Windows is easier to install than Linux

[hm_murdock]

I don't know either.

why is it that so many people DO IN FACT have the same impressions of Linux? difficult to install, hard to install new apps, impossible to find useful support ,et cetera?

are all of these people hallucinating? no. they aren't.

the issues are real. deal with them now before they forever kill Linux's chances on the desktop.

a few people are doing what they can!

http://calix.calyptos.com is a good example. It's Linux, but you won't find /usr, or /lib or any of that. You won't find apt-get or RPM. Instead, there's folders like /Software and /System, and apps are in bundles that are drag-and-drop, just like NeXTStep and Mac OS X. All of this with KDE.

Now it's time for all of the Linux and OSS movement to embrace these ideas, for they are the future. Embrace the ideas of NO MORE FUCKING UNIX. UNIX, while a firm foundation, is something that deserves to be left "behind the curtain". It should be dragged OUT of the light and thrust into the depths where it belongs. UNIX is ugly. UNIX is arcane, and ancient. It needs to do what it does best. Be the plumbing, and let something else interact with the user.

Linux tries so hard to be a UNIX clone that it makes it hard on the user. And developers try as hard as they can to NOT cover up the ass ugly UNIX mess. Instead, they simply put a candy coating over it. There isn't even a half-hearted attempt to make it friendly. And in the end, it ends up being a condescending, intimidating mess.

Ask users who've tried it, looking for an alternative to Windows, and have decided to simply go back to it because it wasn't worth it to them to have to do everything through the MOST COMPLEX WAYS IMAGINABLE.

Now the argument is over. I'm right, you're wrong.

[jtpenrod]

quote:
why is it that so many people DO IN FACT have the same impressions of Linux? difficult to install, hard to install new apps, impossible to find useful support ,et cetera?

Unfortunately, first impressions are lasting impressions. There once was a time when all of that was quite true. "Ask users who've tried it, looking for an alternative to Windows, and have decided to simply go back to it because it wasn't worth it to them to have to do everything through the MOST COMPLEX WAYS IMAGINABLE." And those users will tell everyone all about it. What they fail to consider is that progress moves onward. Just because they had a hard time with something like Red Hat 5.0, doesn't mean that they'd have the same problems today. Either that, or these n00bs tried something like Slackware, Debian or Gentoo, none of which are "newbie" distros, nor do they present themselves as such.

Secondly, we've seen a campaign of FUD going on for nearly five years now. Sling enough 5h17 against the wall, and some of it is bound to stick. These days, newbie-friendly distros such as Mandrake are really NBD to install. There's no need to do any editing of any config files. ELX is even easier. The ELX installer kicks off with an X Server, includes hyperlinked help, and installs quite easily. The only OS that has an easier install is QNX.

As for installing apps, both Debian and Gentoo make this quite easy:

Code: [Select]

Anyone who can'r comprehend that has no business using a computer anyway.    
 

quote:
It's Linux, but you won't find /usr, or /lib or any of that. You won't find apt-get or RPM. Instead, there's folders like /Software and /System, and apps are in bundles that are drag-and-drop, just like NeXTStep and Mac OS X. All of this with KDE.

Now it's time for all of the Linux and OSS movement to embrace these ideas, for they are the future.

If this sumbitch doesn't do tarball installs, then I want no part of it. Believe it or not, some of us actually like having full control over our systems.            
__________________________________

Live Free or Die: Linux
If software can be free, why can't dolphins?

[restin256]

quote:Originally posted by root@localhost / BOB:
let me sum up all the Linux help forums,

wait for it... wait for it.

"RTFM n00b!"

there.  that is the only "Tech Support" offered by the helpful linux community.

ammendum, reading documentation is the first mistake of application design.  the user interface NEEDS to be intuitive, consistent and logical

The application should "just work" without having to dig through man-pages

[ March 10, 2004: Message edited by: root@localhost / BOB ]

Why do you waste your time here if you're obviously too stupid to ask for help on accredited places where people are known to help you? There's never been a case in which "RTFM" has been the only answer on Linuxforums or CTH.

[Meshuggener]

Personally, I'd like Linux distrobutions to stay away from a rehaul of turning Linux into being Windows - or making everything as easy as Windows and needing virtually no command line stuff.  KDE is such a resource hog anyway, crashes too much too.  Some of us like something fast, with minimal bloat, and complete control.  As long as there's Slack and Fluxbox...

 

quote:the issues are real. deal with them now before they forever kill Linux's chances on the desktop.

Who has what to lose in this?  We don't need a revolution taking place to replace Windows with Linux for the desktop - MS is taking care of that for us anyway.  Windows users are being bombarded with worries of security and data loss from viruses.  Each new hole found is the worst one ever -- this "security through obscurity" will be their downfall.  Just keep supporting RedHat and all the other 'make things easier' distros, they'll get there.

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by jimmyjames.sytes.net:
Because you don't have to know about /dev/hda or swap partitions. You don't have to know about X11 config files or about configuring CUPS or about networks.

Nor do you need to know about that in Linux when you set it up.  The above printed is your imagination!

A default installation IS VERY simple and IS easier compared to windows which needs to know the exact hardware your running.  Needs all the driver software (nothing built in and if you don't have driver software you are screwed!)  and cannot locate and configure things like the net automaticaly because you have to know the settings of the network!

 

quote:You don't need to know about compiliing stuff, or about how to use apt-get.

Thats correct, under linux you don't need to know that stuff but under windows you have to know things like how dll files work as well as the system registry!


 

quote:And most of all...

PEOPLE WILL HELP YOU IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM! They won't piss at you and yell 'RTFM, YOU FUCKING NEWB!"

Agree.  People in the linux commuinty WILL help as well as there is a lot of information already from the internet, books and if you use a major distro like Red Hat or SuSE there is even a toll free number to call and no they won't leave you hanging for 40min while they shove a very large bill up your ass!

Truth.[/QUOTE]

[skyman8081]

quote:Originally posted by restin256:


Why do you waste your time here if you're obviously too stupid to ask for help on accredited places where people are known to help you? There's never been a case in which "RTFM" has been the only answer on Linuxforums or CTH.

This is where you took it too far.  You personally insulted me instead of stating your case in this debate.  Good Day.

[hm_murdock]

You lose, Restin.

We've been perfectly nice during all this. Never once struck first with a flame. Only you're flaming here.

[OldManRiver]

Hand writing is on the wall.

MS XP running on Red Hat Kernal

New Apple/MAC OS running on Red Hat Kernal

If they are both going to Linux why not you.

If you don't you'll be left behind.

[Refalm]

quote:OldManRiver: MS XP running on Red Hat Kernal

New Apple/MAC OS running on Red Hat Kernal

Erm...  :confused:

I guess XPde looks very much like Windows (screenshot), but I didn't know Windows runs on the Red Hat "Kernal".

By "Kernal", do you mean the customly compiled Linux kernel for Red Hat, or the core of Red Hat?

[skyman8081]

quote:Originally posted by OldManRiver:
Hand writing is on the wall.

MS XP running on Red Hat Kernal

New Apple/MAC OS running on Red Hat Kernal

If they are both going to Linux why not you.

If you don't you'll be left behind.

What... The... Hell...?

what is a kernal, is it anything like a kernel?

Linux is an OS kernel, it does NOT interact with the user whatsoever.

XP/2003 Server have a POSIX LAYER for interactions. not the "Red Hat Kernal"

and Mac OSX has a BSD layer from its NeXT heritage, running on Mach.  but that is all under the hood.

NOTHING to do with user interaction.

[restin256]

quote:Originally posted by jimmyjames.sytes.net:
You lose, Restin.

We've been perfectly nice during all this. Never once struck first with a flame. Only you're flaming here.

I believe that people should have a certain degree of intelligence before trying to do something. You need a drivers liscense before you can buy a car, you should know how to use a computer to the very least degree before trying to. The fact is, you aren't told to RTFM if you ask for help in the right place. I may have lost, but no argument can be made that I'm simply right.

[skyman8081]

quote:Originally posted by restin256:


I believe that people should have a certain degree of intelligence before trying to do something. You need a drivers liscense before you can buy a car, you should know how to use a computer to the very least degree before trying to. The fact is, you aren't told to RTFM if you ask for help in the right place. I may have lost, but no argument can be made that I'm simply right.

Yes, but that does not mean the software should make users jump through unnecessary hoops just to get something done.  should all cars have to require a user to pump the brakes.  Hell no, we passed that.  Linux is stuck between it's UGLY past (UNIX) and the promising future ahead of it.  If it stays UNIX people will NOT want to use it.

[xyle_one]

quote:Originally posted by OldManRiver:
Hand writing is on the wall.

MS XP running on Red Hat Kernal

New Apple/MAC OS running on Red Hat Kernal

If they are both going to Linux why not you.

If you don't you'll be left behind.

You sir, are a fucking moron.

[WMD]

quote:Originally posted by [root@localhost /]#:
Linux is stuck between it's UGLY past (UNIX) and the promising future ahead of it.  If it stays UNIX people will NOT want to use it.

I don't know what you guys are talking about...what's wrong with Unix?

If you mean the file structure, with /usr, /home, /lib, and whatever - what's so bad about it?  I think it's very logical and simple.  Plus, /usr and /home are the only ones you normally have to deal with.

Other than this, I don't know what's so wrong about the Unix heritage.  Recent Linux distros are NOT hard to use in any respect, unless of course it supposed to be (like Slackware).

[worker201]

quote:Originally posted by WMD:

Recent Linux distros are NOT hard to use in any respect, unless of course it supposed to be (like Slackware).

Slackware isn't supposed to be hard.  PatV didn't sit down and say "gosh, how could I make a Linux distro that's really hard to use?"  It was probably more along the lines of "I'm a geek, what would I like to see in a Linux?"  It wasn't really designed to be a noob distro, and it wasn't designed to be archaic.  It was designed to be completely and totally configurable, down to the last semicolon.  If you want the configuration done for you by wizards, don't use Slackware.