# [PCWorld] Why Linux on the Desktop Is Dead



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> "Linux is awesome. It's a powerful, capable, flexible operating system with tremendous potential. But, it's never going to be a factor on the desktop, so don't even waste your time considering it."


Makes me want to install Linux as my only OS just for spite..

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/252516/why_linux_on_the_desktop_is_dead.html

URL is't working for me


----------



## farmdve

Source?


----------



## Methos07

You should probably add a source link and embed the quote on this.


----------



## joshd

This is a joke, right? 20,000,000 people use just one distro as their desktop: ubuntu. It aint dead. It's only going to grow after Windows 8 release.


----------



## joshd

SOURCE: http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/252516/why_linux_on_the_desktop_is_dead.html


----------



## GermanyChris

Source link is done..

Didn't work when I hyperlinked??


----------



## Oystein

Bollocks. I use it, which means it still lives. It's the only place to go for geeks, since Apple and Microsoft have to make operating systems made for ordinary users. I want my customizability, thank you.


----------



## joshd

Use:

Code:



Code:


To read the full article, click [URL=http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/252516/why_linux_on_the_desktop_is_dead.html]here[/URL].


----------



## rdrdrdrd

I'm sick of people claiming "X is dead" or "Y is dying" no its not, stupid sensationalist journalists...


----------



## Methos07

I wouldn't really consider Linux a "rounding error". Though the market share is small compared to Windows, Linux has an important place in the computing world.


----------



## Malcolm

Quote:


> To its credit, Linux has a phenomenal support system, and loyal, knowledgeable users willing to help guide you through the murky waters. Of course, it's often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you're doing.
> 
> I know there's an army of dedicated Linux hobbyists who will no doubt unleash a barrage of flames and tirades as a result of this article. They'll tell me all the ways Windows sucks, and all the reasons Apple is evil, and make exalted claims about how wonderful their lives are since they made the switch, and how they'll never go back.
> 
> Let me preemptively say, "That's great. I'm happy for you." It doesn't change the fact that you're part of a negligible market segment. It doesn't change the reality that Linux is not as intuitive or user friendly as its rivals, *or that it lacks the third-party hardware and software support of its rivals,* or that using it requires a learning curve and the dedication to dive into forums and learn to tinker. It's great for hobbyists and hackers, but not for an average user at a company.


I lol'd at the use of the word "hacker," but otherwise, article was written by Captain Obvious. The part in bold is the main reason why Linux will always stay in a single digit market share on the desktop. Even being free isn't going to convince people to switch to something if it's going to be less usable than what they're coming from.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Methos07*
> 
> I wouldn't really consider Linux a "rounding error". Though the market share is small compared to Windows, Linux has an important place in the computing world.


It's just cause the author is a Windows fanboy and couldn't even work Ubuntu.


----------



## SamTheJarvis

There will always be a demand for open-source operating systems, until it's made illegal or something.

I can't help but think press like this is a deliberate attack on the open source community because it doesn't sit with corporate ideals.

- My 2 pence.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malcolm*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> To its credit, Linux has a phenomenal support system, and loyal, knowledgeable users willing to help guide you through the murky waters. Of course, it's often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you're doing.
> I know there's an army of dedicated Linux hobbyists who will no doubt unleash a barrage of flames and tirades as a result of this article. They'll tell me all the ways Windows sucks, and all the reasons Apple is evil, and make exalted claims about how wonderful their lives are since they made the switch, and how they'll never go back.
> Let me preemptively say, "That's great. I'm happy for you." It doesn't change the fact that you're part of a negligible market segment. It doesn't change the reality that Linux is not as intuitive or user friendly as its rivals, *or that it lacks the third-party hardware and software support of its rivals,* or that using it requires a learning curve and the dedication to dive into forums and learn to tinker. It's great for hobbyists and hackers, but not for an average user at a company.
> 
> 
> 
> I lol'd at the use of the word "hacker," but otherwise, article was written by Captain Obvious. The part in bold is the main reason why Linux will always stay in a single digit market share on the desktop. Even being free isn't going to convince people to switch to something if it's going to be less usable than what they're coming from.
Click to expand...

Malcolm as always you are spot on. How's the middle by the way?


----------



## TFL Replica

Just google "industry is dead" and sift through the results. Make sure you're not in the middle of drinking something when you do.


----------



## Mygaffer

"but a year and a half later it is up only slightly"

So Linux use is up, but only a little so that means it is dead?


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mygaffer*
> 
> "but a year and a half later it is up only slightly"
> So Linux use is up, but only a little so that means it is dead?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TFL Replica*
> 
> Just google "industry is dead" and sift through the results. Make sure you're not in the middle of drinking something when you do.


----------



## Quantum Reality

Man does have a point about getting stuff to work in Linux. Half the time you need to Google for a remedy that amounts to:

"step 1. Open a command shell.
step 2. [spate of commands you must enter in the correct order]
step 3. Pray you never need to do this again because this quoted remedy is not part of the official literature on the OS and may disappear at any time."

What's the point of a GUI OS if all the stuff you have to do to make it work is still CLI?

Furthermore, I've known people who use an OS purposely designed to be more GUI-friendly (e.g. PC-BSD) and they actively resent using the modular PBI plugin design! They're the frickin' ambassadors for this OS and they still insist on compiling all their stuff from ports or from the repository! Come on, guys.


----------



## Flying Toilet

Yeah sure, the market share is up from last year, a major video game developer is talking about bringing their platform to the OS, and you can pretty much get anything you use now for free with it. But don't bother with it, just keep paying for stuff.


----------



## ironmaiden

Linux was designed as a server system and there it shines, the problem is user friendliness Linux lacks , but if you checkout LMDE it is one of the most user friendly linux distros. I have win 7 64 and opensuse 12.1 sitting on my lappy and I use linux more and than windows, my work actually is on linux but as a desktop I prefer linux.

Linux is not dead it is very much alive and growing.

Yes it will never overtake win or mac os as a desktop replacement.


----------



## BinaryDemon

I think an Android-based desktop could be quite popular. Android is appearing in more devices like SmartTV's everyday and App-developers see potential for profit on that platform.


----------



## Malcolm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malcolm*
> 
> I lol'd at the use of the word "hacker," but otherwise, article was written by Captain Obvious. The part in bold is the main reason why Linux will always stay in a single digit market share on the desktop. Even being free isn't going to convince people to switch to something if it's going to be less usable than what they're coming from.


And just to add to my above post, it annoys me when people forget these critical points and just assume that the only reason Linux market share is low and more people aren't using it is because they're stupid, M$ fanboys, corporate sheep, etc. There's this little thing called "market segments" which are determined according to a given group of user's needs in regard to the capabilities of the OS, among other things. This explains both Windows' massive success on the desktop AND Linux's massive success in the server segment. Linux is successful in the latter because it delivers attractive features to THOSE users, whereas it fails on the desktop because it doesn't deliver what THOSE users want/need. Different segments are different.

And to the guy/girl/person who mentioned that this article might be an attack on open source from the butthurt megacorps, I wouldn't rule that out either. But the article is fairly true nevertheless.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Malcolm as always you are spot on. How's the middle by the way?


Can't tell you, closed source


----------



## Oystein

So here we have another victim of the classic

Code:



Code:


sudo rm -rf /

prank. "It'll make your computer faster!"

And he never tried Linux again.


----------



## DaClownie

It's certainly lacking... I've been using Ubuntu 12.04 for the last few weeks and there are still some obvious short comings. Nothing so far is a "deal breaker" but it's just a lot of small quirks that add up to annoyance. However, I will say it has come a long way (I'm posting from Ubuntu now). I've been making the solid effort to boot up into Linux daily, perform tasks, and switch to Windows 7 when I'm gaming. Let's just say, I'm happy Google is there. I've had to look up more fixes than I care to share, and half the tiem I don't understand a damn thing I'm typing into that console to make something work. Any person with malicious intent that wanted to could prey on new Linux users by simply making some "helpful" posts for the Google Search Engine to find... us n00bs would scoop those articles up in a second, type it all in, and give all our lives away. lol


----------



## Flying Toilet

I just briefly read his "30 days with Linux" day 28, five biggest issues with Linux:

Syncing the iPhone
Banshee
Wine (wants to use MS Office, also couldn't figure out how to install WINE through terminal...)
Swimming upstream (apparently installing it was too much of a hassle, and took the entire first day to do so)
Linux flamers (He keeps referring to negative comments from the community, of which are no where to be found on his site. The Ubuntu community is one of the friendliest and helpful, so I don't know why he just didn't reach out.)

This guy's a quack and just trying to get his article more views. Ditch this.


----------



## Quantum Reality

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Flying Toilet*
> 
> Linux flamers (He keeps referring to negative comments from the community, of which are no where to be found on his site. The Ubuntu community is one of the friendliest and helpful, so I don't know why he just didn't reach out.)
> This guy's a quack and just trying to get his article more views. Ditch this.


You've obviously never been personally dumped on by people who question why you're too dumb to just KNOW that you do Thing X when Occasion Y happens, even though there's no formal documentation for the OS.

(Parenthetically, have you never seen a war break out between Linux users and FreeBSD users? The fact that they bring such intensity to their OSes tells you how they really feel about Windows users trying to learn the OS they've mastered)


----------



## Oystein

Well, if this journalist showed this kind of attitude on a Linux forum I'm not really surprised he got flamed


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oystein*
> 
> Well, if this journalist showed this kind of attitude on a Linux forum I'm not really surprised he got flamed


QFT


----------



## ironmaiden

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaClownie*
> 
> It's certainly lacking... I've been using Ubuntu 12.04 for the last few weeks and there are still some obvious short comings. Nothing so far is a "deal breaker" but it's just a lot of small quirks that add up to annoyance. However, I will say it has come a long way (I'm posting from Ubuntu now). I've been making the solid effort to boot up into Linux daily, perform tasks, and switch to Windows 7 when I'm gaming. Let's just say, I'm happy Google is there. I've had to look up more fixes than I care to share, and half the tiem I don't understand a damn thing I'm typing into that console to make something work. Any person with malicious intent that wanted to could prey on new Linux users by simply making some "helpful" posts for the Google Search Engine to find... us n00bs would scoop those articles up in a second, type it all in, and give all our lives away. lol


heck even after 15-16 years on a linux system even I at times do not understand quite a few things.

But I can say this linux servers just performs fantastically just too good.


----------



## Flying Toilet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> You've obviously never been personally dumped on by people who question why you're too dumb to just KNOW that you do Thing X when Occasion Y happens, even though there's no formal documentation for the OS.
> (Parenthetically, have you never seen a war break out between Linux users and FreeBSD users? The fact that they bring such intensity to their OSes tells you how they really feel about Windows users trying to learn the OS they've mastered)


I have. It's just a matter of knowing who to go to. You don't ask the guy who punched you in the face yesterday how to do something today. Was he relying strictly on his readers? The article seems to indicate so. He didn't figure out the sudo command until day 18... and only did so by the suggestion of his readers. If I was suggesting that he used the command line instead of the GUI for 17 days, I'd get aggravated with him too.

Although you are correct, I haven't seen the wars break out. However I know that I'm a novice when it comes down to it, but we're talking about the basic principles of Linux. I'm here to tell you that I'm not a guru of anything tech, I work in a deli, I have no certifications in computers and computing is strictly a hobby of mine. If I can understand command line operations, there shouldn't be any reason a columnist with a background in computers would have an issue doing the same.


----------



## snaguoonkee

I've used Ubuntu and many other distros in the past (favorite was Peppermint) and I was impressed with Linux overall, like the speed, help docs, the community, but unfortunately my wireless card on my laptop just didn't want to work with Linux and I'm a gamer, so I had to use Windows.

I feel Linux is like a lifestyle, something I wasn't ready to commit to. But it's certainly not going to die, even in the desktop market.


----------



## Harbinger

I read the article and this is a rough summary of what I think he said:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tony Bradley*
> herpa derpa...lunix be part of minority, so it's ded


----------



## rammbhat

LOL.. the author is trolling right?


----------



## Blameless

I wouldn't say Linux on the desktop is dead, but progress in terms of real usability has been agonizingly slow. Can't die if it hasn't really lived yet.

I first tried Linux with Mandrake 6.0 back in 1999 and honestly, my experiences have barely changed. Basic tasks that I always took for granted in Windows, or even DOS, are still a chore in most Linux distros, while documentation is still sporadic and sketchy for novice users. For many, including myself, the advantages of Linux are too small to warrant the investment in time and effort in mastering the OS.


----------



## blenton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malcolm*
> 
> There's this little thing called "market segments" which are determined according to a given group of user's needs in regard to the capabilities of the OS, among other things.


The biggest part of the home desktop segment only ever uses a computer for web and mail and light multimedia.
Linux isn't any less suited for those tasks than Windows or OS X.

The main reason it's not more popular on the desktop lies in the fact that that part of the market buys premade computers and:
(a) barely any exist with linux installed
(b) even if there are some those people will go for the things they're familiar with, instead of linux which has the stigma of being _"complicated"_

That's really the crux of the issue behind most problems people have with linux on desktop: they go into linux expecting free Windows and get surprised that it doesn't do everything _exactly the same_ like Windows.


----------



## Fortunex

It is largely dead. Less than 2% of the market share between three competitors is dead in my opinion. It fits a very small niche, and I doubt it will ever grow beyond that.

I've used several Linux distros, and while it's fun to tinker and customize everything, I really just don't see the point unless you need a free, or very lightweight OS. Things just work better in Windows. When I want to listen to music I don't want to have to find the player that's the least buggy with my sound card, I don't want to have to find a specific driver to use my wireless internet (and have it be buggy anyways), I want things to work. If Linux gave me something, like better performance (which it arguably could on a netbook or old PC, that I don't own), better programs, _something_, I'd use it more. However, all it seems to do is create more problems than it solves. I don't care if it doesn't degrade over time if I have to spend hours upon hours troubleshooting just to get basic things working as I'd like them to, it's faster and more efficient to just backup and format my Windows installation every few months.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> I wouldn't say Linux on the desktop is dead, but progress in terms of real usability has been agonizingly slow. Can't die if it hasn't really lived yet.
> I first tried Linux with Mandrake 6.0 back in 1999 and honestly, my experiences have barely changed. Basic tasks that I always took for granted in Windows, or even DOS, are still a chore in most Linux distros, while documentation is still sporadic and sketchy for novice users. For many, including myself, the advantages of Linux are too small to warrant the investment in time and effort in mastering the OS.


This is exactly where I am coming from. Back in the 90s when I was running Redhat and Suse and Mandrake.. I had no job and no responsibilities. I had time to spend 12 to 15 hours a day learning command lines. I'm a professional now with responsibilities and I cannot spend that kind of time just getting a basic operation to work. I mean heck.. If we're going to say command line is so WIN lets go back to DOS please.


----------



## guitarmageddon88

I think its completely true. You can question the author's motivations for writing the article all you want- maybe hes got a thrill up his leg for windows 8 right now- but the reason linux is not huge was pretty correctly stated. Why would you take all that time to completely transform your way of doing things to an open source OS with a tenth of the support to run the every day applications you have become used to with windows? Granted, I think it is pretty cool the very limited exposure Ive had to it (running parted magic off a live cd if you would even consider that) and if I had more coding knowledge and such, I probably would use it. But switching to it completely would mean that I have the ability to word-process, surf the web, and thats about it for me.


----------



## Malcolm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blenton*
> 
> That's really the crux of the issue behind most problems people have with linux on desktop: they go into linux expecting free Windows and get surprised that it doesn't do everything _exactly the same_ like Windows.


And there's really no reason it couldn't, except Linux tries too hard to be everything Windows isn't.

Also games.


----------



## GermanyChris

I don't think Linux is "hard" my father-in-law uses it because he didn't know it was hard before he used it he thinks it's easy..

For Most people gamers excepted Linux is a viable desktop alternative, the shift has to happen in you head. You define what you need to do vs what you've had in the past.

Linux isn't viable for computers that make money using a specific workflow with specific programs but other than that it's rather nice.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guitarmageddon88*
> 
> I think its completely true. You can question the author's motivations for writing the article all you want- maybe hes got a thrill up his leg for windows 8 right now- but the reason linux is not huge was pretty correctly stated. *Why would you take all that time to completely transform your way of doing things to an open source OS with a tenth of the support to run the every day applications you have become used to with windows?* Granted, I think it is pretty cool the very limited exposure Ive had to it (running parted magic off a live cd if you would even consider that) and if I had more coding knowledge and such, I probably would use it. But switching to it completely would mean that I have the ability to word-process, surf the web, and thats about it for me.


Because you disagree with the idea behind Windows and OS X..


----------



## blenton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malcolm*
> 
> Also games.


Games are hardly an issue.

People who don't game at all > People who only play browser based games > People who play actual games that require Windows


----------



## farmdve

I suppose we really are in the post-PC era...kind of sad.


----------



## roleki

Either I'm inadvertently smarter than I give myself credit for, or the author is a complete lummox. I don't know the first thing about Linux, and I have set up three Linux file/ftp servers and joined them to AD just by using google. The Linux support community is second to none in terms of documenting specific tasks people might want to achieve, and you don't necessarily have to go into a forum to get answers.


----------



## GermanyChris

Hey I use OSX, I just don't like people who condemn based on personal inability..


----------



## gsa700

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> I don't think Linux is "hard" my father-in-law uses it because he didn't know it was hard before he used it he thinks it's easy..
> For Most people gamers excepted Linux is a viable desktop alternative, the shift has to happen in you head. You define what you need to do vs what you've had in the past.
> Linux isn't viable for computers that make money using a specific workflow with specific programs but other than that it's rather nice.


I agree with Chris here.

Linux is a great desktop OS in the right application. If you are going to be annoyed because of the lack of third party software such as Photoshop and the like, then Desktop Linux isn't for you.

I ran Linux as my only OS from 1997 to 2003 and back then it really put hair on your chest if you could even INSTALL it, much less run it as your daily OS.

As far as the driver support, Linux does indeed lag behind a bit. But they also support hardware long after the company has stopped and if you have an old PC lying around gathering dust, odds are it's totally supported right out of the box on Linux. Try that with windows. You won;t even get online to try and download 10 year old drivers because your NIC won't work.

A while back, my retired father wanted to get online. I didn't want to give him a windows system because his needs are very basic, basically he uses Firefox for everything, and I didn't want to have to babysit the OS for AV software and the like.

I installed Ubuntu on that system and set it to auto-update and it ran for years until I replaced it with a Macintosh. ( For the same reasons )

Fact is, Linux is very user friendly, it's just picky about who it's friends are.

;-)


----------



## watsoverclockin

The article is just bait to get views, hence i don't think this warrants a thought out reply from anyone.
Quote:


> They'll tell me all the ways Windows sucks, and all the reasons Apple is evil, and make exalted claims about how wonderful their lives are since they made the switch, and how they'll never go back.
> 
> Let me preemptively say, "That's great. I'm happy for you." It doesn't change the fact that you're part of a negligible market segment.


He is saying there is no room for debate, simply because Linux has a small market share. Hopefully i don't need to say how wrong that is.


----------



## Ulquiorra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> Man does have a point about getting stuff to work in Linux. Half the time you need to Google for a remedy that amounts to:
> "step 1. Open a command shell.
> step 2. [spate of commands you must enter in the correct order]
> step 3. Pray you never need to do this again because this quoted remedy is not part of the official literature on the OS and may disappear at any time."
> What's the point of a GUI OS if all the stuff you have to do to make it work is still CLI?
> Furthermore, I've known people who use an OS purposely designed to be more GUI-friendly (e.g. PC-BSD) and they actively resent using the modular PBI plugin design! They're the frickin' ambassadors for this OS and they still insist on compiling all their stuff from ports or from the repository! Come on, guys.


Its faster, well for most things but hey
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> This is exactly where I am coming from. Back in the 90s when I was running Redhat and Suse and Mandrake.. I had no job and no responsibilities. I had time to spend 12 to 15 hours a day learning command lines. I'm a professional now with responsibilities and I cannot spend that kind of time just getting a basic operation to work. I mean heck.. If we're going to say command line is so WIN lets go back to DOS please.


Please give me something that you can do in the gui which you just magicaly knew .. you still have to learn a gui, IE i can manage email from the CLI for qmail, yet i spend ages looking over Exchnage going EI why you no work! WHERE YOUR LOGS
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blenton*
> 
> Games are hardly an issue.
> People who don't game at all > People who only play browser based games > People who play actual games that require Windows


Games are a issue for linux, i have to use windows for that which is grr


----------



## BlackVenom

Author is an idiot... couldn't even find OpenOffice. /thread


----------



## redsunx

Linux will always be freaking Linux. End of story.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> This is a joke, right? 20,000,000 people use just one distro as their desktop: ubuntu. It aint dead. It's only going to grow after Windows 8 release.


That my friend is a tad bit ignorant. You honestly think, for the average user, that they'll go anything but mainstream? Better yet, you honestly think that the average user will think or even care to go to Linux, like a big light bulb just lit up over their head? Be real. They'll do one of 3 things:

Stick it out on Windows, liking it eventually.
Switch to Mac.
Figure out a way to get 7 on their PC.

I'm betting on the later.

Will Linux's market rise? Sure, but just a hair, barely, if that. Not sure why people keep referring to 8 as "ME 2". Do these people even remember WHY me was as bad as it was? Are you guys even old enough to remember? Windows 8 isn't blue screening, slow and unstable. It's perfectly usable, and actually very fast. The only thing different is the start menu, which they've replaced with a start SCREEN that functions almost the same way.


----------



## Ulquiorra

day 3) Erm it does support vpn, and why is it linux fault apple wont make itunes linux?
day 4) it does its called linux mint
day 5) wahhh ive been caled out
day 6) so your complainnig that your laptop went to sleep?
day7) Thunderbird is the usual choice but everyone to there own
day 8) why do you need tools
day 9) ¬_¬
day 10) more crying
giving up my head hurts
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> Windows 8 isn't blue screening, slow and unstable. It's perfectly usable, and actually very fast. The only thing different is the start menu, which they've replaced with a start SCREEN that functions almost the same way.


Im getting constant blue screens on mine >_< but apart from that and not being able to use 3 screens, and the screen does nto function in the same way ... you dont click a mouse you use the windows key, which even supprised me to find people not knowing what it did
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> The author probably just looked at their own little piece of the world. I mean if I looked around my work place it would easy for me to say Linux is dying...we are consistently replacing Zimbra with MS Exchange...SUSE with Sever 2008 and I don't think I've seen a distro of linux on a desktop in a work place in over five years


Where as i see the opposite as you say people see there part of the world


----------



## Vagrant Storm

The author probably just looked at their own little piece of the world. I mean if I looked around my work place it would easy for me to say Linux is dying...we are consistently replacing Zimbra with MS Exchange...SUSE with Sever 2008 and I don't think I've seen a distro of linux on a desktop in a work place in over five years. I am sure there are all sorts of people using at hoe though on machines they don't want to spend the money for a Microsoft OS for.

Linux is pretty much dead to me. I have a laptop at home with Sabayon on it that I use to surf from my couch, but today I don't see much reason to put linux on a desktop unless it is not going to be much of a system...which is basically means it is the same as my "couch laptop" that just can't move. If you are putting in $1200 worth of hardware you will likely install windows.

Even my laptop will likely get move to windows again one of these days...I just have linux on there for fun and to stop my wife from using it since she can't understand anything non-windows. It doesn't really matter if the system is just an old C2D with a 8600M GPU...I wouldn't even use it to photoshop


----------



## MagicBox

- "Why Linux on the Desktop is Dead"
- "Because Chuck Norris jumped ship to Windows 8"


----------



## dhenzjhen

It's not dead it's just not a lot of people not using it, because they don't know how to use it!!

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dhenzjhen*
> 
> It's not dead it's just not a lot of people not using it, because they don't know how to use it!!


No excuse. I've got my 80 year old grandmother, 83 year old grandfather, mom, aunt, and pretty much our whole family using it. Took me about 5 minutes worth of explaining and they were able to figure out the rest with no problems. Hell, my 4 year old niece uses it fine enough as well.

9/10 the people that have issues with it, are those going into it thinking it's Windows. It's not, plain and simple. I don't even know how many time's I've heard " but in Windows I do it this way " on forums and IRC. People just need to realize, it isn't Windows. Don't try to do things the "windows way", it won't work out well.

People had to learn to use Windows at some point in time, whether they remember it or not. And Linux is being used more and more in schools which means the newer generations will have the knowledge to use it from an early age like most of you had.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> And Linux is *being used more and more in schools* which means the newer generations will have the knowledge to use it from an early age like most of you had.


Please name any Division 1 or Ivy league university that uses Linux as their primary operating system.. And don't just throw names. Show me actual sourced, cited, proof.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Please name any Division 1 or Ivy league university that uses Linux as their primary operating system.. And don't just throw names. Show me actual sourced, cited, proof.


You know there are more schools than just "Ivy League" ones, right?


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Please name any Division 1 or Ivy league university that uses Linux as their primary operating system.. And don't just throw names. Show me actual sourced, cited, proof.


Maybe you missed the "early age" part of that. Sorry, I don't know of any toddlers in Universities.

Oh, and just for lulz look up Pakistan schools and colleges. To name one -area-.

Or, maybe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfT9zMo0WHw for K-12.

There is literally thousands of different schools around the world that use Linux. And it's ever growing.


----------



## bigvaL

It's been dead since it was invented for desktop use and anyone who denies that is just being silly. It's great for its purpose but it's purpose isn't the same as windows....


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ulquiorra*
> 
> Im getting constant blue screens on mine >_< but apart from that and not being able to use 3 screens, and the screen does nto function in the same way ... you dont click a mouse you use the windows key, which even supprised me to find people not knowing what it did


I'd say your blue screens are an isolated incident. Mine doesn't do this, been using it for months. Keep in mind, it's a beta that you're using. Also, you do click the mouse for the start menu. Down in the lower right hand corner like always.


----------



## Xaero252

The problem is, market share statistics are incredibly skewed. A lot of Linux users are also counted in the Windows statistics, and aren't counted in the Linux statistics at all because market statistics only include purchases.

For example:

User A: I built my PC, and put Linux on it that I obtained for free.
User B: I built my PC, and bought a copy of RHEL to use on it.
User C: I bought a prebuilt with Windows 7 and replaced the operating system with Linux.

Users A and C are NOT included in market statistics as using Linux. Furthermore, user C is considered a Windows 7 user according to market statistics, and user B is the only user considered to be using Linux as far as the market is concerned.

This is the problem with staring at numbers and not paying attention to what is actually happening in the world. Linux on the desktop isn't as big as I could hope for it be, but it certainly isn't dead. This article is from a sensationalist journalist point of view...and it irritates me.


----------



## Nivacs

This article is based off of bad data

They claim browser market-share is source
IE 54%
Fire Fox 20%
Chrome 19%

and for Mobile/Tablet OS source
IOS 63%
Android 19 %
Java 12%

So I tried to look into the numbers. Their data collections is based on usage from "over 40,000 websites" and the actual methodology is hidden. I will make the assumption that most people who install and use Firefox and Chrome take additional steps to further secure the browser (noscript, Do Not Track Plus) Both which would prevent the data collection. Now, Linux users are generally either on the high end of computer experience and are much more likely to have additional security features or are non experienced users on systems set up by the high end users specifically to provide security.

So if you are seeing 1% market share for Linux. How many more computers go untracked?

IMO Mint or Lubuntu should be the default desktop on most of the home PCs out there. I have converted plenty of my non-technical friends and relatives to Lubuntu. The interface is similar to windows. Most of the configuration settings they use are GUI driven and easy to use. As far as the author saying Linux was more difficult, most of the issues he complains about are easily resolved through a Google search and honestly have much easier to understand solutions than Windows. Those who have a lower computing knowledge would be better server being on Linux because they will end up with more secure systems that will be less venerable to user error. Plus teaching someone "If it asks you for your password and you don't know exactly what its doing, don't type it in" is a lot easier then teaching safe computing on a windows machine.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xaero252*
> 
> The problem is, market share statistics are incredibly skewed. A lot of Linux users are also counted in the Windows statistics, and aren't counted in the Linux statistics at all because market statistics only include purchases.
> For example:
> User A: I built my PC, and put Linux on it that I obtained for free.
> User B: I built my PC, and bought a copy of RHEL to use on it.
> User C: I bought a prebuilt with Windows 7 and replaced the operating system with Linux.
> Users A and C are NOT included in market statistics as using Linux. Furthermore, user C is considered a Windows 7 user according to market statistics, and user B is the only user considered to be using Linux as far as the market is concerned.
> This is the problem with staring at numbers and not paying attention to what is actually happening in the world. Linux on the desktop isn't as big as I could hope for it be, but it certainly isn't dead. This article is from a sensationalist journalist point of view...and it irritates me.


Don't forget User D! ( for the short time it was around ), Dell, Asus, eeePC offered Ubuntu on prebuilts. But it went mostly unnoticed by a lot of people.


----------



## Nivacs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Please name any Division 1 or Ivy league university that uses Linux as their primary operating system.. And don't just throw names. Show me actual sourced, cited, proof.


MIT Athena Clusters Source


----------



## Ulquiorra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven Dizzle*
> 
> I'd say your blue screens are an isolated incident. Mine doesn't do this, been using it for months. Keep in mind, it's a beta that you're using. Also, you do click the mouse for the start menu. Down in the lower right hand corner like always.


I know its a isolated incident its to do with the grpahics card, and errrm you dont havnt you seen the new interface design? there is no start button and has been no "start button" since vista







but serioulsy its now gone for good XD

And dell still offer Ubuntu they just dont like it


----------



## ILoveHighDPI

1. I first used Ubuntu to save time (Windows XP service pack 3 takes forever to get installed), and it did everything I needed it to do.

2. I've had to delve into forums and the Microsoft Knowledge base plenty of times to get things working on Windows, IMO the only reason the author thinks that Linux is so much extra work is that he hasn't been using it for decades already.

3. No one has ever been able to get a truly accurate picture of Linux usage, I'm sure the author of the article picket the most pessimistic survey he could find.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nivacs*
> 
> MIT Athena Clusters Source


Touche... I stand corrected.

You have to go to the premier technological institute on the planet before you can start using linux campus wide.

Also the pakistan comment? Does anyone know why engineer graduates in the U.S. are primarily from South and South East Asia? Its not because there are no universities in those parts of the world. It is because we have the best University system in the world. If linux was the end all be all. Everyone would be using it.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Besides, we live in a post-PC era where even Windows and Mac OS X are being supplanted by mobile platforms like iOS and Android.


Yeah... No. sometimes I get pissed off with my phone and just get off the sofa to use the PC.


----------



## DuckieHo

Linux will never be a mainstream desktop OS..... until a major corporation pushes it. If a major corporation is supporting it, they have an ulterior motive.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, we live in a post-PC era where even Windows and Mac OS X are being supplanted by mobile platforms like iOS and Android.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah... No. sometimes I get pissed off with my phone and just get off the sofa to use the PC.
Click to expand...

You != Everyone.

People *are* using their smartphones/tablets more and more as their primary computing device.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Touche... I stand corrected.
> You have to go to the premier technological institute on the planet before you can start using linux campus wide.
> Also the pakistan comment? Does anyone know why engineer graduates in the U.S. are primarily from South and South East Asia? Its not because there are no universities in those parts of the world. It is because we have the best University system in the world. If linux was the end all be all. Everyone would be using it.


Just because you say it's the best, doesn't make it true.

How much does a degree in the States cost...?

Yeah.

In Scotland it's free.

So I'd say we have the best.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> If linux was the end all be all. Everyone would be using it.


And who said it was the end all be all? I don't remember that anywhere in this thread.









But really, all it takes is a quick Google search. And you'll find tons of school and programs helping schools get started into it. Not just Uni's, but any school. All around the world. Pakistan, Africa and Cuba just to name a couple of places.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> And who said it was the end all be all? I don't remember that anywhere in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But really, all it takes is a quick Google search. And you'll find tons of school and programs helping schools get started into it. Not just Uni's, but any school. All around the world. Pakistan, Africa and Cuba just to name a couple of places.


4 primary schools in Iceland run open source only. So it can be done.


----------



## {Unregistered}

The only reason Linux is dead, is because it isn't Windows.

Anything that isn't Windows is either dead or for hipsters.

Most people will never ever bother with any distro of Linux, no matter how user-friendly it is unless it forced on them, like Windows was because it had practically no competition (for the average user) at the time when it came out and home PC usage market began to proceed toward its "boom".

That being said, Ubuntu or Mint are just as good as Windows if all you want to do is browse the Internet and use a word-processing software like the majority of the people.


----------



## Riou

PCWorld must want to get a lot of web page hits.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> Uh. Typical American. "WE ARE THE BEST AT "X"" while offering no evidence. Just because you say it's the best, doesn't make it true.
> How much does a degree in the States cost...?
> Yeah.
> In Scotland it's free.
> So I'd say we have the best.


If its free why aren't they all going there for engineering degrees? I'm just curious.

this is the problem with the entire linux community. They somehow think that just because something is free its better. There is that saying "you get what you pay for"


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> If its free why aren't they all going there for engineering degrees? I'm just curious.
> this is the problem with the entire linux community. They somehow think that just because something is free its better. There is that saying "you get what you pay for"


The linux term of "free" is as Stallman put it " Think of free speech, not free beer".


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> If its free why aren't they all going there for engineering degrees? I'm just curious.
> this is the problem with the entire linux community. They somehow think that just because something is free its better. There is that saying "you get what you pay for"


There is also a saying; you pay your taxes for a reason. A degree at Harvard is $140,000? Who can afford that as a percentage of the population? People are obviously getting degrees though..


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> In Scotland it's free.
> So I'd say we have the best.


...no, it's not. It is paid through your taxes.









What do you annually in taxes?


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> ...no, it's not. It is paid through your taxes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you annually in taxes?


In the US you pay to go.. and pay taxes...

And nothing









PS I did say paid through taxes above


----------



## Methos07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> Uh. Typical American. "WE ARE THE BEST AT "X"" while offering no evidence. Just because you say it's the best, doesn't make it true.
> How much does a degree in the States cost...?
> Yeah.
> In Scotland it's free.
> So I'd say we have the best.


Typical European.

See, I can do it too.


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> In the US you pay to go.. and pay taxes...
> And nothing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS I did say paid through taxes above


You had stated "free".... just wanted to point it was not free. It is just that the government deems higher education is important enough to subsidize. (I agree with this.)

You are also arguing best for the cost.... If you want to argue "best", you need a different metric like number of research papers a year.... or patents.... or graduates who make over $1M... etc.


----------



## {Unregistered}

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> You had stated "free".... just wanted to point it was not free. It is just that the government deems higher education is important enough to subsidize. (I agree with this.)
> *You are also arguing best for the cost.... If you want to argue "best", you need a different metric like number of research papers a year.... or patents.... or graduates who make over $1M... etc*.


Quoting for emphasis.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *{Unregistered}*
> 
> Quoting for emphasis.


I just wanted to make a simple argument and not derail the whole thread.


----------



## {Unregistered}

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> I just wanted to make a simple argument and not derail the whole thread.


Don't worry. Me neither.


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *{Unregistered}*
> 
> Quoting for emphasis.


Nobel laureates is a good one... 8 of the top 10 are US schools....

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/st_nobel-prizes_20091012.html


----------



## adamkatt

I like Linux but I can't stand the simple software I can't install or use.

Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blenton*
> 
> The biggest part of the home desktop segment only ever uses a computer for web and mail and light multimedia.
> Linux isn't any less suited for those tasks than Windows or OS X.
> The main reason it's not more popular on the desktop lies in the fact that that part of the market buys premade computers and:
> (a) barely any exist with linux installed
> (b) even if there are some those people will go for the things they're familiar with, instead of linux which has the stigma of being _"complicated"_
> That's really the crux of the issue behind most problems people have with linux on desktop: they go into linux expecting free Windows and get surprised that it doesn't do everything _exactly the same_ like Windows.


That seems to be the typical answer when anyone is "critical" of Linux but it ignores many other factors. Personally I love certain aspects of linux. It's faster, runs smoothly (when setup properly), no BSOD when something crashes et . Now let's look at the reasons why it will never be the OS of choice for the average non computer geek. The author is absolutely correct when he said "But, the whole 30 days felt like I was swimming upstream--constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done." Even someone who uses their PC for just web, mail, and light multimedia will at some point plug in some new hardware they just picked up at the local big box store, whether it's a USB camera for skyping etc, their new Ipod (damn apple-ites), or some other piece of "cool" tech that just came out OR do something else that will leave them staring at a blinking cursor in the terminal box with not a clue on how to fix whatever issue they have and will need to spend hours searching through online forums etc. on what exactly to type (because remember they're not a computer geek) and can't figure out why what they are typing isn't working. And then are faced with as the author states "To its credit, Linux has a phenomenal support system, and loyal, knowledgeable users willing to help guide you through the murky waters. Of course, it's often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you're doing.". That user just wants their computer to work and don't care to know or understand how. That's a vast majority of the "user" market out there. *Until the entrenched Linux community realizes that using terminal MUST be optional, NOT a requirement the market share will NEVER increase to a more than marginal size*. How do you think Apple became the giant of a company that it is? While most of us where typing commands on our computers in DOS etc., people were snapping up Macintosh because of the GUI. Can you imagine how things would go right now if a user was *required* at some point or another to type commands into the command prompt box. People would flock to other options like Apple in droves leaving a small group of computer enthusiests (comp geeks like us). Average computer users are lazy when it comes to their computer. They want it to just work and move a mouse and click on an icon and that's it. Until that becomes a reality for Linux, it will be doomed to live deep in the shadows of the big boys.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Methos07*
> 
> Typical European.
> See, I can do it too.


I'm not European.


----------



## {Unregistered}

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> I'm not European.


Scottish ~==~ British ~==~ European







Same thing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> Nobel laureates is a good one... 8 of the top 10 are US schools....
> http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/st_nobel-prizes_20091012.html


Nice find!


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> You had stated "free".... just wanted to point it was not free. It is just that the government deems higher education is important enough to subsidize. (I agree with this.)
> You are also arguing best for the cost.... If you want to argue "best", you need a different metric like number of research papers a year.... or patents.... or graduates who make over $1M... etc.


How about testing metrics that show the US mid pack..

I am a product of the US school system, my parents are both teachers but US education doesn't stack up well compared to the German system which also has it faults.


----------



## Paladin Goo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ulquiorra*
> 
> I know its a isolated incident its to do with the grpahics card, and errrm you dont havnt you seen the new interface design? there is no start button and has been no "start button" since vista
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but serioulsy its now gone for good XD
> And dell still offer Ubuntu they just dont like it


Despite there being no start button, you can still click in the lower left corner of the screen to get the start screen, bro.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> This is a joke, right? 20,000,000 people use just one distro as their desktop: ubuntu. It aint dead. It's only going to grow after Windows 8 release.


I bet there will be more Linux users after Windows8 release :







:
It will drive them to it


----------



## TFL Replica

Linux plays an important role in supercomputers, distributed computing, servers, embedded and mobile devices. It's not significant in the desktop market but that doesn't make it a hobby OS for tinkerers or people with too much free time. I know there's nobody here that would hold such a misguided point of view.


----------



## Nivacs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Touche... I stand corrected.
> You have to go to the premier technological institute on the planet before you can start using linux campus wide.
> Also the pakistan comment? Does anyone know why engineer graduates in the U.S. are primarily from South and South East Asia? Its not because there are no universities in those parts of the world. It is because we have the best University system in the world. If linux was the end all be all. Everyone would be using it.


Stanford Source
University of California : Berkley The originators of BSD. It is still used as well as Linux.
Georgia Tech Red Hat Source
Carnegie Mellon Red Hat Source

Most Universities have support for Linux systems and rely on Linix/OpenBSD for compute farms.and major infrastructiure. If you look, you will find the genisis for most open source projects in one university or another.


----------



## tehwalris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdrdrdrd*
> 
> I'm sick of people claiming "X is dead" or "Y is dying" no its not, stupid sensationalist journalists...


^ This


----------



## nathris

X is dead though. Long live Wayland!


----------



## tehwalris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> What's the point of a GUI OS if all the stuff you have to do to make it work is still CLI?


There is a level of control, speed and power with CLI. Of course there are things not made to be done with CLI, but it just takes practice.

Example: I had a rar with ebooks like this main.rar contains author.rar contains book.rar contains ebook.epub (different names of course). So there were 2000 of them







and I wanted to copy all of them to my ereader. Imagine that with a gui: unrar the main, unrar the author rars (1000ish), unrar the book rars (2000ish). That's over 3000 files to decompress, nested in each other. That would be hell with a GUI, but CLI can do it with 4 commands.

The power of CLI, and linux is crazy. It really can give you and extreme feeling of control.

Linux (and especially CLI) takes patience and practice, it's not for everyone, but it is very flexible and rewarding. So to my two final opinions:

1. Linux is not for everyone, but is awesome (excl. ubuntu







)

2. Linux is not dead

(Thanks journalists)


----------



## guyladouche

Regardless of whether it is or is not dead (or if it was even alive in the first place) is because it's not widely-supported by developers and hardware distributors. That will pretty much kill anything. Not that I WANT to give MS even more money, but honestly, $100 to have a system that does what I want and need vs. free (some) but having to first learn the commands, and then figure out where to get files to support hardware when I have problems, the fact that gpy support is poor, and that it generally doesn't do anything FOR ME any better than a windows machine.

I'm not against linux, but think realistically, does the average moron who doesn't know that their computer tower is not their CPU care to be perpetually confused, more than they already are?


----------



## tehwalris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> You've obviously never been personally dumped on by people who question why you're too dumb to just KNOW that you do Thing X when Occasion Y happens, even though there's no formal documentation for the OS.
> (Parenthetically, have you never seen a war break out between Linux users and FreeBSD users? The fact that they bring such intensity to their OSes tells you how they really feel about Windows users trying to learn the OS they've mastered)


[quote

Never seen anything like that. I find linux users really helpful, and not agressive as you say. I've been using it for about three years, asked the stupidest questions, and they tolerate it and help.


----------



## Riou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *blenton*
> 
> The biggest part of the home desktop segment only ever uses a computer for web and mail and light multimedia.
> Linux isn't any less suited for those tasks than Windows or OS X.
> The main reason it's not more popular on the desktop lies in the fact that that part of the market buys premade computers and:
> (a) barely any exist with linux installed
> (b) even if there are some those people will go for the things they're familiar with, instead of linux which has the stigma of being _"complicated"_
> That's really the crux of the issue behind most problems people have with linux on desktop: they go into linux expecting free Windows and get surprised that it doesn't do everything _exactly the same_ like Windows.
> 
> 
> 
> That seems to be the typical answer when anyone is "critical" of Linux but it ignores many other factors. Personally I love certain aspects of linux. It's faster, runs smoothly (when setup properly), no BSOD when something crashes et . Now let's look at the reasons why it will never be the OS of choice for the average non computer geek. The author is absolutely correct when he said "But, the whole 30 days felt like I was swimming upstream--constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done." Even someone who uses their PC for just web, mail, and light multimedia will at some point plug in some new hardware they just picked up at the local big box store, whether it's a USB camera for skyping etc, their new Ipod (damn apple-ites), or some other piece of "cool" tech that just came out OR do something else that will leave them staring at a blinking cursor in the terminal box with not a clue on how to fix whatever issue they have and will need to spend hours searching through online forums etc. on what exactly to type (because remember they're not a computer geek) and can't figure out why what they are typing isn't working. And then are faced with as the author states "To its credit, Linux has a phenomenal support system, and loyal, knowledgeable users willing to help guide you through the murky waters. Of course, it's often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you're doing.". That user just wants their computer to work and don't care to know or understand how. That's a vast majority of the "user" market out there. *Until the entrenched Linux community realizes that using terminal MUST be optional, NOT a requirement the market share will NEVER increase to a more than marginal size*. How do you think Apple became the giant of a company that it is? While most of us where typing commands on our computers in DOS etc., people were snapping up Macintosh because of the GUI. Can you imagine how things would go right now if a user was *required* at some point or another to type commands into the command prompt box. People would flock to other options like Apple in droves leaving a small group of computer enthusiests (comp geeks like us). Average computer users are lazy when it comes to their computer. They want it to just work and move a mouse and click on an icon and that's it. Until that becomes a reality for Linux, it will be doomed to live deep in the shadows of the big boys.
Click to expand...

The terminal is not from Linux. It is from Unix. All the things you hate about Linux originated from Unix. Text based output is one of the paradigms of Unix.

Macs are Unix.


----------



## uncholowapo

These articles keep coming back and back and back and back....

They said that when UI's weren't intuitive enough

They said that when KDE 4.0 was released.

They said that when Gnome 3.0 was released (this actually held some ground because the UI "makeover" was non-intuitive and complete garbage)

They said that when there weren't enough applications to replace the matching ones in windows.

They are going to say that when Linux becomes an exact clone of Windows saying that it didn't have the windows logo on it as the excuse.

These articles get extremely boring...


----------



## tehwalris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fortunex*
> 
> If Linux gave me something, like better performance (which it arguably could on a netbook or old PC, that I don't own), better programs, _something_, I'd use it more. However, all it seems to do is create more problems than it solves.


I have a computer that I consider more powerful than a notebook, I see an enormous difference between win7 and linux. Peoples opinion is linux=ubuntu, but the truth is ubuntu imho doesn't have any benefits. There is other stuff in the linux world, but it's not for everyone. It's kinda like overclocking and custom pcs, it takes patience and work, but it has it's benefits in the end and isn't for everyone. It's a niche, but an awesome one when done right.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> I bet there will be more Linux users after Windows8 release :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :
> It will drive them to it


We can only hope that it will change the Linux community and lead to a very user friendly easy to use distro but I won't hold my breath








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tehwalris*
> 
> There is a level of control, speed and power with CLI. Of course there are things not made to be done with CLI, but it just takes practice.
> Example: I had a rar with ebooks like this main.rar contains author.rar contains book.rar contains ebook.epub (different names of course). So there were 2000 of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and I wanted to copy all of them to my ereader. Imagine that with a gui: unrar the main, unrar the author rars (1000ish), unrar the book rars (2000ish). That's over 3000 files to decompress, nested in each other. That would be hell with a GUI, but CLI can do it with 4 commands.
> The power of CLI, and linux is crazy. It really can give you and extreme feeling of control.
> Linux (and especially CLI) takes patience and practice, it's not for everyone, but it is very flexible and rewarding. So to my two final opinions:
> 1. Linux is not for everyone, but is awesome (excl. ubuntu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 2. Linux is not dead
> (Thanks journalists)


This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's awesome that CLI (terminal in the case of linux) gives you that kindof power and flexibility but too many people in the linux community focus on that and forget the other 80% of users who don't want to use the CLI at all, EVER.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tehwalris*
> 
> [quote
> Never seen anything like that. I find linux users really helpful, and not agressive as you say. I've been using it for about three years, asked the stupidest questions, and they tolerate it and help.


Like, someone asking a question in the forum and getting "do a search before you ask stupid questions" in response? I've seen that MANY times.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Riou*
> 
> The terminal is not from Linux. It is from Unix. All the things you hate about Linux originated from Unix. Text based output is one of the paradigms of Unix.
> Macs are Unix.


I know where it comes from, I had to learn more than a little of it while operating systems in the Navy that were still Unix based. But that doesn't change the fact that it would be very easy to code the GUI interface and OS in such a way that terminal isn't REQUIRED for even some things but becomes instead a "power user" OPTION. Much like MS did with their CLI.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tehwalris*
> 
> I have a computer that I consider more powerful than a notebook, I see an enormous difference between win7 and linux. Peoples opinion is linux=ubuntu, but the truth is ubuntu imho doesn't have any benefits. There is other stuff in the linux world, but it's not for everyone. It's kinda like overclocking and custom pcs, it takes patience and work, but it has it's benefits in the end and isn't for everyone. It's a niche, but an awesome one when done right.


I completely agree, I just think it doesn't HAVE to be a niche. It really could become mainstream if some basic changes were made in how it operates (that don't sacrifice what makes linux so good).


----------



## DaClownie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xaero252*
> 
> The problem is, market share statistics are incredibly skewed. A lot of Linux users are also counted in the Windows statistics, and aren't counted in the Linux statistics at all because market statistics only include purchases.
> 
> For example:
> 
> User A: I built my PC, and put Linux on it that I obtained for free.
> User B: I built my PC, and bought a copy of RHEL to use on it.
> User C: I bought a prebuilt with Windows 7 and replaced the operating system with Linux.
> 
> Users A and C are NOT included in market statistics as using Linux. Furthermore, user C is considered a Windows 7 user according to market statistics, and user B is the only user considered to be using Linux as far as the market is concerned.
> 
> This is the problem with staring at numbers and not paying attention to what is actually happening in the world. Linux on the desktop isn't as big as I could hope for it be, but it certainly isn't dead. This article is from a sensationalist journalist point of view...and it irritates me.


If it were sales statistics, then Windows results would be skewed as well. There's a lot of not legitimate Windows users out there that wouldn't count towards that demographic as well. It probably evens out.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tehwalris*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Fortunex*
> 
> If Linux gave me something, like better performance (which it arguably could on a netbook or old PC, that I don't own), better programs, _something_, I'd use it more. However, all it seems to do is create more problems than it solves.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a computer that I consider more powerful than a notebook, I see an enormous difference between win7 and linux. Peoples opinion is linux=ubuntu, but the truth is ubuntu imho doesn't have any benefits. There is other stuff in the linux world, but it's not for everyone. It's kinda like overclocking and custom pcs, it takes patience and work, but it has it's benefits in the end and isn't for everyone. It's a niche, but an awesome one when done right.
Click to expand...

I can see that. I'm currently running Ubuntu on a spare 7200RPM 320GB SATAII drive... and Win7 off my SSD. Overall, Linux feels VERY sluggish though... and I don't think that's anything to do with the drives.

Take web browsing for example. I go on OCN... I go to my subscriptions page... oh what do you know! 14 threads have been active since I was last on... hold down CTRL and click click click until they're all open. With Linux/Firefox there's a noticeable stutter in the performance of the system as it's approaching tab number 6 or so. I still have 9 more threads to open... Fast forward, windows 7, Firefox as well (even though I'm a Chrome user) and I can ctrl click one after another, all 15 up, not a single stutter.

Now, I'm not saying this is Linux per se... but it might be Ubuntu... however my level of expertise is not sufficient enough to handle any other distros I guess... Anything I put in a terminal is purely reading from the screen and typing it in... and I really don't feel comfortable doing so. I am getting a bit smoother getting around ubuntu though... It'll take me some time.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> Linux will never be a mainstream desktop OS..... until a major corporation pushes it. If a major corporation is supporting it, they have an ulterior motive.
> You != Everyone.
> People *are* using their smartphones/tablets more and more as their primary computing device.


Yeah I get that. I want to get myself one of those Asus Padfone's with the laptop dock and see how that works out... But I still constantly miss my PC when it comes to multitasking and browsing. I just don't get or agree with the post-PC world idiom.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guyladouche*
> 
> Regardless of whether it is or is not dead (or if it was even alive in the first place) is because it's not widely-supported by developers and hardware distributors. That will pretty much kill anything. Not that I WANT to give MS even more money, but honestly, $100 to have a system that does what I want and need vs. free (some) but having to first learn the commands, and then figure out where to get files to support hardware when I have problems, the fact that gpy support is poor, and that it generally doesn't do anything FOR ME any better than a windows machine.
> I'm not against linux, but think realistically, does the average moron who doesn't know that their computer tower is not their CPU care to be perpetually confused, more than they already are?


I taught nearly my entire family to use Linux. Even my 8x year old grandparents. It isn't hard for the normal user. All they need is a browser, text editor, maybe some excel work, im client, and possibly some games to keep them from being too bored, like solitaire and pretty much any game that comes standard in Windows.

And Linux can do all of that, without touching the command line. And many allow for it, Ubuntu has the software center now, which is just seach, and click install.

Pretty much any browser out there aside from IE is on Linux. ( most come with firefox ( gnome/xfce/etc ), or whatever the KDE one is called for KDE based DE's, pre-installed as long as they aren't barebone distros )
LibreOffice / OpenOffice for the normal user is more than enough and easily doubles as MS Office for them.
Pidgin or any of our other IM clients will cover pretty much any kind of messenger you need.

Bam, perfectly good computer for any normal user, with absolutely no confusion at all, and not one keystroke in the command line.

Now if you want to start changing themes, fonts, system files, etc, then yeah.. you're going to have to learn the basics in the command line. But those aren't normal users.

And had I the choice, I would of never touched Windows command line. It's an absolute nightmare compared to the Linux command line.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Riou*
> 
> The terminal is not from Linux. It is from Unix. All the things you hate about Linux originated from Unix. Text based output is one of the paradigms of Unix.
> Macs are Unix.


Mac's can't be Unix, theres no CLI in OSX, remember all Mac users are bubble heads


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Mac's can't be Unix, theres no CLI in OSX, remember all Mac users are bubble heads


The irony is strong with this one


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I taught nearly my entire family to use Linux. Even my 8x year old grandparents. It isn't hard for the normal user. All they need is a browser, text editor, maybe some excel work, im client, and possibly some games to keep them from being too bored, like solitaire and pretty much any game that comes standard in Windows.
> And Linux can do all of that, without touching the command line. And many allow for it, Ubuntu has the software center now, which is just seach, and click install.
> Pretty much any browser out there aside from IE is on Linux. ( most come with firefox ( gnome/xfce/etc ), or whatever the KDE one is called for KDE based DE's, pre-installed as long as they aren't barebone distros )
> LibreOffice / OpenOffice for the normal user is more than enough and easily doubles as MS Office for them.
> Pidgin or any of our other IM clients will cover pretty much any kind of messenger you need.
> Bam, perfectly good computer for any normal user, with absolutely no confusion at all, and not one keystroke in the command line.
> Now if you want to start changing themes, fonts, system files, etc, then yeah.. you're going to have to learn the basics in the command line. But those aren't normal users.
> And had I the choice, I would of never touched Windows command line. It's an absolute nightmare compared to the Linux command line.


Now remove yourself from the equation since everyone doesn't have or want to call a relative to "fix" their computer. Add that in order to be a widely used OS the "average" user will have to be able to install various software as they use it. Can that be done with ease the way Linux is set up now? (I mean retail software not the freebies found in the database searches).


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Now remove yourself from the equation since everyone doesn't have or want to call a relative to "fix" their computer. Add that in order to be a widely used OS the "average" user will have to be able to install various software as they use it. Can that be done with ease the way Linux is set up now? (I mean retail software not the freebies found in the database searches).


Retail software? Linux? Since when?









Like I said, quit treating Linux as It's Windows. It isn't. Everything you need is in the Repo's and all it takes is a quick search with Ubuntu's software center to find what you want. And none of them have called me to "fix" the computers I've set up for them. They simply haven't broken yet in several years.

Yes, It's incredibly easy to install stuff. And if provided by an OEM all it would take is a small pamphlet to tell them where to go to find the software. Which most provide anyways for setting up computers and othe rmisc things.


----------



## Artikbot

Why is Linux Dead?

Because PC World LOVES Windows. No news here.

Linux is far from dead. In fact, it's just starting to take off.


----------



## Nocturin

Saw this on the ariticle, ment to post it eariler, pay attention to the green highlight.

I thought it was funnies!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Retail software? Linux? Since when?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, quit treating Linux as It's Windows. It isn't. Everything you need is in the Repo's and all it takes is a quick search with Ubuntu's software center to find what you want. And none of them have called me to "fix" the computers I've set up for them. They simply haven't broken yet in several years.
> Yes, It's incredibly easy to install stuff. And if provided by an OEM all it would take is a small pamplet to tell them where to go to find the software. Which most provide anyways for setting up computers and othe rmisc things.


QFT

My wife doesn't know the difference between windows and linux... which is why she was told to boot up into my linux distro when she wanted to use my computer.

never had to fix it, but I had to "fix" my windows installation many times (myself).


----------



## Nocturin

double post delete


----------



## Nivacs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Now remove yourself from the equation since everyone doesn't have or want to call a relative to "fix" their computer. Add that in order to be a widely used OS the "average" user will have to be able to install various software as they use it. Can that be done with ease the way Linux is set up now? (I mean retail software not the freebies found in the database searches).


If i am removing myself from the equation, I'm going to make sure they have Linux. They can do far more damage to the OS and to their personal privacy with a Windows box.
I have set up computers for some of my family where they don't even have sudo access because they make really poor computing choices.


----------



## 161029

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdrdrdrd*
> 
> I'm sick of people claiming "X is dead" or "Y is dying" no its not, stupid sensationalist journalists...


This.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I taught nearly my entire family to use Linux. Even my 8x year old grandparents. It isn't hard for the normal user. All they need is a browser, text editor, maybe some excel work, im client, and possibly some games to keep them from being too bored, like solitaire and pretty much any game that comes standard in Windows.
> And Linux can do all of that, without touching the command line. And many allow for it, Ubuntu has the software center now, which is just seach, and click install.
> Pretty much any browser out there aside from IE is on Linux. ( most come with firefox ( gnome/xfce/etc ), or whatever the KDE one is called for KDE based DE's, pre-installed as long as they aren't barebone distros )
> LibreOffice / OpenOffice for the normal user is more than enough and easily doubles as MS Office for them.
> Pidgin or any of our other IM clients will cover pretty much any kind of messenger you need.
> Bam, perfectly good computer for any normal user, with absolutely no confusion at all, and not one keystroke in the command line.
> Now if you want to start changing themes, fonts, system files, etc, then yeah.. you're going to have to learn the basics in the command line. But those aren't normal users.
> And had I the choice, I would of never touched Windows command line. It's an absolute nightmare compared to the Linux command line.


Chromium on XFCE these days









I agree 100%. I got my GF using it and she was quite technologically ******ed (one of the reasons I love her so much because I can explain my upgrades and she doesn't have the slightest idea that some of them are nearing pathetic on the "point of it" scale







She just trusts me that they're entirely essential to the survival of my PC). I installed Lubuntu, installed the software centre and left her to it. She did Dropbox and found herself a paint program (trial and error) on her own.

I'll agree it's not as easy to fix if stuff goes wrong but the beauty is that it pretty much rarely goes wrong unless you purposely do something. IF you don't install a driver or update nothing goes wrong.. and most updates form the update centre are heavily tested at canonical Just tonight the WI-Fi drivers on one of my Windows PC's decided they'd had enough of working properly and were giving "not working at all" a go to see how that works out. I had to uninstall and reinstall the same drivers from the same file.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Retail software? Linux? Since when?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, quit treating Linux as It's Windows. It isn't. Everything you need is in the Repo's and all it takes is a quick search with Ubuntu's software center to find what you want. And none of them have called me to "fix" the computers I've set up for them. They simply haven't broken yet in several years.
> Yes, It's incredibly easy to install stuff. And if provided by an OEM all it would take is a small pamphlet to tell them where to go to find the software. Which most provide anyways for setting up computers and othe rmisc things.










Are you saying that if Linux held a major market segment (over 30%) that there would be no retail software? Are you crazy? The only reason there ISN'T retail software (productivity, games etc) is because it doesn't have a major market segment. The whole point I'm making is a typical 15-25 year old that wants to play games can't just run out and install the latest GPU that's out and with two clicks install the drivers and be up and running. Same goes for going out and buying whatever software they want to use (IF it were hypothetically available). That's precisely why Linux isn't a major threat to the other OS makers. And until that changes it will never be.


----------



## tehwalris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaClownie*
> 
> I can see that. I'm currently running Ubuntu on a spare 7200RPM 320GB SATAII drive... and Win7 off my SSD. Overall, Linux feels VERY sluggish though... and I don't think that's anything to do with the drives.


It's Ubuntu and their (sorta) new unity interface, its ready inefficient and super slow (kinda sad really)
Try downloading gnome 3 and gnome shell from the software center and select it at login with the little gear icon. You'll see an enormous speed boost,
the interface is a little alternative, but its my favourite as far as point and click goes.

It's sad that their interface (peoples first taste of "Linux") is so badly designed and implemented, but never judge a book by its cover (aka. Ubuntu







)


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that if Linux held a major market segment (over 30%) that there would be no retail software? Are you crazy? The only reason there ISN'T retail software (productivity, games etc) is because it doesn't have a major market segment. The whole point I'm making is a typical 15-25 year old that wants to play games can't just run out and install the latest GPU that's out and with two clicks install the drivers and be up and running. Same goes for going out and buying whatever software they want to use (IF it were hypothetically available). That's precisely why Linux isn't a major threat to the other OS makers. And until that changes it will never be.


When did this turn into gamers and enthusiast or even future market segments? We were talking NOW with NORMAL USERS. Quit trying to change it up.

And no, that isn't the only reason there isn't retail software. No reason for me to go abotu explaining with the ignorance shown on that subject.

And you can throw in pretty much any GPU you want and have it up and running quicker. Most Linux distro's have quick access to the newer nvidia drivers much quicker. Not sure about AMD right now, as in the past ATI was highly frowned upon by Linux users for lack of support, but ever since AMD took over completely and actually changed the name, support as been on the rise.

And the thing about the software center, in Ubuntu is, if/when anyone wanted to start charging for software it would pretty much act as a Steam-like software distribution software. And there is pay for software, but it's usually highly specialized software where NORMAL users won't need it. And for the NORMAL user, there are programs for whatever they want to do already.

And I would honestly like to see the REAL numbers and not just this market crap. I believe it would paint a different picture.


----------



## tehwalris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nathris*
> 
> X is dead though. Long live Wayland!


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that if Linux held a major market segment (over 30%) that there would be no retail software? Are you crazy? The only reason there ISN'T retail software (productivity, games etc) is because it doesn't have a major market segment. The whole point I'm making is a typical 15-25 year old that wants to play games can't just run out and install the latest GPU that's out and with two clicks install the drivers and be up and running. Same goes for going out and buying whatever software they want to use (IF it were hypothetically available). That's precisely why Linux isn't a major threat to the other OS makers. And until that changes it will never be.


To be fair the latest supported GPU drivers are always two clicks away on Linux.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Actually we're talking about WHY Linux doesn't have a significant amount of market penetration. And software availability (games etc) has a LOT to do with that. People aren't going to use an OS if tney can't run the software that they want to (and freeware in the repos isn't going to make up for that). The article is entirely on point when he points out ease of installation and use. Linux may have come a long way from where it once was, but it's nowhere near ready to be a serious consideration for the entire spectrum of users when looking at OS choices (THAT is what's called the market that Linux only has a very small portion of right now).

As for the "repos" being a software distribution center. Software developers are having a hard enough time as it is switching to online distribution forms such as Steam (they are a paranoid bunch). To say that the repos could easily be used to distribut paid software ignores the fact that it would have to undergo MAJOR changes before Dev's would be comfortable enough to release their software through it and not overly worry about piracy.


----------



## Shrak




----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Actually we're talking about WHY Linux doesn't have a significant amount of market penetration. And software availability (games etc) has a LOT to do with that. People aren't going to use an OS if tney can't run the software that they want to (and freeware in the repos isn't going to make up for that). The article is entirely on point when he points out ease of installation and use. Linux may have come a long way from where it once was, but it's nowhere near ready to be a serious consideration for the entire spectrum of users when looking at OS choices (THAT is what's called the market that Linux only has a very small portion of right now).
> As for the "repos" being a software distribution center. Software developers are having a hard enough time as it is switching to online distribution forms such as Steam (they are a paranoid bunch). *To say that the repos could easily be used to distribut paid software ignores the fact that it would have to undergo MAJOR changes before Dev's would be comfortable enough to release their software through it and not overly worry about piracy.*


Just worth a small mention.

Linux Users Continue To Pay Most for the @Humble Indie Bundle


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to see Linux be a fully viable option to replace windows or mac osx (especially after this crap metro UI that MS is pushing). But it's just not there yet and without a major shift in the attitude of the community the needed changes to make it fully viable aren't going to happen. Instead of looking at what needs to change to make it widely accepted which in turn would only benefit Linux, the community get's entrenched and resists simple things like giving up the absolute REQUIREMENT for Terminal (having it as an option is different than a requirement). I just don't get it.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to see Linux be a fully viable option to replace windows or mac osx (especially after this crap metro UI that MS is pushing). But it's just not there yet and without a major shift in the attitude of the community the needed changes to make it fully viable aren't going to happen. Instead of looking at what needs to change to make it widely accepted which in turn would only benefit Linux, the community get's entrenched and resists simple things like giving up the absolute REQUIREMENT for Terminal (having it as an option is different than a requirement). I just don't get it.


Normal users do NOT need the terminal. It's been repeated here plenty of times now. Especially in Ubuntu who's been trying to do away with the terminal. And as I said, unless you're making changes to the system, the terminal does not need to be touched one bit.

Get over that already.


----------



## lordikon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> I wouldn't say Linux on the desktop is dead, but progress in terms of real usability has been agonizingly slow. Can't die if it hasn't really lived yet.
> I first tried Linux with Mandrake 6.0 back in 1999 and honestly, my experiences have barely changed. Basic tasks that I always took for granted in Windows, or even DOS, are still a chore in most Linux distros, while documentation is still sporadic and sketchy for novice users. For many, including myself, the advantages of Linux are too small to warrant the investment in time and effort in mastering the OS.


I agree with this. I have to use Unix/FreeBSD in my daily work, but it's always a pain to do things that were so much easier and straightforward to do with a GUI.

For example, today I'm using Mercurial in FreeBSD, and need to move changes from one branch to another. Having used another source control with a GUI, this was fairly easy, as you just submit your changes to your branch, and go to the other branch and grab the changes and merge them in. Here's only part of what I found if I want to do this in Mercurial:

Code:



Code:


#!/bin/sh

MESSAGE="$1"
PATCH="$2"

# This performs an in-place (-i) modification of the $PATCH file
sed -e's,^\(--- a/\)\|\(+++ b/\),&hgext/,' \
    -e'/^diff --git/s,a/\(.*\) b/\(.*\),a/hgext/\1 b/hgext/\2,' \
    -e's,^\(rename\|copy\) \(from\|to\) ,&hgext/', \
    -i "$PATCH"

Honestly, how many people understand the above text, and how is this user-friendly in the even the slightest way? Unix/Linux can be very powerful for a power-user, but it will never be popular compared to your other OSes because of the learning curve.


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> Honestly, how many people understand the above text, and how is this user-friendly in the even the slightest way?


I do!









I work with AIX, Solaris, Red Hat. Server 2003, and Server 2008 R2 weekly.... they are about the same in the end. They manage your hardware resources to run programs.

No one OS is the *best*. Each have their strengths and weakness.... it is what works for you.

GUI vs CLI.... there is always a trade-off/balance about complexity and ease.... again... what works for you.


----------



## PappaSmurfsHarem

All I have to say is if DirectX was ported to linux (not going to happen), or game dev's start relying on OpenGL then I will drop windows in a heartbeat. Valve making their source games and steam on linux is making it easier, but sadly I still play a few other developers titles.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> I do!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> snip.


Yeah, but that doesn't count. You might as well be Jesus, Duckie.


----------



## lordikon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> I do!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I work with AIX, Solaris, Red Hat. Server 2003, and Server 2008 R2 weekly.... they are about the same in the end. They manage your hardware resources to run programs.
> No one OS is the *best*. Each have their strengths and weakness.... it is what works for you.
> GUI vs CLI.... there is always a trade-off/balance about complexity and ease.... again... what works for you.


Sure, like I said, some people will understand this, but if only people like yourself were able to use the OS effectively, it wouldn't have very many users (which it doesn't, compared to popular OSes at least).


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> Honestly, how many people understand the above text, and how is this user-friendly in the even the slightest way? Unix/Linux can be very powerful for a power-user, but it will never be popular compared to your other OSes because of the learning curve.


I understand it just fine


----------



## Andr3az

I love it how from time to time we have news that something is dead.

Dunno, most of the school computers run linux, not dead to me.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Normal users do NOT need the terminal. It's been repeated here plenty of times now. Especially in Ubuntu who's been trying to do away with the terminal. And as I said, unless you're making changes to the system, the terminal does not need to be touched one bit.
> Get over that already.


Exactly. And how often does someone own a computer that NEVER has a system change?


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Exactly. And how often does someone own a computer that NEVER has a system change?


I think you missread that.

Any normal user that is going and messing with system files is an idiot and then in return the blame can't be put on the OS in question. Just like if you were to go delete your system32 folder in Windows. The user has no need to venture into the system files. I as a power user, even rarely venture outside of /home/ which is the equevalant to 'Users' in Windows. Except to modify stuff like cron jobs, udev rules, etc. Everything else can be done locally.


----------



## Ryanb213

In other news, market share for the entire linux group of operating systems is still below 1%., even when mobile browsers are counted out of the race.


----------



## Brutuz

Lets take this apart, then: "constantly tinkering and finding workarounds to get everyday tasks done." If you're tinkering something in Ubuntu, then it's not an 'everyday task' for most desktop users. My mother is going to LMDE with MATE soon because *all* she uses is Firefox. That's someone who knows much more about technology than most people in her age group, too. I can gaurentee I won't need to use the terminal at all; all I'll need to do is go to additional drivers to install the nVidia drivers, set up Thunderbird for her email, put a bunch of addons in Firefox that she uses and finally show her the software centre on her computer rather than my laptop.

"Of course, it's often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you're doing" Where did he go? Unless he was posting stuff like "LINUX BLOODY SUCKS BECAUSE I CAN'T DO X" on a forum, no real forum should be full of "self-righteous flamers" apart from a few trolls who do it for any forum.

"It doesn't change the reality that Linux is not as intuitive or user friendly as its rivals, or that it lacks the third-party hardware and software support of its rivals, or that using it requires a learning curve and the dedication to dive into forums and learn to tinker." First part? Yeah, it is for most people. For enthusiasts/people who want to do more than watch TV Shows online, listen to music and go on Facebook or just run company programs, sure, there might be problems with the user friendliness; but most people don't. Unless you're using *very* recent hardware, or *very* rare hardware (Or a TV Tuner) then you're probably in the right with Linux drivers. As for learning curve..The learning curve for my mother was "This is the software centre, use it to install programs" and she was off on my laptop.

"The dream of Linux becoming relevant in the desktop market will never be realized." I wouldn't be so sure; free stuff (As in, freedom) tends to have a way of sticking around and outlasting its rivals.

"Besides, we live in a post-PC era where even Windows and Mac OS X are being supplanted by mobile platforms like iOS and Android." A post PC era, where plenty of people still buy laptops, right? Don't confuse desktops being regulated to niche use as the end of PCs completely.

Copied and pasted into comments on that, too.

Edit: I just worked out he tried Ubuntu via Wubi...That explains a lot.


----------



## GAMERIG

Yes I believing that Ubuntu 11.04 on desktop is dead after 10.10, EPIC FAIL!


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I think you missread that.
> Any normal user that is going and messing with system files is an idiot and then in return the blame can't be put on the OS in question. Just like if you were to go delete your system32 folder in Windows. The user has no need to venture into the system files. I as a power user, even rarely venture outside of /home/ which is the equevalant to 'Users' in Windows. Except to modify stuff like cron jobs, udev rules, etc. Everything else can be done locally.


Nothing gets through to this guy so you know what...I give up. Linux is awesome, Linux is the best and easiest OS ever in the history of OSes with the best price of free and that's why everyone in the world is using it except for a few die hard windows and mac fanboys.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Nothing gets through to this guy so you know what...I give up. Linux is awesome, Linux is the best and easiest OS ever in the history of OSes with the best price of free and that's why everyone in the world is using it except for a few die hard windows and mac fanboys.


Don't blame me for you not understanding what I'm saying. You want me to install ubutnu and video tape me never touching the terminal and getting the system completely set up and running? I can do so. It isn't hard.

Are you really going to try to tell me that an average normal user will ever need to go into /root, /bin, /etc, or any other folder other than /home/$USER/?. You are sadly mistaken. Nothing that a normal user does will ever go outside of their /home folder, plain and simple.


----------



## Nautilus

I used Suse Linux 11 for a few days but my video editing software didn't work on WINE and video editing programs that run natively on Linux are a joke. So i had to switch back to Windows 7.


----------



## gsa700

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tehwalris*
> 
> How about:
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> sudo dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/sd*
> 
> All your data, on all connected drives, dead and gone


I tried on an OpenSUSE VM, it doesn't work.


----------



## dioxholster

I use linux as my main OS for work and browsing, but its true, it aint going no where. And Unity just made things worse for them. As a cheap alternative its great though but for all its fans you would think it does something other OS can't when in fact it barely does the most basic things out right.


----------



## Riou

Why does Linux keep dying every year? How many lives does Linux have?


----------



## dioxholster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> I used Suse Linux 11 for a few days but my video editing software didn't work on WINE and video editing programs that run natively on Linux are a joke. So i had to switch back to Windows 7.


I tried them all, and all duly suck. People even suggested to me Blender which is a 3D modeling tool, which goes to show you how out of luck you will be if you want to do proper video editing on linux. Wine is a mess and unreliable as one would expect.


----------



## RagingCain

Full fledge Steam and a triple AAA game on the linux kernel would breathe a large amount of life into a few of distros.

Especially if they can really get that OOBE that Linux is famous for not having.

I have always been a fan of Crunchbang #!, but alas have always had such a modern computer there are always issues getting 100% functionality.


----------



## jrl1357

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> "Linux is awesome. It's a powerful, capable, flexible operating system with tremendous potential. But, it's never going to be a factor on the desktop, so don't even waste your time considering it."
> 
> Makes me want to install Linux as my only OS just for spite..
> 
> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/252516/why_linux_on_the_desktop_is_dead.html
> 
> URL is't working for me


may the computing gods smite him!


----------



## dioxholster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Full fledge Steam and a triple AAA game on the linux kernel would breathe a large amount of life into a few of distros.
> Especially if they can really get that OOBE that Linux is famous for not having.
> I have always been a fan of Crunchbang #!, but alas have always had such a modern computer there are always issues getting 100% functionality.


What brings an OS fame and fortune is in its usefulness in the business environment, why game on linux when windows does it already?


----------



## 7heMy7h

I agree with a couple points in the article. A lot of it is sensationalized though. I wouldn't call Linux "dead", but I doubt it will ever have significant market share on desktops (enough to threaten MS or Apple). It is certainly a great alternative for a lot of people, but for the average person who just wants things to work seamlessly out of the box, I wouldn't really consider it an option. For phones, tablets, servers, and other devices it has a lot more potential though. Android is proof of that.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dioxholster*
> 
> What brings an OS fame and fortune is in its usefulness in the business environment, why game on linux when windows does it already?


I'd stop buying Windows if you could game fully on Ubuntu!


----------



## Rookie1337

Ingrained minds will never change, possibly even with their own extinction upon them.

Take that how you will people. If you grew up with Windows odds are you'll die being happy with it or just going "why would I change" with a few that will venture to something else. It's exposure and MS was wise to get a hold of the education system. I laugh at how many people on here cry foul at Win8 but I'm more than certain almost all of you that protested the loudest will still make the move to it and yet....you'll slowly start to like Win8 because you'll see no other choice. "All my programs are there." "It's all I know."

Linux is only as good as what you put into it. Even with something as "prebuilt" as buntu this is still fairly true. That's the strength and weakness to it.

On the other hand...the writer used Wubi...so he has no one to blame for his problems but himself.

PS: I find windows more difficult at times simply because I'm tired of having to defrag a damn drive (it's amazing that MS has been using NTFS for so long and seems incapable of making something better







). Tired of having separate updates for just about each and every program. And so on...

Gaming and some limited aspects of school keep me with windows but instead of blaming Linux for this like the writer does I realized the true fault...the devs/hardware makers/etc.


----------



## Quantum Reality

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> Honestly, how many people understand the above text, and how is this user-friendly in the even the slightest way? Unix/Linux can be very powerful for a power-user, but it will never be popular compared to your other OSes because of the learning curve.


Exactly my point. How many *extremely specific* fixes could be constructed from a generalized knowledge of the OS? I had to mercilessly beat my Fedora compiler into shape at one point to get a specific program to compile by adding god only knows hoe many different specific libraries. About half came from the autoupdates repository - clickclickclickclickdone.

The other half? Manual additions and changes that required frequent Googling to figure out how to implement the necessary changes. Without people who had managed to work all this out, I would have been sunk.

At least in Windows it's possible to come up with a specific fix given a generalized knowledge of how the OS works. If a program is acting funny, often a specific fix can be implemented knowing generally what the problem is (e.g. in one case for a while in Win2K I had programs that wouild try to push the refresh rate above 70 Hz, which my monitor didn't cooperate too well with. Fixing the refresh rate in DX9's advanced menu fixed it.







)


----------



## RagingCain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dioxholster*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *RagingCain*
> 
> Full fledge Steam and a triple AAA game on the linux kernel would breathe a large amount of life into a few of distros.
> Especially if they can really get that OOBE that Linux is famous for not having.
> I have always been a fan of Crunchbang #!, but alas have always had such a modern computer there are always issues getting 100% functionality.
> 
> 
> 
> What brings an OS fame and fortune is in its usefulness in the business environment, why game on linux when windows does it already?
Click to expand...

To be honest its a hunch... I got started working with computers troubleshooting games, learning the ins and outs, when parts were expensive, you tweak out your system to get it to run as fast as possible for free. Then you break it, then you fix it, then you break it, then you fix it. The end result is an experienced troubleshooter. This always the younger crowd, who probably get involved with IT in some manner, and thus when they are fully functioning adults, confidently support the business world with their Windows machines. Now for me it was games, others it was coding, others it was learning. There are many avenues to computing passion. When we get a generation of Linux IT techs, then the business world will follow, then everyone.

Linux is great for academia and science and always will be. Average joe on the other hand probably has only heard the word "Linux" and is much more enticed to use OSX's shiny aluminum parts, nevermind that its core functionality is Unix-like. Average joe is dumb, so in my opinion get something that everybody likes / wants / needs and pretty soon people will be poking there heads in and testing it out. Fads can be powerful tools and Linux is one of those systems that really would shine past everything, if it could just get the right light / marketing.

I know a lot of people are just waiting for that first / third party support of a AAA game, to leave Windows for a good long while. But as I said, its a hunch.


----------



## Riou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> Honestly, how many people understand the above text, and how is this user-friendly in the even the slightest way? Unix/Linux can be very powerful for a power-user, but it will never be popular compared to your other OSes because of the learning curve.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly my point. How many *extremely specific* fixes could be constructed from a generalized knowledge of the OS? I had to mercilessly beat my Fedora compiler into shape at one point to get a specific program to compile by adding god only knows hoe many different specific libraries. About half came from the autoupdates repository - clickclickclickclickdone.
> 
> The other half? Manual additions and changes that required frequent Googling to figure out how to implement the necessary changes. Without people who had managed to work all this out, I would have been sunk.
> 
> At least in Windows it's possible to come up with a specific fix given a generalized knowledge of how the OS works. If a program is acting funny, often a specific fix can be implemented knowing generally what the problem is (e.g. in one case for a while in Win2K I had programs that wouild try to push the refresh rate above 70 Hz, which my monitor didn't cooperate too well with. Fixing the refresh rate in DX9's advanced menu fixed it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
Click to expand...

What you guys are arguing over the Windows way vs. the UNIX way.

Do not blame Linux. Blame UNIX.


----------



## flamingoyster

Wait a minute, I thought everyone was proclaiming the desktop platform is dying altogether?

So....if the platform itself is dead, wouldn't that necessitate all the desktop OS's being dead too?















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Riou*
> 
> What you guys are arguing over the Windows way vs. the UNIX way.
> Do not blame Linux. Blame UNIX.


Who even knows the difference anymore? A while ago, I google searched "Linux vs. Unix" and found a few websites that tried to explain the difference....but not even a website trying to explain it could make me understand. They're the same for all intents and purposes.


----------



## jrl1357

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flamingoyster*
> 
> Wait a minute, I thought everyone was proclaiming the desktop platform is dying altogether?
> 
> So....if the platform itself is dead, wouldn't that necessitate all the desktop OS's being dead too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Riou*
> 
> What you guys are arguing over the Windows way vs. the UNIX way.
> Do not blame Linux. Blame UNIX.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who even knows the difference anymore? A while ago, I google searched "Linux vs. Unix" and found a few websites that tried to explain the difference....but not even a website trying to explain it could make me understand. They're the same for all intents and purposes.
Click to expand...

this is a good point, this is coming from the same people who tell us the desktop as a whole is dead, and we know thats not the case. anyone who knows linux, who uses it, know its growing. will it ever compeat with windows? only andriod. but small dosnt mean dead. the guy who wrote that can go to hell.

P.S. for those of you who think linux is for advanced geeks only, my grandmother has had linux mint on her computer for the last year. she dosnt even know. its just her computer. noone has ever in the life of the thing had to touch the terminal.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jrl1357*
> 
> P.S. for those of you who think linux is for advanced geeks only, my grandmother has had linux mint on her computer for the last year. she dosnt even know. its just her computer. noone has ever in the life of the thing had to touch the terminal.


I've got both of my 8x year old grandparents ( on both sides of the family ) using my custom Arch install. Not once have they had issues with it, and still haven't had to touch the terminal ( but that's because I installed the programs they use most on it prior, but with Ubuntu and I think mint has a software center? that removes that need ).


----------



## Riou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flamingoyster*
> 
> Wait a minute, I thought everyone was proclaiming the desktop platform is dying altogether?
> 
> So....if the platform itself is dead, wouldn't that necessitate all the desktop OS's being dead too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Riou*
> 
> What you guys are arguing over the Windows way vs. the UNIX way.
> Do not blame Linux. Blame UNIX.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who even knows the difference anymore? A while ago, I google searched "Linux vs. Unix" and found a few websites that tried to explain the difference....but not even a website trying to explain it could make me understand. They're the same for all intents and purposes.
Click to expand...

UNIX came first. Computer scientists and mathematicians designed the UNIX paradigms. Linux, BSD, and the rest adopted those principles.

Macs and Ubuntu are trying to create a UNIX/UNIX-like OS with GUIs for everything.


----------



## d-block

The link sure is dead. Can't even read the article


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Don't blame me for you not understanding what I'm saying. You want me to install ubutnu and video tape me never touching the terminal and getting the system completely set up and running? I can do so. It isn't hard.
> Are you really going to try to tell me that an average normal user will ever need to go into /root, /bin, /etc, or any other folder other than /home/$USER/?. You are sadly mistaken. Nothing that a normal user does will ever go outside of their /home folder, plain and simple.


That is what I would expect from an entrenched linux user. Defensive about his operating system to the exclusion of all others.

It's pretty simple, can ALL of these questions be answered with a yes:

A)Can any linux distro be installed without going online to read instructions and how tos, including formatting properly, installing all drivers etc.?
B)Can you install any drivers you need by simply putting the self executing files onto a USB stick or putting in a disk without using terminal or a "driver wrapper"? (hint last time I checked trying to install a netgear usb wireless adapter took half a day of scouring the internet and jumping through hoops to get it to work)
C)Can any purchased add-on hardware, whether it be a usb wireless adapter, slingbox, webcam, graphics card, sound card etc. be installed with a self executing install driver/software file without going online and looking for instructions or using terminal and will function properly?
D)Can any linux distro be used without taking more than a day for the average joe to learn how to use it?

Windows and Mac OSX can do all of those. If you've answered no to ANY of those questions you've just answered your own question as to why it's not embraced by the majority of people. Remember, people like free stuff. If they aren't using something that's free there is a REAL reason for that.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> That is what I would expect from an entrenched linux user. Defensive about his operating system to the exclusion of all others.
> It's pretty simple, can ALL of these questions be answered with a yes:
> A)Can any linux distro be installed without going online to read instructions and how tos, including formatting properly, installing all drivers etc.?
> B)Can you install any drivers you need by simply putting the self executing files onto a USB stick or putting in a disk without using terminal or a "driver wrapper"? (hint last time I checked trying to install a netgear usb wireless adapter took half a day of scouring the internet and jumping through hoops to get it to work)
> C)Can any purchased add-on hardware, whether it be a usb wireless adapter, slingbox, webcam, graphics card, sound card etc. be installed with a self executing install driver/software file without going online and looking for instructions or using terminal and will function properly?
> D)Can any linux distro be used without taking more than a day for the average joe to learn how to use it?
> Windows and Mac OSX can do all of those. If you've answered no to ANY of those questions you've just answered your own question as to why it's not embraced by the majority of people. Remember, people like free stuff. If they aren't using something that's free there is a REAL reason for that.


Hi there...this is an average user right here and I can see your problem. You thought Linux was going to be windows like. Did you try to download a program to install it only to be greeted with frustration? Don't worry...I did that on day one.

A) Can a person do those same things with windows? Most can't. Why hold Linux responsible?
B) Only drivers I've ever needed where nvidias...the rest the kernel should provide or you check your hardware. Pretty damn easy.
C) Again check hardware. You want to know something funny...most stuff actually works in Linux without begging for a driver unlike windows. But of course...there are some well known perpetrators of hostile hardware. Not Linux's fault. Direct your anger were it belongs. At the hardware maker.
D) Can OSX or Windows? The answer is no unless you're as deeply "entrenched" as you claim Shrak to be. Face it...Windows rules because MS was smart enough to control the education system with it. As soon as they did that using anything else becomes an uphill battle. Everyone is really "forced" to learn/use windows and it takes more than a day for them to grow used to it.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> That is what I would expect from an entrenched linux user. Defensive about his operating system to the exclusion of all others.
> It's pretty simple, can ALL of these questions be answered with a yes:
> A)Can any linux distro be installed without going online to read instructions and how tos, including formatting properly, installing all drivers etc.?
> B)Can you install any drivers you need by simply putting the self executing files onto a USB stick or putting in a disk without using terminal or a "driver wrapper"? (hint last time I checked trying to install a netgear usb wireless adapter took half a day of scouring the internet and jumping through hoops to get it to work)
> C)Can any purchased add-on hardware, whether it be a usb wireless adapter, slingbox, webcam, graphics card, sound card etc. be installed with a self executing install driver/software file without going online and looking for instructions or using terminal and will function properly?
> D)Can any linux distro be used without taking more than a day for the average joe to learn how to use it?
> Windows and Mac OSX can do all of those. If you've answered no to ANY of those questions you've just answered your own question as to why it's not embraced by the majority of people. Remember, people like free stuff. If they aren't using something that's free there is a REAL reason for that.


You sure are one piece of work. You seem like an ignorant Windows user who's never tried Linux. I mean try, not just install and say you don't like it. I'm not getting defensive. You seem to be the only one with a stick up the rear here. People are kindly trying to explain that it isn't as hard as it used to be and plenty of people even elderly aged people, are using it with absolutely no problems. Without touching the terminal.

A.) Yes. Especially with the way Ubuntu, Fedoro, Mint and other have their installers. You get a couple of VERY simple options. Install on whole hard drive, install next to Windows or other OS, install on largest empty partition. Everything else is done for you, formatting-wise, it partitions what needs to partition, formats them itself and everything.

B.) Yes, you can technically. It works easier with an internet connection as it'll find all proprietary software for you automatically. But you can install from a USB. Just make sure to do so by pointing to it via the software center as installing outside of the software center / package manager is highly frowned upon in most distro's. For ease of use purposes. ( or in Ubuntu, you can double click the .deb files which are basically the same as an .exe in Windows ) And as long as you know what the chipset your wireless card is using you shouldn't have spend half a day. Simple, either look on the chip or read the book/box it came with and it should tell you if it's using a broadcom, atheros, etc. Not something a normal user would have to worry about ( you don't have a clue how many calls I get a day for me to come install PCI/e devices that people have bought, and don't know how to put in ).

C.) Again, you really don't seem to understand how Linux works here, talking about drivers and etc. Most drivers come built into the kernel. There's very few that you need to go looking for and even then it's not much of looking. Open your package manager / software center and do a quick search for it ( ubuntu will normally detect it and give you options what to do. ). Most webcams are PLUG AND PLAY. USB Wireless adapters are easy, just like in B, make sure you know what chip it has. And no it isn't hard to find out again, book/box that it comes with should tell you. Graphics card usually always work ( windows fails here as well with some of them as well ). Sound cards are still iffy but have gotten much greater attention lately, ALSA/OSS/Pulse has gotten support for the entire X-Fi line aside from the USB version, which still work, just no internal controls. The rest of stuff can easily work. But yes, don't need to touch the terminal.

And then there's something you may forget. A lot of people look to make sure what they're buying will work with their operating system. Or ask an employee if it will. It's always applied, why would it change now. There's some things that work with XP but not vista or 7, and vice versa. Nothing new there, to people.

D.) No, not any Linux distro. But we aren't talking any. Right tool for the job the old saying goes. Some linux distros like my choice, are geared towards people who know what they're doing. While others such as Ubuntu, are coorperately funded and geared to make a transition from Windows easier. As they are doing a lot lately. So no to this one simply because it's a trick question. A new user isn't going to say " Hey, I feel like installing LFS or Gentoo " it just isn't going to happen. Ubuntu has that recognition for being easy to use and PLENTY of people have transitioned.

And if you're implying that you don't have to google stuff for Windows then obviously you haven't met the average user. Everyone who's ever called me to fix their computers are people who have tried just that. And you can find results of plenty other online. Having to go online and search for something isn't a Linux thing only. Now pull the stick out of your butt, and try it yourself. You want answers to your question then go install Ubuntu right now, and test yourself. Can YOU do it without the terminal? I know I can, and I know my family can, and I know a ton of other people can. But can YOU?

And if you're implying I'm saying it's perfect.. .Please point out once, where I ever said it's perfect or the "end all be all" as you said earlier. I never once claimed it's perfect. I just claimed it isn't as bad as YOU want to make it out to be. And it IS possible and plausible to use it WITHOUT the terminal.


----------



## 161029

If Linux really was dead, then Valve would stop any effort to make Steam for Linux. Honestly. People these days.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Hi there...this is an average user right here and I can see your problem. You thought Linux was going to be windows like. Did you try to download a program to install it only to be greeted with frustration? Don't worry...I did that on day one.
> A) Can a person do those same things with windows? Most can't. Why hold Linux responsible?
> B) Only drivers I've ever needed where nvidias...the rest the kernel should provide or you check your hardware. Pretty damn easy.
> C) Again check hardware. You want to know something funny...most stuff actually works in Linux without begging for a driver unlike windows. But of course...there are some well known perpetrators of hostile hardware. Not Linux's fault. Direct your anger were it belongs. At the hardware maker.
> D) Can OSX or Windows? The answer is no unless you're as deeply "entrenched" as you claim Shrak to be. Face it...Windows rules because MS was smart enough to control the education system with it. As soon as they did that using anything else becomes an uphill battle. Everyone is really "forced" to learn/use windows and it takes more than a day for them to grow used to it.


You should have read through the thread first. I'm talking about the 80% of users out there are NOT computer geeks and just know how to point and click. Yes I know there can be a problem or two with windows (evidenced by the somewhat annual call from my parents to come "fix" whatever problem there is....usually virus related). I myself actually enjoy linux. But it isn't my main OS. I use it for certain purposes and just to play around in it. But getting back on point. The point I'm trying to make is that there is a reason WHY most people in the world are not willing to give up windows or mac for Linux even though it's FREE. And the author of the article is completely correct when he talks about ease of use etc.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> You should have read through the thread first. I'm talking about the 80% of users out there are NOT computer geeks and just know how to point and click. Yes I know there can be a problem or two with windows (evidenced by the somewhat annual call from my parents to come "fix" whatever problem there is....usually virus related). I myself actually enjoy linux. But it isn't my main OS. I use it for certain purposes and just to play around in it. But getting back on point. The point I'm trying to make is that there is a reason WHY most people in the world are not willing to give up windows or mac for Linux even though it's FREE. And the author of the article is completely correct when he talks about ease of use etc.


And you've been given reasons why it isn't more mainstream. Simply because Windows get's all the attention. People from a young age, are shown and taught Windows. Because of this, it will always have the advantage. Plain and Simple. No other reason. Had Linux got the attention and in return of attention, the sponsors, money to progress faster, then it would be a willing rival. But Windows got to their first. Welcome to life. It's pretty much the same for any aspect of it. Get somewhere first, be the victor and take all the spoils. The spoils in this case, the market share.

And Linux isn't about being free as in money. Linux free is for freedom. Something some people fail to understand. Stallmans great quote " Think free speech, not free beer " explains it perfectly.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> You sure are one piece of work. You seem like an ignorant Windows user who's never tried Linux. I mean try, not just install and say you don't like it. I'm not getting defensive. You seem to be the only one with a stick up the rear here. People are kindly trying to explain that it isn't as hard as it used to be and plenty of people even elderly aged people, are using it with absolutely no problems. Without touching the terminal.
> A.) Yes. Especially with the way Ubuntu, Fedoro, Mint and other have their installers. You get a couple of VERY simple options. Install on whole hard drive, install next to Windows or other OS, install on largest empty partition. Everything else is done for you, formatting-wise, it partitions what needs to partition, formats them itself and everything.
> B.) Yes, you can technically. It works easier with an internet connection as it'll find all proprietary software for you automatically. But you can install from a USB. Just make sure to do so by pointing to it via the software center as installing outside of the software center / package manager is highly frowned upon in most distro's. For ease of use purposes. ( or in Ubuntu, you can double click the .deb files which are basically the same as an .exe in Windows ) And as long as you know what the chipset your wireless card is using you shouldn't have spend half a day. Simple, either look on the chip or read the book/box it came with and it should tell you if it's using a broadcom, atheros, etc. Not something a normal user would have to worry about ( you don't have a clue how many calls I get a day for me to come install PCI/e devices that people have bought, and don't know how to put in ).
> C.) Again, you really don't seem to understand how Linux works here, talking about drivers and etc. Most drivers come built into the kernel. There's very few that you need to go looking for and even then it's not much of looking. Open your package manager / software center and do a quick search for it ( ubuntu will normally detect it and give you options what to do. ). Most webcams are PLUG AND PLAY. USB Wireless adapters are easy, just like in B, make sure you know what chip it has. And no it isn't hard to find out again, book/box that it comes with should tell you. Graphics card usually always work ( windows fails here as well with some of them as well ). Sound cards are still iffy but have gotten much greater attention lately, ALSA/OSS/Pulse has gotten support for the entire X-Fi line aside from the USB version, which still work, just no internal controls. The rest of stuff can easily work. But yes, don't need to touch the terminal.
> And then there's something you may forget. A lot of people look to make sure what they're buying will work with their operating system. Or ask an employee if it will. It's always applied, why would it change now. There's some things that work with XP but not vista or 7, and vice versa. Nothing new there, to people.
> D.) No, not any Linux distro. But we aren't talking any. Right tool for the job the old saying goes. Some linux distros like my choice, are geared towards people who know what they're doing. While others such as Ubuntu, are coorperately funded and geared to make a transition from Windows easier. As they are doing a lot lately. So no to this one simply because it's a trick question. A new user isn't going to say " Hey, I feel like installing LFS or Gentoo " it just isn't going to happen. Ubuntu has that recognition for being easy to use and PLENTY of people have transitioned.
> And if you're implying that you don't have to google stuff for Windows then obviously you haven't met the average user. Everyone who's ever called me to fix their computers are people who have tried just that. And you can find results of plenty other online. Having to go online and search for something isn't a Linux thing only. Now pull the stick out of your butt, and try it yourself. You want answers to your question then go install Ubuntu right now, and test yourself. Can YOU do it without the terminal? I know I can, and I know my family can, and I know a ton of other people can. But can YOU?
> And if you're implying I'm saying it's perfect.. .Please point out once, where I ever said it's perfect or the "end all be all" as you said earlier. I never once claimed it's perfect. I just claimed it isn't as bad as YOU want to make it out to be. And it IS possible and plausible to use it WITHOUT the terminal.


You prove my point with every answer you give. You keep saying "well most". The average joe out there doesn't care if "most" things are compatible. He wants to walk into best buy, pick up whatever he wants and plug it in and it works. He doesn't want to search through lists, search the internet for answers, figure out "what chip he has" in the thing. In fact at least half of the people out there could care less what "chip" or anything is in there. I was in best buy the other day and the associate was trying to explain to a college girl the available options she had for the price range she gave (less than 500) and as he's showing her the AMD Llano laptops that were well within her budget and would do just fine for her given uses (surfing, microsoft word, and videos as she said) and her response to him was "oh it HAS to be an intel". He said "Which one did you have in mind" (I almost laughed out at this one....had to stifle it) she said "the intel one". Do you think she really cares or will even attempt to figure out which "chip" or whatever it is she needs to figure out to get it to work? Yeah, right. First sign of trouble and she'll call a computer geek. A few times having to go through that and she'd never use linux ever again.

Edit - and as for answer B, your making an assumption that EVERY install will be on a system connected through ethernet. If you can't install an OS offline with a couple of disks that's a fail. Again, NOT everyone is a computer geek. They want to stick a disk in answer a few questions and let it install by itself with minimal interaction.

And I never once said or claimed that Linux is "bad". But it is definately frustrating to people who can barely make windows work (I see people like that all the time, they wouldn't last an hour with linux the way it is now).


----------



## Nocturin

my head hurts


----------



## Shrak

I give up trying to converse with you. Same thing in every post without reading a single thing.

If you think Windows is so superior then continue to think it. It isn't that much better. People like her will have the same issues with Windows as they would Linux or any other OS so your point is moot.

I get calls from people asking for help for Windows every day. Man I sure am glad Windows isn't so easy to use, else I'd be a broke mutha I can tell you that.

And I guess by your definition of what an OS needs to be successful... Windows flops at it, so does OSX, and Linux. Guess it's time for you to get off of the computer, nothing meets your requirements. Cya.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> And you've been given reasons why it isn't more mainstream. Simply because Windows get's all the attention. People from a young age, are shown and taught Windows. Because of this, it will always have the advantage. Plain and Simple. No other reason. Had Linux got the attention and in return of attention, the sponsors, money to progress faster, then it would be a willing rival. But Windows got to their first. Welcome to life. It's pretty much the same for any aspect of it. Get somewhere first, be the victor and take all the spoils. The spoils in this case, the market share.
> And Linux isn't about being free as in money. Linux free is for freedom. Something some people fail to understand. Stallmans great quote " Think free speech, not free beer " explains it perfectly.


And to say it's not widestream because "windows has been given all the attention" is misleading. Don't misunderstand me, personally I like linux. It's fast, powerful, lightweight (Hell, you can run it off a usb. Try that with windows and it will be sluggish) and yes there is a level of freedom to be enjoyed. I'm saying it's not mainstream even in light of all that because the community as a whole (mostly computer geeks like us who love computers) are ignoring he rest of the PC owners out there who barely know what a CPU is or don't really care. They just want things to work and work easily.


----------



## lordikon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Riou*
> 
> What you guys are arguing over the Windows way vs. the UNIX way.
> Do not blame Linux. Blame UNIX.


My post said Unix/Linux.









Obviously Linux will be easier for most users than Unix. I'd honestly be fine with Linux if it was easily compatible with all of the same hardware as Windows. I honestly haven't tried Linux in 5 years, last time I tried it wouldn't recognize my network card, flash drives, or optical drive. Good luck updating the OS to work with any of those things when you have no means to get new data onto the computer other than through a keyboard and mouse. Honestly what's the point in making an OS that won't recognize basic hardware? I forget which distro it was at this point, I think it was Fedora. From what I've heard Ubuntu is much better, and probably wouldn't have all those issues anymore. Either way, there is no point for me to use Linux, I need both Windows and OSX for my job, and I wouldn't touch Linux if I have Windows or OSX to choose from. If I get a hankering for some Unix-style terminal stuff (and I won't) I'll just use OSX.


----------



## magic8ball88

I don't like Linux just because every little thing you do it a battle. Its understandable because there aren't big companies behind it, but I like that when I want to do a fresh install of windows it gets all the drivers for me and it works. I like that when I go to install software there is an installer that does the work for me. And I like that there is more software for OS X and Windows.

It most certainly is not dead though. There will always be people using it. But I won't be one of those people. I don't see any gain in using it, except for how customizable it is, which I don't have the patience for.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magic8ball88*
> 
> I don't like Linux just because every little thing you do it a battle. Its understandable because there aren't big companies behind it, but I like that when I want to do a fresh install of windows it gets all the drivers for me and it works. I like that when I go to install software there is an installer that does the work for me. And I like that there is more software for OS X and Windows.
> It most certainly is not dead though. There will always be people using it. But I won't be one of those people. I don't see any gain in using it, except for how customizable it is, which I don't have the patience for.


That's the only thing IMHO that the author of the article got wrong I think. I wouldn't say that it's "dead" for the desktop, just relegated to a "niche" group of users (for the home desktop). It's the Enterprise level that it's really kickin "A" and taking names.


----------



## drbaltazar

The main issue with Linux is they ignore gamer.and no wine isn't gona cut it.they need the number one rule in techno:the k.I.s.s rule.keep it stupid simple.I tried it.I can go set regedit setting in windows but I cant do basic stuff in Linux.

_


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I taught nearly my entire family to use Linux. Even my 8x year old grandparents. It isn't hard for the normal user. All they need is a browser, text editor, maybe some excel work, im client, and possibly some games to keep them from being too bored, like solitaire and pretty much any game that comes standard in Windows.
> And Linux can do all of that, without touching the command line. And many allow for it, Ubuntu has the software center now, which is just seach, and click install.
> Pretty much any browser out there aside from IE is on Linux. ( most come with firefox ( gnome/xfce/etc ), or whatever the KDE one is called for KDE based DE's, pre-installed as long as they aren't barebone distros )
> LibreOffice / OpenOffice for the normal user is more than enough and easily doubles as MS Office for them.
> Pidgin or any of our other IM clients will cover pretty much any kind of messenger you need.
> Bam, perfectly good computer for any normal user, with absolutely no confusion at all, and not one keystroke in the command line.
> Now if you want to start changing themes, fonts, system files, etc, then yeah.. you're going to have to learn the basics in the command line. But those aren't normal users.
> And had I the choice, I would of never touched Windows command line. It's an absolute nightmare compared to the Linux command line.


My problems with Linux stem from the fact that I am _not_ a normal user (and I still need to use the command line to install drivers on my ubuntu systems), but I don't know enough about Linux to be a power user. Yes, I can do all the general usage tasks just fine on Linux. However, I somewhat ironically have a vastly harder time delving into the deeper workings of the system.

I make use of command prompt in DOS and Windows quite extensively and have started dabbling in power shell. I didn't even find them that difficult to learn. I cannot say the same for Unix/Linux style terminals, which seem vastly less conducive to trial and error.

I have always had difficulty getting a hold of usable documentation with regards to Linux. The vast majority I've come across either assumes I'm a complete idiot trying to do completely mundane tasks, or that I already know my way around the command line.

Security is also an issue, in that there is too much of it. If I had started learning Windows with XP or 7, for example, it would have taken me an order of magnitude longer to learn what I know now, because I would have been prevented from making the mistakes needed to learn how to turn off what was preventing me from making mistakes. I'm having similar issues with Linux because most of the more accessible distros are anal about security.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magic8ball88*
> 
> I don't like Linux just because every little thing you do it a battle. Its understandable because there aren't big companies behind it, but I like that when I want to do a fresh install of windows it gets all the drivers for me and it works. I like that when I go to install software there is an installer that does the work for me.


There are serious problems with this approach too. Windows Update is a terrible source for drivers, and many installers riddle the system with garbage.

Windows is chore, and I've used it long enough to be intimately aware with it's many flaws. However, I find it more accessible and much more responsive to trial and error than many OSes that this makes up for much of that.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dioxholster*
> 
> What brings an OS fame and fortune is in its usefulness in the business environment, why game on linux when windows does it already?


I'd stop buying Windows if you could game fully on Ubuntu!


----------



## UltraVolta425

Me personally, I prefer Windows above Linux any day, but to call Linux dead, for me, that's one step too far, and untrue.
Dead is dead. If you're dead then you're dead and you don't exist anymore. Linux still exists so hence it's not dead. Close to it, maybe, on the deskop side, but definately not dead.


----------



## Rubers

I know people who haven't touched Windows in 15 years.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> My problems with Linux stem from the fact that I am _not_ a normal user (and I still need to use the command line to install drivers on my ubuntu systems), but I don't know enough about Linux to be a power user. Yes, I can do all the general usage tasks just fine on Linux. However, I somewhat ironically have a vastly harder time delving into the deeper workings of the system.
> I make use of command prompt in DOS and Windows quite extensively and have started dabbling in power shell. I didn't even find them that difficult to learn. I cannot say the same for Unix/Linux style terminals, which seem vastly less conducive to trial and error.
> I have always had difficulty getting a hold of usable documentation with regards to Linux. The vast majority I've come across either assumes I'm a complete idiot trying to do completely mundane tasks, or that I already know my way around the command line.
> Security is also an issue, in that there is too much of it. If I had started learning Windows with XP or 7, for example, it would have taken me an order of magnitude longer to learn what I know now, because I would have been prevented from making the mistakes needed to learn how to turn off what was preventing me from making mistakes. I'm having similar issues with Linux because most of the more accessible distros are anal about security.
> There are serious problems with this approach too. Windows Update is a terrible source for drivers, and many installers riddle the system with garbage.
> Windows is chore, and I've used it long enough to be intimately aware with it's many flaws. However, *I find it more accessible and much more responsive to trial and error than many OSes* that this makes up for much of that.


Because you think Windows, I can do very little in windows beyond office productivity.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> I know people who haven't *touched Windows in 15 years*.


While it's not been 15 years for me it's been 10 or 12..I never made it to to ME.


----------



## thiussat

I think this article is troll bait. I have noticed a lot of these popular tech sites will make "Linux is dead" posts about once a month. Why do they do it? I think they do it because it generates controversy which in turn generates more hits, which in turn generates more ad revenue. Zdnet and Cnet are notorious for making troll bait posts about Windows vs Mac or Linux vs. the world.

But if you read the article, the guy says nothing. All he does is repeat that Linux has a small market share and then make up some story about how he can't make his iPod work. He then repeats the big lie that Linux's hardware support is bad. It's not, it will recognize more hardware ootb than what Windows will (fact). He complains about having no MS Office, when I would wager LibreOffice will do everything he needs.

He also says Linux has 20% share of the server market. What he didn't tell you is that those IDC numbers only take into account the number of Linux servers *sold* by companies like Red Hat selling preinstalled server hardware. They do not take into account people who create and run their own Linux servers (you know people like Google). W3Techs polls the top million websites and has reported that *51%* of them run Linux servers. Moreover, W3Techs reports that Windows only makes up about 30% of that server market.

So, yeah, the article is FUD. I don't even care anymore because I am tired of explaining why Linux is better. Most people will never "get it" because they will never break outside the MS mold. That's cool. I know Linux is far better for my needs and that's all that matters.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magic8ball88*
> 
> I don't like Linux just because every little thing you do it a battle. Its understandable because there aren't big companies behind it,


How about Canonical, Red Hat, Novell, Oracle, Intel, IBM? And let's not forget Google. All of those companies write code for the kernel. 75% of Linux code is written by paid developers.
Quote:


> but I like that when I want to do a fresh install of windows it gets all the drivers for me and it works. I like that when I go to install software there is an installer that does the work for me. And I like that there is more software for OS X and Windows.


Wrong on all counts. Whenever I install a Linux distro for the past 5 years or so, *all* of my hardware works out of the box. I don't have to do anything. Installing software on Linux is both safer and easier to do than on Windows (Ubuntu software center?) And the amount of software rivals Windows easily. Ubuntu's software center has 30,000 pieces of software available for download.


----------



## UltraVolta425

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thiussat*
> 
> I think this article is troll bait.


With an exaggerated and untrue title, I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Ulquiorra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> That is what I would expect from an entrenched linux user. Defensive about his operating system to the exclusion of all others.
> It's pretty simple, can ALL of these questions be answered with a yes:
> A)Can any linux distro be installed without going online to read instructions and how tos, including formatting properly, installing all drivers etc.?
> B)Can you install any drivers you need by simply putting the self executing files onto a USB stick or putting in a disk without using terminal or a "driver wrapper"? (hint last time I checked trying to install a netgear usb wireless adapter took half a day of scouring the internet and jumping through hoops to get it to work)
> C)Can any purchased add-on hardware, whether it be a usb wireless adapter, slingbox, webcam, graphics card, sound card etc. be installed with a self executing install driver/software file without going online and looking for instructions or using terminal and will function properly?
> D)Can any linux distro be used without taking more than a day for the average joe to learn how to use it?
> Windows and Mac OSX can do all of those. If you've answered no to ANY of those questions you've just answered your own question as to why it's not embraced by the majority of people. Remember, people like free stuff. If they aren't using something that's free there is a REAL reason for that.


A) Yes order a ubuntu cd pop it in done SAME as windows

B) Yes, pop the CD that came with my wifi adapter in the PC click install.sh then it goes oops please do this and well install it

C) Webcam support OTB, graphics suported OTB sound cards OTB, slingbox hmm people buyt these hunks of junk?

D) Nope, but WINDOWS cant either ....

next few questions?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thiussat*
> 
> Wrong on all counts. Whenever I install a Linux distro for the past 5 years or so, *all* of my hardware works out of the box. I don't have to do anything. Installing software on Linux is both safer and easier to do than on Windows (Ubuntu software center?) And the amount of software rivals Windows easily. Ubuntu's software center has 30,000 pieces of software available for download.


All I'll say is that you're right on a lot of counts when it comes to the server market. Desktop though, just because you're hardware works out of the box doesn't mean everyone's does. The forums are filled with people needing advice because one thing or another doesn't work out of the box. I do disagree with the "easier" part of installing software vs windows/mac osx (I HATE mac apple-ites by the way...just annoy the hell out of me). And to say the amount of software "rivals" windows is a bit misleading. Just because there are 30,000 pieces of software doesn't mean that all of them are "polished", run well and are easy to use. But that's another part of the larger debate.

I agree that saying linux is dead is a step too far. But you can't discount the rest of what he writes about (minus the "dead" part). Again, I would LOVE to see Linux develpe into a mainstream and fully supported OS that could rival MS on all counts. Maybe this "metro ui" fiasco will create a huge opening and that might happen. As much as I hope it does, I get a little discouraged by the entrenched Linux community. There's a joke, I'll tell the short version. Take some gorillas and put them in a cage, hang bananas in the middle with a box of steps under. Every time a gorilla goes for the bananas spray the rest with high pressure ice cold water from a fire hose. Repeat until the other gorillas beat the hell out of anyone who goes for the bananas and you no longer need to spray them with water. Replace a gorilla every few days until all of the original gorillas are gone. Now put in a new gorilla. All of the replacement gorillas will happily beat the hell out of the new gorilla when he goes for the bananas. None of them know why, that's just the way things have always been done (punchline drumroll). There's a bit of truth in that. It gets to the point where people get so entrenched in something that they don't even see the larger picture and how to improve it for computer users as a whole because they had to learn linux and it works for them "and that's always the way things have been done".


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> All I'll say is that you're right on a lot of counts when it comes to the server market. Desktop though, just because you're hardware works out of the box doesn't mean everyone's does. The forums are filled with people needing advice because one thing or another doesn't work out of the box. I do disagree with the "easier" part of installing software vs windows/mac osx *(I HATE mac apple-ites by the way...just annoy the hell out of me).* And to say the amount of software "rivals" windows is a bit misleading. Just because there are 30,000 pieces of software doesn't mean that all of them are "polished", run well and are easy to use. But that's another part of the larger debate.
> I agree that saying linux is dead is a step too far. But you can't discount the rest of what he writes about (minus the "dead" part). Again, I would LOVE to see Linux develpe into a mainstream and fully supported OS that could rival MS on all counts. Maybe this "metro ui" fiasco will create a huge opening and that might happen. As much as I hope it does, I get a little discouraged by the entrenched Linux community. There's a joke, I'll tell the short version. Take some gorillas and put them in a cage, hang bananas in the middle with a box of steps under. Every time a gorilla goes for the bananas spray the rest with high pressure ice cold water from a fire hose. Repeat until the other gorillas beat the hell out of anyone who goes for the bananas and you no longer need to spray them with water. Replace a gorilla every few days until all of the original gorillas are gone. Now put in a new gorilla. All of the replacement gorillas will happily beat the hell out of the new gorilla when he goes for the bananas. None of them know why, that's just the way things have always been done (punchline drumroll). There's a bit of truth in that. *It gets to the point where people get so entrenched in something that they don't even see the larger picture* and how to improve it for computer users as a whole because they had to learn linux and it works for them "and that's always the way things have been done".


I'm sure the feeling is mutual from the Applites..

Bold number 2 is you right?

So what your saying is I don't like it because I don't like it, and to top it your saying I don't like people who like anything different from me (see first bold). Your way is the only correct and proper way, along with your way of thinking.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> I'm sure the feeling is mutual from the Applites..
> Bold number 2 is you right?
> So what your saying is I don't like it because I don't like it, and to top it your saying I don't like people who like anything different from me (see first bold). Your way is the only correct and proper way, along with your way of thinking.


You really don't read through a thread before posting a reply. I NEVER once said I don't like Linux, I never once said I "hate" linux. I said and let me write it out in big letters so read slowly and you might comprehend it this time, THERE IS A VERY GOOD REASON LINUX IS NOT WIDELY ADOPTED BY CONSUMERS/PC USERS AND THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT AS EASY TO INSTALL AND OPERATE AS MUCH AS THE COMPETITION.

I can spell it out individually if that might help.

I hope the "apple-ite" don't like me. They won't try to mindlessly convert me to whatever the latest, expensive, and "does the same thing as the last one" hardware that Apple releases.

edit - by the way it's not the apple products I hate....just the "apple-ites". You know them, they're the snobby pretentious ones running around telling everyone how great their latest apple gadget is and how everything else sucks (like android).


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> You really don't read through a thread before posting a reply. I NEVER once said I don't like Linux, I never once said I "hate" linux. I said and let me write it out in big letters so read slowly and you might comprehend it this time, *THERE IS A VERY GOOD REASON LINUX IS NOT WIDELY ADOPTED BY CONSUMERS/PC USERS AND THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT AS EASY TO INSTALL AND OPERATE AS MUCH AS THE COMPETITION*.
> I can spell it out individually if that might help.
> I hope the "apple-ite" don't like me. They won't try to mindlessly convert me to whatever the latest, expensive, and "does the same thing as the last one" hardware that Apple releases.
> edit - by the way it's not the apple products I hate....just the "apple-ites".


And there is 10 pages of posts telling you it is...

You don't want to hear it..

Trust me Applites really don't want to convert you, trust me on this one.

And where did I say you hat Linux? I said you disliked it, with only a percieved valid reason.


----------



## PriestOfSin

I use linux on my HTPC every single day. It's so stripped down that it is the easiest to use computer in the house.


----------



## chemicalfan

This isn't news, it's trolling









(By the author, not by OP, although he/she didn't have to post it)


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> And there is 10 pages of posts telling you it is...
> You don't want to hear it..
> Trust me Applites really don't want to convert you, trust me on this one.
> And where did I say you hat Linux? I said you disliked it, with only a percieved valid reason.










And you made an assumption that simply because I made a criticism of it that I "dislike" it. You know what they say about assuming. And there may be 10 pages of posts "claiming" how easy it is but I dare you to take 20 average NON computer geek types, give them each a CD/DVD of the distro of your choice, ask them to go home and install it on their computer and use it. Then ask them in a week how many are still using it.

edit - And then ask them how many successfully got it up and running completely without going online to a forum to search for help.


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> , THERE IS A VERY GOOD REASON LINUX IS NOT WIDELY ADOPTED BY CONSUMERS/PC USERS AND THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT AS EASY TO INSTALL AND OPERATE AS MUCH AS THE COMPETITION.


Sorry for the double post, but this is rubbish. Bubba - Might I suggest that you try installing Ubuntu in a VM or something before making a statement like that? I'd argue that the Ubuntu installer is just as easy to work as Windows (you don't have to mess about with a product key or activation either)


----------



## ChocolateBadger

LINUX = Free. What more can you possibly want?

Ubuntu being by far being my favorite flavor. I think Ubuntu for Android should really be pushed to see the return for linux to the desktop computers. Just dock your android phone and bam, you have desktop Ubuntu on your desktop. Admit it, who wouldn't want to use their phone as a mobile PC.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Sorry for the double post, but this is rubbish. Bubba - Might I suggest that you try installing Ubuntu in a VM or something before making a statement like that? I'd argue that the Ubuntu installer is just as easy to work as Windows (you don't have to mess about with a product key or activation either)


Maybe there has been some kind of drastic change in the past 10 months (since I tried meerkat) but I highly doubt it. Before I wired my house with Cat 6 and I was using a WNA1000 on my main pc, the last time I tried to install ubuntu it took me half a day of jumping through hoops trying to get it to work. I finally had to unplug the computer, take it into the room with the router and plug it in so I could get online to do the steps needed to get it going (the wifi). If I were an average joe I would have given up long before that point and thrown the disk out. Personally I like Mint (I'll probably spend the weekend playing with 13 now that it's out) but that's just my preference and even Mint is a pain to get some wifi adapters working. And that's the whole point I'm making. Linux may be great once it's up and going and everything is properly set up, but that's not ALWAYS an easy process. I'll say it once MORE, I really do hope that mindsets can be on making Linux as easy to setup and run as the other guys. I would LOVE to be able to completely ditch windows (I refuse to use Win 8 anyways after using that crap of a ui called metro) and go completely with linux. I will say this. I love my android tablet and I hope ICS and beyond brings together all the fragmentation.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you made an assumption that simply because I made a criticism of it that I "dislike" it. You know what they say about assuming. And there may be 10 pages of posts "claiming" how easy it is but I dare you to take 20 average NON computer geek types, give them each a CD/DVD of the distro of your choice, ask them to go home and install it on their computer and use it. Then ask them in a week how many are still using it.
> edit - And then ask them how many successfully got it up and running completely without going online to a forum to search for help.


Your not criticizing you're ozing contempt, though you didn't come right out and say it like you did about we bubble headed appleite's.

I and others have done that..thats the point you don't *WANT* to grasp..

I personally had to google to Windows to install, I still can't get both my monitors functional under Windows. I had to google to figure out how to uninstall an ATI driver that was crashing my system. I had to google to figure out how to boot windows into safe mode so I could well boot. But I don't come on to forums and tell people that windows doesn't wrk for the average user because they have to google stuff to figure it out.

This artical made me install Fedora last night (my old linux standby) took about 20 minutes, everything worked VPN and all. Fedora read my 5 Mac HDD's and my Windows drive which is better than OSX even. Fully funtional desktop from empty partition half hour, just like OSX.


----------



## BizzareRide

A half hour? It takes me 15 minutes to install Windows 7 and have almost all of my programs downloaded again. It takes me longer to take a crap


----------



## randomizer

Is it a rite of passage for all tech journalists to put up a story on this topic at least once in their careers?


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Because you think Windows, I can do very little in windows beyond office productivity.


Acclimation certainly has something to do with it, but I didn't really start dabbling in Linux that long after Windows, and Windows was far from my first OS.


----------



## QuietlyLinux

+ installing all your peripheral drivers such as sound card,USB.30 graphics,Ethernet card.and wireless card FROM DISK.
Ubuntu took me 30 Minutes to install all my sound card wireless card drivers working from the start.Windows toll 25 Minutes PLUS installing all of my drivers form disks.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Acclimation certainly has something to do with it, but I didn't really start dabbling in Linux that long after Windows, and Windows was far from my first OS.


you used intimate knowledge..

If you're old enough windows isn't anyones first OS. Linux isn't either being the kernal wasn't released until '91 I believe and then only with a few.

Windows requires a way of thinking, that once you get it it's resonably simple going forward. Things like regedit to me are more complicated than "system/library/extensions" to accomplish the same task. But my perspective is 10+ years away Windows so thats expected.

I remember when MS was big and evil, now for me Apple is approaching that point and I don't much like it. Thats why I posted the artical I was doing research for alternative for my daily use programs to slowly start replacing OSX.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magic8ball88*
> 
> I don't like Linux just because every little thing you do it a battle. Its understandable because there aren't big companies behind it, but I like that when I want to do a fresh install of windows it gets all the drivers for me and it works. I like that when I go to install software there is an installer that does the work for me. And I like that there is more software for OS X and Windows.
> It most certainly is not dead though. There will always be people using it. But I won't be one of those people. I don't see any gain in using it, except for how customizable it is, which I don't have the patience for.


Windows doesn't get all the drivers for me, I have to manually download the nVidia drivers for my machine at least.

As for uphill battle, as far as I'm aware installing drivers on any of the buntus is ridiculously easy (You have an AMD GPU so that may be the problem) and most are already pre-installed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drbaltazar*
> 
> The main issue with Linux is they ignore gamer.and no wine isn't gona cut it.they need the number one rule in techno:the k.I.s.s rule.keep it stupid simple.I tried it.I can go set regedit setting in windows but I cant do basic stuff in Linux.
> _


If you can use the registry and regedit in Windows fine, then you're almost definitely going to be fine doing nearly anything in Linux.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> All I'll say is that you're right on a lot of counts when it comes to the server market. Desktop though, just because you're hardware works out of the box doesn't mean everyone's does. The forums are filled with people needing advice because one thing or another doesn't work out of the box.


I could no doubt find the same thing with Windows. For the most part, a lot of hardware does work ootb without any tweaking; I'm not sure for 3G modems and TV Tuners are a bit hit or miss but any popular, recent WiFi chipset usually works fine.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> THERE IS A VERY GOOD REASON LINUX IS NOT WIDELY ADOPTED BY CONSUMERS/PC USERS AND THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT AS EASY TO INSTALL AND OPERATE AS MUCH AS THE COMPETITION.


I'd actually wager that Ubuntu is easier to install than Windows 7; as for drivers and programs...Well, you install say, Linux Mint, reboot after the installations done and chances are you've got a fully working system, as opposed to needing to download GPU drivers, Flash, etc in Windows.

My mother's happily using Mint right now; she's the very definition of "average joe" as all she does is facebook, e-banking, email and TV show streaming. She's happier with Linux than she was with Windows and all I did was literally install it, put the WiFi password in, set her email up and then finally show her how to use the software centre.

And remember, just because Ubuntu doesn't work fine ootb on your hardware; doesn't mean it won't on everyones.


----------



## warakawa

true, linux is dead on desktop, actually it was never alive in the first place.


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drbaltazar*
> 
> The main issue with Linux is they ignore gamer.and no wine isn't gona cut it.they need the number one rule in techno:the k.I.s.s rule.keep it stupid simple.I tried it.I can go set regedit setting in windows but I cant do basic stuff in Linux.
> _


...No, game developers generally ignore Linux because it does not support DirectX. OpenGL does not prioritize game developers so most have moved to DX.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> I know people who haven't touched Windows in 15 years.


Lies!

Windows runs more than desktops...... ATMs often run Windows as well. (I don't know why since Linux would be more lightweight...)


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> ...No, game developers generally ignore Linux because it does not support DirectX. OpenGL does not prioritize game developers so most have moved to DX.
> Lies!
> Windows runs more than desktops...... ATMs often run Windows as well. (I don't know why since Linux would be more lightweight...)


I think he meant as a primary desktop


----------



## Harbinger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> And then ask them how many successfully got it up and running completely without going online to a forum to search for help.


I could say the same for Windows. Nobody's born knowing how to use a specific OS. Now I expect you to tell me that it's common sense; it's hardly common sense for the average joe.

Ubuntu and its derivatives (especially Linux Mint) make using Linux-based systems dead easy. Package maintainers and OS developers provide you with all the good stuff, both in GUI and CLI tools. There's excellent official (and community-contributed) documentation. Updating software is much easier compared to Windows, where you have to hunt down all the latest binaries/zipballs by hand.

The reason people fear (and dislike) Linux is because of how different it is from Windows. From the filesystem hierarchy to how software is installed and updated, everything is different. But that doesn't mean that it's worse, only that it's not Windows.

Linux isn't the end all and be all of operating systems. For workplaces tied to using software which have no Linux equivalent (or port), using Windows is the only option; the same goes for individual users. But for most cases, the mainstream Linux distros are more than enough for everyday needs.


----------



## TFL Replica

If you remove "desktop" from the discussion then It's almost impossible to not use Windows/Linux on a frequent basis (directly or indirectly).


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Harbinger*
> 
> I could say the same for Windows. Nobody's born knowing how to use a specific OS. Now I expect you to tell me that it's common sense; it's hardly common sense for the average joe.
> Ubuntu and its derivatives (especially Linux Mint) make using Linux-based systems dead easy. Package maintainers and OS developers provide you with all the good stuff, both in GUI and CLI tools. *There's excellent official (and community-contributed) documentation.* Updating software is much easier compared to Windows, where you have to hunt down all the latest binaries/zipballs by hand.
> The reason people fear (and dislike) Linux is because of how different it is from Windows. From the filesystem hierarchy to how software is installed and updated, everything is different. But that doesn't mean that it's worse, only that it's not Windows.
> Linux isn't the end all and be all of operating systems. For workplaces tied to using software which have no Linux equivalent (or port), using Windows is the only option; the same goes for individual users. But for most cases, the mainstream Linux distros are more than enough for everyday needs.


That is one of the issues with Linux.... who do you *call* for support? Yes, I know Canonical, RHEL, etc do provide paid support. However, Linux generally is not sold with direct support and that is a known "issue" for mass adoption. Most people do not know how to Google or go to forums for technical issues. Even if they did, many would not understand what to do or how to read a technical document.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> That is one of the issues with Linux.... who do you *call* for support? Yes, I know Canonical, RHEL, etc do provide paid support. However, Linux generally is not sold with direct support and that is a known "issue" for mass adoption. Most people do not know how to Google or go to forums for technical issues. Even if they did, many would not understand what to do or how to read a technical document.


Sad part is most average people don't know they can call microsoft either. They usually end up calling geek squad or dragging their computer to a local shop or calling people like me who does it cheaper than both







Most places that would /need/ call support, like RHEL and the like, they have it. But when does the regular customer ever call microsoft?


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Sad part is most average people don't know they can call microsoft either. They usually end up calling geek squad or dragging their computer to a local shop or calling people like me who does it cheaper than both


Never less, Windows has a better support structure in place.

Drag a Linux system to Geek Squad or many local shops.... and they cannot support on-site.


----------



## giga_hertz

Hi,

Linux has been my Only Main OS for at least 13 years. And started to use Linux in 1996. It was a challenge just to install








And the 20 Million users is simply a very conservative estimate. That number grows by the day.
These types of news on media controlled by MS fanboys that never had any type of computing expertise or IT knowledge is the definitive confirmation that not Only Linux will grow Exponentially in every single computing platform and also as a desktop OS but also it show despair for the "MS and mouse only" type of IT guys that plagues this world








Since the introduction of VMWare and all other virtualization,a and also the move to the so called "Cloud", that is web-based software MS products are about to be kicked out ... it is just a matter of time. Much has changed in IT world ...
Actually there is also a huge change in the computing world from Desktop/laptop to really mobile stuff like smartphones and tablets. Oh ... and by the way ... were is the so much talked about "booming" windows phones ???
Like I said previously Even the launch promotions .. .that is GIVEN phones .... of Nokia Windows phones, (and Only windows phones as the Symbian ones overwhelmingly outsell windows phones ) that was a complete Flop, same as every single attempt to make a decent portability solution and we are already counting at least 4 attempts an huge amounts of billions stuck in into the same old desktop-centric MS approach.
That is the end for the company in terms of future growth.
MS is basically beyond the point of relevance (if not survival if people worldwide start to wake up ... ). It is today already a legacy company.
These guys from the so called computing media do not really get a grip ...

Oh and by the way there number of devices running Linux since at least 2010 Largely surpasses any numbers from windows devices by far and large.
Wanna know how ? Think Flat-panel TV's + smarthpones + computers (desktop's and servers).

Regards.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> Lies!
> Windows runs more than desktops...... ATMs often run Windows as well. (I don't know why since Linux would be more lightweight...)


True and true! the ATM where I used to work caught me by surprise when I saw it was running Windows XP Embedded. Though having seen the Defcon videos from not so long back watching an ATM be hacked in minutes was cool.

UK National Lottery machines run some form of Linux. Never been able to tell which from the boot screens but Tux is featured quite clearly on them


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> Never less, Windows has a better support structure in place.
> Drag a Linux system to Geek Squad or many local shops.... and they cannot support on-site.


True, but they also have a 25 year headstart. Just imagine what today would be like had Jobs massmarketed Apples first, lol. If Linux were to ever go mainstream, the support would increase rather fast. And if anyone is going to be able to make it happen, it will likely be Canonical.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> True, but they also have a 25 year headstart. *Just imagine what today would be like had Jobs massmarketed Apples first, lol.* If Linux were to ever go mainstream, the support would increase rather fast. And if anyone is going to be able to make it happen, it will likely be Canonical.


NooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo!!


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> True, but they also have a 25 year headstart. J*ust imagine what today would be like had Jobs massmarketed Apples first,* lol. If Linux were to ever go mainstream, the support would increase rather fast. And if anyone is going to be able to make it happen, it will likely be Canonical.


Life would be grand!


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> True, but they also have a 25 year headstart. Just imagine what today would be like had Jobs massmarketed Apples first, lol. If Linux were to ever go mainstream, the support would increase rather fast. And if anyone is going to be able to make it happen, it will likely be Canonical.


Naw.... Google probably would be better to make it happen.


----------



## Harbinger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> Naw.... Google probably would be better to make it happen.


They'd probably push Goobuntu (or some variant) rather than vanilla Ubuntu


----------



## Epitope

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdrdrdrd*
> 
> I'm sick of people claiming "X is dead" or "Y is dying" no its not, stupid sensationalist journalists...


It generates hits on their site. That is all they really care about. X # of hits = Y # of $...

If they wrote a nice little article about the usefulness of Linux nobody would read it.


----------



## Methos07

This thread only has 22 pages. OCN is dead!


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Methos07*
> 
> This thread only has 22 pages. OCN is dead!


22 pages?

pffffttt.... I only have 4.

Long Live OCN!


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> 22 pages?
> pffffttt.... I only have 4.
> Long Live OCN!


3 Here. Gotta love 100 posts per page <3


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> 3 Here. Gotta love 100 posts per page <3


I need to switch that eventually. 70 works ok for now though









I might need to change it to 100 when PD "launches" because you know we're going to all camp up and go nuts here when that happens.

Speaking of PD, wasn't linux supposed to get a few things to help BD kick-butt in that enviornment?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> I need to switch that eventually. 70 works ok for now though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might need to change it to 100 when PD "launches" because you know we're going to all camp up and go nuts here when that happens.
> 
> Speaking of PD, wasn't linux supposed to get a few things to help BD kick-butt in that enviornment?


I'm going to play with Mint Maya this weekend. Any test/benchmarks you want me to run while I'm at it?


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I'm going to play with Mint Maya this weekend. Any test/benchmarks you want me to run while I'm at it?


I know so little nothing of linux benchies to even recommend a few to compare between W7 and linux distros







.


----------



## Usario

Stupid articles such as these really rustle my jimmies. I shouldn't have to explain why.


----------



## 8800GT

Since when does PCWorld get paid by microsoft? But seriously, Linux has done nothing but grow. 10 years ago the only linux option for me was red hat and it sucked. It was good in some aspects, but it sucked. If this article was made 10 years ago maybe i'd believe it...but with all these new distros, revisions and LTS versions, Linux isn't going anywhere.

P.s: What other OS actually can compete in the FREE and OPEN SOURCE "market"? I don't know what constitutes being dead, but having no income and a smaller user base doesn't mean dead.


----------



## Waltibaba

The author has many correct arguments, but got one main point wrong: linux isn't dead, linux is not yet really alive. Once its user base starts expanding, money will start flowing, drivers will be written, updates will be made, and user satisfaction will be increased. Just look at the boost that happened when/since Canonical dumped that load of cash into it.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waltibaba*
> 
> The author has many correct arguments, but got one main point wrong: linux isn't dead, linux is not yet really alive. Once its user base starts expanding, money will start flowing, drivers will be written, updates will be made, and user satisfaction will be increased. Just look at the boost that happened when/since Canonical dumped that load of cash into it.


I 100% totally agree with you.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> That is one of the issues with Linux.... who do you *call* for support? Yes, I know Canonical, RHEL, etc do provide paid support. However, Linux generally is not sold with direct support and that is a known "issue" for mass adoption. Most people do not know how to Google or go to forums for technical issues. Even if they did, many would not understand what to do or how to read a technical document.


When I first dabbled in Linux, I had one hell of a time getting modem/network drivers working, and since this was back when I only had one or two computers, and when usually only one could be on-line at any given time, it was a real pain in the ass figuring things out without access to the web.


----------



## jrl1357

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Waltibaba*
> 
> The author has many correct arguments, but got one main point wrong: linux isn't dead, linux is not yet really alive. Once its user base starts expanding, money will start flowing, drivers will be written, updates will be made, and user satisfaction will be increased. Just look at the boost that happened when/since Canonical dumped that load of cash into it.
> 
> 
> 
> I 100% totally agree with you.
Click to expand...

desktop linux, you mean. andriod linux is one of the most alive systems on the planet. btw, drivers are writen, are easyer to use then windows because there often already in the os, updates come quick and easy with the repo way of getting packages, and user satisfaction with those who already use it is already high. if you havnt tried it before, i highly recommend it. after getting use to linux, i can now see what a piece of sh** windows really is. you have to install all of your drivers? enter a key? pay at least $100? never be able to change and fool around with its internals?


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jrl1357*
> 
> desktop linux, you mean. andriod linux is one of the most alive systems on the planet. btw, drivers are writen, are easyer to use then windows because there often already in the os, updates come quick and easy with the repo way of getting packages, and user satisfaction with those who already use it is already high. if you havnt tried it before, i highly recommend it. after getting use to linux, i can now see what a piece of sh** windows really is. *you have to install all of your drivers?* enter a key? pay at least $100? *never be able to change and fool around with its internals?*


Anecdotal,

Windows has been easier to use for me than linux for these reasons:

Learning Curve
CLI
Driver Conflicts/Missing/Not Available
Once I got over that learning curve, everything was OK and I was feeling confident. Then I went back to windows for a few years, now I can't find a distro I like enough to put the effort into (I'm ok with dual booting, need windows for the gamez!).

I liked Gnome w/ Fedora 8. Dun like the new ones. Don't have time to learn a new OS now either, since they've completely changed since I used linux.

Ease of use people, ease of use is extremely important.

The bolded areas are falsifications. Don't stretch the truth to suit your perception.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> Anecdotal,
> Windows has been easier to use for me than linux for these reasons:
> 
> Learning Curve
> CLI
> Driver Conflicts/Missing/Not Available
> Once I got over that learning curve, everything was OK and I was feeling confident. Then I went back to windows for a few years, now I can't find a distro I like enough to put the effort into (I'm ok with dual booting, need windows for the gamez!).
> I liked Gnome w/ Fedora 8. Dun like the new ones. Don't have time to learn a new OS now either, since they've completely changed since I used linux.
> Ease of use people, ease of use is extremely important.
> The bolded areas are falsifications. Don't stretch the truth to suit your perception.


Really so the source code is open, and I don't need to go to the ATI site to down load my video card drives, mobo site for on board ports, intel site for my NIC , etc. It all comes in the Win 7 Package?


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Really so the source code is open, and I don't need to go to the ATI site to down load my video card drives, mobo site for on board ports, intel site for my NIC , etc. It all comes in the Win 7 Package?


What are we in the stone age or something?

Most, if not all of those drivers will be download and installed through windows update. Mine would've been if I didn't want to do it manually.

edit: not all drivers for everything come in the linux packages(distros) either, so you better check-yo-self.
edit edit: and it's a heck of a lot easier to download and install drivers (say GPU) on windows than linux.
edit edit edit: what does it matter if the source code is open? I'm not going to download a distro and compile it myself. I'm a "power" user and that's not going to happen unless I specifically have a need that it addresses.








edit edit edit edit: And who wrote that "ati" driver? what happens when your "built-in" driver doesn't work and you have to go find the right driver? *poke*


----------



## Fear of Oneself

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> Anecdotal,
> Windows has been easier to use for me than linux for these reasons:
> 
> Learning Curve
> CLI
> Driver Conflicts/Missing/Not Available
> Once I got over that learning curve, everything was OK and I was feeling confident. Then I went back to windows for a few years, now I can't find a distro I like enough to put the effort into (I'm ok with dual booting, need windows for the gamez!).
> I liked Gnome w/ Fedora 8. Dun like the new ones. Don't have time to learn a new OS now either, since they've completely changed since I used linux.
> Ease of use people, ease of use is extremely important.
> The bolded areas are falsifications. Don't stretch the truth to suit your perception.


Yea.
It was such a pain to get drivers for anything in Linux. I had to put in my Wifi key and wait 45 minutes to finish installing the OS.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> What are we in the stone age or something?
> Most, if not all of those drivers will be download and installed through windows update. Mine would've been if I didn't want to do it manually.
> edit: not all drivers for everything come in the linux packages(distros) either, so you better check-yo-self.
> edit edit: and it's a heck of a lot easier to download and install drivers (say GPU) on windows than linux.
> edit edit edit: what does it matter if the source code is open? I'm not going to download a distro and compile it myself. I'm a "power" user and that's not going to happen unless I specifically have a need that it addresses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit edit edit edit: And who wrote that "ati" driver? what happens when your *"built-in" driver doesn't work* and you have to go find the right driver? *poke*


Except with 7 distros so far it has, so what if I get hit by a bus tomorrow?

Software update is great if your NIC works. My Intel NIC works great in OSX and Linux OOB but in windows I need to install the drivers from the CD to get functionality.

Because you don't want to compile doesn't make the argument invalid it simply means you don't want to compile.

This place is like Mac Rumors just the other side of the coin, it's completely mind boggling..


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Except with 7 distros so far it has, so what if I get hit by a bus tomorrow?


In your experience. The difference between my post and yours, is I specified that it was anecdotal.
Quote:


> Software update is great if your NIC works. My Intel NIC works great in OSX and Linux OOB but in windows I need to install the drivers from the CD to get functionality.


I've had the exact opposite thing happen with my various NIC cards. It wasn't easy to get it(them) working, and one of them refused to work so I had to default to my HSPDA (teathered cell) connection at the time (<---anecdotal)

And if you don't have internet access at all because the driver's missing... well.. your kinda SOL, especially with a new Linux user.
Quote:


> Because you don't want to compile doesn't make the argument invalid it simply means you don't want to compile.


You brought it up, and yes it is an invalid argument. I can provide a roughly accurate guestimization that of the 10% of PC users that use linux as an OS, probably 5% or less of those active users actually compile what they use. I have never met someone who wasn't a programmer that even KNOWs what compiling is(let alone use linux(<---that's an anecdote, too)).
Quote:


> *This place is like Mac Rumors just the other side of the coin, it's completely mind boggling..*


Really? You bring this attitude and you expected a different result?

Get off my lawn.

I was not bashing linux, as I've used it and liked it in the past, but this is how it's perceived. A lot of people on OCN today are getting their panties all in bunches of innocent comments.

I state again, "Get off my lawn."
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fear of Oneself*
> 
> Yea.
> It was such a pain to get drivers for anything in Linux. I had to put in my Wifi key and wait 45 minutes to finish installing the OS.


Your Lavender is showing.

Oh, and sounds like my windows install


----------



## LBGreenthumb

Interesting that I have four computers and 3 of them run ubuntu..... well its not dead to me I guess


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LBGreenthumb*
> 
> Interesting that I have four computers and 3 of them run ubuntu..... well its not dead to me I guess


I have an old k8 box that I've got to get up and running if I could find my old CD with my distros on it.

They said PC gaming was dead too! (jokes on them)


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> In your experience. The difference between my post and yours, is I specified that it was anecdotal.
> I've had the exact opposite thing happen with my various NIC cards. It wasn't easy to get it(them) working, and one of them refused to work so I had to default to my HSPDA (teathered cell) connection at the time (<---anecdotal)
> And if you don't have internet access at all because the driver's missing... well.. your kinda SOL, especially with a new Linux user.
> You brought it up, and yes it is an invalid argument. I can provide a roughly accurate guestimization that of the 10% of PC users that use linux as an OS, probably 5% or less of those active users actually compile what they use. I have never met someone who wasn't a programmer that even KNOWs what compiling is(let alone use linux(<---that's an anecdote, too)).
> Really? You bring this attitude and you expected a different result?
> Get off my lawn.
> I was not bashing linux, as I've used it and liked it in the past, but this is how it's perceived. A lot of people on OCN today are getting their panties all in bunches of innocent comments.
> I state again, "Get off my lawn."
> Your Lavender is showing.
> Oh, and sounds like my windows install












Have you ever met a "linux lobbyist" that doesn't come with a "Thou hast spoke ill of mine OS....I shall flame thee upon thy alter of the penquin" attitude at the slightest mention of Linux shortcomings? I have yet to see that happen when discussing Windows shortcomings (and there are many). That's precisely what I mean by an "entrenched" community.


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever met a "linux lobbyist" that doesn't come with a "Thou hast spoke ill of mine OS....I shall flame thee upon thy alter of the penquin" attitude at the slightest mention of Linux shortcomings? I have yet to see that happen when discussing Windows shortcomings (and there are many). That's precisely what I mean by an "entrenched" community.


I have now










I tend to stay out of Linux communities for this reason. Most are nice, some are not. It's more exasperated than normal samsung/apple/everyone else "debates" that happen around the interwebs.

You wanna see a fight, pitch windows against apple.

You wanna see a really really good fight?

Throw the penguin under the bus!

(I have a penguin on my desk now, as we speak, so it's all very comical)


----------



## GermanyChris

Except my desktop OS is OSX..

and I'll stay on this lawn and keep my attitude..


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Except my desktop OS is OSX..
> and I'll stay on this lawn and keep my attitude..


I give two squats what you use on a daily basis, it had no relevance to the argument







.

Don't care if you stay, just play nice







.

Actually, I'd prefer it if you stay, more fun that way







.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> I give two squats what you use on a daily basis, it had no relevance to the argument
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Don't care if you stay, just play nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Actually, I'd prefer it if you stay, more fun that way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


But I don't play nice..


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> I have now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tend to stay out of Linux communities for this reason. Most are nice, some are not. It's more exasperated than normal samsung/apple/everyone else "debates" that happen around the interwebs.
> You wanna see a fight, pitch windows against apple.
> You wanna see a really really good fight?
> Throw the penguin under the bus!
> (I have a penguin on my desk now, as we speak, so it's all very comical)


Want to piss off an Apple-ite? Tell him how easy it is to paint something silver, slap an apple on the side and charge $3000 for it.

Want to piss off a Linux Lobbyist? Just say anything about linux at all that isn't glowing praise.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> I give two squats what you use on a daily basis, it had no relevance to the argument
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Don't care if you stay, just play nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Actually, I'd prefer it if you stay, more fun that way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Want to piss off an Apple-ite? Tell him how easy it is to paint something silver, slap an apple on the side and charge $3000 for it.
> Want to piss off a Linux Lobbyist? Just say anything about linux at all that isn't glowing praise.


You do realize you make neither community mad, we just sorta laugh.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> "Want to piss off a BSD user. Insult ports..." I'm not so sure on that one.


*looks at sig*

Oh now you done did it.


----------



## BizzareRide

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever met a "linux lobbyist" that doesn't come with a "Thou hast spoke ill of mine OS....I shall flame thee upon thy alter of the penquin" attitude at the slightest mention of Linux shortcomings? I have yet to see that happen when discussing Windows shortcomings (and there are many). That's precisely what I mean by an "entrenched" community.


Lol I've noticed this.. I can even name the users,

They like to tie their personal beliefs in with their whole "Linux lobbyist" persona and take facetious shots at Windows whenever possible.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BizzareRide*
> 
> Lol I've noticed this.. I can even name the users,
> They like to tie their personal beliefs in with their whole "Linux lobbyist" persona and take facetious shots at Windows whenever possible.


Honestly...I don't really care so long as another person's personal preferences are never forced upon me. I just think it's amusing how people on here complain about things like how horrible Win8 will look and instead of doing something about it they'll likely end up buying it. Nothing wrong with that but you know...I never realized how spoiled Windows has made people and/or how much freedom/control/privacy they're willing to give up until I really tried to do things with Slackware and even more so with Arch. There's people on here and elsewhere that complain loudly about privacy invasions but the thing is they use an OS/software that is designed to allowed these things. So it's rather annoying to hear them complain about things and then do nothing/even attempt to change it.

But more on topic...what is an OS? A tool/vehicle in a most general sense. So just like an ax vs. a chainsaw or a customized hot-rod you built in your own garage vs. a car from a dealer what makes one person happy is not going to make another person happy or there may be a time for one tool over another. So making a flat statement as something is "crap" or "dead" is about as pointless as measuring ego and serves nothing more than to create some self righteousness and enrage others. In the end choose what makes you happy and understand/accept the trade offs you are making with that choice, don't force it on someone else, and don't insult someone's choice (this is difficult for all of us).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> *looks at sig*
> Oh now you done did it.


Bring it...


----------



## ironmaiden

Linux is a community driven OS , not like MS who has the sole rights to windows and they charge and hence can come up with things which look nice and jazzy and user friendly, heck you want to troubleshoot windows or exchange call up MS and you need to pay a fee (at least here in India) per problem.

User friendliness is what MS has and believe me even at times its confusing.

Linux has come a long way and it is here to stay.

EVERY EXCHANGE SERVER HAS QMAIL OR A POSTFIX SITTING IN FRONT OF IT.


----------



## 8800GT

I thought the reason why we have so many distros is so the missing features can be added through support. Some guy doesnt like fedora, so he starts making mint for ease of use. some guy doesnt like mint because of its lack of control, so he makes Linux Breath-Mint(made up, sorry). Some guy doesn't like Linux Breath mint because it relies to heavily on the terminal so he makes Linux BreathOfFreshAir-mint....basically it's an ever growing community trying to meet the needs of a huge array of people whether advanced or basic in knowledge. Windows just does whatever apple does because they have to appeal to a "Market"....funny how we pay good money for stuff we want, and we don't get any of it and yet we ignore what people are trying to give us for FREE...makes me laugh. Anyway enjoy your respective operating systems, in the end they all suck because of API's.


----------



## hajile

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> I agree with this. I have to use Unix/FreeBSD in my daily work, but it's always a pain to do things that were so much easier and straightforward to do with a GUI.
> For example, today I'm using Mercurial in FreeBSD, and need to move changes from one branch to another. Having used another source control with a GUI, this was fairly easy, as you just submit your changes to your branch, and go to the other branch and grab the changes and merge them in. Here's only part of what I found if I want to do this in Mercurial:
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> MESSAGE="$1"
> PATCH="$2"
> # This performs an in-place (-i) modification of the $PATCH file
> sed -e's,^\(--- a/\)\|\(+++ b/\),&hgext/,' \
> -e'/^diff --git/s,a/\(.*\) b/\(.*\),a/hgext/\1 b/hgext/\2,' \
> -e's,^\(rename\|copy\) \(from\|to\) ,&hgext/', \
> -i "$PATCH"
> 
> Honestly, how many people understand the above text, and how is this user-friendly in the even the slightest way? Unix/Linux can be very powerful for a power-user, but it will never be popular compared to your other OSes because of the learning curve.


Most people would be lost attempting to teach themselves how to use a 3D modeling program. That has little to do with "bad" or "non-user friendly" UI and a lot to do with it's-out-of-my-field-so-I-don't-know-how-to-use-it. In fact, I would say that learning to use 3D software is harder than learning basic Linux commands and a little shell scripting (the entire Linux system is extremely logical as you know). Yes, most would find that confusing, but it makes sense to people in your field (or anyone who has used shell and sed before).

Back OT

IMHO, Gnome 3 is the easiest to use UI I've ever seen. I hate using it for my computer because I like more options (I use KDE 4), but I love it for less computer-literate people because I can set up Linux and then teach them everything they need to know about the UI in 5-10 minutes (and be fairly certain that I won't be called later to uninstall a bunch of malware).

I think that the command-line "problem" is overstated. Most users just want to be able to change a few basic things such as screensaver or background. The "big job" for the typical user is creating a couple extra user accounts. All of this (and much more) is doable from GUI. Once the tasks leave this realm, they are oftentimes better accomplished with a command line. In fact, quite a number of Windows "GUI" tasks are just command lines with different names and a bunch more steps.

One such example is firewall configuring in windows (a step-by-step example with picture is here). The task isn't simpler. The hard part is understanding how a firewall works and what the different settings affect. If this is known, hiding the config data behind a dozen screens isn't helpful If you understand firewalls, a simple text file with labels is the easiest option. If you don't understand firewalls, no amount of GUI is going to compensate (for tasks beyond "allow X program access"). Linux gives people who don't understand firewalls a basic allow/deny GUI (see this page for Ubuntu's solution), but it also gives a great command line for advanced uses.

Walking someone through a dozen steps in a GUI is actually harder than having them copy/paste the same amount of steps into a command line. The individual likely doesn't understand either action (though the command line steps can be recorded and looked up in the man pages), but the command line option is superior for two reasons: it allows less room for error as it is being copied and pasted directly rather than being described (with good chance of miscommunication), and it is frequently faster to accomplish.

Linux and Windows error codes are both likely to require a trip to google to research the cause, but the signal to noise ratio is better for Linux than for Windows (and in both cases, almost any problem encountered already has a solution posted if people will just copy/paste the error message, OS, and perhaps a couple other keywords into Google).


----------



## kikkO

One simple word why Linux desktop didn't take off, Support.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> So going to regret reviving this but...I think in fairness we need to add...
> "Want to piss off a Windows wacko? Just ask them what is this "defragging" thing? Ask them why they can't run the latest windows on a netbook without going mad? Ask them why supercomputers and the stock markets ditched windows? Ask them why would anyone have to go to a website to download programs and make sure that they had anything that is required for it? Ask them why a new version of a program isn't automatically updated? Ask them why windows is so limited on desktop options? What do you mean there's only one desktop? Etc."
> "Want to piss off a BSD user. Insult ports..." I'm not so sure on that one.


















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Honestly...I don't really care so long as another person's personal preferences are never forced upon me. I just think it's amusing how people on here complain about things like how horrible Win8 will look and instead of doing something about it they'll likely end up buying it. Nothing wrong with that but you know...I never realized how spoiled Windows has made people and/or how much freedom/control/privacy they're willing to give up until I really tried to do things with Slackware and even more so with Arch. There's people on here and elsewhere that complain loudly about privacy invasions but the thing is they use an OS/software that is designed to allowed these things. So it's rather annoying to hear them complain about things and then do nothing/even attempt to change it.
> But more on topic...what is an OS? A tool/vehicle in a most general sense. So just like an ax vs. a chainsaw or a customized hot-rod you built in your own garage vs. a car from a dealer what makes one person happy is not going to make another person happy or there may be a time for one tool over another. So making a flat statement as something is "crap" or "dead" is about as pointless as measuring ego and serves nothing more than to create some self righteousness and enrage others. In the end choose what makes you happy and understand/accept the trade offs you are making with that choice, don't force it on someone else, and don't insult someone's choice (this is difficult for all of us).
> Bring it...


<

One windows user who won't be upgrading to Win8. They did such a good job with Win 7 (comparatively speaking of course) that I see zero reason to fork out more money for a desktop OS with a tablet interface.

Edit - Okay....Have Mint 13 Cinnamon installed on a spare hard drive, Not entirely impressed with cinnamon so far but I haven't done much with it yet (just finished installing 5 mins ago).

I might have to eat a little crow here. There have been some significant changes in the past year.

Edit 2 - First hiccup. Activated the ATI/AMD prop. driver and hit logout. quick half second message flashed in the top left corner saying something about "could not write" (missed the rest it was too fast). And now I have a dark screen and locked up PC.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> Speaking of PD, wasn't linux supposed to get a few things to help BD kick-butt in that enviornment?


AMD generally runs better in Linux than Windows, simply because most programs in the Linux world compiles using GCC which is fairer than Intel's compiler is. (And because it's so easy to manually compile applications, you can get them to use AVX, XOP, etc for example)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> I know so little nothing of linux benchies to even recommend a few to compare between W7 and linux distros
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


If you were comparing Windows to Linux performance, Linux is higher in CPU performance out of the box (Hence why a lot of folders use it) but I'd guess that the difference between a FX-8120 and 3770k in Linux is smaller than the difference between the same setup in Windows. I'd say download the Phoronix test suite and go to town on both Windows and Linux on a 3770k and a FX-8120 or the like (Any chip that matches) in both Windows and Linux.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> Most, if not all of those drivers will be download and installed through windows update. Mine would've been if I didn't want to do it manually.


Speak for yourself; every time I've reinstalled if I wanted drivers bar the monitor configuration files I have to go to the various sites..Especially if you want updated drivers.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fear of Oneself*
> 
> Yea.
> It was such a pain to get drivers for anything in Linux. I had to put in my Wifi key and wait 45 minutes to finish installing the OS.


How long ago was this? Most newer WiFi dongles/chipsets are supported in the kernel these days.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> <
> 
> One windows user who won't be upgrading to Win8. They did such a good job with Win 7 (comparatively speaking of course) that I see zero reason to fork out more money for a desktop OS with a tablet interface.
> Edit - Okay....Have Mint 13 Cinnamon installed on a spare hard drive, Not entirely impressed with cinnamon so far but I haven't done much with it yet (just finished installing 5 mins ago).
> I might have to eat a little crow here. There have been some significant changes in the past year.


What will you do when Windows 7 isn't supported by MS/has no games coming out/no updated programs running on it any more, if MS hasn't gotten Metro to a good place?

And if you don't like Cinnamon, try MATE.

I got one! "Want to piss off a Windows wacko? Make them a SMP folder..."


----------



## Zen00

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> What will you do when Windows 7 isn't supported by MS/has no games coming out/no updated programs running on it any more, if MS hasn't gotten Metro to a good place?
> And if you don't like Cinnamon, try MATE.
> I got one! "Want to piss off a Windows wacko? Make them a SMP folder..."


Going by the XP track record, I say he has another 6 or so years before he has to start worrying about that anyways, which translates to another 2 versions of Windows, or a sudden shift in programming for Linux so all the games are on there.


----------



## TFL Replica

Installing bumblebee only takes a few minutes and that includes the binary nvidia drivers. In fact it's a bigger download to get the same feature working in windows.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> AMD generally runs better in Linux than Windows, simply because most programs in the Linux world compiles using GCC which is fairer than Intel's compiler is. (And because it's so easy to manually compile applications, you can get them to use AVX, XOP, etc for example)
> If you were comparing Windows to Linux performance, Linux is higher in CPU performance out of the box (Hence why a lot of folders use it) but I'd guess that the difference between a FX-8120 and 3770k in Linux is smaller than the difference between the same setup in Windows. I'd say download the Phoronix test suite and go to town on both Windows and Linux on a 3770k and a FX-8120 or the like (Any chip that matches) in both Windows and Linux.
> Speak for yourself; every time I've reinstalled if I wanted drivers bar the monitor configuration files I have to go to the various sites..Especially if you want updated drivers.
> How long ago was this? Most newer WiFi dongles/chipsets are supported in the kernel these days.
> What will you do when Windows 7 isn't supported by MS/has no games coming out/no updated programs running on it any more, if MS hasn't gotten Metro to a good place?
> And if you don't like Cinnamon, try MATE.
> I got one! "Want to piss off a Windows wacko? Make them a SMP folder..."


Windows 8 isn't a complete departure from the core components and kernal of Win 7 like it was going from XP to Win CrapVista and Win 7. Which makes me wonder why their trying to force a change like this when Win 7 is still viable and will be for some time to come. I'll test out OOB compatibility with the WNA1000 in a little bit to see if that's fixed (I'll be disconnecting ether for that). Is it just me or does cinnamon seem jittery/stutters with the window (minimizing/maximizing etc).


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Windows 8 isn't a complete departure from the core components and kernal of Win 7 like it was going from XP to Win CrapVista and Win 7. Which makes me wonder why their trying to force a change like this when Win 7 is still viable and will be for some time to come. I'll test out OOB compatibility with the WNA1000 in a little bit to see if that's fixed (I'll be disconnecting ether for that). Is it just me or does cinnamon seem jittery/stutters with the window (minimizing/maximizing etc).


1) Vista isn't crap
2) I honestly don't know. Either they're seriously dumb (It didn't work when they tried forcing a desktop UI onto a phone so now they're doing the opposite *right* after people were hating Vista so badly they released what was essentially a service pack to fix that revenue problem) or there's something we're not seeing yet.
3) I wouldn't be sure, I don't get it in Unity or gnome3 (What Cinnamon is based off) but I haven't tried cinnamon as I jumped straight to MATE as soon as I could.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> 1) Vista isn't crap
> 2) I honestly don't know. Either they're seriously dumb (It didn't work when they tried forcing a desktop UI onto a phone so now they're doing the opposite *right* after people were hating Vista so badly they released what was essentially a service pack to fix that revenue problem) or there's something we're not seeing yet.
> 3) I wouldn't be sure, I don't get it in Unity or gnome3 (What Cinnamon is based off) but I haven't tried cinnamon as I jumped straight to MATE as soon as I could.


I haven't used vista since Win 7 Beta....so maybe they fixed things with updates. I found it to be sluggish and unstable. Switched to Win 7 beta and noticed a HUGE difference and never looked back. Can't bear the thought of selling the copy I havd and foisting it off on someone else







.

Edit - Mate immediately feels snappier and smoother, but that's just an observation so take it for what it's worth.

Edit 2 - Hiccup number 2. Sound isn't working OOB. If I choose 5.1 or 7.1 it plays rear speaker sounds through the center channel. All other settings give me nothing.

Edit 3 - Hiccup number 3. Installed Phoronix from the repos. I click to start it and it shows up immediately in processes as "sleeping". Another thing I'm going to have to troubleshoot/read through online searches for.


----------



## Brutuz

I wouldn't really know how to fix it (I'm only running 2.1 or headphones, so yeah.) but try mucking around in here.


----------



## Rubers

AMD drivers suck for Linux anyway since they're closed source and AMD neglect them.

Anyway,. all this arse ache over Linux and Windows. Meh, both are fine. I've had my fair share of problems with both and both were just as much of a ball ache to sort out. My current hardware works OOTB for both OS's... but Linux takes the lead on that one because it doesn't require any drivers installing from third party sources at all. But then, Windows plays games and has GUI versions of most programs I want to use.

Both are great OS's, imho, and I'm not surprised some of the Linux guys have been out in full force getting annoyed at someone in this thread given how trollish they have been.

Linux doesn't take off, ever, because it lacks serious support and it lacks the money to throw support at it. But the reason you get support with Windows is because you buy it.


----------



## Zero4549

I'd love to see someone actually support linux properly. Charge people for all I care as long as it actually is usable for the average joe who wants to slap a CD in and an hour later be word processing, youtubing, facebooking, gaming, listening to music and enjoying flash content.

That's the day that OTHER distributions of linux will actually be worth using as a main OS for people like me who work in photoshop and game


----------



## hajile

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> AMD drivers suck for Linux anyway since they're closed source and AMD neglect them.
> Anyway,. all this arse ache over Linux and Windows. Meh, both are fine. I've had my fair share of problems with both and both were just as much of a ball ache to sort out. My current hardware works OOTB for both OS's... but Linux takes the lead on that one because it doesn't require any drivers installing from third party sources at all. But then, Windows plays games and has GUI versions of most programs I want to use.
> Both are great OS's, imho, and I'm not surprised some of the Linux guys have been out in full force getting annoyed at someone in this thread given how trollish they have been.
> Linux doesn't take off, ever, because it lacks serious support and it lacks the money to throw support at it. But the reason you get support with Windows is because you buy it.


I think that AMD's done a much better job with Open drivers than Nvidia. Mesa is making huge strides (I expect more noticeable results after the big OpenCL push is done).


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hajile*
> 
> I think that AMD's done a much better job with Open drivers than Nvidia. Mesa is making huge strides (I expect more noticeable results after the big OpenCL push is done).


AMD drivers are notoriously sucky on Linux, though and NVidia's are famously nice and more frequently updated despite being proprietary and closed source.


----------



## tout

Is there a point to this article? It reads like someone crying that they can't figure out how to use something.

When my girlfriend's daughters were 8 and 9 years old I built them a PC to share... they requested Linux. This was back in Mandrake 8 days... they had no issue booting up, typing their password (they each had a user account) and playing games or drawing pictures on it. Why is it so hard, in this day with Linux being so much more user friendly now, for this guy who works for a PC tech publisher to figure things out? Methinks he's in the wrong line of work.

Dumb article is dumb and useless flame bait.

Now that I think about it, who can't use Linux as a basic OS? If all you do is check mail, read articles and play facebook games and the like (which is probably 90% of the world) then it works just fine. Really people, it's not that difficult unless you do some sort of special tasks that require only Windows software. At which point, you are no longer the average user of the world.


----------



## chemicalfan

iTunes screws it up in my recent experience. People with iPods like iTunes. I know you can sync iPods using other software, but you can't use the iTunes store. Even if Apple don't want to port iTunes to Linux, or make it Wine compatible (or at least stop breaking compatibility with each update), they should allow access to the iTunes store via website (like Steam do).

I know at least 3 people who I'd love to get off of XP and onto Mint, but they all use iTunes and are entrenched. All they do is web browse and use iTunes, and they're stuck on XP as they only have P4s or old Celerons. It's infuriating.


----------



## Zero4549

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tout*
> 
> Is there a point to this article? It reads like someone crying that they can't figure out how to use something.
> When my girlfriend's daughters were 8 and 9 years old I built them a PC to share... they requested Linux. This was back in Mandrake 8 days... they had no issue booting up, typing their password (they each had a user account) and playing games or drawing pictures on it. Why is it so hard, in this day with Linux being so much more user friendly now, for this guy who works for a PC tech publisher to figure things out? Methinks he's in the wrong line of work.
> Dumb article is dumb and useless flame bait.
> Now that I think about it, who can't use Linux as a basic OS? If all you do is check mail, read articles and play facebook games and the like (which is probably 90% of the world) then it works just fine. Really people, it's not that difficult unless you do some sort of special tasks that require only Windows software. At which point, you are no longer the average user of the world.


Flash, silver-light, networking, and audio all say hi.


----------



## tout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> Flash, silver-light, networking, and audio all say hi.


What's the issue with flash? I've never had any. I've had more issues with Windows and flash than in Linux.

Networking? Really? I've had one motherboard out of 10 that has issues with the onboard LAN in Linux. The new driver is enabled in the latest kernels. Unless you mean something else... I know not what.

Same thing with audio, I can't remember the last time I had an issue with audio in Linux... I think it was once back in 2001... Windows 7 hates my Creative sound card. It simply stops working for no reason. Reports no problem, displays sound being output but does not work. I have to uninstall and reinstall every time...

Silver-light, lol. You use that? I'm sorry. That's a product I refuse to use, along with Netflix. The issue there is that the developers refuse to make a Linux version. The community is working on making it happen, someday.


----------



## Stalker

I just downloaded the new Ubuntu just because of this dumb article.


----------



## tout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Stalker*
> 
> I just downloaded the new Ubuntu just because of this dumb article.


I am due for a new OS, I think I will do the same.


----------



## Zero4549

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tout*
> 
> What's the issue with flash? I've never had any. I've had more issues with Windows and flash than in Linux.
> Networking? Really? I've had one motherboard out of 10 that has issues with the onboard LAN in Linux. The new driver is enabled in the latest kernels. Unless you mean something else... I know not what.
> Same thing with audio, I can't remember the last time I had an issue with audio in Linux... I think it was once back in 2001... Windows 7 hates my Creative sound card. It simply stops working for no reason. Reports no problem, displays sound being output but does not work. I have to uninstall and reinstall every time...
> Silver-light, lol. You use that? I'm sorry. That's a product I refuse to use, along with Netflix. The issue there is that the developers refuse to make a Linux version. The community is working on making it happen, someday.


These aren't issues for people like us. These are issues for the common user. People like us ALREADY use linux or have a proper reason not to.

For the average user, windows/osx is
1) Familiar and natural
2) As easy to install as just plopping in the CD and following a wizard written in ******-talk.
3) Gets all the updates it needs automatically.
4) Software you pick up at a store just works.
5) Websites and ALL of their content, regardless of how it was created, simply works.

For the same user looking at linux, they see:
1) scary computer jargon words. Oh no, will I fry my floppy disk processors If I accept?
2) that game my brother gave me. It dun work. My computa's broke
3) Whats a kernal? Is this a popcorn machine? Do I need to clean out the tarballs with Windex?
4) I bought netflix. Why isn't there CSI: Miami?
5) What's a GOOIE? Is it a type of candy? Why cant I has candy? Also why is there words on my computer where buttons should be?
6) Wheres my little paperclip buddy? I can't write my papers without him!

You get the picture. Keep in mind that while we use half decent hardware, most computer users are still rocking 10 year old bargain bin OEM prebuilts with obscure hardware that doesn't even have any existing documentation.


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> most computer users are still rocking 10 year old bargain bin OEM prebuilts with obscure hardware that doesn't even have any existing documentation.


...that won't run anything newer than XP

I dispute this hardware issue - if there is a problem, I agree, Linux is more daunting to fix. However, in the last couple of years, hardware support has increased exponentially for Linux. Either more manufacturers are getting on board and supply drivers, or community developers are getting better at writing them from scratch. Linux now has pretty decent hardware support. "Obscure" hardware is very rare, as most of the cheap, OEM stuff, is just rebadged versions of well-known stuff (e.g. Atheros, Realtek & Broadcom for networking products)

Anyway, my point is that almost everything works OOTB with Linux nowadays, so don't make a big deal about incompatibility.

Although I accept your point on some irreplaceable software items (such as Netflix, and iTunes as I have previously mentioned). The "scary world of Linux" is mostly insulated in distros like Mint - it's no scarier to average joe than the Windows registry. Forget the CLI - while it won't disappear, remember that the most knowledgable Linux gurus are old-school, and the CLI is second home to them. In time, you'll get more Linux wizards who are more familiar with the GUI way of doing thing. Also, ever range Microsoft support? I've call them once before, and they had me diving into the "Run" menu command, and a command prompt in order to investigate. When it comes to support issues, on any platform, sometimes you can't avoid the CLI.

And everyone switches off the Office Assistant, he's annoying


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> These aren't issues for people like us. These are issues for the common user. People like us ALREADY use linux or have a proper reason not to.
> For the average user, windows/osx is
> 1) Familiar and natural
> 2) As easy to install as just plopping in the CD and following a wizard written in ******-talk.
> 3) Gets all the updates it needs automatically.
> 4) Software you pick up at a store just works.
> 5) Websites and ALL of their content, regardless of how it was created, simply works.
> For the same user looking at linux, they see:
> 1) scary computer jargon words. Oh no, will I fry my floppy disk processors If I accept?
> 2) that game my brother gave me. It dun work. My computa's broke
> 3) Whats a kernal? Is this a popcorn machine? Do I need to clean out the tarballs with Windex?
> 4) I bought netflix. Why isn't there CSI: Miami?
> 5) What's a GOOIE? Is it a type of candy? Why cant I has candy? Also why is there words on my computer where buttons should be?
> 6) Wheres my little paperclip buddy? I can't write my papers without him!
> You get the picture. Keep in mind that while we use half decent hardware, most computer users are still rocking 10 year old bargain bin OEM prebuilts with obscure hardware that doesn't even have any existing documentation.


GOOIE/GUI I believe


----------



## tout

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> These aren't issues for people like us. These are issues for the common user. People like us ALREADY use linux or have a proper reason not to.
> For the average user, windows/osx is
> 1) Familiar and natural
> 2) As easy to install as just plopping in the CD and following a wizard written in ******-talk.
> 3) Gets all the updates it needs automatically.
> 4) Software you pick up at a store just works.
> 5) Websites and ALL of their content, regardless of how it was created, simply works.
> For the same user looking at linux, they see:
> 1) scary computer jargon words. Oh no, will I fry my floppy disk processors If I accept?
> 2) that game my brother gave me. It dun work. My computa's broke
> 3) Whats a kernal? Is this a popcorn machine? Do I need to clean out the tarballs with Windex?
> 4) I bought netflix. Why isn't there CSI: Miami?
> 5) What's a GOOIE? Is it a type of candy? Why cant I has candy? Also why is there words on my computer where buttons should be?
> 6) Wheres my little paperclip buddy? I can't write my papers without him!
> You get the picture. Keep in mind that while we use half decent hardware, *most computer users are still rocking 10 year old bargain bin OEM prebuilts with obscure hardware that doesn't even have any existing documentation.*


I agree with some of your points however there's a few that are wrong...

Windows:
1) Familiar yes, natural? I don't think so. Have you tried navigating administrative tools in Windows compared to Linux?
2) It's the same process for Linux. You have to select partitions in both OS. Select language, keyboard type, lol, is this really that hard?
3) So does Linux (we are talking Ubuntu and the like, right? The user friendly OS')
4) You got that one.
5) The same issues can occur in Windows.

Linux:
1) Really? To use the basic functions of Linux there isn't anything scary about it. Children use it.
2) You can have that one too. However same could be said of Mac.
3) Windows has a kernel, what's your point?
4) You can have that one. However, Netflix is bundled with malware/spyware called Silver-light so I don't use it and recommend people not to.
5) What the heck are you talking about? GUI? Windows also has one. Linux GUI is much nicer IMO.
6) Paper clip buddy? You talking about Office programs? Linux has far better for free.

I get the picture you're trying to paint but most of it is highly distorted. Your worst argument I bolded... those are the PCs that Linux excels on. Let's see, find a legal copy of Windows 98 (that runs like garbage) for some ridiculously gouged price on eBay or get Linux and run system.... yay!


----------



## Zero4549

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> GOOIE/GUI I believe


Not entirely sure what you're getting at with this post... but ok. lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> ...that won't run anything newer than XP
> I dispute this hardware issue - if there is a problem, I agree, Linux is more daunting to fix. However, in the last couple of years, hardware support has increased exponentially for Linux. Either more manufacturers are getting on board and supply drivers, or community developers are getting better at writing them from scratch. Linux now has pretty decent hardware support. "Obscure" hardware is very rare, as most of the cheap, OEM stuff, is just rebadged versions of well-known stuff (e.g. Atheros, Realtek & Broadcom for networking products)
> Anyway, my point is that almost everything works OOTB with Linux nowadays, so don't make a big deal about incompatibility.
> Although I accept your point on some irreplaceable software items (such as Netflix, and iTunes as I have previously mentioned). The "scary world of Linux" is mostly insulated in distros like Mint - it's no scarier to average joe than the Windows registry. Forget the CLI - while it won't disappear, remember that the most knowledgable Linux gurus are old-school, and the CLI is second home to them. In time, you'll get more Linux wizards who are more familiar with the GUI way of doing thing. Also, ever range Microsoft support? I've call them once before, and they had me diving into the "Run" menu command, and a command prompt in order to investigate. When it comes to support issues, on any platform, sometimes you can't avoid the CLI.
> And everyone switches off the Office Assistant, he's annoying


I know it all sounds like it would make sense... but have you ever tried to talk a normal windows user through the process of aquiring, installing, and actually using linux? It's like pulling teeth and at the end of they day you still end up having to do it for them.

I can tell the same person "go get windows 7" and they'll just do it. They know where to buy it. They know how to install it. They know how to use it.

Granted, I haven't done this myself for about 2 years, but I'm assuming it would go somewhat along the same lines If I had.

I'm not really saying linux is harder... it _is_, slightly, but that's not the point. The average user couldn't use command line in windows, what makes you think they can do it in linux?

Sorry if my points are getting sloppy I've not slept for quite a few too many hours... hopefully you see where im going with this though.


----------



## Rubers

You said "What is a GOOIE" and the only thing I can think of is a GUI, which a lot of my lecturers call a "Gooie" or "Gw-ee"


----------



## Zero4549

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> You said "What is a GOOIE" and the only thing I can think of is a GUI, which a lot of my lecturers call a "Gooie" or "Gw-ee"


well yeah that was the point. I was mocking normal users. As in that's what they would say out loud when looking at command line in linux and trying to read an online/computers for dummies/whatever resource on what's going on.


----------



## Nocturin

Lol. All this discussion and I've got to try linux again after I shift all my data around. 5 HDDs and not enough space for a new OS/Dual Boot (dunno if I wanna dual on my SSD)


----------



## beers

Tony Bradley y u still have job after producing garbage articles.


----------



## Harbinger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> well yeah that was the point. I was mocking normal users. As in that's what they would say out loud when looking at command line in linux and trying to read an online/computers for dummies/whatever resource on what's going on.


Your last experience with Linux must have been pretty far back. Try out one of the recent distros if you want to know how easy everything is these days.


----------



## ironmaiden

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Harbinger*
> 
> Your last experience with Linux must have been pretty far back. Try out one of the recent distros if you want to know how easy everything is these days.


this.


----------



## Kanalplus

I started using linux distros when vista came out as it was a bit too much for my rig then. For my basic needs it was more than enough as it would be for any casual user. Was a bit sceptic at first and i must addmit that it took me quite a while to learn some advanced stuff (weeks of reading and plenty of reinstalling also, doubt it's any different if u plan to power use wins) and when i finally got to the point when i was comfortable with current distro i never looked back and saved *$100+* (talking from PoV of an average pc user).
Recently plagued small portion of my hdd space with wins just to run Diablo 3.









@ Zero4549
*1) Familiar and natural
i bet that most common win user hardly ever touches stuff outside of browser and explorer and as a living prof is my sister that was using ubuntu with a tweaked ui for almost a week without realising it wasn't win 7


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> I'd love to see someone actually support linux properly. Charge people for all I care as long as it actually is usable for the average joe who wants to slap a CD in and an hour later be word processing, youtubing, facebooking, gaming, listening to music and enjoying flash content.
> That's the day that OTHER distributions of linux will actually be worth using as a main OS for people like me who work in photoshop and game


^Sounds like you should be taking up that issue with the devs and Adobe. Honestly, why do people blame the wrong thing for their problems? Flash is a pain to me in Linux unless I'm using Chrome (even in Chromium flash doesn't work well) but that's not Linux's fault. *That is Adobe's fault.* Honestly, they can die in a fire sale and take flash with them as far as I care. The world would be better for it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hajile*
> 
> I think that AMD's done a much better job with Open drivers than Nvidia. Mesa is making huge strides (I expect more noticeable results after the big OpenCL push is done).


AMD may have "open" drivers but this is where I fight with FOSS-heads...what good is an "open" driver if it doesn't work? I don't know why but even nouveau has caused me less pain than AMD/ATI drivers.


----------



## TFL Replica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Harbinger*
> 
> Your last experience with Linux must have been pretty far back. Try out one of the recent distros if you want to know how easy everything is these days.


This. There once was a time when things like wireless, sleep/hibernate and optimus were difficult to impossible. Not anymore.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *beers*
> 
> Tony Bradley y u still have job after producing garbage articles.


If I was a prospective employer and he handed his CV to me, and I seen this, I'd bin it.


----------



## {Unregistered}

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> If I was a prospective employer and he handed his CV to me, and I seen this, I'd bin it.


Just because his opinion is wrong by your standards (and by most people's standards), it doesn't mean that he is not a worthy employee.









Can you imagine the amount of hits PCWorld received due to this article!


----------



## Kanalplus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> ^Sounds like you should be taking up that issue with the devs and Adobe. Honestly, why do people blame the wrong thing for their problems? Flash is a pain to me in Linux unless I'm using Chrome (even in Chromium flash doesn't work well) but that's not Linux's fault. *That is Adobe's fault.* Honestly, they can die in a fire sale and take flash with them as far as I care. The world would be better for it.
> 
> Pretty much this!


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> Not entirely sure what you're getting at with this post... but ok. lol
> I know it all sounds like it would make sense... but have you ever tried to talk a normal windows user through the process of aquiring, installing, and actually using linux? It's like pulling teeth and at the end of they day you still end up having to do it for them.
> I can tell the same person "go get windows 7" and they'll just do it. They know where to buy it. They know how to install it. They know how to use it.
> Granted, I haven't done this myself for about 2 years, but I'm assuming it would go somewhat along the same lines If I had.
> I'm not really saying linux is harder... it _is_, slightly, but that's not the point. The average user couldn't use command line in windows, what makes you think they can do it in linux?
> Sorry if my points are getting sloppy I've not slept for quite a few too many hours... hopefully you see where im going with this though.


It's all good I get what you mean. The process of _acquiring_ Linux is still difficult compared to Windows. It could be helped if stores had piles of pre-burnt CDs/DVDs of Ubuntu/Mint/PCLinuxOS given away at cost, or even for free (but why would a store do that?). Now, I downloaded my copy of Windows from Microsoft, but that's still uncommon. The most common way of getting an OS, is people buying new PCs, pre-loaded with Windows. This leads to 2 ways of getting Linux on there - convince OEMs to pre-load Linux (like with netbook, and I think Dell have some pre-loaded with Ubuntu or SUSE?), OR get some kind of campaign going to advocate that your old P4 isn't junk, it just needs Xubuntu on it or something. If you can talk people out of buying a new PC just to browse the web, and that they can save the cash by loading Xubuntu (or Mint LXDE, or similar) instead, you might be onto a winner. This kind of approach would work in the third-world as well, where cash is scarce.

It's the lack of co-ordination that's a killer. Sure, Canonical are flying the flag a bit, but not really in the mainstream. Seen the IE9 advert on the TV? Seen the Macbook advert there too? Sure you have! Seen that Ubuntu advert? Nope, because there isn't one. I wonder if it would pay for someone like Richard Branson, or Google, or some other ethical business to bankroll a decent media campaign to get some momentum. It's even in Google's interest, as it will raise Chrome's market share. I seriously think the way forward is old/underpowered rigs, as running XP is getting to a stage where it's not an option. It's a security risk, it's not multiprocessor efficient (netbooks & some P4s wouold benefit), and it's got the famous "Microsoft self-destruct" code, where performance gets progressively worse, necessitating a re-install ever 12-18 months. You mention that you can jump to the latest version of Linux for the next re-install, instead of just sticking with old XP, and you might win some fans. People confident enough to install XP, are confident enought to install Xubuntu or Mint LXDE.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Harbinger*
> 
> Your last experience with Linux must have been pretty far back. Try out one of the recent distros if you want to know how easy everything is these days.


Another +1
I've only been a Linux user for 3.5 years, and it's changed light-years in terms of user friendlyness over that time.

Edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *{Unregistered}*
> 
> Just because his opinion is wrong by your standards (and by most people's standards), it doesn't mean that he is not a worthy employee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you imagine the amount of hits PCWorld received due to this article!


Yeah, but when your reputation is heading to FUD-like levels, I'd argue that's not a good thing


----------



## Rookie1337

OK...if anyone wants to get Linux with support here you go:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1165884/linux-system-builders-retailers

Read the first post and check the websites. Enjoy.


----------



## cavallino

I still find Linux to be more of a novelty OS when it comes to desktop use. It is fun to tweak things but I don't really have a reason to use since I still need windows for some things anyway. I still use Linux though for browsing and typing stuff etc. etc. It really isn't as hard as people make it out to be. The average person who just wants to browse facebook and write emails would be the best person to use desktop Linux. It's the people who game or use Adobe apps etc, that need windows.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> well yeah that was the point. I was mocking normal users. As in that's what they would say out loud when looking at command line in linux and trying to read an online/computers for dummies/whatever resource on what's going on.


Ah I wasn't following entirely I just skim read and thought it was a genuine question... I still call it a "Gee Hue Eye" though







I still call Asus Hay-Sus, those, not A-Soos.


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Ah I wasn't following entirely I just skim read and thought it was a genuine question... I still call it a "Gee Hue Eye" though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still call Asus Hay-Sus, those, not A-Soos.


I will forever pronounce those words as you spelled out. Because racecar.


----------



## DaClownie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Ah I wasn't following entirely I just skim read and thought it was a genuine question... I still call it a "Gee Hue Eye" though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still call Asus Hay-Sus, those, not A-Soos.
> 
> 
> 
> I will forever pronounce those words as you spelled out. Because racecar.
Click to expand...

Yay Palindrome!


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tout*
> 
> Is there a point to this article? It reads like someone crying that they can't figure out how to use something.
> When my girlfriend's daughters were 8 and 9 years old I built them a PC to share... they requested Linux. This was back in Mandrake 8 days... they had no issue booting up, typing their password (they each had a user account) and playing games or drawing pictures on it. Why is it so hard, in this day with Linux being so much more user friendly now, for this guy who works for a PC tech publisher to figure things out? Methinks he's in the wrong line of work.
> Dumb article is dumb and useless flame bait.
> Now that I think about it, who can't use Linux as a basic OS? If all you do is check mail, read articles and play facebook games and the like (which is probably 90% of the world) then it works just fine. Really people, it's not that difficult unless you do some sort of special tasks that require only Windows software. At which point, you are no longer the average user of the world.


The only thing the author got wrong was that linux is dead. As for the rest of your post.....that's only with someone like you to come in and set it up for them. Now what happens when something goes wrong (and I don't mean a difficult problem or uncommon problem either but something a medium user should be able to fix without calling an IT)? Can you really see them wading through endless forums, getting flamed for being a "noob", and then actually following the proper steps to fix it?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tout*
> 
> What's the issue with flash? I've never had any. I've had more issues with Windows and flash than in Linux.
> Networking? Really? I've had one motherboard out of 10 that has issues with the onboard LAN in Linux. The new driver is enabled in the latest kernels. Unless you mean something else... I know not what.
> Same thing with audio, I can't remember the last time I had an issue with audio in Linux... I think it was once back in 2001... Windows 7 hates my Creative sound card. It simply stops working for no reason. Reports no problem, displays sound being output but does not work. I have to uninstall and reinstall every time...
> Silver-light, lol. You use that? I'm sorry. That's a product I refuse to use, along with Netflix. The issue there is that the developers refuse to make a Linux version. The community is working on making it happen, someday.


No issues with audio right? I just installed Mint Maya to check it out and guess what, my audio doesn't work. In fact doing just a cursory search I saw MANY posts from people trying to get help with x-fi cards. And that's not an "old" chipset either? Mine is currently still being sold by auzentech. Yet two days ago everyone was trying to convince me that "linux installs as easy as windows and supports 90% of the hardware out there". I haven't even tried dusting off my WNA1000 adapter and seeing if it "works". Last time I had to jump through hoops, and move the whole computer to a different room to connect the ethernet. One of the main reasons I went ahead and wired my whole house with cat 6. How many other wifi adapters require you to be connected to the internet in order for Linux to set it up?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> ...that won't run anything newer than XP
> I dispute this hardware issue - if there is a problem, I agree, Linux is more daunting to fix. However, in the last couple of years, hardware support has increased exponentially for Linux. Either more manufacturers are getting on board and supply drivers, or community developers are getting better at writing them from scratch. Linux now has pretty decent hardware support. "Obscure" hardware is very rare, as most of the cheap, OEM stuff, is just rebadged versions of well-known stuff (e.g. Atheros, Realtek & Broadcom for networking products)
> Anyway, my point is that almost everything works OOTB with Linux nowadays, so don't make a big deal about incompatibility.
> Although I accept your point on some irreplaceable software items (such as Netflix, and iTunes as I have previously mentioned). The "scary world of Linux" is mostly insulated in distros like Mint - it's no scarier to average joe than the Windows registry. Forget the CLI - while it won't disappear, remember that the most knowledgable Linux gurus are old-school, and the CLI is second home to them. In time, you'll get more Linux wizards who are more familiar with the GUI way of doing thing. Also, ever range Microsoft support? I've call them once before, and they had me diving into the "Run" menu command, and a command prompt in order to investigate. When it comes to support issues, on any platform, sometimes you can't avoid the CLI.
> And everyone switches off the Office Assistant, he's annoying


I love that "well, almost everything works".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tout*
> 
> I agree with some of your points however there's a few that are wrong...
> Windows:
> 1) Familiar yes, natural? I don't think so. Have you tried navigating administrative tools in Windows compared to Linux?
> 2) It's the same process for Linux. You have to select partitions in both OS. Select language, keyboard type, lol, is this really that hard?
> 3) So does Linux (we are talking Ubuntu and the like, right? The user friendly OS')
> 4) You got that one.
> 5) The same issues can occur in Windows.
> Linux:
> 1) Really? To use the basic functions of Linux there isn't anything scary about it. Children use it.
> 2) You can have that one too. However same could be said of Mac.
> 3) Windows has a kernel, what's your point?
> 4) You can have that one. However, Netflix is bundled with malware/spyware called Silver-light so I don't use it and recommend people not to.
> 5) What the heck are you talking about? GUI? Windows also has one. Linux GUI is much nicer IMO.
> 6) Paper clip buddy? You talking about Office programs? Linux has far better for free.
> I get the picture you're trying to paint but most of it is highly distorted. Your worst argument I bolded... those are the PCs that Linux excels on. Let's see, find a legal copy of Windows 98 (that runs like garbage) for some ridiculously gouged price on eBay or get Linux and run system.... yay!


Windows:
1)windows is so easy a kid can use it with minimal instructions (not saying that's a great thing but it's true), Linux even a slight computer geek needs to do some reading up to run linux.
2)A monkey with a bad attitude could install windows and the chances of having an install problem are EXTREMELY low (less than 1%). I just tried installing Mint and already see multiple issues (on less than 3 year old hardware) that will require troubleshooting to fix.
3)no disagreement with that one.
4)of course
5)not that I've ever come across or heard of
Linux:
1)Note the "basic". Anything beyond firefox, word proc., and a paint program will require "learning linux" which is a daunting task for the average joe.
2)Like it or not most devs use directx and until that changes it's a hard road for gaming on linux.
3)Even advanced users never even need to know that windows has a "kernal".
4)Of course he has that one. And more and more programs are using silver-light. I had to install it on my wifes laptop so she could use a program from work while at home.
5)agree with you on that one.
6)I wouldn't go as far as to say "better". Very similar is more like it (in function and use not interface).

It all boils down to Linux is far "better" than it used to be. But can you objectively and honesly say it's just as easy to install and run it as windows? I wish it were true because more people would make the switch and the devs would take note and cater to that expanding market. But it isn't true.....YET. If I were to take 100 random people and have them install windows on their bare systems, how many would encounter a problem? I would guess between 0 and 5. Now take the distro of your choice. Can the same be said? I'd say at least 20+ would encounter some hardware "issue" if not much more.


----------



## Vagrant Storm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> I still find Linux to be more of a novelty OS when it comes to desktop use. It is fun to tweak things but I don't really have a reason to use since I still need windows for some things anyway. I still use Linux though for browsing and typing stuff etc. etc. It really isn't as hard as people make it out to be. The average person who just wants to browse facebook and write emails would be the best person to use desktop Linux. It's the people who game or use Adobe apps etc, that need windows.
> Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2


I actually put Sabayon on machines for people who have no computer knowledge all the time. Since they are just going to be surfing or emailing it is just fine...if they plug their camera in it will still be able to import the pics and videos...they won't even notice the difference and they can save themselves a $100 on a operating system.

Though if some one wants to spend some money on a machine...putting Linux on it is just plain wrong. Sure some games will work OK in WINE, but you are not getting the best out of them. If some one dropped $1200 for a gaming machine they are going to want everything out of it. Even if they never planned to game and only wanted it for photo or video editing they will still need windows for that. I mean, things like Cinelerra are OK for dinking around, but you are going to get serious about it you will want to purchase some windows based software for it.

Linux on a modern high powered desktop is like putting 13" tires on a new truck...sure it will drive around, but you are limiting yourself.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> The only thing the author got wrong was that linux is dead. As for the rest of your post.....that's only with someone like you to come in and set it up for them. Now what happens when something goes wrong (and I don't mean a difficult problem or uncommon problem either but something a medium user should be able to fix without calling an IT)? Can you really see them wading through endless forums, getting flamed for being a "noob", and then actually following the proper steps to fix it?
> No issues with audio right? I just installed Mint Maya to check it out and guess what, my audio doesn't work. In fact doing just a cursory search I saw MANY posts from people trying to get help with x-fi cards. And that's not an "old" chipset either? Mine is currently still being sold by auzentech. Yet two days ago everyone was trying to convince me that "linux installs as easy as windows and supports 90% of the hardware out there". I haven't even tried dusting off my WNA1000 adapter and seeing if it "works". Last time I had to jump through hoops, and move the whole computer to a different room to connect the ethernet. One of the main reasons I went ahead and wired my whole house with cat 6. How many other wifi adapters require you to be connected to the internet in order for Linux to set it up?
> I love that "well, almost everything works".
> Windows:
> 1)windows is so easy a kid can use it with minimal instructions (not saying that's a great thing but it's true), Linux even a slight computer geek needs to do some reading up to run linux.
> 2)A monkey with a bad attitude could install windows and the chances of having an install problem are EXTREMELY low (less than 1%). I just tried installing Mint and already see multiple issues (on less than 3 year old hardware) that will require troubleshooting to fix.
> 3)no disagreement with that one.
> 4)of course
> 5)not that I've ever come across or heard of
> Linux:
> 1)Note the "basic". Anything beyond firefox, word proc., and a paint program will require "learning linux" which is a daunting task for the average joe.
> 2)Like it or not most devs use directx and until that changes it's a hard road for gaming on linux.
> 3)Even advanced users never even need to know that windows has a "kernal".
> 4)Of course he has that one. And more and more programs are using silver-light. I had to install it on my wifes laptop so she could use a program from work while at home.
> 5)agree with you on that one.
> 6)I wouldn't go as far as to say "better". Very similar is more like it (in function and use not interface).
> It all boils down to Linux is far "better" than it used to be. But can you objectively and honesly say it's just as easy to install and run it as windows? I wish it were true because more people would make the switch and the devs would take note and cater to that expanding market. But it isn't true.....YET. If I were to take 100 random people and have them install windows on their bare systems, how many would encounter a problem? I would guess between 0 and 5. Now take the distro of your choice. Can the same be said? I'd say at least 20+ would encounter some hardware "issue" if not much more.


Let me break down this.

1) Fully agree.

2) Do not agree completely. Chances are you'll mess up in the partition part if you go monkeying around. But still, yes, it's easier than Linux (no need to make multiple partitions, even if the process is automated).

3)Because Windows cares about that. The kernel itself isn't available nor modifiable by anyone but MS themselves, so it makes no sense to publicly explain it. Linux, on the other way, is the complete opposite.

4)I never cared about Silverlight. I don't even have it installed.

5)Already discussed... I prefer gnome-shell a thousand times above any other GUI available in the world.

6) Already discussed.

Linux's hardware issues usually come down to passive developers. Take, for instance, AMD desktop graphics drivers, as they're one of the most common issues people have. Due to them being privative, and Catalyst team having enough problems to fix in Windows, they are pretty unstable. They usually don't work in an usable manner in newer kernels, but that's because they aren't open, and thus they can't be adapted to kernels in a fast way by the open source community.

General usage hardware, it has good enough open drivers that usually work as good as their Windows counterparts.

Windows is usually less problematic. Now, if you pick, say Fedora (my fav distro), and give it to someone who knows what a partition is, and instead of going 'nextnextnextnextnext', stops to read that the dialogs say, I am sure you can install and set up a system fairly quickly and in a pretty reliable way.

I'll make my father try and install a Fedora distro (he has little to no knowledge about computers, he has a hard time figuring how to copy/paste a piece of text, or uploading a pic to the web). I'll make sure to write down the process, with a progress timeline.


----------



## ironmaiden

I am into opensource services - Iptables + Postfix + clamav + spamassassin + IPSec + Squid with privoxy and squidguard + and a lot of other services based on linux, and I can say that once everything installed it just works flawlessly and fast.

But when I installed LMDE for my desktop I never had a problem with any video codecs it was working perfectly and smooth installation , setting up ATI drivers was a *****, but I also use Opensuse and the difference I found between Opensuse and LMDE , LMDE installs codecs without a glitch but in opensuse it is a slight pain. Most of the distros have some differences.

So the most user friendly distro is LMDE.


----------



## djk11

2012: Year of the Linux desktop!











Linux can be useful, and its big on mobile via Android obviously, network appliances, servers, etc. But seriously challenging Windows for desktop marketshare really hasn't happened and probably never will. People just want to play BF3 natively with max FPS.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> Linux on a modern high powered desktop is like putting 13" tires on a new truck...sure it will drive around, but you are limiting yourself.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> I actually put Sabayon on machines for people who have no computer knowledge all the time. Since they are just going to be surfing or emailing it is just fine...if they plug their camera in it will still be able to import the pics and videos...they won't even notice the difference and they can save themselves a $100 on a operating system.
> Though if some one wants to spend some money on a machine...putting Linux on it is just plain wrong. Sure some games will work OK in WINE, but you are not getting the best out of them. If some one dropped $1200 for a gaming machine they are going to want everything out of it. Even if they never planned to game and only wanted it for photo or video editing they will still need windows for that. I mean, things like Cinelerra are OK for dinking around, but you are going to get serious about it you will want to purchase some windows based software for it.
> *Linux on a modern high powered desktop is like putting 13" tires on a new truck...sure it will drive around, but you are limiting yourself.*


How so?


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ironmaiden*
> 
> I am into opensource services - Iptables + Postfix + clamav + spamassassin + IPSec + Squid with privoxy and squidguard + and a lot of other services based on linux, and I can say that once everything installed it just works flawlessly and fast.
> But when I installed LMDE for my desktop I never had a problem with any video codecs it was working perfectly and smooth installation , setting up ATI drivers was a *****, but I also use Opensuse and the difference I found between Opensuse and LMDE , LMDE installs codecs without a glitch but in opensuse it is a slight pain. Most of the distros have some differences.
> So the most user friendly distro is LMDE.


Out of all that jargon, I know maybe three words.

I am ashamed.


----------



## crust_cheese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> Linux on a modern high powered desktop is like putting 13" tires on a new truck...sure it will drive around, but you are limiting yourself.


You're perhaps not getting full _games_ or _DirectX_ performance... but installing Windows is like putting huge tractor wheels on your new truck. Sure, they do get the job done and they will surmount any obstacles, but boy, do they weigh you down.


----------



## Nocturin




----------



## Vagrant Storm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> How so?


I mention a couple limitations in my post...but at the end of the day it basically comes down to no Direct X or software that is expensive, but is feature rich. WINE is getting better...or has gotten better I should say. I honestly haven't heard or read any one saying anything good about it in a while and I haven't tried it in about six months and it wasn't perfect then...and by perfect I mean exact quality and performance as a Windows install.

Oh...and good luck playing a BluRay on Linux.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> Linux on a modern high powered desktop is like putting 13" tires on a new truck...sure it will drive around, but you are limiting yourself.


Sorry Linuxs version of Aero doesn't require a 1GB Ram requirement, darn them FOSS heads for optimizing compositing and all them other features in less than 1-10MB.

Other than that, most Windows system really won't saturate most of the high end equipment you put into a computer anyways. Unless you're doing extremely specific stuff, such as rendering, compiling, folding, etc. Which Linux ( in most cases, until you get even more specific and add .NET and Windows only programs ofc ) can do just as easily. And aside from those things, there's not much to really stress a system and put it to the use they're made for, gaming can add a little but alone by itself isn't enough to really use a system to it's full potential. No system will.

Most people here with $1000++++++++++ machines, are going to fall under the above about the truck. It's more "bling" or "bragging rights" than anything else in most cases.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> Oh...and good luck playing a BluRay on Linux.


Not sure if serious. I guess my Linux HTPC box just has good luck then.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crust_cheese*
> 
> You're perhaps not getting full _games_ or _DirectX_ performance... but installing Windows is like putting huge tractor wheels on your new truck. Sure, they do get the job done and they will surmount any obstacles, but boy, do they weigh you down.


Actually windows is more like buying a sports car with an inline 4. It gets you where you need to go, it's reasonably quick, and you just have to change the oil every now and then. Linux is like buying a jet engine to put in that car. Yes nobody can catch you and you'll have massive bragging rights but you'll need to learn how to put it in the car and do regular service and do you really want your grandparents to look like this when you take them out for a spin?


----------



## cavallino

Ooh analogy time!

Windows is like toaster streudel and linux is like pancakes.

Wat?


----------



## Quantum Reality

"Microsoft self-destruct"? Ahem, that sounds like FUD to me.

Incidentally, XP with Service Pack 3 is reasonably multiprocessor friendly, as is (I am given to understand) Win2K on non-HyperThreaded systems.

Behind a hardware firewall and with safe browsing practices such machines would still be perfectly usable in today's world.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> Ooh analogy time!
> Windows is like toaster streudel and linux is like pancakes.
> Wat?


That's a tough one. Toaster streudels sure are good, but man are hotcakes so hard to turn down.


----------



## ironmaiden

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> Out of all that jargon, I know maybe three words.
> I am ashamed.


lol ashamed about what ?


----------



## Vagrant Storm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Sorry Linuxs version of Aero doesn't require a 1GB Ram requirement, darn them FOSS heads for optimizing compositing and all them other features in less than 1-10MB.
> Other than that, most Windows system really won't saturate most of the high end equipment you put into a computer anyways. Unless you're doing extremely specific stuff, such as rendering, compiling, folding, etc. Which Linux ( in most cases, until you get even more specific and add .NET and Windows only programs ofc ) can do just as easily. And aside from those things, there's not much to really stress a system and put it to the use they're made for, gaming can add a little but alone by itself isn't enough to really use a system to it's full potential. No system will.
> Most people here with $1000++++++++++ machines, are going to fall under the above about the truck. It's more "bling" or "bragging rights" than anything else in most cases.
> Not sure if serious. I guess my Linux HTPC box just has good luck then.


What player are you using? The only way I can play a bluray from linux is to first rip the bluray to a "whatever" format (usually use MP4 myself, but it shouldn't make a difference) and then play. It technically is still a bluray, but I don't always want to do this seeing as how it takes a couple hours to do so. Even a raw mt2s copy takes upto an hour.

Are you saying you can actually insert a disc and play it?


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ironmaiden*
> 
> lol ashamed about what ?


My techno-dictonary in my head is not expansive enough and I was too lazy to google the other terms







.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> I mention a couple limitations in my post...but at the end of the day it basically comes down to no Direct X or software that is expensive, but is feature rich. WINE is getting better...or has gotten better I should say. I honestly haven't heard or read any one saying anything good about it in a while and I haven't tried it in about six months and it wasn't perfect then...and by perfect I mean exact quality and performance as a Windows install.
> Oh...and good luck playing a BluRay on Linux.


For blu-ray you use makemkv like you do in OSX..

I don't game so Direct X doesn't matter..

I ran PS in Snow Leopard in virtual box last night on my linux install, it worked ok but would work better if I feed it more resources.

Linux won't work for the creative pro yet though I'm curious to see the evolution of Adobe creative cloud..

I have in essence a $1200 PC or close to it without windows installed.


----------



## ironmaiden

talking about Aero than how about compiz ?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> Ooh analogy time!
> Windows is like toaster streudel and linux is like pancakes.
> Wat?


Ooooh.....pancakes......


----------



## Vagrant Storm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> For blu-ray you use makemkv like you do in OSX..
> I don't game so Direct X doesn't matter..
> I ran PS in Snow Leopard in virtual box last night on my linux install, it worked ok but would work better if I feed it more resources.
> Linux won't work for the creative pro yet though I'm curious to see the evolution of Adobe creative cloud..
> I have in essence a $1200 PC or close to it without windows installed.


If you are running a VM of an Apple OS you are in violation of ELUAs...Apple has this thing about about Apple software can only be run on Apple hardware I believe, but the real trouble is that a VM can't make full use of the GPU. Can turn into a pretty big limitation.

And if you were to run a VM of windows instead...why not just install it. Windows is a resource hog the way it is...taking it off bare metal makes it even more so.

And does makeMKV let you play a disc directly? I though it is was just another decoding/riping program. I have issues with purchasing software for Linux I guess so I didn't look into it to much. If all it does is rips it then I am doing that already...I just do the ripping on Windows since I have nice Bluray ripper for windows that I shelled out a decent amount of cash for already. If it can play a disk directly I will likely by it this weekend.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Ooooh.....pancakes......


See no one can resist the hotcakes!


----------



## 0xygen

That's why Steam is going to Linux?


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> If you are running a VM of an Apple OS you are in violation of ELUAs...Apple has this thing about about Apple software can only be run on Apple hardware I believe, but the real trouble is that a VM can't make full use of the GPU. Can turn into a pretty big limitation.
> And if you were to run a VM of windows instead...why not just install it. Windows is a resource hog the way it is...taking it off bare metal makes it even more so.
> And does makeMKV let you play a disc directly? I though it is was just another decoding/riping program. I have issues with purchasing software for Linux I guess so I didn't look into it to much. If all it does is rips it then I am doing that already...I just do the ripping on Windows since I have nice Bluray ripper for windows that I shelled out a decent amount of cash for already. If it can play a disk directly I will likely by it this weekend.


I'm already in violation of Apples EULA, so another infraction really doesn't bother me..

Yes Make MKV is a ripping program, the nice part is you don't lose the audio quality like you do with a lot of blu-ray drives.

I don't/won't run Windows because I try not to reward bad behavior, and MS is king of bad behavior though not as much anymore. Apple is moving into that territory for me also which is why I was running Snow leopard in a virtual on Linux. Software licenses are a bit expensive I own the licenses for CS 5 and use a work license for FCP7. I like OSX I even like Apple hardware I am unwilling to go in the direction that Apple wants to take us with gate keeper in name of "security." It's just pre-planning and making things work just in case I need to jump ship.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> I'm already in violation of Apples EULA, so another infraction really doesn't bother me..
> Yes Make MKV is a ripping program, the nice part is you don't lose the audio quality like you do with a lot of blu-ray drives.
> I don't/won't run Windows because I try not to reward bad behavior, and MS is king of bad behavior though not as much anymore. Apple is moving into that territory for me also which is why I was running Snow leopard in a virtual on Linux. Software licenses are a bit expensive I own the licenses for CS 5 and use a work license for FCP7. I like OSX I even like Apple hardware I am unwilling to go in the direction that Apple wants to take us with gate keeper in name of "security." It's just pre-planning and making things work just in case I need to jump ship.


Shhhhhhhhh....don't say stuff like that too loud...you'll anger the cult leaders.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Shhhhhhhhh....don't say stuff like that too loud...you'll anger the cult leaders.


Steve jobs will come and burn your house down...


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> Steve jobs will come and burn your house down...


He's not actually dead....just an attempt to be as revered by the Apple-ites as LRH is by his "people".









Next thing you know there will be a movie coming out showing Jobs as a WW2 hero who valiantly and single handedly saved 3200 marines while simultaneously taken out an entire division of japanese soldiers with a can opener and a toothpick.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> He's not actually dead....just an attempt to be as revered by the Apple-ites as LRH is by his "people".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next thing you know there will be a movie coming out showing Jobs as a WW2 hero who valiantly and single handedly saved 3200 marines while simultaneously taken out an entire division of japanese soldiers with a can opener and a toothpick.


... while convincing them to buy crap that they don't need xD

But yeah, good one


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Shhhhhhhhh....don't say stuff like that too loud...you'll anger the cult leaders.


Yea I just finished a 10 day time out 2 hours ago at mac rumors for my opinions&#8230;

Thats the second in 30 days so I figure I'll be banned in two months but ohh well..


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Yea I just finished a 10 day time out 2 hours ago at mac rumors for my opinions&#8230;
> Thats the second in 30 days so I figure I'll be banned in two months but ohh well..


And on that note... I just signed up xD


----------



## Scuba Steve in VA

Hmmm...I just found this thread, so I haven't read it all...but I did go read the actual article...so here are my impressions.

I'll first say this - I am a developer who uses multiple OSes...and I moved my 80 year-old mother to Ubuntu 6 years ago, because I could not find the right combination of software to protect her former Windows-based PC from viruses and spyware. She is just too naive...and clicks on things. Ubuntu was also insanely configurable...and allowed me to vastly simplify the UI for her.

My impression - the article is fairly shallow, but it's not far off....and the timing is interesting because I just moved my mother back to Windows.

Why? Ever try to get a printer working on Ubuntu...and get all of the functionality out of that printer? Yes, I have...multiple times...and I have gotten things working...mostly...but with effort...and only after writing off some of the printer's functionality. Want to walk up to it and click the scan to desktop button? Yeah, well maybe...but more likely you'll need to walk back to the PC and initiate the scan from there...assuming you installed the correct TWAIN driver. Furthermore, even getting basic printing working normally takes significant effort (and technical prowess).

Wireless drivers? Nuff said.

Want commercial software like iTunes or something else not available on Linux? Yeah, I know, we are savvy enough to run Wine, VMWare, or Virtual Box...but I am talking about a casual user. A casual user like my mother who bought a new printer and was naive enough to think that she could just plug it in and get walked through related prompts. A casual user who bought Turbo Tax and who didn't want to use the online version.

Linux is great...and has definite advantages...especially for a developer or power user...and the price is right...but Windows still makes life easy...and is generally optimized for folks who aren't "PC enthusiasts". i.e., folks who don't want to have to deal with config files, terminal windows, etc.

Yes, I have Linux at home...in a VM. My main OS is Windows 7. It's just easier.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> And on that note... I just signed up xD


you'll find a few friends over there..

Linux is bad mouthed quite as bad there as it is here..

People tend to be nicer to windows users there than here&#8230;

I said something to the effect that hackintoshing is pretty mainstream by now witnessed by psystar and pear computers and it was on..kinda like this thread..


----------



## newphase

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ironmaiden*
> 
> talking about Aero than how about compiz ?


I tried Aero on an ole Qosmio laptop and Window basically gave-me-the-finger.

Tried Compiz in Sabayon (same lappy) and it worked perfectly.


----------



## Rocket Lawnchair

I haven't read the ENTIRE thread, but I'll say this. Linux has it's problems. Driver support is still a big issue, X.org makes setting up multiple monitors hell, and there's the occasional piece of hardware that's a big fuss to set up. Top that off with the lack of serious software available and fragmentation. But a cynical attitude isn't going to improve the situation, and things are getting better. Hardware that didn't work before now works out of the box, and Wayland is deprecating X.org, which will make it easier for developers to create pretty even more user friendly interfaces.

I have to agree that for most people it's not there yet, but it's getting there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> you'll find a few friends over there..
> 
> Linux is bad mouthed quite as bad there as it is here..
> 
> People tend to be nicer to windows users there than here&#8230;
> 
> I said something to the effect that hackintoshing is pretty mainstream by now witnessed by psystar and pear computers and it was on..kinda like this thread..


Hackintoshing, for the record, is completely legal if your copy of Mac OS X is legitimate. Apple can't jail you for breaking their EULA.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> You shouldn't have done it that way, it'll get moved to wasteland..
> Do you like Tor..it's always been painfully slow for me.


Yep. Always is. But hey it keeps my IP from the admins so I'm happy. Yeah, it got five responses in three minutes, and then got deleted :/


----------



## Shrak

Josh failed, threads gone


----------



## GermanyChris

I was about to say the same thing

GONE.


----------



## wierdo124

Some behavior in here is WAY out of line. Leaving it unlocked, but be warned.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Yea I just finished a 10 day time out 2 hours ago at mac rumors for my opinions&#8230;
> Thats the second in 30 days so I figure I'll be banned in two months but ohh well..


I might have to sign up there too. For some reason the thought of getting banned from an apple forum just brings a smile to my face.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scuba Steve in VA*
> 
> Hmmm...I just found this thread, so I haven't read it all...but I did go read the actual article...so here are my impressions.
> I'll first say this - I am a developer who uses multiple OSes...and I moved my 80 year-old mother to Ubuntu 6 years ago, because I could not find the right combination of software to protect her former Windows-based PC from viruses and spyware. She is just too naive...and clicks on things. Ubuntu was also insanely configurable...and allowed me to vastly simplify the UI for her.
> My impression - the article is fairly shallow, but it's not far off....and the timing is interesting because I just moved my mother back to Windows.
> Why? Ever try to get a printer working on Ubuntu...and get all of the functionality out of that printer? Yes, I have...multiple times...and I have gotten things working...mostly...but with effort...and only after writing off some of the printer's functionality. Want to walk up to it and click the scan to desktop button? Yeah, well maybe...but more likely you'll need to walk back to the PC and initiate the scan from there...assuming you installed the correct TWAIN driver. Furthermore, even getting basic printing working normally takes significant effort (and technical prowess).
> Wireless drivers? Nuff said.
> Want commercial software like iTunes or something else not available on Linux? Yeah, I know, we are savvy enough to run Wine, VMWare, or Virtual Box...but I am talking about a casual user. A casual user like my mother who bought a new printer and was naive enough to think that she could just plug it in and get walked through related prompts. A casual user who bought Turbo Tax and who didn't want to use the online version.
> Linux is great...and has definite advantages...especially for a developer or power user...and the price is right...but Windows still makes life easy...and is generally optimized for folks who aren't "PC enthusiasts". i.e., folks who don't want to have to deal with config files, terminal windows, etc.
> Yes, I have Linux at home...in a VM. My main OS is Windows 7. It's just easier.


Spot on.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> you'll find a few friends over there..
> Linux is bad mouthed quite as bad there as it is here..
> People tend to be nicer to windows users there than here&#8230;
> I said something to the effect that hackintoshing is pretty mainstream by now witnessed by psystar and pear computers and it was on..kinda like this thread..


With a few exceptions everyone in this thread (myself included) have not "bad mouthed" linux. We've merely pointed out how the author is correct on some of his points. But that's the problem with the entrenched linux community. You point out some flaws and how it could be improved to make it more widely accepted and they don their penguin armor so that they might "slay the foul beast who hath dare challenged our realm". A linux noob going into linux forums doesn't stand a chance with that kind of mentality. For every 2 linux "pros" that offer help there's at least 1 entrenched user who will flame him for being a "stupid noob" and asking stupid questions. And those same entrenched users will complain and wonder why linux isn't more widely accepted because it's so easy to use.


----------



## Vagrant Storm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *newphase*
> 
> I tried Aero on an ole Qosmio laptop and Window basically gave-me-the-finger.
> Tried Compiz in Sabayon (same lappy) and it worked perfectly.


Yeah I've ran a fusion desktop on machines with 1GB of memory.

Honestly...this is why I like Sabayon so much. It installs Compiz during the install


----------



## newphase

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> Yeah I've ran a fusion desktop on machines with 1GB of memory.
> Honestly...this is why I like Sabayon so much. It installs Compiz during the install


And ain't it purty


----------



## crust_cheese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Actually windows is more like buying a sports car with an inline 4. It gets you where you need to go, it's reasonably quick, and you just have to change the oil every now and then. Linux is like buying a jet engine to put in that car. Yes nobody can catch you and you'll have massive bragging rights but you'll need to learn how to put it in the car and do regular service and do you really want your grandparents to look like this when you take them out for a spin?


What are you even talking about? It's true that Linux brings far less bloat and resource hogs than Mac OS X or Windows 7, and thus it will allow you to more fully harness the full power of your personal computer. And it's not like your run-of-the-mill user-friendly distribution was a lot of complicated work to install or maintain... but we've been through this, you don't really want to know something else.


----------



## Contagion

That's strange. It's dead?
I just installed Fedora 16, used it for a week, and got rid of W7 all together because F16 does everything that I want.


----------



## Quantum Reality

The things that would push me to Linux more than anything else is the following:

1. Allowing Firefox to push updates more frequently through the OS's update mechanism rather than locking that down (you can't update Linux FF through FF, only when the OS's central repository update manager itself pushes out the update)
2. Effortless and reliable DVD and Blu-Ray playback without messing about via mechanisms you have to google to find because no-one will lay it out plainly that the OS lacks all the features of disc playback due to licencing restrictions.
3. A media player with the same interface (or as near as) Media Player Classic, which would include being able to play back subtitle files.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> The things that would push me to Linux more than anything else is the following:
> 1. Allowing Firefox to push updates more frequently through the OS's update mechanism rather than locking that down (you can't update Linux FF through FF, only when the OS's central repository update manager itself pushes out the update)
> 2. Effortless and reliable DVD and Blu-Ray playback without messing about via mechanisms you have to google to find because no-one will lay it out plainly that the OS lacks all the features of disc playback due to licencing restrictions.
> 3. A media player with the same interface (or as near as) Media Player Classic, which would include being able to play back subtitle files.


Have you tried Plex?

Plex replaced all my video players not to long ago.


----------



## Rubers

You can run Compiz/Unity on 1gb RAM but it's not exactly speedy. LXDE would be better on those machines!


----------



## xeekei

This thread has been a blast! My personal favourite is Xubuntu. Even though I'm a power user I prefer the out of the box functionality of Ubuntu-based distros. Built in support for tethering is really a life-saver sometimes. I know that LXDE is more lightweight than Xfce, but it's not as nice to me.
KDE is really good too, but a slight too heavy even now after a lot of progress on that front.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> The things that would push me to Linux more than anything else is the following:
> 1. Allowing Firefox to push updates more frequently through the OS's update mechanism rather than locking that down (you can't update Linux FF through FF, only when the OS's central repository update manager itself pushes out the update)
> 2. Effortless and reliable DVD and Blu-Ray playback without messing about via mechanisms you have to google to find because no-one will lay it out plainly that the OS lacks all the features of disc playback due to licencing restrictions.
> 3. A media player with the same interface (or as near as) Media Player Classic, which would include being able to play back subtitle files.


1) You could always tarball if you're that impatient as FF is available that way too. Some distros are really right on it so you could always move to them.

2) DVD works fine for me in everything. Bluray, you can either MakeMkv or or you can use MakeMkv to decrypt and feed into a player. Plus, someone had posted some current keys for some bluray discs. But again...this is misdirected anger/complaints. This is not Linux's fault. It is the producers. You want things to change than you speak with the wallet and complain to them.

3) Eh...XBMC in Linux is much better. Sure it's a little "bloated" but hell it's so easy to use and get everything working that the trade off is worth it.


----------



## Petrol

Good article. I like tinkering with Linux but I like many people don't have the time and patience to go through all kinds of crap just to have a set-up that works as reliably as Windows. There are so many Linux apps that are just written in someone's spare time with no R&D and no support so basically a whole lot of buggy-as-hell software. It's very rare that I get a 3rd party app for Windows that is so buggy it's barely functional, but it happens a bunch with Linux apps.

One thing that really bugs me is when Linux proponents respond to "Linux can't do this or that..." with a tone that basically sounds like "YOU MUST BE AN IGNORANT MORON. Of course it can, you just have to do this, this other thing, that, that other thing, and fourty supplementary things, oh and don't forget the twenty dependencies..." I guess if you deal with it professionally, it makes sense to learn how to do a thousand things just to get one thing done. All I know is after countless hours of tinkering with Linux just to gain some ground that may be lost at the next kernel update, I've bloody well had enough of the can-do attitude. Considering the hours lost on figuring Linux out and getting it to run _as a reliable desktop OS_, I would have saved a lot of time and consequently money by just paying for the Windows version of whatever I need, installing it in minutes instead of hours and moving onto the next thing in my life.


----------



## cavallino

I don't really find linux to be all that much faster for normal tasks. I have used very minimal arch installations but excluding boot time on my desktop everything is just as fast on windows. On paper it is using less memory or resources but unless you are running on a weaker machine it doesn't really matter for the average OCN super computer. Now if you are doing some professional work that requires every ounce of resources thats different.

Once you try to create a windows comparable kde environment resource usage gets even closer.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Linux doesn't take off, ever, because it lacks serious support and it lacks the money to throw support at it. But the reason you get support with Windows is because you buy it.


I think it will eventually; the amount of people using it tends to increase slowly over time, eventually someone will see the benefit of having actual support and the other thing people seem to be forgetting Linux is missing: Advertisement.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> Flash, silver-light, networking, and audio all say hi.


Flash? Works fine now.
Silverlight? I've seen 2 sites that actually uses it; the official Microsoft one and Netflix.
Networking? Try a recent PCs, most are supported now.
Audio? Most chipsets are fine, although a few have issues. OSS4 screws up on my laptop but works fine on my desktop. Hell, ALSA works better than Windows for me; I don't need to download drivers. It's literally plug and play, on Windows I need to download the driver from ASUS' website.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> These aren't issues for people like us. These are issues for the common user. People like us ALREADY use linux or have a proper reason not to.
> For the average user, windows/osx is
> 1) Familiar and natural
> 2) As easy to install as just plopping in the CD and following a wizard written in ******-talk.
> 3) Gets all the updates it needs automatically.
> 4) Software you pick up at a store just works.
> 5) Websites and ALL of their content, regardless of how it was created, simply works.
> For the same user looking at linux, they see:
> 1) scary computer jargon words. Oh no, will I fry my floppy disk processors If I accept?
> 2) that game my brother gave me. It dun work. My computa's broke
> 3) Whats a kernal? Is this a popcorn machine? Do I need to clean out the tarballs with Windex?
> 4) I bought netflix. Why isn't there CSI: Miami?
> 5) What's a GOOIE? Is it a type of candy? Why cant I has candy? Also why is there words on my computer where buttons should be?
> 6) Wheres my little paperclip buddy? I can't write my papers without him!
> You get the picture. Keep in mind that while we use half decent hardware, most computer users are still rocking 10 year old bargain bin OEM prebuilts with obscure hardware that doesn't even have any existing documentation.


Sure, Netflix matters but other than that? None of that is really applicable to most users...Especially games, they'll most likely play flash games.
As for your positives for OS X and Windows:
1) And Metro is natural and familiar how? OS X isn't, unless you've already used it too. Not to mention, a lot of Linux distros aren't much more different from say, XP, than Vista or Win7 are.
2) ...And Linux isn't? In fact it's easier than Windows a lot of the time.
3) ...And Linux doesn't? Even Arch does.
4) Software centre. It's already been proven time and time again people would rather not leave the house to buy some software or the like if they can buy it online and download it.
5) A tiny, tiny amount of content wouldn't render properly in Linux. Silverlight isn't used much; Flash works perfectly fine and most websites render fine in Firefox/Chromium. Not much more than in OS X, which while it has Silverlight support, doesn't support recent versions of IE. (Most people use Safari on it, anyway...)

Not to mention, what about users who live in other countries? We don't get Netflix (Afaik?) and any streaming things here (ABC iView, etc) are all flash and work *perfectly* in Linux.

You're grasping at straws, there's very good reasons as to why Linux isn't successful but as Linux has stood since 2010, it's not really the OS itself but the support structure. (Advertisement and Support in particular)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zero4549*
> 
> Not entirely sure what you're getting at with this post... but ok. lol
> I know it all sounds like it would make sense... but have you ever tried to talk a normal windows user through the process of aquiring, installing, and actually using linux? It's like pulling teeth and at the end of they day you still end up having to do it for them.
> I can tell the same person "go get windows 7" and they'll just do it. They know where to buy it. They know how to install it. They know how to use it.
> Granted, I haven't done this myself for about 2 years, but I'm assuming it would go somewhat along the same lines If I had.
> I'm not really saying linux is harder... it _is_, slightly, but that's not the point. The average user couldn't use command line in windows, what makes you think they can do it in linux?
> Sorry if my points are getting sloppy I've not slept for quite a few too many hours... hopefully you see where im going with this though.


Done it with my mother.
Told her to download Linux Mint Debian Edition latest off the Internode server, she got it fine and installed it on her own. It is *not* like pullling teeth, it's easier than Windows a lot of the time because they can do it from the comfort of their computer chair.

The average user could probably use the cmd line in Windows and the terminal in Linux, but chooses not to for simplicity. Users _could_ do a lot more than they do currently, but it's better to make it more user friendly IMO.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> No issues with audio right? I just installed Mint Maya to check it out and guess what, my audio doesn't work. In fact doing just a cursory search I saw MANY posts from people trying to get help with x-fi cards. And that's not an "old" chipset either? Mine is currently still being sold by auzentech. Yet two days ago everyone was trying to convince me that "linux installs as easy as windows and supports 90% of the hardware out there".
> 
> I haven't even tried dusting off my WNA1000 adapter and seeing if it "works". Last time I had to jump through hoops, and move the whole computer to a different room to connect the ethernet. One of the main reasons I went ahead and wired my whole house with cat 6. How many other wifi adapters require you to be connected to the internet in order for Linux to set it up?


Because the average user is going to have an X-Fi, right? Nearly all the realtek chipsets (generally) work fine. As do most of the ASUS AV100 and AV200 based sound cards; you got the one that even had crappy driver support on Windows for a while and are then complaining about drivers...Yeah. Try your onboard with Linux, I bet it will work *perfectly fine.*

Not many, actually. My laptop works fine in any of the non-libre distros (eg. I can start Ubuntu/Mint, Arch, etc and connect via WiFi easily but on Debian I need to use Ethernet) as does my mothers Dlink USB WiFi dongle and pretty much every recent WiFi dongle. Driver support and usability in Linux has improved tenfold since 2010.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Windows:
> 1)windows is so easy a kid can use it with minimal instructions (not saying that's a great thing but it's true), Linux even a slight computer geek needs to do some reading up to run linux.
> 2)A monkey with a bad attitude could install windows and the chances of having an install problem are EXTREMELY low (less than 1%). I just tried installing Mint and already see multiple issues (on less than 3 year old hardware) that will require troubleshooting to fix.
> 3)no disagreement with that one.
> 4)of course
> 5)not that I've ever come across or heard of
> Linux:
> 1)Note the "basic". Anything beyond firefox, word proc., and a paint program will require "learning linux" which is a daunting task for the average joe.
> 2)Like it or not most devs use directx and until that changes it's a hard road for gaming on linux.
> 3)Even advanced users never even need to know that windows has a "kernal".
> 4)Of course he has that one. And more and more programs are using silver-light. I had to install it on my wifes laptop so she could use a program from work while at home.
> 5)agree with you on that one.
> 6)I wouldn't go as far as to say "better". Very similar is more like it (in function and use not interface).
> It all boils down to Linux is far "better" than it used to be. But can you objectively and honesly say it's just as easy to install and run it as windows? I wish it were true because more people would make the switch and the devs would take note and cater to that expanding market. But it isn't true.....YET. If I were to take 100 random people and have them install windows on their bare systems, how many would encounter a problem? I would guess between 0 and 5. Now take the distro of your choice. Can the same be said? I'd say at least 20+ would encounter some hardware "issue" if not much more.


1) Yeah..no. My mother's working on it fine on her own, after I showed her the software centre. No different to the first time she used Windows (Windows 95).
2) What issues, again? Audio? Works fine on the most common chipsets (Realtek) with only a few issues. You're running an X-Fi, I believe which is *not* as common. WiFi adapters? You admitted yourself you didn't try your WNA1000 on Linux again and the only other issue is that "Cinnamon was a bit laggy"
Linux:
1) Most users use firefox/internet, word processing and email. They're all pre-installed on nearly every Linux distro and work ootb.
2) It's a slow process at best, Steam on Linux will hopefully help that.
3) Likewise for Linux. You don't need to pay any attention to the fact Linux has a kernel at all, it's only nutheads on sites like this that recompile and download optimised ones for a tiny performance boost.








4) I'm still yet to see any bar MS' official site and Netflix.
6) Agreed, Libreoffice is definitely worse than MS Office but it's good enough for most.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vagrant Storm*
> 
> Linux on a modern high powered desktop is like putting 13" tires on a new truck...sure it will drive around, but you are limiting yourself.


...Yeah, no. Linux uses CPUs better than Windows. If you're doing CPU intensive tasks only, Linux will do them faster than Windows. I'd say that 4x 16 core Opterons would be faster (For mutli-core stuff) than your i7, wouldn't you? Go in the [email protected] section and tell them that they're limiting themselves by running [email protected] in a Linux VM in Windows and *still* getting better performance than native Windows.

As for gaming; I think that out of the games I play there's about 2-3 that don't run near perfectly in Wine? Steam's still being ported to Linux and Minecraft runs perfectly fine (I could go further into indie games but the majority don't stress your GPU hard)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> But still, yes, it's easier than Linux (no need to make multiple partitions, even if the process is automated).


There isn't on Linux anyway. Not to mention, if it's all automated then why does it matter? People won't notice it in actual usage of their machine.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> "Microsoft self-destruct"? Ahem, that sounds like FUD to me.
> Incidentally, XP with Service Pack 3 is reasonably multiprocessor friendly, as is (I am given to understand) Win2K on non-HyperThreaded systems.
> Behind a hardware firewall and with safe browsing practices such machines would still be perfectly usable in today's world.


That's meaning it can run on multiprocessor setups. Windows Vista/7 are much faster and Linux has extra performance on top of that.

I'll be the first to admit Linux isn't the most user friendly for a lot of tasks (Try setting up proper video acceleration on a PCI HD4350 to play 1080p in Arch...Fun) but for the average user? It's fine. You need end-user support and advertisement for the most part now, then better hardware support comes along from that.


----------



## Ryanb213

oh boy. more fangirls defending a piece of software like a personal attack.

The point is, linux will never suceed as a serious contender on the desktop. *never.* Use it all you want, but fact is market share is below 1% still. Linux on the desktop never died, it was never alive to begin with.

Until this has changed, there is not a thing left to argue about.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crust_cheese*
> 
> What are you even talking about? It's true that Linux brings far less bloat and resource hogs than Mac OS X or Windows 7, and thus it will allow you to more fully harness the full power of your personal computer. *And it's not like your run-of-the-mill user-friendly distribution was a lot of complicated work to install or maintain*... but we've been through this, you don't really want to know something else.


Oh really? Like Mint/Ubuntu with an X-Fi sound card? Or netgear wifi? Or multiple other normal pieces of hardware that are not supported out of the box and will require extra steps to find out how to get it running if it even does? Yep...definately so easy a grandma could do it right?


----------



## Minnetonka16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> URL is't working for me


Got a little shakespeare in us do we?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

I love how he said "x-fi is NOT common". Someone should tell Creative that their not going to survive selling just a few because it's "not common".


----------



## xeekei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I love how he said "x-fi is NOT common". Someone should tell Creative that their not going to survive selling just a few because it's "not common".


My X-Fi works out of the box in Linux. It's getting old though; not the card itself, I bought it just a few months ago, but the model.


----------



## Riou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I love how he said "x-fi is NOT common". Someone should tell Creative that their not going to survive selling just a few because it's "not common".


Try changing the default sound device to X-Fi in the sound control panel. On Ubuntu, they tend to make the onboard audio the default source.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

It's the default sound output device. The only time I get sound is when I choose 5.1 or 7.1 and the two rear channel sounds play through the center channel. Nothing else comes through. I have the onboard audio device disabled in UEFI so there shouldn't be any way for linux to detect it. I'd love some help on this issue. If not I'll have to search through the net and troubleshoot it. But it goes back to my original point. Linux is a very powerful and flexible OS with some excellent features. But to make a blanket claim that it's "as easy to install and operate as windows" like some in here have claimed while flaming the author of the article for daring to state otherwise is rediculous and untrue. Sure it's easy to install if you have a MB made within the last 5 years and have nothing else added to the system other than a newish GPU (meaning non legacy) and are connected through the LAN port on the MB. Change that scenario and it may not be so easy to install and setup anymore. If it's so easy to install and setup 99% of the time then why do I always hear "I set it up for my mother/brother/sister/grandparents/friend"?

And as for:

"*Try your onboard with Linux, I bet it will work perfectly fine*."

That's the answer to Linux is ready for mass distribution?? If your hardware doesn't work ditch it? And in no way is Sound Blaster X-Fi "uncommon". It might only be used by 10% of users but that's not "uncommon". There are even more than a few motherboards that highlight having an onboard X-Fi chip as a feature (higher end of course).

"*You're running an X-Fi, I believe which is not as common. WiFi adapters? You admitted yourself you didn't try your WNA1000 on Linux again and the only other issue is that "Cinnamon was a bit laggy"*"

Only other issue? Did you miss that phoronix goes straight to "sleeping" and won't run? Maybe I've missed some very basic thing that someone who knows linux inside and out would know and I'll kick myself for being a dunce, but how many other programs will that happen to (even if it's a basic fix) and how many "grandma's" would get frustrated that their newly acquired software isn't working? I've never in my years from Win 95 on had a program install, click to start it and nothing happens without even an error message.

Edit - I've said it once and I'll say it again. There needs to be a fundamental change in the mindset of the Linux community in it's approach to how Linux as a desktop OS should fit into the world community at large to make it "ready" for mass use (That's EXACTLY what Google did while creating Android and look at the success it's having). Otherwise don't "flame" authors of articles like the one here that criticize it for "user friendliness".


----------



## _GTech

While I'm definitely not saying I agree with this article, as I think it's hogwash myself, I will say this...

Those USB Modems & WIfi Routers that some ISPs dish out, are definitely NOT Linux supported, unfortunately, that makes the OS a lot less desirable... (at least to some people anyway)

AT&T will NOT let you run their internet on some Operating Systems, and if you are wondering why, it's simple, very simple....

They want you to install their software, and they do not support older Operating Systems, including many Linux Distros...

The problem is, the older distros have far better security and privacy than the new ones (just don't update them!)...

For me, it's about privacy, I don't want people watching what I'm doing, and if I choose to encrypt traffic, I don't want people reading that either...

I for one do not like the newer version of Ubuntu w/ Unity because I smell a very stinky rat...


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *_GTech*
> 
> While I'm definitely not saying I agree with this article, as I think it's hogwash myself, I will say this...
> Those USB Modems & WIfi Routers that some ISPs dish out, are definitely NOT Linux supported, unfortunately, that makes the OS a lot less desirable... (at least to some people anyway)
> AT&T will NOT let you run their internet on some Operating Systems, and if you are wondering why, it's simple, very simple....
> They want you to install their software, and they do not support older Operating Systems, including many Linux Distros...
> The problem is, the older distros have far better security and privacy than the new ones (just don't update them!)...
> For me, it's about privacy, I don't want people watching what I'm doing, and if I choose to encrypt traffic, I don't want people reading that either...
> I for one do not like the newer version of Ubuntu w/ Unity because I smell a very stinky rat...


I think the title of the article and his conclusion (desktop linux is dead) is hogwash because it will always stay alive as long as the community is there to support it. He DOES bring up some very valid points though.


----------



## ironmaiden

As I have posted before linux was never intended as a desktop system, it's power is server sided and CLI and that I can say works just beautifully , not that it cannot be used as a desktop, there are DEs like kde , gnome , lxde , xfce. most of the hardware companies don't offer drivers for linux except maybe a few like ati / nvidia a few others, so we have to rely on the updated kernels.

e.g. kde offers everything a day to day user does on a windows platform like kmail / libre / openoffice / chromium / firefox / opera of course no IE as most of the users would not touch that browser. Heck flash works perfectly on linux and chromium / FF.

The thing about win 7 is that it is the most stable windows platform I have used till date. Linux has come from where MS was once DOS - win 3.1 - win 95 / 98SE / ME - WIn XP - Vista - Win 7. So linux DE is between XP n 7.

On my Toshiba my wi-fi + plus Reliance Netconnect (datacard) works without trouble I did not have to install any drivers as the kernel has the modules (opensuse 12.1 64 ).

Heck people love Mac OS hey that's again a Unix based system. Compiz offers beautiful desktop effects, ah use gnome 2 and the mac lion theme with cairo or docky and you will see the mac os on your linux system , you want windows type than kde or lxde or xfce.

Now don't tell me that linux DE uses some different language than English, any windows user will be able to use KDE without any trouble for day to day work.

But again it's all a personal.

Hey but I do not need an anti virus.


----------



## Horse Head

The news is in! I seen Tux on the side walk looking for handouts! Poor Tux got fooled. Little guy never knew he was being fooled. He told me his owner left him in front of an animal shelter in a Windows PC box. Turned out that the shelter closed several months ago and posted directions to another shelter, but the other shelter does not accept Penguins.

I really never cared for Tux, but felt bad for the little guy, so I gave him a free copy of Windows 7 and Pirates of Silicon Valley DVD.

Now it's Tux against the world!

Tux you can do it! Join the winning side! Resistance is futile!


----------



## QuietlyLinux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horse Head*
> 
> The news is in! I seen Tux on the side walk looking for handouts! Poor Tux got fooled. Little guy never knew he was being fooled. He told me his owner left him in front of an animal shelter in a Windows PC box. Turned out that the shelter closed several months ago and posted directions to another shelter, but the other shelter does not accept Penguins.
> I really never cared for Tux, but felt bad for the little guy, so I gave him a free copy of Windows 7 and Pirates of Silicon Valley DVD.
> Now it's Tux against the world!
> Tux you can do it! Join the winning side! Resistance is futile!


No! My friends to not listen to his lies!


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuietlyLinux*
> 
> No! My friends to not listen to his lies!


All your Linux are belong to us.


----------



## chemicalfan

Man there's a lot of flaming going on here, it's hot enough outside without that.

On the X-Fi point - please show me where an average new PC that a novice might buy (say, around £500-600) comes with an X-Fi. Regardless of your "10% of users" comment (which sounds way too high, none of our 200 PCs at work has one), AVERAGE JOE will not have one (why would they?).

Anyway, we should all agree to disagree, as there's too much fanboy vs. anti-fanboy in here. I say I'm right, you say I'm wrong. The answer is of course both, and because it's all opinion, this argument could go on until the end of time.


----------



## Rubers

Bubba makes good points but disguises them in bile and ridiculous posts that jump from point to point.

Not one Linux user is going agree with you when you post like that. Which I'm sure is fine with you, but these posts seems like you're on the fast track to infractionland.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Bubba makes good points but disguises them in bile and ridiculous posts that jump from point to point.
> Not one Linux user is going agree with you when you post like that. Which I'm sure is fine with you, but these posts seems like you're on the fast track to infractionland.


Bile? Really? I merely posted an opinion and was flamed for it and then had to defend it. And I'm on the fast track to infractionland? I didn't realize that in this forum if you pointed out flaws in an operating system you were personally attacking people with "bile". I would expect that from an apple forum. Not here.

Chemical I will agree it's not something a typical "average joe" will come across but it is something that should be addressed in order to open it up to a wider audience as a daily use OS. Anyways, I've said my opinion and shall take my charred hind end out lest I contaminate anyone else with my "bile". I would appreciate help with the x-fi and phoronix issue though if anyone is up to it.


----------



## MediaRocker

I guess I'm masochistic or something. I for one love using terminal... it's so much faster to get things done.

But this article, while touching on some valid points, is a joke.

Use is up, it's not dead. However 3rd party support as well as drivers are limited, and this is what will keep Linux in the lower market share as Malcom pointed out. However I don't really believe it's dead. I belive the FAD is dead... where kiddies thought it was cool to run Linux to show off, now it's back to the hardcore users whom use it daily, which is not a bad place to be. Perhaps the Linux community can band together and kick Ubuntu out of it's "Ambassadors Office" by creating a completely user friendly environment, much like openSUSE (Formerly SuSE).... If anything I think this article will help stir the juices and encourage future projects to be sprouting up... can't wait to see what they come up with next...









But they really need to figure out a way to port M$office over because I kinda need OneNote and Visio to work on my laptop.









Yeah having Word, PowerPoint, and Excel is all fine and dandy, but I bought M$O 2k7 and I'd like to use all of my components out of the box...









Till then I'll fiddle with WINE and PlayOnLinux, but this is exactly what's turning users away.

The undertone of the above post is: I don't really care considering Linux isn't dead...


----------



## randomizer

TL;DR version of the article: "I don't like tinkering with my system so Linux on the desktop is dead. "

Long version: [insert recycled points from other peoples' articles and make them sound like my own]


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Bile? Really? I merely posted an opinion and was flamed for it and then had to defend it. And I'm on the fast track to infractionland? I didn't realize that in this forum if you pointed out flaws in an operating system you were personally attacking people with "bile". I would expect that from an apple forum. Not here.
> Chemical I will agree it's not something a typical "average joe" will come across but it is something that should be addressed in order to open it up to a wider audience as a daily use OS. Anyways, I've said my opinion and shall take my charred hind end out lest I contaminate anyone else with my "bile". I would appreciate help with the x-fi and phoronix issue though if anyone is up to it.


Your posts all amounted to "linux sucks and you're all linux defending sissy fanboys" which is bound to put backs up no matter how many good points you make. Fast track to infractionland because you're getting angry a lot.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Your posts all amounted to "linux sucks and you're all linux defending sissy fanboys" which is bound to put backs up no matter how many good points you make. Fast track to infractionland because you're getting angry a lot.


Maybe you should go back and actually read the WHOLE thread. Not only did I NOT say linux sucks, I've pointed out NUMEROUS times the excellent features of Linux. But that's what happens when you jump into a conversation without taking the time to learn what it's about or what's being said. But that's what happens when you make ANY criticisms at all about linux even if it's constructive criticism. The linux fanboys come running with flame throwers in hand to make personal attacks and turn it into an all out brawl.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Maybe you should go back and actually read the WHOLE thread. Not only did I NOT say linux sucks, I've pointed out NUMEROUS times the excellent features of Linux. But that's what happens when you jump into a conversation without taking the time to learn what it's about or what's being said. But that's what happens when you make ANY criticisms at all about linux even if it's constructive criticism. The linux fanboys come running with flame throwers in hand to make personal attacks and turn it into an all out brawl.


"amounts to" is what I said. I've been following this thread from the start. No-one's made personal attacks on you they've just fought fire with fire. You've all been flaming each other.


----------



## Contagion

lol at everybody saying "I don't have time to learn a new OS. qq" But, you have time to get on OCN and tell people you don't have time.
If you can't just take a weekend and tinker with a new OS.. it's fun, if anything. And a learning experience. I used Windows exclusively for a long time. Had a go at Fedora and threw away Windows a few days later.


----------



## Rubers

Well, I''m still keeping Windows. I'm back and forth between the two. If I'm not doing anything Windows Specific (gaming, mainly) then I let GRUB (BURG







) auto load Xubuntu and go from there... Though sometimes I do load Windows just because I think I should use my 12GB RAM. Xubuntu being super awesome only uses roughly 800MB!


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I would appreciate help with the x-fi and phoronix issue though if anyone is up to it.


Let's see what we can do








Although you should probably make a post in the Linux forum rather than hijacking this one









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Well, I''m still keeping Windows. I'm back and forth between the two. If I'm not doing anything Windows Specific (gaming, mainly) then I let GRUB (BURG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) auto load Xubuntu and go from there... Though sometimes I do load Windows just because I think I should use my 12GB RAM. Xubuntu being super awesome only uses roughly 800MB!


This is what I'm aiming for with my future laptop









Quick question - why Xubuntu if you've got 12Gb of RAM? Your system would scream even KDE or Gnome/Unity


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Oh really? Like Mint/Ubuntu with an X-Fi sound card? Or netgear wifi? Or multiple other normal pieces of hardware that are not supported out of the box and will require extra steps to find out how to get it running if it even does? Yep...definately so easy a grandma could do it right?


Most people don't have X-Fis, and you *admitted you didn't try your WiFi on Mint.*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I love how he said "x-fi is NOT common". Someone should tell Creative that their not going to survive selling just a few because it's "not common".


It isn't. For every machine with an X-Fi or the like, there will be 10 with Realtek.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> It's the default sound output device. The only time I get sound is when I choose 5.1 or 7.1 and the two rear channel sounds play through the center channel. Nothing else comes through. I have the onboard audio device disabled in UEFI so there shouldn't be any way for linux to detect it. I'd love some help on this issue. If not I'll have to search through the net and troubleshoot it. But it goes back to my original point. Linux is a very powerful and flexible OS with some excellent features. But to make a blanket claim that it's "as easy to install and operate as windows" like some in here have claimed while flaming the author of the article for daring to state otherwise is rediculous and untrue. Sure it's easy to install if you have a MB made within the last 5 years and have nothing else added to the system other than a newish GPU (meaning non legacy) and are connected through the LAN port on the MB. Change that scenario and it may not be so easy to install and setup anymore. If it's so easy to install and setup 99% of the time then why do I always hear "I set it up for my mother/brother/sister/grandparents/friend"?
> And as for:
> "*Try your onboard with Linux, I bet it will work perfectly fine*."
> That's the answer to Linux is ready for mass distribution?? If your hardware doesn't work ditch it? And in no way is Sound Blaster X-Fi "uncommon". It might only be used by 10% of users but that's not "uncommon". There are even more than a few motherboards that highlight having an onboard X-Fi chip as a feature (higher end of course).
> 
> "*You're running an X-Fi, I believe which is not as common. WiFi adapters? You admitted yourself you didn't try your WNA1000 on Linux again and the only other issue is that "Cinnamon was a bit laggy"*"
> Only other issue? Did you miss that phoronix goes straight to "sleeping" and won't run? Maybe I've missed some very basic thing that someone who knows linux inside and out would know and I'll kick myself for being a dunce, but how many other programs will that happen to (even if it's a basic fix) and how many "grandma's" would get frustrated that their newly acquired software isn't working? I've never in my years from Win 95 on had a program install, click to start it and nothing happens without even an error message.
> Edit - I've said it once and I'll say it again. There needs to be a fundamental change in the mindset of the Linux community in it's approach to how Linux as a desktop OS should fit into the world community at large to make it "ready" for mass use (That's EXACTLY what Google did while creating Android and look at the success it's having). Otherwise don't "flame" authors of articles like the one here that criticize it for "user friendliness".


We're talking the desktop here, are we not? Tell me; how many users (And I don't mean ones getting old hardware off a techie) have dedicated sound cards? Nearly none. How many business PCs have more than the absolute basics? Nearly none. The market for dedicated sound cards is actually very small, just like dedicated GPUs. Why do you think Creative sells stuff other than just their sound cards?

I must have missed the sleeping part. And I've actually had that type of error plenty of times on both Windows and Linux, only to open Task Manager/top and see it's running but not doing anything.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Let's see what we can do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although you should probably make a post in the Linux forum rather than hijacking this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I'm aiming for with my future laptop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quick question - why Xubuntu if you've got 12Gb of RAM? Your system would scream even KDE or Gnome/Unity


... I just really like the XFCE GUI although I'm starting to look out out afield and see what else is on the cards. I just don't like the Unity sidebar very much. Prefer my Rocketdock like panel on the bottom and one on the top. I'm undecided, though!

I was running Lubuntu before that...


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> Most people don't have X-Fis, and you *admitted you didn't try your WiFi on Mint.*
> It isn't. For every machine with an X-Fi or the like, there will be 10 with Realtek.
> We're talking the desktop here, are we not? Tell me; how many users (And I don't mean ones getting old hardware off a techie) have dedicated sound cards? Nearly none. How many business PCs have more than the absolute basics? Nearly none. The market for dedicated sound cards is actually very small, just like dedicated GPUs. Why do you think Creative sells stuff other than just their sound cards?
> I must have missed the sleeping part. And I've actually had that type of error plenty of times on both Windows and Linux, only to open Task Manager/top and see it's running but not doing anything.


My X-Fi works perfectly with Linux without any messing....

edit:

though I've disabled the onboard in my BIOS, though (just like everything else I don't use, like onboard LAN)


----------



## hajile

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> AMD may have "open" drivers but this is where I fight with FOSS-heads...what good is an "open" driver if it doesn't work? I don't know why but even nouveau has caused me less pain than AMD/ATI drivers.


I agree. Closed Nvidia drivers do work better. That said, AMD closed drivers have improved quite a lot as well and are nowhere near the problem they once were.

I'm not one for the short game though. The progress on the open drivers has been much faster than the closed ones (and that has only been helped by AMD -- unlike Nvidia's policy on the matter). It's only a matter of when they overtake the others. The major "performance problem" is mostly because the developers believe that implementing OpenCL (to allow more compute in non-graphics software) is a more important focus. Once more of them are free to focus elsewhere, then those improvements will happen.

A couple other notes:
Things such as open implementations of DX10/11 API are in the works (note: these are libraries, but must still be supported by the drivers), but aren't likely to be supported by AMD (closed source) when they are ready for use. The mesa project wouldn't likely have any reservations about adding support.

The open-source drivers also give the chance for a complete overhaul of the software architecture (something that AMD seems to desire for its own proprietary drivers and something they seem to be watching closely).


----------



## lordikon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> ...No, game developers generally ignore Linux because it does not support DirectX. OpenGL does not prioritize game developers so most have moved to DX.


OpenGL has been picking up more steam lately however due to the iOS and Android markets. The iOS market boom has also increased sales of Macs, which also use OpenGL. In terms of consoles and AAA titles, DirectX is still king, but I do see that trend reversing at the moment. It would be nice if companies like Microsoft and Apple would let go of their proprietary stranglehold on things, Microsoft with C# and DX, and Apple with limiting OSX to Mac.


----------



## wierdo124

Plain and simple the reason i cannot run Linux exclusively have been stated. Netflix, and Office. Some people say LibreOffice is good. It is, but it's still a LONG waay off from MS Office and that will probably never change. I need MS Office. Netflix hasn't supported Linux yet (say they plan to, but hasn't happened), nor has Silverlight, so its a no-go there. From what I can tell it's flat out not possible to run Netflix in Linux.

I do dual boot Ubuntu 12.04 though, I just run Gnome in it. Hate that Unity.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> OpenGL has been picking up more steam lately however due to the iOS and Android markets. The iOS market boom has also increased sales of Macs, which also use OpenGL. In terms of consoles and AAA titles, DirectX is still king, but I do see that trend reversing at the moment. It would be nice if companies like Microsoft and Apple would let go of their proprietary stranglehold on things, Microsoft with C# and DX, and Apple with limiting OSX to Mac.


Microsoft played dirty to get DirectX where it is today, they won't ever release the stranglehold on it. The OSX part I don't see too much of an issue, if it was possible for the average joe, sure. But as is you can still install OSX on any intel based computer and it run perfectly and be updateable, Apple may not like it, but they haven't stopped it and haven't done anything about it.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> OpenGL has been picking up more steam lately however due to the iOS and Android markets. The iOS market boom has also increased sales of Macs, which also use OpenGL. In terms of consoles and AAA titles, DirectX is still king, but I do see that trend reversing at the moment. It would be nice if companies like Microsoft and Apple would let go of their proprietary stranglehold on things, Microsoft with C# and DX, and *Apple with limiting OSX to Mac*.


That will NEVER happen..history says Mac clones are bad for Apple.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Microsoft played dirty to get DirectX where it is today, they won't ever release the stranglehold on it. The OSX part I don't see too much of an issue, if it was possible for the average joe, sure. But as is you can still install OSX on any intel based computer and it run perfectly and be updatable, *Apple may not like it, but they haven't stopped it and haven't done anything about it*.


I think they don't for two reasons:

1: We tend to build the xMac that they don't want to, and it's justifiable. Every time I walk into and electronics store I see fewer and fewer towers but more AIO's and Notebooks. Mix that with the post PC comments by Steve Jobs and there you have it.

2: Hackintoshers tend to also own real Mac's in my case a MP, G5, MB, MBP, and PB G4. When/if the new MP arrives I'll sell the G5 and the 3,1 and buy one.

None of this includes app and itunes sales to Hackintosh's there is just to little gain to fight the hack fight, but they do get there revenge .4 allows no/little overclocking


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wierdo124*
> 
> Plain and simple the reason i cannot run Linux exclusively have been stated. Netflix, and Office. Some people say LibreOffice is good. It is, but it's still a LONG waay off from MS Office and that will probably never change. I need MS Office. Netflix hasn't supported Linux yet (say they plan to, but hasn't happened), nor has Silverlight, so its a no-go there. From what I can tell it's flat out not possible to run Netflix in Linux.
> I do dual boot Ubuntu 12.04 though, I just run Gnome in it. Hate that Unity.


Eh...Netflix I guess even after getting broadband I'm still not with the majority of the US on speed, I mean I couldn't imagine waiting to load a Bluray quality movie. As for Office...the only things that LibreOffice on Linux (Windows version has been terrible for me however) isn't so good at are the damn extensions for Excel/Calc that I need at times for my Finance and Accounting classes. Silverlight like Flash should die in a fire though. Honestly, I love how people are OK with the subtly collusive activities engaged to sustain Silverlight and similar things.


----------



## DuckieHo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Eh...Netflix I guess even after getting broadband I'm still not with the majority of the US on speed, I mean I couldn't imagine waiting to load a Bluray quality movie. As for Office...the only things that LibreOffice on Linux (Windows version has been terrible for me however) isn't so good at are the damn extensions for Excel/Calc that I need at times for my Finance and Accounting classes. Silverlight like Flash should die in a fire though. Honestly, I love how people are OK with the subtly collusive activities engaged to sustain Silverlight and similar things.


If you're doing finance, use Excel..... traders and modelers use it in the real-world as well. The VBA and extensions usage is wide spread.


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuckieHo*
> 
> If you're doing finance, use Excel..... traders and modelers use it in the real-world as well. The VBA and extensions usage is wide spread.


My company does EVERYTHING in excel, even presentations. When they do PPTs, they pull screenshots from spreadsheets.

It drives me mad, but so much better than my current bosses' dependance on word.

I'll take excel over word anyday.

I hate word.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Let's see what we can do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although you should probably make a post in the Linux forum rather than hijacking this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I'm aiming for with my future laptop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quick question - why Xubuntu if you've got 12Gb of RAM? Your system would scream even KDE or Gnome/Unity


I'll have to start one this weekend when I play around with mint as a full install. Right now I just switched to running it in a VM on Win 7.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> Most people don't have X-Fis, and you *admitted you didn't try your WiFi on Mint.*
> It isn't. For every machine with an X-Fi or the like, there will be 10 with Realtek.
> We're talking the desktop here, are we not? Tell me; how many users (And I don't mean ones getting old hardware off a techie) have dedicated sound cards? Nearly none. How many business PCs have more than the absolute basics? Nearly none. The market for dedicated sound cards is actually very small, just like dedicated GPUs. Why do you think Creative sells stuff other than just their sound cards?
> I must have missed the sleeping part. And I've actually had that type of error plenty of times on both Windows and Linux, only to open Task Manager/top and see it's running but not doing anything.


10% is uncommon? I would have thought that 1 in 100 or 1 in a 1000 would be uncommon. And which is it? 1 in 10 or "nearly none"? The whole point is this. It was claimed that Linux is "just as easy to install" as windows (now before the flamers start seeing red and don't seem to understand what is being said I'll qualify this first by saying "I DON'T THINK LINUX IS A HORRIBLE OS"). I'm not saying it's necessarily hard to install in fact I'm sure that 80% of the time it installs easily just fine. But when was the last time you saw a windows install that didn't recognize all of the hardware and automatically load a driver for it? (and don't even start with some 15 year old legacy hardware story). For people like you and I, Linux is fairly simple and any "bumps" we hit we can easily troubleshoot or find the info on how to fix it. But I don't consider myself to be the "average" computer user. I started with a Tandy TRS-80 (doubt most people now have even heard of one) and have been a closet computer geek ever since. That doesn't mean Linux is hard or "crap". But it does mean that when the "average" computer user hits a "bump in the road" while installing or using Linux, and he has no dedicated support structure (forums are not a "dedicated support structure") it becomes just another turn-off to using Linux. Couple that with difficulty running his favorite software (it's getting better though) and lack of hit games (don't even bring up "web" games..you know what I mean) and it's no surprise that more people haven't given up Windows for Linux. I for one hope that will change in the future but the skeptic in me doesn't see or hasn't heard anything that points out that it will.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Microsoft played dirty to get DirectX where it is today, they won't ever release the stranglehold on it. The OSX part I don't see too much of an issue, if it was possible for the average joe, sure. But as is you can still install OSX on any intel based computer and it run perfectly and be updateable, Apple may not like it, but they haven't stopped it and haven't done anything about it.


Fat chance getting microsoft to play nice.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> That will NEVER happen..history says Mac clones are bad for Apple.










History says Mac clones are bad for Apples bottom line. They'd never be able to slap an apple logo on it and charge 3-5 times it's market value if there were Mac clones out there.


----------



## cavallino

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> But as is you can still install OSX on any intel based computer and it run perfectly and be updateable, Apple may not like it, but they haven't stopped it and haven't done anything about it.


Apple makes this pretty difficult and you need pretty specific hardware not just Intel. Even if you can actually boot to the installer using iboot etc. it's still a toss up whether everything will work. Graphics cards are the biggest issue. They function properly with a pretty narrow range of cards. I couldn't even boot snow leopard to the installer with my GTX 570 and a 6870 wouldn't work either. I hear lion is better though. Many motherboards simply won't work either. You can really only install it on "certain" intel based pc's.

I don't pick hardware based on what will work with OSX. I've tried on 3 pc's and 2 laptops and only two would boot with iboot at all. On one the ethernet wouldn't work (forget wireless) and it wouldn't shutdown with out forcing it. The other PC that worked the best still had sporadic inexplicable kernel panics and the 6870 got so hot it was unusable. All of these were Intel based.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> Apple makes this pretty difficult and you need pretty specific hardware not just Intel. Even if you can actually boot to the installer using iboot etc. it's still a toss up whether everything will work. Graphics cards are the biggest issue. They function properly with a pretty narrow range of cards. I couldn't even boot snow leopard to the installer with my GTX 570 and a 6870 wouldn't work either. I hear lion is better though. Many motherboards simply won't work either. You can really only install it on "certain" intel based pc's.
> I don't pick hardware based on what will work with OSX. I've tried on 3 pc's and 2 laptops and only two would boot with iboot at all. On one the ethernet wouldn't work (forget wireless) and it wouldn't shutdown with out forcing it. The other PC that worked the best still had sporadic inexplicable kernel panics and the 6870 got so hot it was unusable. All of these were Intel based.


Every one of my computers has been able to boot it just fine


----------



## cavallino

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Every one of my computers has been able to boot it just fine


You happened to pick the right hardware I guess.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> You got lucky.


I'm just patient when it comes to figuring stuff out. Usually takes little to no modifications to get things to work.


----------



## cavallino

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I'm just patient when it comes to figuring stuff out. Usually takes little to no modifications to get things to work.


Did you use iboot and easybeast?

I'm pretty patient too but no manner of fixes would get it to boot on most of them.

I found it easier to run it in a VM but that also took some work.


----------



## djamorpheus

Terribly written article here's a summary:

Linux sucks because it has no market share. Bye.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> Did you use iboot and easybeast?
> I'm pretty patient too but no manner of fixes would get it to boot on most of them.
> I found it easier to run it in a VM but that also took some work.


no you use iBoot and DSDT for your motherboard&#8230;

Graphics drivers in 10.6 weren't good, Lion is a 1000% better..I have 3 graphics cars here 8800, 550Ti and 6850 all of them boot and run without issue..


----------



## cavallino

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> no you use iBoot and DSDT for your motherboard&#8230;
> Graphics drivers in 10.6 weren't good, Lion is a 1000% better..I have 3 graphics cars here 8800, 550Ti and 6850 all of them boot and run without issue..


Yeah I saw the sabertooth x58 was in the DSDT database I thought I had a good chance and that it would work for my sig rig. However could not even get to the installer. I get a KP when I try to iboot to the to it. Tried every logical boot flag, removed the extra memory etc. etc.

The other mobos weren't in the DSDT so I had to use easybeast.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I'll have to start one this weekend when I play around with mint as a full install. Right now I just switched to running it in a VM on Win 7.
> 10% is uncommon? I would have thought that 1 in 100 or 1 in a 1000 would be uncommon. And which is it? 1 in 10 or "nearly none"? The whole point is this. It was claimed that Linux is "just as easy to install" as windows (now before the flamers start seeing red and don't seem to understand what is being said I'll qualify this first by saying "I DON'T THINK LINUX IS A HORRIBLE OS"). I'm not saying it's necessarily hard to install in fact I'm sure that 80% of the time it installs easily just fine. But when was the last time you saw a windows install that didn't recognize all of the hardware and automatically load a driver for it? (and don't even start with some 15 year old legacy hardware story). For people like you and I, Linux is fairly simple and any "bumps" we hit we can easily troubleshoot or find the info on how to fix it. But I don't consider myself to be the "average" computer user. I started with a Tandy TRS-80 (doubt most people now have even heard of one) and have been a closet computer geek ever since. That doesn't mean Linux is hard or "crap". But it does mean that when the "average" computer user hits a "bump in the road" while installing or using Linux, and he has no dedicated support structure (forums are not a "dedicated support structure") it becomes just another turn-off to using Linux. Couple that with difficulty running his favorite software (it's getting better though) and lack of hit games (don't even bring up "web" games..you know what I mean) and it's no surprise that more people haven't given up Windows for Linux. I for one hope that will change in the future but the skeptic in me doesn't see or hasn't heard anything that points out that it will.
> Fat chance getting microsoft to play nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History says Mac clones are bad for Apples bottom line. T*hey'd never be able to slap an apple logo on it and charge 3-5 times it's market value if there were Mac clones out there*.


The won't support mac clones because OSX would get bloated like Windows. Lion is less than 8GB installed 7 is 12-14GB installed. OSX is slim is supports virtually no legacy HW, and it only supports particular HW if they licensed OSX they could do none of those things and tech support would be a nightmare!!


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> The won't support mac clones because OSX would get bloated like Windows. Lion is less than 8GB installed 7 is 12-14GB installed. OSX is slim is supports virtually no legacy HW, and it only supports particular HW if they licensed OSX they could do none of those things and tech support would be a nightmare!!


And they wouldn't be able to slap an Apple logo on the side and charge 3-5 times the market price.


----------



## ivesceneenough

i've had OSx86 working on:
an old dual Xeon (p4 era RDRAM and all) based dell workstation
a dell inspirion 8600 (pentium M)
an acer 3680 (conroe celerton)
custom build on a DX58SO
a biostar g31 m7 te
and custom build on a 975xbx2

srsly, and some of these were years ago, way before how popular this all got...


----------



## Exostenza

*Why I Don't Care: An in Depth Article Regarding Linux on Desktops*

By: Exostenza

Because people who like Linux will use it and that is all that matters.

Also poor people.

The end.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> Yeah I saw the sabertooth x58 was in the DSDT database I thought I had a good chance and that it would work for my sig rig. However could not even get to the installer. I get a KP when I try to iboot to the to it. Tried every logical boot flag, removed the extra memory etc. etc.
> The other mobos weren't in the DSDT so I had to use easybeast.


Yes, it's mostly gigabyte..

You could compile your own DSDT after extracting it using Linux I can guide you to the process if you care enough..


----------



## Rocket Lawnchair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ivesceneenough*
> 
> i've had OSx86 working on:
> an old dual Xeon (p4 era RDRAM and all) based dell workstation
> a dell inspirion 8600 (pentium M)
> an acer 3680 (conroe celerton)
> custom build on a DX58SO
> a biostar g31 m7 te
> and custom build on a 975xbx2
> 
> srsly, and some of these were years ago, way before how popular this all got...


I actually have Leopard running on an old Dell OptiPlex G-something (Pentium 4) that I was given, and it runs incredibly well. Compositing and everything.


----------



## Rothen

A Linux thread gone Leapord/Lion. No more OS X stuff please.

The Linux desktop isn't dead, and never will be dead. It just lacks the standardization that Windows and OS X have. It makes up for that in customizabiltiy. /thread


----------



## Nocturin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exostenza*
> 
> *Why I Don't Care: An in Depth Article Regarding Linux on Desktops*
> By: Exostenza
> Because people who like Linux will use it and that is all that matters.
> Also poor people.
> The end.


Where's my fluff, darnet?


----------



## hout17

Linux is not dead it is just not main stream (never has so how can it be dead?) plus it is free with lots of free software. I feel linux has come a long way as far as usability goes as well and it really is not that hard to use.

I love my windows and my linux as I type from my Fedora 16 install.


----------



## Quantum Reality

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*
> 
> Yeah I saw the sabertooth x58 was in the DSDT database I thought I had a good chance and that it would work for my sig rig. However could not even get to the installer. I get a KP when I try to iboot to the to it. Tried every logical boot flag, removed the extra memory etc. etc.
> The other mobos weren't in the DSDT so I had to use easybeast.


What on God's Green Earth did that all even *mean*?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> What on God's Green Earth did that all even *mean*?


It means that with a KPT they went to the RGLB and built a PDAVEL and then used that to perform a BNESLEFOOSAL.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> It means that with a KPT they went to the RGLB and built a PDAVEL and then used that to perform a BNESLEFOOSAL.


Well played.


----------



## BizzareRide

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> OpenGL has been picking up more steam lately however due to the iOS and Android markets. The iOS market boom has also increased sales of Macs, which also use OpenGL. In terms of consoles and AAA titles, DirectX is still king, but I do see that trend reversing at the moment. It would be nice if companies like Microsoft and Apple would let go of their proprietary stranglehold on things, Microsoft with C# and DX, and Apple with limiting OSX to Mac.


OpenGL really isn't open source either as their is a consortium that advances the code base, you can't just willingly contribute and even if you could, you would still have to elect a governing body to handle standards compliance. It would be no different than DX and MSFT except the difference is that with DX, implementation into real games is better and there is more support. I would take support and implementation over open standards.

I feel we must make a distinction between open source and open standard as they are not the same thing.


----------



## wierdo124

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wierdo124*
> 
> Plain and simple the reason i cannot run Linux exclusively have been stated. Netflix, and Office. Some people say LibreOffice is good. It is, but it's still a LONG waay off from MS Office and that will probably never change. I need MS Office. Netflix hasn't supported Linux yet (say they plan to, but hasn't happened), nor has Silverlight, so its a no-go there. From what I can tell it's flat out not possible to run Netflix in Linux.
> I do dual boot Ubuntu 12.04 though, I just run Gnome in it. Hate that Unity.
> 
> 
> 
> Eh...Netflix I guess even after getting broadband I'm still not with the majority of the US on speed, I mean I couldn't imagine waiting to load a Bluray quality movie. As for Office...the only things that LibreOffice on Linux (Windows version has been terrible for me however) isn't so good at are the damn extensions for Excel/Calc that I need at times for my Finance and Accounting classes. Silverlight like Flash should die in a fire though. Honestly, I love how people are OK with the subtly collusive activities engaged to sustain Silverlight and similar things.
Click to expand...

Oh, i never said that I liked Silverlight. I'm just saying its a necessity for Netflix.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wierdo124*
> 
> Oh, i never said that I liked Silverlight. I'm just saying its a necessity for Netflix.


Don't forget that silverlight is a requirement for accessing medical billing websites such as EMR.

Just because all of you haven't heard of it being used in anything other than netflix, don't assume it's hardly used at all.


----------



## Sn0

I'm using Linux as I write this.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 10% is uncommon? I would have thought that 1 in 100 or 1 in a 1000 would be uncommon. And which is it? 1 in 10 or "nearly none"? The whole point is this. It was claimed that Linux is "just as easy to install" as windows (now before the flamers start seeing red and don't seem to understand what is being said I'll qualify this first by saying "I DON'T THINK LINUX IS A HORRIBLE OS"). I'm not saying it's necessarily hard to install in fact I'm sure that 80% of the time it installs easily just fine. But when was the last time you saw a windows install that didn't recognize all of the hardware and automatically load a driver for it? (and don't even start with some 15 year old legacy hardware story). For people like you and I, Linux is fairly simple and any "bumps" we hit we can easily troubleshoot or find the info on how to fix it. But I don't consider myself to be the "average" computer user. I started with a Tandy TRS-80 (doubt most people now have even heard of one) and have been a closet computer geek ever since. That doesn't mean Linux is hard or "crap". But it does mean that when the "average" computer user hits a "bump in the road" while installing or using Linux, and he has no dedicated support structure (forums are not a "dedicated support structure") it becomes just another turn-off to using Linux. Couple that with difficulty running his favorite software (it's getting better though) and lack of hit games (don't even bring up "web" games..you know what I mean) and it's no surprise that more people haven't given up Windows for Linux. I for one hope that will change in the future but the skeptic in me doesn't see or hasn't heard anything that points out that it will.


10% is actually fairly uncommon once you take into account all the PCs that no doubt run realtek with creatives extra software on top, where did you even get that number by the way? I seriously doubt 10% total of *all* PCs have an X-Fi; most consumers won't even know who creative are or what an X-Fi is. I said 1 in 10 as I have no real numbers to back it up and it is probably much larger than that, not enough people care about computer sound to actively go for an X-Fi or Xonar. A lot actually run USB speakers, this is going off real industry experience too; I've barely seen any dedicated sound cards outside (or even inside) enthusiasts PCs since ~2005ish; most people are fine with onboard these days.

Last time I installed Windows, I needed to download drivers for my Xonar; as well as the PCI USB2 card (Yeah, legacy hardware but USB2 is hardly uncommon) I own. Add in nVidia's drivers (Stuck at 1280x1024 max until I downloaded them...And no, they weren't on Windows update) and practically any WiFi card that came out after whenever the disk that Windows was installed off was made....Yeah...Windows doesn't come with working drivers any more or less than Linux in my experience. Add in the ethernet driver that breaks my ethernet when installed for some really weird reason that *does* appear in Windows update...Yeah.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> The won't support mac clones because OSX would get bloated like Windows. Lion is less than 8GB installed 7 is 12-14GB installed. OSX is slim is supports virtually no legacy HW, and it only supports particular HW if they licensed OSX they could do none of those things and tech support would be a nightmare!!


Less than 8GB? That's still fairly high for an OS IMO...Linux uses sub2GB usually for me.


----------



## ForNever

Man, this sucker is still being hashed out? Move ON.

"Don't forget that silverlight is a requirement for accessing medical billing websites such as EMR."

That is interesting to know, thanks.


----------



## Horse Head

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> 10% is actually fairly uncommon once you take into account all the PCs that no doubt run realtek with creatives extra software on top, where did you even get that number by the way? I seriously doubt 10% total of *all* PCs have an X-Fi; most consumers won't even know who creative are or what an X-Fi is. I said 1 in 10 as I have no real numbers to back it up and it is probably much larger than that, not enough people care about computer sound to actively go for an X-Fi or Xonar. A lot actually run USB speakers, this is going off real industry experience too; I've barely seen any dedicated sound cards outside (or even inside) enthusiasts PCs since ~2005ish; most people are fine with onboard these days.
> Last time I installed Windows, I needed to download drivers for my Xonar; as well as the PCI USB2 card (Yeah, legacy hardware but USB2 is hardly uncommon) I own. Add in nVidia's drivers (Stuck at 1280x1024 max until I downloaded them...And no, they weren't on Windows update) and practically any WiFi card that came out after whenever the disk that Windows was installed off was made....Yeah...Windows doesn't come with working drivers any more or less than Linux in my experience. Add in the ethernet driver that breaks my ethernet when installed for some really weird reason that *does* appear in Windows update...Yeah.
> Less than 8GB? That's still fairly high for an OS IMO...Linux uses sub2GB usually for me.


8GBs fairly high? A little to low. HDs and system ram/memory are extremely affordable. My Desktops have 16Gs, 32Gs and 64Gs MB Ram and 1.3GBs, 8TBs, and 16TBs HD space/memory. The days of limited resources is over for most desktops and notebooks/laptops. Some Ultra-Books are still limited, but that is changing very quick...


----------



## whitingnick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malcolm*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> To its credit, Linux has a phenomenal support system, and loyal, knowledgeable users willing to help guide you through the murky waters. Of course, it's often difficult to find them through the sea of self-righteous flamers who berate you for not knowing what you're doing.
> I know there's an army of dedicated Linux hobbyists who will no doubt unleash a barrage of flames and tirades as a result of this article. They'll tell me all the ways Windows sucks, and all the reasons Apple is evil, and make exalted claims about how wonderful their lives are since they made the switch, and how they'll never go back.
> Let me preemptively say, "That's great. I'm happy for you." It doesn't change the fact that you're part of a negligible market segment. It doesn't change the reality that Linux is not as intuitive or user friendly as its rivals, *or that it lacks the third-party hardware and software support of its rivals,* or that using it requires a learning curve and the dedication to dive into forums and learn to tinker. It's great for hobbyists and hackers, but not for an average user at a company.
> 
> 
> 
> I lol'd at the use of the word "hacker," but otherwise, article was written by Captain Obvious. The part in bold is the main reason why Linux will always stay in a single digit market share on the desktop. Even being free isn't going to convince people to switch to something if it's going to be less usable than what they're coming from.
Click to expand...

QFT. This is the main problem with Linux and it will never be a serious contender as a desktop OS without third party support.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horse Head*
> 
> 8GBs fairly high? A little to low. HDs and system ram/memory are extremely affordable. My Desktops have 16Gs, 32Gs and 64Gs MB Ram and 1.3GBs, 8TBs, and 16TBs HD space/memory. The days of limited resources is over for most desktops and notebooks/laptops. Some Ultra-Books are still limited, but that is changing very quick...


It is, actually; for an OS I want to use as little as possible (especially when a lot of it is fluff I won't ever use but can't uninstall), maybe that comes from being on an SSD even if I do have 100GB free space still.

Computers these days take much longer to boot up than computers with less than 1/1000th the processing power because we followed the "We don't have limited resources, go wild!" mentality; while the need for optimisation to the degree of say, a 8080, isn't required any more at least a decent amount should be IMO, it's just better overall.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Don't forget that silverlight is a requirement for accessing medical billing websites such as EMR.
> Just because all of you haven't heard of it being used in anything other than netflix, don't assume it's hardly used at all.


Never assumed that it was hardly used...just that it seems like a neat method of controlling people by limiting their choices.


----------



## MediaRocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History says Mac clones are bad for Apples bottom line. They'd never be able to slap an apple logo on it and charge 3-5 times it's market value if there were Mac clones out there.


Quoted for truth.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> The won't support mac clones because OSX would get bloated like Windows. Lion is less than 8GB installed 7 is 12-14GB installed. OSX is slim is supports virtually no legacy HW, and it only supports particular HW if they licensed OSX they could do none of those things and tech support would be a nightmare!!


Don't blind yourself and buy into the Apple garbage of "Simplicity". Yes differing hardware and drivers would make it slightly more complex, but it would be far from being a nightmare. It just means that Apple is going to lose their tight control over the Apple namesake and won't be able to control their value. It would "water down" the name so to speak. Different hardware is not a bad thing.

They wouldn't be able to get their $1500 Out of an i5 2500K systems if there were Apple clones being sold with similar specs at a lower price. They'd lose money. All this "Simplicity" preaching is a gimmick perpetuated by Apple to mask their real motive. Profit margin. Foxconn doesn't pay their employees that well ya know









Now lets get back on track. This is about Linux. Not Macintosh.


----------



## lordikon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BizzareRide*
> 
> OpenGL really isn't open source either as their is a consortium that advances the code base, you can't just willingly contribute and even if you could, you would still have to elect a governing body to handle standards compliance. It would be no different than DX and MSFT except the difference is that with DX, implementation into real games is better and there is more support. I would take support and implementation over open standards.
> I feel we must make a distinction between open source and open standard as they are not the same thing.


Yes, but the major difference is that Microsoft won't allow DirectX to run natively on any device/OS for free, OpenGL is 'open', and works on any platform that wants to support it (PC/Mac/Linux/iOS/Android/Web (WebGL)/etc...). DirectX is easier to develop with, but if you are making mobile games, or you want your game to be multiplatform, then you might as well not even touch DirectX. Microsoft is backing themselves into a corner with DirectX IMO, as other gaming markets are gain huge amounts of traction DirectX's strangehold is loosening, and I don't see Microsoft doing anything about it. I'm curious if DirectX will be used on Windows Phone 8, or Windows 8 ARM devices like tablets. That's their best chance to try and extend the life of DirectX, short of making it open for any platform.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horse Head*
> 
> Guys! I'm very disappointing in Tux. Found him in front of Micro Center trying to sell the Windows 7 DVD and the Pirate of Silicon Valley DVD I gave him. So much for the so called free software movement. Little does he know they're both pirated and I notified the proper authorities. Ha! Ha!


Too late. I just kicked him in the twins took the DVD's and ran off. MUAH HA HA HA HA......
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Quoted for truth.
> Don't blind yourself and buy into the Apple garbage of "Simplicity". Yes differing hardware and drivers would make it slightly more complex, but it would be far from being a nightmare. It just means that Apple is going to lose their tight control over the Apple namesake and won't be able to control their value. It would "water down" the name so to speak. Different hardware is not a bad thing.
> They wouldn't be able to get their $1500 Out of an i5 2500K systems if there were Apple clones being sold with similar specs at a lower price. They'd lose money. All this "Simplicity" preaching is a gimmick perpetuated by Apple to mask their real motive. Profit margin. Foxconn doesn't pay their employees that well ya know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now lets get back on track. This is about Linux. Not Macintosh.


Too late they already drank the kool-aid.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> Yes, but the major difference is that Microsoft won't allow DirectX to run natively on any device/OS for free, OpenGL is 'open', and works on any platform that wants to support it (PC/Mac/Linux/iOS/Android/Web (WebGL)/etc...). DirectX is easier to develop with, but if you are making mobile games, or you want your game to be multiplatform, then you might as well not even touch DirectX. Microsoft is backing themselves into a corner with DirectX IMO, as other gaming markets are gain huge amounts of traction DirectX's strangehold is loosening, and I don't see Microsoft doing anything about it. I'm curious if DirectX will be used on Windows Phone 8, or Windows 8 ARM devices like tablets. That's their best chance to try and extend the life of DirectX, short of making it open for any platform.


I think the honest answer lies somewhere in protecting their market coupled with not wanting a hodgepodge mess by making it open. Before ya'll knock directx so fast, remember why it was created in the first place. To move game devs off of an unsecured OS (MSDOS) that allowed them to directly access all the pc's hardware (not even something linux would do) and move them over to win 95 where there was better security (relatively speaking of course) over system resources. At the time OpenGL was really only used for expensive hardware and apps like CAD etc. Can't blame MS for DX being adopted as a standard when there was really nothing else other than going back to DOS.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> 10% is actually fairly uncommon once you take into account all the PCs that no doubt run realtek with creatives extra software on top, where did you even get that number by the way? I seriously doubt 10% total of *all* PCs have an X-Fi; most consumers won't even know who creative are or what an X-Fi is. I said 1 in 10 as I have no real numbers to back it up and it is probably much larger than that, not enough people care about computer sound to actively go for an X-Fi or Xonar. A lot actually run USB speakers, this is going off real industry experience too; I've barely seen any dedicated sound cards outside (or even inside) enthusiasts PCs since ~2005ish; most people are fine with onboard these days.
> Last time I installed Windows, I needed to download drivers for my Xonar; as well as the PCI USB2 card (Yeah, legacy hardware but USB2 is hardly uncommon) I own. Add in nVidia's drivers (Stuck at 1280x1024 max until I downloaded them...And no, they weren't on Windows update) and practically any WiFi card that came out after whenever the disk that Windows was installed off was made....Yeah...Windows doesn't come with working drivers any more or less than Linux in my experience. Add in the ethernet driver that breaks my ethernet when installed for some really weird reason that *does* appear in Windows update...Yeah.
> *Less than 8GB? That's still fairly high for an OS IMO...Linux uses sub2GB usually for me*.


Modern coders could learn a little from their elders..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horse Head*
> 
> 8GBs fairly high? A little to low. *HDs and system ram/memory are extremely affordable. My Desktops have 16Gs, 32Gs and 64Gs MB Ram and 1.3GBs, 8TBs, and 16TBs HD space/memory*. The days of limited resources is over for most desktops and notebooks/laptops. Some Ultra-Books are still limited, but that is changing very quick...


So that meas we have to use more resouces to achieve the same things we did a few years back with less and slower resouces
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Quoted for truth.
> Don't blind yourself and buy into the Apple garbage of "Simplicity". Yes differing hardware and drivers would make it slightly more complex, but it would be far from being a nightmare. It just means that Apple is going to lose their tight control over the Apple namesake and won't be able to control their value. It would "water down" the name so to speak. Different hardware is not a bad thing.
> They wouldn't be able to get their $1500 Out of an i5 2500K systems if there were Apple clones being sold with similar specs at a lower price. They'd lose money. All this "Simplicity" preaching is a gimmick perpetuated by Apple to mask their real motive. Profit margin. Foxconn doesn't pay their employees that well ya know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now lets get back on track. This is about Linux. Not Macintosh.


And don't let the windows world blind you to the fact that the initial cost of something is the cost of somthing. Also don't be blind to the fact that the value of something is not the cost of the inputs plus profit. Differing hardware would make OSX vastly more complicated and it would be a nightmare witness hackintoshing while it's mostly dead simple veer to far from recommended HW and it get complex. Apple is a fan of curated computing they have absolute control of the end user experience they will not give that up. I bring up OSX only because it's Linux's cousin, an entrenched OSX user will have a much easier time in Linux than and entrenched windows user because the paradigms are similar/same
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Too late. I just kicked him in the twins took the DVD's and ran off. MUAH HA HA HA HA......
> Too late they already drank the kool-aid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I think the honest answer lies somewhere in protecting their market coupled with not wanting a hodgepodge mess by making it open*. Before ya'll knock directx so fast, remember why it was created in the first place. To move game devs off of an unsecured OS (MSDOS) that allowed them to directly access all the pc's hardware (not even something linux would do) and move them over to win 95 where there was better security (relatively speaking of course) over system resources. At the time OpenGL was really only used for expensive hardware and apps like CAD etc. Can't blame MS for DX being adopted as a standard when there was really nothing else other than going back to DOS.


This is the most correct thing you've said in this thread.


----------



## ironmaiden

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Before ya'll knock directx so fast, remember why it was created in the first place. To move game devs off of an unsecured OS (MSDOS) that allowed them to directly access all the pc's hardware (not even something linux would do) and move them over to win 95 where there was better security (relatively speaking of course) over system resources. .


Bubba, Linux interacts much better with the hardware. Yes the direct access to hardware in Linux is not allowed IIRC as the program first interacts with the shell and that interacts with the hardware and that is for security reasons. Opencl will be ported in games , it all comes slow and steady.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ironmaiden*
> 
> Bubba, Linux interacts much better with the hardware. Yes the direct access to hardware in Linux is not allowed IIRC as the program first interacts with the shell and that interacts with the hardware and that is for security reasons. Opencl will be ported in games , it all comes slow and steady.


I don't disagree with you at all. Someone will craft a solution for linux and gaming eventually and then have to fight to get it in as a "standard". I just hate to see people pounce all over MS (I'd be the first one if something is really true) a little bit unfairly as if the whole reason DX was created was to control the whole gaming market. Sure I would be willing to bet that there's a bit of protecting their market by not making it open sourced but there are other factors at play as well.


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I don't disagree with you at all. Someone will craft a solution for linux and gaming eventually and then have to fight to get it in as a "standard". I just hate to see people pounce all over MS (I'd be the first one if something is really true) a little bit unfairly as if the whole reason DX was created was to control the whole gaming market. Sure I would be willing to bet that there's a bit of protecting their market by not making it open sourced but there are other factors at play as well.


Isn't this what the WINE project (among other things) is trying to do? It's just not really happening, their progress is too slow. Not their fault, it's not an easy task, but it doesn't help the Linux argument.

I often wonder, the game devs - they have to port between DX and consoles for practically every release. I guess it comes down to the market share - why bust a gut porting a game to Linux's standard, for the small market share Linux has (most of which probably aren't gamers, worldwide). This means that the only options are "open standards" that work cross-platform like OpenGL & Java, or more effort into the WINE project to get a more reliable 'mirror' of DirectX's API. Neither of which are very likely imo unfortunatly, so dual-booting will continue


----------



## DaClownie

This thread is the most awesome tangent ever. It just keeps going in different directions but remains civil. How do we do it?


----------



## QuietlyLinux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Isn't this what the WINE project (among other things) is trying to do? It's just not really happening, their progress is too slow. Not their fault, it's not an easy task, but it doesn't help the Linux argument.
> I often wonder, the game devs - they have to port between DX and consoles for practically every release. I guess it comes down to the market share - why bust a gut porting a game to Linux's standard, for the small market share Linux has (most of which probably aren't gamers, worldwide). This means that the only options are "open standards" that work cross-platform like OpenGL & Java, or more effort into the WINE project to get a more reliable 'mirror' of DirectX's API. Neither of which are very likely imo unfortunatly, so dual-booting will continue


WINE just converts the windows file into Linux ones as the game is running.
But don't be down, Steam IS coming to Linux. L4D2 can already run on Linux Which isn't a massive thing in itself, but hey it is a mainstream game and once one come the rest will follow however long it should take.


----------



## TFL Replica

Only Valve has the power/position/guts to create a Linux based gaming OS. The Steam client is only their first step.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Isn't this what the WINE project (among other things) is trying to do? It's just not really happening, their progress is too slow. Not their fault, it's not an easy task, but it doesn't help the Linux argument.
> I often wonder, the game devs - they have to port between DX and consoles for practically every release. I guess it comes down to the market share - why bust a gut porting a game to Linux's standard, for the small market share Linux has (most of which probably aren't gamers, worldwide). This means that the only options are "open standards" that work cross-platform like OpenGL & Java, or more effort into the WINE project to get a more reliable 'mirror' of DirectX's API. Neither of which are very likely imo unfortunatly, so dual-booting will continue


Wine is like taking turkey leftovers from thanksgiving, sticking them in a food processor until it's a creamy paste, rolling it into a tube till it "hardens" and then cut it into slices for a sandwich. Sure it tastes the same (kind of) but it just isn't as good.







(i.e. it's not Linux natively running a game)


----------



## Harbinger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuietlyLinux*
> 
> WINE just converts the windows file into Linux ones as the game is running.
> But don't be down, Steam IS coming to Linux. L4D2 can already run on Linux Which isn't a massive thing in itself, but hey it is a mainstream game and once one come the rest will follow however long it should take.


It provides a translation layer so that Windows programs can use their native calls without freaking out on Linux systems.

This thread doesn't want to die lol


----------



## QuietlyLinux

But if there is a steam client it means game-makers will be missing out on a market (albeit a small one).
not all game makers will port there games but i think some of the big ones will.
But any games the isn't SuperTuxKart is good enough.


----------



## GermanyChris

If steam content comes to Linux and show's some poularity I wonder if that will pop the cork and we'll se MS Office and Adobe products also. Those two names I think are actually what holds people back. Most of the world now is computer literate enough to get Linux installed and if the need comes search for drivers and copy and paste into the terminal to make something work. Those two name will probably be enough for the OEM's to really start marketing Linux based products. Android is popular because of the app store and cutomization, not because handsets are cheap Most of the phones I see rival iPhone for price. The Linux desktop would offer the same thing with the above two names. This is the reason I'm kind of excited to watch the evelution of the creative cloud , if it can become web based with out host applications problem solved. I think MS is driving in that direction to are they not?


----------



## QuietlyLinux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> If stem content comes to Linux and show's some poularity I wonder if that will pop the cork and we'll se MS Office and Adobe products also. Those two names I think are actually what holds people back. Most of the world now is computer literate enough to get Linux installed and if the need comes search for drivers and copy and paste into the terminal to make something work. Those two name will probably be enough for the OEM's to really start marketing Linux based products. Android is popular because of the app store and customization, not because handsets are cheap Most of the phones I see rival iPhone for price. The Linux desktop would offer the same thing with the above two names. This is the reason I'm kind of excited to watch the evelution of the creative cloud , if it can become web based with out host applications problem solved. I think MS is driving in that direction to are they not?


Personally I like terminal but that is just me and a few others.
Most driver actually work out of the box.
(alot more then Win7(but less the OSX but that doesn't count))


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuietlyLinux*
> 
> WINE just converts the windows file into Linux ones as the game is running.
> But don't be down, Steam IS coming to Linux. L4D2 can already run on Linux Which isn't a massive thing in itself, but hey it is a mainstream game and once one come the rest will follow however long it should take.


Yeah but those are only Source Engine games running OpenGL natively. For a full range of Steam games it'd require the devs for those games to put OpenGL in place too... Which would be costly.

However if Steam did it... Made Linux a gaming platform for their Engine others would start making new Engines with OpenGL natively!


----------



## MediaRocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> And don't let the windows world blind you to the fact that the initial cost of something is the cost of somthing.


Why whenever someone has something negative to say about Apple they assume they are a Windows fanboy









Let me spell it out for you and everyone else. I AM NEITHER AND AM IN BETWEEN. Windows sucks, Mac's overpriced, and Linux has poor 3rd party support. All three have annoying fanbases and some are more ignorant than others. *I'm a realist!* I'm furthest from being blinded.

Look when I can buy a laptop with the exact same hardware at a quarter to half the price, it's obvious someone is charging a premium for the name especially whenever using the same exact OEM. It's the same exact crap at twice the price. Failing to acknowledge that is being blinded. "It's built better" doesn't cut it. Now if it were built in the states, I could understand the price premium... we can't get away with paying people $2.50 an hour working 13 hour days. Though I'm sure companies here would love to.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Also don't be blind to the fact that the value of something is not the cost of the inputs plus profit.


I can't really understand this... so forgive me if I am wrong, but I think you're saying that The value of something is not the cost of the inputs plus profit? Well you're right, a value of something is what someone is willing to give it... and it's a shame that people value apple products so highly when it's the same crap just rebadged and remixed. Sold as "new" and "innovative" when it's just a rehash and a spin off an existing idea or product.

A Macbook is only 'worth more' because people think it's worth more...

(Though I admit that Apple is a marketing genius, and was on to something with the iPhone and iPad, thought this is a discussion for another thread.)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Differing hardware would make OSX vastly more complicated and it would be a nightmare witness hackintoshing while it's mostly dead simple veer to far from recommended HW and it get complex.


The problem lies in 3rd party support. It's the same exact way in the Linux world. Though you make a great point. Apple can barely keep up with updating Java bugs that have already been patched by Oracle...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Apple is a fan of curated computing they have absolute control of the end user experience they will not give that up.


And they love the extra cash from charging a premium for hardware. They DEFINITELY will not give that up. Don't forget that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> I bring up OSX only because it's Linux's cousin, an entrenched OSX user will have a much easier time in Linux than and entrenched windows user because the paradigms are similar/same


It is, but the point of discussion in this article is for and against the article and Linux not Apple.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuietlyLinux*
> 
> Personally I like terminal but that is just me and a few others.
> Most driver actually work out of the box.
> (alot more then Win7(but less the OSX but that doesn't count))


I'm a fan of the terminal too, it quick and efficient. Yes most things "just work" in Linux any more, yes you can find things that don't but that can be found with any OS. IMHO OSX does count for the reasons I stated above somewhere. If Gate Keeper happens with a lock out I'll be on Linux that day.


----------



## MediaRocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> I'm a fan of the terminal too, it quick and efficient.


Terminal is a godsend...


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Why whenever someone has something negative to say about Apple they assume they are a Windows fanboy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me spell it out for you and everyone else. I AM NEITHER AND AM IN BETWEEN. Windows sucks, Mac's overpriced, and Linux has poor 3rd party support. All three have annoying fanbases and some are more ignorant than others. *I'm a realist!* I'm furthest from being blinded.
> Look when I can buy a laptop with the exact same hardware at a quarter to half the price, it's obvious someone is charging a premium for the name especially whenever using the same exact OEM. It's the same exact crap at twice the price. Failing to acknowledge that is being blinded. "It's built better" doesn't cut it. Now if it were built in the states, I could understand the price premium... we can't get away with paying people $2.50 an hour working 13 hour days. Though I'm sure companies here would love to.
> I can't really understand this... so forgive me if I am wrong, but I think you're saying that The value of something is not the cost of the inputs plus profit? Well you're right, a value of something is what someone is willing to give it... and it's a shame that people value apple products so highly when it's the same crap just rebadged and remixed. Sold as "new" and "innovative" when it's just a rehash and a spin off an existing idea or product.
> A Macbook is only 'worth more' because people think it's worth more...
> (Though I admit that Apple is a marketing genius, and was on to something with the iPhone and iPad, thought this is a discussion for another thread.)
> The problem lies in 3rd party support. It's the same exact way in the Linux world. Though you make a great point. Apple can barely keep up with updating Java bugs that have already been patched by Oracle...
> And they love the extra cash from charging a premium for hardware. They DEFINITELY will not give that up. Don't forget that.
> It is, but the point of discussion in this article is for and against the article and Linux not Apple.


By brining up the original price of somthing you losing cost of ownership. I buy a new MBP every year, I'm not rich but my Mac looses virtually no value in the year I own it I can sell it for 150-200 less than what I paid for it, so for a couple benjamins I always have the newest computer. My '03 PB is still worth a couple hundred, and the G5 is 300-400 and neither will run anything past Leopard. Value lies in the brand as Lexus, Acura, Infinity, Audi, lamborghini, cadilliac, and to a lesser extent Porsche all prove. The first six share a platform and the same running gear with the lower cost siblings but sell like hot cakes and maintain brand image. Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Vw, VW, Chevrolet, and VW respectively don't dilute the brand.

I didn't bring up Mac's they're not whats in discussion, I bring up OSX because it's the cousin to Linux and therefore relevant. Much Mac software could be ported to Linux greater ease than widows software. If steam is available for OSX it should be for Linux especially since Direct X doesn't work in OSX either.


----------



## MediaRocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> By brining up the original price of somthing you losing cost of ownership. I buy a new MBP every year, I'm not rich but my Mac looses virtually no value in the year I own it I can sell it for 150-200 less than what I paid for it, so for a couple benjamins I always have the newest computer.


But that's only because people are willing to pay that price for a Macbook. It don't make it that valuable. Demand != Value
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> My '03 PB is still worth a couple hundred, and the G5 is 300-400 and neither will run anything past Leopard. Value lies in the brand as Lexus, Acura, Infinity, Audi, lamborghini, cadilliac, and to a lesser extent Porsche all prove. The first six share a platform and the same running gear with the lower cost siblings but sell like hot cakes and maintain brand image. Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Vw, VW, Chevrolet, and VW respectively don't dilute the brand.


No it doesn't, but Dell's sporting OSX would kill off Apple's control on people... Why pay the premium name when you can have OSX on a cheap computer?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> I didn't bring up Mac's they're not whats in discussion, I bring up OSX because it's the cousin to Linux and therefore relevant. Much Mac software could be ported to Linux greater ease than widows software. If steam is available for OSX it should be for Linux especially since Direct X doesn't work in OSX either.


I wasn't saying you were, some how the topic got off on Hackintoshes....


----------



## DaClownie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *QuietlyLinux*
> 
> WINE just converts the windows file into Linux ones as the game is running.
> But don't be down, Steam IS coming to Linux. L4D2 can already run on Linux Which isn't a massive thing in itself, but hey it is a mainstream game and once one come the rest will follow however long it should take.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but those are only Source Engine games running OpenGL natively. For a full range of Steam games it'd require the devs for those games to put OpenGL in place too... Which would be costly.
> 
> However if Steam did it... Made Linux a gaming platform for their Engine others would start making new Engines with OpenGL natively!
Click to expand...

They should create a Steam Distro... that'd be legit. Have it all valve themed... that's totally a legit way of doing it!


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> But that's only because people are willing to pay that price for a Macbook. It don't make it that valuable. Demand != Value
> No it doesn't, but Dell's sporting OSX would kill off Apple's control on people... *Why pay the premium name when you can have OSX on a cheap computer*?
> I wasn't saying you were, some how the topic got off on Hackintoshes....


Why have an Acura when you can have a Honda?

Why have a Porsche Cayenne when you can have a Toureg?

Why have an Hp Elite book when you can have a Pavilion?

We do this because nicer things cost more money.

and demand does equal value thats the whole point to the free market. The argument that Marx made that the value of an object correlates to the value of the labor put in to it is valid but not they system we live in.


----------



## MediaRocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Why have an Acura when you can have a Honda?
> Why have a Porsche Cayenne when you can have a Toureg?
> Why have an Hp Elite book when you can have a Pavilion?
> We do this because nicer things cost more money.
> and demand does equal value thats the whole point to the free market. The argument that Marx made that the value of an object correlates to the value of the labor put in to it is valid but not they system we live in.


Because you want an Acura, but associative value varies with each person, however the true value of something maintains the same..

If I had a Ford Focus... it's a ford focus. If I had a Ford Focus owned by Johnny Depp, it's now has an associative value for Johnny depp fans. For the rest of the world it's just a Ford Focus.

So associative value != True Value.

an i5 2500K Mac = i5 2500K PC (Windows/Linux/Hackintosh)

But the mac costs more. It doesn't correlate. Here you're just paying for the name and the name alone. When you put cash down on the Porsche, you ARE buying a better product... The leather is rich, the motor is finely tuned. When you buy a VW your interior isn't as plush... your motor doesn't make the same power....

So the comparison isn't there.

You buy an i5 Mac it's an i5 with OSX. That's the only difference between it and an i5 PC....

I get where you're trying to go with this... but it doesn't correlate... I can't buy into it. Now if Apple was using pure Copper heatsinks for maximum heat dissipation, CNC titanium frames and overclocked their i5's......... Then your argument is spot on.


----------



## perfectblade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Because you want an Acura, but associative value varies with each person, however the true value of something maintains the same..
> If I had a Ford Focus... it's a ford focus. If I had a Ford Focus owned by Johnny Depp, it's now has an associative value for Johnny depp fans. For the rest of the world it's just a Ford Focus.
> So associative value != True Value.
> an i5 2500K Mac = i5 2500K PC (Windows/Linux/Hackintosh)
> But the mac costs more. It doesn't correlate. Here you're just paying for the name and the name alone. When you put cash down on the Porsche, you ARE buying a better product... The leather is rich, the motor is finely tuned. When you buy a VW your interior isn't as plush... your motor doesn't make the same power....
> So the comparison isn't there.
> You buy an i5 Mac it's an i5 with OSX. That's the only difference between it and an i5 PC....
> I get where you're trying to go with this... but it doesn't correlate... I can't buy into it. Now if Apple was using pure Copper heatsinks for maximum heat dissipation, CNC titanium frames and overclocked their i5's......... Then your argument is spot on.


Why would you want osx if you lve got linux? As a pretty average user i cant think of anythingg i would want to do in osx that i cant do in ubuntu. On top of that, linux has loads of free.software and a more efficient interface (oh snap i can *maximize windows* and open other tabs in a program in one clickd its faster too especially at multitasking. But hey it doesnt have all those cute shiney icons.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaClownie*
> 
> They should create a Steam Distro... that'd be legit. Have it all valve themed... that's totally a legit way of doing it!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Because you want an Acura, but associative value varies with each person, however the true value of something maintains the same..
> If I had a Ford Focus... it's a ford focus. If I had a Ford Focus owned by Johnny Depp, it's now has an associative value for Johnny depp fans. For the rest of the world it's just a Ford Focus.
> So associative value != True Value.
> an i5 2500K Mac = i5 2500K PC (Windows/Linux/Hackintosh)
> But the mac costs more. It doesn't correlate. Here you're just paying for the name and the name alone. When you put cash down on the Porsche, you ARE buying a better product... The leather is rich, the motor is finely tuned. When you buy a VW your interior isn't as plush... your motor doesn't make the same power....
> So the comparison isn't there.
> You buy an i5 Mac it's an i5 with OSX. That's the only difference between it and an i5 PC....
> I get where you're trying to go with this... but it doesn't correlate... I can't buy into it. Now if Apple was using pure Copper heatsinks for maximum heat dissipation, CNC titanium frames and overclocked their i5's......... Then your argument is spot on.


I agree 100% with, at least, your last three posts here. The only valid reason I can see for someone to get a MAc is because they need OSX for media work... but with how Apple got themselves into that "Need OSX for media work" position annoys me greatly.


----------



## Megaman_90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *perfectblade*
> 
> Why would you want osx if you lve got linux? As a pretty average user i cant think of anythingg i would want to do in osx that i cant do in ubuntu. On top of that, linux has loads of free.software and a more efficient interface (oh snap i can *maximize windows* and open other tabs in a program in one clickd its faster too especially at multitasking. But hey it doesnt have all those cute shiney icons.


As much as I'm a avid hater of Mac, there are a few things that Mac excels in. Media production for sure.

If your familiar with audio interfaces for recording you'll know that in Windows you can only use one interface at a time. OSX can use multiple and firewire support is much better. Linux is too dodgy to even try to set up a recording rig, even if there is no professional grade software.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> *Because you want an Acura, but associative value varies with each person, however the true value of something maintains the same*..
> *If I had a Ford Focus... it's a ford focus. If I had a Ford Focus owned by Johnny Depp, it's now has an associative value for Johnny depp fans. For the rest of the world it's just a Ford Focus.
> So associative value != True Value.*an i5 2500K Mac = i5 2500K PC (Windows/Linux/Hackintosh)
> But the mac costs more. It doesn't correlate. Here you're just paying for the name and the name alone. *When you put cash down on the Porsche, you ARE buying a better product... The leather is rich, the motor is finely tuned. When you buy a VW your interior isn't as plush... your motor doesn't make the same power....*
> So the comparison isn't there.
> You buy an i5 Mac it's an i5 with OSX. That's the only difference between it and an i5 PC....
> I get where you're trying to go with this... but it doesn't correlate... I can't buy into it. Now if Apple was using pure Copper heatsinks for maximum heat dissipation, CNC titanium frames and overclocked their i5's......... Then your argument is spot on.


This is correct and its the same with Mac's

This is the Mac user's are buble heads argument

but the toureg and cayene are built on the same chasis and use the same engine until you get to the top where the Porsche has turbo gas and the Toureg has the v10 TDI so the 80% engine.

But your basing the premise of your argment on the fact that we buy Mac's because we're buble heads see second bold. A MacBook Pro is a much nicer computer than the Pavilion even though they have the same parts inside. Just like and HP Elite Book is a much nicer computer and comparable pricewise to the MBP than the Pavilion even though they use the same parts inside.


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Megaman_90*
> 
> If your familiar with audio interfaces for recording you'll know that in Windows you can only use one interface at a time. OSX can use multiple and firewire support is much better..


Meh, you work with your restrictions. Besides, needing multiple audio interfaces is rare, as you can get huge single audio interfaces. Also, if they're not identical, you could run into all sorts of latency issues between them, sounds like a headache.

I don't disagree, it is an advantage of OSX, but there are more disadvantages that put me off. And I get really hacked off that there isn't really a way forward under Linux (not Rosegarden, I hate it), as I'd be all over it


----------



## MediaRocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> This is correct and its the same with Mac's
> This is the Mac user's are buble heads argument


No I'm not calling Mac users bubble heads. I was gifted a Macbook Air. I love it.







(Although a lot of Mac users are, in fact, bubble heads.)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> but the toureg and cayene are built on the same chasis and use the same engine until you get to the top where the Porsche has turbo gas and the Toureg has the v10 TDI so the 80% engine.


But while they are the same chassis and can share motors, They are tuned differently... Look I get your point. But this analogy doesn't really work well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> But your basing the premise of your argment on the fact that we buy Mac's because we're buble heads see second bold. A MacBook Pro is a much nicer computer than the Pavilion even though they have the same parts inside.


But they are "Nicer" that's the thing... Which is what I alluded to earlier... It's opinion on weather or not the Macbook pro is nicer than the HP pavilion. If they both ran OSX and were the same price I'd chose the Macbook. But I wouldn't pay 1500 for what the HP has for 500... despite me loathing HP.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Just like and HP Elite Book is a much nicer computer and comparable pricewise to the MBP than the Pavilion even though they use the same parts inside.


And while I agree that a Macbook is a "nicer" computer, it's still opinion on weather or not one should buy a MBP at twice the price of a similarly spec'd Hackintosh. I wouldn't.. no matter how nice the case was. I only have... (well Had..) a Mac because it was given to me. (And while I loved it, I gave it to someone who can use it more than I could.) Now if they were using high performance thermal management systems and overclocking their laptops.. They are definitely now worth more than other computers now...


----------



## Megaman_90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Meh, you work with your restrictions. Besides, needing multiple audio interfaces is rare, as you can get huge single audio interfaces.....And I get really hacked off that there isn't really a way forward under Linux (not Rosegarden, I hate it), as I'd be all over it


True, in some situations it can prove useful though. Like if your condenser mic is USB. Either way I do my recording in Windows 7 with Reaper, I wouldn't mind a Mac but I'm not gonna spend big bucks on it.

I would love to see a Reaper port into Linux.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> If steam content comes to Linux and show's some poularity I wonder if that will pop the cork and we'll se MS Office and Adobe products also. Those two names I think are actually what holds people back. Most of the world now is computer literate enough to get Linux installed and if the need comes search for drivers and copy and paste into the terminal to make something work. Those two name will probably be enough for the OEM's to really start marketing Linux based products. Android is popular because of the app store and cutomization, not because handsets are cheap Most of the phones I see rival iPhone for price. The Linux desktop would offer the same thing with the above two names. This is the reason I'm kind of excited to watch the evelution of the creative cloud , if it can become web based with out host applications problem solved. I think MS is driving in that direction to are they not?


There's one MAJOR barrier to digital distributing becoming the main delivery method and we haven't experienced it yet but it's coming. Already telecoms have moved over with few exceptions to bnadwidth caps and we let them. Here's another example of "give them an inch and they take a mile". Now they've been given the blessing to start charging "usage based" internet prices so the more you use the more you'll pay. I see that putting a serious damper on digital distribution.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> This is correct and its the same with Mac's
> This is the Mac user's are buble heads argument
> but the toureg and cayene are built on the same chasis and use the same engine until you get to the top where the Porsche has turbo gas and the Toureg has the v10 TDI so the 80% engine.
> But your basing the premise of your argment on the fact that we buy Mac's because we're buble heads see second bold. A MacBook Pro is a much nicer computer than the Pavilion even though they have the same parts inside. Just like and HP Elite Book is a much nicer computer and comparable pricewise to the MBP than the Pavilion even though they use the same parts inside.


I've never owned a MBP so I'd love to learn what makes it a "much nicer" laptop than all the others.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Terminal is a godsend...


Terminal is extremely useful but I've got to say that other times...it's a bit obtuse to use it and programs based inside it even if they're really good because sometimes the GUI is just way faster. I mean Scrot is an awesome tool for screenshots but it's all about memorization of commands and if you have a screenshot programs with a GUI control then you'll probably use that as you won't have to remember as much or it might work out faster for you. Since I grew up with Windows I'm probably biased on this but I think there needs to be a balance for both GUI and terminal usage to get the best of both worlds. It's just reinforcing the whole thing that I think should be talked about more with Linux...freedom of choice. I look at the pad fad and direction that even Windows is going now and it's all about limiting choice which to me seems like something people wouldn't be happy about but they are. And while everyone is talking about standardization would be a great thing to get Linux more fans I think they're focused on conforming outward appearance which is where it's not a good idea/meaningful to bring about conformity. Linux needs to standardize/fix some internals and then it can move forward.

As for the SteamOS thing...I salivate at the idea but know they'd never do it. We'll be lucky just to get Steam native.


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Megaman_90*
> 
> As much as I'm a avid hater of Mac, there are a few things that Mac excels in. Media production for sure.
> If your familiar with audio interfaces for recording you'll know that in Windows you can only use one interface at a time. OSX can use multiple and firewire support is much better. Linux is too dodgy to even try to set up a recording rig, even if there is no professional grade software.


Thing is OSX isn't any better at audio production, it's that they bought out the popular software and made it Mac-only.


----------



## emeianoite

PCworld can suck a ... sock, thousands of people use linux, all sorts of distros. I dual boot Mint Debian Ed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Thing is OSX isn't any better at audio production, it's that they bought out the popular software and made it Mac-only.


I second this, only reason why Mac is more fluid than other OS's is that they also devoted their equipment to a small selection, allowing driver integration to grow. Windows + Linux (Unix based) support the widest range of hardware, when Mac (Unix based) requires you to buy their models, that way they can charge you an arm an a leg, and have you make appointments, with idiot hipster kids, to return headphones that broke 2 days ago. Mac is a filthy, self absorbed pig of a company.... but I do love their iphone, mainly because I can VNC and RDP into Linux or Windows.


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Megaman_90*
> 
> True, in some situations it can prove useful though. Like if your condenser mic is USB. Either way I do my recording in Windows 7 with Reaper, I wouldn't mind a Mac but I'm not gonna spend big bucks on it.
> I would love to see a Reaper port into Linux.


Amen brother









I don't use Reaper, I'm on Ableton on Vista, but my buddy (former gigging partner) bought a Macbook a couple of years ago based on the hype. He's happy, but no happier than when he was on Windows, so I'm like "what's the point?"

Linux needs a user-friendly, VST-hosting DAW, like you wouldn't believe! I'd be happy paying £200 for a closed-source application as long as it worked well and was Linux-native.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rubers*
> 
> Thing is OSX isn't any better at audio production, it's that they bought out the popular software and made it Mac-only.


Meh, that's not really true - only applies to Logic (I think), and Logic isn't my cup of tea


----------



## Rubers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Meh, that's not really true - only applies to Logic (I think), and Logic isn't my cup of tea


Yeah but Logic is mainly what they teach in Universities (In UK, anyway) with mainly College's covering alternatives such as Audacity (which is probably due to budget constraints really).


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaClownie*
> 
> This thread is the most awesome tangent ever. It just keeps going in different directions but remains civil. How do we do it?


We're talented like that.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> We're talented like that.


We have to be since running and using Linux to do things the majority of people do is soooo hard. /sarcasm

Sorry, that's mostly directed at the writer of this article.


----------



## Megaman_90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> Amen brother
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't use Reaper, I'm on Ableton on Vista, but my buddy (former gigging partner) bought a Macbook a couple of years ago based on the hype. He's happy, but no happier than when he was on Windows, so I'm like "what's the point?"
> Linux needs a user-friendly, VST-hosting DAW, like you wouldn't believe! I'd be happy paying £200 for a closed-source application as long as it worked well and was Linux-native.
> Meh, that's not really true - only applies to Logic (I think), and Logic isn't my cup of tea


Reaper is pretty darn good in my opinion and I've tried quite a few different DAWs. Its lightweight(about 7MB), powerful and has no DRM. It would be a perfect fit on the Linux platform. If you have never tried it you should at least give the trial a go: http://www.reaper.fm/

And yeah...I have a buddy that uses a Mac too and he loves it. He says Windows has so many driver problems and viruses(lol). Gotta love Mac people.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Megaman_90*
> 
> Reaper is pretty darn good in my opinion and I've tried quite a few different DAWs. Its lightweight(about 7MB), powerful and has no DRM. It would be a perfect fit on the Linux platform. If you have never tried it you should at least give the trial a go: http://www.reaper.fm/
> And yeah...I have a buddy that uses a Mac too and he loves it. He says Windows has so many driver problems and viruses(lol). Gotta love Mac people.


I wouldn't be so quick to call out windows (or mac) for virus problems. The only reason there aren't a plethora of viruses/trojans is because it really is not worth the time for hackers to write the code for one on linux. Would you take the time to write a virus for linux if there was only a limited base of x number of users when you could write it for windows and reach a huge amount of people and have better chances of success (stealing info etc)? It's already starting on android now that it's become widely used on tablet and phone devices.

You know what really irritates me? That garage band app is awesome and I can't get it for android. Stinking apple-ites


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I wouldn't be so quick to call out windows (or mac) for virus problems. The only reason there aren't a plethora of viruses/trojans is because it really is not worth the time for hackers to write the code for one on linux. Would you take the time to write a virus for linux if there was only a limited base of x number of users when you could write it for windows and reach a huge amount of people and have better chances of success (stealing info etc)? It's already starting on android now that it's become widely used on tablet and phone devices.
> You know what really irritates me? That garage band app is awesome and I can't get it for android. Stinking apple-ites


And what about all of the Linux web servers?

The platforms much more secure by design, however bugs within it remains to be proven by anyone really.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Not saying there ARE viruses in linux web servers. But asking do you really think there wouldn't be any if linux was the dominating desktop platform?

Edit - Just saying black hats are going to go where the money is. And right now the money is getting grandma to click on a file and install a trojan so they can clear out her bank account. Or distributing bots in millions and millions of computers so they have a powerful botnet.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I wouldn't be so quick to call out windows (or mac) for virus problems. The only reason there aren't a plethora of viruses/trojans is because it really is not worth the time for hackers to write the code for one on linux. Would you take the time to write a virus for linux if there was only a limited base of x number of users when you could write it for windows and reach a huge amount of people and have better chances of success (stealing info etc)? It's already starting on android now that it's become widely used on tablet and phone devices.
> You know what really irritates me? That garage band app is awesome and I can't get it for android. Stinking apple-ites


But the problem is, in Windows viruses in most cases can be downloaded/installed right through the browser. And most people are pretty much always on Admin accounts, which makes things that much easier for them and they need little to no human interaction to actually start spreading.

Whereas with the way Linux / Unix-like systems are set up, you're never on an Admin ( root ) account, so any viruses you /may/ get will be locked in the /home/ userland. And to get outside they would have to ask for permission, so in that sense a computer is only as secure as the person using it. But when everything is properly set up in Linux / Unix-like systems, there's not much that a rouge program in userland can do ( at least to a certain extent, compared to what they can do on Windows ).

Of course you get people that just click "ok" to every popup box that appears, but people are learning to not do that as much from what I've noticed the last few months of fixing computers, there's been less and less of those kind's of infections.

Now if Windows could make it easy to install programs and whatnot from a /normal/ user account, and just ask for permission to install when needed, then throw all users into normal accounts, it would be much better. But that's always made things a pain in Windows from my perspective. And most if not all, OEM computers I've fixed/cleaned, every single one is running on an Admin account, which means full system access to whatever the browser downloads.

But at the end of the day, neither one is really secure if the user behind the keyboard is a complete idiot.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> But the problem is, in Windows viruses in most cases can be downloaded/installed right through the browser. And most people are pretty much always on Admin accounts, which makes things that much easier for them and they need little to no human interaction to actually start spreading.
> Whereas with the way Linux / Unix-like systems are set up, you're never on an Admin ( root ) account, so any viruses you /may/ get will be locked in the /home/ userland. And to get outside they would have to ask for permission, so in that sense a computer is only as secure as the person using it. But when everything is properly set up in Linux / Unix-like systems, there's not much that a rouge program in userland can do ( at least to a certain extent, compared to what they can do on Windows ).
> Of course you get people that just click "ok" to every popup box that appears, but people are learning to not do that as much from what I've noticed the last few months of fixing computers, there's been less and less of those kind's of infections.
> Now if Windows could make it easy to install programs and whatnot from a /normal/ user account, and just ask for permission to install when needed, then throw all users into normal accounts, it would be much better. But that's always made things a pain in Windows from my perspective. And most if not all, OEM computers I've fixed/cleaned, every single one is running on an Admin account, which means full system access to whatever the browser downloads.
> But at the end of the day, neither one is really secure if the user behind the keyboard is a complete idiot.


I 100% agree. That is one of the big benefits of Linux over Win. Most people install it and don't even think about setting up a standard user account. That being said due to being lazy over half the time I'm logged into my admin account and I've NEVER had an infected system. I run MSE and a once a month double check with malwarebytes and of course I use a little common sense when it comes to browsing the web and checking email etc.

It just strikes me as a bit misleading when I see people talk about windows like it's a hackers free for all and as if linux is plated in impenetrable anti-virus armor.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I 100% agree. That is one of the big benefits of Linux over Win. Most people install it and don't even think about setting up a standard user account. That being said due to being lazy over half the time I'm logged into my admin account and I've NEVER had an infected system. I run MSE and a once a month double check with malwarebytes and of course I use a little common sense when it comes to browsing the web and checking email etc.
> It just strikes me as a bit misleading when I see people talk about windows like it's a hackers free for all and as if linux is plated in impenetrable anti-virus armor.


I agree, the few Windows systems I've ever run ( like my gf's netbook, or families computer before I converted them all in 05' ) have never had viruses.

But for some reason every other computer I get brought to fix is like a dang playground for them. I honestly can't fathom what half of them do to get so many but somehow they pull it off, but they do! And it's usually systems with somewhat decent protection as well, I've installed MBAM on most of them and they always normally have some kind of decent AV to go along with it, and yet they still manage to rape it.


----------



## Edge Of Pain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I agree, the few Windows systems I've ever run ( like my gf's netbook, or families computer before I converted them all in 05' ) have never had viruses.
> But for some reason every other computer I get brought to fix is like a dang playground for them. I honestly can't fathom what half of them do to get so many but somehow they pull it off, but they do! And it's usually systems with somewhat decent protection as well, I've installed MBAM on most of them and they always normally have some kind of decent AV to go along with it, and yet they still manage to rape it.


I guess the AVERAGE average user is just a little too careless.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I agree, the few Windows systems I've ever run ( like my gf's netbook, or families computer before I converted them all in 05' ) have never had viruses.
> But for some reason every other computer I get brought to fix is like a dang playground for them. I honestly can't fathom what half of them do to get so many but somehow they pull it off, but they do! And it's usually systems with somewhat decent protection as well, I've installed MBAM on most of them and they always normally have some kind of decent AV to go along with it, and yet they still manage to rape it.


*spitting cola through nose*









I say the exact same thing "What in God's name were they doing?" I'm the resident computer geek I guess for all my family and friends (and wife's coworkers now). And almost ALL of the problems I've seen with all of their computers are virus related. One of my friends had literally over 30 trojans, over 100 other various types of malware and 5 really nasty viruses that couldn't be removed no matter what I tried (format time). And he was using Norton.


----------



## Megaman_90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> *spitting cola through nose*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I say the exact same thing "What in God's name were they doing?" I'm the resident computer geek I guess for all my family and friends (and wife's coworkers now). And almost ALL of the problems I've seen with all of their computers are virus related. One of my friends had literally over 30 trojans, over 100 other various types of malware and 5 really nasty viruses that couldn't be removed no matter what I tried (format time). And he was using Norton.


Its just a case of people downloading junkie software and hitting "next, next, next" without unchecking the "Install some crap I don't want" box. Toolbars are another thing, I've seen computers with like 7 or 8 of them running at a time. Every time.....I'm like "seriously"?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Megaman_90*
> 
> Its just a case of people downloading junkie software and hitting "next, next, next" without unchecking the "Install some crap I don't want" box. Toolbars are another thing, I've seen computers with like 7 or 8 of them running at a time. Every time.....I'm like "seriously"?


Or surfing every porn site they can find. Or clicking on every email that says something like "You've just WON" etc. etc.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Just saw this on the first page of MSN.

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2012/05/malware_and_computer_viruses_they_ve_left_porn_sites_for_religious_sites_.html

I had to pick myself up off of the floor after seeing that.


----------



## DaClownie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Megaman_90*
> 
> Its just a case of people downloading junkie software and hitting "next, next, next" without unchecking the "Install some crap I don't want" box. Toolbars are another thing, I've seen computers with like 7 or 8 of them running at a time. Every time.....I'm like "seriously"?
> 
> 
> 
> Or surfing every porn site they can find. Or clicking on every email that says something like "You've just WON" etc. etc.
> 
> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
> 
> Just saw this on the first page of MSN.
> 
> http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2012/05/malware_and_computer_viruses_they_ve_left_porn_sites_for_religious_sites_.html
> 
> I had to pick myself up off of the floor after seeing that.
Click to expand...

Porn site. The issue is porn site. If anyone has teenage boys in their home, porn sites are the issue... my son just turned 14. Naturally, being the curious age, he went searching. However, since they don't know the subtle nuances of finding high quality material on the internet from a site that won't trash your system, he searches google for the word porn. And clicks every single link. Until he finds a boob shot. And clicks, and clicks and clicks. Last time I went on a business trip and left him with access to my computer, I came home to a corrupted Windows installation with over 150 different viruses, and 29,000 infected files. When I left she worked perfectly. LOL

Brings on next tangent question in this thread... is there a way to block access to certain content through my router? Not particular sites, but almost like a rating system? Then I could leave him access to my computer for gaming, but not material that will make my 3770k run like a 486 DX-33 when I get home.

I have a cheap netgear e1000 i think it is. lol

EDIT: The religious sites is mainly because older generation search the internet for religion websites. Younger kids typically don't seem to be as active in their faith, but the older "I don't know how to use these confounded contraptions!" generation just clicks everything that comes up because curious bi-focal eyes get confused


----------



## TinDaDragon

This article is definitely more dead than Linux


----------



## DaClownie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TinDaDragon*
> 
> This article is definitely more dead than Linux


We're done with that. We're talking about everything but Linux now in a civil fashion.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Have you tried Win 7's built in parental controls? You can even set access time for internet usage.


----------



## BizzareRide

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lordikon*
> 
> Yes, but the major difference is that Microsoft won't allow DirectX to run natively on any device/OS for free, OpenGL is 'open', and works on any platform that wants to support it (PC/Mac/Linux/iOS/Android/Web (WebGL)/etc...). DirectX is easier to develop with, but if you are making mobile games, or you want your game to be multiplatform, then you might as well not even touch DirectX. Microsoft is backing themselves into a corner with DirectX IMO, as other gaming markets are gain huge amounts of traction DirectX's strangehold is loosening, and I don't see Microsoft doing anything about it. I'm curious if DirectX will be used on Windows Phone 8, or Windows 8 ARM devices like tablets. That's their best chance to try and extend the life of DirectX, short of making it open for any platform.


OpenGL is on more platforms but they all lack serious investment. The smartphone market is huge and yet, money spent on gaming is minuscule in comparison to money spent on apps in its entirety. People aren't ready to spend $30-60 on a smartphone game thats run by OpenGL. Those are reserved for desktops and as long as this fact remains true, DX will always be home to "serious" games. You know, ones you spend hours at a time playing, not minute-killers.

Unless developers move away from DX, I doubt its going anywhere. If they want to develop for multiple platforms then they can still port to OGL.


----------



## hgfdsa

I have installed Linux distro's on way more pc's than Windos. For desktop only Linux is in my opinion lightyears ahead of Windos. Really.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> And what about all of the Linux web servers?


There is simply no reason to write viruses for web servers when it's a whole lot easier to exploit the poorly-tested and poorly-secured applications running on them.


----------



## TinDaDragon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hgfdsa*
> 
> I have installed Linux distro's on way more pc's than Windos. For desktop only Linux is in my opinion lightyears ahead of Windos. Really.


Why?

Unless your family/the pcs' owners have high knowledge, I don't see why they would have a linux computer vs a windows.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TinDaDragon*
> 
> Why?
> Unless your family/the pcs' owners have high knowledge, I don't see why they would have a linux computer vs a windows.


Clearly they have enough knowledge to use it, in which case the reason why they would not use a Windows computer is because it costs them more money.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Not saying there ARE viruses in linux web servers. But asking do you really think there wouldn't be any if linux was the dominating desktop platform?
> Edit - Just saying black hats are going to go where the money is. And right now the money is getting grandma to click on a file and install a trojan so they can clear out her bank account. Or distributing bots in millions and millions of computers so they have a powerful botnet.


I'm not saying that nor do I think that; but Linux is popular in the server world, there is a market but it's more for actual hacking rather than writing malware I guess though.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> I'm not saying that nor do I think that; but Linux is popular in the server world, there is a market but it's more for actual hacking rather than writing malware I guess though.


Yeah...they're always going to do things the easiest way that return the most results.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Yeah...they're always going to do things the easiest way that return the most results.


While there's obviously other factors at play, it does prove that Linux is significantly stronger against attacks than Windows. Pwn2own shows it as well; however the strongest OS can be opened right up by the right crapware anyway..coughflashcough


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> While there's obviously other factors at play, it does prove that Linux is significantly stronger against attacks than Windows. Pwn2own shows it as well; however the strongest OS can be opened right up by the right crapware anyway..coughflashcough


I think it's as well a matter of focus by the black hats. Even as strong as linux is, if the black hats really devoted their time they would find exploits or other ways to deploy their viruses into linux. Just not something linux has really faced yet and I wouldn't declare any challenges







someone might just take up the gauntlet out of spite.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> While there's obviously other factors at play, it does prove that Linux is significantly stronger against attacks than Windows. Pwn2own shows it as well; however the strongest OS can be opened right up by the right crapware anyway..coughflashcough
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's as well a matter of focus by the black hats. Even as strong as linux is, if the black hats really devoted their time they would find exploits or other ways to deploy their viruses into linux. Just not something linux has really faced yet and I wouldn't declare any challenges
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> someone might just take up the gauntlet out of spite.
Click to expand...

I'd actually like to see the gauntlet thrown. An actively defended Linux box that the hacker cannot actually see vs said hacker. Any system can be penetrated it's by what and how much time.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I think it's as well a matter of focus by the black hats. Even as strong as linux is, if the black hats really devoted their time they would find exploits or other ways to deploy their viruses into linux. Just not something linux has really faced yet and I wouldn't declare any challenges
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> someone might just take up the gauntlet out of spite.


I thought it was the whole point of pwn2own? They aren't going by market share there. They're literally going by the knowledge of the hackers against the inherent security of the system/programs.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> I thought it was the whole point of pwn2own? They aren't going by market share there. They're literally going by the knowledge of the hackers against the inherent security of the system/programs.


5 or 10 years ago I would have said that is true. And there still is a black hat community like that but we're seeing a new breed of black hat hackers coming out of Asia, Africa, and the middle east. (mostly asia with former U.S.S.R. bloc countries). They clever, organized and out to make money.


----------



## PCCstudent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> The linux term of "free" is as Stallman put it " Think of free speech, not free beer".


With "free beer" something of value is being given away. Are you saying with "free speech" there is nothing of value being given away? Are you also saying I should apply this same comparison to pay for software and free software? With the free software the hope is to recover the costs by providing support. But with Linux distros we have all those friendly always right forums to hook up with


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> With "free beer" something of value is being given away. Are you saying with "free speech" there is nothing of value being given away? Are you also saying I should apply this same comparison to pay for software and free software? With the free software the hope is to recover the costs by providing support. But with Linux distros we have all those friendly always right forums to hook up with


Maybe this will help you better understand.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html


----------



## PCCstudent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Maybe this will help you better understand.
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html


Sounds like they put a lot of spin on a simple word.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> With the free software the hope is to recover the costs by providing support.


Only if it is developed for commercial purposes. Otherwise the hope is that it works and is useful.


----------



## Harbinger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> With the free software the hope is to recover the costs by providing support. But with Linux distros we have all those friendly always right forums to hook up with


Only companies such as Red Hat and Canonical operate that way. Most of the free and open source applications that are developed are worked on by volunteers in their spare time. They don't particularly do it in hopes of getting some compensation from a kind fellow on the internet.


----------



## terraprime

[email protected]+Linux FTW !!!!


----------



## placidity

I guarantee it will be the last desktop operating system standing. As long as there are a few users people are going to keep updating the source code. Open source will never die. I still love it.


----------



## anon-nick

I don't know if you know this guys...

guys look..

right here guys...

It's..guys..

the manual is built in..

guys..

It's called "man"


----------



## z3r0_k00l75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anon-nick*
> 
> I don't know if you know this guys...
> guys look..
> right here guys...
> It's..guys..
> the manual is built in..
> guys..
> It's called "man"


LMAO!!! That is the "windows" mindset nowadays. If you have to look for an answer or actually read instructions it is just too hard. That is unless its a popup box asking "would you like to be infected?" with 2 choices yes and yes. And then its "MOOOOM! The stupid computer did it again!"


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z3r0_k00l75*
> 
> LMAO!!! That is the "windows" mindset nowadays. If you have to look for an answer or actually read instructions it is just too hard. That is unless its a popup box asking "would you like to be infected?" with 2 choices yes and yes. And then its "MOOOOM! The stupid computer did it again!"


Making the worlds population dumber, 1 popup box at a time


----------



## PCCstudent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z3r0_k00l75*
> 
> LMAO!!! That is the "windows" mindset nowadays. If you have to look for an answer or actually read instructions it is just too hard. That is unless its a popup box asking "would you like to be infected?" with 2 choices yes and yes. And then its "MOOOOM! The stupid computer did it again!"


Are we back to the "computers running linux do not get infected" mindset? there ought to be a manual that comes with "man".Man is really for people that already know what they are doing but are simply having a brain lockup and need a bit of proding.Man is not the same as actualy having documentation.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> Are we back to the "computers running linux do not get infected" mindset? there ought to be a manual that comes with "man".Man is really for people that already know what they are doing but are simply having a brain lockup and need a bit of proding.*Man is not the same as actualy having documentation.*


Looks like quite decent documentation to me.


----------



## PCCstudent

My Linux documentation is in 4 volumes and measures 9x10x12.I go to man when I am reconfiguring and need a refresh when the syntax I have chosen does not work.I do try and hit sites like HowToForge before I go to the actual book.My use for "man" is a quickie fix when I know I pretty much have it right and just one small thing is out of order, or when I have already done the task but have messed it up this time.Man has its uses, but telling a nOOb to "just pull up man" is not going to bring people into the linux fold, it will do the opposite.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> My Linux documentation is in 4 volumes and measures 9x10x12.I go to man when I am reconfiguring and need a refresh when the syntax I have chosen does not work.I do try and hit sites like HowToForge before I go to the actual book.My use for "man" is a quickie fix when I know I pretty much have it right and just one small thing is out of order, or when I have already done the task but have messed it up this time.Man has its uses, but telling a nOOb to "just pull up man" is not going to bring people into the linux fold, it will do the opposite.


Definitely going to agree with this. I get headaches when reading some man files because they're literally from a programmer's mindset and they haven't transferred it into laymen terms. I mean something as simple as the man for scrot took me a while to figure out things and that's only because I'm a trial and error person. I can understand Shrak being able to make sense of it and it's probably because of his background. But most of use don't have that basis for viewing things (I'm a business major dammit lol). And most people view computers as magic boxes so they're never going to approach things that trial and error way either. I'm sure I've said it before but I think Linux could beat the rest if it could blend/combine both views/approaches of the poweruser/programmer type along with the low on time and "view computers as magic boxes" type. So leave man in while maybe having a better GUI guide than what windows has which confuse me even more than man pages to be honest when you ask about something "complicated".


----------



## .:hybrid:.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *z3r0_k00l75*
> 
> LMAO!!! That is the "windows" mindset nowadays. If you have to look for an answer or actually read instructions it is just too hard. That is unless its a popup box asking "would you like to be infected?" with 2 choices yes and yes. And then its "MOOOOM! The stupid computer did it again!"


What are you trying to say, that because Linux is harder its better? Windows is stupid because it uses GUI instead of terminal? Lol windoze virus xDD
I hope you realize those statements just make Linux users look bad, your not doing yourself any favours.


----------



## tippy25

Things I use Linux for:
- Web browsing
- Some homework
- Watching videos/movies

Things I use Windows for:
- Gaming
- Some homework

I find myself booting into Linux most often because I just don't have that much work that requires Windows. If I can do it in Linux, I don't bother with Windows. Libre Office is a suitable substitute to MS Office 90% of the time. The only time I use Windows for something I can do in Linux is if I was already doing something in Windows. Linux is my go-to OS for media. Find the right program in the Ubuntu Software Center, and you're set.


----------



## Bitech

Lolpcworld, they wrote an article on why our next computers should be Macs, no offense to Mac users.


----------



## UltraVolta425

Why linux is dead? Jeez, this TOPIC should be dead...
50 pages ranting and discussing about an old fact...


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Ya'll need to make up your minds. You "flame" the author of the article and me for agreeing with him (on this point, not the "linux is dead" part), when he points out "user friendliness" as a serious drawback of Linux , telling me it's "just as easy to install and run as windows". And your arguing about how if people find Linux "hard" they should not be lazy and pull out some manual or "man" and learn how to do what they need. Which is it? Linux is so easy grandma can use it? Or Linux can be difficult but there's a manual to read if you're not lazy?

Edit - So let's summarize my recent install of Mint 13. Programs going straight to "sleeping" and don't seem to want to "wake" up, the sound card isn't working, and it doesn't load a driver for the WNA1000 wifi adapter (I tried again) so without an ether connection youre SOL. Now I can't seem to get it to add the network printer (I'm going to have to take a half hour to read through all of the posts online about that with instructions). So I in NO WAY say that "Linux Sux" or "Linux is Dead" or even "I don't like Linux" and I'll troubleshoot and work through these issues until I get it set up correctly but it irks me a little when people say it's "just as easy" to install and use as windows and Mac (Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are red tailed devils but they did make noob friendly products).


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *.:hybrid:.*
> 
> What are you trying to say, that because Linux is harder its better? Windows is stupid because it uses GUI instead of terminal? Lol windoze virus xDD
> I hope you realize those statements just make Linux users look bad, your not doing yourself any favours.


Actually they don't make Linux users look bad..

Please keep in mind harder is relative, because you believe something mis more difficult doesn't mean I do..


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Ya'll need to make up your minds. You "flame" the author of the article and me for agreeing with him (on this point, not the "linux is dead" part), when he points out "user friendliness" as a serious drawback of Linux , telling me it's "just as easy to install and run as windows". And your arguing about how if people find Linux "hard" they should not be lazy and pull out some manual or "man" and learn how to do what they need. Which is it? Linux is so easy grandma can use it? Or Linux can be difficult but there's a manual to read if you're not lazy?
> Edit - So let's summarize my recent install of Mint 13. Programs going straight to "sleeping" and don't seem to want to "wake" up, the sound card isn't working, and it doesn't load a driver for the WNA1000 wifi adapter (I tried again) so without an ether connection youre SOL. Now I can't seem to get it to add the network printer (I'm going to have to take a half hour to read through all of the posts online about that with instructions). So I in NO WAY say that "Linux Sux" or "Linux is Dead" or even "I don't like Linux" and I'll troubleshoot and work through these issues until I get it set up correctly but it irks me a little when people say it's "just as easy" to install and use as windows and Mac (Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are red tailed devils but they did make noob friendly products).


Depending on which distro and what you want to do it can be both, and you know that..

Did you get your sound card working..I think for you it's time time to ditch ubuntu and it derivatives and go with fedora.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *UltraVolta425*
> 
> Why linux is dead? Jeez, this TOPIC should be dead...
> 50 pages ranting and discussing about an old fact...


If the topic is dead why are people having fun discussing it? You can always read another thread.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Depending on which distro and what you want to do it can be both, and you know that..
> Did you get your sound card working..I think for you it's time time to ditch ubuntu and it derivatives and go with fedora.


I don't *know* that. I know for me, being a computer geek, it can be relatively "easy" to use, but my capabilities are quite a bit above what a non computer geeks capabilities are I would like to think.

I haven't worked on the sound card issue at all. Spent yesterday installing mint and OSX in virtual machines. I'll probably work on it tomorrow. I was thinking of trying the latest Opensuse as well. I prefer the KDE desktop anyways.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> If the topic is dead why are people having fun discussing it? You can always read another thread.
> I don't *know* that. I know for me, being a computer geek, it can be relatively "easy" to use, but my capabilities are quite a bit above what a non computer geeks capabilities are I would like to think.
> I haven't worked on the sound card issue at all. Spent yesterday installing mint and OSX in virtual machines. I'll probably work on it tomorrow. I was thinking of trying the latest Opensuse as well. I prefer the KDE desktop anyways.


SUSE never works well for me..

Linux can be easy enough for your grandma and difficult enough to make geeks cry it just depends on what you're looking for.


----------



## Rookie1337

@Bubba: You ever think that the reason a distro may be "hard" is because it tries to be "easy"? I remember someone told me that a when I started out 2 years ago on Linux and I thought he was smoking something. After getting to really try Arch/Archbang I can tell you that there is something to it. Your problems with buntu, Fedora, SUSE may be because they try to do things for you that they can't because they're not as smart as you. This is one thing people complain about with Windows at times is when Windows does something they don't want it to. Why? Because in attempting to be user friendly it assumes you're too dumb to know what to do even if you had the choice. This is why I find Linux easier at times. It's all about balance bubba...Windows and OSX are moving further and further from allowing a user to be in control and helping them exert that control. This also allows them to do things without you knowing...say backtracks into Skype and your OS itself. So to answer your question...Linux can be so easy Grandma can use it if she's never been exposed to Windows and she has Linux on hardware that is known to work with Linux. It would be like throwing Grandma on a Hackintosh that was never setup right or even letting her be with windows. None of those scenarios will work out well. So is any easier? Is any better? Linux's problem is simply it's still too much from the view of a programmer for programmers. When you make man pages or hell a wiki that is not intimidating to people then you don't need to have "smart" programs that try and do everything for everyone (and likely fail/become bloated and slow) because then people will be able to do things on their own and probably understand and be better able to think about how to fix the next problem. Sure it sounds like it's not plug and play simple but it would solve a lot more problems and in the long run waste less time than people waiting around for some quick fix that fixes things fast but erases or complicates other things.

I need to stop writing on here since no one agrees understands me.









@GermanyChris: Fedora would likely be worse for him. It's almost a "FOSS" only mentality which means if he's got a piece of hardware that's being problematic in buntu (likely because it's proprietary soundcard added on right?)...then it's likely going to be more difficult to work in Fedora. Again ask your questions in the Linux section and we'll help you if we can.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> @Bubba: You ever think that the reason a distro may be "hard" is because it tries to be "easy"? I remember someone told me that a when I started out 2 years ago on Linux and I thought he was smoking something. After getting to really try Arch/Archbang I can tell you that there is something to it. Your problems with buntu, Fedora, SUSE may be because they try to do things for you that they can't because they're not as smart as you. This is one thing people complain about with Windows at times is when Windows does something they don't want it to. Why? Because in attempting to be user friendly it assumes you're too dumb to know what to do even if you had the choice. This is why I find Linux easier at times. It's all about balance bubba...Windows and OSX are moving further and further from allowing a user to be in control and helping them exert that control. This also allows them to do things without you knowing...say backtracks into Skype and your OS itself. So to answer your question...Linux can be so easy Grandma can use it if she's never been exposed to Windows and she has Linux on hardware that is known to work with Linux. It would be like throwing Grandma on a Hackintosh that was never setup right or even letting her be with windows. None of those scenarios will work out well. So is any easier? Is any better? Linux's problem is simply it's still too much from the view of a programmer for programmers. When you make man pages or hell a wiki that is not intimidating to people then you don't need to have "smart" programs that try and do everything for everyone (and likely fail/become bloated and slow) because then people will be able to do things on their own and probably understand and be better able to think about how to fix the next problem. Sure it sounds like it's not plug and play simple but it would solve a lot more problems and in the long run waste less time than people waiting around for some quick fix that fixes things fast but erases or complicates other things.
> I need to stop writing on here since no one agrees with me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @GermanyChris: Fedora would likely be worse for him. It's almost a "FOSS" only mentality which means if he's got a piece of hardware that's being problematic in buntu (likely because it's proprietary soundcard added on right?)...then it's likely going to be more difficult to work in Fedora. Again ask your questions in the Linux section and we'll help you if we can.


I don't disagree with you for the most part. I HATE that osx and now apparently windows take choices away from you. My original point though was that Linux is not as widely adopted by the whole world as much as windows or mac because there's an element of difficulty installing and sometimes "using" Linux (all dependent on which hardware you're using) that can be a major turn off for those that are not computer geeks like us. But that is just IMHO.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I don't disagree with you for the most part. I HATE that osx and now apparently windows take choices away from you. My original point though was that Linux is not as widely adopted by the whole world as much as windows or mac because there's an element of difficulty installing and sometimes "using" Linux (all dependent on which hardware you're using) that can be a major turn off for those that are not computer geeks like us. But that is just IMHO.


See that's the reason I'm so for Linux...it is actually responding to demand. Windows and OSX are not. They are one trick ponies or dictatorial communism. Everyone is the same under those OSes by default and they wish to make it were you can't break out, where you can't choice things without massive effort or someone else's program/work. That's the price of not giving a damn about a topic/product/choice. I'm OK with the right balance of freedom/control being used to pay for "ease of use" (hence why I mostly stick to debian/buntu variants) but there's a line that people seem unaware or apathetic to because they "just don't have the time".

I don't agree with the element of difficulty in installing as if you don't keep a windows partition buntu installers make windows installers look like crap. They're faster and easier. But the whole thing is people are think they're more difficult because they're afraid of what they don't know/isn't familiar. That's a big enemy for Linux. Honestly, if you cloned Windows for a GUI all the way through people would find Linux just as easy because they don't know any better.

People are their own worse enemy and excuses with Linux are a great place to demonstrate that. People cry foul at MS, Apple, and Google for limiting their choices (even something like a GUI) and yet they'll still end up using those things. People won't try Linux because of such and such a reason, but if they had started with Linux in the first place I bet they wouldn't try Windows either and probably call it difficult to install or hard to use. MS were no idiots in getting into the education market. They're also not idiots about slowly and methodically coming down on "piracy" of MS software in places like Chine and the rest of the "developing world". Why? Because they know that if they cracked down on people's access to the software (demanding they paid) then those people would seek another alternative (likely Linux or something else).

So Linux languishes because there's so few users and the reason there's so few users is because there's so few users.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> @Bubba: You ever think that the reason a distro may be "hard" is because it tries to be "easy"? I remember someone told me that a when I started out 2 years ago on Linux and I thought he was smoking something. After getting to really try Arch/Archbang I can tell you that there is something to it. Your problems with buntu, Fedora, SUSE may be because they try to do things for you that they can't because they're not as smart as you. This is one thing people complain about with Windows at times is when Windows does something they don't want it to. Why? Because in attempting to be user friendly it assumes you're too dumb to know what to do even if you had the choice. This is why I find Linux easier at times. It's all about balance bubba...Windows and OSX are moving further and further from allowing a user to be in control and helping them exert that control. This also allows them to do things without you knowing...say backtracks into Skype and your OS itself. So to answer your question...Linux can be so easy Grandma can use it if she's never been exposed to Windows and she has Linux on hardware that is known to work with Linux. It would be like throwing Grandma on a Hackintosh that was never setup right or even letting her be with windows. None of those scenarios will work out well. So is any easier? Is any better? Linux's problem is simply it's still too much from the view of a programmer for programmers. When you make man pages or hell a wiki that is not intimidating to people then you don't need to have "smart" programs that try and do everything for everyone (and likely fail/become bloated and slow) because then people will be able to do things on their own and probably understand and be better able to think about how to fix the next problem. Sure it sounds like it's not plug and play simple but it would solve a lot more problems and in the long run waste less time than people waiting around for some quick fix that fixes things fast but erases or complicates other things.
> I need to stop writing on here since no one agrees understands me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @GermanyChris: Fedora would likely be worse for him. *It's almost a "FOSS" only mentality which means if he's got a piece of hardware that's being problematic in buntu (likely because it's proprietary soundcard added on right?)...then it's likely going to be more difficult to work in Fedora. Again ask your questions in the Linux section and we'll help you if we can*.


Is it??

Fedora has always been the reliable backup..install everything works and move on with life..

Linux setup has been easier for the most part than this Hackintosh I type form..


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Is it??
> Fedora has always been the reliable backup..install everything works and move on with life..
> Linux setup has been easier for the most part than this Hackintosh I type form..


I love how people like him immediately assume that because I point out some inherent difficulties with installing linux that would have noobs tearing their hair out that I suddenly require an "easy" distro to use instead of realizing I was making a point about widespread acceptance. I *completely* agree with you on hackintosh. I'm still trying to get it to install on an AMD platform and that is by FAR more difficult than installing Linux (unless you're compiling your own distro).


----------



## PCCstudent

What is going to happen is you are (unless you are just a browser) going to have to know both linux and Windows and know how to integrate the two. You are going to have your applications where Linux works best and you are also going to have a Windows machine(or two) on the network.You are going to have to share files between the two machines and provide security for the entire group. All the writers are seeing the reasons why the "other guy" exists and are figuring out ways to incorporate him in their network.We (meaning people that do more than browse and entertain ourselves) are going to have to know both methods.I just finished up three Debian classes and it did not take very long until Windows was introduced.I have not seen many Linux installs running Windows VM's but sure have seen a bunch of Windows machines running Linux VM's.Things are moving so as the OS's work together, even better than we do.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I love how people like him immediately assume that because I point out some inherent difficulties with installing linux that would have noobs tearing their hair out that I suddenly require an "easy" distro to use instead of realizing I was making a point about widespread acceptance. I *completely* agree with you on hackintosh. I'm still trying to get it to install on an AMD platform and that is by FAR more difficult than installing Linux (unless you're compiling your own distro).


AMD hackintosh's are like hens teeth..

And I can't recall seeing a bulldozer version, and I'll assume the bulldozer is overclocked too right..


----------



## newphase

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> With "free beer" something of value is being given away. Are you saying with "free speech" there is nothing of value being given away? Are you also saying I should apply this same comparison to pay for software and free software? With the free software the hope is to recover the costs by providing support. But with Linux distros we have all those friendly always right forums to hook up with


Free as in Beer = you never own it and therefore it is not free cos it comes out as pee.


----------



## PCCstudent

Myself i do not see the install difficulties.I do see some issues with setting up proxys,apps like shorewall,bind9,DanGuardian,using the LVM and partition tool,squid,Samba to a lesser degree,dual interfaces (one for a private network) Apache2 (not so terrible).Shorewall was my nemisis but just getting the basic install up and online,this was not an issue.It was configuring the speciality apps (like the telephony app asterix) and the data backup apps like rsync that can give issues.

Would I pick a linux distro for my desktop (which is where I think this all started) I certainly know people that do and would not have it any other way,but myself I would pick Win 7 and use my linux tools where they excel.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I love how people like him immediately assume that because I point out some inherent difficulties with installing linux that would have noobs tearing their hair out that I suddenly require an "easy" distro to use instead of realizing I was making a point about widespread acceptance. I *completely* agree with you on hackintosh. I'm still trying to get it to install on an AMD platform and that is by FAR more difficult than installing Linux (unless you're compiling your own distro).


Be careful what you infer...at no point did I say that you require an "easy" distro. In fact I suggested that you are smart enough not to need it if you desired because as I pointed out it may be holding you back simply because it may have a problem understanding how to setup your hardware and since it doesn't actually ask your input on that it assumes something and "poof" things don't work. The same thing actually happened a lot in Windows in the early days now that I remember it. The difference is Windows just became generic so it spread out and engulfed those issues by becoming bigger and removing your direct access to those things (for better or worse is up to you). But if we are going to get needlessly specific grandma or the "noobs" you refer to are likely people who would never conceive of installing windows themselves. So the difficulty you describe is irrelevant to them. I gave an explanation as to why someone who may be competent would find something difficult..it's familiarity and effort mostly.

But again the problems within Linux are that the user base is still likely the programmer orientated. They talk about KISS and FOSS like it's Jesus and yes there's appeal to it but they fail to see how they're going from their point of view on what qualifies as KISS and ignoring anyone else's. There needs to be a middle ground but it seems to either be growing extremely slow or is just being ignored.


----------



## tippy25

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> I love how people like him immediately assume that because I point out some inherent difficulties with installing linux that would have noobs tearing their hair out that I suddenly require an "easy" distro to use instead of realizing I was making a point about widespread acceptance. I *completely* agree with you on hackintosh. I'm still trying to get it to install on an AMD platform and that is by FAR more difficult than installing Linux (unless you're compiling your own distro).


I'm not quite sure what you mean when you talk about difficulties in installing linux. I installed Ubuntu 11.10 & 12.04 and the only difficulty I came across were GRUB-based since I'm dual booting with Windows. Oneiric Ocelot install was 100% painless and just worked right off the bat. If I was running linux only instead of a dual boot, my Precise Pangolin install would have been the same. These problems only existed on my desktop. I'm running a dual boot with Windows on my laptop as well and the install of 11.10 & upgrade to 12.04 was smooth as silk. Could you site examples of difficulties that would arise in installing linux if it were the only OS?

Also, Linux has better names for their OSs than both Windows & Mac.


----------



## gildadan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *joshd*
> 
> Just because you say it's the best, doesn't make it true.
> How much does a degree in the States cost...?
> Yeah.
> In Scotland it's free.
> So I'd say we have the best.


Lol free. Nothing is truly free and if it is then it is for a good reason. People do pay for it. A degree you get for free is worth exactly that.

On topic. Linux while useful will never be a mainstream os for the general public for much the same reasoning that I pointed out above. It is free for a reason. If it started being an os you paid for that had all the driver support and such that windows enjoys it would be more of a mainstream os. I think that is its main limiting factor at this point. Being able to do everything through the gui would be another one. A lot of the gui programs out there are finnicky at best or outright don't work and will wreck your system at worst. Been there done that. I learned you use the command line for anything important.

I use linux on my home server and while it is cumbersome I like it better than whs for one big reason and that is the fact it isn't ridiculously overbloated. I can install Linux on a very small partition while for Windows you need at least a 160 gigs before windows will even let you install it. Plus it takes much more computing power than it needs to. It isn't quite as full featured as whs. No there is no slick gui like whs has nor the dashboard for my clients. But it was free I can't complain too much. Again you get what you pay for. But I do have a web interface so that works just as well I think. The biggest difference in getting this stripped down os to work was a lot of headaches and sleepless nights learning which for me was semi ok as it was something new and a challenge. But for others it would just not work. They would put in some big drives and hit install and be going in a couple hours with whs. Not caring that it took more power to run it or whatever. They just care that it works and it worked easily.

There is a learning curve like anything else and while linux will never be my fulltime desktop os it does have its place in my home.


----------



## newphase

2x post


----------



## newphase

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *UltraVolta425*
> 
> Why linux is dead? Jeez, this TOPIC should be dead...
> 50 pages ranting and discussing about an old fact...


What, "old fact", are you referring to?


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> AMD hackintosh's are like hens teeth..
> And I can't recall seeing a bulldozer version, and I'll assume the bulldozer is overclocked too right..


You're telling me. I'm trying to figure out what commands I need to input before install or how to patch it to make it work on AMD with a bus at 250 (gonna have to do some reading up on it first). I would give up since I'm installing it just to play around with it but there's that part of me that doesn't want to give up till I crack the problem and see how to do it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Be careful what you infer...at no point did I say that you require an "easy" distro. In fact I suggested that you are smart enough not to need it if you desired because as I pointed out it may be holding you back simply because it may have a problem understanding how to setup your hardware and since it doesn't actually ask your input on that it assumes something and "poof" things don't work. The same thing actually happened a lot in Windows in the early days now that I remember it. The difference is Windows just became generic so it spread out and engulfed those issues by becoming bigger and removing your direct access to those things (for better or worse is up to you). But if we are going to get needlessly specific grandma or the "noobs" you refer to are likely people who would never conceive of installing windows themselves. So the difficulty you describe is irrelevant to them. I gave an explanation as to why someone who may be competent would find something difficult..it's familiarity and effort mostly.
> But again the problems within Linux are that the user base is still likely the programmer orientated. They talk about KISS and FOSS like it's Jesus and yes there's appeal to it but they fail to see how they're going from their point of view on what qualifies as KISS and ignoring anyone else's. There needs to be a middle ground but it seems to either be growing extremely slow or is just being ignored.


Just going by this "@GermanyChris: Fedora would likely be worse for him.". Anyways, even some "noobs" while having not a clue about linux might still have some capabilities when it comes to installing an OS. Take my wife for example. If I were to hand her a windows install disk and say put it in the DVD drive, on my computer upstairs (with a blank hard drive for example) and turn it on, the chances she would run into any kind of difficulty installing windows on it would be very very small and most she might encounter would be fairly straightforward to fix with a call to MS tech support and a few simple steps to follow.. Now take the same setup and instead give her a linux distro disk (any distro) and can the same be honestly said for that install? Are the chances of encountering a problem really very small? And if problems ARE encountered what are the chances she'll be able to fix them with a few simple steps or easily be able to even find those steps? Let's all be really honest. That doesn't mean it makes Linux "worse" or windows any "better", it just means it has made it "easier" (for better or worse) to get up and running. Like I've said repeatedly, Linux has some really awesome and powerful features but there are some drawbacks, maybe not what you or I would consider drawbacks but something that many people would find a level of frustration in and are not willing to deal with just to get on the internet etc when there are other simpler options out there. Me, I will continue to use windows for the most part and from time to time install and play around with linux. If not for my experience (limited) with linux I would not have been able to unlock my android tablet and customize it to how I want it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tippy25*
> 
> I'm not quite sure what you mean when you talk about difficulties in installing linux. I installed Ubuntu 11.10 & 12.04 and the only difficulty I came across were GRUB-based since I'm dual booting with Windows. Oneiric Ocelot install was 100% painless and just worked right off the bat. If I was running linux only instead of a dual boot, my Precise Pangolin install would have been the same. These problems only existed on my desktop. I'm running a dual boot with Windows on my laptop as well and the install of 11.10 & upgrade to 12.04 was smooth as silk. Could you site examples of difficulties that would arise in installing linux if it were the only OS?
> Also, Linux has better names for their OSs than both Windows & Mac.


Just because you had no difficulty installing it on your system doesn't mean there *won't* be difficulty, or that it's "rarely" encountered.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> /snipped Take my wife for example. If I were to hand her a windows install disk and say put it in the DVD drive, on my computer upstairs (with a blank hard drive for example) and turn it on, the chances she would run into any kind of difficulty installing windows on it would be very very small and most she might encounter would be fairly straightforward to fix with a call to MS tech support and a few simple steps to follow.. /snipped


I laughed at the MS tech support thing....cause to be honest...I didn't even know they had any.

But seriously, we've gone over this installing thing. It's not about whether it will work that's even the important part because most people would never attempt the Linux install because they don't know what it is. Fear of the unknown will hold them back. I've already said it before that even if you made things one to one and told them they were installing windows they'd probably go through with it and be fine. Sure there's bound to be a glitch or two every now and then but that happens even with Windows. The difference is what has everyone been ingrained to "trust" or expect on a computer? Best prank I ever pulled on someone was telling them that I had replaced their windows install with Linux and then watch them suddenly have problems with doing things even though I didn't do a thing to their computer. Yes, there are problems with Linux but I'm pretty sure a bigger problem is with the mindset of people about it. I thought Arch was going to be a terribly hard thing to get installed and working but the truth is it wasn't nearly as bad as I made it out. I'm sure Gentoo is probably less difficult than I think but my fear/laziness gets in the way. The point is simple. Your wife may or may not succeed with windows installing depending on her knowledge and mindset. For the most part she'd succeed because Windows gives you probably the least amount of choices it can during that install. But to get to that point would be a step that many people can't/won't take.


----------



## MediaRocker

Just throwing this out there...

Installed Ubuntu 10.10 on my Dell Inspiron (with a mobility radeon 9000)... radeon drivers were broken... Put 11.04 on it.. problem solved... though I still have suspend and resume issues.

Installed Mint 12 on my other Gateway laptop, no issues at all. Thinking of trying Mint on my Dell...

So it's going to be hit and miss, but most integrated peripherals will install without any issues. I noticed on systems with Integrated Graphics I had notably less issues than with ones with proprietary graphics. The one I've always had issues with were ATI cards.


----------



## QuietlyLinux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MediaRocker*
> 
> Just throwing this out there...
> Installed Ubuntu 10.10 on my Dell Inspiron (with a mobility radeon 9000)... radeon drivers were broken... Put 11.04 on it.. problem solved... though I still have suspend and resume issues.
> Installed Mint 12 on my other Gateway laptop, no issues at all. Thinking of trying Mint on my Dell...
> So it's going to be hit and miss, but most integrated peripherals will install without any issues. I noticed on systems with Integrated Graphics I had notably less issues than with ones with proprietary graphics. The one I've always had issues with were ATI cards.


Agreed.
I have NEVER had any issues with nVidia graphics cards.
Oh wait i have never had one!








Although seriously here is a list of hardest to easiest driver-wise. The thing is with windows you actually have to install the drivers with a CD(yes actually!)! Linux has all of your drivers by default but there are some issues with certain thing's e.g audio cards. And OSX doesn't count
Win7

Linux

OSX


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> there ought to be a manual that comes with "man"


There is.







http://linux.die.net/man/1/man


----------



## Mr_Torch

@MediaRocker, use the new Mint 13 either the Mate edition or the Cinnamon edition.

As far as the thread title, no Linux desktop is not dead.
More people are getting exposed to it now as they are seeing things that companies such as Microsoft are doing by closing them into a little box that choices are made for them (for their own good they are saying). That sounds like what Apple does..........

In the same respects there are some Linux distributions that have either taken free choice away in some areas, or made it an obfuscated task to change some things.

This is why a great percentage of Linux users can't stand things like Unity.
I prefer the "Mate" version of Linux Mint 13 because it continues to give me the free and easy ways to change things to the way I like them to look and act.

That is one of the wonderful things with Linux, you are not 'Locked in a box'
If you don't like it, you can change it to either a different distribution, or change your DE.

Windows is trying to copy the Unity interface with their new Metro interface, disregarding the fact that most Linux users can't stand Unity and won't use it.

Humans do like to have choices, Linux does give you choices for your Desktop Environment and your operating system, Microsoft and Apple do not.

The Linux Desktop is not dead and never will be.


----------



## randomizer

Software is dead when nobody uses it. There are approximately 1.5 billion PCs in use around the world, and if Linux has a market share of 1% (using the most conservative estimates from the poorest sources) then 15 million people are using it on their desktop. Let's be honest, there is far more dead software than that.


----------



## Mr_Torch

Well, I've been a 1% er for many many years.


----------



## darknight670

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gildadan*
> 
> Lol free. Nothing is truly free and if it is then it is for a good reason. People do pay for it. A degree you get for free is worth exactly that.
> On topic. Linux while useful will never be a mainstream os for the general public for much the same reasoning that I pointed out above. It is free for a reason. If it started being an os you paid for that had all the driver support and such that windows enjoys it would be more of a mainstream os. I think that is its main limiting factor at this point. Being able to do everything through the gui would be another one. A lot of the gui programs out there are finnicky at best or outright don't work and will wreck your system at worst. Been there done that. I learned you use the command line for anything important.
> I use linux on my home server and while it is cumbersome I like it better than whs for one big reason and that is the fact it isn't ridiculously overbloated. I can install Linux on a very small partition while for Windows you need at least a 160 gigs before windows will even let you install it. Plus it takes much more computing power than it needs to. It isn't quite as full featured as whs. No there is no slick gui like whs has nor the dashboard for my clients. But it was free I can't complain too much. Again you get what you pay for. But I do have a web interface so that works just as well I think. The biggest difference in getting this stripped down os to work was a lot of headaches and sleepless nights learning which for me was semi ok as it was something new and a challenge. But for others it would just not work. They would put in some big drives and hit install and be going in a couple hours with whs. Not caring that it took more power to run it or whatever. They just care that it works and it worked easily.
> There is a learning curve like anything else and while linux will never be my fulltime desktop os it does have its place in my home.


Do you know how much the BEST science degree in France costs ?

-1300 Euros per month. And now the - in front is not a mistake.

So bad example


----------



## pratesh

I like Ubuntu. I haven't done much work on it, but it seems solid. So much so in fact that I intend to have a dual OS(Win7+ Ubuntu) for my next rig.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomizer*
> 
> There is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://linux.die.net/man/1/man


I guess you didn't see ....

http://www.overclock.net/t/1259964/pcworld-why-linux-on-the-desktop-is-dead/480_30#post_17339746


----------



## Nocturin

hah this is the thread that never ends

and goes on and on my friends

some people started singing

not knowing what it was


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

*"It just won't dieeeeeeee....* *running away screaming*


----------



## GermanyChris

It won't stop until you make a commitment to pull your windows drives for a month


----------



## PCCstudent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomizer*
> 
> Software is dead when nobody uses it. There are approximately 1.5 billion PCs in use around the world, and if Linux has a market share of 1% (using the most conservative estimates from the poorest sources) then 15 million people are using it on their desktop. Let's be honest, there is far more dead software than that.


This study puts the destop use of the various linux distros at under 1%.I was suprised at how high XP still is
http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/08/10/failure-of-linux-to-grab-1-percent-of-desktop-os-market/


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> This study puts the destop use of the various linux distros at under 1%.I was suprised at how high XP still is
> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/08/10/failure-of-linux-to-grab-1-percent-of-desktop-os-market/


That's 18 months out of date, Unity wasn't even the main DE for Ubuntu at that point!

18 months is a lifetime with Linux & open-source software


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> I guess you didn't see ....
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1259964/pcworld-why-linux-on-the-desktop-is-dead/480_30#post_17339746


I did see it, but I didn't actually look at the screenshot to see that it was in fact the man manpage










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> This study puts the destop use of the various linux distros at under 1%.I was suprised at how high XP still is
> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/08/10/failure-of-linux-to-grab-1-percent-of-desktop-os-market/


Thank you for ignoring the point of my post to provide a link to yet another study that that uses the same dubious data sources. I can provide a link to a more recent blog post from the same site that places it near 1.6% of you like.


----------



## PCCstudent

They certainly did not achieve the 20% prediction (for 2008) made by Siemens in 2003, but predicting Linux will ever have 20% of the desktop market is the definition of "going out on a limb".I do wonder what Siemens saw in 2003(or didn't see) that made them feel comfortable with this 20% prediction by 2008? Can't really conclude things are moving in the correct direction with any type of speed.

I wonder why achieving a high level of desktop usage is important to linux users.Now that is the definition of square peg in round hole.Linux has its "niche" where it excels,that should be good enough.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> I wonder why achieving a high level of desktop usage is important to linux users.


It's more important to journalists than Linux users. That is why this topic gets an article about it once a month.


----------



## chemicalfan

I don't buy the "niche" argument, Linux happily runs on everything from desktops to servers to routers to vending machines. It's the most flexible OS in the world, hence why it's nice to see it in more common use. People don't see anything other than the desktops' OS, so it's more visible, and a more meaniful statistic.

Personally, I don't really care what OS people run on their desktop. I run Linux because it's free, I have the freedom to do what I like (in terms of packages, kernel config, etc), and it's safe. I dare say that anyone who solely uses their PC for web browsing and basic word processing & spreadsheet work, could save themselves £120 on a Windows license, and be just as happy. And while the OOTB hardware support is strides ahead of where it was even 3 years ago, I acknoledge that anything going wrong OOTB is likely to send average Joe running. But in the majority of cases, with distros like Ubuntu & Mint, this won't happen - they'll have a painless install, and be £120 richer.


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> I wonder why achieving a high level of desktop usage is important to linux users.


I couldn't really care less if you use Linux daily; however if someone says something wrong about Linux I sure as hell will correct it.


----------



## PCCstudent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brutuz*
> 
> I couldn't really care less if you use Linux daily; however if someone says something wrong about Linux I sure as hell will correct it.


This protectiveness is something very common within the linux community,and I do not know why.You know you have a good product,you know it has features that Windows could only dream about, but let someone "diss" linux in even the smallest way and out comes the heavy artillery I say let linux either suceede or fail on its own merits.If it deserves to have 20% of the destop market sooner or later,and no matter what either of us does it will get it. The protectiveness thing makes it seem people are overly sensitive towards criticisim of linux.Linux can stand on its merits,just give it a chance.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> This protectiveness is something very common within the linux community,and I do not know why.You know you have a good product,you know it has features that Windows could only dream about, but let someone "diss" linux in even the smallest way and out comes the heavy artillery I say let linux either suceede or fail on its own merits.If it deserves to have 20% of the destop market sooner or later,and no matter what either of us does it will get it. The protectiveness thing makes it seem people are overly sensitive towards criticisim of linux.Linux can stand on its merits,just give it a chance.












Those that are blind to criticism, especially constructive, are doomed to fail.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> This protectiveness is something very common within the linux community,and I do not know why.You know you have a good product,you know it has features that Windows could only dream about, but let someone "diss" linux in even the smallest way and out comes the heavy artillery I say let linux either suceede or fail on its own merits.If it deserves to have 20% of the destop market sooner or later,and no matter what either of us does it will get it. The protectiveness thing makes it seem people are overly sensitive towards criticisim of linux.Linux can stand on its merits,just give it a chance.


You need to be protective because people believe incorrect things&#8230;

Linux folks aren't half as protective though as we OSX folks


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those that are blind to criticism, especially constructive, are doomed to fail.


Except that there's tons of people who still think Linux 5 years ago is the same as today. I would say more so because of Windows. With Windows, 5 years is nothing, still the same version and little to no real fixes to bugs. Whereas with Linux, 5 years is lightyears of difference. But you still get people spouting rumors about how 'bad' things are in Linux when they haven't tried it in those long long years.

I can remember all my 13 years of Linux, and it's hard to believe how far things have come since then. More so because it's mainly been a hobby and not had any _real_ money like Windows had for it's development.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Except that there's tons of people who still think Linux 5 years ago is the same as today. I would say more so because of Windows. With Windows, 5 years is nothing, still the same version and little to no real fixes to bugs. Whereas with Linux, 5 years is lightyears of difference. But you still get people spouting rumors about how 'bad' things are in Linux when they haven't tried it in those long long years.
> I can remember all my 13 years of Linux, and it's hard to believe how far things have come since then. More so because it's mainly been a hobby and not had any _real_ money like Windows had for it's development.


That's what he means by overly protective. Not one person in here said anything about "how bad things are". They (myself included) have only mentioned a few "problems" that need to be sorted out. Linux is light years ahead of where it was 13 years ago (I never even attempted compiling it like you had to back then). But that doesn't mean it's perfect and "the best OS in the whole wide world that everyone should embrace and thank us for".


----------



## gsa700

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> That's what he means by overly protective. Not one person in here said anything about "how bad things are". They (myself included) have only mentioned a few "problems" that need to be sorted out. Linux is light years ahead of where it was 13 years ago (I never even attempted compiling it like you had to back then). *But that doesn't mean it's perfect and "the best OS in the whole wide world that everyone should embrace and thank us for*".


Yes it does.


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsa700*
> 
> Yes it does.


----------



## DaClownie

I said this about 150 posts back but I need to reiterate: I love this thread.

Keep up the good work, both sides of the coin! I'm proud of you!


----------



## Quantum Reality

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anon-nick*
> 
> I don't know if you know this guys...
> guys look..
> right here guys...
> It's..guys..
> the manual is built in..
> guys..
> It's called "man"


And have you even *read* some of the manpages? They're worse than a 1960s IBM technical manual.


----------



## cavallino




----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cavallino*










You killed kenny too didn't you??


----------



## Rookie1337

This thread shall never die. If we keep exposing people to Linux maybe we'll get enough that we can change the world....

Ah...who am I kidding. People would be happy if life was just point and click.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> And have you even *read* some of the manpages? They're worse than a 1960s IBM technical manual.


I've read a good 85+% of them.

They're actually quite informative and well laid out.


----------



## Quantum Reality

What part of the word "some" did you not see?


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> What part of the word "some" did you not see?


So you're saying the absolute most secluded man pages that no one in their right mind would ever NEED to read, let alone want to?

I've read pretty much everything multiple times aside from a few. Those few you must be talking about must include the few of the deepest depths of the kernel.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> So you're saying the absolute most secluded man pages that no one in their right mind would ever NEED to read, let alone want to?
> I've read pretty much everything multiple times aside from a few. Those few you must be talking about must include the few of the deepest depths of the kernel.


Maybe he meant that to the majority of people they seem intimidating and kind of leave things unsaid as far as they understand. I know that sometimes I often wonder what the heck I'm supposed to do with certain things after reading a man page.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Maybe he meant that to the majority of people they seem intimidating and kind of leave things unsaid as far as they understand. I know that sometimes I often wonder what the heck I'm supposed to do with certain things after reading a man page.


Such a Rookie... read them again <3









I SHALL DRILL THEM INTO YOUR HEAD


----------



## Bubba Hotepp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> This thread shall never die. If we keep exposing people to Linux maybe we'll get enough that we can change the world....
> Ah...who am I kidding. People would be happy if life was just point and click.


Who are you kidding!!....People are irritated with anything more than just point.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shrak*
> 
> Such a Rookie... read them again <3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I SHALL DRILL THEM INTO YOUR HEAD


Hey...some of us aren't programmers or geniuses...or even average. Come to think of that...since many people have called me stupid and I get Linux working without many/any problems shouldn't that kind of debunk the whole Linux being difficult thing?









ADD:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bubba Hotepp*
> 
> Who are you kidding!!....People are irritated with anything more than just point.


Yeah..I guess that's why they're all gaga over touch screens. I shudder at the future sometimes.


----------



## Psyrical

Linux > everything else

if Linux had no limits to gaming, it would be my default system and i would never ever touch windows again


----------



## bomfunk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantum Reality*
> 
> And have you even *read* some of the manpages? They're worse than a 1960s IBM technical manual.


Which man pages are you referring to?

I think they're a great reference. I went from knowing nothing about connecting to a network (except for using NetworkManager GUI) to comfortably using WPA supplicant with manpages alone in just a couple of hours. Same with rsync, xorg.conf and synclient.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bomfunk*
> 
> Which man pages are you referring to?
> I think they're a great reference. I went from knowing nothing about connecting to a network (except for using NetworkManager GUI) to comfortably using WPA supplicant with manpages alone in just a couple of hours. Same with rsync, *xorg.conf* and synclient.


http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/x11.png


----------



## .:hybrid:.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Actually they don't make Linux users look bad..
> Please keep in mind harder is relative, because you believe something mis more difficult doesn't mean I do..


I really do not think hardness is relative in this case. If I want to install flash on linux backtrack:

[email protected]:~# apt-get purge flashplugin-nonfree flashplugin-installer gnash gnash-common mozilla-plugin-gnash swfdec-mozilla
[email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox/plugins/*flash*
[email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/*flash*
[email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/*flash*
[email protected]:~# rm -f ~/.mozilla/plugins/*flash*so
[email protected]:~# rm -rfd /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper
[email protected]:~# tar xvfz install_flash_player_11_linux.tar.gz
[email protected]:~# mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
[email protected]:~# mv -f libflashplayer.so ~/.mozilla/plugins/
[email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/
[email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/xulrunner-addons/plugins/

On windows:
Doubleclick flash.exe

I don't know if its a different proces on other distros, but I can use _any_ program on windows without help, while for linux I consistently have to google the commands.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *.:hybrid:.*
> 
> I really do not think hardness is relative in this case. If I want to install flash on linux backtrack:
> [email protected]:~# apt-get purge flashplugin-nonfree flashplugin-installer gnash gnash-common mozilla-plugin-gnash swfdec-mozilla
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f ~/.mozilla/plugins/*flash*so
> [email protected]:~# rm -rfd /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper
> [email protected]:~# tar xvfz install_flash_player_11_linux.tar.gz
> [email protected]:~# mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
> [email protected]:~# mv -f libflashplayer.so ~/.mozilla/plugins/
> [email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/
> [email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/xulrunner-addons/plugins/
> On windows:
> Doubleclick flash.exe
> I don't know if its a different proces on other distros, but I can use _any_ program on windows without help, while for linux I consistently have to google the commands.


Why are you talking about how difficult it is to install a virus in Linux and Windows?









PS: You really need to use the flashplugin/flashplayer-installer script that most distros have. Then it's a one step process. It's all about info. If you don't know something then of course it's going to be harder. The really hard part is actually getting flash to work without crashing, smurf mode, browser bleed through, etc. in Linux. Adobe execs can take a plasma blade up the buttocks for all the pain they make us go through on Linux.


----------



## DaClownie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *.:hybrid:.*
> 
> I really do not think hardness is relative in this case. If I want to install flash on linux backtrack:
> [email protected]:~# apt-get purge flashplugin-nonfree flashplugin-installer gnash gnash-common mozilla-plugin-gnash swfdec-mozilla
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f ~/.mozilla/plugins/*flash*so
> [email protected]:~# rm -rfd /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper
> [email protected]:~# tar xvfz install_flash_player_11_linux.tar.gz
> [email protected]:~# mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
> [email protected]:~# mv -f libflashplayer.so ~/.mozilla/plugins/
> [email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/
> [email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/xulrunner-addons/plugins/
> On windows:
> Doubleclick flash.exe
> I don't know if its a different proces on other distros, but I can use _any_ program on windows without help, while for linux I consistently have to google the commands.
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you talking about how difficult it is to install a virus in Linux and Windows?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: You really need to use the flashplugin/flashplayer-installer script that most distros have. Then it's a one step process. It's all about info. If you don't know something then of course it's going to be harder. The really hard part is actually getting flash to work without crashing, smurf mode, browser bleed through, etc. in Linux. Adobe execs can take a plasma blade up the buttocks for all the pain they make us go through on Linux.
Click to expand...

Yea... I figured my Pentium M 1.6 could atleast handle a 240p youtube vid... but it turned it into Stuttering Stanley from Sixth Sense.


----------



## Usario

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *.:hybrid:.*
> 
> I really do not think hardness is relative in this case. If I want to install flash on linux backtrack:
> [email protected]:~# apt-get purge flashplugin-nonfree flashplugin-installer gnash gnash-common mozilla-plugin-gnash swfdec-mozilla
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f ~/.mozilla/plugins/*flash*so
> [email protected]:~# rm -rfd /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper
> [email protected]:~# tar xvfz install_flash_player_11_linux.tar.gz
> [email protected]:~# mkdir ~/.mozilla/plugins
> [email protected]:~# mv -f libflashplayer.so ~/.mozilla/plugins/
> [email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/
> [email protected]:~# ln -s /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/xulrunner-addons/plugins/
> On windows:
> Doubleclick flash.exe
> I don't know if its a different proces on other distros, but I can use _any_ program on windows without help, while for linux I consistently have to google the commands.


It's must simpler in other distros. IIRC when I was getting Fedora set up it was just "yum install (whatever the gnash package was called)" and that's it -- obviously, I didn't install the actual Adobe Flash Player, but I've never had any real problems with gnash and it is free as in freedom software. Gentoo it was something like "USE="nsplugin" emerge www-plugins/gnash".

I hear that a lot of users of some of the more "user friendly" distros such as Ubuntu and Mint use the graphical package manager exclusively, which greatly simplifies things.


----------



## Rookie1337

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaClownie*
> 
> Yea... I figured my Pentium M 1.6 could atleast handle a 240p youtube vid... but it turned it into Stuttering Stanley from Sixth Sense.


Hmm...depending on the other things going on my N450 can handle 360p just fine. Of course it can handle 1080p when it's from my HDD so again...flash...eh. HTML5 seems to work better on the netbook too.


----------



## Usario

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rookie1337*
> 
> Hmm...depending on the other things going on my N450 can handle 360p just fine. Of course it can handle 1080p when it's from my HDD so again...flash...eh. HTML5 seems to work better on the netbook too.


My situation is kinda different... but on my older MacBook Pro despite it being able to handle flash video just fine, the heat is just terrible. And yes, I'm aware that's a design fault on Apple's part. It's just too intensive on the hardware it runs on compared to other standards.

I have an old netbook with an N450 lying around somewhere with Ubuntu Netbook Remix (that doesn't exist anymore, does it?) and IIRC it plays 480p YouTube well.


----------



## Xenthos

This forums Linux department has some dedicated people







10 days have passed and this "news" is still going


----------



## Brutuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> This protectiveness is something very common within the linux community,and I do not know why.You know you have a good product,you know it has features that Windows could only dream about, but let someone "diss" linux in even the smallest way and out comes the heavy artillery I say let linux either suceede or fail on its own merits.If it deserves to have 20% of the destop market sooner or later,and no matter what either of us does it will get it. The protectiveness thing makes it seem people are overly sensitive towards criticisim of linux.Linux can stand on its merits,just give it a chance.


Oh, there is constructive criticism but then there's people just talking out of their rear about their bad Linux experience in 2003.

It also depends on how people say it, too; if someone comes in and demands people fix their problem or starts saying how Linux is bad because of x, y, z then people would get defensive too; Windows users do to Mac owners, people who run AMD do it to Intel owners, etc.


----------



## PCCstudent

Perhaps people that just want to use Linux to run a browser would be a bit more impressed with the product if they were exposed to just how many working applications are compatible with Linux.I made up the phrase 'working applications" myself but what I mean is applications that can actually do something that helps or enhances the network.They can do this by helping with the routing and DNS functions,of helping with the security of the network or helping with backing up data.There are so many "programs" out there that work with some form of linux and are helpful towards your network is almost like the world was meant for Linux to exist and it is Windows that is the afterthought.Now for me, I have grown too accustomed to my Adobe apps and my Office Suite apps to make a desktop change, but when it is realised just how easy it is to integrate the two OS's perhaps more will see them as complementary and not in conflict with eachother.

Just last week with finals when had to do some partitioning work and create different RAID levels for our partitions.Sure some people had trouble.We were told that we should be thankful we were not trying to do this activity in the "bad ole days' as it was not such an easy task.Linux has moved forward in regards to making things easier to do and I think it has a spetacular future ahead for it.This is much more that I can say about how I feel what the future holds for Windows.Linux just keeps getting better and Windows seems to be stuck in a rut of some type.


----------



## Harbinger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *.:hybrid:.*
> 
> I really do not think hardness is relative in this case. If I want to install flash on linux backtrack:
> [email protected]:~# apt-get purge flashplugin-nonfree flashplugin-installer gnash gnash-common mozilla-plugin-gnash swfdec-mozilla
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/firefox-addons/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/*flash*
> [email protected]:~# rm -f ~/.mozilla/plugins/*flash*so
> [email protected]:~# rm -rfd /usr/lib/nspluginwrapper
> ~clipped~


Backtrack is hardly the epitome of Linux awesomeness as far as regular usage goes.


----------



## chemicalfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Harbinger*
> 
> Backtrack is hardly the epitome of Linux awesomeness as far as regular usage goes.


This - it's not really fair to hold up Backtrack as an example, it's not designed as a general-purpose desktop OS


----------



## tedman

Linux on a server is brilliant, especially with MySQL databases etc.

Linux on a regular Desktop = headache.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tedman*
> 
> Linux on a server is brilliant, especially with MySQL databases etc.
> *Linux on a regular Desktop = headache*.


For whom?


----------



## tedman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> For whom?


For me!









I could figure it all out, but at the same time I can't be bothered.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tedman*
> 
> For me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could figure it all out, but at the same time I can't be bothered.


Some of us like that kinda stuff (CLI Work, compiling stuff) so that equals no headache just a challenge


----------



## tedman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GermanyChris*
> 
> Some of us like that kinda stuff (CLI Work, compiling stuff) so that equals no headache just a challenge


I used to administer MySQL databases on Fedora using the terminal etc, which was quite intuitive once you get the hang of it.

Then again, installing drivers and stuff would be horrible haha.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> This protectiveness is something very common within the linux community,and I do not know why.


How long have you been involved in the tech community? This is just the norm for fans of anything. I've made negative comments in threads related to Windows and right on queue the pack comes out and protests the point. Go and tell AMD fans that AMD can't build a half-decent CPU and see how long it takes for them to rebuke you.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chemicalfan*
> 
> This - it's not really fair to hold up Backtrack as an example, it's not designed as a general-purpose desktop OS


It's actually designed as a live disc with readily available pen-test tools, not made for actual desktop use, but so you can pop it into any computer, at any place, and have all the tools you need without having to worry about anything.


----------



## Nocturin

on and on my friend.


----------



## Shrak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nocturin*
> 
> on and on my friend.


Forever and ever...........

......... and EVER


----------



## PCCstudent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *randomizer*
> 
> How long have you been involved in the tech community? This is just the norm for fans of anything. I've made negative comments in threads related to Windows and right on queue the pack comes out and protests the point. Go and tell AMD fans that AMD can't build a half-decent CPU and see how long it takes for them to rebuke you.


Let me tell you a little how life works.If you want to always be fighting go ahead and post inflamatory statements.If you want to get along,try to mix up the good with the bad.I have already said Linux makes a poor desktop but then I have said there is a world of things it does that windows could not even attempt to do.No I don't post over in the AMD section looking for a fight,in fact I think they have some real good products.


----------



## GermanyChris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCCstudent*
> 
> Let me tell you a little how life works.If you want to always be fighting go ahead and post inflamatory statements.If you want to *get along*,try to mix up the good with the bad.*I have already said Linux makes a poor desktop* but then I have said there is a world of things it does that windows could not even attempt to do.No I don't post over in the AMD section looking for a fight,in fact I think they have some real good products.


getting along is overrated..

Thats your opinion, Linux is a much better desktop OS than Windows of any iteration.

Please let us know since you made unequivocal statements why your opinion is the "right" opinion..


----------

