Make Linux easier for the general population! Please.
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Linux is just fine the way it is. Most people don't have a problem with paying for Microsoft's (overpriced and generally unstable) easy-to-use software. The ones who do have a problem with it should be somewhat motivated to learn about Linux. Linux (in most cases) sacrifices Microsoft's simple interface for an extremely powerful system. And to have a powerful system, you need to sacrifice some of the frontends and automation. Plus the unfair marketing. When I have a problem with Linux, I remember how much I paid for it and work a little harder. It's a good learning experience and Linux doesn't need to be made easier.
Why should someone who wants a so called better system need to feel forced into learning intricate details of their computer or OS that they have no desire to learn. They just want a computer that works. They keep hearing that Linux is better but then find out they have to spend countless hours reading man pages that they don't have a clue as to what the 'geek speak' is saying trying to get the simplest of things to work right. So they should learn every single nuance of how their computer works or go back to what you keep telling them is the worst OS ever created. That is rediculous.
What if everyone had to follow that same thought process for other things in life? Before you could get and drive a car you had to learn how the engine and transmission worked. Like the correct timeing point for the plugs to fire, or how to adjust the govenor or butterfly valve, or perhaps the proper gap between your intake and exaust valves? Hmm something not working tight, better read this manual written by our engineers and go in there and fix it yourself or you shouldn't have a car. What, don't want to learn or don't understand, you must be stupid, go back to peddling your bike. I know it's a bit exagerated but you get the point.
What's wrong with some distros (Lindows, Xandros, Lycoris) targeting a market that was previously unrealistic for the other distros? (Debain, Gentoo, Slack) I personally love the fact that distros are finally targeting the average user who really knows nothing about computers. There are areas that Linux should be a little easier but without sacrificing other features.
By the way, I remember when Mandrake was constantly bashed by LOTS of linux users becasue they thought it was being too dumbed down, now because of Mandrake and other distros like it Linux is more popular than ever and it's still growing, easier distros will only help Linux continue to grow and mature.
Originally posted by poloktim Sadie and digiot, thanks for your replies (and the lack of insults that I thought would be hurled at me).
Sadie, I guess I agree with you. People shouldn't automatically disregard a prodcut just because it has "Microsoft" printed on the box, They should give it a try (when it comes to games download a demo from the MS product's respectable website), read up on the product on both Microsoft's website, MS critics' webpages and reviewers who don't give two hoots about MS and rate the software on its quality and not the producer's quality. The truth is MS Windows is the most widely used operating system and their products are equally as popular, and for those people who have careers with computers (or career aspirations) it is almost necessary to be knowledgeable on their products (as with others) so you can give good, anti-biased advice.
It's an opinion, hon, you're entitled to your own and whether I like it or not, I'm not gonna slam you for it. Because it's so difficult to sometimes "get the feel" of what someone is saying, in a flat medium such as this, I try to read with the best possible light in mind. Or at least ask a question when I'm not sure of what the person is saying. I've been misunderstood over the Internet *way* too many times to count! lol
As for Microsoft - yes, they're big. I have to use their products for a variety of reasons. As do many people. They have good products. Mostly their games. I'm particularly fond of "Pandora's Box" and I liked Asheron's Call a lot but didn't want to pay for the service. *shrug*
I guess the point is that after a time, you become so disallusioned with a company for making bad products that you don't trust *anything* they make. I try hard to steer clear of that, but I haven't liked anything MS has done (aside from games) for quite some time now. I reccomend StarOffice because, although it's a little different from Word/Excel, etc and has a bit of a learning curve, like Linux (if you like Linux for this), it is more powerful and flexible, if you can get through the fact that it's not as "easy" to use. (Just as an aside, my husband, who doesn't like Microsofft Office, doesn't like StarOffice *either*. He's pushing for Lotus lol!)
Just goes to show that even people in close proximity don't agree on everything!
And btw, whoever posted it was right - this *is* a great thread! Lots of interesting talk and opinions going on here!
Prophet, you'll get no arguments from me. People should have the right to choose, and they shouldn't be badmouthed for choosing one that's simple because they don't have a desire to learn about it. People do have the right to choose, but the latter part of the previous statement, sadly hasn't fully happened yet. And it is true too, I've seen some people (mainly in IRC) tell people who are having a small problem, and can't understand the man pages to "go back to Windows" when in less than two seconds time they're badmouthing aforementioned product. It's silly, immature and whenever I'm there to see it I make sure I help the person asking for it (if I can) and complain to the person who said "go back to Windows".
IMO telling somebody to change product because they can't get one (or more) facets of it working is unprofessional. It's just proof that they are impatient, rude, disrespectful and mean people.
However people who offer help to anyone (even if it's just 'man <program>' at first then an explaination if the person requireing help doesn't understand) need to be applauded. These are the people who act professionally. People doing this show to everybody they are patient, polite (not all the time), respectful (enough to offer help) and kind people.
Sadie, I understand that, I can equate that to clothes I guess. If you buy a pair of pants and a jumper from a cirtain brand of clothing and they are in a shambles in a short time then I guess you wouldn't want to buy from that brand again (I know I wouldn't). I can't afford StarOffice and use (on Windows) MS Office 2000. On Linux I use OpenOffice (though I do want an Access-esque program). I have Lotus (for dad) and can't stand that. Neither can he, but his work requires it. They're pushing for OfficeXP (which I'll admit is better than Lotus) now.
Various people have posted comments about buying software either micr0$0ft or linux distro's or in some comments office software etc.
Now while I find myself in the position of trying to be a micr0$0ft refusenik, that is only on the basis that I don't agree with their licencing/marketing type restrictions and the extortionate prices they charge for most of their products. I am pretty sure that there are alternative more civilised/fairer methods that they could use and still come out with a considerable profit.
Hence, I am not adverse to paying for my software - though in respect of M$, it depends entirely on the value that I see in a given product.
When I first tried mandrake 8.2, it was the download version. The same as when they released 9.0 but when I checked out the prices, I thought that I'd buy a copy from them as the £25 that it cost me, wouldn't have gone very far.
The minor differences that I experienced, I felt were worth the money - hence I saw the value in purchasing a copy. I am now waiting (not quite as patiently as I would like) for my 9.1 powerpack DVD (though the cheaper option - 54 euros - without support and doc's despite my earlier comments about published documentation - I figure that I can get it installed enough for what I need to do and get a copy of "their definitive guide" later, should I feel that I need it).
The commercial software included in the "powerpack" helps me by not having to sit here for hours trying to sus too many things out - hence again, I see the value in it.
I certainly can't see myself trying slackware or debian, or anything that requires me to have too spend many hours trying to learn the intricacies command line. I came to IT too late to really appreciate it's power - though that doesn't mean that I won't ever give it a go - I can even see some "value" in that, but would say that it depends on the individual's depth of interest.
As far as seeing value in M$ products e.g. something in the "Office" range, it depends on what someone wants to use it for and how much/how many of the features they are going to have a use for. At about £500 or so for a "full" edition, I would see it as unnecessarily expensive, while I am unaware of how much effort/expense has been put in to developing the various components, I would be prepared to pay maybe as much as £70 for a "lite" version that only included word, excel and maybe frontpage. I have no use for the rest, as it would be for basic home use, also I am undecided as to whether it's expensive in a business sense (that's something else that doesn't seem to have been touched on here, as to whether the costs of using linux in a commercial environment are considered "expensive" or not! and whether it needs to be made "easier" for the commercial sector).
You say, "linux is just as easy to use as windows.".....You really are kidding yourself if you think that. ......I'm not bashing Linux. I think it's great. But if you think it doesn't need improving when it comes to ease of use, you've got your head in the sand.
Exactly. I have been trying to configure my flash USB hard drive for several hours. What a waste of time: it just works in Windows. And if you have learned M$-ese for most of your life, learning a new OS and how to perform basic tasks can be daunting, especially if "it's a hobby" and you have to stick to M$ products for your real job.
Regarding Paul's post:
Windows DOES slow down with age. I read a column yesterday where the author said MS is working on the next version of Windows and headed in the wrong direction. The author said what many of us believe: M$ should give the people what they want:
- stability (improved with W2K and XP)
- performance (still not good over time, with more apps installed and uninstalled),
- security (still lots of holes),
- efficiency (why does a Windows box require so much RAM and hard disk? bloated code).
I am a newbie, but I continue to explore it. I just don't have a lot of time to do it.
People want linux to be something its not. If you want to game why not use windows were it works best?? I dont get it. Why would you want it to work half as good in linux when it was made for windows?
Linux install is as easy as can be. The first distro i installed was mandrake and it was easy as could be.
For gaming, ease of installing programs, quick, common apps -windows
complaining about microsoft (personally i dont care, they are a company and that is what companies do, make as much as possible, if you dont like it there is other choices) Mac is for you then.
Have alot of time, interested in new things, into programming whether hacking, making existing apps better, making you own apps, etc. Enjoy a challenge and have control - then linux is for you.
And i don't get everyone that says winblows, windoze, microsoft free!!!! who cares, i really dont think anyone cares if you paint microsoft on your car or never use it again. you guys are just like my friend who drove a honda for 5 years now has a toyota and talks bad about hondas.
dont mean to offend anyone with that last comment but this is something i always wanted to ask/say
I always thought something similar wr3ck3d. I think it's childish behavior to throw names around.
MS/Microsoft is the name of the company, Win/Windows is the name of the OS. I've never seen a box that says 'winblowz' or 'windoze' on it.
But I don't agree with you where you already segregate people by what they want. Debian provides a very easy to use installation program. There is very little configuring at all. Just 'apt-get install <program>' or 'dpkg -i <package name>.deb'
I don't agree that things should be left the way they are though. I would like to see MS apps ported to Linux. I would like to see Linux getting more popular, some healthy competition is exactly what's needed in this industry. Everybody complains about Microsoft's prices. Having Linux more popular, cheaper (and some flavours even free) might give MS a push in the right direction when it comes to charging.
really the classification part is for the complainers. If you can just accept the fact that things are the way they are and not going to change just because you started to use linux things would be much better for you.
Anyone that wants something different in linux learn to code and write your own distro. You can make it just the way you like.
No one should be complaining about anything, except about the complainers of course
Originally posted by appler Linux is just fine the way it is. Most people don't have a problem with paying for Microsoft's (overpriced and generally unstable) easy-to-use software. The ones who do have a problem with it should be somewhat motivated to learn about Linux. Linux (in most cases) sacrifices Microsoft's simple interface for an extremely powerful system. And to have a powerful system, you need to sacrifice some of the frontends and automation. Plus the unfair marketing. When I have a problem with Linux, I remember how much I paid for it and work a little harder. It's a good learning experience and Linux doesn't need to be made easier.
Agreed. Linux is not for everyone. nor should it be. some people drive racecars, some people build their own cars, and the vast majority drive overpriced junk and get screwed on repair bills.
m$ users got a 88 taurus - it starts most of the time, some of the dials are busted and it leaks oil, its not too fast, gets them to the grocery and back. every year or two m$ takes in into the shop, throws some bondo on it and a cheap paint job and charges another couple hundred bucks. Linux users have whatever they want, from stock to racecar -- the catch of course is that they have to understand the car in order to build it the way they want. if you don't want to understand it, that's fine - drive the taurus, lots of people do.
But you can, and a number of the more popular distros(I wonder why they are popular?)do have neat front-ends and wizards for many of the more common configs. Some people are lightly slamming companies like lindows, lycoris, and xandros because they are doing some of the things MS and Apple have been doing for years. They make it work out of the box, the common things are very easy to configure and use, the gui has a bit more polish, etc. And they charge for it. They are commercial companies out to make a profit. And I wish them well! My thinking is that when the user base gets large enough to make it profitable for developers to write software for it, much of what I miss in linux will become available. QuikBooks pro on Linux would be neat. Field Notes, PCM(Pest Control Manager), Corel, Moviemaker software, Firewire devices, etc. Slack, Debian, Sorceror, and Chainsaw will still be there for the purists(and we need the purists - they keep the rest of us honest), but I see a real need for the comercial companies to supply the easily configurable and installable apps for the rest of us. I do not believe that linux would be usable for many of the folks who are using it now without Yast, RPM, Harddrake, etc. Lindows, Xandros and companies like them are to be commended for their efforts and I hope they are successful.
Distribution: Debian if i can ever get it working right
Re: Re: Reasoning for Switches
Originally posted by poloktim I don't understand this... Why is the product's manufacturer an executioner for the product. This hatred of Microsoft still eludes me. So what if their products are somewhat buggy, that shouldn't stop you from trying out another product from them.
Personally I love the 'Age of...' series. Yet judging by the quote, it must be inferior. I'd like to know what is the problem people have with Microsoft? They're competition. Good for them. Leave them alone and worry about what you want done and not who made it.
i haven't played it but personaly but i though MS was the publisher not the creator.
i'm afraid i haven't seen an MS programed product that was worth using until it had been repeatedly patched for at least six months (that is unless they don't realease a patch and just call is SE and make you pay again for the working product they should have given you in the first place) now i haven't used windows XP, but office XP crashes at least twice aday though from what i've heard win XP has final 'borrowed' enough linux technology to get the OS running properly (and i don't think anyone beleives that the fnode wasn't a direct rip off of the linux inode)
Last edited by Windows Runaway; 04-22-2003 at 05:17 AM.
I am an inexperienced newbie. I had never owned a pc until last year, but wanted to get online, write doc's and edit photos.
I found the lack of choice of operating systems quite shocking, and I'm English! -- Choice and competition are paramount in the USA, so I could not understand the lack of choice and MS's domination.
I bought a car recently and would have been horrified if there were only two manufacturers available on the high street.
Yes sir we sell the Chrysler 2000 and XP. We have an older model soon to be withdrawn, The Chrysler ME and we have some obsolete Chrysler 95's and 98's around the back.
Is that it, I wondered.
I did find a Porsche dealer in the next town who could sell me a MACi.
I asked some freinds "Are there really only two car manufacturers in the world?"
They said yes only two. Well actually no, there is a third if you include the Linux models, but they are a bit 'black-market'.
Apalled at the lack of choice, and unwilling to help line MS's pockets further I decided to build my own car, sorry I mean PC, and install SuSe Linux as the OS.
The basic Install process on a fresh new PC was easy (easier than installing Windows).
Using the system for office duties was a breeze. Never crashed, unlike the (Win 98) PC's at work.
However I never could get the sound working (major distress), and had vast amounts of trouble with the modem, once I got this working, the internet config was very difficult.
In the end I needed a fully functional system, that was easy to set up and had to change to the dreaded Windows.
Everything I needed was available and easy to install and worked with the bare minimum of fiddling around. It locks up and crashes no more and no less than any other Windoze PC. In this respect I miss darling SuSe, I just wish she was easier to configure as a USER of a PC and not just someone interested in tinkering. Dont get me wrong I like tinkering, but sometimes I need to just get the job done!
I don't like being FORCED to use Windoze, and after a year at home with my PC, having gained some computer experience, I am preparing to install Linux again. This time I will try Lycoris.
I am still worried about installing new software applications to Linux, an operation which is generally so easy on Windows.
Wish me luck.
Originally posted by Windows Runaway ...though from what i've heard win XP has final 'borrowed' enough linux technology to get the OS running properly (and i don't think anyone beleives that the fnode wasn't a direct rip off of the linux inode)
Nope - XP still sucks and Windows Exploder is the worst part... well, it's sort of *all* the parts - still hangs and crashes - not so much the GPF flame and burn sort of crash but the hang for eternity so you gotta reboot anyway crash - and XP is kind of sluggish on a 1.2 gig processor and 256 megs RAM. (!) Much better than Win98 but still sucks.
mike975's post was great. I'm not going to say anything and mess it up - just great. Good luck!