yes, you are right there. I am only making a point to make Linux as easier as OS X.
SS

I must agree with the original poster. I've also seen in this thread some of the linux elitists come in and try to say linux isn't hard to use, etc. Some of the propaganda is that windows is hard to install. I'm sorry but I've installed every version of windows since 3.1 and had absolutely no problems. It's very easy and always has been to install windows. Getting drivers and installing if they don't come with the machine is pretty much a breeze. The only problem you ever run into with windows is if drivers just don't exist for very proprietary hardware (very common for sony, you rarely can upgrade a machine from them without losing some device).

I have no doubt that there are utilities available that may help certain people already in the linux community be more productive than they would be on windows, but that is not the majority. Also, I noted the typical argument that ease of use brings slowness, etc. I'm sorry but that also simply isn't true, not for what these people are talking about. We are just wanting basic things to be basic. If I want to do huge batch operations or program, I expect a certain deal of complexity in doing those things. I've done them and had to learn new syntax for different programs, etc. But if I want to find out how to get my 3d card working and have opengl running, that should be easy. If it's not easy then it's a problem.

The other comment I see all the time throughout the thread, "windows makes you lazy." And this whole "Linux makes you think" Ok.. I'll grant you that Linux makes you think. Anything as frustrating as Linux can be has to make you think But the fact of the matter is there are many operations that shouldn't require a great deal of thought! If they do require a great deal of thought it's a deficiency, because while you could be thinking about something else, you've got to spend hours figuring out how to get your video card to work with quake 3, or whatever else. And that is really the problem of linux. It makes you think about tasks that don't matter to the common user. They want it to "just work" not to spend hours figuring out how to make that happen. Now, there was also some things brought up that were important here and that I don't agree with, but I can see their side of. Such as, do you want Linux to be a replacement or competitor for windows? I say yes. I think that it should, can and will eventually take that role. I think there are enough people who want it to, and that's proven by the easier to use distributions like mandrake. There is still quite a ways to go. Dependencies are still a huge pain as are driver installs, etc.

But anyway, if these types of things are made easy (and yes that means requiring little to no thought) that's good for everyone. Why? Because that's more time that the elite linux users can spend doing other things as well.

xanas3712,
Insightful post. You have summed up a lot of what is true.

I must take issue to what you have said about installs (which the average person just won't ever do - they have a computer shop down the road for that)

I have a not-so-new computer that is composed of fairly common parts. If I were to sell this computer to someone used (which is how I have aquired every one of my computers so far - used or from used parts - I can't fork over the cash for a newer one yet) without an operating system, the only way they'd have an easy time of it would be to use a good Linux distro like Mandrake 10, which installed in about 1/2 hour with no glitches whatsoever (I even tried it with the default selections to see if anything would mess up - it didn't). Thus My computer and Mandrake seem to agree (one of the reasons I choose Mandrake is for its hardware compatability with the hardware I have owned). Some other distros installed the ati driver instead if the r128, so I didn't get 3d accelleration, but that was easy to fix with a but of googling. The other choice would be for Windows XP, which installs fairly seamlessly as well in about an hour (or maybe a bit more). Of course, they'd have to spend days finding various freeware around the net to fill their needs. And, my Rage 128 Pro (which is in zillions of Compaq workstations out there) doesn't get 3d support out of the box. You gotta install the ATI driver for that to work (even the Windows flowerbox jolts around the screen without a driver install). My problem with the second choice is the price. XP is still around $150 here for home and $250 for pro.

If anyone tries to install Windows 98 on the machine, which is more likely, they'd be unsuccessful. They would have to find a friend with an internet connection so they could get the driver for the common Linksys Network Everywhere card in this machine. If they wanted on the net through dialup, I could give them the A-Open winmodem I have taken out of the machine, but they'd have to do the same thing for its driver. Same goes for the video card - no driver. Same goes for my SB Live! No driver. Why is this? My P-III machine has equipment that is slightly newer than the OS. SInce I got the stuff used, I don't have any of the driver disks that would have shipped with the cards. I did install Windows 98 on this machine so I could play a racing game I have that wouldn't work under XP, so I have the distinct pleasure of sharing my 4-1/2 hour install experience with everyone. I got it to work, but if I hadn't installed OS's many many times, I'd have had to ask someone else. If I didn't have another computer to get the ethernet driver off the net, I'd have had to get someone to help me. The 4-1/2 hour install would have become perhaps week-long, for all I know.

To be fair, I did include in that time estimate, installing msn messenger, yahoo messenger, a decent video player, an openoffice.

As far as ease of use, there are some things that all OSs do well. There are things I find to be more intuitive and useful in Linux (some distros or window managers handle things better or worse as well) and there are some things that are more pleasurable to do with Windows. Installing new software from the wild is usually easier for a Windows user, but most things one needs are out there in an official repository waiting to be downloaded along with their dependancies without a hitch as well.

Long live choice! I am glad I get to taste all these flavors of usefulness out there. BTW, did you know that you can get jalapeno ice cream?

I agree with xanas3712, installing windows is very easy, like cacthing a cold, the problems only start once thing are up and running.

Also I've seen the same comments on this thread over and over again about making Linux easer will make it slower, limted, toxic, whatever, it all sound a bit like the comments by DOS experts when Micro$oft released Windows.

I believe that linux its evolving, but the question is, evolving to what???,
Maybe if hardware manufacturers would do the drivers for linux, just like it does it for windows, it would be a breeze , but the problem its that Linux instead of trying to unify every distro, it keeps dividing, i believe thats not the UNIX idea, the UNIX idea should be to unify all the linux distros, i mean, ok, every one should have their own programs or something, or their own special thing, but drivers should be like unix commands equals in all distros. But this way, what would be the difference between Suse and Mandrake, and every distro outthere??? suse will have yast, and in mandrake its the same but called Drakconf, Thats one of the problems i see in using the same drivers, really for me its a dilema

The whole thread (or what I managed to read of it) was very insightful )is that a word??) When I saw the pole I was disturbed because it didn't have a choice appropriate for me. I am a constant newbie wishing dearly to learn continuously and not have everything done for me. Lets face it... If I want free OS and software that will do all I need (word processing and such) I will download and install and get cracks and the hell with MS spies. But I want to learn those nuts and bolts and do the things myself and maybe get some work done once I can get the machine to understand Hebrew. I was last to get 95 when that came out (but first with 3.11) and I told everyone that 98 takes control of their lives 2000 was a step in the right direction and xp... say no more. I know this will not keep linux popular but I really think that it should stay a powerful networking tool and leave office to windows and graphics to mac. As I said it's not business thinking but thats my opinion. Besides where will you get such interesting views concerning an OS that actually does what you want when you want??

spell check is such a neat idea thanks

I had good sucess with Mandrake and I recommend it to any newbie and I am planning to install version 10. The idea of most users is to use computer for their purpose as opposed to what Linux geeks do. I won't like to struggle for 30 mins to install a program to analyse 10 min data. The idea of computing is to serve people's needs.
I think it might take another 5years to make Linux as common to mass as Win or Mac.
Apart from the idiosyncracies of Apple, I think they are in good position as one can run almost all Linux things on OSX thru FINK and of course it has the ease of using things. Hardware issues are less problems on Mac as compared to Linux. Before thinking of upgrade to Mandrake 10, I have to make sure that I get the modem driver for kernel 2.6 etc!! But I use X11 programs usually on my Mac/Win to connect to UNIX servers for working, and I must emphasize Linux works incredibly great as comparted to any other OS!! Absolute pleasure to work on!!
SS

I have to strongly disagree with Windows elitists
coming along claiming that Windows is easy to install.

I've tried to install all versions of windows since 2, and
had massive troubles with all versions, on any of my machines
(including the manufacturer pre-installed XP on my notebook).

That's not propaganda, that's a personal account. And
I could give you names of several people who had similar
experiences.

In all those machines there only ever was ONE proprietary
signal-processor board that I bought for evaluation, and
after 3 months of mucking around never used. Everything
else was well known, branded, stock of-the-shelf products.

The fact that your personal experience differs from mine
doesn't mean that yours is better, or any more correct than
mine. But in terms of scientific research we've both proven
the other party wrong with saying it's easy. One white bird
will prove the theory that all birds are black wrong.

I'll save the both of us replying to your other statements,
I'd hate to become abusive :}


Cheers,
Tink

neenee has it right!

I love the Idea of community software etc.

I love even better the idea that running software (like windows) does not include spending an extra $1000 just to make the god damn thing useful and safe.

What I don't want is to spend 2 days on a forum waiting for answers on how to install programs and drivers. I also don't want the PC to spit back at me and tell me that This program can only be run from root and not in an X environment.

X environment is the only way I can use a pc as too with 20 billion other people.

Command line is fine if you sleep with your PC. Dream about PC's and love them to death and beyond but this is for PC people that use Linux which make up about 0.000000000001% of the total population...

I can't install from my Desktop (even with a logon key for admin) I can't install my Nvidia drivers for my blistering fast and much loved Vidio card without exiting X. i.e. Command line............When I did I
a) could not get back to X.
and
B) the driver would not install anyway becouse it want's to go home.............

EGAD!

One thing I disagree with is the Windows installer.
I have and possably forever will Fix friends and other peoples Windows software.

I can do this with win because
A) installation is a snap!
B) the software is intutive and a breeze to navigate.
C) setting up a policy for users is a snap
D) Software installs itself upon 3 clicks of a mouse.
E) Software problems are almost non existent and they don't ask for special treatment when installing them.

It takes me 4 hours to reinstall Xp with all the drivers and software a person could ever need. On the partition I want. And without any particular need for me to be there 100% of the time.

If you have trouble installing windows how the hell did you get so good with Linux?

Many of us realize that Window$ (all versions) is easy to install. This is mainly because Micro$oft has bullied most of the manufacturers into making things M$ compatible, and often ONLY M$ compatible.

Also, Window$ costs a lot of money, but doesn't come with much software. A basic word processor, a basic text editor, some games, and a paint program. To actually get any work done, you have to shell out some pretty impressive bucks for M$Office, an Anti-virus/Firewall suite, a quality Graphics program, and possibly a programing language (if so inclined).

And while you can pick up quite a bit of stuff on the $9.96 rack at Wal-Mart, you learn quickly the value of the old cliche "You get what you pay for".

I love Windows games, but I often wait weeks, months or years to buy anything because of the price. Some can run out and buy a game for $50 or $60, but I consider $19.95 a big game purchase.

Now, like many people I had trouble installing Linux my first time out. In fact, my husband and I tried to install several times before getting a PC that would take Linux. Now I have installed SuSE8.2 and 9.0 on 4 different computers.

And while it has never been uneventful, we've figured out on our own, or with the help of bulletin boards how to overcome all the problems. It didn't take hours or days, just about 30 minutes with the Manual that came with the distribution, and an old bookLinux for Dummies.

From what I have seen and heard, all versions of Linux come with scores, if not hundreds, of programs ready to use. You just choose what you want to install, and often it is not difficult to install stuff from the installation cd afterwards.

Most of the time these are good quality programs. Easy to use, and the manuals are available through the distributions help system, or the program's help system. And if you don't like one program, there are two or three options to choose from.

Installing things off the internet can be a bit aggrevating. I am dealing with that problem now. Not everything is as frustrating as it is made out to be here. But most truly valuable programs are rather easy to install, even from the web. It is the more obscure titles that seem to cause the most problems.

And finally, those of us coming from Window$ must realize, it took us YEARS to learn Window$. I have been dealing with Window$ since 1991. Each time I use the program I learn something new. So it has taken me over 13 years to learn the M$ software. None of us should expect to become Linux experts in just a few weeks.

But with patience, diligence, open-mindedness, and a sincere desire to change, we can learn to use Linux and other OpenSource software. We provide our children with an environment of choice. And while I doubt M$ will ever truly go away, we can give them the competition they deserve.

On the other hand, i think both OS (linux & windows) are easy to install [slackware isnt easy but we are talking about the end user! - try suse/redhat ].

The point is the OS after installation:

- Device support: Linux is really hard (for installing "hostap" i needed 10days!) Windows needs 5 clicks! not kernel rebulding, modules .... just 3 clicks.

- Installing new programs: "configure/make/make install " if u are lucky and dont face any dependencies problems! [apt-get is nice but not really uptodate]

- Windows has GUI that does evertything and not a part of everything (linux)

- bla bla

I dont claim that windows are better(generally) but are better for the end user!

End-user isnt interesting for "compiling" a program! He doesnt know and doesnt want to learn(lack of time/motivation) what "compiling" is! He doesnt want to read 2 books before he can do every-day jobs.

end user = a random user , not IT.
The sistuation is tottaly different for an IT [who should have deep knowledge of OS,etc....]

Thats my opinion

Ease of installation is nothing compared to system stability. I would consider it a fact that Windows becomes unstable over time. I've used Windows 3.1, Win95, Win98, Win2000, and WinXP, and although the "mean time between failures" (aka BSOD) has improved from once every 1 or 2 days to about once or twice a month, it still can't hold a candle to Linux. It blows me away that *many* companies make it a practice to reboot their Windows boxen on a daily basis in order to achieve *cough* "stability" *cough* *cough*. Meanwhile, my Linux boxen just work. Suffice it to say that the only time I need to reboot my Linux boxen is when I've returned from holiday, after having intentionally shut them down prior because I don't want to unnecessarily pay for approx 100 unused kwh . -- J.W.

Hey I think you are all wrong in that Linux IS NOT A COPY OF WINDOWS, and therefore you need to click in different places, that is all for me it is the other way round I can not use Windows, when I try to install and configure Windows,I get as fustrated as many when they try Linux for the first time. Linux is far more stable than any of the Windows versions, and then there is the VIRUS issue that there is only very few viruses there can attack Linux, and not many of those do any harme, but under Windows well you know what the means VIRUS under Windows disaster.
Linux is more for professionales than Windows was made for Kids, and home users and later wen't for business, where Linux is the other way round, and remember that if you want a very stable server you should not put to much GUI into it, as you know from Windows it is not that stable.

Think Linux & Windows like this - If a Pilot has been trained to fly Airbus AB 320, he can not just change over to Boing 777 without lots of training as teh two are not copies of each other, but they are very different, just Linux & Windows are different.
I know what you all are talking about you have been to used to Windows, and now you are all stuck in the same grove. Try to get out from Microsoft's spel

True You do need to reinstall windows after say 6 months But how hard is it.....................

Save files to spare HDD or DVD/CD

Use Format

Reinstall everything except games (you can save them elsewhere) do the updates...settings.............Your done..

I am sure linux is the same for the experienced but there is one difference.

I have been using PC's since 2001

I know windows backwards and inside out...........even some hacking techniques for obtaining free software. But I cant load an rpm in Linux for fear of loosing the mouse again and not being able to get it back or being able to load a Nvidia driver without reading a 360 page novel

Seriously I have to study (not computers) and I have waisted 3 days on this and I still am no closer to installing a freaking Flash plugin and a video driver so I can play a game> (MDRK 10)

When I firt Used a PC I had to install from a CD that would not load.
A friend gave me 3 instructions from a phone call and I was off like a rocket

I had 98 running in ten Min
And Quake installed 5 min later with all my drivers for grphics etc.

From DOS
C;/ DIR
Find file name X
C://X

Your done................
Edit CD key (LOL)