When will Linux be Ready for the desktop? My crazy theory.

[blackbelt_jones]

Okay, I may be talking outta my butt here. Please let me know if you think so, without being a jerk about it. But I think that with the right support, the real arrival of linux on everybody's desktop just might be... :D Debian 4.0!

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

I can see that you're confused, but there are two caveats.

1. The average user will need someone else to install it.

2. Someone will have to write a really good manual.

But think about it. You've got your BASH, and you've got your KDE. You've got 10 disks with nearly all the software you could ever need, and you've got apt-get. I ran Debian 3.0 as a novice a year or so ago, and the main problem that I had was that I couldn't get the soundcard to work-- the sound utilities that I was familiar with need a higher number kernel. Obviously, that problem will not exist with the next stable version.

Really, i think that it all comes down to the manual. There's a glut of linux documentation, and a dearth of good documentation.

[sharth]

You do realize that we will never see debian 4.0 though. And it will be about 10 DVDs in size :-p

[madcompnerd]

Let's face it. Joe Trailer Park cannot install or administrate Linux. He can't do it on BSD, he can't do it on Windows either and he'll be lucky if he can keep a Mac up.
Linux will be ready for the desktop when you see local repair shops for it. That's about the end of it. You have to be able to pay a half educated guy $80 an hour to work on it before it will be "ready for the desktop."

It doesn't matter how many gui tools you make, if you don't understand what an IP is you will never know to check to DHCPCD, or the "automatic network detection" box until you have some clue about what's going on.

I have an extremely low opinion of the average user, because I work with them at work... They're lazy, don't want to learn new things. They expect their computer to work well no matter how much they abuse it. They don't understand why software is *never* covered under warranties, and they insist on calling their computer things like:
"hard drive"
"modem"
"CPU"


Let's just let them stick with Windows.

Now as for the geeks, gamers, and anyone else who knows what's going on; they're welcome to come and use a wonderfully done operating system that functions so so so well :).
As for the rest: Read a book.


Oh before anybody gets offended. I'd like to say, if you are reading this site you are not Joe Trailer Park, and you must have some clue of what's going on.

[saikee]

I thought Linux is ready now.

There are marvellous Live CD out now loading up everything for you without touching the keyboard.

An average user's needs are to go to the Internet, view photographs, do some word processing, dabble a preadsheet, play some games, listen to the music, view DVD and use the mouse. They are all available in Linux now. Newer Linux distros are adventurous in detecting hardware while the stable versions just stick to the older hardware.

Don't think we need to wait for Debian 4 when you got Suse 9, Mandrake 10, Fedora 2, Knoppix 3.4..................

[Dark Ninja]

But think about it. You've got your BASH, and you've got your KDE. You've got 10 disks with nearly all the software you could ever need, and you've got apt-get. I ran Debian 3.0 as a novice a year or so ago, and the main problem that I had was that I couldn't get the soundcard to work-- the sound utilities that I was familiar with need a higher number kernel.
No offense, but I had the same good fortune with Gentoo. Does that mean it's going to be the "Linux of choice" when Linux is "ready." Eh...not really.

And, I for one think Linux is ready right now. ;)

[hlrguy]

Originally posted by madcompnerd
Let's face it. Joe Trailer Park cannot install or administrate Linux.

Trailer park Joe probably doesn't own a computer, but Joe average may like this...available in the US.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/linuxunix/0,39020390,39162425,00.htm
HP is the first major laptop vendor to launch a non-Windows notebook and other vendors are expected to follow in the near future.

Linux is more than ready for the desktop, it is the installs that are not ready for the average person, but now MS's worst nightmare is coming true, OEM with Linux pre-installed. Awesome.

Also read this, and if companies will build it for Apple with 3%, I think they will be hard pressed to ignore the Linux 6%, especially if they can follow someone who defies MS like HP. Think Dell wants to lose 6% of market share to HP, what about Compaq. 6% is HUGE.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/08/02/HNbusinesscase_1.html
...giving Linux a small but respectable 6 percent of the desktop market.

"Linux captured the No. 2 spot as desktop operating system in 2003,"

hlrguy

[JohnT]

Okay, I may be talking outta my butt here. http://www.geocities.com/jtarin47/images/eck13.gif :D

[infiniphunk]

there's always gonna be people trying to argue that linux isn't ready for the desktop. And one reason for that is that many people(many, many people) have gotten very used to using windows, even achieving great profficiency in using it, to the point that they feel they have learned something big and now its just too much to learn something new. I know this sounds crazy but its true. I've talked to numerous guys who are into windows, aknowledge that it sucks even but they refuse to try something new. One guy I spoke with said it will never be possible because M$ will alway make it so that their office suite is incomaptible with open-office.
For many of these guys its like windows is their baby; they've worked long and hard to lock it down in terms of security and bugs(and continue to do so) and now it is just too much for them to make the leap to a different OS. It also amazes me how many of these guys claim they have aleady tried using linux(4 or 5 years ago maybe) and that they just can't see any usability in it. I tell these people that I use it for everything one can do on a desktop; they don't believe me. In fact I'm at the point now where I'm almost sick and tired of trying to convince poeple about linux's usability. Some seem to think that its an OS made of tape, string and cardboard. One guy even admits that its safer to use linux on the internet, but that it will get just as bad as windows once it gets more popular(more frequently attacked by virus writers) I tried to explain open-source to him and how there will never be viruses for linux like for windows; he didn't get it.
And another thing; all these guys I talk to who down't really know anything about linux pronounce it "line-ucks", how many people do I have to send that WAV file to with Linus saying it correctly? Its crazy. The truth is that linux is ready for the desktop NOW!!! We all know this and we all know windows is CRAP compared with linux. Jeez!

But you wanna know what's really sad? Its all these poeple defending microsoft, who keep saying "its not that bad, its not that bad" -Yes it is! Most of these are people who can't afford to actually buy the WinXP CD, and so they use a ripped off version. Yet there they go still defending it. They have never ready there EULA, they are being led foolishly by the nose. Kinda reminds me of the ignorant segment of the middle-class in a certain western nation that insists on supporting a president who believes in bleeding the working class to give the rich a tax break.
I am confident in my use of linux on the desktop, and no amount of FUD is gonna make me think otherwise.
ah, that little rant felt good! now back to work...

[thread_killer]

Originally posted by hlrguy

Also read this, and if companies will build it for Apple with 3%, I think they will be hard pressed to ignore the Linux 6%, especially if they can follow someone who defies MS like HP. Think Dell wants to lose 6% of market share to HP, what about Compaq. 6% is HUGE.

hlrguy

Nitpick alert. Compaq was bought by HP about two years ago. In fact, I'm sitting here now looking at my Compaq NC6000 laptop that has the HP logo right next to the Compaq one.

[hard candy]

This is a guess, but with Longhorn being pushed back on its release date, more folks will be trying Linux in the next 2-3 years. Just because Linux is "new" for them. The WinXP Service pack may excite folks for a couple of months but the "new, newer, newest!" will grow our linux base. Especially with the major mfg's releasing laptops and desktops with linux preinstalled.
By the way, whatever happened to the Trustworthy computing initiative, haven't heard much about it since last winter.

[bosox79]

linux is ready for at leat one desktop at least, mine!:D,
my question is is windows ready for the net connected desktop?, I know that when my friends or family have computer problems, they contact me

[hlrguy]

Originally posted by thread_killer
Nitpick alert. Compaq was bought by HP about two years ago. In fact, I'm sitting here now looking at my Compaq NC6000 laptop that has the HP logo right next to the Compaq one.

Doh, I meant Gateway.

hlrguy

[JohnT]

Originally posted by bosox79
linux is ready for at leat one desktop at least, mine!:D,
I love being in the minority.....I would just as soon keep it that way to. Why cast pearls before swine? :D

[bosox79]

Good point JohnT,

but I would love to see more hardware support directly from OEM's :D

[psi42]

So far it seems like we are defining "The Desktop" as something ms-windows is ready for.

Linux is not ready for the desktop, windows is not ready for the desktop, mac OS is not ready for the desktop. Period, end of story.

Let's face it... can our wonderful computer-illiterate friends manage to start a word processor if we don't put "YOUR WORD PROCESSOR IS HERE, click TWO times, not just ONE, one the little PICTURE" on the desktop? I have realized they don't actually learn how to start programs, they just memorize the places they need to click to "get to my e-mail."

In this context, linux will work in the same fashion. We just have to microconfigure everything and leave it at that.

Such is the desktop.


~psi42

[Sawdusty]

An apprentice Linux monk once asked the Linux master if Linux was ready for the Desktop.

The Linux master shouted "MU" and dissappeared. The apprentice was enlightened.

Dusty

[blackbelt_jones]

Yeah, I guess I was talking out my butt, but I seem to have spurred some thought and conversation-- and I think that, in a way, I was onto something, but I spoke before I'd reached the end of my thought. The guy who said that Linux will be ready for the desk top when there are repair shops for it was thinking along the same lines.

This time, I think I'm talking a little higher up on my anatomy. Linux is absolutely ready for the desktop (whatever that means)... the disadvantages aren't technical, they're cultural. If Debian came preinstalled and preconfigured on everybody's computer, if you could take it to the shop when you couldn't get it to work, if six year old kids were cutting their teeth on it, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I apologize for framing my post in terms of the "is linux ready for the desktop?" question, which is pure FUD. I feel like an *** for falling for that trick. Those of us-- apparently not everybody here, but definitely me-- who wants Linux and open source to continue to grow and to influence the direction of IT don't need to worry about the software-- which is great, and getting better all the time. We need to ask ourselves and each other what we can do to create a more Linux-positive culture.

[madcompnerd]

Originally posted by JohnT
Why cast pearls before swine? :D
Now that's just perfect man, perfect perfect perfect..

[JohnT]

Linux is ready for the desktop when hardware vendors get fully behind it and the desktop can be locked down in a manner thats idiot proof. ;)

[bosox79]

JohnT,

I agree with the first part of your statment, but I am not sure about the 2nd part can you define idiot proof please?:D I know people that ca'nt program a VCR, and on a more serious note, one of the great things about linux is the distro's we can choose from. If a company or group of hackers/coders want to create a push here dummy (PHD) distro they are free to do so

just my .02:)

[EnigmaOne]

Originally posted by madcompnerd
I have an extremely low opinion of the average user, because I work with them at work... They're lazy, don't want to learn new things. They expect their computer to work well no matter how much they abuse it. They don't understand why software is *never* covered under warranties, and they insist on calling their computer things like:
"hard drive"
"modem"
"CPU"

Let's just let them stick with Windows.
I'll give-up an "AMEN!" for that one. ;)

Originally posted by madcompnerd
As for the rest: Read a book.
You're joking, right?
(L)users don't read anything but People magazine and The National Enquirer (probably to keep up with where Bat Boy has been sighted this week).

Linux has been ready for the desktop for years, but I'm with John on this one...when the 'majority' spends most of their time drooling all over themselves in front of prime-time sit-coms, count me as the minority of minorities. :D

[JohnT]

Originally posted by bosox79
JohnT,

I agree with the first part of your statment, but I am not sure about the 2nd part can you define idiot proof please?:D :) All the majority needs.....a Browser, E-mail client, multi-media player and an Office Suite. Don't even give them a "run" box. I just spent a little over an hour this a.m. walking someone through a font install in Win. It started with.."Open Windows Explorer". The response was..."I don't have a Windows Explorer".
http://www.geocities.com/jtarin47/images/3-jawdrop.gif

[twilli227]

Linux at some point could be good enough to run home PCs.

In January Taylor poached one of IBM's former Linux technical leaders, William Hilf, to test 20 versions of open-source software in Redmond. Hilf two years ago was in front of audiences touting the cost effectiveness, reliability and performance of open-source software. Nowadays he's working the Microsoft spiel: "There's no set architecture in Linux. All roads lead to madness," and "the devil is in the details. This stuff is not easy to run."

I guess I will have to wait awhile to use linux on my desktop. It's not good enough for my comp. and it's not easy. Well back to windows for me.

Full story:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/fo/20040729/bs_fo/e480060b0a468422ebda77f77d4c9b8a

[EnigmaOne]

::: shrug :::

Money erases truth, and any sense of ethics, if "some folks" are any indicator of the corporate state of affairs in this country. :rolleyes:

[bosox79]

Originally posted by JohnT
All the majority needs.....a Browser, E-mail client, multi-media player and an Office Suite. Don't even give them a "run" box. I just spent a little over an hour this a.m. walking someone through a font install in Win. It started with.."Open Windows Explorer". The response was..."I don't have a Windows Explorer".
http://www.geocities.com/jtarin47/images/3-jawdrop.gif

yeah i have been there myself, so I guess the only way to make the box idiot proof would be for a computer Guru/Geek to have remote access to a person's linux box via SSH;) only problem with that is you may open up the box to remote exploites, I guess the only real option is to be in front of the box yourself, becuse as you know explaining things over the phone or via e-mail can be a pain

[madcompnerd]

Originally posted by EnigmaOne
(L)users don't read anything but People magazine and The National Enquirer (probably to keep up with where Bat Boy has been sighted this week).

I'll give an amen for that one, I can't stand people who fund things like National Enquirer. It's like saying "oh I love the stars, I want to know all their personal secrets and to do so I will fund men who harrass them at every turn. But tomorrow I will say how much I hate those people who harrass the stars!"

[JohnT]

Originally posted by twilli227
I guess I will have to wait awhile to use linux on my desktop. It's not good enough for my comp. and it's not easy. Well back to windows for me. http://www.geocities.com/jtarin47/images/comp26.gif

[blackbelt_jones]

Whoever said "supported by hardware manufacturers" hit the nail right on the head. I consider myself to be your "average user"-- except that I was so taken with theI]idea[/I] of Linux, the politics of open source, and so seized by microphobia, that I refused to give up.

I started out using Debian, and I think that if only my soundcard had worked-- which I've been lead to believe that it would have done it had been preinstalled-- I'd be using it still, instead of the dearly departed Red Hat 9. It was not only cheaper than Windows, it was cooler, and obviously faster and more stable.

With KDE, there's no real reason why you couldn't point and click till you died of old age, and I bet most average users would get as big a kick out of the multiple desktop choices as I did. And the biggest pain of all with Linux-- installing applications, is usually effortless with apt-get and those seven wonderful disks-- all that free software! What's for the average user not to love? It's always Christmas when you start up dselect!

If my computer had come with Debian pre-installed, configured and working just fine, in some ways, it wouldn't have been as much fun-- but mostly, it would have been much more fun. Obviously, I wouldn't have put the system through it's fullest and best possible use right away, but I don't see where I'd have had a problem running it.[

[JohnT]

I started out using Debian, and I think that if only my soundcard had worked-- which I've been lead to believe that it would have done it had been preinstalled-- I'd be using it still, instead of the dearly departed Red Hat 9. It was not only cheaper than Windows, it was cooler, and obviously faster and more stable. Thats the number one reason I think that users leave Linux. Discouraged by the lack of hardware support. The mindset is formed with Windows. Buy a computer>Take it home>Run it. Install new hardware>install drivers>Run it. Now with Linux it takes a little more thought not to put the cart before the horse. Hardware selection comes into play. Now the user has to learn about the innards of that box he wants to buy to make sure support for his hardware selections are there......in the kernel, in the software, in the distro.......Before the purchase!! Now this is where the clash come into play.....we have to have the latest, greatest and fastest computer we can afford...nothing else will do, but wait Linux developers are behind in driver development, so the path of least resistance is taken for something that will run on that hardware.

[bosox79]

That was me:)

Better Hardware support benifits eveyone:cool:Whoever said "supported by hardware manufacturers" hit the nail right on the head.

[hlrguy]

Found an interesting read.
http://hardware.silicon.com/desktops/0,39024645,39118341,00.htm

After that, we found that no man would say that he couldn't use his PC now that everyone knew a woman could do it."

"Private screensavers and computer magazine CDs might not work in Linux, but on the other hand the MyDoom virus doesn't either," Bräuner told the conference.

hlrguy

[EnigmaOne]

Another article...oddly pertinent to the OP:
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/07/30/1419205

[hlrguy]

My open letter to HP. Will it make a difference, I doubt it, but just maybe it will be read by a non Pro Windows tech.

hlrguy

Hello, I was recently pleasantly surprised at your offering a Linux pre-installed laptop soon. That brings your computers back into hardware that I will consider purchasing, at least that laptop anyway. In the past, for both bussiness and personal (about 32 users converted to Linux so far), and my general rule of thumb is, do not purchase a Dell, Compaq/HP or Gateway if you want Linux usability in the future. I review hardware specs and compare to linux tested sites before a purchase is made. (again, both bussiness and personal, because I refuse to support Windows anymore) for the simple reason that when a wholesale computer is purchased, it is often very inconvenient to have to go purchase a sound card or video card because the onboard has no Linux support. Given your Linux preloaded, I have a suggestion that may help you to gain even more market share at what is basically a MINIMUM of effort on your part. Most Linux users don't need to have Linux preloaded, but their purchases (now currently 6% of the worlds desktops run Linux) are swayed by how compatible Linux would be on their systems. If you were to simply create an indication of Linux compatibility on your computers (especially laptops) that simply meant that 'The hardware supplied in this computer is compatible with Linux', you would see a growth in people like myself who would be interested in purchasing computers without playing Russian Roulette and hoping that distro XYZ will work with your bluetooth card, etc. For the cost of an engineers afternoon with Knoppix, Suse, Mandrake or Fedora, etc, you would have the edge over the others when Linux users decide what computers they want to purchase.

Regards, and thanks for the consideration. Also, let me know when the nx5000 laptop is available for purchase in the US. I went to the web site, but nowehere did I see how to purchase it without XP.

[ev8r]

Basically the quandry is this: How do you infiltrate a market already well saturated with a dominant product.

do you

a) emulate the dominant product and hope by offering it at a substantional lower price it will attract a dominant share?

This doesnt quite work as your backrupting the superiority of your product by emulating an inferior one, and if you will notice m$ has a habit of REWRITING standard to suit its own purpose, in effect making m$ products compatable only with.....m$ products. And of course close sourcing to boot !

or

b) wait for microsoft to implode and then pick up the pieces

Thats not really going to happen either as King Bill has $$$$$ and propaganda on his side, not to mention a butt load of games u can play on windows. ( and as a side note: I wish someone would conduct a study with the premise of "If linux was easier to download porn with would you switch from windows") I am confident the results would be most surprising....after all porn built the freakin internet....
Sadly, this situation mimics politics, you dont have to be a superior candidate to win, you just have to have superior PR and a buttload of cash.

OR

c) teach our children, and the younger generation that sometimes the easiest solution is not the best, and to actually look at things for what they are.


I like this one...my 6 year old likes it too :)

[EnigmaOne]

Originally posted by ev8r
OR

c) teach our children, and the younger generation that sometimes the easiest solution is not the best, and to actually look at things for what they are.


I like this one...my 6 year old likes it too :)

Good parent! :D

Our 6 year old still likes RH7.3/KDE.
What flavor does your 6 year-old like?

[bsm2001]

My 10 &12 yo dont like it but the only comp's they can use are mom's & dad's and both have MDK10 on them. :)

[madcompnerd]

Do we really want to go to google.com/linux to search for porn? I don't.
That's an idea. Somebody suggest this to google, google.com/porn!


But yea, the guys who see their computer as a gateway to porn can stick with Windows.

[ev8r]

Originally posted by EnigmaOne
Good parent! :D

Our 6 year old still likes RH7.3/KDE.
What flavor does your 6 year-old like?


So far he likes any distro that has Tux Racer on it :)

When he gets his spelling down im teaching him perl hehe :D

[cybertron]

Sorry if I repeat something said before. I've read most of the thread but I got lazy and skipped to the end:)

I think Linux will be ready for the mainstream when someone makes it as idiot-proof as OS X, which is hard for me to admit because I hate OS X:rolleyes: The problem is that then it will have all of the flaws (in my mind anyway) that OS X does. However, the important thing is that there is a perception out there that OS X is the simplest OS (which is sometimes true, sometimes not, as always), and when someone can make Linux that simple a lot of people are going to flock to it. In a way Apple has done that to BSD, except that it still only runs on Mac hardware which is a big reason more people won't be adopting it.

Yes, I know that in some ways Linux is already easier than either Windows or Mac OS, but the areas that it's not are just too much for most users that I deal with on a day to day basis (like the ones who can't figure out whether they're using XP or 98).

Also, the problem I see with this is that to make Linux that simple you have to remove a lot of the functionality and flexibility (like OS X did), which eliminates a lot of the advantages for the more advanced users. I guess the problem is is that a single OS won't satisfy everyone, so there Linux wins again because there are like a zillion distros to satisfy almost anyone.

Anyway, that's my 2+ cents;)

[paj12]

I hope Linux will hurry up and get ready for the desktop. Quite frankly, I'm tired of having my desktop running an OS which is not ready for it. :p

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Being someone who works with Joe Six pack day in and day out with their computers, I can honestly say that there's not an OS out there that's ready for the desktop, period. I think "Every OS Sucks" from deadtrolls.com sums it up best in that respect.

How many of you have tried to explain to grandma how to attach a file to an email, or burn a CD, or scan a picture over the phone? GOOD LUCK. And that's just on the usage side-- wait until you have to work with your run of the mill computer user when they have a computer problem: if that doesn't get you hating computers, I don't know what will.

I've always been an advocate for making computers "stoopid easy". Want a computer that burns CDs? Buy a CD burning computer. Want to check email? Buy an email computer. Web surfing? That's a web surfing computer for you. What the average user needs is one icon on a touch screen, that says EMAIL, or SCAN A PICTURE, or FORWARD DUMB EMAILS TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T CARE. They can bonk their already bobbling head on that touch screen, thus activating that function.

In the case of scanning a picture, it will then say, "Put the picture on the little dooley there and shut the lid". Then, 2 minutes later, it will say, "OK, it's scanned... remember to wipe the drool off of your lip!", and then the computer ejects a picture disk with that one picture.

...Then, they can take that picture disk to the Email Computer, and bonk their head on that screen. It will say "Put the thing that the picture computer gave you into the little dooley slot there. " Then, after reading the disk, it pops the picture up on the screen, and it says, "Forward this picture to everyone in your contact list? ", where the user is presented with two big buttons on screen-- a green YES, and a red NO button, both of which will actually both forward and not forward the picture, because we know the user doesn't really know whether they wanted to or not. Then, the message "OK, it's sent... remember to wipe the drool from your lip!" is displayed, and a peppermint is ejected from the computer's treat slot.

I really don't mean to be so cynical about this, but the average home user probably doesn't need a computer to begin with. Once they get them, they don't know how to use them, and they don't care to know-- all they want to do is get their pointless Fwd:Fwd:Fw emails and look at things on the web. If they bought a computer based off of that criteria, that could do nothing else, then that would be ideal. They should be able to go into a store and say "I want a computer that does email", and get a computer that does that, and ONLY that. That way, they never have to worry about anything else.

What most pundits on either side of the fence rarely realize is that the computer they buy is not a "Windows" PC, or a "Linux" PC, or even a "MacOS" PC. To them, it's a computer, made by HP, Dell, Compaq, or Gateway, or whoever, and the interface was made by that manufacturer. Have you ever heard people arguing about how their HP Windows computer is better than such-and-so's Dell Windows computer?

Regardless of what OS is on there, people just want their computer to be a toaster, or a microwave. When you hit this or that button, it should do just this, or just that, and that's all they should ever expect for it to be able to do.

[cybertron]

Originally posted by Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
Being someone who works with Joe Six pack day in and day out with their computers, I can honestly say that there's not an OS out there that's ready for the desktop, period. I think "Every OS Sucks" from deadtrolls.com sums it up best in that respect.

How many of you have tried to explain to grandma how to attach a file to an email, or burn a CD, or scan a picture over the phone? GOOD LUCK. And that's just on the usage side-- wait until you have to work with your run of the mill computer user when they have a computer problem: if that doesn't get you hating computers, I don't know what will.

I've always been an advocate for making computers "stoopid easy". Want a computer that burns CDs? Buy a CD burning computer. Want to check email? Buy an email computer. Web surfing? That's a web surfing computer for you. What the average user needs is one icon on a touch screen, that says EMAIL, or SCAN A PICTURE, or FORWARD DUMB EMAILS TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T CARE. They can bonk their already bobbling head on that touch screen, thus activating that function.

In the case of scanning a picture, it will then say, "Put the picture on the little dooley there and shut the lid". Then, 2 minutes later, it will say, "OK, it's scanned... remember to wipe the drool off of your lip!", and then the computer ejects a picture disk with that one picture.

...Then, they can take that picture disk to the Email Computer, and bonk their head on that screen. It will say "Put the thing that the picture computer gave you into the little dooley slot there. " Then, after reading the disk, it pops the picture up on the screen, and it says, "Forward this picture to everyone in your contact list? ", where the user is presented with two big buttons on screen-- a green YES, and a red NO button, both of which will actually both forward and not forward the picture, because we know the user doesn't really know whether they wanted to or not. Then, the message "OK, it's sent... remember to wipe the drool from your lip!" is displayed, and a peppermint is ejected from the computer's treat slot.

I really don't mean to be so cynical about this, but the average home user probably doesn't need a computer to begin with. Once they get them, they don't know how to use them, and they don't care to know-- all they want to do is get their pointless Fwd:Fwd:Fw emails and look at things on the web. If they bought a computer based off of that criteria, that could do nothing else, then that would be ideal. They should be able to go into a store and say "I want a computer that does email", and get a computer that does that, and ONLY that. That way, they never have to worry about anything else.

What most pundits on either side of the fence rarely realize is that the computer they buy is not a "Windows" PC, or a "Linux" PC, or even a "MacOS" PC. To them, it's a computer, made by HP, Dell, Compaq, or Gateway, or whoever, and the interface was made by that manufacturer. Have you ever heard people arguing about how their HP Windows computer is better than such-and-so's Dell Windows computer?

Regardless of what OS is on there, people just want their computer to be a toaster, or a microwave. When you hit this or that button, it should do just this, or just that, and that's all they should ever expect for it to be able to do.

It's scary, but you're so right:)

[JohnT]

Alex , I never laughed so hard after reading your post.http://www.geocities.com/jtarin47/images/21.gif
I especially like the "They can bonk their already bobbling head on that touch screen, thus activating that function. ". That set the tone. :p

[XiaoKJ]

Of course -- Linux is ready now, and more ready than Windows. I don't think Linux is not when Windows is -- Linux is no longer just BASH!!!

Linux user base will increase no matter what, cos I am helping propagate it :D

Ohh -- these days its really starting to get hot, and if you can install windows, there is not much reason you can't do linux except partitioning, which many can't do even in windows.

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Originally posted by JohnT
Alex , I never laughed so hard after reading your post.http://www.geocities.com/jtarin47/images/21.gif
I especially like the "They can bonk their already bobbling head on that touch screen, thus activating that function. ". That set the tone. :p

Hah! I appreciate the feedback.

Sadly, though, I'm speaking from experience. Just last week, I had a guy tell me his "double click" on the mouse wouldn't work. I'd tell him to double click on My Computer, or on the Recycle Bin, and he'd say, "No, I can't do that.... I have to right click on it, and then choose Open... I told you, my double click isn't working!"

After a couple of go arounds, humoring him, letting him right click, and then choose Open, it started to wear on me that he would always say, "No! I have to right click, then..." every time I'd say "double click" on an icon. So, I pressed him a little more on how exactly his double click was broken.

It turns out that some time ago, somebody did an OS reinstall on his box. However, they failed to realize that he had some kind of peripheral mouse with one of those thumb-buttons on it. Apparently, that button was programmed for a double click-- he never knew that you could double click by literally clicking the left mouse button twice! :eek: This man had been going on for a year now completely unable to double click, because his "double click button" was not working! Poor guy. Just to help him out, even though my company didn't support that mouse with our hardware, I went and installed the mouse driver, and reactivated his double click button. He acted like I just revived his first born child or something.

It's true-life stories like these that make me feel like the only "click" one should ever hear is the sound of a user's teeth chattering as they bonk their head on that SEND EMAIL TO MY FRIENDS button on their email computer I illustrated earlier-- they absolutely don't want to think!

[blackbelt_jones]

Since I started this thread, I have tried the new "Debian Installer" CD, and i think it's a great leap forward, a reasonably easy install, which is going to put Debian within the reach of many more prople-- and when ordinary people learn how tio run apt-get , the era of desktop linux will have arrived. At my house, it's here already.

[fatTrav]

Originally posted by Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
...and a peppermint is ejected from the computer's treat slot.

yep, that sums it up about right.

[soulestream]

this is gonna tick some folks off. now that, that is said. the problem is in the first post. all you need is someone else to install it. "joe trailer park loser" or whatever you call people only need three things.

1. a preloaded system. most people can't install windows, why should they have to install linux?

2. everyone says hardware drivers if 1 = true, then 2 is not a real problem.

3. there word processor, email,internet access, and games on there desktop.

There are companies that do this for people. Redhat and Suse are probaly the biggest names in linux, they are trying to get the desktop pushed into the market, Like with HPs new laptop, this is when the problem starts. Those companies are then turned on by the very community they came from. this whole forum is filled with anti corporate remarks about the companies that are doing something to promote linux. I can't remember the last time i saw a 2 milliion dollar commercial about the benefits of debian. the manufacturers say try linux, we have linux try ours. before i started learning *nix, i would download a copy of mandrake or something and i couldn't figure something out, i would go to a forum and read drop mandrake, slack works better, or dont use slack cause aliens will eat your children. a community is just that, if none of your neighbors can agree on anything and often, not always, beliitle those trying to learn(even if they don't mean it) it is hard for that community to grow. Linux will be ready for the desktop when 90% of the versions disappear. thats sad i like alot of them, but thats the truth. the abundance of OS's has helped linux grow, but in the end it will kill it. my hope is that Redhat, suse, hell even debian can stand up and take over to fight MS$. United we stand.


soule

PS 99% of posters on THIS forum are helpful and well behaved. i know i ask a lot of questions

[dragaal]

Heres my 2 cents, I think linux is ready for the desktop, but as some of you have said, it needs simple installers for the idiots, but this is the way I see it. Its not hard to install a game in linux, like for instance a native game such as Quake 3, install the latest binary for Quake 3, go on your quake 3 cd, copy the pk3's you're done, then you just create a shortcut to the command or just type quake3 on your command line, its not tough, but for a idiot its impossible.

I know the computer world will never be this way, but wouldn't this be nice ;), just keep everything the way it is, so the morons are out of the computer world, and either have to learn, or depend on other people, they already do so it doesn't matter. And it would do alot more for our future, like our kids and stuff, they would turn out to be very creative on a computer and make our work look like nothing, it would be amazing for the future, but of course, the morons yell the loudest so they are heard

[ensane]

Within the last year I completely went over to LINUX myself. Though I have had 3 classes now teaching me the jist of things. I also have other classes (PERL) that are entirely taught in a linux based computer lab.

Its gotten to the point that everything I need is on LINUX. The thought of going back to windows makes me cringe. There is a question of technologies that worked on windows that don't really work all that well on linux. These are simple luxuries of a computer that I have learned to either do without, or do with the less functionable.

I use SUSE 9.0... and it is just as friendly as Windows with the install. Most software to be productive on my computer are included with YAST install. The YAST RPM manager is almost flawless. The only problem I would forsee uneducated lazy users having problems with is when there are system conflicts or missing libraries.

I think now is the time to start getting linux as the main dekstop OS. Lets start with the smarter people like myself. I know many smart people who would probably learn to love linux, they are just afraid of making the change. WHen someone gets used to something, and they know where things are at, its hard to convince them to switch to something different, even if it means having something better.

Games are a big issue though. A lot of people simply just use computers for games. In my opinion computers should be used as a tool though. For keeping track of money, running a business, writing papers, reading up on the web, managing music and photos, designing art and making music. If you want to play games, buy a gaming system, they are about to get even more advance anyway.. and they rarely crash...

All in all, i think linux is ready for the Desktop, and thats why Billy is freaking out. He should continue to invest his money in other aspects of technology, because people are starting to wake up about how dumb his windows concept really is. What linux really needs is a marketing department that was as aggressive as windows when it started to merge in the market. Except this time the marketing would benefit the world as a whole, and not just a money grubbing corporation.

[soulestream]

Heres my 2 cents, I think linux is ready for the desktop, but as some of you have said, it needs simple installers for the idiots, but this is the way I see it. Its not hard to install a game in linux, like for instance a native game such as Quake 3, install the latest binary for Quake 3, go on your quake 3 cd, copy the pk3's you're done, then you just create a shortcut to the command or just type quake3 on your command line, its not tough, but for a idiot its impossible.


my point. calling someone an idiot for not knowing how to do this is, well idiotic. my sister in law is a brain surgeon, she doesn't think im a idiot cause im not a brain surgeon.


soule

[Chess007]

"When will Linux be Ready for the desktop?"

Hardware support is an issue. I remember following all the guides, following suggestions from people here, and still nix would not recognise my digital camera, and/or let me get the pictures off of it. (I'm not mindless joe user. I've tought myself html, hex editing ect. )

Gaming is also an issue. As in playing Windows games on it (sadly most new games don't have linux versions some do but not most) .

Sidenote: Why aren't there more games developed for linux? I'm not talking little games like cards , I mean 3d shooters, quest games ect. If the open source movement can built an os, games shouldn't be that much of a challenge. :)

Wheter or not linux is ready for the desktop really depends on the user(s) of said desktop. The first time I ran nix was knoppix and I had no problem getting online and doing what I wanted to do with it. I believe linux would be less frustrating to a new user -unless the user was a gamer- because of its stability.

Also, spyware would be a non issue. :)

[leonpmu]

It is ready, final. In the form of MDK 10, Suse 9.1 etc, etc.

I have moved users who only know how to "click this icon for the internet users, to using Linux on their office desktop and Loving it!

One of the users asked me to put it on their home computer, so that his family can learn to do what he is doing!!

Sorry, but it is there.

Linux is not a clone of Windows, and it never will be. I have found that in the systems like KDE that have taken the best bits of all the systems and put it together, now MS has been stealing their ideas and putting them in XP as an quote "innovative feature".

Linux is on the desktop. Final.

[cybertron]

Originally posted by Chess007
Sidenote: Why aren't there more games developed for linux? I'm not talking little games like cards , I mean 3d shooters, quest games ect. If the open source movement can built an os, games shouldn't be that much of a challenge. :)

There was a thread on this back a while and I think some people got together to try, but there was a distinct lack of artists for it.:)

[GlennaclawZ]

I really dont understand how the points you made give debian an advantage over any of the other distros expecially the ones that start out more user developed at installation such as mandrake, red-hat, and suse.
And not to mention Lindows.
Seeing how the average computer user/ windows user has no knowledge of how thier OS works because windows has not taught them anything but to be lazy I believe that those 4 distros are by far the closes to everyone's desktop becuase they require far less knowledge about computers to use.

-GlennaclawZ

[happybunny]

I often go back and forth on the readyness of linux on the desktop...

here's what happened...

i was monkeying with my hdparm'eters (see other thread about it trashing my drive) which had Slackware 10 on it...now it has nothing! Word to the wise....don't monkey with hdparm!!

So, i took another box i had that had no similar hardware...one was AMD, nvidia, dvd cdburner and the other a compaq small form factor with default hardware.

I took a new harddrive and a new version of Ghost and made a disk to disk image.

So after 20 minutes, I took the newly imaged harddrive and put it in the broke machine...while i was at it, i slide in a WinTV card (yes, WinTV) 'cause, well, why not.

On bootup it went through a hardware reconfig ---removed old, installed new----and all went fine.

Well, here we are.....i am up and running, watching TV, listening to MP3s, surfing the web.

So, is linux ready for the desktop?

An un-abashed yes! Even if you need to move from desktop to desktop on different hardware.

In the windows world, I would have needed bill gates permission himself to do so, and some would say the letter of the EULA says you can't move OS from one box to another.

[madcompnerd]

And I've spent half my weekend trying to image one drive onto a newer larger drive, Windows 2000.
Windows keeps bootin up with issues..

We're trying dd for the image now, instead of norton Ghost or WD's utility.
I doubt this will work, I think Windows is just this dependant.

[GigaShadow]

Having read all four pages of this thread (and had two cups of Joe...), the primary image that I get is one of "frustration". I can empathize with Alex with regards to the often unbelievable actions of Users (as I believe most of us can), and their often unobtainable expectations. However, the question looms large as to why the Linux population (yes, you know who you are!!! :D ) is so concerned with winbloz Users? IMHO, the expansion of Linux usage is driven by economic pressures that are beyond our control...I recommend Linux (in any flavour) to anyone who will listen, but this will not change the winbloz monopoly....and I do not and cannot worry about this.

I use LInux because I have a fascination with things "new", because it is "interesting" and because I can. Winbloz Users are free to continue to do so and I shall not concern myself with their un-ending lamintations regarding the OS and their problems with it....they do not care to change and that is their issue, not mine.
:)

[LAT]

It was frustration that caused me to move from ms to linux. Frustration with all the crap (viruses, spyware, etc) and propriatory licensing.

I have this still snapshot in my mind of an outside tech we had brought into my workplace. We must have been having licensing issues at the time because this photo is when he told us that there was a free OS out there called linux. We continued on with our ms solution, but obviously, I didn't forget.

Last year I finally DID get fed up and installed Debian to my home computer. It was a bear, but I did it (mucho thanks to you all!). I have learned more in this year than 20yrs with ms. I love the choice (of course choice means responsibility) and my growing respect for the open source community and it's future.

Is linux ready for the typical users desktop? Well, IMHO, yes with some caution.
I have a spare computer at work setup with Debian (KDE). One of our sales reps spilled water on her laptop (argh). For 2 weeks she used the spare. Showed her 2-3 icons and she was off and running. Lesson1: As others have stated, preinstalled and configured is a good thing.
Workplace: Boss asks "What do you do at home?", I reply "I run linux so I don't have these problems." "Why can't we do this linux thing?" "Well, I'm the only one here that knows anything about linux and that ain't much. You'd have to pay more than you'd like to get someone in here that knows what they're doing". Lesson2: Support in the workplace or at home is an issue (give me a break...can't say I'll be there forever as cheap labor!).
Games. Though my boy is not suffering by any means, it is his source for the battle cry "linux sucks". Sigh. This will take some work. In the meantime, my hope is that we will get some more people interest/motivated in this aspect.

I apologize for the long post. Just wanted to add my 2 cents.

lat

[bufferman]

To be honest, linux will only be ready for the desktop and gain a significant chunk of desktop market share when it natively starts supporting any and all windows programs.. meaning u download the exe file like u do in windows and double click to install without wine or anything in between..

[x0054]

I think linux is good to go on most desktops. The only true thing that would stop it is HW support. That is by far the only big thing that linux really sucks at. However it is not it's fault, if the company that produces HW chooses not to make linux drivers for it, nor to release any specifications for the hardware, what are we to do.

To truly become a viable desktop alternative here are few things that linux community needs to do.

1. Settle on ONE distribution. Yeah, true, that goose completely against everything linux stands for at the moment. But what I mean is to get a base distro that will have ONE package format, ONE kernel, and ONE universal file system layout. (and we really need to cleanup the file system, many things have changed since the days of old) The ONE Base system will alow programmers to compile only one version of there program and have it work on all the systems. Different flavors of linux, such as server linux or desktop linux or laptop linux could be grown from that. Debian (I personally use MEPIS, based on it) seems to me as the way to go.

2. The base system would be a shell, decent set of libs and the kernel, oh yeah and a organized and easy to use configuration/package system (UI independent). By UI independent I mean that we should still relay on text files to store configurations, but we can use an XML style to do so and have an interpreter program, both shell and X, to work with these files. This will be kind of same as the config programs for the kernel. For instance an option might look like this:
<var name="ACPI" value="1" type="checkbox" help="this is acpi..... bla">
The system configuration program would read in the config file and without needing to know what the ACPI variable is it will know to draw a check box with "ACPI" next to it, check the box, and display the help message the user is looking for help. This should be slowly adopted to all programs, so instead of creating his/her own configuration screen a developer, of say text editing program like gedit, could simply send a comment to the config interpreter with that location of a needed config file, and the interpreter will do the rest. If this is done through out the system, and older programs are adopted to use this too, linux would become the most userfriendly OS. Much more so then windows.

3. Hardware support: Installing linux on a laptop is a pain. I only buy Panasonic laptops, as in these days of cheep quality and no support they remain as the only reliable laptops that I can actually lag around without 30 layers of padding protecting it. An linux support, on CF-73 for instence, is really bad. It took me 3 months to configure my WLAN card, and now my ACPI sleep3 hangs. So ACPI and HW support in general have some ways to go. But to solve this we might create a system specific config files. So for instance someone who is smarter then I am sets up and configures his CF-73 to work as it should. Now that person can run a utility, non existent at the moment, that would figure out what kernel configs and other general configs he has used. Then it would write them to a file. Now I can go and get that file, read it, or just run it on my laptop and providing that we both have same base system he file would inform my system about all the drivers it needs to download and install and all the changes that the system needs to make to th kernel to make the leptop reform flawlessly. For instance a HW Manufacturer such as HP can sell windows laptops but put a Linux logo on a box and a Config CD inside. So that then a user buys this laptop, they can install linux on it and then run the linux config file that will fine tune linux to the HW specifications. This will let a lot of people try linux without being discouraged by the hard first steps of getting simple things like sound to work.

All of the suggestion above are hypothetical and are probably not as thought through as they should be. But just few thing that personally would like to see.

- Bogdan

[j79zlr]

Minus hardware support, what you just described is FreeBSD. Heirarchy is my main complaint with Linux. Decide whether you are going to use a SysV [init.d] or UNIX [rc.d] startup scripts. All base system packages use /etc /bin /sbin; user packages use /usr/local; X apps use /usr/X11R6, so simple, why isn't it done [outside of BSD].

[jot-87]

Confusion concerning all the distros, Bad hardware support and the rumour that Linux is advanced are the three main problems I think.

Many of my friends seem to think that I can hack into Pentagon just because I use Linux, while all I use it for is surf on the net...

This is what made me interested in Linux:
- It was free, which really facinated me.
- The rumour said that it was advanced, and I liked the idea of people thinking I was using an advanced OS. This scares away the average user though.

This is what scared me:
- The VAAAST amout of distros.
- The console icon :)

I think that the rumour that "Linux is advanced" needs to be changed, because quite frankly, it's not true. Linux can be advanced, but it can also be very simple. IMO a SuSE installation is much simpler than a WinXP installation, while a Debian installation can be pretty demanding compared to WinXP.

IMO, SuSE is an excellent desktop, much batter and simpler than WinXP. More elegant as well.

[infiniphunk]

What exaclty do you mean when you say advanced? I think some people are going to challenge you on this notion when you sayI think that the rumour that "Linux is advanced" needs to be changed, because quite frankly, it's not true.
In a sense, linux is more advanced than many of the other OS's in its ability to be customized and configured. There are some GNU/linux distros out there that you can install on your desktop and everything is ready to go, icons, screensavers, backgrounds....
Some other distros', on the other hand, you have to do EVERYTHING, which demands an advanced degree of linux knowledge in order for things to work properly. And by virtue that the users of some distros have advanced knowledge of the system they are setting up, that makes their distro "more advanced" than some others.
For example, right now, I am slowly learning the ins and outs of Debian, and am confident that I can learn to be an expert at it. I tried to set up gentoo once, but at the time my linux know-how was just not advanced enough, so I settled for mepis. This was after I had used Mandrake for a while, which is IMHO more geared to less advanced linux users. I installed it no problem before I even understood what root was.
The beauty of it now is almost anyone with a new computer can install some version of linux. As long as there's a willingness to read and try to understand the process, even someone who never has used a computer before can quickly learn to find applications through menus, start games, email, chat, internet, letter-writing...
But then again, one could argue that something is so advanced because of its simplicity....
:)

[GlennaclawZ]

I would have to agree with most of you when you say that linux is good to go for most desktops now.
Seeing that Linux is a polymorphic OS (having more than one distro) that controls the amount of "Linux know-how" as you all call it anyone could you it.
My point is, the question at hand really isn't if Linux is ready for the desktop, its are people ready for Linux.
Many people are scared (for lack of better word) of linux. They think, 1: Sense all the hackers use it it must be bad and you have to know alot to use it, and 2: seeing as it was developed mainly in '96 it is underdeveloped and "not nearly as secure as windows"
My answers for these questions are as follows:
1: Just because quite a bit of hackers use linux does not mean its bad, I believe that it is used by hackers because of its versatility and the fact that it can be morphed to fit the needs for each user it has.
2: Linux is just as developed at Windows XP or OSX because of the fact that, you don't have to be F-16 qualified to develop anything for Linux.
You don't have to take some test to work for the Linux community, therefore Linux products and programs are developed daily. Not one project at a time, millions at a time. This increases the production level for Linux Programs.
And thats my little rant about if linux is ready for the desktop.

[jot-87]

What exaclty do you mean when you say advanced? I think some people are going to challenge you on this notion [...]

True, advanced it the wrong word, complicated is better. Please excuse my bad english vocabulary.

From my personal experience, many people seem to think that you need to be an expert at computers before you can use Linux. Sometimes I hear stuff like
"How do you change the IP in Windows XP?"
"Ask Josef, he knows Linux"

People don't seem to get that it's just as easy to click on the K-menu button as to click on the "Start" button.

[root.veg]

ingen orsak, jot-87, din engelska är finfin! Jag förståde... egentligen pratar alla svenskarna mycket bra engelska! Eller hur?

...och självklart är jag inte svensk... en gång hade jag en svenska flickvän!

back to English...

Well I understood what was meant. There is a continuing image that Linux (or any other less well-known OS) has got to be too advanced/complicated, and must be horribly difficult. Well, it may be difficult, but no more than anything else I believe.

The worst thing (I find) is when people complain about not being able to do something with Linux, and then go back to Windows, when in fact they have just as many problems with Windows, it's just it's more familiar to them.

Sometimes people will stick with what they know, and refuse to see the wasted time, money and effort. But that's their problem. Except if it's family, and then I get the "can you come and fix Windows ME again?" :-)

[80Spider]

I have been using Linux since Caldera's distro. I am now using Mandrake 9.1. I have hoped I could switch over to it as my primary workstation but I don't see it happening for me anytime soon. My main problems are trying to find decent software and problems with installation of software. I spend more time trying to make Linux work than I do getting work done. It gets a bit frustrating. I bought a big thick Linux Bible but it is
very time consuming and not easy to find stuff in. I go to forums with what I think are legitimate questions and lets just say I am not always made to feel very welcome with my noobie questions by certain people. Luckily those type are the minority.
I plug my Linux HD in and use it till I get good and frustated and then I go back to Windows because everything works and I can spend my time more productively. I haven't had many problems with Windows. I just don't like some of Microsoft's business practices. By the way, does anyone know of a decent Bookkeeping program similar to Quickbooks for Linux? I am trying one out by a company called Quasar but I'm not sure that I like it yet. Just my two cents........

Dave

[jot-87]

I used to use Mandrake 9.1 as well but I too found that it was hard to find and install software. If you have the possibility, I'd suggest that you try SuSE and add a few FTP installation sources (you do all this from YaST, very simple once you find the FTP sources, I have a couple of good ones if you want them). That way you have a whole library of programs available for easy downloading and installing; just select what you want and click "accept" (or was it "ok"? whatever).

YaST is a very good tool since you can do most other configuring with it as well.

Debian has even more packages for download, but requires a bit more time to configure, and is not as noobie-friendly IMO. I have both SuSE and Debian Sarge; Debain because I like it better, and SuSE because it just works, just in case I mess up my Debian system :)

With SuSE & Debian I've managed to ge to the point where I get frustrated with Windows and switch over to Linux :)

[happybunny]

I think it is ironic that I get just as frustrated with linux not being able to do things I want it to, while I can't get Windows to NOT do things i DONT want it too!

I have a Dell laptop with a GForce4 440 Go video card, which supports rotating my monitor. However, Windows refuses to let me install the NVidia driver I want to use, and forces what ever Dell/MS has chosen to use, which doesn't support rotating my monitor!!! "Just do what I <blanking> tell you to do!!!!" is often heard for miles around my desk.

Linux, on the other hand, will do what I tell it to do, for good or ill. BUT, try installing a program and you could be fighting with dependancies for the rest of the day!! "Just do what I <blanking> tell you to do!!!!" is often heard for miles around my desk.

So, in my opinion, neither one are ready for the desktop!

[madcompnerd]

Install one with a packager, or install a packager. Let's see, I bet you use fedora:
apt.freshrpms.net
apt-get update
apt-get synaptic
synaptic #gui package management

Ubuntu? Already has these things.
Suse? Already has a packager.
Mandrake? Use the cd's
RedHat, same instructions as Fedora.
Slackware? Install swaret.

Arch, Debian, Gentoo, and the list goes on of dists that have net based package management by default.

[madcompnerd]

Originally posted by 80Spider
I have been using Linux since Caldera's distro. I am now using Mandrake 9.1. I have hoped I could switch over to it as my primary workstation but I don't see it happening for me anytime soon. My main problems are trying to find decent software and problems with installation of software. I spend more time trying to make Linux work than I do getting work done. It gets a bit frustrating. I bought a big thick Linux Bible but it is
very time consuming and not easy to find stuff in. I go to forums with what I think are legitimate questions and lets just say I am not always made to feel very welcome with my noobie questions by certain people. Luckily those type are the minority.
I plug my Linux HD in and use it till I get good and frustated and then I go back to Windows because everything works and I can spend my time more productively. I haven't had many problems with Windows. I just don't like some of Microsoft's business practices. By the way, does anyone know of a decent Bookkeeping program similar to Quickbooks for Linux? I am trying one out by a company called Quasar but I'm not sure that I like it yet. Just my two cents........

Dave

Book advise:
Step 1: Turn to indeces and make sure there is at least one page of indeces for every 100 in the book, but 1 for every 30 is even better!
Step 2: Whatever you normally do.

[jot-87]

Tack root.veg, din svenska är inte alltför dum den heller!

By the way... I started using debian a few days ago, and I'm becoming more and more satisfied for every day! I love it! It's everything I thought it would be!

The only thing I've missed so far is that I can't download VYM via apt-get.

[root.veg]

And I just discovered you can get Debian Weekly News in Swedish (http://www.uk.debian.org/News/weekly/2004/51/index.sv.html) ! Nice one.

Yes, I am a Debian zealot.

[blackbelt_jones]

I'm sort of embrassed that this thread is still alive, but I think that I was right esseantially, I just had my Debian release numbers tragically skewed.

If there was anything in the last year that was important to this perennial question that I still don't really understand, it was the release of the Debian Installer Disk. Even most Linux enthiusiasts don't seem to be aware that Sarge has become fairly easy to install. It was always pretty easy to maintain through apt-get, and tons of free applications-- so now that the installation isn't a long interrogation that you have to bluff your way through, I'd say that Debian is starting to look like a good deal, although it's stil a little buggy.

Another breakthrough is the development of the live Linux CD distro.. For or five days last week, I was without a hard drive, and I experienced firsthand just how versatile and powerful these live Linux distros are... They can also be remarkably stable, but I guess that shouldn't be such a surprise. An operating system that is written on a CD, and cannot be changed is pretty stable by definition. I'm now using my kanotix cd as a backup when certain applications (e.g. Mozilla Firefox) turn out to be buggy when installed on my Debian Sarge system.