Most challenges for newbies to Linux boils down to installation and administration. Would this be correct ?

I feel that if I was given a well installed and maintained Linux workstation, I can use all the applications the same way that I use in windows. For eg., a Linux browser will work the same way as a windows browser. Is this correct ? Thanks.

Vijay

Yes, except you forgot to put in the part that you would not be as worried about viruses or trojans.

. . . oh and blue screen . . .

This is very good to know. The future versions of Linux are expected to get more easy/user friendly. As this happens, more and more people can be expected to transition from Windows to Linux.

Vijay

Yeah, you're right. The only thing keeping Linux from booming real big right now I think is that most people grow up with Windows, or have more friends using Windows. If they try to use Linux they get frustrated initially with all the different types of installs and the entirely different system.
After the initial leaps and bounds of learning needed to setup and get a friendly linux GUI working it's really as easy to use as Windows, most peopel never make it this far though.

With windows getting more expensive and demanding (this will happen with more viruses etc.,) and Linux versions getting easier and friendlier, several will choose Linux down the road.

Vijay

Actually, you don't have to have one in place of the other... there's nothing wrong with keeping both windows *and* linux and getting the best of all worlds. Niether Linux nor Windows is better - both have pros and cons that balance each other out. Windows is good because it has an easy to use interface and a *massive* software library and general thirdparty support. Linux on the other hand is robust and stable. It's all to do with what your needs are. For example, if you're a serious gamer, Linux is probably not for you... rather stick with Windows 98 SE.

rvijay,

To paraphrase a former President "Depends on what you mean by administration" !!

The installation of the latests distros of Red Hat and Mandrake is as "easy as Windows". I can -
1) surf the 'net.
2) send/receive Email
3) print documents
4) play a CD
BUT, I still don't know how to install the latest version of Mozilla, for example.

To me, the big "learning hump" to get over is use of the command line. I started computing with DOS 3.1 & GWbasic, so I used the command line before getting Windows.

But, the actual Linux commands are all different and a newbie quickly learns that "typos" are DEADLY !!

Let me throw my two cents in here.

I've been using RH9 now for about 3 days, and am no rookie when it comes to computing. I started back in 1988 when DOS 3.3 was the standard, and Windows 2.0 was being bundled with the MS Mouse. I can say that I really enjoy the challenges I've found in Linux, but brothers and sisters, this OS is not for the faint of heart. For those of us with enough technical saavy to dig, most of what we need to do is right there (word processing, file mgmt., etc). Still, it took me a half a day to figure out how to get online! I configured my modem OK, discovered that activating it would make it dial, even downloaded and installed Netscape 7.1. Since then, I feel more comfortable. But if RH and and the other distributers want the general public to even think about moving over to Linux, they need to make using it one hellavu lot easier. Like it or not, people expect some ease of use and hand-holding. As far as I can see, Linux offers none. Can I handle it? Sure. Can my wife or technically challenged brother? Not a chance.

QUOTE: BUT, I still don't know how to install the latest version of Mozilla, for example.

i managed to install it on day 1 of using linux.

i dont understand whats so difficult about it.

RPM:
rpm -ivh package.rpm

tar.gz:
tar -zxf file-1.xxxxxx.tar.gz
cd file-1.xxxxxxxx/
./configure
make
su
[pass]
make install

and as for mozilla, when i downloaded it, all u have to do it extract the tar ball to where ever u want it, and execute the binary. done.

And if you get error messages spewing out in a failed compile? Most Windows users - hell, even DOS users - see *that* crap and have no idea what to do. And, if they figure it out it's a tedious process of looking for the files to download. And then it can *still* fail. Not knowing any better, they might assume their entire system's totally fubared because they *already* tried downloading dependencies. Etc, etc. I started out on a 3 or 4 year old system on a 7 year old computer or so, at the time - tiny hard drive and no development libraries and had never compiled anything before. It wuz not perty. And that's *without* being freaked out by the command line, because I was more of a DOS user than Windows, anyhow. Now, most people probably didn't have as bad an experience as me, but probably not as good a one as you, either. No, it ain't hard with an rpm with no dependency errors. That's not really the valid test case, though.

Another realistic post. Perhaps this is one another reason why Linux is more secure:
1) Free source code and software, so solutions to problems are readily available
2) Most users are of technical background
3) Far lesser users and even lesser corporate users

Hence, it maybe atleast another good 10 to 20 years before Linux becomes more vulnerable to security.

Vijay

Excellent point. These morons with nothing better to do than send virii and worms out to break Windows servers and workstations have a huge, captive audience to work with, and an OS that is still too rife with security holes. Jesus, I logged on to Windows update yesterday, ran the scan, and there was 32 MB in 19 updates (mostly security) waiting for me to download. Can't wait til next week

I like Linux, I love the open source concept, and want to see all the distros wildly succeed. But until this OS can be mastered (or even handled) by less technical folks, it has absolutely no chance of ever growing beyond the niche it now nicely fills. And, perhaps that is ultimately a good thing. Somehow, I can't see RH or Mandrake ever becoming a M$ or Apple. OK, now how the hell was I going to install that lastest build of StarOffice......?

Man, I agree, I am pissed with all those MS updates !!! Why is so much needed so often ? This is one of the things that is quite annoying.

With RedHat going Enterprise, there could be a chance that this will set a SMALL but better Linux interest trend. Imagine all those who use Red Hat Linux at work and see the advantages. They might eventually change at home and discuss advantages of Linux with their friends etc.,

Vijay

On the other hand, there is a new version of a Linux Distro comming out every few months. Are we needed to download them each and every time ? How does that work ? Is there a lot of downloading needed for Linux libraries etc., ? Please share your experience. Thanks.

Vijay

Nah, get the right distro and you can just "update" for life. It's no biggie, or you can stick with the same apps you get from day 1. I run Slackware 8.1, it's relatively old, but works great still. I update certain applications on occasion, maybe for security or bugs, or just because I want to checkout the latest and greatest, but there is no "requirement" (usually) on updating to the latest version.

Cool