Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge)
This NewsForge article says Linux is
ready for the desktop. "Of course, just because Linux is ready
for the desktop doesn't mean users are ready for Linux. Users get very
comfortable with their computers, and quite naturally fear change. But new
systems come into production all the time as the needs of a business
change, and when new client operating system better fit business needs,
employees have to change with the times."
(Log in to post comments)
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 12, 2003 22:07 UTC (Sat) by philbu (guest, #10608) [Link] I think it is.I was finally able to switch from Windows just recently. I've been toying around with various distros for the last couple years. But until now, the time hasn't been right. Now I can install Redhat 9, with full feature support for my laptop, except for the modem, which I don't use. I'm also running a printer, scanner, external usb/firewire hard drive, connecting via usb to my 12 track audio recorder, burning CDs, as well as doing my job. I'm a System Admin for a lot of Windows boxes by the way. Rdesktop and VNC are the best. Another big plus is how far Mozilla has come along. Java and Flash support is bonus with me. And the fonts are a lot more readable. Just my 2 cents,
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 12, 2003 22:33 UTC (Sat) by Evil_E (guest, #10609) [Link] I think Linux is ready. I switched to Mandrake Linux 9.1 recently and the only thing thatkeeps me from wiping XP from my Harddrive is my Music program. That's the only area where Linux is not ready... ok we got Ardour and some other programs. But they are not ready for PrimeTime... all I need is a good reliable old fashioned Harddisk recorder with some good effects. When they start arriving I'll say good bye to XP. Many people at my work don't think Linux is good enough for anything, but most of them looked at RH 5.2 or something that old and doesn't realize how far Linux and all the GUI:s have come since then. I switched because I wanted freedom and most of my needs are satisfied now. David
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 13, 2003 14:43 UTC (Sun) by fandom (subscriber, #4028) [Link] Unfortunately, that's the big point, no matter how ready Linux is for the desktop, aslong as there is a single app that doesn't work for you in Linux, you have to keep Windows around, and as long as there is a single app that doesn't work in Linux, why bother having Linux at all. I mean, I do have Linux at home but at work it is not feasible because of an app that almost nobody has heard of.
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 13, 2003 17:13 UTC (Sun) by utidjian (subscriber, #444) [Link] That cuts both ways... in my case there are dozens of apps I use in Linux that aren't available for Windows (ok so mebbe 5 or 6 main ones). Some have Windows versions but are a PITA to setup and are missing a lot of the functionality that the Linux version offers.The only reason I bother having Windows at all is because I have to check webpages and services for my Windows users. -DU-...etc...
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 13, 2003 18:06 UTC (Sun) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] If you have to use the non-Linux app all the time, that's certainly true. But if you only occasionally use the app, Linux could be more pleasent and efficient for the rest of the time. Trying to primarily use Linux also means that you're less likely to start using more apps that tie you to Windows, and encourages you to try to find an alternative to that app (which will be necessary at some point, regardless, because you will eventually be unable to get a computer that runs a particular version of a Windows app). It's also worth looking into VMWare and similar software, which can make it relatively easy to run both at the same time for different tasks (and can also improve the lifetime of your Windows installation by handling hardware that the Windows version you need can't support natively).
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 13, 2003 3:18 UTC (Sun) by kenf (guest, #5523) [Link] "Users get very comfortable with their computers, and quite naturally fear change."This is very true. I have been using Linux for my desktop for years. And one of my greatest fears is that I will have to use m$ windoze. This is reinforced every time I have to do something on my wife's computer running windoze me.
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 13, 2003 3:21 UTC (Sun) by robotralph (guest, #2570) [Link] I use mandrake 9 and waiting on my 9.1 subscription to be delivered, It does everything the microsoft o/s did only i am not worried about problems now. I use aim,yahoo,msn messengers, and work with graphics using my digital camera, audio is great, I had used mandrake starting with 7.0 and it keeps getting better with each release, from my stand point microsoft windows of any version is not quiet ready for a desk top, and the way they are going never will be.
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 3:10 UTC (Mon) by gdt (subscriber, #6284) [Link] The NewsForge article claims that a desktop Linux needs: reliability, security, compatibility and availability of applications.These criteria are stated without support. There is no reference to a user survey or attempt to build generalised requirements from users' specific desires. There are deserving criteria such as "ease of use" where Linux doesn't currently even come close to Windows let alone MacOS. The user interface lacks even basic design criteria such as consistency. Why are there differing procedures to print a page in Mozilla and OpenOffice and Xpdf and from the desktop? Why do I need to tell every package that the printer has A4 paper? And then there's questions of the quality of software to do even moderately serious desktop tasks. Let's try to write a memo. OpenOffice has no templates and the default paragraph settings suck. Oh well, let's set those and finish our memo. Do a spell check? Not with the default dictionary! The article concludes oddly, looking at desktop management software. This is bizaare as such software is really a hack to fix the near unmanagability of Windows. The scale of software needed for Linux is considerably less, as the RPM or Deb packaging allows simple software maintenance and company-wide customisation. A cron jon calling apt-get or a RPM maintenance package such as autoupdate is all that is needed. [Aside: With this in mind, it's always a shame to see software reviewers praise products rather than scold them when the system's package manager is not used to do software installation.]
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 10:13 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] quote:And then there's questions of the quality of software to do even moderately serious desktop tasks. Let's try to write a memo. OpenOffice has no templates and the default paragraph settings suck. Oh well, let's set those and finish our memo. Do a spell check? Not with the default dictionary! \quote And Windows has decent software? Oh, well, there's always WordPerfect. Wait - that runs on linux! Gimme a break - about the only MS software that I personally use at home is Windows itself (have to - my family would scream at me...), and of course rather more at work where it's what the sysadmins (at the behest of the PHBs) have put on my puter. Oh well, at least I have the ability to install PerfectOffice and Open Office too, even if I don't really use them - but I don't really use Word, either :-) Cheers,
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 14:54 UTC (Mon) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] > And then there's questions of the quality of software to do even moderately> serious desktop tasks. Let's try to write a memo. OpenOffice has no > templates and the default paragraph settings suck. Sometime ago I did some project documents on OpenOffice/Linux I admit in this case I had to use some OpenOffice features in a certain The above of course is an issue only in a "mixed" environment: I believe a
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 23:15 UTC (Mon) by melauer (guest, #2438) [Link] There are deserving criteria such as "ease of use" where Linux doesn't currently even come close to Windows let alone MacOS. The user interface lacks even basic design criteria such as consistency. Why are there differing procedures to print a page in Mozilla and OpenOffice and Xpdf and from the desktop? Why do I need to tell every package that the printer has A4 paper? You've hit upon an interesting issue here. You ask why Mozilla, OpenOffice and Xpdf print differently. One answer: Use Konqueror, KWord (which has templates), and KGhostView, or the GNOME equivalents. Both KDE and GNOME are internally consistent, and both have tons of software which follows their standards. More to the point, if all your software is designed for one environment, it is much easier to use (because it all behaves the same). Yet most distros ship with both, and lots more X software which isn't consistent with either (console software/daemons are, of course, something else entirely). May I make a suggestion to the makers of "Desktop" Linux distros: Ship less software! Seriously, try including just KDE or GNOME, and none of the "extra" X software (perhaps excepting full-screen games and similar software which one would expect to behave somewhat differently). For that matter, just include one "preferred" version of each type of software (e.g. one MP3/music file player, one mixer, one text editor, yeah you heard me!) Your competition (Windows) hardly ships with any software, why should you? People can always download and install more free software if they want. Perhaps you could sell a larger product with all that extra software for more money, as a "Plus" pack or some sort of "Expert Edition". If you must ship tons of software, then make your "default" install (the one all the newbies will choose) smaller. Make the default installation very small but very easy to understand, then let people add on from there. KDE and GNOME are well designed interfaces. They do not lack "basic" design criteria. They lack good help files, but that's another story :). Anyway, they are each highly consistent. But mixing the two, and other software besides, breaks that consistency. Any distro which wants to be "Linux for the Masses" should keep in mind that the masses need to start sinmple, and learn from there.
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 17, 2003 14:17 UTC (Thu) by ceebee (guest, #10207) [Link] you mean, like debian? or lycoris? or like ark? or like xandros? or like....
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 18, 2003 18:10 UTC (Fri) by melauer (guest, #2438) [Link] > you mean, like debian? or lycoris? or like ark? or like xandros? or like....Not like Debian, that's for sure. Debian is massive. As for those other distros, sure, I think they have the right idea. but they're niche players right now. I'd like to see the big boys (RedHat, Mandrake, SUSE) some up with a minimal install, or even a minimal distro.
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 9:09 UTC (Mon) by jonas_larson (guest, #10628) [Link] Is Linux ready? -yes! Is the buisiness ready? -No!Why? Every manager is looking for ROI (Return Of Investment) and are terrified of change... The most usuall question I get is: -can you get support for Linux? In order to put Linux on the desktop you have to "sell" the idea to the managers, and the best way to do that is the money way... (I know, I'm working as a "low level" manager)... Another problem is that a lot of companies are "microsoft blind" and their internal helpdesk (sys-admins) doesn't know anything else then windows... Unfortunally today Linux is only steeling market shares from the "real" unix's (HP-UX, Solaris, AIX...) So all you sys-admins out there get to work on your managers, they are the one's making the decitions.... //jonas
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 15:05 UTC (Mon) by kstamour (guest, #10632) [Link] I think it has been for 18 or so months. And when I say that I mean for the Average Joe and Jane. Imagin another 18 months of getting it easyer to uses for Joe and Jane. Geeks still have the hard core distro. My wife infact became sick of XP and so I installed Mandrake 9.1. She is IM'n, Burning CDs, browsing, using Mozilla. There are only one or two pet programs left to replace for windows. She at this time is a little put off when installing software on her own, thats were Linux the desktop needs work. I belive thats what Lindows claim to fam is (in part).
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 14, 2003 15:43 UTC (Mon) by novi (guest, #10633) [Link] The article is right.Linux is very well ready for desktop applications. It offers the comfort of a fully tunable Destop Environment, which you cannot find on Microsoft-Systems. Further it gives you the possibility to ease you daily work through user-adjustable configuations and scripting possibilities. On Windows Systems you need various $oftware products to finally "never" achieve the same productivity. Approaches made by "Cygwin" are already a big step to port this productivity to Windows platforms, but if you reach this step, the you are really nearby to become a Linux user. The bigger problem is if users can find the same software on a new OP-System. And the answer is and will be "NO". Except some basic tools there is different software. Be ready and willing to explorer those new software products. Sooner or later you will find out about the advantage of this freedom. And one last thing. Let me point out that it can be a somewhat huge problem to change from on Microsoft System to another Microsoft System (eg. Win95->WinNT or Win98->Win2000 or Win2000->WinXP). My experience is that those changes are rather bigger that those when changing the version of your Linux distribution or when even changing your Linux distribution itself. Find out about Linux. Sooner or later you will be happy you started. Novi
Linux not ready for the desktop? Give me a break! (NewsForge) Posted Apr 15, 2003 22:43 UTC (Tue) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] I had some things to say here, but I decided they'd be better as a Letter to the Editor; look for it Thursday.-- j
|
|
||||||||||||