Or if I want to find wifi software, I just simply "emerge --searchdesc wifi"... How much simpler does it get? Or we can do it the same was PCBSD does it. With self installers that use the ports repository... Hell the best of both worlds right there.

And then the shear amount of software available... It is mind blowing. If it can be done, it can be done native linux software. I mean Everything from WiFi to packet sniffers to port scanners to web severs to photo editors to media players to p2p clients to SSI clustering to package management.... And the list just goes on and on and on and on and on... Windows dont hold a lick to th quantity or quality of software that is available in linux... and all of it can be installed with one SINGLE command....

And what is the most screwed up about this whole rant is that NONE of it matters. None of you will change your minds. I'm not changing my mind either, so it seems we're at a stale mate. If you prefer windows then so be it. But donrt come in here preaching about how shitty linux is in comparison. I --prove-- that linux is technically supioror OS from the ground up, but it dont mean jack squat. Same as yours dont mean jack squat either. Deal with it.
 
I am really glad to hear the software package thing is MUCH improved from the last time I tried a distro (probably fedora 3). I always like to see how the linux project is progressing and sounds like I am overdue for giving it another eval.

Honestly, if price were no object and I was given two boxes... one with Vista Ultimate and the other with some super-duper linux distro, I'm sorry but I would pick Vista.

Taking it a few steps from a home user, how would linux desktop do in a large corporate environment? You mention manageability features... are there comparable products for software delivery and remote control like SMS? Deployment tools like sysprep and unattended install answer files? Scalable security similar to Active Directory domain accounts and groups?

Last I knew, the *NIX platform had NIS, which didn't seem a fraction as capable as active directory. What is the new directory service for linux and how does it compare to active directory? You say the management is better, can you be more specific?
 
Lets just take this one step at a time.

About ease of use... Well that is entirely 100% subjective. I personally think Windows is a management nightmare. There just simply is no way to lock it down. As an administrator it is simply not possible to guaranty that the configuration will not be comprimised. In most Linux distro's this is possible. From the management side considering deployment Linux is simply less hairy then windows is. From a users perspective though, it depends. Lets face it most users are stupid. I hate to say it but it's true. They will be going to BB to buy the latest and greatest "Security Suite" only to find out that it wont install on the Linux box becouse it aint Windows. They are just simply too studid to know that they have a package manager installed, and they never needed to leave their seat to get a better more comrehensive system for free. With their choice of either GUI interface or CLI interface. Running as an application or service. Monitoring locally or remotely.

AS far as a directory service. There are a couple of choices. Though my personal opinion is that they are a total waste of time.
1: LDAP. Light Directory Access Protocol. The name says it all. Check this out for more information.
2: NIS. Your clearly familiar with this already.
3: Samba. Set up a Windows domain, using a windows server, and then join your Linux boxes to that domain using Samba

There is another choice however, In my opinion the best choice, Thinclients. Let's face it, Fatclients were a bad idea. the only time that a Fatclient would be required is if the machine were either a server or remote client. For example a laptop, in which case you'd be stupid to put it on a Directory anyhow. And for a server side directory, LDAP is perfect.

The biggest problem here is that your thinking like a MCP, or an MSCE, whichever be the case. The truth is that the two systems were designed to be completely different. MS designed the system to manage Fat clients. *Nix was designed to manage Thin clients. Windows and Linux are not the same. They wer never the same. I can go into why I think Thin clients are so much better if you'd like, but that is a topic for another thread. If you'd like to discuss the merits of Fat vs Thin, I'll start a new thread and we can discuss it.
 
duby229 said:
AS far as a directory service. There are a couple of choices. Though my personal opinion is that they are a total waste of time.
1: LDAP. Light Directory Access Protocol. The name says it all. Check this out for more information.
2: NIS. Your clearly familiar with this already.
3: Samba. Set up a Windows domain, using a windows server, and then join your Linux boxes to that domain using Samba
Click to expand...

waste of time? how would you manage user access to network (and local) resorces when you have, say, 10,000+ PC's? Wouldn't NIS be clunky for a system that large? Samba did great to emulate a NT 4.0 domain, but does the latest version support things like group policy, OU delegation, and the latest authentication protocols? (Last I checked, samba just started supporting NTLMv2, which is not the most secure). Samba always seems to be a few generations behind in emulating a MS domain and I would put money on it that it wouldnt scale as far.

I always thought of LDAP as more of a standard than a product, but curious what this open ldap package provides and how to use it. I didn't see any simple "about" page to describe what it does, but I'm sure it provides authentication. Does it do anything more than authentication? Active Directory uses LDAP as well.
 
duby229 said:
Lets just take this one step at a time.

About ease of use... Well that is entirely 100% subjective. I personally think Windows is a management nightmare. There just simply is no way to lock it down. As an administrator it is simply not possible to guaranty that the configuration will not be comprimised. In most Linux distro's this is possible. From the management side considering deployment Linux is simply less hairy then windows is. From a users perspective though, it depends. Lets face it most users are stupid. I hate to say it but it's true. They will be going to BB to buy the latest and greatest "Security Suite" only to find out that it wont install on the Linux box becouse it aint Windows. They are just simply too studid to know that they have a package manager installed, and they never needed to leave their seat to get a better more comrehensive system for free.
Click to expand...
Gotta disagree, those package managers (if you reffer to things such as YaST and the Ubuntu one as well) are a bunch of crap, they're SELECT software, meaning if you wanted program X but the respitory managers haven't heard of it or don't like it, it won't be on there, which happened many times for me, so I found it a bit useless and more of "I'm a Linux newbie, I can't install anything!" excuse
 
There are repositories that have broader ranges of packages, but it is rather irritating when mp3 support is not included because it is the evil-ness closed source "evil software" (that seems to be the attiude some people take to closed source).

As for software, there is obviously the games problem, but what about backup programs like dvdshrink, overclocking utilities (I am not an overclocker, but have seen screens of dozens of specialized windows tools), and may other indespenaible utilities?
 
shadowwyvern said:
There are repositories that have broader ranges of packages, but it is rather irritating when mp3 support is not included because it is the evil-ness closed source "evil software" (that seems to be the attiude some people take to closed source).

As for software, there is obviously the games problem, but what about backup programs like dvdshrink, overclocking utilities (I am not an overclocker, but have seen screens of dozens of specialized windows tools), and may other indespenaible utilities?
Click to expand...

Dvdshrink works in wine, there is a Linux build of Prime95 and there are other Linux based benchmarking programs.
 
Hornswoggler said:
waste of time? how would you manage user access to network (and local) resorces when you have, say, 10,000+ PC's? Wouldn't NIS be clunky for a system that large? Samba did great to emulate a NT 4.0 domain, but does the latest version support things like group policy, OU delegation, and the latest authentication protocols? (Last I checked, samba just started supporting NTLMv2, which is not the most secure). Samba always seems to be a few generations behind in emulating a MS domain and I would put money on it that it wouldnt scale as far.

I always thought of LDAP as more of a standard than a product, but curious what this open ldap package provides and how to use it. I didn't see any simple "about" page to describe what it does, but I'm sure it provides authentication. Does it do anything more than authentication? Active Directory uses LDAP as well.
Click to expand...

Your still thinkin like a Windows user. :D Windows Tends to be monolithic. Linux Tends to be Modular.

Interesting concept. You see LDAP doesnt authenticate, it doesnt have sucurity policies. None of that bullshit. None of that bloat. If you want authentication use PAM. If you file sharing use NFS if you want print sharing use CUPS. If you want a recource directory use LDAP. You see these are the biggets differences between Linux and windows. Windows bloats everything. A simple directory is turned into a one size fits all that doesnt really fit anybody. Also the openLDAP page has a comprehensive guide on the page that dedicates a whole chapter to what it is exactly, and what it does exactly. Also realize that the scenarios that you were taught to use Active Directory, was never intended to happen. The only reason the do happen is becouse of MS's flawed architecture. Remember the whole thing about thin vs fat.
 
Tylerdurdened said:
Gotta disagree, those package managers (if you reffer to things such as YaST and the Ubuntu one as well) are a bunch of crap, they're SELECT software, meaning if you wanted program X but the respitory managers haven't heard of it or don't like it, it won't be on there, which happened many times for me, so I found it a bit useless and more of "I'm a Linux newbie, I can't install anything!" excuse
Click to expand...

That is the beauty of repositories.... You can have as many as you like. If you talkin about yast repos..... Pretty much every linux application ever written is available for it in some repo or another. The same is true for apt repos. The same is true for yum repos. the same is true for gentoo overlays. Everything available in one place with your choice of either GUI or CLI. one command away or just a few clicks. It really doesnt get easier then that. If you couldnt figure it out then something was wrong. In which case there is literally thousands of help resources throughout the world in every single written language known to man. Available with only a single google search away.
 
duby229 said:
That is the beauty of repositories.... You can have as many as you like. If you talkin about yast repos..... Pretty much every linux application ever written is available for it in some repo or another. The same is true for apt repos. The same is true for yum repos. the same is true for gentoo overlays. Everything available in one place with your choice of either GUI or CLI. one command away or just a few clicks. It really doesnt get easier then that. If you couldnt figure it out then something was wrong. In which case there is literally thousands of help resources throughout the world in every single written language known to man. Available with only a single google search away.
Click to expand...
Did you read what I even said before you quoted? :rolleyes:
 
ummm clearly.... Hence why I responded....

You said you couldnt figure it out, and I said it's becouse you clearly didnt try.....

What am I missing?
 
duby229 said:
That is the beauty of repositories.... You can have as many as you like. If you talkin about yast repos..... Pretty much every linux application ever written is available for it in some repo or another. The same is true for apt repos. The same is true for yum repos. the same is true for gentoo overlays. Everything available in one place with your choice of either GUI or CLI. one command away or just a few clicks. It really doesnt get easier then that. If you couldnt figure it out then something was wrong. In which case there is literally thousands of help resources throughout the world in every single written language known to man. Available with only a single google search away.
Click to expand...
if you can _not only_ explain all of this to my 88-year-old grandmother, _but also_ get her to truly fathom it and think in this fashion, then, my friend, Linux will become (and be proven) to be a viable _consumer_ choice.

this is what it always ends up as. i'm as big of a proponent of Linux as the next penguinista. However, it's still a very niche choice -- because it's not INTUITIVE. This has nothing to do with the "it's all about what you're used to" argument. If I want to install a program, I want the program I buy to include the required files neccessary to install it. I shouldn't have to go on the Intertubes to find the answer and the files I need -- they should be in the box.

Is installing an application in Linux easy? thanks to repositories it's much easier than it was even three years ago. However, it's a far cry short of the simplicity of Windows or (even better) Mac OS. Mostly, because it's not intuitive.

Put a person who's never seen a computer before (a rogue Amish kid, let's say) in front of three PC's -- a Mac, a Windows box, and a Linux box -- and tell him to install an application from an included CD media.

First, he goes to the Mac and doesn't know what to do. He browses to the install CD and sees some files. he looks for an install program -- drat, none found. so, instead he copies the files to the hard drive. guess what, he just installed the program. he didn't know what to do, but his natural action ("take the program from the CD to my computer") was interpreted properly by the machine.

Next, he goes to the Windows box and doesn't know what to do. He again goes to the CD and looks around. he tries copying the files over like on the Mac, but that doesn't work. However, he does find a file called "setup.exe" and runs it. guess what, he just initialized the install program. Again, his natural inclination (that the CD includes some mechanism for installing the program) was correct and work intuitively.

Finally, he goes to the Linux box. He again browses to the CD and tries copying files over like on the mac. The files copy but do nothing on their own. He goes back to the CD and looks for an install program. He finds a file called "install". He double clicks on it and it opens in a text editor. He can read the programming language displayed in the text editor but has no idea what it means. At this point, he's essentially stuck.

if he'd known a little more, he'd open a console window and first try to run the program as

Code: 
  $ install

but he's greeted with an "insufficient privelages" error message. again he's essentially stuck if he's on a machine where he's not the administrator (root).

he calls his "computer savvy friend" and his friend comes over. they look at it together and the friend says "oh, you've got to execute that as root". after talking to the administrator, they are able to log in as root and they try again

Code: 
  # install

this time the code executes but returns an error message

Code: 
  dependency check failed on packages:
  xxxYYYzzzz.tar.gz
  ppppQQQQttt.tar.gz

...... and so I digress. at this point, I hope it's obvious that installing applications under Windows and MacOS is better because it's _intuitive_. This is not the 1970's and 1980's any more. Computers are no longer reserved for the "intellectually elite". Computers are designed and intended for mass consumption by the public. If an operating system or piece of software ever wants to succeed, it MUST cater to the lowest common denominator and not only anticipate, but also handle gracefully, every possible way in which a potential user can interact with it.

and, thus, my [/rant] is over.
 
Your telling telling me that.....

"emerge -va k3b"

Is harder then....
1: go to nero's web site.
2: download the burner software.
3: install the burnewr software.
4: register, and pay for the burner software.
5: actually know that this is what you need to do.

Is this what your saying?
 
svet-am said:
if he'd known a little more, he'd open a console window and first try to run the program as

Code: 
  $ install
Click to expand...

Heh, that would have been fun to watch.

Too bad he would have gotten:
-bash: install: command not found


Now, ./install ...........
 
duby229 said:
ummm clearly.... Hence why I responded....

You said you couldnt figure it out, and I said it's becouse you clearly didnt try.....

What am I missing?
Click to expand...
Nope, that's not what I said/meant What I said was this:
Repos are useless in that they don't offer a lot of software that you could find elsewhere (aka from the developers website, for example) and are often left unupdated, Wine is another example, it is always a few versions behind the up to date release on their website.
And that repos are a poor excuse/replacement for double click next next next finish.
 
duby229 said:
If you want authentication use PAM. If you file sharing use NFS if you want print sharing use CUPS. If you want a recource directory use LDAP.
Click to expand...

Ok, build me this:

Say you have 2,000 users, one print server, and 100 printers. You don't want just anybody to print to these, so they will need to be authenticated users, and you have five printers that need to be restricted to a certain handful of people.

How much administrative work is involved with PAM, CUPS, and LDAP?

To do this with windows, you install the server OS, install and configure a DNS server, promote the server to a domain controller, create the forest/domain, create each user a domain user account (takes maybe two minutes each, or can be scripted), create a global group for the restricted printer access, place privy users in that group, install the 100 printers on the server, configure permissions on the restricted printers, and you are done. Can Linux do it as quickly and easily?
 
svet-am said:
i'm as big of a proponent of Linux as the next penguinista.
Click to expand...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. "penguinista." HAHA Sorry, didn't mean to go off topic, but aside from the great points you made, that word just cracked me up and I definitely needed a good laugh.

:D
 
bbz_Ghost said:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. "penguinista." HAHA Sorry, didn't mean to go off topic, but aside from the great points you made, that word just cracked me up and I definitely needed a good laugh.

:D
Click to expand...
that's an old term for a Linux user and advocate. i guess it's so old some folks 'round here haven't heard it ;-)
 
Say you have 2,000 users, one print server, and 100 printers. You don't want just anybody to print to these, so they will need to be authenticated users, and you have five printers that need to be restricted to a certain handful of people.
Click to expand...

Couple things wrong with this scenario.

1: If you tryed to run ANY print server with 100 printers.......
2: If you had a need for 100 printers.....no matter the size of the network. You will certainly need to re-evaluate things considerably
3: cups can do this all by it's lonesome with just a few minutes configuration in a text file. Provided that the drivers are set up properly. And Users are configured properly

Heres what I would do....

Set up a terminal server using FreeNX. Add users. The terminal server will authenticate users locally. Set up a cups server. Add the printers to the cups server. Then configure access rights.
 
pretty good windows vs linux debate....

i've been kicking myself in the ass for the past few weeks trying to figure out Linux....

i'm getting there bit by bit, and i'm liking it more and more as time goes on...


but god damn, 9.9999 outta 10 people definately can't use this thing... it has a steep learning curve!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top