When the percentage of desktops running Linux hit double digits. Then Linux would be considered a viable threat to Microsoft rather than a niche OS.

@prophet621

maybe its just me... but i fial to understand these kinds of opinions....i know they say there are no such things as wrong opinions.. but some points you made get pretty close.

you say: "Hell, to me, tarballs are one rung higher on the evolution ladder than punch cards and an utter pain in the @ss to install. Still, I believe that's because I never used DOS,"
a tar ball is basically a winzip ZIP file in windows.

there is no difference between them, you double click them, a window pops up showing there contents, then you extract by drag copying.
its exactly the same in windows and linux.

true, most people extract them by command line... but thats just because every1 has a command line, not every1 uses a graphical desktop like KDE or GNOME.
but you are not most people.. if you prefere graphical methods, then use the graphical method.

and when you say a pain in the ass to install... i can only assume you talk about compiling, because binary would be anouther double click / drag copy.

Its not Fair to make a comparason between windows and linux for compiling software, because in windows, you dont even get to option to compile software, its all binary.

you also say "I'm not good with command lines and hate using them unless I have to and despise 'cd' ing, I'd much rather click my way through."
the CD command exists in windows too... just like file directory browsers exist in linux.
you can browse the file system clicking your way through in linux too. its exactly the same !

or did i completely miss understand what you are saying ?

I first put my vote in this threat about a month ago when I first joined, I remember voeting for making it easier. I am now beinig to really wish I hadn't and after reading many of the other posts in this thread and after getting to grips with Fedroa Core 1 (althoug I am now farting about about with new kernels etc) I am learning loads. I am now using windoze for less and less and linux for more and more.

I regret voteing for making it easier because it is already fairly easy to perform most tasks and to learn it is also great (well fedora core is anyway) All the problems I had and thought "ooooh I'm gonna have to open a command line and post lots of questions here to help me" were easily sorted out in the GUI by a right click.

Ok you have to learn, but I had to learn Windows 95, why should I not have to learn linux too

@cprogrck
 

In response to cprogrcks post.

I'm honestly not trying to come off the wrong when I say this but I've been writting, researching, and dealing with software for a number of years and peoples arguements against simplification I just can't see where it holds ground. More simplistic environments make motivated people more productive. I think some people are getting confused with the idea of simplifying things with abstracting them until they do not resemle any bit of truth of how things operate under the hood. If you truely believe that taking the path of most resitance then why don't you write all of your own applications from scratch in assembly language? That way you can have more flexibilty and power than anybody and your system would be completely customized. See, In the realist world people have other things to do than to worry about then worry themselves with things they are not interested in just to get to the things they want or need to do. For example, I want to write software for Linux but before that happens I want to make sure I have the development environment and stuff set up the way I like it. So to install some of the applications I've been looking through I run into a lot of cases where I have to learn a lot of annoying details of the underworkings of Linux just to get the applications up that I want to use for development. I don't want to learn how to compile development programs on linux. I just want to use the application sombody else created and then make one myself other people can just use without having to understand how it works.

I'm not going to take the (simplifying linux == less choice) unless somebody gives me an precise example that supports evidence that this assumption can hold any truth.

I'll offer some starting points if you can agrue against these suggestions.
1. I'm using KDE or Gnome and I have successfully downloaded the source for GIMP, untarred or rolled it or whatever, built it, installed it and, set configurations manually via emacs. Ok thats nice now I have a folder open and I'm looking the executable file dead in the eye. Why can't I drag it onto the panel or the menu to make a link/shortcut/launcher there? Would doing this mean the end of having choice on linux? If so how? what choice is it taking away? The choice of draging the icons of executable files to places and having it result it nothing?
2. I decide I want a random non-repository application, I download a file off the web, run it, I'm asked a series of questions and offered some choices, then dependencies are autmatically resolved downloaded. Well this is more simple than what is available now for any random application and why would this simplification specifically be bad? Is somebody stupid for using this timesaver of a method to get an application installed? Get real man!

Thuth is I was very suprised by the difficulties I had with some aspects in when first using Linux. After I poked around I was baffled why somebody hasn't simplified certain things such as application installation, application configuration, and doing such things in a grphical environment such as adding programs to the menu or making shortcuts/links. What I've found out since I've been trying to look for help online is that there are some people who are actually holding back the movement to simplify things. I really can't understand why people are doing this, and can only guess that they feel threatend that somebody that hasn't wasted as much time as them to get Linux working may actually be able to use it. As if they don't appricate what some people go through to get it working. It's like a chef getting pissed at customers for not knowing how to cook the food themselves. As I distros have matured I can see that a lot of these problems are being solved over time. Projects like autopackage is a great example of how exactly what I'm griping about is actually a serious problem and is being worked on.

I just really hope that people who have this backwards oppinion about simplification being bad will get a clue from some of the people such as prophet621 who have been making very good points. Simplification is just yet another choice in the world of linux and the fact that some users want simplification is in absolutly no way a sign of incompetence, lack of experience, or inferror intelligence on part of that user.

@kainhart

are you being sarcastic ?
you can do that !!!.. well you can in KDE, ive not tried in GNOME

the reason programs like yum or apt get dont work for just ANY random program is because you would need a server that holds rpm's or atleast links to the rpm's
maintaining this server, and making sure this server always has a working hyperlink to every RPM ever compiled by any user anywhere simple is not possible.

anyway.... even the most newbie linux users are fully capable of copying and pasting a dependency name into a web-browser.

now i know you dont understand.

You say you have not wasted time learning and understanding know linux ?
this time is never wasted..... if you dont learn, then how are you going to contribute to linux ?
it sounds to me like you have no intention of contributing ?

you want linux to work for you without you working for linux.

i will explain.

Linux is an operating system, people work on it for free, and distribute it for free. Some users do a litle work themself and contribute slightly.. aver the years, millions of people contributing a little has caused the OS to grow. Become Better.

if you want to change linux... learn it, and start changin it yourself.
you cannot put down the work off all the billions of open source developers, ask them to change what they do to make it easyer for you, when you are unwilling to put anything into it yourself.

Even the people who never program a line of code for linux contribute by helping others learn linux.

linux is a project, not your personal tool.
if you dont like it, dont use it.

qwijibow, I'm not sure if your dissagreeing for any other purpose than defending what you have already written. I know for a fact that I couldn't do the whole drag and drop link creation in the menu using KDE in Mandrake 10 Official when I tried it about 2 weeks ago. I had to resort to using some KDE configuration utility which would manage the menu. Maybe there is some key combination or a config file that I have to edit somewhere to get it to work but it didn't. I still can't do it on my fedora core 2 installation too. I just tried. However I must have been wrong about dragging to the panel because that seems to work under both Gnome and KDE. The point is though pretend that feature didn't exist or if users were able to do convenient things such as this, I don't think it's a bad thing. You yourself said that you drag links to the panel so you are agreeing that simple ways of doing things are useful. Why don't you do it through the command line? I'm sure you can. This is why I mad the comment earlier about writting your own applications in assembly code because I'm trying to show you how hypocritical your being when you say that things are easy enough, as if when some feature comes out next week in KDE which lets you do something that used to take you 4 steps that you wouldn't use it.

Once again I ask you to look at what autopackage.org is doing because it shows exactly how things can be organized in a distributed fashion where you don't have to rely on software always being in your distributions repsitories in order to get benifits of simplified installations. I'm honestly tired of arguing my point about simplifying installations being a good thing because I think it's pretty obvious and I think I've made enough points to support what I'm talking about.

What I'm doing is offering criticism, I'm not dumping on the work that many people have done. It's important to rember too that when developers get used to a certain way of doing things, it is good and sometimes essential that they look at things from the outside to find good solutions. It is hard to do that when you have a blue print of the inner workings of an OS imprinted on your brain. Thats why friendly oppinions and suggestions of frustrated users like myself are valuable. Let me remind you that I didn't come on this board cussing up a storm and badmouthing linux. I came on and posted my frustrations and offered some suggestions to how things could be solved. So who do you think is being more constructive? By the way I don't need to know about every internal function of something before I can user it. These principles are evident in many technologies from TVs, Microwaves, GPS Units, Telescopes, Automobiles... the list goes on. Computers are just one of tool amongst these and the OSs that run on them are no different, free or not.

So I consider myself very much in favor of open source and linux, however I'm not a fan of users who are holding back the potential of linux because they could care less about other people who actually want to get practical use out of their system without sacrificing a great amount of time and effort learning things they could care less about and sacrificing luxuries they have come accustom to in other operating systems.

@kainhart. subject: proving you wrong.

i cant remember exactly what you said..BUT, you asked my how making the operating system easyer to use could possibly deprive users of choice.

You gave as an example the porgram KDE and its inability to drag links into the main menu. (when i said you can, i said KDE, but sorry, i meant one of the other lesser used DE's)
i agree with you that in this case, adding the functionality to KDE would not deprive a user of choice, or freedom.

HOWEVER.....
i belive that the lack of a function to drag a link into a main menu , and being forced to use a slightly less convinient 'Menu Editor' is completely trivial.
the menu editor is easy to learn, its graphical, and it takes seconds.

What i am talking about what i saw somthing is hard, Is installing Drivers that do not come with your kernel, (because of rare hardware or kernel pre-dating hardware)
for those who dont know, drivers have to be specifically compiled for the kernel there intended to be sued with.

installing a new driver to windows is easy, you go to the driver download page, and select the driver for your kernel (windows version)
options are Windows9X, windows 2K/XP.

in linux, the user has choice.... which distro, which kernel version.. custom kernel ? what kernel configureation... Uni-processor kernel or dual processor kernel.
there are thousands of different possibilities. new Kernel versions are released avery few weeks... new distro's are emerging, mrore people of custom compiling there kernels.
there are patches people might have applied to there kernel. a hardware company couldnt possibly compile a driver for every body. they dont have the time, they dont have the web space, they cant afford the man power.

the solution... if you are unlucky enough to be in this ituation, and down want to upgrade your distro, then the only sollution is to compile the driver yourself.
this is easy to do providing you can read english, there are always step by step guides especially for common distro's
but it isnt as easy as the windows methos of.... chose your OS.. then double click.

YES, companies like nvidia have writted an installer that does everything for you... but you still have to make sure kernel source and a compiler are installed.

There is only 1 way to make driver installation as easy in linux as it is in windows.....
Restrict Choise of kernel's

Force EVERY linux distro to use the same kernel, and keep it, completely un-changed for X number of years, untill the next one is released.

Do you see now How The COst of Simplifying the driver install process would Deprive Users of choise and freedom ?

you gave an example which was valid, but sumwhat trivial compared to the complexity of driver installation.

do you understand now why many of us would rather take the time to read a set of instructions and ask a few questions, than have certian areas of linux "Simplified"

cummon every1... Do you Agree / Disagree with me ?

can we put this area of the discussion to rest.

Yes... make some areas of linux easyer if drag and drop into the start menue in KDE is that important to you... but NEVER deprive anyone of Freedom of choice in the porcess, which the example i have given would !

How about reading again what you originally said?
Now, quij is perfectly justified in correcting you, it IS possible to
drag stuff into the launcher (not the menu, or at least I don't
know how :}) ... if you know anything for a fact then it may be
that Mandrake 10 Official has managed to screw up KDE's
settings, it's certainly not KDE's default behaviour.


Cheers,
Tink

qwijibow, you call the menu thing trivial but in my case it actually saves of about 20 seconds or so. I timed myself a few times. Small things like this add up to take serveral minutes away from a users time. On top of that when a user has to pause and do some other task for an extended duration it is easy to get side tracked and loose focus on the work being done. So, you may consider it trivial however there are people who's whole jobs are based on comparing and finding more efficient ways of doing things. The way I see it is that if something has to do with a significant amount of my time while I'm alive on this earth it is not trivial one bit.

Your example with the device drivers fails to mention other possibilites of simplification. For example, compiling kernels or device drivers can take place in a graphical environment. A simple utility which is either manually executed or automatically opens when the kernel is updated that walks the user through recompiling divice drivers doesn't sound impossible at all. Unless the user must attain the driver source on their own, all of this could actually be handled behind the scenes without the user ever even knowing that the divice driver had to be recompiled. See, these graphical utilites which are easier for the average person to use and easier for them to learn quickly could be offered as a choice (emphasis).

Actually to tell you the truth I've never had a problem at all with a single device driver since I've tried any Linux distribution this year and I've updated my kernel many times. Knoppix, Fedora Core 2, and Mandrake 10 Official all seemed to recognize every single bit of hardware from three different machines. So as I see it now I personally wouldn't want to change a thing about how Linux distros are handling device drivers.

I would however like to do a few things such make the shortcut keys for copy and paste universal in applications, allow dragging of icons onto the menu in KDE and Gnome, simplified installation utilities to support something like autopackage is working on, add ability to back out of distro installations and provide alternative ftp sites while doing ftp installs or at least ability to supply an alternate if the source ftp starts to fail in middle of install (had this happen to me), possibly create meaningful english words for commands or at least aliases so that people don't have to guess at things like passwd for password and such, and ive some built in fully functional IMEs for people who speak foreign langauges (Japanese in particular is something that is really needed). Some of these features may be out of line some of them may even exist already however just off the top of my head and as a user of about a total of 4 months or so these just are some brainstorms for simplification. I don't see how anything I mentioned would really hamper anybody else using linux too.

@kainhart.

i dont believe you still argue !

there are some people here for which there sound card is not detected in fedora core 2.
ive talked them though installing alsa-drivers package.

Here is the method.
Extract the tar package (which is graphicall)
run the configure script (command line)
run the command make && make install (command line)

Are you SERIOUSLY saying you would want to develop graphical frontends to the 2 graphical stages ???

what would this graphical interface be ?
a window, with a button at the top that says "GO"
a checkbox that says "Show compiler output (for debugging bad source)
and a huge text box underneith that shows the compiler output ?

The whole labour Saving of this GUI saves a user from tpying ~25 keys.

any simplifications would be trivial.
AND would still not make driver installation anywhere near as straight forward as in windows.

Every time i argue you down, you chnage the arguemt !

first Off, you wanted Linux to be as simple as Windows.
I gave un-arguable reasons why doing this would deprive users of choise and freedom, so you bent your argument into saying that linux has room for trivial imporvement.

EVERYTHING on the face of the earth has room for trivial improvement.

Toilets.... They are easy to use arnt they... But no1 is making as bigger fuss about making them lift the seat for you, as you are making about adding shortcuts. which you anly do one every new software installation..

CD disk drivers.... are you getting tired of having to puch that little button when you want them to open ? wouldnt it be great if an infra red sensor detected your hand and opened for you... YES IT WOULD.... but is it a usefull and profitable use of developers TIME... NO ?

Why can some people just not accept losing an argument ???

Lol..... did u delibratly make that joke ?
you said " Significant Time is not Trivial" basically "Significant, is not IN-significant"
or True != Falsa...... or TRUE = TRUE.

this is not a good point to make dureing an argument, its doesnt prove your case at all :)

@qwijibow

If you say that I've lost an arument then why don't you explicitly state what that argument is. If it's weather simplification has to limit choice I think I've shown how it can do just the opposite. The idea of changing the whole nature of linux kernels was your suggestion and a agreeably bad one. I'm simply trying to explain to you how simplification can be a good thing. Name an argument I changed... you say I did but I don't see where I "chaged" the argument. Like I mentioned before I don't give a rats @$$ about device drivers as they have worked completely fine for me. And no I would definitly not show the complier output in a GUI I would probably have a dialog that pops up and says something such as, ther kernel has been updated from version THIS to version THAT, some drivers may be incompatable would you like to recompile now .... recompilation successfull, have a nice day. See, much more simplistic. And no there is now choice taken away. Stubborn users like yourself can still use linux without this automated utility and the command line to compile stuff such as device drivers. Did I say that Linux had to be as simple as windows? No I didn't. If anything I mentioned that Linux could be more simple than windows. Simple where it makes sense and not where it confuses the user would be the best move in my oppinion. You are getting ridiculouis with some of the suggestions such with the CD drive. There is a big difference between inefficiencies of a GUI which people interact with constantly through the day and opening and closing a CD tray. That is unless sombody switched CDs constantly for a job or something, in these cases there have already been made simplifications such as ability to mount multipule ISO CD images on a machine, or using driver arrays. Even though once you learn and memorize command lines it is quick to do certain things, not everybody wants to read pages of manuals to learn about commands and the cryptic arguments they sometimes take and if Linux is about choice then they should be able to do it with alternate means. Other than the fact that you feel some of the aspects that I and other users would like to improve are trivial, think I've made my points well enough so that even people like you agree that simplifcation can be good and doesn't nessecarly entail that you limit choice. So this will just go in a circle if we don't just admit that we have a differenence of oppinion and move on.

im bored of this argumentt, if you cant remember what the argument is / was, then go back and re-read.

Why always " why this and why that " Linux is NOT A COPY of windoze, and in fact for me it is far easier to install than windoze, I never have any problems with drivers, I install Redhat and within 20 Min it is all ready to use, now I tried in the office to install XP, and what a problem I had with drivers. Then after a week it crashed and I need to re-install, about two hours or more before everything is back, and after I lost all my short cuts, and the desktop, so now you have to totally re-configure everything, for me Windows is to difficult to handle.
I say as alway if Lunux is to difficult for you to handle give it up and stay with Uncle gates. In Linux you can change and shape the OS to fit your special requirements, as it is opensource, and is many times more stable than any of the Windows OS,and no virus atacks on linux or very little. When you want to drive a car you also need to know something about the car, in Lunix you also have to know something, what you want is a system which is 100% for small children to manage.
I agree with qwijibow.

Linux is easy, it's people that are hard :-)

And yep. You need to study and get a licence to drive a car...

But they let anyone drive a PC :-) Hence all the dangerous traffic out on the net :-)

great.... i knew some1 would agree with me sooner or later.

Linux is much easyer than windows.
a friend of mine was trying to convert an MP£ into a wav.
in windows, to do this you need an extra program !

in linux, you get your normal mp3 player... (for example xmms, or mplayer) which has no more functionality that Windows Media Player, and you just re-direct the output from the sound card file to a regular file... no extra shareware required.

easy.

anyways, 103 pages long.. this discussion is going to go on forever !

some people have been using linux for a while now, and find it to be alot easyer than windows, requires a LOT less maintenance, and doesnt just break itself over time.

and some people new to linux find if hard because the graphical interface isnt a perfect rip-off of Windows.... suppose they cant survive without the my computer icon ?

i would bet you if the same people who think linux is hard started life on linux, and were now trying windows, they would be argueing how windows is too hard.

It's like saying the French language is hard, just because you spend the first 20 years of your life in england, speaking english.