Linux users help me: I'm tempted to the Dark Side

[Tristan]

So back in November or so I fitted a spare hard-drive to my computer and installed Linux -- Fedora Core 3 to be exact. I did this because we use Linux on my university course, and I wanted to get familiar with it (and being able to SSH to uni is very handy).

I've been using it a lot since then, and in fact it's got to the stage where I now use Linux about 95% of the time, if not more.

Anyway, my brother came down to stay for a couple of days. He saw my computer and was curious about the OS. He'd heard of Linux, but didn't know much about it. His first thoughts were that Gnome "looked okay, but the fonts are a bit strange".

He then told me to "impress him". So I fired up Firefox. Look, I said, it's a great browser. A Google seach box right there. Just start typing and it seaches. No popups, no Active X. "Yes, I know," said my brother, "I use Firefox on Windows"...

Well, okay. I started OpenOffice. Look, I said, you can create a PDF with just one click on the taskbar. "Oh," said my brother, "that's good. Can I get that for Windows?". Yes, I said....

Next, I decided to show off Linux's media capabilities. I put in a DVD and ran Ogle. All well and good. My brother eyed my 5.1 speaker Audigy setup. "Can it do proper surround sound?", he asked. Probably, I replied, but I'm not sure how to set it up...

So games, then. I started Doom 3. He was impressed. The graphics looked fantastic, the sound was good. "Does it run as well as it does on Windows?" he asked. Well, I said, performance is 90% of the way there...

Then I showed him Gaim. I pointed out that he could have all his Yahoo and MSN contacts together. That he could merge them so he just saw one contact, and could message them using either protocol (and any others he might sign up for). Again, he was impressed. I didn't think I'd mention there was a Windows version. I'd scored a point here. Until he said, "so how do I use the webcam?"...

He asked me if it was easy to set up. I replied, cautiously, that it wasn't too bad if you knew what you were doing. So he asked again: would it be ready to use without him having to do anything but click a few options. I thought about having to set up the update repositories for Yum. Probably not, I said.

"So," said my brother, "there's nothing I want to do that it actually does better than Windows, and lots of things it does worse. It's more difficult to set up and a lot less user friendly. I've got a decent antivirus and firewall for Windows, so those things don't bother me. And it doesn't even matter that it's free because I paid for Windows when I bought my PC."

"Tell me," he said, " exactly has it Linux got going for it?"

I couldn't answer him.

Can anybody else?

Tell him he's right.

[Mauldor]

Let me tell you what Linux cannot do when I tried to play with it (been playing with Linux for Years btw)...

Tried using Skype while listen to Winamp type program, cannot be done on default install, sound device is in use. Need to Jump through hoops and recompile Kernal and XWindows to Get ATI 9600XT working 3D Wise. I cannot play damm .Mov Files apart from in the web browser...the list goes on tbh..

I get the same spiel from my mate who owns a Mac - here is what I often say back:

* I have not rebuilt windows for a LONG time now
* Not had a program which crashed the whole O/S yet
* UnKnown Programs wont run automatic unless I tell it to.
* Anything trying to talk on the net has to get my permission
* I have not had a Virus - simple as that (combination of not installing anything that I come across, Decent Virus checker and dont open mails I dont recognise or with Attachments..)
* I do not get Pop ups on my IE, FF now I do......
* Trillian can do all the Chat programs in one..
* I can plug in some hardware and it works..brill

I still feel linux has a long way to go on the desktop front, if you spend long enough with it, its great...

[Bifta]

Once linux can be setup as easily as windows I'll consider using it more regularly, as it stands I have an ubuntu box that has no wireless networking, no sound, unable to print or scan, doesn't recognise my camera, steering wheel, joypad or joystick and the external drive seems to only be running on USB1.1

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Paul M

Tell him he's right.

Exactly, but if he wants a server...

[philip.j.fry]

Horses for courses. It's all down to a personal preference whether you think Linux or Windows can do things better than it's alternative. It's a red herring to compare Linux with Windows anyway, the only fair way to do with it is to compare individual distributions as Linux is only the kernel. On the usability stakes it's a bit unfair to lump say Fedora and Gentoo together. Perhaps some people feel that this is the problem, that there is too much confusion over the choices in Linux distros. I would disagree with that and would be mortified if everything revolved around one single distribution and window manager.

Personally, I find my Slackware and Fedora core systems to be far more usable and flexible than XP because it suits my way of working. If you think Windows would be a better choice for you, then use it. The world would after all be a more boring place if we were all the same.
__________________

Originally Posted by Bifta

Once linux can be setup as easily as windows I'll consider using it more regularly, as it stands I have an ubuntu box that has no wireless networking, no sound, unable to print or scan, doesn't recognise my camera, steering wheel, joypad or joystick and the external drive seems to only be running on USB1.1

Hmm, what version were you using? I tested Hoary Hedgehog 64bit (the most recent) and it had no problems with any of those things (except the wheel as I don't have one, and my wireless network as it is a daughterboard rather than a pci card).

Imo linux is only any good for people with the aptitude to get good at using it,from what I have seen there are few if any variants that will install easy and just work .Lets face facts general public do not want to have to learn how to compile installs when most of them cannot even set up outlook,Windows was developed to be an easy gui and it is for the most part simple

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by philip.j.fry

Horses for courses. It's all down to a personal preference whether you think Linux or Windows can do things better than it's alternative. It's a red herring to compare Linux with Windows anyway, the only fair way to do with it is to compare individual distributions as Linux is only the kernel. On the usability stakes it's a bit unfair to lump say Fedora and Gentoo together. Perhaps some people feel that this is the problem, that there is too much confusion over the choices in Linux distros. I would disagree with that and would be mortified if everything revolved around one single distribution and window manager.

Personally, I find my Slackware and Fedora core systems to be far more usable and flexible than XP because it suits my way of working. If you think Windows would be a better choice for you, then use it. The world would after all be a more boring place if we were all the same.
__________________



Hmm, what version were you using? I tested Hoary Hedgehog 64bit (the most recent) and it had no problems with any of those things (except the wheel as I don't have one, and my wireless network as it is a daughterboard rather than a pci card).

Whatever the latest 64bit version is. I started tinkering with NDISwrapper to get the wireless networking up and running but decided that it really shouldn't be such a kerfuffle installing a card that was automatically installed and configured during a Windows XP 64 install, drivers installation should go, download, double click setup.exe and it's working, I never had to do anything else with any of my hardware under windows and I'm certainly not going to fanny about in a console under *nix.

[philip.j.fry]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Imo linux is only any good for people with the aptitude to get good at using it,from what I have seen there are few if any variants that will install easy and just work .Lets face facts general public do not want to have to learn how to compile installs when most of them cannot even set up outlook,Windows was developed to be an easy gui and it is for the most part simple

This is an interesting point, would average Joe Public have any more luck with installing Windows on their machine and getting it up and running than something like Fedora Core (which I have found does just work). MY G/F, who is of fairly average computer ability has absolutely no problems with the Gnome desktop I set up but wouldn't be able install Windows. I would imagine that it's the same for most people, as long as somebody else is administering the system they are okay.

Originally Posted by Bifta

...snip...

It's okay, I wasn't going to try to talk you into using a Linux distro :p I was just genuinely interested in the problems you had. I do agree with you on the issue of the drivers. There are good reasons why driver installs have to be like that for the moment, hopefully it will change in the not to distant future.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Bifta

<snip> drivers installation should go, download, double click setup.exe and it's working <snip>

Last time I tried Linux (RH8 I belive, so a long time ago). I had to tell it what a double click was, and it took me over an hour to figure out how to. Nuff said...

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by philip.j.fry

This is an interesting point, would average Joe Public have any more luck with installing Windows on their machine and getting it up and running than something like Fedora Core (which I have found does just work). MY G/F, who is of fairly average computer ability has absolutely no problems with the Gnome desktop I set up but wouldn't be able install Windows. I would imagine that it's the same for most people, as long as somebody else is administering the system they are okay.

Installing it isn't the issue, and you should know that. It's getting your hardware to work with it, take (for example) a user (me, who still can't get it working under linux) who has a canon scanner that needs installing under windows, in goes a CD, it autostarts, you follow the prompts and it's working. Are you seriously trying to tell us that it's that simple under linux?
__________________

Originally Posted by danielf

Last time I tried Linux (RH8 I belive, so a long time ago). I had to tell it what a double click was, and it took me over an hour to figure out how to. Nuff said...

Linux reminds me of that sketch on the Fast Show

"So this is the bus is it? So I get on it do I? So I pay you for the ticket to do I?"

^^^ what bifta said


plus:
most average users buy pc's with windows installed with simple restore packs,imo linux is firmly aimed at enthuisiasts at the least or IT professionals
Windows set up isnt really that difficult ,few questions few options then drivers as a rule install easily as long as you have been provided with the cd when pc was sourced

[philip.j.fry]

Originally Posted by Bifta

Installing it isn't the issue, and you should know that. It's getting your hardware to work with it, take (for example) a user (me, who still can't get it working under linux) who has a canon scanner that needs installing under windows, in goes a CD, it autostarts, you follow the prompts and it's working. Are you seriously trying to tell us that it's that simple under linux?

Well, with FC3 all I had to do was plug my scanner (HP) and it worked

I would like to reiterate my point about horses for courses at this point, there's no absolute 'better' it's about a personal choice. E.g, you think it's better for an install to happen with a double click, I personally would rather type a command. Surely there is room for both methods?

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by philip.j.fry

Well, with FC3 all I had to do was plug my scanner (HP) and it worked

I would like to reiterate my point about horses for courses at this point, there's no absolute 'better' it's about a personal choice.

I'd say it's pretty much a given that more hardware is supported under windows and any hardware that's not supported is a LOT easier to install.

Another fact to face is like it or not microsoft have a monopoly in the home,most software is written to run for windows,this gives windows users more choice and thats good for the consumer,its just to late to do anything about microsoft