I've been using Linux off and on for quite a while now. But I haven't stuck with it. You know why? Its a pain in the ass. Its not streamlined, it feels like you're working with dos again, only you have a desktop now. You have to go through a big mess to install a program, unless its a rpm but those are rare and distro specific, from what I understand. You can't just pop any program in on a CD then press next a bunch of times. You first have to install java virtual machine, which you have to understand the concept of an unbin then you have to use command lines to launch the installation only to hit an error because it can't find some needed file.

If you want to simply browse a network you have to go edit your boot file with some command lines. You have to read pages and pages of mans to figure anything out.

Linux also isn't integrated with itself. It can't share components because each little thing the OS does is a seperate component, written by a different person at a different time in a different place.

Simply put, Linux isn't practical. Its not smart.

I consider myself an advanced computer user, at least with windows and I understand the underlying concept of any operating system. But when I have to go through so much shit to do something that in windows will only take a couple mouse clicks because it does everything for you.... I just don't have that kind of time, and "normal" people (read non-geeks) don't have the patience to deal with all that.

Linux may have been getting better, I think. There are some things that the OS actually does for you, but there is a LONG way to go.

And so ends my rant. Now I get flamed.

Zac Witte

I can agree with you that Linux is a little more difficult than Windows, but that doesn't mean it sucks. I like doing things from the command line, I find it easier if you ask me. Drag and drop is cool, but say you drop something in the wrong folder or something, then you have to go searching for it. In Linux I just have to type 'mv program /dir' and I can be assured that the file will go in that directory. When I first started using Linux I was thought... yea all this command line crap is a pain in the ass, why can't they just make it easy. Now I find that I can't live without it. Installing programs on my distro isn't hard at all... All I have to do is type 'emerge programname' and it compiles the program (and dependencies for it) from source. Debian has it's apt-get, which has been included in Red Hat I heard. This makes it a lot easier to install applications and in a way easier than getting files in Windows. Also have you tried one of the automount programs? It'll automount your CD drive when a CD is inserted....

Good Lord, where to start. No flames here, you make good points and I agree but i seem to have a little more hope than you. Having just tried (tried being the key word here) to install a simple printer, I couldn't agree more. Having just installed redhat 8.0 out of the box(dual boot with XP no less), I couldn't disagree more. The hardware auto-discovery stuff had advanced light years since i last fiddled with Linux. Then I had a wierd thought, why not print something?? Where, oh where is the "Have Disk..." button when you need it!! I ended up typing "sh- scarylong driver name with version numbers that may or may not be for my distro" plus untar it, plus unzip it,.sh" Then it warned that i needed enscript... and then i started drinking heavily, and am now posting this from XP cause my nvidia driver didn't work on my nvidia card. Go figure. OK, maybe your right, there is some merit to a ruthless monopoly...
Sorry, I couldn't resist... now i'll never get my other post answered. ;-)

Depends on how you define smart ...

I find it smart that not every distro follows the same "standards"
because that will make it hard to write mallicious code that is
bad for all of us.

I'm glad it's not integrated like MS-Software, where a Word-Document
can send virii to everyone in the address-book. :)

Even though my distro doesn't use RPM's I have to say that you
are wrong :) ... you can get RPM's for about 95% of all installtions. To
me the question is why one would want to use them...:)

And that, too, is good ... what a disaster winDOHs with it's
DLL's is ... anyone here remember the mfc42.dll catastrophy?
Literally for YEARS some piece of software you found/bought/
downloaded could render your winDOHs unusable by installing
a "b" over a "c" version :}

I don't think you've ever been using (trying to use) winDOHs in
a heterogenous (physically and/or software-wise) environment,
otherwise you wouldn't have said that :}

And now - to make MY rave worthwhile :) - I have to
say that I am glad that despite for instance
Mandrake's best efforts a majority of Linux
users still knows (has to know) how and why
their system works.

I didn't have to re-install my Linux(es) in
ages, whereas the common windows-users aproach
to a failure of any kind is re-install...
I upgraded my Slack 8 to 8.1 without a reboot, even
though there were MAJOR changes in the glibc-library.


Go Linux, :) and I don't want it any easier ;)

Cheers,
Tink

Currently all the Linux users are the computer professionals and power users who don't mind and even enjoy to sit down and spend a lot of hours in front of the computer.

Well, if you really want Linux to replace Windows, it must be as easy as windows. Or if u want Linux only for the professionals and power users I described above, then of course it doesn't need to be any easier.

But I believe Linux will be as easy as windows in next 10 years. Because redhat is starting the Desktop War on Linux with it's redhat 8.0 with the Mandrake and I think some other distribution will also join this Desktop War.

Hmmm... where to start. Well, first of all, mainstream can have 2 definitions, are you talking "mainstream public" or "mainstream corporate" ? Public, sure, Linux isn't the most friendly operating system but think of how many kids (like me) are getting into things like programming and networking and Linux. By 2012, kids may be considered "dweebs" if they use winDOH's (as Tink called it). Hey, I can honestly say, when I first tried Linux, I was conviced it was crap, I thought "who the hell would wanna do all this just for an OS". Then later on after moving back to MS then back to Linux, I realized why. Linux is stable, its consistent, and its RELIABLE. Just earlier on my windows computer today I was doing something with Photoshop and had the music going, and then I had AIM open... windows froze, I rebooted as usual... and it wouldnt boot. Go figure, how many times has that happened to me? Too many, I'm ready to give up an operating system written as a piece of crap. Another thing about RPM's... Why bother using them? Just use Tarballs, they're easy to make compile for your distro because all you need is "./configure", "make" and "make install". So personally, sure Windows is good now, but if you look into the corporate world you'll see 100's upon 100's of company's using SOME flavor of *nix in there. My father's company, the defense contractor Lockheed Martin uses Solaris for all their servers. And most webhosting companies these days run off of RedHat. And lastly.... programming... Most high-level advanced programming is done on linux because it is the ultimate system for testing. There's my input on that... so yah... linux is mainstream in the corporate world, just no one realizes that.

Whats the very first question someone asks you when you come to them with a problem in windows? "Did you reboot?" Linux isn't like that, if it doesn't work now the chance of it working after a reboot aren't that much greater, and most of the time you don't have to reboot to fix something.

Yes, I understand that Linux is much more efficient.
But the common users don't care about this.
All they know is simplicity.

If you want to fight the Microsoft's monopoly, you cannot just fight in the court. You gotta do the Linux as easy as windows for the common home users.

Here we go again

Actually, the reason why virii can't spread on Linux is the very fact that it's multi-user: you log in as user and get a virus, you spread it to yourself and no one else cuz you don't have the permissions to write sh!t on someone's files.

DELTREE /Y /WINDOWS destroys all W9x/ME boxes. No exceptions.

It is real fun to boot into W2K recover console with the 4 fricking-slow floppies. The console wouldn't take 8MB now would it? It loads all stupid drivers whether your PC needs it or not.

W2K defrag freezes up computer while it's reading the HD before letting you click anything. And while it's defragging, it takes a while after you clicked cancel. In a few cases, it froze my PC and kept choking the HD to death.

Whatever you typed including your PGP passphrase is stored in the swap/page file. Even if you're the admin, you're NOT allowed to view it. Talk about redefining admin.

But Linux eventually take on Windohs in corporate boxes since they tell employees what and how to do with the machines, and admin is carried out by specialized personnel. Home desktops ?
is not difficult to imagine distros oriented to make Linux fool-proof, as easy or even easier than Windohs: RH 8 goes in that direction, also Mandrake 9. But RH distro (which I use) is far of it.

True, Linux isn't integrated with itself. For example, the desktop: KDE and GNOME. Two hearts.

It's freedom to choose... not lack of integration...
-NSKL

Well, today I moved my install from two old hard drives ( 8.4gb Quantum and 13gb Seagate) to my new drive ( 80gb Seagate Barracuda IV) with a simple console command, "cp -a /bin /boot /dev /etc /home /lib /mnt /opt /root /sbin /tmp /usr /var /new-disk", of course there was some preperation involved before I issued that command, mainly installing the new disk, partitioning it, formatting it and mounting it to /new-disk, then after the copy finished I had to edit a couple of config files, specificly lilo and fstab, then one more reboot to remove the old drives and place the new drive onto the primary controller and the job was done, no need to go and buy expensive third party programs to make disk images with, just the tools thatare included with each and every linux distro. Remember people, rebooting is for adding hardware.

NSKL's statement is true.

There are requirements (personal and corporate) in this world that specify a rigidly monolithic OS, user interface, and app suite. And that's fine. There are equally valid requirements that specify choice of OS, user interface, and app suite. And that's fine, too.

The fact of the matter is that there are an increasing number of individual and corporate users who see the economic benefit of using open source, free/low cost OS, user interface, and app suite solutions for their needs. The fact of the matter is that there are some very high quality products that are not targeted for the Windows space. The fact is that there is improvement to made in both the open source and the Windows that can make each solution better. The open source and Linux world is being recognized as a possible contender for computing solutions. Mainstream is definitely in the realm of possibility, monopoly is probably NOT going to happen -- and that "NOT" is of benefit to all of us.

You don't need a flame-proof suit, you just need to realize the possibilities and not fear them .

I think that a big issue is how computers are marketed to the "mainstream". Computers are sold as appliances - a video editor, a photo editor, a game platform, an internet browser etc. So when a person brings home their brand new appliance, they expect to plug it in, turn it on and use it - just like thier TV or stereo system or microwave oven. Microsoft and the PC manufactures love this because if you tried to market a computer as what it really is, you probebly wouldn't sell as many. Plus, the more complex the appliance like feature the bigger the need for upgrade and thus increased sales of hardware. Microsoft understands that the average human can't do the most simple configuration, so it produces bloated software to do everything for you. And the more it needs to do the more bloated it gets and the more upgrading you have to do blah blah blah. Plus, most people simply do not need the computing power they have. They are forced to buy it simply to run bloated shitty software. (or eye-candy games)

Linux, on the otherhand, forces one to see the box on your desk as what it is - a very powerful computing machine. This is bad for those who do not have the aptitude, patience, willingness to learn, time to spend ect. It's also bad for the segment of the population who still fear computers. Seeing it as an appliance reduces the fear My finished Linux box will be configured to do what "I" need it to do and nothing more. My windows XP will be the same as everyone elses (if I had it) capable of doing alot of stuff I don't need and sucking up resources in the process.

So yes, your right, linux will never become mainstream. Unless it bocomes a bloated GUI mess. Then, what would be the point. Of course, even if it did become a bloated GUI mess, it would still be free (as in speech) which really should be at the top of anyone's list as to why use Linux instead of Windows.

Well, actually I don't blame microsoft because of their monopoly.
While Unix, Linux people are happily staying in their community, enjoying the complex, powerful operation systems, teaching, learning, discussing theirself and forgetting about the normal home users, only the Microsoft think about them, do the business and get the money.
Although I'm not a windows and microsoft fan, I think it's fair enough. I won't blame microsoft.