GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
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.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Ubuntu is the probably the only distro that can attract non-technical people to linux. You expect every tween out there to run distros like debian and slackware? Even fedora and suse are kind of "difficult" for the average user to use. Try installing skype of 64-bit fedora/suse.
IMHO Debian and/or Slackware are not difficult distros... they are just average in terms of user Friendliness...
one must rate Arch or Crux or BLFS as difficult to have a proper scale of user (Un)Friendliness....
Ubuntu is the probably the only distro that can attract non-technical people to linux. You expect every tween out there to run distros like debian and slackware? Even fedora and suse are kind of "difficult" for the average user to use. Try installing skype of 64-bit fedora/suse.
See post #62.
Ubuntu could be called the best distribution of all, depending on one's definition of "best."
I love Ubuntu users, and I celebrate their love of their distribution.
Well, seems like some so called experience Linux users started thinking that Ubuntu is not Linux anymore,so it shouldn't be counted in, hah, great, keep it up, this attitude will help maintaining less than 5% of crowd further too!
Linux IS DIFFERENT from W$... trying to make it similar is plain stupid... it is like killing linux with all its differencing features... now I ask... should it still be called "Linux"...?
... someone tell me...
Quote:
...but what about non-technical users/home users...
Think about cars, or airplanes... a car is a car... it has a car-like interface, gear control, steering wheel, brake, accelerator, etc... you do not see a car-like boat, or a helicopter-like car... interfaces although different from different brands, all share the same features... this is what makes car driving capability almost universal ( i am not talking about the legal particularities of each contry, pertaining to the act of driving )...
Now think of aircraft... they ARE different from cars... they have a different interface... nonetheless, you will still find some common stuff between the cockpit of a Mitsubishi a6m Zero, a Mitsubishi F1, a Douglas DC-3, and a Sukhoi-35... of course you will, despite being different they are all of a kind ... they are Aircraft... and piloting them should have similar actions involved... and it has... should somenone design a car-like fighter Aircraft, or a boat-like cargo airplane ( interface-wise speaking )... i think not IMHO...
Different stuff shouln't be forcibly made "equal"...
He he, I understand your emotions, but what about non-technical users/home users, they would never fall in Linux users category going by your words?
Why of course, you are right, they don't count either, so that brings it down to 0.1 % or so.
In fact, they have to use Slackware to be considered real Linux users, so that brings it down again, lets say 0.01 %.
But wait, actually, they have to never use X, they must use only CLI, so that brings it to 0.001 %.
They also have to use at most an i486 or lesser. And they have to live in a shack by the highway overpass and pirate current and internet so that's about 0.000001 %.
Not quite, I think they also have to have a small (or large) statue of RMS and Linus T in their house/shack and pray to it every day (more than once if possible) ... that brings it to 0.00000001 %.
Hey, while we're at it, they also have to be girls ... you calculate that one.
Last edited by H_TeXMeX_H; 09-30-2010 at 02:38 PM.
Linux IS DIFFERENT from W$... trying to make it similar is plain stupid... it is like killing linux with all its differencing features... now I ask... should it still be called "Linux"...?
Have you ever actually used Ubuntu? It's nothing like Windows. It's way more user friendly, way easier to install, and way easier to maintain.
And it looks and feels pretty Unix-like to me. If I had to describe the feel of it, I'd say, "GNOME." Which isn't so bad, if you're into that sort of thing.
easy... : the possibility that an automatic upgrade will bork some applications, have you ever tried to install k3b in Gnome...?! ( AFAIK Brasero will spoil lots od DVDs with uncompleted recording ... ) man... this is an adventure...
synaptic will trash your applications menu with kdedu, keject, k-this, k-that... afaik only kdelibs is really needed for k3b to work, plus the Qt libraries and widgets, but no sir...
Synaptic decides, you will have to "mangle" kde inside gnome...
I do not get this behaviour with less "automated" distros...
How come has not Xavier come yet to get the topic on track?
Anyhow, why the tell are everyone fighting on what is Linux and what is not? I thought Linux WAS the kernel and Linus was authority to decide if a distribution will ever be called Linux distribution?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.