Posted on 12/18/2008 5:54:37 PM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
Windows users have a real problem when it comes to updates. Sure they have Microsoft Update and certainly many applications include their own update mechanisms. Yet despite that, there seems to be a problem with Windows users actually updating.
So allow me to make a suggestion. Microsoft (or a really smart ISV) should build a full application manager for Windows, similar to what most Linux distributions do today.
For the non-Linux users out there - what Linux distros typically do is have a package management utility of some sort that pulls updates from a package repository (or repositories). Those updates could be for the core operating system but also could include updates for any application package in a repository. So if for example Mozilla Firefox is updated, you don't necessary have to go to Mozilla to update. Instead if its in your Linux distro's repository when an update is issued you'll get an update as part of your existing unified update process.
Small caveat though - there can sometimes be a delay between the time an application has an update upstream and the time an update actually appears in a particular Linux repository.
Overall though, the general idea of one unified approach through a master application package updating tool is one that in my view keeps Linux users (relatively speaking) up to date (and no pun intended on the old Red Hat Up2date command). Wouldn't that type of system be a good one for Windows too? Wouldn't you rather have one update process instead of many?
tech
Yeah they do. Adding new software is ridiculously easy with Linux - although it also helps that it’s free.
One of the main purposes of a package manager is to handle shared-library conflicts. These are those pesky .dll files in Windows, and .so files in *nix.
But in Unix, unlike Windows, you can get around the problems by configuring the LD_LIBRARY_PATH env variable in a startup script, and then run the script to start the app.
First, let me admit that I’ve been spoiled by the linux way, I’m incredibly lazy now because of it.
However, this can only be a rule of thumb. The linux way isn’t as completely unified as the author would have you believe. But it is immensely more unified than the windows way is.
Example of the disunification: Yum, Apt, Yast, Redcarpet, up2date, synaptic......... Now granted, some of these are front ends, some are back ends. Which complicates things even more.......... somewhat.
Now, an example of the unification:
I go to yum and type update, I get my update for firefox(Browser) gimp(graphics) openoffice, kaffeine(media player) bzflag(game) freeciv(another game) plus my security updates plus my new feature updates plus updates for everything else.
All with one single action.
It would take me 10-30 minutes to round up all of that stuff from various websites and initiate the downloads. It’s not incredibly hard mind you, but as I said I’m spoiled. :-)
Boy, I think you could become rich and famous (well, famous anyhow) if you’d write a tutorial on how to add stuff to Linux. Everyone I know who tries ends up downloading something to somewhere, and that’s the end of it. I struggle with it too, and the prevailing attitude on Linux sites is “figure it out, dumbass, you’re not in Windows-land any more”.
Just sayin. It’s not easy for folks I’ve talked to who have tried one of the Linux distros, then gave up in frustration.
You know how I do it in PCLinuxOS? There’s a quick-launch button that opens Synaptic that I push, enter my password, and the program opens. I hit “Reload” “Mark Updates” and “Apply”. That’s how easy it is to stay up-to-date.
If I want to put on a piece of software before leaving Synaptic, I search for it, mark for installation, hit “Apply” and hit”Apply” again. It is then installed, applies changes and it’s done. EXTREMELY easy, simple, safe, and because it came from a PCLinuxOS repository, it’s been found to work, conform to PCLOS’ standards, and I can get support from the PCLOS website.
If I want to download something NOT in the repository, Im’ on my own, no support. But the whole idea of a repository is making sure a package is compatible and available.
Actually, I’d rather write Unix shell scripts. But that’s just me.....
windows - why bother updating that 20th century os?
sumitted from a salvaged IBM 500mhz thinkpad with
debris linux
Windows? What’s that? Oh.. it’s that old antiquated operating system that I load in VirtualBox while I’m in Linux in case there’s some odd application that I can’t successfully run under Wine.
With Ubuntu, things have become disgustingly easy.
looks like the b key is missing...
Those interested in trying Linux have choices. Ubuntu can be installed within Windows without risk and booted (Search Wubi). You can download an Ubuntu ISO file and burn it to a CD and use the CD to live boot Ubuntu from the CD/DVD drive. Live boot does not install, you can sample what Linux is like first and see if your hardware and wireless card works. Install on your hard drive is also an option with the same CD.
For a complete start to finish preparation, intall, usage for a beginner I used this book. It covers just about everything you need. I recommend a complete install to enjoy Linux the most.
***First, let me admit that I’ve been spoiled by the linux way, I’m incredibly lazy now because of it.***
I always found an answer on the Ubuntu forums.
Well, here’s one Linux user who hosed one of my first installs (Ubuntu) by downloading stuff from its repository.
There are distros with repositories that are well-maintained and which contain only tested and safe software, and there are distros with repositories with the occasional grenade in ‘em.
I wonder which model Microsoft would choose...
PCLinuxOS is an example of repos done right.
They seriously need an updated .iso, though. The one they have is more than a year old, and the updates amount to nearly a gigabyte. Worth it, but off-putting for newbies.
I'm a fan of Puppy Linux for that. Choices are limited, and it's certainly not as pretty as UBUNTU, but it's easy for beginners to add stuff from the menu. It's also very small, so it boots quickly.
Wireless on a cheap laptop can be a pain with several flavors of Linux.
They are getting the 2009 version ready now.
Yeah, like the average American wants to be a geeky dork that gets off on configuring their computers all day. No thanks. I’d rather be busy configuring my wife’s bra.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.