EDIT: Changing linux's name would be like changing ISA Server to Forefront Management Gateway - Who the hell was the monkey that came up with that idea? What the hell was wrong with the already familiar "ISA Server" name? How can you go from Internet SECURITY and acceleration, to MANAGEMENT gateway? 'Cause managers sure as hell ain't security...
- Status
- Jul 24, 2006
- 22,736
- 236
- 57,490
I don't believe a monkey-proof OS is possible. There will always be someone who manages to screw it up, by social engineering if nothing else.
hallowed_dragon
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 1,016
- 0
- 19,360
Until Linux gives up the stupid console it won't make any significant gain in marketshare. No command window is necessary for accomplishing anything. The user is not required to write hieroglyphs in order to install things. Next->Next->Finish + open. That's it. Until Linux is not user friendly it won't matter.
- Jul 24, 2006
- 22,736
- 236
- 57,490
[citation][nom]hallowed_dragon[/nom]Next->Next->Finish + open. [/citation]
As opposed to click install -> enter password -> done?
As opposed to click install -> enter password -> done?
hallowed_dragon
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 1,016
- 0
- 19,360
[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]As opposed to click install -> enter password -> done?[/citation]
I have encountered installations that required at least 10 minutes of reading some stupid a## help file then writing idiotic shell commands. Of course that was for a programming tool, but that didn't ever happen on a Windows machine.
I have encountered installations that required at least 10 minutes of reading some stupid a## help file then writing idiotic shell commands. Of course that was for a programming tool, but that didn't ever happen on a Windows machine.
- Jul 24, 2006
- 22,736
- 236
- 57,490
Well help files are there to be read 
What tool was this anyway?
The thing with Terminal commands, is that although you may find them "idiotic" they can be extremely efficient (especially if you can simply copy/paste). GUIs are terribly inefficient because you can't do more than one thing at a time due to the need to click through menus. In Terminal you can string together hundreds of commands to execute in one go. Of course, it's not much fun to remember them, but a regularly execute sequence of commands should be in a script anyway unless you have a photographic memory or alot of time.
Obviously installing is not one of the times when Terminal commands are useful, unless you want to install multiple things sequentially without intermediate user involvement (something you can't do on Windows with a GUI, and probably not on Linux with a GUI either). I'm personally a GUI guy myself because I'm used to it, but I appreciate the flexibility and power of Terminal should I need it.
Whether or not you need Terminal comes down to the application you're installing in the end.
What tool was this anyway?The thing with Terminal commands, is that although you may find them "idiotic" they can be extremely efficient (especially if you can simply copy/paste). GUIs are terribly inefficient because you can't do more than one thing at a time due to the need to click through menus. In Terminal you can string together hundreds of commands to execute in one go. Of course, it's not much fun to remember them, but a regularly execute sequence of commands should be in a script anyway unless you have a photographic memory or alot of time.
Obviously installing is not one of the times when Terminal commands are useful, unless you want to install multiple things sequentially without intermediate user involvement (something you can't do on Windows with a GUI, and probably not on Linux with a GUI either). I'm personally a GUI guy myself because I'm used to it, but I appreciate the flexibility and power of Terminal should I need it.
Whether or not you need Terminal comes down to the application you're installing in the end.
killerclick
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2010
- 1,563
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]then it will never catch up to windows in the mainstream then. Linux will continue to he the least used mainstream OS[/citation]
It doesn't need to catch up to Windows. Linux does not live or die by its market share.
It doesn't need to catch up to Windows. Linux does not live or die by its market share.
- Jul 26, 2008
- 3,873
- 519
- 23,840
Typical users do not care about efficiency, they want ease of use and don't want to be overloaded with fck tons of diagnostic information. Average Joe does ~not~ care if he's running at 95% efficiency of time / resources within his OS or 60% efficiency. He only care's about turning it on, going to whatever site / email / video game / youtube / ect.. without needing to go through hoops.
MS Windows became popular because it was able to makes things easy, while still being open ended for developers / HW manufactures. Apple ~could~ of done this if they would of given more freedom to device / system manufactures. But alas, missed opportunities.
Linux is just a kernel, or more generally an open development platform. Honestly each distribution is a separate OS because each tends to do things differently. It took years for RHEL and DEB to become de-facto industry standards for writing scripts and managing installation binary's. Prior to that it was "every man for himself" forcing you to compile everything you downloaded. We're still doing that too much these days, but its getting better.
For games... one of two things needs to happen. Either OpenGL gets a complete make over and stops being a committee run standard (where things take years to standardize). Thus allowing them to finally catch up with DirectX for standardized capabilities. Or MS releases DirectX to be installed / built into a Linux framework. Really don't know if that is gonna be possible. WINE makes a decent attempt at it, but really its just taking the DX calls and putting them in a OpenGL wrapper, this absolutely destroy's performance.
MS Windows became popular because it was able to makes things easy, while still being open ended for developers / HW manufactures. Apple ~could~ of done this if they would of given more freedom to device / system manufactures. But alas, missed opportunities.
Linux is just a kernel, or more generally an open development platform. Honestly each distribution is a separate OS because each tends to do things differently. It took years for RHEL and DEB to become de-facto industry standards for writing scripts and managing installation binary's. Prior to that it was "every man for himself" forcing you to compile everything you downloaded. We're still doing that too much these days, but its getting better.
For games... one of two things needs to happen. Either OpenGL gets a complete make over and stops being a committee run standard (where things take years to standardize). Thus allowing them to finally catch up with DirectX for standardized capabilities. Or MS releases DirectX to be installed / built into a Linux framework. Really don't know if that is gonna be possible. WINE makes a decent attempt at it, but really its just taking the DX calls and putting them in a OpenGL wrapper, this absolutely destroy's performance.
Tomtompiper
Distinguished
- Jan 20, 2010
- 382
- 0
- 18,780
"For games... one of two things needs to happen. "
There is a third option, get a console. And a forth, Dual Boot. As I have said before apart from the "Bleed them dry MMORPG" sector PC gaming is dying. Software houses are abandoning the MS platform in droves, the few that remain mainly pay lip service with console ports with only a few PC only titles released each month. Some shops have stopped selling full priced PC games altogether. With gaming becoming less and less important the other aspects of a home computer are brought into focus. Internet Browsing, Video on Demand and Social Networking are where the growth is now, apps like Flock web browser and Skype are much more important than games. Ten or even five years I would have never switched to Linux, I spent a lot of time gaming, but now I game on X-box and Wii I got tired of constantly fighting a losing battle against Hackers and Malware and made the switch. No more virus scans interrupting a program or turning a Skype call into a slide show. No more worrying about opening e-mails from strangers, or attachments from friends, no more chasing a Trojan or Virus around my home network. I still keep Windows for the odd game and IE but it is used less and less as time goes by. If only I could get IE8 working in Linux I would give it up altogether.
There is a third option, get a console. And a forth, Dual Boot. As I have said before apart from the "Bleed them dry MMORPG" sector PC gaming is dying. Software houses are abandoning the MS platform in droves, the few that remain mainly pay lip service with console ports with only a few PC only titles released each month. Some shops have stopped selling full priced PC games altogether. With gaming becoming less and less important the other aspects of a home computer are brought into focus. Internet Browsing, Video on Demand and Social Networking are where the growth is now, apps like Flock web browser and Skype are much more important than games. Ten or even five years I would have never switched to Linux, I spent a lot of time gaming, but now I game on X-box and Wii I got tired of constantly fighting a losing battle against Hackers and Malware and made the switch. No more virus scans interrupting a program or turning a Skype call into a slide show. No more worrying about opening e-mails from strangers, or attachments from friends, no more chasing a Trojan or Virus around my home network. I still keep Windows for the odd game and IE but it is used less and less as time goes by. If only I could get IE8 working in Linux I would give it up altogether.
[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]So why can't AMD get their damn graphics drivers on Linux right?[/citation]
Because they still keep them proprietary and out of the hands of people who could do it right!
Come on AMD. You've gotten almost everything else right. Why not this?
Because they still keep them proprietary and out of the hands of people who could do it right!
Come on AMD. You've gotten almost everything else right. Why not this?
MU_Engineer
Splendid
- Feb 18, 2006
- 3,868
- 4
- 23,165
[citation][nom]Exodite2[/nom]Chalk me down to not being particularly impressed with Linux.Don't get me wrong, it certainly has strong points compared to the other major OSs of our time but in the end they all suck.Linux is still based around a software concept that's 40 years old.[citation]
Most things in computing are "based" on technology that debuted in the 60s and 70s because that's when the first computers were really developed. But to say that because current Unixes have roots that go back that far makes them somehow obsolete is silly because a 2010 Unix is very different from UNIX in 1969. Is your CPU obsolete because it can trace its lineage back to the 70s-era 8086?
If you want bass-ackwards, the Windows registry is practically the definition of it. It's in hexadecimal for crying out loud! At least the Unixy stuff is in plain text...
That's true for some Linux installs, but tell me what you can do with an out-of-the-box Windows installation. Can't play a DVD. Can't open any Office files. You'll be lucky if all of your hardware even works.
First of all, the metrics that define the success of proprietary software do not apply to OSS like Linux. Linux does not need to be the most popular OS on the planet to succeed. The code won't disappear if the company develops it decides to throw in the towel like in proprietary software. All that needs to happen is enough people use it that development continues, and that is more than the case today.
Secondly, the fact that there are a bunch of different options is exactly why Linux exists. If people wanted a one-size-fits-all option, then there are other OSes out there that will do just that. If somebody came and said, "here is exactly what a Linux distribution must be," you'd see developers leave in droves. (Actually, you'd see them fork the code and carry on the same as before under a different name, but you get my point.)
Third, the ability to have advanced options is another reason Linux exists. Not everybody wants to have an OS with a dumbed-down GUI and almost all of the advanced tweaking options inaccesssible. I especially find it ironic that somebody at a enthusiast site where not having 50 different memory tweaking options in a motherboard's BIOS gets booed but having an OS that exposes a similar set of advanced configuration tools isn't well-received because it's "consumer-unfriendly."
Most things in computing are "based" on technology that debuted in the 60s and 70s because that's when the first computers were really developed. But to say that because current Unixes have roots that go back that far makes them somehow obsolete is silly because a 2010 Unix is very different from UNIX in 1969. Is your CPU obsolete because it can trace its lineage back to the 70s-era 8086?
If you want bass-ackwards, the Windows registry is practically the definition of it. It's in hexadecimal for crying out loud! At least the Unixy stuff is in plain text...
That's true for some Linux installs, but tell me what you can do with an out-of-the-box Windows installation. Can't play a DVD. Can't open any Office files. You'll be lucky if all of your hardware even works.
First of all, the metrics that define the success of proprietary software do not apply to OSS like Linux. Linux does not need to be the most popular OS on the planet to succeed. The code won't disappear if the company develops it decides to throw in the towel like in proprietary software. All that needs to happen is enough people use it that development continues, and that is more than the case today.
Secondly, the fact that there are a bunch of different options is exactly why Linux exists. If people wanted a one-size-fits-all option, then there are other OSes out there that will do just that. If somebody came and said, "here is exactly what a Linux distribution must be," you'd see developers leave in droves. (Actually, you'd see them fork the code and carry on the same as before under a different name, but you get my point.)
Third, the ability to have advanced options is another reason Linux exists. Not everybody wants to have an OS with a dumbed-down GUI and almost all of the advanced tweaking options inaccesssible. I especially find it ironic that somebody at a enthusiast site where not having 50 different memory tweaking options in a motherboard's BIOS gets booed but having an OS that exposes a similar set of advanced configuration tools isn't well-received because it's "consumer-unfriendly."
dgingeri
Distinguished
- Dec 4, 2009
- 2,123
- 1
- 20,460
The only way Linux will ever become mainstream will to get these three things:
1. a decent graphical installer system in place, consistent between all distributions so that any program written for Linux can install and configure without any command line functions
2. graphical controls for all system functions and settings, so that nobody has to deal with the command line
3. keep all the command line functions currently in place for availability of scripting
The big thing about Windows is that nearly every function and setting can be set at least 2 different ways, and many have half a dozen ways. Also, most people hate command line functions because they have to type too much. (Yes, I am one of those people, and I am administering 16 Linux servers right now. I hate the command line garbage, editing text files with vi, and having to type everything precisely or type the whole thing over.) A graphical interface to overlay the command line functions would be great. Windows' controls for DNS and DHCP are far superior to Linux. (copying and editing 2 text files is so annoying when trying to set a single DNS entry. It takes about 10 times as long, with 100 times the effort, compared to Windows.)
I have heard there is a series of functions in Linux similar to Windows Active Directory, for user and system administration, app and setting distribution, and inventory capabilities, but I have yet to see it. It must mean there are things missing compared to AD, or it would be far more frequent.
Once these things are done, Linux will rule. Until it's done, Linux is going to stay nothing but a niche market. Nobody wants to pay someone three times the pay to administer Linux, when it would cost 1/10 that amount to just buy Windows and get a Windows admin. The cost of the licensing is far less than the cost of actually getting a Linux Admin.
Unfortunately, that would likely mean the end of my current job, but I would volunteer to go down in pay just to avoid having to use this stupid command line all the time.
1. a decent graphical installer system in place, consistent between all distributions so that any program written for Linux can install and configure without any command line functions
2. graphical controls for all system functions and settings, so that nobody has to deal with the command line
3. keep all the command line functions currently in place for availability of scripting
The big thing about Windows is that nearly every function and setting can be set at least 2 different ways, and many have half a dozen ways. Also, most people hate command line functions because they have to type too much. (Yes, I am one of those people, and I am administering 16 Linux servers right now. I hate the command line garbage, editing text files with vi, and having to type everything precisely or type the whole thing over.) A graphical interface to overlay the command line functions would be great. Windows' controls for DNS and DHCP are far superior to Linux. (copying and editing 2 text files is so annoying when trying to set a single DNS entry. It takes about 10 times as long, with 100 times the effort, compared to Windows.)
I have heard there is a series of functions in Linux similar to Windows Active Directory, for user and system administration, app and setting distribution, and inventory capabilities, but I have yet to see it. It must mean there are things missing compared to AD, or it would be far more frequent.
Once these things are done, Linux will rule. Until it's done, Linux is going to stay nothing but a niche market. Nobody wants to pay someone three times the pay to administer Linux, when it would cost 1/10 that amount to just buy Windows and get a Windows admin. The cost of the licensing is far less than the cost of actually getting a Linux Admin.
Unfortunately, that would likely mean the end of my current job, but I would volunteer to go down in pay just to avoid having to use this stupid command line all the time.
daggs
Distinguished
- May 12, 2009
- 712
- 0
- 19,010
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]The only way Linux will ever become mainstream will to get these three things:1. a decent graphical installer system in place, consistent between all distributions so that any program written for Linux can install and configure without any command line functions[/citation]
have you taken a look in the opensuse and ubuntu installer latley?
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]
2. graphical controls for all system functions and settings, so that nobody has to deal with the command line[/citation]
will never happen, know why? because linux is freedom of choosing. newbies and normal users shouldn't even bother messing with debian, gentoo, slackware and other advance distribution.
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]
3. keep all the command line functions currently in place for availability of scriptingThe big thing about Windows is that nearly every function and setting can be set at least 2 different ways, and many have half a dozen ways.[/citation]
you really don't know about linux commands... in linux you can do anything you want in cli with more then one way and with more then one types of shell...
how many ways are there to print a content of a file in windows cli?
have you taken a look in the opensuse and ubuntu installer latley?
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]
2. graphical controls for all system functions and settings, so that nobody has to deal with the command line[/citation]
will never happen, know why? because linux is freedom of choosing. newbies and normal users shouldn't even bother messing with debian, gentoo, slackware and other advance distribution.
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]
3. keep all the command line functions currently in place for availability of scriptingThe big thing about Windows is that nearly every function and setting can be set at least 2 different ways, and many have half a dozen ways.[/citation]
you really don't know about linux commands... in linux you can do anything you want in cli with more then one way and with more then one types of shell...
how many ways are there to print a content of a file in windows cli?
dgingeri
Distinguished
- Dec 4, 2009
- 2,123
- 1
- 20,460
yes, I have. I trained myself with vmware server on Ubuntu 8.04 before I got my current job.
I've been a Windows support tech for 12 years, and finally getting a chance to do server level support. I have to support 16 Linux servers along with the 4 dozen or so Windows servers for normal user functions.
The problem is that the installer in Fedora is likely the best, but it is only used on a couple distros. Ubuntu uses that crappy "apt-get" command line, and if you don't type it out just right or don't know the exact wording of the package you want. you don't get what you want, or worse, you get something you definitely don't want.
With the Windows installer, any program for Windows can be tracked, changed, and/or uninstalled with a few mouse clicks. Sure, some programs don't remove themselves completely when uninstalled, but with Linux, I haven't found a way to remove anything other than manually deleting the files, stopping the service, and editing start up files.
That's exactly what will keep most users and most companies from widely using it. Sure, my current company uses it extensively, including a specialized distro for the core of our main product, however, that is a very specialized use, and the users never see it. Most of the customers don't even see it. they use the web admin interface, and never see which OS is used.
That's my point: it all command line. If it is not typed out perfectly, it doesn't work. I don't know about you, but I have this problem with my fingers where trying to type out a single line, I get about half a dozen typos. My fingers don't do what I tell them to. It's massively frustrating. 37 years haven't changed that at all. I hate command line stuff specifically for that. Until it is all graphical, I will continue to hate Linux, even if I have to work on it for a living. I keep pushing for us to move to a Windows DHCP and DNS server because Linux is just too frustrating to work with and doesn't affect security at all. (I'd keep the Linux firewall, web, and backup servers because they would help with security.) They hired me because getting a Linux admin that would also work with Windows AD would cost them nearly twice as much. I was willing to work with a little Linux.
funny thing is, we have 30 physical servers spread over 7 racks, and half of our Windows servers are actually virtuals running on Linux hosts. Those are easy to administer, because the only thing they do is host the virtuals. SMS, WDS, WSUS, print servers, file servers, are all virtuals. we only have 4 domain controllers that are running Windows as the main OS.
nebun
Distinguished
- Oct 20, 2008
- 2,840
- 0
- 20,810
"but they are far better when it comes to game play and involvement" Sales of console games would tend to disprove this statement."
the only reason why console games are sold in a bigger quantity is because a lot of people don't have the money to spend on a well built PC. since more units means more games sold.
games always have and will always be better on a well built PC
the only reason why console games are sold in a bigger quantity is because a lot of people don't have the money to spend on a well built PC. since more units means more games sold.
games always have and will always be better on a well built PC
Tomtompiper
Distinguished
- Jan 20, 2010
- 382
- 0
- 18,780
"That's my point: it all command line. If it is not typed out perfectly, it doesn't work. "
Yep I have noticed with the Windows registry and command prompt (Which contrary to your post are needed to maintain a windows system from time to time.) that it corrects your spelling mistakes (Not!). To criticize an application because you can't type is a bit sad to be honest. Maybe you could learn Ctrl C and Ctrl V, these work in Linux too you know.
I have set up plenty of Linux systems without having to go near a terminal. I do sometimes use a terminal when I want to install a beta program for testing purposes, but this is happening less and less as a lot of these beta programs are now being posted on the testing server for my package manager.
Yep I have noticed with the Windows registry and command prompt (Which contrary to your post are needed to maintain a windows system from time to time.) that it corrects your spelling mistakes (Not!). To criticize an application because you can't type is a bit sad to be honest. Maybe you could learn Ctrl C and Ctrl V, these work in Linux too you know.
I have set up plenty of Linux systems without having to go near a terminal. I do sometimes use a terminal when I want to install a beta program for testing purposes, but this is happening less and less as a lot of these beta programs are now being posted on the testing server for my package manager.
Tomtompiper
Distinguished
- Jan 20, 2010
- 382
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]"but they are far better when it comes to game play and involvement" Sales of console games would tend to disprove this statement."the only reason why console games are sold in a bigger quantity is because a lot of people don't have the money to spend on a well built PC. since more units means more games sold. games always have and will always be better on a well built PC[/citation]
All of the people I know that have a console also own a PC so it's not that it's a cheap option, hell the games cost much more, it's because they get better games and a greater choice with a console. Try this experiment open two browsers and run them side by side, now go to Walmart or any game retailer website and put xbox on one browser and PC on the other. Scroll down the lists and watch how quickly the PC games dwindle from current games to discounted older games. Marvel at how many of the PC games are also available on the xbox and how many more new and current xbox
games there are compared to the PC. Even the PS3 has more titles than the PC, the writing is on the wall. I've seen this happen many times before, it's not always the best system that wins, consoles are easier to easier to develop for and that is where the software houses will concentrate their resources, get used to console hand-me-downs it is the future of PC games.
All of the people I know that have a console also own a PC so it's not that it's a cheap option, hell the games cost much more, it's because they get better games and a greater choice with a console. Try this experiment open two browsers and run them side by side, now go to Walmart or any game retailer website and put xbox on one browser and PC on the other. Scroll down the lists and watch how quickly the PC games dwindle from current games to discounted older games. Marvel at how many of the PC games are also available on the xbox and how many more new and current xbox
games there are compared to the PC. Even the PS3 has more titles than the PC, the writing is on the wall. I've seen this happen many times before, it's not always the best system that wins, consoles are easier to easier to develop for and that is where the software houses will concentrate their resources, get used to console hand-me-downs it is the future of PC games.
daggs
Distinguished
- May 12, 2009
- 712
- 0
- 19,010
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]yes, I have. I trained myself with vmware server on Ubuntu 8.04 before I got my current job. I've been a Windows support tech for 12 years, and finally getting a chance to do server level support. I have to support 16 Linux servers along with the 4 dozen or so Windows servers for normal user functions. The problem is that the installer in Fedora is likely the best, but it is only used on a couple distros. Ubuntu uses that crappy "apt-get" command line, and if you don't type it out just right or don't know the exact wording of the package you want. you don't get what you want, or worse, you get something you definitely don't want. With the Windows installer, any program for Windows can be tracked, changed, and/or uninstalled with a few mouse clicks. Sure, some programs don't remove themselves completely when uninstalled, but with Linux, I haven't found a way to remove anything other than manually deleting the files, stopping the service, and editing start up files.[/citation]
don't know the fedora installer but my windows driven girlfriend has installed xubuntu on her laptop without any problems.
in regards to the crappy apt-get cli, first currently, the deb packaging system is considered better them rpm (the one fedora use), now I don't know what they teach you there in windows land but searching the programs installed by default on your ubuntu for example will lead you to the package manager which enables you to install and uninstall programs with a click of a button, now can windows install in a click of a button? (in click I mean find the program, updates all dependencies if needed including download and installation, downloading and installing the program you've asked for)? even asking google will yield this result: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_system as first hit where you findout that synaptics is an excellent package manager.
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]That's exactly what will keep most users and most companies from widely using it. Sure, my current company uses it extensively, including a specialized distro for the core of our main product, however, that is a very specialized use, and the users never see it. Most of the customers don't even see it. they use the web admin interface, and never see which OS is used.
[/citation]
dude, 80% of the world's most powerful supercomputers and almost all isp aren't wrong...
people are afraid of difference, they don't know so they don't try, any user that will spend 5 minutes googling about linux will find the answer to the ultimate question which is: "what is linux and which is suited to my needs?" lazyness isn't a reason.
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]
That's my point: it all command line. If it is not typed out perfectly, it doesn't work. I don't know about you, but I have this problem with my fingers where trying to type out a single line, I get about half a dozen typos. My fingers don't do what I tell them to. It's massively frustrating. 37 years haven't changed that at all. I hate command line stuff specifically for that. Until it is all graphical, I will continue to hate Linux, even if I have to work on it for a living. I keep pushing for us to move to a Windows DHCP and DNS server because Linux is just too frustrating to work with and doesn't affect security at all. (I'd keep the Linux firewall, web, and backup servers because they would help with security.) They hired me because getting a Linux admin that would also work with Windows AD would cost them nearly twice as much. I was willing to work with a little Linux. funny thing is, we have 30 physical servers spread over 7 racks, and half of our Windows servers are actually virtuals running on Linux hosts. Those are easy to administer, because the only thing they do is host the virtuals. SMS, WDS, WSUS, print servers, file servers, are all virtuals. we only have 4 domain controllers that are running Windows as the main OS.[/citation]
first, learn to use tab completion when using cli. second, teaching you is pointless as you said it by yourself, you will always hate linux. third, you are blaming linux on errors you make? sounds like the dancer that falls and blames the croocked floor.
if you don't come to linux with an open mind, it is better to not come at all. linux isn't windows.
don't know the fedora installer but my windows driven girlfriend has installed xubuntu on her laptop without any problems.
in regards to the crappy apt-get cli, first currently, the deb packaging system is considered better them rpm (the one fedora use), now I don't know what they teach you there in windows land but searching the programs installed by default on your ubuntu for example will lead you to the package manager which enables you to install and uninstall programs with a click of a button, now can windows install in a click of a button? (in click I mean find the program, updates all dependencies if needed including download and installation, downloading and installing the program you've asked for)? even asking google will yield this result: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_system as first hit where you findout that synaptics is an excellent package manager.
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]That's exactly what will keep most users and most companies from widely using it. Sure, my current company uses it extensively, including a specialized distro for the core of our main product, however, that is a very specialized use, and the users never see it. Most of the customers don't even see it. they use the web admin interface, and never see which OS is used.
[/citation]
dude, 80% of the world's most powerful supercomputers and almost all isp aren't wrong...
people are afraid of difference, they don't know so they don't try, any user that will spend 5 minutes googling about linux will find the answer to the ultimate question which is: "what is linux and which is suited to my needs?" lazyness isn't a reason.
[citation][nom]dgingeri[/nom]
That's my point: it all command line. If it is not typed out perfectly, it doesn't work. I don't know about you, but I have this problem with my fingers where trying to type out a single line, I get about half a dozen typos. My fingers don't do what I tell them to. It's massively frustrating. 37 years haven't changed that at all. I hate command line stuff specifically for that. Until it is all graphical, I will continue to hate Linux, even if I have to work on it for a living. I keep pushing for us to move to a Windows DHCP and DNS server because Linux is just too frustrating to work with and doesn't affect security at all. (I'd keep the Linux firewall, web, and backup servers because they would help with security.) They hired me because getting a Linux admin that would also work with Windows AD would cost them nearly twice as much. I was willing to work with a little Linux. funny thing is, we have 30 physical servers spread over 7 racks, and half of our Windows servers are actually virtuals running on Linux hosts. Those are easy to administer, because the only thing they do is host the virtuals. SMS, WDS, WSUS, print servers, file servers, are all virtuals. we only have 4 domain controllers that are running Windows as the main OS.[/citation]
first, learn to use tab completion when using cli. second, teaching you is pointless as you said it by yourself, you will always hate linux. third, you are blaming linux on errors you make? sounds like the dancer that falls and blames the croocked floor.
if you don't come to linux with an open mind, it is better to not come at all. linux isn't windows.
dgingeri
Distinguished
- Dec 4, 2009
- 2,123
- 1
- 20,460
That's easy. The same thing Linux has has been in Windows since Windows 95: Add/remove Windows Components. it's part of Add/remove Programs.
Select a component, it adds all dependencies. In Windows Server, that includes Administration tools, DHCP, WINS, DNS, and all web server functions. (I still wouldn't use Windows as a web server, though.)
I have not seen anything like you are describing anywhere in Linux. Personally, I've tried CentOS, Ubuntu (8.04 and 8.10, since 9.10 won't even install on a virtual or on my secondary system), Fedora, and OpenSUSE. At work, we currently use RHEL and SUSE, along with a custom build. I have not seen any graphical interface to add components.
people aren't afraid of "difference". (I'd have used the word "change" myself.) I certainly am not. I've been using Windows Powershell for a couple years now. That's new. I moved to Vista and got used to the new interface pretty quickly, despite the issues. I have used multiple monitors since Windows 98. (Well, SE when I actually got the money for the second monitor.)
I accept the change, when it is needed. I certainly know that Linux has its place. The security is better for outward facing applications, such as firewalls and web servers. It's is great for back up applications. (We use a custom Linux app to back up all our Windows file shares, along with file deduplication during the backup.)
However, it is too hard to use and takes far more time to do anything because so much has to be typed. I didn't say I will always hate Linux. I said I will hate it until they make the graphical interfaces necessary to do the things Windows does. Then I wouldn't have to sit at a black screen and type in, with half of my keystrokes being typos, all those stupid commands.
Oh, and while I do periodically use the command line in Windows, I am able to mostly avoid it. Linux, I have to use it for EVERYTHING, and I hate that.
What is this tab completion you talk about? Would it help me? I have no idea what it is.
as far as your example, I am a bad dancer, and don't blame the floor for my problems, I simply state that I hate dancing and don't do it unless I have to. (Which, that has thankfully only come up once. that particular red head was SO worth the humiliating experience.)
I am bad at typing, so I hate it when I am forced to use it constantly. Linux forces me into that.
Well, the Ubuntu/Deban bug tracker issue would be mostly Ubuntu's fault as it's based on Debian. Ubuntu could at least provide some sort of hint towards which version of Debian it's based on. Keeping /etc/debian_version would be enough.
Asking developers to abandon C for user mode would not work, if you can't produce sane code then that's a different issue.
Asking developers to abandon C for user mode would not work, if you can't produce sane code then that's a different issue.
Tomtompiper
Distinguished
- Jan 20, 2010
- 382
- 0
- 18,780
"That's easy. The same thing Linux has has been in Windows since Windows 95: Add/remove Windows Components. it's part of Add/remove Programs."
It is most certainly not the same thing, Add/remove Windows Components, Add/remove Programs is not able to search a repository of thousands of third party software programs. It is not in the same league as Synaptic. It's like comparing Word pad to Word.
It is most certainly not the same thing, Add/remove Windows Components, Add/remove Programs is not able to search a repository of thousands of third party software programs. It is not in the same league as Synaptic. It's like comparing Word pad to Word.
Alessandro17
Distinguished
- Sep 2, 2008
- 1
- 0
- 18,510
Linux world domination? Not in my lifetime, and especially *NOT* Ubuntu.
Maybe Mandriva, openSUSE or PCLinuxOS...
As it has already been said, Linux developers don't seem to care about users. Worst case: KDE4. Or Debian insisting on re-branding Firefox, Thunderbird or Seamonkey...
And why use Linux, when you can use such great operating systems as Windows 7 or OS X...
Maybe Mandriva, openSUSE or PCLinuxOS...
As it has already been said, Linux developers don't seem to care about users. Worst case: KDE4. Or Debian insisting on re-branding Firefox, Thunderbird or Seamonkey...
And why use Linux, when you can use such great operating systems as Windows 7 or OS X...
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]Wrong. It's not that hard to write some tiny OOP blocks to "overload" the standard command line options and replace them with something a little more familiar, if not at the very least something a little more understandable for new users - ESPECIALLY for linux coders, considering they need to know more about code than your average programmer. It would be equally as simple to provide an option for/against command line upon install for veteran linux users or new linux users. I'm sure adding tutorials to a fresh rip would be a cinch as well. I also wouldn't change the name at all. Linux means something to me and many others (even though I've only ever touched it once), but as a technical specialist I have alot of respect for what linux does, has done, and can do.[/citation]
You lost 99% of the masses needed for world domination after "OOP blocks", methinks.
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]Making a monkey-proof version isn't necessary. A version needs to be made only as far as the average technically inclined user can make sense of it. I learned DOS and Win 3.1 just from WATCHING my mother. I helped spread it to my cousin who spread it etc. Once you can get the technically inclined familiar with it, it will spread the same way people are still obsessed with XP. You can still find people who swear by XP and pray to their manuals before bed at night[/citation]
You know, you're right. The proof is right in front of all along. I forgot about how DOS and Win3.1 has become the world dominators.
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]People don't just up and buy macs. Some do, but the rest are acquainted with it from some other source. I was acquainted with it at my job, and now at my school. I only wont go to it because there's no backward compatibility like there is with windows. So just because there's a monkey-proof version of linux produced doesn't mean people are just going to switch over to it in droves. It boils down to a matter of familiarity and introduction. Cars aren't easy to use for the pre-license driver, but it's easy to familiarize one's self with it. I feel that way about windows. I can't speak for linux, but i'm sure there are those who can say the same for linux.Linux, just like everything else in the world, has the potential to do many and amazing things - it's all about how well it can be executed.[citation]
A little TMI there, don't you think? Especially considering that you end up letting us know that you can't speak for the very world dominating-challenged operating system as the subject of the article.
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]Fourth, you're the monkey.[/citation]
ah, now you had to go and ruin you well thought out and articulated rebuttal by throwing an ad hominem in there. I'm crestfallen!
You lost 99% of the masses needed for world domination after "OOP blocks", methinks.
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]Making a monkey-proof version isn't necessary. A version needs to be made only as far as the average technically inclined user can make sense of it. I learned DOS and Win 3.1 just from WATCHING my mother. I helped spread it to my cousin who spread it etc. Once you can get the technically inclined familiar with it, it will spread the same way people are still obsessed with XP. You can still find people who swear by XP and pray to their manuals before bed at night[/citation]
You know, you're right. The proof is right in front of all along. I forgot about how DOS and Win3.1 has become the world dominators.
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]People don't just up and buy macs. Some do, but the rest are acquainted with it from some other source. I was acquainted with it at my job, and now at my school. I only wont go to it because there's no backward compatibility like there is with windows. So just because there's a monkey-proof version of linux produced doesn't mean people are just going to switch over to it in droves. It boils down to a matter of familiarity and introduction. Cars aren't easy to use for the pre-license driver, but it's easy to familiarize one's self with it. I feel that way about windows. I can't speak for linux, but i'm sure there are those who can say the same for linux.Linux, just like everything else in the world, has the potential to do many and amazing things - it's all about how well it can be executed.[citation]
A little TMI there, don't you think? Especially considering that you end up letting us know that you can't speak for the very world dominating-challenged operating system as the subject of the article.
[citation][nom]korsen[/nom]Fourth, you're the monkey.[/citation]
ah, now you had to go and ruin you well thought out and articulated rebuttal by throwing an ad hominem in there. I'm crestfallen!
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
[SOLVED] Is it safe to use a recapped PSU for a long time ?- Started by zwtch_17
- Replies: 7
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 3K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram