Why Linux will never replace Windows (for now)
- Thread starter Beanbag
- Start date
Beanbag
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2003
- Messages
- 3,468
End of this line.
Dumped ThizLinux and tried Knoppix on a bootable CD. Even THAT wouldn't work -- it "lost" the monitor during the bootup, even with the so-called "universal vesa" option. I calmly removed the CD and smashed it over the edge of the computer table.
I installed Windows ME on the same machine in less than a half hour, and everything works fine. So much for Linux's ease of use and install.
Linux is the operating system of choice for people who want to spend their time dinking with the operating system and trying to get it to work. Anyone else who wants to do something else with their computer should look elsewhere for an operating system. This is what I've learned in the past two weeks.
I have enough frustrations in my life right now without adding another one. Therefore, I declare this experiment with Linux to be at an end, and will move on to other more interesting projects.
I'd like to thank everyone who's helped me along the way in this thread. Your advice was invaluable, even if the end results are somewhat less than optimal. I have learned a great deal of useful information that will be useful later on.
Maybe in a few years Linux will have grown from the level of Windows 3.1 and will become the Windows Killer it has been hyped to be. For the moment, it isn't worth the frustration.
Regards;
Beanbag
Dumped ThizLinux and tried Knoppix on a bootable CD. Even THAT wouldn't work -- it "lost" the monitor during the bootup, even with the so-called "universal vesa" option. I calmly removed the CD and smashed it over the edge of the computer table.
I installed Windows ME on the same machine in less than a half hour, and everything works fine. So much for Linux's ease of use and install.
Linux is the operating system of choice for people who want to spend their time dinking with the operating system and trying to get it to work. Anyone else who wants to do something else with their computer should look elsewhere for an operating system. This is what I've learned in the past two weeks.
I have enough frustrations in my life right now without adding another one. Therefore, I declare this experiment with Linux to be at an end, and will move on to other more interesting projects.
I'd like to thank everyone who's helped me along the way in this thread. Your advice was invaluable, even if the end results are somewhat less than optimal. I have learned a great deal of useful information that will be useful later on.
Maybe in a few years Linux will have grown from the level of Windows 3.1 and will become the Windows Killer it has been hyped to be. For the moment, it isn't worth the frustration.
Regards;
Beanbag
jimlintott
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2002
- Messages
- 2,893
It's a shame that it didn't work out. I hope you still check out the LUG.
I will say that the entire reason I use it is to get stuff done. I don't like dinking with my system. I like to set it up and work on it. I always seemed to be reapiring Windows and I certainly couldn't afford the software to do the things I want to do. I will not bootleg software so open source is the only way for me.
I still think that Mandrake would have been a different story for you. The knoppix cd definately doesn't boot everything I've tried it on and sometimes it can take a loooong time to bring up the monitor.
Oh well. I hope you try again. Or better yet have someone do it for you. You really never got to use it.
(Oh, I'm going to ignore the comparisons to Win 3.1)
Re: End of this line.
Fair enough. If I had your experience, I would probably have come to the same conclusion. All I can say is that you've tried installing Linux on one piece of hardware and you shouldn't assume that is representative of all Linux installations.
I've installed Linux on several computers and done a few Windows installations too. I've had problems with both but overall I've found recent Linux distributions being no worse than Windows and better in some cases.
I've rarely had to spend more than a couple of hours getting Linux to work - at least as far as the basics go (installed correctly, internet connection etc.). I honestly think that you've been unlucky and your Linux experience was atypical.
Beanbag,Beanbag said:
Fair enough. If I had your experience, I would probably have come to the same conclusion. All I can say is that you've tried installing Linux on one piece of hardware and you shouldn't assume that is representative of all Linux installations.
I've installed Linux on several computers and done a few Windows installations too. I've had problems with both but overall I've found recent Linux distributions being no worse than Windows and better in some cases.
I've rarely had to spend more than a couple of hours getting Linux to work - at least as far as the basics go (installed correctly, internet connection etc.). I honestly think that you've been unlucky and your Linux experience was atypical.
Iain is right. I can point you to pieces of hardware that have given me much more trouble with Windows than you've had with Linux. At least with Linux you can try different distros. If the Knoppix CD didn't work, you can try the SuSE CD, for example. Usually one will work if the other one doesn't. When Windows just won't install, you're stuck.
For the most part, I install Linux and it just works. I've never had that be the case with Windows.
For the most part, I install Linux and it just works. I've never had that be the case with Windows.
Cleon
King of the Pod People
shanek said:
Or, worst case, do what we did in the Old Days of Linux (i.e., 1995 when I started using it): pop up on a newsgroup and say "Hey! Anybody able to get this to work?" And wait for someone to point you to a driver.
Or you can be REALLY hardcore and write it yourself.
Beanbag
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2003
- Messages
- 3,468
I suppose I could say it's a run of bad luck. Linux must work for some people, because there are a lot of folks out there using it. There are some things where I just have the fertilizer touch. One would expect that buying a system with Linux already installed would eliminate a lot of the startup difficulties, but there I go, thinking again. Despite the problems, it was an interesting experience.
We can trade war stories about what works and what doesn't. I can point out that the last six Windows installs that I've done have ALWAYS worked on the first try, found all the hardware, and configured themselves correctly. Frankly, I'm puzzled that some people find Windows installs difficult, but then again, maybe I understand the MS mindset and can interpret and anticipate what I need to do next. I suspect the Linux users out there are as puzzled about my problems. After all, how hard can it be?
After a few weeks or months, I suppose I'll start fiddling with Linux yet again. After all, I've got a spare machine, and I've gotten some good advice from you all. Right now it's time to pull back, regroup, and consider the next steps.
Regards;
Beanbag
We can trade war stories about what works and what doesn't. I can point out that the last six Windows installs that I've done have ALWAYS worked on the first try, found all the hardware, and configured themselves correctly. Frankly, I'm puzzled that some people find Windows installs difficult, but then again, maybe I understand the MS mindset and can interpret and anticipate what I need to do next. I suspect the Linux users out there are as puzzled about my problems. After all, how hard can it be?
After a few weeks or months, I suppose I'll start fiddling with Linux yet again. After all, I've got a spare machine, and I've gotten some good advice from you all. Right now it's time to pull back, regroup, and consider the next steps.
Regards;
Beanbag
Beanbag said:
*Everyone* has a run of "bad luck" when they try Linux the first time. The key is that Linux is not meant to do stuff for you, you have to figure it out and get it working, so that you know *exactly* how the box does something and what it's doing. The only weak point in Linux is the drivers. If you want to use Linux, you have to get over the mindset that the computer is supposed to think and do things for you automatically. That's what Windows does, and we wonder why we have viruses, worms, and things going on behind our back on our computers. This rant brought to you by someone forced to work with Windows.
Beanbag
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2003
- Messages
- 3,468
OK, maybe I was wrong...
Just got thru putting SuSe Personal Linux 9.0 on the test machine, dual boot with Windows ME. The whole thing took about an hour and a half, what with downloading and installing all the patches, plus configuring OpenOffice. The sound card wasn't working right off the bat -- it took an actual power-off reboot to get the sound to kick in, but it works. The install found everything and set it up fine.
The problem I'm having is with Konqueror and trying to post to this forum. I log in, go to post a reply, and after entering all the text and hitting submit, I get a "not logged in" error screen and get dumpoed out, losing all the message. Cookie-related thing? I'm bumfuzzled. Seems to work ok in Internet Explorer (which is what I'm using right now). I lost two previous attempts to post from the Linux box.
Anyhow, for the most part it was a relatively painless out-of-box experience. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
Regards;
Beanbag
Just got thru putting SuSe Personal Linux 9.0 on the test machine, dual boot with Windows ME. The whole thing took about an hour and a half, what with downloading and installing all the patches, plus configuring OpenOffice. The sound card wasn't working right off the bat -- it took an actual power-off reboot to get the sound to kick in, but it works. The install found everything and set it up fine.
The problem I'm having is with Konqueror and trying to post to this forum. I log in, go to post a reply, and after entering all the text and hitting submit, I get a "not logged in" error screen and get dumpoed out, losing all the message. Cookie-related thing? I'm bumfuzzled. Seems to work ok in Internet Explorer (which is what I'm using right now). I lost two previous attempts to post from the Linux box.
Anyhow, for the most part it was a relatively painless out-of-box experience. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
Regards;
Beanbag
shanek said:Congrats! Welcome to the Linux club! We meet once a week, and all we do is sit around and laugh at thosepoor schmucks who are still using Windows.
The windows users would do this same sort of thing.. but unlike the linux users..
..windows users actualy have software they can run with an operating system that supports their hardware..
..so all their free time is spent playing with their computer.
rockoon said:
I don't think you can accuse us Linux users of spending too little time playing with our computers; or of having too little software
I'm seriously considering getting a second Linux laptop so my (non-technical) wife and I can both work together in the front room using the wireless LAN; not to mention so my son can play his computer games at the same time as I'm posting here (being moaned at right now to get off the computer).
As for supporting hardware, my new external firewire Yamaha CD burner worked right out of the box when I plugged it into my Linux laptop (very happy burning 700MB in 4m5s) - none of this Windows nonsense of needing to install additional drivers. Happy days.
TillEulenspiegel
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 30, 2003
- Messages
- 2,302
Guys, Your all (like me ) geeks. What geeks don't realize is that "normal people " want to have the computer as appliance. They don't care or want to know what is under the hood or the diff between a dynamic or static addy. They know not their APIs as well as their ABCs and are fine with that. They want their Internet experience to be the intellectual equivalent to their toaster . Plug her in and bingo. Command line my arse they want to point to lotus and be able to use it as easily as a notebook and pencil.
We have gone from GEM at 64k to Winblows at what, 60+gig of source code ? We're to blame ( well at least the coders who take advantage of cheap storage, I'm a hardware dweeb meself)
So the thread line is correct Linux remains a great OS tool for people who are technologically savvy and until such time as we marry the open source, black box functonality of Linux with the (relatively) intuitive GUI model of Windows,
the ideal OS will not exist and in the end people will keep buying toasters and TVs and not computers that do not work.
/rant off
We have gone from GEM at 64k to Winblows at what, 60+gig of source code ? We're to blame ( well at least the coders who take advantage of cheap storage, I'm a hardware dweeb meself)
So the thread line is correct Linux remains a great OS tool for people who are technologically savvy and until such time as we marry the open source, black box functonality of Linux with the (relatively) intuitive GUI model of Windows,
the ideal OS will not exist and in the end people will keep buying toasters and TVs and not computers that do not work.
/rant off
No problem with that - you won't hear any argument from me.TillEulenspiegel said:
I think Linux is probably about two years away from matching Windows for the non-technical home user; but that two years depends on getting buy-in from vendors so games and popular software gets ported to Linux, having more people using Linux at work so it doesn't seem completely alien and also having more computer sellers offering pre-installed Linux as an option (and it working, of course).
For a reasonably technical user, Linux does nearly everything Windows can do, quite a few things that it can't, and works just fine.
evildave
Unregistered
E
Why shoot so low?
Get the Linux products to surpass M$ for ease of use.
Why aim for something that most users still don't "get"? Besides, if you only aim for what M$ has already done, you will always be trailing them. All you can ever do is hope to close the gap.
Better to lead and get M$ to fall into that trap.
The only thing Linux really will foreseeably trail in is drivers, as so many vendors still only support Windoze, and fail to document their hardware. Making developing a Linux driver MUCH better documented and easier than M$ would help to close that gap. There are numerous "open source" examples, and a few examples of "kits" for money but hunting all the details down can be daunting, and some driver development will always force people to reverse-engineer hardware to provide support.
Get the Linux products to surpass M$ for ease of use.
Why aim for something that most users still don't "get"? Besides, if you only aim for what M$ has already done, you will always be trailing them. All you can ever do is hope to close the gap.
Better to lead and get M$ to fall into that trap.
The only thing Linux really will foreseeably trail in is drivers, as so many vendors still only support Windoze, and fail to document their hardware. Making developing a Linux driver MUCH better documented and easier than M$ would help to close that gap. There are numerous "open source" examples, and a few examples of "kits" for money but hunting all the details down can be daunting, and some driver development will always force people to reverse-engineer hardware to provide support.
rockoon said:
I have software that I can run with an OS that supports every single piece of hardware I have. I can open Office documents and trade them with pretty much anyone, browse the web, view PDFs and Flash animations, program and design web pages, play games, every single thing I need to do.
No, all their would-be free time is spent rebooting the computer after it crashes for no reason, or installing the 473 critical updates for this month that close security holes we've known about for months, or other time-wasing activities. Linux users can do all of those things sans crashes, so we still have plenty of time left over to laugh at the Windows people, especially the ones like you who think they have it made!
Beanbag
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2003
- Messages
- 3,468
While we're on the subject...
of what software is available for Linux, I've got a couple of basic questions that are probably so obvious to you all that you can't fathom anyone ever asking them.
Been looking at what I can download. I am guessing that YaST can install the downloadable as an executable on my machine. Is this correct?
Second off, I notice that some of the software is listed as running on X11 (or maybe XII -- can't tell from the font used). So what is this X11? Some version of XWindows? I'm guessing I already have it on my machine, since I read somewhere that KDE uses XWindows.
On the hardware side, how does Linux recgnize new hardware? Do I just plug it in and it will recognize it (al la Windows), or is there some setup program I need to run? What about a USB CD-RW drive? Does it need to be plugged in before booting, or will it hot-swap?
I've found answers to most of my questions in the manual that came with SuSE (see, I'm even spelling it correctly now), but not for these questions specifically.
Regards;
Beanbag
of what software is available for Linux, I've got a couple of basic questions that are probably so obvious to you all that you can't fathom anyone ever asking them.
Been looking at what I can download. I am guessing that YaST can install the downloadable as an executable on my machine. Is this correct?
Second off, I notice that some of the software is listed as running on X11 (or maybe XII -- can't tell from the font used). So what is this X11? Some version of XWindows? I'm guessing I already have it on my machine, since I read somewhere that KDE uses XWindows.
On the hardware side, how does Linux recgnize new hardware? Do I just plug it in and it will recognize it (al la Windows), or is there some setup program I need to run? What about a USB CD-RW drive? Does it need to be plugged in before booting, or will it hot-swap?
I've found answers to most of my questions in the manual that came with SuSE (see, I'm even spelling it correctly now), but not for these questions specifically.
Regards;
Beanbag
X.11 is a protocol used for windowing applications in a client-server mode. It allows the application to run on one machine, while the user interface (window(s), mouse, kb) may be on another, across a network. It is a super-protocol, in that it needs to be carried as data by a lower-level protocol, usually TCP/IP.
X.11 is primarily used to aggregate displays from multiple machines onto one console unit. These units are built primarily to be X.11 client (user-interface) machines only with wizzo graphics and stuff, and are known as "X-terms". This saves having to use video support in every machine being managed - you can network their displays easily to one place.
The vast majority of UNIX dists have X.11 support, as do most high-level proprietary OS's. X.11 is an industry standard protocol, NOT defined by MS, so they can all play together happily. There are vendors of X.11 client software for Windows - see Hummingbird for a start.
EDIT: Word of warning: In the X.11 world, a "server" is the client PC and the "client" is the server host! Neh!
X.11 is primarily used to aggregate displays from multiple machines onto one console unit. These units are built primarily to be X.11 client (user-interface) machines only with wizzo graphics and stuff, and are known as "X-terms". This saves having to use video support in every machine being managed - you can network their displays easily to one place.
The vast majority of UNIX dists have X.11 support, as do most high-level proprietary OS's. X.11 is an industry standard protocol, NOT defined by MS, so they can all play together happily. There are vendors of X.11 client software for Windows - see Hummingbird for a start.
EDIT: Word of warning: In the X.11 world, a "server" is the client PC and the "client" is the server host! Neh!