Philosophical questions on the nature of OS's. Or some such crap.

[ntg85]

These are some deep thoughts I had while I should have been paying attention in class:

As a Linux user for about two months now, the biggest problem I see with Linux is ease of use. As an example, take my search for a program to play MP3's. My distro came with two programs, XMMS and something named Music Player. Neither one will play my substantial MP3 collection. XMMS told me that the Red Hat people had stripped out MP3 support due to copyright issues. No problem, I thought, I'll just download the original (and probably newer) version from the web site. Well, I tried doing that several different ways. The RPM told me the program XMMS is dependent on XMMS to install. The source left me confused. I have no idea how to compile things; I have to blindly follow instructions without knowing what I'm actually doing, which I hate. The same thing happened when I tried to find a replacement for Trillian (an all-in-one instant messenger program). (I know FC1 comes with GAIM, but I didn't realize it because it was informatively labeled "Messaging Client.") Again, I had to download source; the particular program I tried was nice enough to tell me to do "the usual make install". Firefox came as a tarball; I opened it relatively easily, copied the setup files to /etc/firefox (a directory I created myself) and ran the install binary. The best experience I had, frighteningly enough, was with the Linux version of AIM, which came as an RPM that installed itself *and* made links to the Applications menu.


What surprises me is that Microsoft actually got something right in the ease-of-use category. When I was looking for an AIM replacement for Windows, I was able to download two or three programs, install them in minutes, and use them and decide if I wanted to keep them very quickly. Windows recognized my USB mouse and keyboard and hard drive instantly. I won't go into video cards and such, as I know it's not a fair comparison (manufacturers all make drivers for Windows to include, while Linux has no such advantage, and still runs beautifully for it.) But I just fought an uphill battle to figure out how to get my USB mouse and keyboard working, and am still working on the hard drive. I could understand, again, the driver issue, but my BIOS actually recognizes all three- I can go into setup with my USB keyboard and tell it to boot off my external harddrive. It seems like support for these things would be a breeze for linux, but instead I have to search and configure and curse and search some more.

Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. It's far more stable than Windows, farmore customizable, and therefore far more powerful. But part of the reason Linux isn't as popular is probably because of its usability issues. I find myself rebooting to windows to do the simplest things- connect to a network drive ( can't figure out Samba), play an MP3 (still haven't gotten XMMS up), use my hard drive. I recently convinced my boyfriend to let me set up his computer as a dual boot Windows/Linux, but now I'm starting to wonder if I should, as he doesn't have nearly as mch computer skill and knowledge as I do. What happens when he opens Hardware Browser and the system hangs? What happens when the icons on his desktop start randomly flashing? What happens when he has to mount a USB mouse? Or anything else, for that matter?

If Linux could become as easy to use as Windows, while at the same time retaining its power and stability, it'll be a killer. Until then, though, it will remain "a great big mess for elitist, nerdy schmucks", as the Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie sing.

[hard candy]

If Linux could become as easy to use as Windows, while at the same time retaining its power and stability, it'll be a killer.

You have to remember, Sauron ruled for hundreds of years before his ring was cut off. :)
Do we want Linux to be like Windows? I think the biggest growth will be where the annual income ranks at the bottom 30% on the income scale. In our "upper 30%" countries, big business is the fabric of most peoples' social structure. So even if Linux becomes easier to use, it will still be tied to IBM, RedHat, Novell, Sun, etc. So one big commercial OS will replace the former big commercial OS.
I think the true revolution will be where lack of economic resources will force people to develop new uses and flavors of Linux.

[fatTrav]

All loving linux aside, if you want an easy-to-use OS, get a mac. Nothing comes close to OS X. All the benefits of Linux and none of the problems. Only downside is you have to spend $$ on the Apple-built-only machine.

*counting the days till I can afford my mac*

[bosox79]

If Linux could become as easy to use as Windows, while at the same time retaining its power and stability, it'll be a killer.

I understand where you are coming from, that said Linux can be made very easy to use if you give it the time & effort, I think part of the problem is with installing Linux it's self. ounce it is setup and configured it can be very user friendly ( maybe not always admin friendly at first) but ounce someone learns how to configure and setup Linux it can be very user friendly. I have been using Linux as my desktop system for about 2 years now & I learn how to do something new with Linux almost every day & I have found that it meets almost all of my desktop computing needs. I enjoy Linux even more after I have spent an evening or after noon either fighting with spyware or cleaning up from the latest windows virus. when I come back to my computer I just feel more at home:D

just my .02

if you need help getting mp3 playback in xmms try search the forums using terms like RH unable to play mp3. and I am not quite sure what you mean by "Neither one will play my substantial MP3 collection" you may want to post another thread about that problem. And a tool like apt or yum may alleviate most of your software installation dependency problems

[janet loves bill]

Originally posted by fatTrav
All loving linux aside, if you want an easy-to-use OS, get a mac.



ha ha, that is a good one.............getting a mac means having to put up
with propriatary hardware........which means it will be More expensive to
maintain than a PC........................D'oh

[fatTrav]

Originally posted by janet loves bill
ha ha, that is a good one.............getting a mac means having to put up
with propriatary hardware........which means it will be More expensive to
maintain than a PC........................D'oh

I agree that it is more expensive in initial investment, but for someone like me who buys/builds a computer and NEVER upgrades anything on it, the possibility of escalating cost is a moot point.

Cost and money aside, it is the ultimate UNIX.

[bosox79]

Cost and money aside, it is the ultimate UNIX.

Trav,

Can you please clarify your statment? if you meant that it is the best desktop Nix OS out of the box. I would be more inclied to agree with you. :)

[Smokey]

MAC OS X is NOT Unix. Nor is any of the BSD variants. They dont have the official Unix certifcations to call themselves such either.

[DMR]

Originally posted by Smokey
MAC OS X is NOT Unix. Nor is any of the BSD variants. They dont have the official Unix certifcations to call themselves such either.

True in the strict and legal sense, yes.

However- very few of us here being patent lawyers by trade, let's not get too pedantic on the subject, OK? Debating issues like that tends to devolve threads into "******** and Spewage", and we don't want this to head in that direction.

[drummerboy195]

I find that the original poster raises some valid issues, ones that I faced as well when I began using Linux. However, after some time, for me it was three years of increasing levels of usage, and now I love it. I still have my problems, but by having these problems, I have gained a great deal of insight into how the system functions, and a great deal of computer troubleshooting procedure in general.

Once I had gotten the majority of my issues worked out, I would have to be offered a great deal of money to switch my computer back to Windows. I find that I can be much more productive in a Linux enviroment. I also find that I spend much less time looking at menu after menu in Control Panel applet after applet, looking for some archane setting. Even now, just two weeks after my Gentoo install, I have a machine that is a very very productive machine. If I need files from it, I can ftp to it from anywhere on campus. If I want to check my mail, and I am a half a mile away, on the IT floor, I just start Cygwin-X, ssh in, and run mozilla.

Now, don't get me wrong, these things are possible under Windows. However, I tried many of these solutions, and they simply did not fufil my requirements. My using Linux was driven purely by utility, by me realizing that I could do so much more with Linux on a computer then I ever could with Windows.

[mengle]

I'm sorry to hear about your experience , ntg85. I've had a little better luck when I first started linux but some distros do a better job at giving you a more useable desktop OS out-of-the-box than others. For instance if you install gentoo , it doesn't even start with Xwindows let alone an office program or whatever (which is perfectly fine if you know what your doing). I found Mandrake and Redhat to work so-so out of the box.

Perhaps you'd have better luck with a different distro (maybe, maybe not). Might I suggest you download and run MEPIS as a live CD (you don't have to install it at first if you don't want to; it runs off CD) and test out if it does better with your USB items and I know it should run mp3's out of the box.

To get back to your main point, linux still has a long way to go in the ease-of-use category however I can say it's gotten considerable better in the last year.

Good luck and please don't give up on linux yet!

[fatTrav]

Originally posted by DMR
True in the strict and legal sense, yes.

However- very few of us here being patent lawyers by trade, let's not get too pedantic on the subject, OK? Debating issues like that tends to devolve threads into "******** and Spewage", and we don't want this to head in that direction.

Ok, ok. It is the best UNIX-based OS around. We're talking about language semantics here...just like how it isn't "linux" but rather "GNU/Linux" or also how people usually say "linux" when they refer to a whole "gnu/linux distribution" Sorry for being a big too vague.

But to get back on topic, linux still has years to go before it is fully useable. The strides in the past 2 years have been remarkable, but they're not there yet. Who knows how linux will be in the next two years. It is impossible for app writers to make consistent guis that work for all the Gnomes, KDEs, Openboxes, etc out there because they are all different in their layout.

The advantage an Apple or M$ has is that there is one look and feel for everything, and all app writers must adhere to those UI guidelines.

Speaking about usability...time to figure out why k3b won't make a bootable cd whereas xcdroast will...ah, the joys of linux...

[dboyer]

Part of the problem is that you're new to linux. You must realize that in many ways, linux is much more userfriendly to windows. The difference is that you have just started with linux, and arn't used to it. As far as the mp3 thing, there is an easy solution.. install this rpm:

FC1:
http://yarrow.freshrpms.net/rpm.html?id=908

FC2:
http://tettnang.freshrpms.net/rpm.html?id=296

and you'll be up and running in no time. Meanwhile, poke around freshrpms, there is lots of relatively easy software to install. I'd recommend Synaptic. It is an easy RPM-manager software that will download dependancies automatically and such. (Although it rocks on systems it works, some systems don't seem to want to run it at all and it crashs frequently... *shrug*.)

difference seems to me between windows and linux is once you get over the initial hump with linux, it just /works/. Windows however, always seems to need TLC to keep it half-assedly working...

You need google (and justlinux, imho) and some time, and linux is surmountable.

[fatTrav]

Originally posted by dboyer
The difference seems to me between windows and linux is once you get over the initial hump with linux, it just /works/. Windows however, always seems to need TLC to keep it half-assedly working...

You need google (and justlinux, imho) and some time, and linux is surmountable.

well put. after all, "reading and learning" are what linux users do.

[CaptainPinko]

Originally posted by fatTrav
All loving linux aside, if you want an easy-to-use OS, get a mac. Nothing comes close to OS X. All the benefits of Linux and none of the problems. Only downside is you have to spend $$ on the Apple-built-only machine.

*counting the days till I can afford my mac*

Exactly. Whenver I am asked by someone what laptop/computer should I buy I first ask: are you tied to anyone programs that you just have to use (eg my g/f needs AutoCAD no ifs-ands-or-buts)? If not then get a Mac if you can afford. It was funny to have a non-geek (oncologist) sounding like an Apple add after 4 months without having really heard of Apple before I suggested it. All the stuff the ads say about more intuitive than MS Windows she was saying. I laughed really hard.

Biggest selling point: proprietary hardware. Apple knows the software Apple knows the software.


Biggest complaint from other people: all i know is windows and i know a lot of it and i don't want to learn a single new thing.

It is these people who bring up cost (but you don't want to learn anything new anyway so cost has nothing to do with it). Or they bring up that they like tweak their hardware all the time.... well that would ruin selling point #1.

Frankly I view Linux\BSD as a farm pickup-truck, ain't pretty but does the work. When I'm not doing CS work I perfer a pretty OS that babies me.

[soulestream]

this kind of turned into a mac link, but here i go.


Try Mplayer and the QUI gui (search google) and this will give you MP3 playback and from what ive read the QUI GUI(thats confusing) is great for managing files in Mplayer. for install probs on FC try using YUM or apt-get for installs. this helps alot for most stuff. RPMs can be saviors for those who dont want to compile from source(like me) but they can be just as much a pain in the as*. the main thing, Linux is here to teach us that there is another way and always another way. We have apt-get, YUM, rpms,portage,source, etc . if a program doesnt do what you want, find another or change that one(provide the license approves). if you dont want a gui dont have one, if you want 5 different guis you can do that too. Its freedom at its simplest and is fun to learn and truly allows you to "think different"

soule

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Originally posted by Smokey
MAC OS X is NOT Unix. Nor is any of the BSD variants. They dont have the official Unix certifcations to call themselves such either.

ACTUALLY....


Mac OS X is a Unix, but it's not a UNIX. The difference is in the spelling. The Open Group has a trademark on the name UNIX. In fact, I think early versions of Netware were certified by the Open Group as a UNIX because it met whatever their criteria was, and Novell ponied up the money for the certification. And, you couldn't even use the Bourne shell on it.

Same goes for Linux, the BSDs, and several other OSes. They're not UNIX, but they can be called a Unix, or collectively, Unices. It's all in the capitalization, I do believe.

Where's El_Cu_Guy when you need him? He seems to delight in this type of symantical banter... :p

[fatTrav]

Officially, it OS X is "UNIX-based."

[zeddity]

Interesting. The issue the original poster described seems more like an issue of IP law rather than a technical issue. Red Hat deliberately stripped the ability to play MP3 files from their distribution due to patent issues, didn't they? Does Red Hat have the motivation to make it easy and convenient for people to put support for that format back in if the user wants it? I don't think they do.

In terms of ease of use, those of us that encode and play ogg files have no such issues with linux support for music. I don't like the fact that legal issues are getting in the way of competition based on technical merit, but I'm afraid I think it's going to be a factor in more and more cases, especially where multimedia is concerned.

[infiniphunk]

In terms of ease of use, those of us that encode and play ogg files have no such issues with linux support for music.

And isn't ogg better than MP3 anyway?
As far as switching from windows to a disribution of GNU/linux is concerned; yes, it can be tough. When I first started using it (mandrake9.2) I had a hard time getting many things to work. Frequently I would get frustrated, then upset(I have French in me,hence the short fuse) and sometimes I reacted rather badly. But I stuck to it, because regardless of the perills and tests involved, began to get it!
Yes windows is easy to use(*usually*) but its partly that ease of use that breeds apathy in users with regards to their computers. That's why there are so many windows boxes out there that are totally infected with tons of crapware; its just so easy to start up a program that downloads MP3's through P2P, turn on winamp and then leave the room with the system unnattended.
On the other side of the coin are MAC people. Most of the ones I know really know nothing about their computer, other than it has style and cost a lot. I'd like to have a MAC one day as well, but I'd probably want to know how it works to some extent. That's the beauty of linux, it teaches the user about its inner workings, it demands her attention and forces one to look under the hood at machinery so wonderful that it is something to admire.
Can you do that with XP?? No. Error messages are cryptic, and if something goes wrong it tells you to go call the other guy(does "Send/Don't send" sound familiar)........or contact your sysadmin?!?! I own this D**N comp, who do I call, Ghostbusters?
You will most likely continue to use linux on your comp after this experience. You will soon be listening to your MP3's, and other victories will follow. And before long you will be free of XP and all the pricey apps you need to go with it.
P.S., don't forget to try a liveCD(kanotix, knoppix, mepis...etc) and oh yeah, tell a friend or two about open-source.

[dboyer]

Can you do that with XP?? No. Error messages are cryptic, and if something goes wrong it tells you to go call the other guy(does "Send/Don't send" sound familiar)........or contact your sysadmin?!?! I own this D**N comp, who do I call, Ghostbusters?

Haha, I love generic windows messages:

"An error has occured. Contact your system administrator"

I'm the system administrator, why doesn't it just tell me what the hell is wrong? gesh!

IMHO, redhat is making itself less and less of a newbie choice (and probably aiming for the more lucrative market where mp3 support isn't a huge deal). Between the lack of mp3 support and the lack of NTFS support ON PURPOSE, installing fedora for someone is a real pain in the ***. There is more system configuration IMHO than there should be.

I recommend knoppix to most people now. Toss in the cd, play with it, see that its useful/not useful for you, and if you like it, a harddrive install is only a few clicks away.

[soulestream]

IMHO, redhat is making itself less and less of a newbie choice (and probably aiming for the more lucrative market where mp3 support isn't a huge deal). Between the lack of mp3 support and the lack of NTFS support ON PURPOSE,


Redhat's rational for dropping MP3 support is that they dont want to get sued. for mp3 copyright and in these crazy lawsuits for copy violation. as far as ntfs redhat supports it somewhat(ro) and with minor changes ro and rw. Miscrosoft themself,unless they change their mind again are dropping ntfs in longhorn also to switch to winfs. whatever thats going to be.



soule

[ntg85]

Bumping this waaaaay too far up, but...

Don't get me wrong; I'm still going to use Linux. I am very much a computer person (I'm in a tech major sequence for System Administration), and I love learning new things about my computers. But I'm still having difficulties. Maybe it's just that I'm not used to not having something mastered yet; I learned DOS in about a month...

But that's the problem. Like another poster said, a lot of people know how to do the few things they want to, and don't want to learn more or different ways to do them. And Linux requires you to know what you're doing, or else have a good friend who does. And I think that turns people off, and probably will keep doing so.

Windows XP was the best Windows since 3.1; it's what the 9x series should have been. But I keep noticing, in all the areas I find improved, that it's also more like linux. What a coincidence.

But right now, I'm trying to burn actual good ISO's of FC2, because I apparently installed with a bad disk, and now half the things won't work. And I've tried burning that damn first disk three times. (At least ACPI works now. Sorta.)

[bosox79]

Hi ntg85,

in case you have not been able to burn good or usable ISO images did you verify that the ISO's were good before you burned them? this should explain how to verify the ISO images http://www.linuxiso.org/viewdoc.php/verifyiso.html
HTH :)

[ntg85]

Yeah, I md5summed them, and the ISOs themselves are fine. It's just the burns that're bad... XP

[infiniphunk]

It's just the burns that're bad... XP
Well what are you using to burn the disc? Are you maybe using a type of CD-R that your burner doesn't really support? For example, I've always had problems with those black CD's. (actually, now that I think of it I've never even tried to use one since I changed to linux) sometimes(rarely) I still get a bad burn using K3B and regular Memorex 700MB CD-R's.
Maybe one out of 40 or so. I think in reality though, most times its the user's input that goes awry and causes a bad burn.
Really and truly though, if you wanna explore linux, just play around with the various LiveCD's.
USB support? mandrake and mepis both deliver very well in that department. I've used both distro's and have done A LOT of data xfers through my USB's; digital photos, scanning, USB-mounted external hard-drives...

[bosox79]

ntg85,

in addition to what infiniphunk suggusted. I would try to use a program such as nero to burn cd's in windows, I have had good luck using that program in the past and I would never use the cd burning software built into XP unless I was forced to.

[CaptainPinko]

Originally posted by bosox79
ntg85,

I would try to use a program such as nero to burn cd's in windows

speaking of Nero... anyone know how to extract the files from a Nero .nrg file? whenever I try to burn it to a DVD some file or another gets corrupted so if I could just open the sucker up and get the pure files...

[bosox79]

I did a quick G4L and then standered google search & this is what I found for linux have a look here http://linuxreviews.org/howtos/cdrecording/#toc9
or there is a windows program called MagicISO that will do the trick http://www.free-*************.com/news/200312/1071225077.html
HTH

Bosox

[EnigmaOne]

Originally posted by ntg85
Yeah, I md5summed them, and the ISOs themselves are fine. It's just the burns that're bad... XP

Use cdrtools for windoze: ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/win32/

[EnigmaOne]

Originally posted by ntg85
Windows XP was the best Windows since 3.1; it's what the 9x series should have been.
No offense, but that's not really saying much.

Originally posted by ntg85
But I keep noticing, in all the areas I find improved, that it's also more like linux.
I think you'll find that, as you look closer, the differences will outnumber the similarities.

[pickarooney]

Nrg2Iso (http://gregory.kokanosky.free.fr/v4/linux/nrg2iso.en.html) can convert NRG to ISO files. Allegedly :)