No, I'm not talking about that kind of 'advanced', which is misnomer anyway, how do you know what's advanced ? I bet I can do much more with Slackware than either you or me can do with Ubuntu.

I mean advanced as in you need to know more in order to use it, thus you will need to learn more, and thus you will be able to do more than you could with *buntu.

OK. I'll take that bet. Of course, I first get to change the configuration of Ubuntu to remove some of the restrictions. But this is easy enough (though it is annoying, IMO, to have to do it).

By that standard, early regenerative radios are more advanced than modern radios with digital tuners. The early regenerative radio is what you see in the really old movies where someone is twiddling the knobs to try to bring in the signal; there were commonly 3 tuning knobs - and all had to be positioned correctly to get the best reception.

The heterodyned radio (a design that appeared in the early '30s and is the design that is still used) reduced the requirement to one tuning knob and was therefore much easier to use. It was more advanced, because it was simpler to use while actually improving performance.

This is the common definition of advanced; highly capable and easy to use (relatively, anyway).

From a personal point of view, Slackware encourages me to learn more than Ubuntu did. I'm a bit (no, a lot) on the lazy side, so I was all too willing to click away and let Ubuntu do all the work. Whereas with Slackware I have to make some effort. If someone just wants to use their computer, then Ubuntu is OK. But to learn more, to go deeper - which is what I want - I have to use Slack.

And I, for one, have nothing negative at all to say about that. When you choose to do that, and it works best for you, then obviously it is the right thing for you to do.

My objection is and has been the idea that learning Linux at a deep level should be a prerequisite for using it. I emphatically disagree; it should be possible for anyone to sit down in front of a Linux machine and quickly be able to use it to at least the same level they use Windows or OS-X.

This means that the "typical user" learning curve has to be short - and Linux is ALMOST there. More vendors deploying pre-loaded and fully working Linux machines are what is needed to complete the job and eliminate the "almost".

...and by the way, I first deployed a slack system in 1996 with Linux kernel version 1.3 or some such. I obtained the source and had to compile the whole thing. I played with it for a bit then nuked it as being too immature for real use, at a time when I lacked the time to just hack on it.

me too. when i started with linux i had no idea whatsoever about linux. i have no deep level understanding and this is not required. i'm working a lot wiht the command line since i have/had no desktop env. i used wmii mostly. and still i can do all i need and i'm using my computer fairly often. ubuntu is much easier to learn since it's wimp-style. BUT you need to have an understanding about the OS you are using wether it is windows or linux. without it you will stumble from problem to problem.

also, you are never too old to learn. the problem is that todays users reject to learn anything. they want everything chewed up. i am drowning, help!!! why not swim? to lazy?...your prob. to be fair it's not all their fault as windows tainted the mind of almost all of us so we are used to cry for help...

vadkutya

To all the above Linux warriors ::cheers ...

First of all you must understand one thing ... there are spectrum of people how use Linux with different attitudes ..

One among them are who wish to learn Linux because Linux has a hacker tint and touch .. which of course would help newbie to hacker cult to get in touch with hacker thoughts ... this why i'
use Linux.

For people in above category AFIK Slackware/LFS would suffice ..


Other are those ho just want to try new OS.. /employees who are force to use Linux ..etc ... these people dont have time and patience to troubleshoot things .. for them there are different
flavors like Ubuntu,SUse ,Redhat ,Lindows etc ..These companies provides service support and troubleshooting assistance ..and These distros comes with excellent documentation and distro specific tools ..(which i hate the most) which help in TShooting.

For the person who started this thread above distros would suffice..

Its best to best distro neutral if u wana learn Linux ...
Slackwarebunny(^..^)

Why do so many 'seasoned' Linux users have such a problem with a distro being easy to use? If you want to keep using an Abacus, fine. No problem. But why do you so adamantly insist that everyone should learn to use the Abacus before they are qualified to use Linux?? That's almost the same as saying one needs to learn DOS commands before they qualify to run Windows. WTF??

I've nothing against anyone who use or want to learn the more primitive distros. But there are user-friendly distros for those who don't. Why is that such a problem?

Personally I am thrilled by the fact that in 2008 we have systems that are quite trivial to install and use, so that those who simply want to have a computer system in order to be able to read Email, browse the Web, automate a few tasks, and store information, a simple system is quite appropriate. Anything more, for such a user, is unnecessary complication.

On the complete opposite end of the spectrum, it is also awesome that we have the source code available for a great number of free and open software applications, definitely enough to create a complete, fully functional operating system that is flexible enough to cater to specific needs.

It is great to have flexible software that can fill the entire spectrum between simple and automatic to completely customizable.

Most people who use free software today are looking for something relatively easy to install and use, but they do want some flexibility to make it what they want it to be. Quite a few, however, are willing to sacrifice flexibility in order to get something simple. I say that there is nothing at all wrong with either objective, and it is nice to have options and alternatives available which cater to both sets of interests.

Personally, I know a reasonable amount about installing and configuring systems. I appreciate something that is relatively easy to install, but I can sacrifice a moderate amount of simplicity in return for flexibility. Not everyone is like me, though, and their needs should be met as well. What's wrong with having hundreds of choices? Distilling the choices is an opportunity itself. Open a business to help people discover, install, and configure the kind of systems that best suit their needs.

I haven't read through much of this thread but-
To me its obvious that learning the nitty gritty of Linux isn't and shouldn't be a prerequisite. I used Ubuntu for ~8 months and i didn't learn a damn thing about linux. It tought me some ins and outs of the gnome desktop which is basically all your dealing with + some ubuntu specific apps maybe. Point being people have a different idea of what is advanced and what is primitive. I wouldn't consider a Ubuntu user an 'advanced user' if you will, based on my experiences because everything was done for me, i had no idea how it was any different from windows short of the obvious GUI differences and that i could apt-get all my software now. Users of this desktop consider it to be "advanced" because of how polished it looks and how easy it is to configure. Calling a distribution such as slack "primitive" seems a bit short sighted to me. I dont' use it myself, i'm an arch user, but just because there isn't a GUI for the config files doesn't mean its restrictive in anyway or less deleveloped (development effort is simply focused on say- stability and bug control as opposed to GUI's and fluffy windows- not to say that these don't exist there too).
All users are looking for something different, which is why so many different flavors exist. If you want a seamless switch from windows there is somthing for you, and if you wish to take full control of your system and tweak everything to your liking than there is somthing for you too.

I don't know how the topic got here anyway but to the OP:

I don't really feel like that stuff is missing actually. For every problem i've ever had in ubuntu or arch. typing the error msg/ problem into google has almost ALWAYS turned up a hit from a forum that solved my problem and if not, a quick search in a distro specific forum would do the job.

and just as a side note. In my experience I learned more about linux after a week using arch than i did for the 8 months i used ubuntu. Not to say you couldn't do the same in ubuntu but everything is so complex or "advanced" that i still have a hard time sometimes trying to sift through all the crap they load on there when i'm configuring my moms laptop.

edit- and i couldn't care less about what distro anyone else is using. Use what suits YOUR needs and dont' become a fanboy.

I don't know if I can explain it well enough. Maybe one day you'll know what I mean.

Nobody is able to use Windows quickly. Somebody (admin) should prepare this crap for user.
E.g. multimedia codecs, office suit, inet connection, etc. Plus drivers. Newbie user can't do it without basic knowledge. Deep knowledge is very important for users cause it saves my time. Instead of drinking beer I have to go to my aunt who is complete noob and showing her AnyKey. It's not normal. Users MUST learn, must understand what's going on with their computer. They must analyze their moves and be able at least describe "A Problem" in short and clear words.

How old are you?

I can tell you that I have worked on computers where I hand-assembled the programs.

I have worked on computers in production environments that did not have operating systems present in them; we toggled the program into the machine through front panel switches.

I have worked on embedded computers that used executives you've never heard of.

I have built computers. With a soldering iron, a wirewrap tool, and individual chips.

I program assembler on a number of different processor families.

Some of my stuff is flying and fighting in the middle east right now, and is flying on electronic intelligence gathering missions around the world.

I do kernel level programming in Linux.

You want to talk about getting down and dirty with systems? I will bet you a bunch that I have forgotten more than you have ever known.

And I fully believe that the most sensible approach, in most cases for most users most of the time, is to have a fully integrated and completely working system that spares them the need to learn the dirty details just to get the job done.

I myself use the full-up effort-free distros, because I have work to do. This is not to say that I cannot work on the system at any level that I find necessary; I can. This is to say that I don't want to, unless that is the job.

If you want to use a roll-your-own distro such as slackware, then by all means do. But don't keep telling people that the only and best way is to become a computer guru before you try to just use a computer. That is silly. It is also unrealistic. It is elitist and it is arrogant.

And it just ain't a-gonna happen; everyone is trying to make these things simple enough that a novice can use them. Because the fact is that these things are very very useful, and most people are not experts and do not want to be.

Without reading all the replies in this thread I will say that there must be a forum for just about every distro of Linux. Look up a forum for the Linux you are having trouble with and ask your questions there. That seems to me to be the most direct way to a solution.
While reading some of the replies in this thread I've decided to look for a forum for my distro of Linux and see if I can get answers there. I'm a newbie as well and just trying out my first distro (Linux 8.04-Hardy Heron).
What say you all to that approach?

ddotyp

p.s. I can say that I'm getting a lot more questions related to windows problems and howto's than to Linux from my aunt and my friends who are using dual boot (Win+Lin). Not because I hadn't explained them how to use things but cause Linux gives more structured knowledge base about Computers at all. IMHO, of course=) All of them use Slack=). And they know - this is XServer, this is K Desktop Environment, this is a folder with docs about e.g. Linux filesystem structure, this is a howto on Inet connections, and this is a document about Konsole and etc. Periodically I call them and ask these things, of course in a fun way but I proud when I hear - "We KNOW about ext3, we know about some new cool console commands" and etc. And it's a progress.

FLAME WARS!!!!
wow, that's a hard hit.

uh, yes! gimme that cable . plug me in...

sounds good. but will be hard to proof . how much did you forget. and if you can tell...have you really forgot it. sounds like an antinom. it's not important how much you forgot, more important is what you know...think about it. and the statement does not necessarily include that the remaining knowledge you have is any higher than that of others just because you are good at forgetting...just a joke, don't get angry, please.

let's hope they don't forget as much as you.

no seriously, slackware is not geekier than ubunutu. you can get things done on either machine just as good as on any other distro. you want to get things done than use ubuntu by all means. i'm a researcher. i want to know why the things are as they are. without researchers the stuff that's up and flying in the middle east would be hardly more than a kite . people are diffrent, so no need to flame them...

vadkutya