The GNU/Linux Desktop: Nine Myths

itmanagement.earthweb.com ^ | 3-16-2009 | Bruce Byfield

[N3WBI3]

Nobody questions whether Mac OS X is ready for the desktop. Never mind that switching to it involves learning different assumptions and tools and a new desktop. It has a reputation for being user-friendly, and is backed by a proprietary company, just like Windows.

With GNU/Linux, however, the story is different. For over a decade, columnists and bloggers have been explaining how GNU/Linux isn't ready for the desktop -- and, despite all the progress in the operating system over the last ten years, the arguments haven't changed much. Moreover, increasingly, they're outdated when they're not based on complete ignorance. In fact, I often get the impression that those who pontificate on GNU/Linux's inadequacies have never tried it.

Often, of course, the criterion for desktop-readiness is subjective. What is a bug to one user is a feature to another: for example, having to log in as root to install software is an inconvenience to inexperienced users, but a security feature to those with more knowledge.

Often, too, complaints about GNU/Linux are actually complaints that it is not exactly like Windows. Never mind the fact that, unless it did things differently, there would be no reason to switch in the first place. Or that anyone who expects to use a new application or operating system without a learning period is arrogantly provincial. The fact that GNU/Linux is not completely familiar is more than enough to damn it in the eyes of some critics.

Then there are arguments that involve a rubber ruler. That's where someone claims that GNU/Linux will never be ready until it has a certain feature, then, when the feature is pointed out or developed, changes directions and insists that another feature is essential. You can never win against such arguments, because the criteria for judging them keeps changing.

However, in addition to all these arguments are the ones that invalidate themselves primarily because of error, incompleteness, or misrepresentation. These are nine of the most common factually incorrect ones:

1) Distros are too forked for easy compatibility for developers

This claim is popular among software vendors explaining why they don't make versions of their products for the operating system. It is based on the fact that all distributions do not follow efforts at consistency like the Linux Standards Base, and often put files in different locations. In addition, distributions use a variety of package systems, so that widespread support can mean building packages in several different formats.

These problems are real, but the claim exaggerates the difficulties they create. Universal installers like InstallBuilder and Install Anywhere offer vendors installers that are similar to those on Windows. As for building several different packages, if community projects have no trouble doing so, why should a software company?

But, really, the largest problem with this claim is that it attempts to impose the Windows way of doing things on an existing system. In GNU/Linux, the creators of an application don't support different distributions or packaging formats -- the distribution does.

This system works because, with free software, the distribution can make whatever changes it needs to make the software run. It is only a problem for proprietary vendors. If they aren't willing to work with the system and release their code as free software, that is their choice -- but then they shouldn't complain that the system isn't set up for them.

2) No migration tools exist

True, GNU/Linux might benefit from a wizard that would import e-mail, browser bookmarks, IRC channels and other personal information from Windows. But the same could be said of Windows. At least GNU/Linux co-exists with other operating systems and can read their formatted partitions so that you can manually migrate some of this information.

3) There's no hardware support

In the past, hardware support for GNU/Linux was spotty. More often than not, it existed because of efforts by the community, not the manufacturer, and its early stages were incomplete.

However, in the last three or four years, community drivers have matured, and more manufacturers are releasing GNU/Linux drivers along with Windows and Mac drivers. The manufacturers' drivers are not always free software, but they are free for the download.

Today, cases of incompatibility for basics such as hard drives, keyboards, and ethernet cards still occur, but are rare. The problem areas are likely to be peripheral areas like scanners, printers, modems, and wireless cards. However, you can hedge your bets by a few tactics such as choosing a postscript printer, which always works with the generic postscript driver, or buying from companies like Hewlett-Packard, which has a long history of supporting GNU/Linux printing.

Some people even maintain that, because GNU/Linux generally retains backwards compatibility, it actually supports more hardware than Windows. I wouldn't quite go that far, but, on the whole, driver problems on GNU/Linux seem only slightly more common than the ones I used to find on various versions of Windows.

Today, too, you can sidestep hardware compatibility entirely by buying GNU/Linux pre-installed from companies such as Acer or Dell.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Someone pays for the food that’s donated.

[N3WBI3]

fine what about old ladies who volunteer to reed *their own* book to people in hospice.. what are they after.. Dude your commie meme is broken..

[ShadowAce]

...it would notice if a given program wanted to send traffic external to your system, and you have the option of allowing or denying the access.

Sounds like SELinux, actually. It's kinda difficult to learn and create rules (I've done it, but it's not as easy as you'd think it could be).

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

It is still not free. Their fuel and time is worth something. Have you ever spent any time around a group of women? With Women there are always strings attached. Maybe not visible strings.

[N3WBI3]

“Their fuel and time is worth something.”

Not to them, thats no different than someone putting code into a FOSS project because they feel like it so if:

Volunteering to read books to people who are dying is communism then yes FOSS is communism..

“Have you ever spent any time around a group of women?”

As someone with a wife and two daughters I really have to tell you that I find gender bashing (no matter which way) to be rather demeaning.

[zeugma]

Interesting. I'll look at that in detail tonight and see if it does what I want. One of the features I'm really looking for is some kind of notification, like "program XYZ wants to connect to the internet - allow/deny?". Programs like this are pretty annoying when you first install them, but once they've run for a while, they can be damned useful in identifying things that you didn't think were accessing the net, but are.

[zeugma]

Excellent! Thanks. I’ll look at those.

[calex59]

My take as a retired computer professional. I like Linux, it is a good system and it gets better all the time. I also like Windows, I use my XP constantly and absolutely hate Vista. It crashes too often and also will not run many older devices and requires a huge hardware upgrade on older machines that run XP just fine. I liked 98SE also, but is didn't find drivers with the ease XP does so I finally switched totally to XP. I always have a machine with one form of linux or another on it, and I need to download the Ubuntu just to check it out.

I acknowledge that MS has problems with some of their stuff, ME and Vista spring to mind. I do rant about them now and them however, I believe that the home PC market would not be what it is today without MS, sure they make mistakes, sure they want the whole computer market to be theirs and they try now and then to do so. Linux keeps this from happening totally, and if MS ever goes through with their plan to license and rent out hardware and software on a yearly basis instead of granting ownership, Linux will fill the gap, along with Apple.

I applaud MS for Bill Gates pioneering efforts working off of Software ideas he took from another company and am glad he built the company up and made PCs popular throughout the world. Where would we be without MS? I also applaud Linux and open source, the savior of software and the OS that helps keep the other two(Apple and MS)at least partly honest.

[Knitebane]

One of the features I'm really looking for is some kind of notification, like "program XYZ wants to connect to the internet - allow/deny?".

I'm not aware of any Linux software that does the pop-up thingy.

Typically you would set up your rules then monitor your log files while trying out each program that you want to allow access. Any DENY or BLOCK statement you see means you missed something.

Once you have everything allowed that you want to allow you shouldn't have to fool around with your firewall rules any more.

Something like KSystemLog (KDE) or System Log (Gnome) will do the job.

[Knitebane]

I believe that the home PC market would not be what it is today without MS,

Well, the home PC market would not be what it is without some company that built an OS. That it was Microsoft had to do with the fact that Mary Gates, Bill's mommy, sat on the board of the United Way with an IBM vice president.

The reality is that the PC market was driven not by Microsoft, which just hitched a ride, but by the openness and low cost of the IBM PC.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Often, too, complaints about GNU/Linux are actually complaints that it is not exactly like Windows.

I used to mutter that under my breath when I would take time to try and setup/use/learn the Linux desktops like Gnome or KDE.

No longer. Yes...it is not exactly like Windows. That does not mean it is hard, klugey or tough to learn.
I use Linux Mint 6.0 on a dual boot with my WinXP. More often than not, I boot to Linux. The desktop is beautiful and the Software Manager is sublime. It allows you to browse for new software with descriptions, user reviews and screenshots.
Installation is easier than Windows....you just click on ...wait for it...."Install".

And if you don't like it, uninstallation is easier than Windows. Just click on...you guessed it..."Uninstall".

I'm currently getting ready to set up either Crossover Linux to run Windows Apps or setup a virtual Windows XP machine within Linux Mint using VMWare...or maybe even "VirtualBox" from Sun. Haven't decided yet. But once I do and get it all running smooth and backed up...I'm done with Microsoft for good. Should be done about the time XP finally gets left twisting in the wind by MS.

[calex59]

That is true, but MS was the company that built the OS, or at least expanded on an existing OS. IBM, by allowing their product to be cloned, did a lot for the home PC market. The fact is though, without MS, there would have been no competition for Apples GUI and PC sales would never have reached the point they have today. You are assuming someone would have jumped in and filled the void left by MS if Bill Gates hadn't decided to go off on his own. There is nothing to back that assumption, no one brought out a competing system, ever. Apple doesn't count because they already existed, and their product was too expensive, the other systems out there met quick deaths.

I stand by my statements, but will throw in IBM also as motivators for the PC market(Apples biggest mistake was to not allow cloning).

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

It does everything else for you.

Including a bunch of useless questions that create the need to click OK, OK, OK, OK, Next....

Just INSTALL the bloody thing already!

Do you accept the license agreement?
Where would you like to install it?
Do you want to create a Start Menu group?
Would you like an icon on your desktop?
Would you like an icon placed in Quickstart?
Do you want to install the Yahoo! Search bar in your Browser?
Would you like to set your Homepage to "www.ThisSoftwareSux.com"?
Are you ready to install?
Would you like to register your software now?
Would you like to open the ReadMe file?

Sheeeesh.

[Knitebane]

That is true, but MS was the company that built the OS, or at least expanded on an existing OS.

Actually, no. Bill Gates, having no OS and only a tiny piece of the compiler market, had his mommy get him the gig with IBM.

When IBM came to Gates, Gates said, "Sure, I've got an OS for you. Come back in three months," and IBM left happy.

Gates then went to go see Tim Patterson at Seattle Computing who actually did have an OS called Quick-and-Dirty OS or QDOS. Gates bought QDOS for $75,000 and after renaming it MSDOS, he delivered it to IBM.

It was widely known that QDOS was pretty much ripped off from CP/M, written by Gary Kildall.

Wary of being sued by Kildall, IBM offered to license CP/M from Kildall and make it available for the IBM PC too. When Kildall's wife threw some IBM suits out of their house because they wanted her to sign an NDA, IBM fixed Kildall. They priced CP/M at $240 and MSDOS at $50, thus ensuring that DOS would win out.

So, no, Gates did very little except commit fraud by selling something he didn't have.

[ShadowAce]

Are you talking about Windows or Linux?

I never ran into that with Linux.

[Knitebane]

Back when Mandriva was still called Mandrake, there was a fun demo you could do you with Mandrake Linux.

You needed three things: A PC that could boot from a CD, said PC either not on a network or on a network with DHCP, and a Mandrake install CD.

You dropped the CD into the drive and rebooted the machine. When the installer screen came up, you could hit the enter key 5 times and then walk away.

When you came back in 15 minutes you'd be greeted with a ready-to-go Mandrake Linux PC.

:)

I wonder why Windows makes things so hard?

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Are you talking about Windows or Linux?

Windows, of course. That's where one finds 'Add/Remove programs'.

[ShadowAce]

Windows, of course. That's where one finds 'Add/Remove programs'.

Yes--but I said "Add/Remove Software".

It right there in the Fedora menu. :)

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Oh come on....

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Sorry. Missed that.