Ubuntu is growing on me ...

[lxndr]

Can anyone tell me what isn't user friendly with Ubuntu ? I mean, concrete examples.

[dfsp_spirit]

Linux makes an excellent desktop for people who do things like programming, advanced network stuff and tasks that require automation. If you want to call that elitist, maybe Linux is elitist. But if I had to work with Windows at university I'd shoot myself.

I'd also shoot myself if I had to play modern games at home under Linux though. It has strengths and weaknesses and of course, people have certain preferences and are used to things. If you're saying it sucks as a desktop in general I gotta say you're not up-to-date.

[bFeared]

Linux makes an excellent desktop for people who do things like programming, advanced network stuff and tasks that require automation. If you want to call that elitist, maybe Linux is elitist. But if I had to work with Windows at university I'd shoot myself.

I'd also shoot myself if I had to play modern games at home under Linux though. It has strengths and weaknesses and of course, people have certain preferences and are used to things. If you're saying it sucks as a desktop in general I gotta say you're not up-to-date.

All of these things you mentioned. Programming, networking, etc. Can all be done in windows and done much better. I do not have much networking experience (mostly know linux for servers, never did like the windows server) but programming I can say is definitely much easier and powerful on Windows. Visual Studio is the best IDE out there, awesome debugger, interface, compiler, etc.

Can anyone tell me what isn't user friendly with Ubuntu ? I mean, concrete examples.

There is a lot of reasons, if you want to know why you could just boot up linux Ubuntu and try that out for a week.
You will see exactly why it fails interface-wise. Majority of the work still needs to be done in the silly terminal that crys all the time for sudo and your password. (asking your password to do something so menial over and over is just silly and does not protect you, just let me login to root and not worry about that rubbish but it doesn't like when I do that)

[lxndr]

There is a lot of reasons

Just need a few ones

if you want to know why you could just boot up linux Ubuntu and try that out for a week.

I use linux since 10 years now and I'm not the average end-user so I guess I'm not the best candidat for the noob experience.

You will see exactly why it fails interface-wise. Majority of the work still needs to be done in the silly terminal that crys all the time for sudo and your password. (asking your password to do something so menial over and over is just silly and does not protect you, just let me login to root and not worry about that rubbish but it doesn't like when I do that)

What does need to be done in a terminal actually ?

[dfsp_spirit]

I've been using on a professional basis for years man. You can't tell me that one can't do that, hehe.

[MH]

Well try to install anything that's not in the default apt-get repositories for starters.

You gotta take off your "It's a Unix system! I know this!" hat and put yourself in the shoes of Joe Average who's just bought a computer here.

[Phenom]

I do have a bad case of hate.
Seriously, though, linux sucks as a desktop and should only be used as a server or operations of that sort.

I never understood why people want Linux to rise. Linux stinks for gaming and really just stinks with anything in a desktop fashion, period.
There are other reasons to use Linux (this I understand) but that is a very small percentage. I am no fanboy of anything.

Windows is better.

Here's a list of Microsoft programs that I've got working within Linux using Wine. These are...

Fruityloops 8 XL
CuteFTP
Adobe Photoshop CS2
Deus EX
World of Warcraft
Valve's Steam
Macromedia's Dreamweaver 8
Qrack 1.90
Guild Wars
Doom3
Duke Nukem 3D

___

My Ubuntu Linux Desktop is much more effective as being a tool for me then Windows has been (I'm not exactly a Windows Noob or a computer noob in general . I've practically swore off Windows with XP and Vista dew to their insecurities . Anything I can do in Windows I can do the equivalent of in Linux (I'm starting to use the command-line MUCH more these days for funzies). I'm not a programmer though I think I am But I chose not to spent hundreds of dollars on a tool when an equivalent tool is 100% free and completely accessible.

Ubuntu's Gnome2 GUI is pretty ugly out of box to me, but customizing the interface is very simple once you learn a few basics. Then if you'd still like a little more pizazz you can install/enable Compiz which adds incredible desktop effects. I know effects and nice looking custom Gnome desktops aren't very useful when it comes to functionality. But not everyone needs or wants Windows just like Not everyone Needs or wants Linux. I plug Linux every time my wife wants me to fix her computer. But its really her OS that is the culprit. Windows to me feels like a toy when I use it, a loosely put together toy which I have to watch which key I press or I might press the magical "BSOD" button. Linux on the other hand offers much more stability from my experience (then and now) and so far every single program I have used has been 100% free. Its a great feeling not being told I have to spend money to do what I want to do.

Another great aspect about Linux when compared to Windows is the computer virus aspect, where Windows is basically considered infected once its connected to the Internet unless you have decent security in place, There's only been one truly successful virus made for Linux, which from my reading was created more for testing then for actual use.

Linux (Ubuntu) as a desktop environment has pushed forwards my curiosity on programming (CodeBlocks,Ogre3D,Basic,C,C++,PHP,PERL,RUBY,RoW,J AVA) then Windows has ever dew to the feeling of security and more focused approach to things.

Windows just doesn't cut the cake for me anymore. a (personally) properly configured Linux box is the way to go for Servers & Desktop use now!

Gamers are still a little S.O.L however When it comes to Linux. From my experience however I've gotten all my games to run with either flawless performance or near flawless performance.

Well try to install anything that's not in the default apt-get repositories for starters.

You gotta take off your "It's a Unix system! I know this!" hat and put yourself in the shoes of Joe Average who's just bought a computer here.

Adding repositories is a snap!


My Linux Box running Gnome2

[golden_boy]

Pretty much every Linux Box has the same capabilities of every Linux Box it depends on the user and the hardware.

This is true. There is only one Linux kernel, and only one GNU userland with the desktops, apps etc. you find in pretty much every Linux distro.

You can install pretty much any Linux program on Ubuntu.

Heck, I think you could even install another distro's package manager, like Gentoo's Portage.

It is really the same thing with different labels. What's different between the "distributions" is

a) the packaging

b) the package manager (the program that installs and updates things, although Ubuntu uses the same as Debian and Fedora uses the same as RedHat, Mandriva (iirc) and Suse)

c) the installer that gets it on the hard disk, this one varies between distros

d) desktop choice, integration of programs and desktop, settings, utilities for a lot of small tasks, and some distros have a "command center" app while others have control applets or whatever.

The core is the same. The software is largely the same, apart from a few critical pieces that have to do with installing, updating and user friendliness.

A Linux distro is Linux + a package manager/installer + varying amounts of user friendliness. What you install during use is the same shit every other Linux user installs.

[Panix]

Linux is for gays. Although if I HAD to make a choice, I'd use Gentoo or Sabayon if I just wanted a full featured desktop.

I'm using Win7 Pro 64-bit now and I'm growing to like it but I do miss being able to turn off the services for port 135 and 445 on my Windows box and running my honeypot on it. I've gotten everything off because the god damn DCOM service.

Honestly, I just don't like Linux. I also like proving that a Windows machine can be just as secure and useful as a machine running Linux. I'm not a fanboy by no means but Linux just seems like that cool thing kids do because they want to 'fight the man' by 'sticking it to Micro$oft'.

This picture sums up this thread:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

FreeBSD > Linux

[Phenom]

Linux is for gays. Although if I HAD to make a choice, I'd use Gentoo or Sabayon if I just wanted a full featured desktop.

I'm using Win7 Pro 64-bit now and I'm growing to like it but I do miss being able to turn off the services for port 135 and 445 on my Windows box and running my honeypot on it. I've gotten everything off because the god damn DCOM service.

Honestly, I just don't like Linux. I also like proving that a Windows machine can be just as secure and useful as a machine running Linux. I'm not a fanboy by no means but Linux just seems like that cool thing kids do because they want to 'fight the man' by 'sticking it to Micro$oft'.

This picture sums up this thread:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

FreeBSD > Linux

I like your picture! haha!

I'm not really against MS Windows (Used it since DOS & Windows 3.1) I just grew tired of the spyware,viruses, crashing, BSOD price etc.. When Linux became more stable for me then Windows (XP) I leaned more towards it and just recently about 8 months ago started using Linux 90% of the time and would Dual-boot into Windows to play Quake.

The only time Linux has freezed up on me that wasn't dew to a P.E.B.K.A.C was when I was trying to install a certain Windows program in Linux using WINE, which I quickly un-installed and replaced with a Linux equivalent. Or when I ran into a mysterious bug while trying to diagnose a Qrack 1.60 SRC issue (Fullscreen got jacked some how).

Windows is still a valuable tool, I just don't need it anymore, Windows programs maybe, but not Windows itself.

I don't speak about Macintosh because I have as much experience on those as a fish has riding a bike, with an exception to number-crunchers or Oregon Trail

If I had it my way I would still be dual-booting Windows/Linux but Windows doesn't play to nice when it comes time to cut the MBR pie so I said F**K it and flipped my Windows HD into a system backup space for my Linux OS... and I'm happy I did.

I find my production level increases on Linux also where as in Windows I would only play games and surf.

To each their own. Windows isn't bad, its just not good for me.

[MH]

I actually quite like both Linux and Windows, and really do believe that there is room for both to exist. This comes on the back of being negatively biased against it for almost a decade, so that's some achievement, and it's all down to recent exposure to Ubuntu.

Despite that I'm going to let my previous comment (that the desktop user experience is roughly at Windows 3.1 level) stand. One thing to remember is that Microsoft have quite extensive experience in the whole usability thing, and in cases where something seems stupid, you only need to scratch the surface a little to see the reason behind it.

To take a classic and often-mocked example: why do you have to click on Start to shut down? Simple reason is that in user testing, when people were asked to shut down their computers, that was where they clicked. So that was when the button went. This would have happened sometime in 1994, if not earlier.

Windows-wise I'm on Windows 7 now which I really like a lot. The previous version of Windows that I was what I'd have to admin was a fanboy of would have been Windows 2000. XP was OK but brought back an awful lot of nastiness from Windows 98, Vista was a total nightmare, and the old DOS-based Windows were just junk (I used NT4 in those days but it wasn't really practical for a lot of stuff - solid as a rock though).

Linux-wise I've no machine at the moment but I've another Ubuntu installation coming up and I'm actually quite looking forward to it.

I do think that Windows is the best platform for development, but that's provided you're developing for Windows and it's all down to the fact that Visual Studio is just so far ahead of the competition that it's not even funny. It's also great for cross-platform development, and I do most RMQ work using Visual C++, only switching over to Code::Blocks for final builds. Building in two different IDEs with 2 different compilers is actually a great discipline to pick up (and an awesome experience) as it makes you a lot more conscious about the code you write, dependencies you might introduce, and assumptions about how things work you might make.

[Baker]

Joe Average expects a computer to be a domestic appliance like a microwave or a refrigerator, and until the day comes when a Linux desktop can be like that to him, it's dead in the water. Ubuntu is making great inroads in that direction, and the reason why is because it's developers/distributors recognise a need for something like it to exist.

I fully agree with this.

Anything "good" has to be something that Joe Average can figure out. Even Ubuntu is a bit tough to deal with when your wireless isn't working.

And how do you change the desktop resolution in Ubuntu? Well, loading up the terminal is not a decent answer.

Still, Ubuntu has made some big in-roads towards user-friendliness. It isn't on par with Windows by any stretch of the imagination, but it also is light years better than past Linux distros.

[Baker]

I do think that Windows is the best platform for development, but that's provided you're developing for Windows and it's all down to the fact that Visual Studio is just so far ahead of the competition that it's not even funny. It's also great for cross-platform development, and I do most RMQ work using Visual C++, only switching over to Code::Blocks for final builds. Building in two different IDEs with 2 different compilers is actually a great discipline to pick up (and an awesome experience) as it makes you a lot more conscious about the code you write, dependencies you might introduce, and assumptions about how things work you might make.

Visual Studio is "better", but the flexibility of Code::Blocks is impressive. I won't claim that gcc /g++ is a better compiler, but it gets the job done ok and is rather portable. And one attractive feature to me is getting the Linux ProQuake build in a graphical IDE.

MH ... any luck on getting Direct 3D 8.1 or later headers to compile with gcc/g++? Just wondering. If there is a way, I *will* find it but if you already have defeated that hurdle I'd rather ask in advance.

[gnounc]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUlAQZB9Ng#t=0m6s

Had to : ) Blame mh

[R00k]

I used to have an Amiga 2000 when all my friends had IBM clones.




Which I thought was funny cause I could be playing a game of "Sid Meier's Civilization" while running a BBS in the background, and my friends were like what's mul-ti-task-ing?