As a note, I think when it comes to operating systems it may be benifitial to thinking of an OS as an object oriented programmer looks at objects. In this respect people are not concerned with the inner workings of an object or OS in this case, but instead they are interested in how to interface with it. For object oriented programming this means knowing the public members (methods and such) of an object but not it's inner functioning. For an OS this probably means the user interface and APIs. The UI can be command line or GUI. So just as useful as it is to have new libraries which abstract lower level functionality to offer powerful features with limited understanding, it is useful to have the same in a UI weather it is GUI or CL.

I think that this method of thinking is more in line with my natural view of things but goes against what is practiced in some cases with Linux development of UI and the OS experience in general. Maybe it has to do with the everything is a file concept of Linux as opposed to everything being an object? I'm still trying to figure this out.

Windows is like driving a smooth easy ride down the street doing like 120 kb, and then all of a sudden theres a problem, and you crash bad... all you see is blue, and all you hear is the sound off error.. I think windows is a hell of alot easier to operate then linux/unix, but when you stand back and look from the outside, it was built for idiots.
But don't get me wrong, you can be advanced in windows trouble shooting, but understanding is a higher act then just knowing, or acknowledging something, with linux your more less communicating with OS then just operating it.
Most people that operate windows, rarely use the command prompt, because it is never really necessary unless you plan on using a command line ftp, and such. Linux, you work with the konsole alot, and you build your self an operating system that fits your needs, and desires... I am still a newbie to the open source word, but I know after become a part of it there is nothing to regret, or miss because this is an oppertunity to a different stage.

@flimzzy Good analogy. I think you make a good point but it still doesn't excuse for some shortcommings of the current state of Linux. Acknowledging these shortcommings or (areas with room for improvement) will only result in making Linux better. Designed for dummies I think is a little harsh but too the point, I like to think of it as designed for people who don't want to muck around in how things work but just use it. It's true that when something goes wrong that there is probably more a linux user can do to solve the problem but as long as the underlying system is working correctly a user shouldn't have to do work under the hood. When a problem happens in windows it's either really easy to fix or I have to wait until microsoft or some other company fixes a bug in their software but rarely are problems in the grey area. With linux, I think it is sometimes hard to figure out if things are not working right because of user error or defects in software. An example is that I keep on getting an error using FC2 when I use yum saying something along the lines of ".conflict between initscrips and pppd". This problem started all of the sudden about 4 days ago and I haven't done anything besides update a pieces of software using yum and apt-get. Now is this error because of something I did or is a defect? Well because I haven't done anything out of the norm or betrayed any warnings I have to believe it is a defect in software or design.

kainhart try Redhat ws as fedora core 2 is a OS under development and remember it is free.

windows is not free, but still very much under development that is the difference LINUX does not charge money for their software as long it is development stage windows do.
Linux will never be for " dummies " so there we are.

I know I came on a little strong about the interface built for idiots, but it got to the point, when you relate windows to linux... thats sorda the way it is. Awtoc123 made a good point how linux is free... You can pay up to $300 hard earned dollars for something unreliable, and unstable. Of couse every OS crashes, freezes or fails, but why would pay $300 dollars for one of the worst one availible... I used windows, and I liked it, and there are times that I will use it again, but don't set limitations to your self to take the easy way out (sounds like me) but yet try to expand on your skills and knowledge. thats all I got to say for today....

@flimzzy it depends on what your time is worth too. I mean here in the US it's easy to assume one makes at least $20 for an hour of work so, 15 hours of work for a hastle free OS doesn't seem that unreasonable. Now I can definitely say that I've spent over that amount of time on problems encountered on Linux, of course I get the side benifit of learning from my experience but thats only useful if I'm in the possition where I need to solve these problems so in reality you pay the price either way it's just a matter if you would rather put up with difficulties of Linux for the benifits of it being free or just pay up front with something like windows and forget about most of these difficulties but be locked into their strategy.

I personally would like another choice, which would be to pay in money to a Linux group or company for the same benifits I get in Windows. I would rather pay this as a donation too as a free product would benifit a larger amount of people in the long run.

I agree wiht some points of both sides in the discussion. I think that linux os nowdays in a very good state for both sides. It is all because of the way linux is developed. Free development allwos u to create an OS wich is easy for dummies and hard enough for gurus, just because both ways are walked by developers freely.

I first came to linux for 2 reasons
1- I love computing and learning thing, a trying a new OS would give de oportunitiy to have a muxh wider knowledge on it.
2-The ideological reason: I beleave that free work and coopeartivism is the only way to rebuild a free, equal society. I'm an anarchist, and what Free Software do is to put in practice what has been said by Bakunning and Kropotkimg more than a century ago.

I installed mandrake, and my first impressiong was: wouh! it was even easier than windows to install, and everything was clear, as you cant never know what MS mean when windows pops up tons of error messages etc...
It was even beter, i had many apps already installed, so i didnt have to loose my time installing what i need, i had many different programs that would most (all maybe) my needs, and they did in many cases it better than windows.
I felt free to choose, and encouraged to expand my knowledge.

It also made me beleave even more in anarchy, as I had an example (the first one was the civil war of my country, spain) of how federalism could enhance the technological progress, as we all must agree that Free Software expands and improves it-self much faster than comercial software.

I think that we must try to change our lives into linux Sticking to microsoft is srupid(well, i still have windows here because i need some apps), and trying linux will give most people a much more interesting experience with computing. The community feelling here is what we need to make our life easier for everybody.

Investigation in guis for noobs is being done and will be done. and also gurus have and will have their distros. I love Slack. And my friend loves Mdk. And why couldnt we both enjoy our OS?

Hmm I once tested Fedora Core 2...
I think it's very much linke windows xp... it's pretty much easy to pick up voor newbies imo

kainhart Just buy Redhat Enterprises is is cheaper than windows and 1 million times more stable, and you get better support without having to pay US$ 250 Pr. Support issue.

" 15 hours of work for a hastle free OS doesn't seem that unreasonable " Did you mean Windows ? If so it is the other way round.
Like I say to may people " if you can get on with Linux just dump it and stay with Windows " Linux is NOT for dummies.

Try Redhat Enterprises ws basic edition US$ 176.00 or SuSE US$ 80.00 there you will se the finest in OS - Look at the world how many Windows based systems do you see on the http servers ? About 5% and 84% Unix / Linux based now 84% of the world can not be wrong now can they ?
How many virus attacks on WIndows every day ? How many people loose their data due to virus in windows ? How many people need to re-install everything in windows due to various issues like virus ?

I just want to say that it is not my intention to "flame" anyone here. kainhart, it may seem like I am because I quote a lot of your posts, but that's becuase you say some things that I don't agree with. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I'm just expressing mine.

Apologies to anyone who doesn't agree.

Now on with the rant...




What about the shortcomings of windows? Everything here depends on your point of view. You sound like you know windows well but don't know linux very well, so from your POV linux is going to be harder and fall short of your expectations. That's ok because for others windows falls just as short and is just as lacking as you find linux. From the POV of many people windows makes very poor use of a users time while linux is efficient and well done.

The "Linux is different" argument is a valid one because on every level it is different. The way it uses hardware, its setup, its look and more are very different because it's not windows. So it's going to be different. Like I said before if you are trying to use linux with windows knowledge it's not going to work for you. They may look the same at times but they are not. With some knowledge and understanding of linux you can accomplish tasks easily and efficiently. If you couldn't there would not be so many people using it. It would die out quickly if you could NOT. Maybe you can't get your task done efficiently but I imagine a little more info about it, just a little learning and you could. The only thing I find that linux can't do as well as windows is games. The higher end 3d games are harder to get to work in linux. Some work fine and others not at all, but that's what I still use windows for is gaming. Office work, email, web, audio and video editing, and much more is all easy and efficient in linux once you know how. What you have to keep in mind about linux also is that there are so many different apps out there that if you try one that doesn't work there is probably an alternative app available somewhere that will do what you want and do it fast and efficient. That's another problem I find with linux, too much choice sometimes can make getting something done tough. How many alternatives are there for M$ office in windows? One, a couple, I don't know. For linux there are several including being able to run M$ office products in linux if you really want. That's just one example.

When you started with windows you didn't just do the things you wanted. I imagine there was some trail and error involved as well as some learning. I think you may just need to open your mind just a little more to linux and you'll be suprised just what you can find there. It sounds to me like you have already made your mind up that linux is not and cannot be for you, which is ok if that's the case. It's not for everyone and neither is windows. You have to find what works for you. I just don't believe in making anything easier for people when it doesn't need to be made easy. From my POV it's not that hard. Linux doesn't need to be made for dummies. That's why windows is made that easy, each is filling it's niche in the OS world.






Linux is not an object oritneted OS. The GUI is just a feature of linux, the GUI IS windows. Linux is based on and run at the commandline and a GUI is just "window dressing" or a feature that is available in linux. Windows is a GUI based OS where the commandline is just a feature that is available. This is another fundamental difference between the two. You can install and run linux without ever using a GUI and have a full featured server running this way. For a desktop you need a GUI of course but you don't need it to use linux. Without the GUI there is no windows.







FC2 is an RPM based linux. RPM makes installing packages a little easier but it is still more of a "manual" install. I say manual because YUM and APT-GET are not FC2 programs. YUM is from Yellow-dog and apt-get from Debian. They are brought over to FC2 to make things easier but you have to keep in mind they are not the standard for FC2 and there can be big problems with them at times, from my experience with them in FC2. You best bet for installing FC2 software is to get the RPMs yourself and install them yourself. This will eliminate the margin of error yum and apt-get can give you with FC2.

A good example of this is Knoppix. Knoppix is based on Debian and you can use apt-get with Knoppix. If you do you can run into errors even though Knoppix is based on Debian, where apt-get comes from.





Good point. I have a server running with linux right now. I spent a couple hundred on the hardware and it's running great. If I used windows I would have to add several hundred more to that price. For what? A nice GUI and less security and stability. My server hasn't been rebooted in 295 days 19 hours 34 minutes. I've kept the os up to date with apt-get and the only thing I haven't updated yet is the kernel, which will be done soon. That will need a reboot. But until then it just runs and I don't have to give it any attention except to add content or new users and passwords.







One thing you have to keep in mind is that out there somewhere, someone is using linux on their job and they are getting thier problems solved fast and efficient. Somewhere else windows is giving someone a fit just like you are having with linux, spending time and effort and not getting anything done.

Where I work all of our servers are unix-based. Linux or BSD operating systems. Windows is on the desktops. Our server uptime is phenominal and most of the problems we run into are the windows computers. Users and the crap they do to them mainly. Along with all the windows viruses that we deal with. We tried windows servers and they did not even come close to the performance our customers demand for their users. They want, of course, 100% uptime which is impossible, but we are averaging 97% right now. Our server only go down for updates or power outages and thats about it.

Neither are a "hassle free" OS, but we do have more problems with windows than we ever have with our linux based systems. M$ tech support does not exist really, on paper for tax and court reasons maybe, but not for any real help. I find forums like this for linux make M$ tech support meaningless and non-existant. What other benefits could there be for windows? Having to register your software with them? Constant virus problems and updates to solve loopholes and flaws? The price? I agree it's more user frienly in the "for dummies" kind of way. But that's about all I see from my experience with it.

Working with both I don't see any real advantages of windows over linux other than the users mindset. They don't use linux at home so "they can't" use it here. Or it's too hard or they don't know how. Once you get them using it they don't really have much trouble though. If my pushing 60 parents who are very computer illiterate can use it then so can other people who are more computer savvy. I admit I set it up for them but they use it daily without calling me near as much as they did with windows. They fall victim to popup installs and that crap with windows. Spyware, another benefit?







I totally agree. Linux is not for dummies. I believe that is where windows comes in to play. That is their niche, computing for the masses. You just need to know how to point and click and you're most of the way there. I use windows myself for gaming and that's about it. I use a few other things but I use linux most of the time. I have to reinstall windows on my computer about every 6 months, sometimes I can push a year. That's without viruses, just normal windows performance degredation. I do that just because windows runs much better when it's just installed and after just that little bit of use there are noticable performance issues. I've had linux machines run for several years with only occasional reboots for updates that may require them, kernel and such.

Linux is not for everyone. If you can use it and like it, more power to you. But don't try to make it like windows. It's not windows and that is what many people find so appealing about it. My fear is that the more it's made like windows the more the performance will become like windows. The penguin screen of death will make it's rise and doom us all.

If you want a unix that is easy to use, buy a mac. If you want a unix with commercial, professional support and the like, try solaris. If you find linux too hard, then ask for a refund... oh wait, it's free. So many people say 'I want to learn linux but it's too hard!'. As much as linux users would love for new people to come and experience the exciting thing that linux is, I think sometimes people approach it with the wrong attitude. Linux doesn't owe you anything, if you want to use it then you have to learn. If it was made possible to use without learning, it would not be as flexible as it is. That said, Mandrake with urpmi or Redhat with apt-get certainly make things very easy for you and I know of 13 and 14 year old kids that manage to install it and use it fine.

It's simple. We don't get everything on a platter in this world. If you wanted to skateboard, but didn't want to put the time into learning to do it don't you think your mates would think that pretty stupid? For some people, learning to skateboard is really easy. For people like me it's real hard, totally uncoordinated :P If you want it that bad, put the time into it. The documentation is out there, and it's not hard to find. If you don't want to learn it then there is Windows, Mac OS, live linux cd's, cygwin, all kinds of alternatives that have a shallow learning curve.

Linux is linux because we want it to be like that. If you want it to be like windows, then use windows. Nothing worthwhile is easy. Think of it as a journey into better understanding your computer.

</rant>

Well said, all of it!

canllaith - Well done I fully agree in everything you said very good.. I just hope they would understand it.

I was just reading this rant of Why Windows Causes Stupidity, link posted by amosf, thanks. It's at http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd...winstupid1.php and had to just post a couple little segments from it. They are to the point and great reading.

I think this quote from his page says it all very briefly. Read the rest of it, I encourage you. He make many great points and I just had to put a couple of them on here for those poeple who won't go read it because they disagree.

To sum things up Mr. Fuller says:
Stick that in you window and smoke it!

I think this is why I originally like linux. With Dos or windows you feel you are in a very small pond and you outgrow it very quickly and know it all in a very short time. But Linux and *nix in general is like the ocean and you are free to swim where you want and find the piece of the ocean you like best... But it can be a big scarey place after the pond...