How hard is Linux? Check out betterdesktop.org

betterdesktop.org ^ | 2005-10-11

[softwarecreator]

There's at least 300 versions already, and no they're not all compatible, not even close.

No doubt.  I had a pretty hard time choosing one when I decided to give it a try.  I ran thru about 6 or 7 of them until I found one that was not too ridiculous to install.  Luckily I had help from n3wbi3 to suggest a few of the one's he has tried or I probably would have given up in frustration.  I think Linux has a future, but you are right, there are way too many versions out there and the average user would not be able to find one right for them.  Microsoft has the advantage in that area.  Also in how user friendly it is, terrific "explorer" navigation and how easy it is to install and run 3rd party software.

[softwarecreator]

That is why I insist on installing software via RPM's.

Problem is, the average user would have no way of knowing this.  I speak from experience on this subject because I wasted many hours tracking down dependencies just to get a few things installed.  Linux will have a hard time in the "desktop" world until they can make these things as easy to install as MS does.

[chronic_loser]

Just an anecdotal story. I kept WinXP on a partition here at the house. I needed to review a couple of items related to some stuff at work on Windows, so I booted into XP and have been working on it the last few days. Both my wife and my daughter have been griping about "when are we going back to Mepis.... I liked it better..... Windows is too SLOW.... there are too many popups in Windows (IE)." It is just an anecdotal story, I know, but it is an illustration that for the avg computer user just looking to check mail and surf, Linux is fine and serves the end user well. I should add that my wife is terribly digitally illiterate and my youngest daughter has a measured IQ of 68 (she finished the 8th grade).

The "loyalty" people have to windows is just familiarity, nothing more.

[chronic_loser]

All you have to do is find a thread like something on FR or one of the Linux forums. Doesn't take long to figure out that there are about 4 "easy" and well supported versions.

Mandriva, Ubuntu, Xandros, and (my favorite) Mepis. All are VERY simple to install.

[softwarecreator]

All you have to do is find a thread like something on FR or one of the Linux forums

My point was that the average user wouldn't be on FR to obtain this advice, get frustrated and give up.

And I actually did search for easy-to-install Linux.  Every Linux person out there has a different opinion on what is "easiest" to install.  There are probably several freepers here who would disagree with your choices.

See what I mean?  The average user is not going to go thru this hassle.  We are talking about people who open a box, plug in the monitor & PC, connect the internet and go.  That's about the extent of their ability to run a PC.

[HAL9000]

Mandriva, Ubuntu, Xandros, and (my favorite) Mepis. All are VERY simple to install.

The geek in charge of naming these products should be fired.

[clyde asbury]

I tried to install Suse on my PC and it had could not recognize my USB ports and wouldn't load... Eventually I gave up and tried Mandrake 10.1, which I like a lot.

Glad you found one you like.

Fedora had big problems with my system. The CPU ran at a high level almost continuously, and 2 days after installation there was constant static through the speakers that made me think I had a virus.

So, it sounds like choice of a Linux distribution is still finding a hardware fit. As with Microsoft, the flavor that is the least fussy about hardware will likely win the most converts. Or, following Macintosh, tailors the hardware to fit the distribution.

[clyde asbury]

Mandriva, Ubuntu, Xandros .. Mepis. The geek in charge of naming these products should be fired.

LOL.

Gentoo, Orudis, Knoppix, Celebrex, Kubuntu...

a) ancient Greek god
b) painkiller
c) Linux distribution

[EricT.]

Linux will have a hard time in the "desktop" world until they can make these things as easy to install as MS does.

Agreed. I did spend a bit of time installing dependencies for some software. The nice thing about using RPMFind[dot]net is that all the dependencies are listed with links in the package description. The dependencies really should be included with the package, though. I try to check for what I want to install on the Distro installation disk first, since it will automatically install dependencies. If it's not there, I go to RPMFind.

[EricT.]

Linux will have a hard time in the "desktop" world until they can make these things as easy to install as MS does.

WindowsXP: sure, my hardware was easy to install. But I really wish my USB mouse didn't make that irritating buzzing noise on my speakers, something that doesn't happen on Linux (which recognized and installed all my hardware just as easily).

[EricT.]

As with Microsoft, the flavor that is the least fussy about hardware will likely win the most converts.

Sorry, that was what I was trying to quote in the last reply. Guess I need to go get some coffee.

[clyde asbury]

Linux .. recognized and installed all my hardware just as easily) [as WindowsXP]

I liked Mandriva/Mandrake, too. It was my first taste of Linux, and worked fine on my system - partition and dual-boot. Fedora was my next choice, but I'm using SUSE because of its easy installation on my system. I had no complaints with Mandrake (it was early this year, before the name change) - just wanted to see what else was out there.

[ShadowAce]

Which is exactly my point, vi is a classic example of expert friendly, incredibly powerful, incredibly fast, a stone bitch to learn.

Exactly. I was claiming that, while it could be difficult to learn, it's easy to use once it's been learned. Most people define "easy" as "easy to learn"--I was defining it as "easy to use". There is a difference, and I think we actually agree on it.

[ShadowAce]

My wife and kids (all MS users) pretty much refuse to use my Linux PC because they find it too daunting, yet they picked up Windows right away.

I believe it. However, I was defining "easy" as "easy to use" not "easy to learn."

BTW--my family is the oppostite. They like linux as well or better than windows. The only introduction I gave them was to assign them a username and password. I didn't perform any training at all, and they have no problems with it.

[js1138]

you can get an XP machine on the net in 10 or 15 minutes...

What are you doing with the other 14 minutes and 50 seconds?

[ShadowAce]

...you can't just click on most "exe" files and have them start right up (most require command line activation)...

Huh? I single click executable files all the time to start them up.

and installing 3rd party software can lead to ulcers.

Learn to use the tools. :) yum and apt work wonders for dependencies. I don't know of anyone (new users included) who have had to deal with dependencies for quite a while.

[ShadowAce]

There's at least 300 versions already...

...and they continue to increase

[N3WBI3]

Its a nice story ;)

The only places where I see Linux as not being ok is for Gamers (very slowly improving) and if there is one or two killer apps somebody needs like visio, and *no* DIA is not there yet..

But youre 100% for for getting on the web, checking mail, writing reports for school Linux is a great tool for the average user...

[N3WBI3]

You eft out Fedora: a new user can click default a handful of times..

[ShadowAce]

You eft out Fedora: a new user can click default a handful of times..

Yup--and an existing user doesn't even have to do that since s/he's got the magic of a kickstart file.