Is Fedora dying? [Archive] - FedoraForum.org

GreyGeek

17th August 2004, 07:44 PM

I started with RH 5.0 in May of 1997, but I've been a SUSE user since Sept of 1997, except for about a year with MDK 8.2-9.2. Only recently did I return to RH when I installed RHEL3 at work. Although I don't like Bluecurve, or the menu structure, or the fact that RH has nothing like YaST, which puts sysadmin work under on convenient item, I have found it to be easy enough to setup and maintain.

I decided to try FC2 on my wife's PC, so I wouldn't disturb my SUSE 9.0 box, and play with it. I was pleasently suprised. FC2 has all the annoyances that RHEL3 has, but the big thing is that I haven't found an app yet that didn't install without complaint. The fact is: EVERYONE and their brother standardizes on RH and RH is built from FC. So, even though RH phased out the desktop version for the general consumer, FC will probably be on the front edge and what you want. I used to use the command line in my early Linux days because that was all that was available. Now, however, I use it for less than 5% of my maintainence chores. I prefer the GUI to the command line (remember "Quigly Down Under"? Quigly said he didn't like the Colt, not that he wasn't any good at it!) and find that in RHEL3 and SUSE 9 and FC2 the only things I use the command line for are "updatedb", "locate", the occasional "rpm", "ps" and "top".

I liked the "Install everything" option (6.2G!) from the 4 FC2 iso's. It is far more complete than the SUSE 9.1 Personal, which comes in one iso. I almost switched my main box to FC2, were it not for the fact that there is NO option to use ReiserFS, and I detest the way Ext3 resorts to fskchk 95% of the time when rebooting following an abend. I doubt that RH will ever add ReiserFS to the FC project, but if they do I'd switch in a moment. I purchased Madrake 10 DVD, but found it not much different from their previous release and like their previous release it required too much manual intervention to configure hardware (scsi scanner confused with v4l -- have you ever seen a frame from a TV program display on the scanner preview?) and their quality control has deteriorated.
I know as long as they continue to offer AT LEAST a 4 CD iso download (a rather complete distro) FC will always have a large user base.
GreyGeek

imdeemvp

17th August 2004, 08:03 PM

1. when i started using linux i was still windoz base in my head....a newborn is given formula not a
cheese burger!!

2. we convert windoz users slowly into linux and sometimes we need to use terms that are windoz
base so the newcomers can understand!

3. as the newcomer gets confortable with using linux and he/she is able to run the basics such
browsing the net, playing music, writing documents, burning cd's and play solitarie which was my
case then i started using the command line and move onto bigger projects :D

4. when we are born we go thru a growing process when you come to linux you are growing out of
windows....

5. firefox and thunderbird have ownership just like the alternative browsers to IE and about M$
raising the security bar dont you think is about time i guess they are trying to emulate the stabily
of the linux world....not once my pc has crash under linux FEDORA WAS BORN LAST
YEAR SO FEDORA CORE IS NOT DYING ...IT JUST GETS BETTER! and you can always use
KDE if you dont like the blue curve!

kosmosik

17th August 2004, 08:21 PM

I prefer the GUI to the command line (remember "Quigly Down Under"? Quigly said he didn't like the Colt, not that he wasn't any good at it!) and find that in RHEL3 and SUSE 9 and FC2 the only things I use the command line for are "updatedb", "locate", the occasional "rpm", "ps" and "top".
just one question: like sysadmin to sysadmin... how do you possibly want to automate (and that is sysadmin job :P) stuff with GUI? I know that it can be done (think Windows Server) but I still can't imagine doing my sysadmin job without CLI. I even prefer CLI on Windows... few times I tried GUI on Linux to configure stuff like printers but I found that it always was broken in some way... I've seen YaST and I don't like it - I don't because it does not make it's job so it is useless to me. try setting advanced web server or anything with GUI, you will end up with tight set of common options, without all the power that some program (name apache, name squid, name ldap, name dozens of sysadmins tools) gives...

I almost switched my main box to FC2, were it not for the fact that there is NO option to use ReiserFS
well it IS an option to use ReiserFS - that's what I am using as my data FS... just type
boot: linux reiserfs
on first boot... what I love about Fedora is:

* standard (RH)
* well belive it or not it just works for me, never ran on any annoying bugs in software, for me it just works like expected. oh and I only use my base set of programs that I know and like...
* since RHL7 and apt4rpm package management is fun in Fedora I have dozens (and as I've said - I only use stable, well known and working stuff) of software one command away from me...
* anaconda kicks ass, best installer (powerfull) I've ever seen on any OS...

what I dislike with Fedora is:

* total lack of documentation, RHL9 as comercial product has excelent documentation (it is in some way suitable for FC and that is where you would find an answer to this ReiserFS question), Fedora has none :\

I doubt that RH will ever add ReiserFS to the FC project, but if they do I'd switch in a moment.
well ReiserFS is here from a looong time :) also I think with Fedora kernel is more free - with RHL they panicly port everything back to kernel, as they certify that some version of distribution is with certain kernel version and it must be it - so f.e. during RHL9 line life there was only one version (2.4.20 AFAIR) in use with tons of backports from next versions (stability/security). now with Fedora there is no such pression, FC is not certified anyway and developers can release whichever version they like. and as I see with FC2, kernel numbers change acording to latest stable, AFAIR FC2 comes as vanila with 2.6.5 and when you upgrade it is 2.6.7 now - that is good...

urquhartia

17th August 2004, 08:38 PM

Hmmmm I don't quite follow how FC will die on the desktop. Sure it lacks a little in places, but then can't you point out the benefits? I mean all linux distros seem to come with online updating but of the pop distros only FC seems to manage this with satisfactory results. When could you use apt and synaptic (free!) and have all those lovely free apps, not updates and (for windows at least) security fixes but real, working, bona fide * i think you get the point* apps.

What of Mandrake? Darn it it's so prone to dramatic change without in my view good reason other than hey, we can, so we will! *boggle* The reason I mention Mandy is because the bug bear I had with it was the menus system, the latest iteration is mind puzzlingly odd why did they fix what wasn't broken? FC maintains a striking similarity to earlier RH releases because much of RH was never broken! I had RH 7.1 on a server for years and the blighter just wouldn't crash! Me thinks there is a little conservatism sure but this is a value, as for newbie friendly errrr what can be more friendly than stability? Stability which i grant you mention :). At least the new user gets to have a look around their system without "illegal operations" raising their ugly head. Or in the case of Mandy a tendancy to through a wobbly, or worse SuSE with it's inherent dcopserver probs.

As it happens I have had Linux on all my machines (server and 'Desktop') since I built my first computer (I don't want to think how long ago that was!) My kids have grown up using it and to be fair when put in front of XP at school they were not at all phased as if the reverse had been true, ie linux from windows. So my question to you is are windows users learning to use windows or a PC? I offer an answer in that linux users learn their way around a PC and how to 'use' it, thus can adapt, but if windows users need their noses wiped and hand held then they are paying for their ignorance, tough. Take linux as is and learn!. Nothing in life is free, errrrrrr unless it's from a penguin! :P *had to get that one in*

Regards Zara... who fears they have just gone of on a rant *sigh* :D

kosmosik

17th August 2004, 08:41 PM

and another few words about innovation :) we see like two different sides:

server - here Linux is not perfect (it cannot perform certain tasks, has some problems with security) but it is improving well beyond competition (UNIX, Windows). Windows is still not real multiuser and network operating system in my opinion. Windows has serious security problems - that is due to: its popularity (monoculture), poor design (privilege separation, roots in DOS), complexity (they don't fix stuff in elegant manner, they just like add another levels of complication/integration and that means trouble), with Windows you still have none decent software (patching) management. windows update sux, SUS sucks also and is expensive... now Windows has some neat server features like Active Directory mostly, and user/machine maping - this (Machine/User scheme) is IMHO better than unix (gid/uid scheme)... but I can't find anything more to add to good stuff :\ now Windows is nonxistant in HPC f.e. where Linux is shining... server software for Linux gets better - you have set of standard stable apps (Apache, Squid, Bind, Sendmail, Postfix ... all the rest), you have new releases such as PHP5 and PostgreSQL8 which will be great. you have set of commercial offerings like system management tools from Veritas, Novell and so on. you have commercial apps from Oracle, SAP and so on. you have Java and all its world, you even have .Net :))) Linux rules server world...

as for desktop world it is like slower but I can see progres... kernel 2.6 is big change, GNOME2/KDE3 is big, lots of killer apps are big (OpenOffice.org, Mozilla, The GIMP, Blender)... now we have to wait for X11 to evolve a little since it has stagnated :) but it is also changing (try XOrg from CVS, JavaLookingGlass and stuff like that - it is impressing, E17 is also impressing). now it is a fair set of aplications and what is really lacking (as stuff like hardware detection, easier desktop, easier system management for desktop user is going here already) is some sorts of apps like specialized ones (CAD, DTP, operating specialized hardware) and games. but IMHO it is only thing (apps) that is lacking for me and my needs (and needs of my desktop users)... and with Fedora sure there is a progress. comparing to RHL9 (and 8.0 which was a mistake) Fedora is much better experience (for desktop user), it is much faster, has a lot more of applications, is more polished in GUI sense, improved security (SELinux) is coming by default (compare it to Windows where you can get this sort of features only with some decent hardware), even little things like fonts, DE, backgrounds, themes - are more polished... it is not dying in any way :) and to be honest I don't care about Windows users, or users or any other operating system - Linux is Linux and I use it cause it offers me advantages that I like, if it was *BSD or something else wich would give me that I'll probably stick with something else :)

superbnerd

17th August 2004, 11:49 PM

thank you for that excellent post, kosmosik. your right, people keep saying what about the windows users, but why do we need to dumb down our systems to the point that any point-n-click idiot can mess things up. granted fc needs a lot of improvements, but its main goal it not to appease windows users or the senseless mac occult. gnome and kde have intuitive UIs for the most part, so if anything needs to change, its those idiots (aka point-n-click users). the cli is an important part of linux culture. to try and do away with it is to try and do away with *nix altogether. remember, one of the reasons linux is more secure than winn/mac drones is because the users are knowledgeable of what they are doing (at least the admins are). instead of complaining that fc is not a win clone (fyi, its a unix clone:)) try embracing it. (think positive thoughts: embrac and extend, embrace and extend...)

kosmosik

18th August 2004, 12:23 AM

well I have to disagree :P I don't think Windows users are idiots. even if they know little or nothing about computers still you cannot assume they are idiots :) they actually may be very clever in domain that you (or I) will look like total idiot (but at least they can operate Windows)...

and I did say Linux is lacking something that Windows has. it is: stuff like AD - the easy way to administer users/system, and aplications... user (desktop) experience is on the way and there is nothing to stop this. right now it is mostly apps (compared to Windows), and some other features (compared to Solaris (Trusted) and f.e. QNX)) but this is improving...

sardaukar_siet

18th August 2004, 12:28 AM

This has gone way off base. I am a Linux and, in general, open source advocate but I see beyond "M$ sux0rs" childhood crap. M$ is a beast to be respected, because I guarantee you that if people start ditching Linux for Window$ in great numbers, you will lose short release cycle distros and you will lose corporate support for Linux and you will be in a position when new apps are released every 2 weeks. Yes.

We can't keep up the attitude of "you use Window$ d00d, u sux0r" much longer. People don't give a crap mostly for the ideology behind Linux. I love Linux and it's the best thing I have seen over all the years I use and build PCs, but I can't fight the "I don't have time to learn 4 or 5 commands" logic of my Dad, Mom or Grandma that need something that just works. And believe it or not, XP is just that. Sure it gets busted every 2 months or so, but the next release will make it bust every 4 months, and the next 8 months, and so on... and people will stop caring about choices, because they need more "quality of life" and less dabbling with the freakin' PC and just use it already and get it over with. 90% of PC users don't enjoy spending hours on front of a screen, they just want to do their thing and go out or do something else or whatever. For them, the concept of "mounting" a drive or using "commands" to install stuff is ludicrous. Window$ is easier, thus better in their perspective.

Although I consider torture for a PC to even have Window$ installed, I respect these opinions and don't think they're "ignorant point-n-clickers" like some snob replies to my original post. People are what they are and have their own needs. I just believe Linux is good enough to encompass all users, but if the Fedora developers think, like you, that most people aren't good enough for Linux, our quest to bring a better platform to everyone (like the author meant for it, I'm sure) is already doomed to failure.

Who hasn't dabbled with some tarball in source package with some missing lib or something or some game that won't run in Linux? These things shouldn't happen on a mature platform and a solution for them must be found real soon. I just hope RedHat/Fedora is on the front line of solution providers vendors for people looking for an alternative to Window$ that doesn't require a lifestyle adjustment.

superbnerd

18th August 2004, 12:49 AM

sardaukar_siet

18th August 2004, 12:58 AM

Why "idiots"? If a user wants to use a PC by pointing and clicking, why shouldn't he be able to do it? What makes someone an idiot? I could say you're an idiot for suggesting that LDAP is as simple or as powerful as AD to even be an alternative, but I won't because I respect your obvious lack of knowledge in the field and I'm a systems administrator for quite some time now.

I sincerely believe becoming less CLI dependant is "improving upon" Linux's culture and making itself available to more people. Your CLI will still be there if you (and I) need it, so why fear change if it means a larger userbase?

superbnerd

18th August 2004, 01:10 AM

by idiot, i mean "one who lacks knowledge of x" as i do of ldap and ad:). so most win/mac users are idiots when it comes to how there system works.
if the gui proves to be more efficient at setting up advanced systems then by all means, linux culture should embrace that, but as it stands, there just isn't a gui that offers most advanced users (read sys admins and beyond) the same power that the cli does, but i understand your point

sardaukar_siet

18th August 2004, 01:13 AM

I didn't meant to diss you. :)

I feel that GUIs don't cut it yet too, and not just for sysadmin work. That's why more effort must be put into it, and that compelled me to start the thread, because I don't see that happening for Fedora Core. :(

Jman

18th August 2004, 03:52 AM

So what you're saying is that Windows is easy, and when it becomes more stable and secure it will be unstoppable? And Fedora has to catch up in the usability department? Note that the XP interface hasn't changed in years, and that there still are a couple years to catch up before Windows gets released again.

Fedora's solution is the config tools project (http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/config-tools/). The goal is to put a pretty interface on common system tasks. The tools are all there under the hood, but this is supposed to make them more accessable.

It would be very interesting to do a study with intermediate level computer users new to Linux. Let them at a Fedora machine and tell them to configure it with a whole list of settings. See if they can do the tasks with the config tools provided.

earobinson111

18th August 2004, 04:18 AM

I've been a RedHat user since 5.2, and I loved it - from the old KDE 2 days (Gnome 1.x wasn't really worth it :) ) to the great Gnome 2.6 that I know use at home and work, but one thing disappoints me - the lack of real innovation in RedHat/Fedora products.

linux is great, but it would not hurt more to have better guis, would it hurt to have a windos like gui, i love the terminal, but i also love guis. i hate windows cant stat it always crasshes spam viruses and you have to reformat all the time, but it is prettyer and feals nicer (for a new user) linux could use that

ewdi

18th August 2004, 04:31 AM

lol, i dont care what people says, as long as the THING gets my job done, put food on my table, it's a good product to me :)

so far linux has been my butter and bread :) so to me it's an amazing os :)

sardaukar_siet

18th August 2004, 06:05 AM

... Note that the XP interface hasn't changed in years, and that there still are a couple years to catch up before Windows gets released again.

What does this mean? It hasn't changed because there hasn't been another (Windows) release to change it.

foolish

18th August 2004, 07:21 AM

Most of these arguments is just silly. Despite popular belief: Windows isn't easy to use.

Oh, most people can use Windows, or kind of, if they spend a good time practising. But here's the deal, most people don't know how to use any system. Most people remember how they did it last time and they try to repeat their steps. Most people don't get "files" or "web browsers". To most people it's just documents and the internet. Most people don't know that there's a kernel at the bottom of their system. Most people don't know, and don't care, and god bless them for that, for there's our only chance.

Forget about windows users, we don't need them. We need computer users. Users who don't know that their system is windows. People who write post-its with little instructions on how to start "The Internet" and get to their bank and pay their bills. We need to make using a computer as easy as possible to the users who don't know how to use a computer, not the users who know windows. We need the users who don't understand the difference between "Up" and "Back" in the file manager.

How? you might say, I don't know. Gnome is getting there by it's easy file management, simple naming schemes and amazing Human Interface Guidelines (HIG). In gnome applications, you'll always find the preferences at the same place. Buttons will always appear in the same way, text under icons by default. Applications behave the same way, which makes remembering how you did it last time much easier. The applications look the same, which is great. You can find the web browser in the menu without knowing that it's a web browser. Gnome is getting there. We still have a lot of work to do though.

Please remember, it's not about the Windows users. We don't really care about them. We care about the computer users, the ones that don't use any operating system (the majority) or the ones that don't know that their system is Windows and don't really care.

18th August 2004, 08:19 AM

Moved to Fedora Focus.

fjleal

18th August 2004, 12:15 PM

Oh, most people can use Windows, or kind of, if they spend a good time practising. But here's the deal, most people don't know how to use any system. Most people remember how they did it last time and they try to repeat their steps. Most people don't get "files" or "web browsers". To most people it's just documents and the internet. Most people don't know that there's a kernel at the bottom of their system. Most people don't know, and don't care, and god bless them for that, for there's our only chance.
You write beautifully sometimes, foolish... ;) I agree.

Have any of you folks had the opportunity teach youg fellows a new o.s.? I have this chance every year, to teach people in the age of 15 to 19 how to work with computers, how do they work (very basic) and how to deal with the o.s. and a few tools (word processor, spreadsheet, image manipulation app., ...). Some of these young fellows haven't ever used a computer before, or simply avoid doing it for they don't "like" computers. You'd be surprised seeing how easily do they learn to use a Linux GUI like Gnome. So I agree with foolish, it is not the Windows interface that is easier by any means - it is just that most of the times people learn the Windows interface first, and then they react against any change if you try to convince them to use something different from what they got used to.

The idea that Linux is hard and Windows is simple is a myth.

ghaefb

18th August 2004, 01:22 PM

earobinson111

18th August 2004, 02:11 PM

foolish is right "Windows isn't easy to use", but i still say is has a much better gui, and it would be nice to see linux do that 2. It would also be nice to see windows using linux security. i love linux dont get me wrong but it could be a bit nicer to look at. (and then it would get a larger user base)

zjimward

18th August 2004, 02:12 PM

A computer is a tool and the OS is the engine. It appears some times that people forget the concept behind having an automation tool. For years I have heard customers that say, "Why can't I just push this button and have this task performed." I tell them that they can if they are willing to pay for the time to have it written. CLI is great, I use it all the time, but when it comes to repetitive tasks I write a script or program to handle the task. Now if I can create a button on a GUI desktop then that makes it even better. Some times it seems that the technical people today are saying that GUI's are for dummies, but I say it a matter of automation. What if we didn't need GUI or CLI, but instead just talked to our computer or it read our mind. I guarantee there would still be some one saying, "CLI is so much better." Having both CLI and GUI is great. Having an GUI application that can configure all the settings for Apache, in place of editing config files or using (CLI editor of choice) are great. As far as Windows being easy for users. I get tired of hearing it. I still get calls from relatives and others about missing DLL files, lost email, etc. If it's so easy to use it must be easy to screw up, because I never hear the end of the problems. This tells me that there is no idiot proof OS and M$ just has a great PR department.

fjleal

18th August 2004, 02:43 PM

foolish is right "Windows isn't easy to use", but i still say is has a much better gui
I totally disagree. The Linux GUIs, like Gnome and KDE, have far better customization capabilities than the Windows one. Using Gnome or KDE I can create how many toolbars I want, place them whereever I want, use multiple desktops, change every aspect of it's design... The antialiased fonts are much more readable... The exception is the customization of the main menu - the Windows Start menu is more easily configured.
Still Linux GUIs have a fundamental advantage: they're client-server applications. I can have multiple desktops on my machine, or in different machines acrross a network. Multiple users can log in to a single machine, and have each one his or her own desktop - this is impossible under Windows. (BTW, has anyone tried "gdmflexiserver" or "gdmflexiserver --xnest" on FC2? :)) And if something goes wrong, these are only processes running that can be killed and restarted. The Windows GUI often blows up or freezes and takes the whole system with it... :(

18th August 2004, 02:46 PM

I also disagree, the windows GUI is only "a much better gui" in your opinion because thats what you were exposed to first.

sailor

18th August 2004, 05:13 PM

a much better gui
we didn't really have much choice to choose gui's...it makes no sense to use windows as the standard
for "good gui"...in fact to compare the 2 OS's will prove nothing...linux is better in my opinion for the majority of tasks that I use it for....

Foolish I am with you on this!!
most Windows users I know, do not have a good knowledge of their system, can not configure without a gui ...etc...they are just internet monkeys with no idea how things work...
it is all about doing your homework and RTFM...most folks do not do this...windows allows you to compute without knowing anything about your system...even then you can run into problems
windows is not immune...

and finally, we are all part of the bigger picture, it is building a linux OS, so let's get on with it and forget about comparing it to windows...lets get our house in order and hope windows does the same.

18th August 2004, 05:50 PM

I dislike the idea of users having to do their homework or for them to "RTFM". Maybe I'm just an idealist.

kosmosik

18th August 2004, 06:13 PM

well windows-easy-instalation is one big myth. my boss is totaly computer ignorant (but he thinks that he is not to make things worse)... I often fix his Windows for him, every kind of stuff like:

* setting up tvtuner - he hasnt got cd with drivers - it would not work with Windows. I've booted knoppix just to see what is this tuner inside (as Windows said only - Unknown PCI device), under knoppix it worked OOTB and little lspci revealed card name. download drivers for windows - done.
* digital camera, fuji - I dont remember exact name but as I remember it was listed on M$ site as fully functional/plug and play on XP... it didn't work at all - all I've got is "Unknown USB device" and that is it... still don't working :) I plugged the camera to one of Linux workstation just to check if the hardware itself is OK (after it failed on several Windows instalations). I plugged it to Linux and camera (as external drive) showed up on desktop...
* another digital camera - this time via COM port... I (technical person) have spent 2h fighting with connecting it throu usb-to-com adapter (since boss notebook does not have COM)... it was worse fighting (for me) than usual troubles with hardware on Linux, it was like blindly changing raw IRQ's disabling ports, rebooting, checkin tweaking... and then it finally worked (but I still don't know why) :) -now that was *not* easy
* connecting USB printer was hell - like I made a mistake and connected it before installing drivers. then the hell began :)

all I want to say hardware on Windows is far from user friendly (on Mac is great) - it is the same like with Linux - when it works OOTB, you are home. when it don't you have to Google. not a big diffrence with Linux. just make sure you buy supported hardware and you have plug and play on Linux - right now.

sailor

18th August 2004, 06:19 PM

I dislike the idea of users having to do their homework or for them to "RTFM". Maybe I'm just an idealist. sounds like liberal thinking to me... :eek:

I find it odd for someone who just finished school to say that, every software i have purchased comes with a manual (of course I only resort to using it when I can't figure something out)...but if people are expecting everything to be logical, understandable and "just like windows" they are gonna be in trouble...they have to read the forum in order to get help (whats the difference?)

I think an idealist would say that "education or lack of it is the root of all problems today"
I also think you are just trolling me...:p

fjleal

18th August 2004, 07:33 PM

my boss is totaly computer ignorant (but he thinks that he is not to make things worse)...
Hey, I think I know your boss... I already worked for him... ;)

nlawalker

18th August 2004, 08:01 PM

"it is all about doing your homework and RTFM...most folks do not do this...windows allows you to compute without knowing anything about your system..."

I'm going to have to agree with Ug's response to this, both in idealistic principal, and in reality. It's the RTFM attitude that scares new users away from linux, especially because of the fact that there often is no manual, or new users aren't capable of finding it. They don't know how to search forums, or even what forums to visit, to find answers. Computers with the fluffiness of Windows XP are tough enough and scary enough for many people; Linux is something they haven't even heard of.

As for the original quote above... well, that's why a lot of people use Windows. It is, as they say, the gold standard. The PC is now the toaster of the 21st century: people expect to press a button or two and have it do exactly what they want. GUIs are big and bright with plain English descriptions and captions on everything. The big green Start button has the Help app right there, you don't even have to look for it.

You said it yourself, Linux is homework and manual reading. People use computers because they want computers to do their homework for them, and not only is a "manual" built right in if you need it, but the apps they use are living, breathing manuals: simple, easy to read and understand. Like I've told other people before; what if you tried to get your car fixed or the wiring in your house repaired, and everyone told you to RTFM? Everyone has something they take for granted. For a lot of people, that PC just needs to turn on.

I'm glad Linux is around for those who want the choice. I can't wait to get started with FC2. But why am I waiting? My copy of "Linux for Non-Geeks" hasn't arrived yet. And I'm a geek... but a Windows one. I don't have an ounce of Linux experience, but I want to learn. But saying that to most PC users is like speaking a different language.

kosmosik

18th August 2004, 08:04 PM

weel but he is a great example of user vs. Windows... usualy he gets something (some gizmo or software). tries to install it himself and fails but he does not make anything wrong. it is just hard for nontechnical people... be it Windows or Linux. as for now IMHO only platform suitable for grannies, aunts, my boss etc. is Mac OSX - with Mac you have excelent operating system and closed hardware platform. so if something is designed for Mac it will work after you plug it in. todays case with boss (camera via usb-to-com conventer) finished like he plugged the device, run program to download photos but this failed since usb-to-com apeared as COM6 and camera software was only capable (wrong design, but hey it is still Windows and Windows applications) of autodetecting stuff on ports 1 to 4... and I happen to run on such problems very often...

zjimward

18th August 2004, 09:48 PM

I dislike the idea of users having to do their homework or for them to "RTFM". Maybe I'm just an idealist.

I agree with you as well. Any software that can be used without having to use a reference manual is excellent software. If you're an idealist then I'm one as well.

18th August 2004, 10:42 PM

Thats why I generally prefer Gnome or Mac OS X stuff, its easier to pick up and use.

sailor

18th August 2004, 10:47 PM

It's the RTFM attitude that scares new users away from linux
that is a good point...I am not avocating that we ignore new users and tell them RTFM, but if you want to have a trouble free install and configuration ...etc it is wise to read what is out there....it infuriates me when I see elitist linux users trashing everyone and every OS in sight...but I am telling you from my own experience I failed until I decided I would make an effort on my own to understand the software/OS that I am using...I think it is essential especially with linux because of its obvious differences and the software does not have the same interface as any other software...all windows software has menu bar, status bar,..etc
it is easier when you move from one application to another because you already know where the commands/menus are...

Any software that can be used without having to use a reference manual is excellent software
also a good point...but I am talking more about getting the OS to work and the software to work on that OS...you just can't jump in clicking the mouse...

if you don't need manuals or instructions than you a way above the average user...I am not
and have no problem helping people...but doing a little research/homework/RTM will only help in the long run....

BTW I have never told anyone to RTFM...I would not be in this forum long if that was the help I was providing...I would kick myself out :)

Mat

18th August 2004, 11:28 PM

that is a good point...I am not avocating that we ignore new users and tell them RTFM, but if you want to have a trouble free install and configuration ...etc it is wise to read what is out there....it infuriates me when I see elitist linux users trashing everyone and every OS in sight...but I am telling you from my own experience I failed until I decided I would make an effort on my own to understand the software/OS that I am using...I think it is essential especially with linux because of its obvious differences and the software does not have the same interface as any other software...all windows software has menu bar, status bar,..etc
it is easier when you move from one application to another because you already know where the commands/menus are...

also a good point...but I am talking more about getting the OS to work and the software to work on that OS...you just can't jump in clicking the mouse...

if you don't need manuals or instructions than you a way above the average user...I am not
and have no problem helping people...but doing a little research/homework/RTM will only help in the long run....

BTW I have never told anyone to RTFM...I would not be in this forum long if that was the help I was providing...I would kick myself out :)

the problem is that users need to "commit" to a certain degree to a OS.. it's no use to install Linux cause your windows crashed again and than run around and ask, how to install my MS Office now...

but I guess that's the general problem with computers.. people expect it to "just work".. like a tv set or a typewriter etc.. that's the attitude people need to lay down...

providing those with nifty guis won't help... look at partition magic for instance.. nice gui, easy to use, yet you can ruin your whole disk if you don't know about partitions and stuff..

Mat

Prometheus

19th August 2004, 12:55 AM

OK, here goes, i have to get onto this one.

Jman earlier said that give an intermeditae user linux, and letem have at it. Well, thats basically what i did. I can make windows just about bend over backwards at my will and tweak the living crap out of it to make it more stable etc etc, but i had never had experience with linux until, o, probably last christmas. Here are the things i love, and things i think need to change.

Love (good things first)

* insane stability
* you can tweak it a million ways to monday
* easily upgradable
* new apps/projects all the time

I'm just hitting the major things (in my mind), and yes i know there are more pros than this

Dislike/need changing
* something like a .exe file for linux. If we could just get a self installing file, things would be so much better. We could just about do away with tar files, and even gzip might become far less used. If a .exe type file were created for linux, it woudl be a major step in migrating people over to linux. One of the biggest problems with linux/fedora is if it isn't a perfect set or rpms fro ma repository, you have a heck of a time getting them to work. for example, the new ATI drivers, a pain in the rear to get working most of the time. A simple .exe type file that you could put the necessary files, patches, etc that woudl auto execute themselves woudl be a big step towards making linux more *gasp* "user friendly" to the noob. I know hardcore linux geeks will bash me for this, but i think a .exe type file is really needed and despirately lacking in linux. It could just solve so much.
*second big problem, again prolly going to get flamed for this, but a standard version of X for a majority of linux distros. The problem we are running into now (as we have seen with the new ATI drivers) is that things are being made for other versions/distros of X, and things are going haywire. If we coudl get a semi-standard version of X across the board, we coudl again make faster progress and simplify the problems of isntalling programs.. thus making set up easier for your normal linux noob. Also, it'd be a lot faster for admin etc.

Anywho, thats what i think linux is missing. Is it dying, hell no. Its only getting bigger, but i think if it was a little more standardized in the version of X, things would go a lot smoother. I love having both KDE and Gnome, and Fluxbox adn others to choose from, but a standard version of X would be a big help. Anyway, i'm rambling... ok guys, let the flame begin :)

sailor

19th August 2004, 01:08 AM

the problem is that users need to "commit" to a certain degree to a OS.
thanks Mat
that is what I am talking about...I didn't get into this because I thought it would work OOTB...I am doing this because I like the challenge... that I am learning linux...for me it is a serious hobby I do it because I love it...

Mat

19th August 2004, 01:32 AM

imdeemvp

19th August 2004, 01:45 AM

i love every fedora feature available it has a different setup but effecient enough for all users from beginer to expert...

windoz is Ok if want to live with....as far as i am concern....i now prefer LINUX..

crackers

19th August 2004, 03:40 AM

Just one point:

"Windows is easier to use..."

WHICH "Windows?" XP? 2000? 98? 95? 3.1? 3.0? 2.0? 1.0?

Like all OSs and user interfaces, Windows too has evolved. The big difference is the approach the proprietary (e.g. Microsoft) and FOSS has taken: FOSS went the "get it working, get it stable, get it secure - now make it pretty" route, whereas proprietary started with "pretty."

blammo

19th August 2004, 03:55 AM

I dislike the Linux desktop! Although Gnome and KDE have come a log way, I don't think they'll ever match the Window GUI and its ease of use. Where Linux shines is in its server and development capabilities! Apache, Sendmail w/ Cyrus, PHP (which I think kicks butt over ASP), OpenSSH, MySQL, etc., these are the things that draw me to Linux. Add up the costs of the equivalent in Windows and you'd break the bank.

kosmosik

19th August 2004, 10:06 AM

* something like a .exe file for linux. If we could just get a self installing file, things would be so much better. We could just about do away with tar files, and even gzip might become far less used. If a .exe type file were created for linux, it woudl be a major step in migrating people over to linux. One of the biggest problems with linux/fedora is if it isn't a perfect set or rpms fro ma repository, you have a heck of a time getting them to work. for example, the new ATI drivers, a pain in the rear to get working most of the time. A simple .exe type file that you could put the necessary files, patches, etc that woudl auto execute themselves woudl be a big step towards making linux more *gasp* "user friendly" to the noob.
actualy it would be a step backwards... with Windows you have this method of installing by click-on-setup-exe... it usualy works, but you have dozens of different installers that do what they will to do (nobody realy knows what - messup registry, load dlls everywhere, load menu entries everywhere, integrate with system everywhere). once you install it there is no convinient way to upgrade the soft, usualy it must be done manualy (remove, install new version), or each simple application comes with it's own upgrade system (name few: Symantec Live upgrade, programs that check for upgrades themselfs and so on) which sends unknown data (OK you can know the data but it is to much of it to track everything - it wouldn't be convinient) to their parent servers and so on... it is just a mess... setup.exe is bad. modern Linux'es have far better and advanced packaging systems than Windows. Linux packaging systems do a lot more than simply installing/uninstalling/updateing packages, also GPG signing/checking, multiple versioning, tight control of what is installed and upgraded, they often are one big build envirement for several architectures... now you have some right. package management should been easier on Linux (which means packages itself should stay as is, just a good GUI for this packages is needed). installing anything as clicking on *.exe from unknown web location and dumbly clicking OK, OK is bad - we don't want it. just guess from where viruses come? from such software distribution model...

second big problem, again prolly going to get flamed for this, but a standard version of X for a majority of linux distros. The problem we are running into now (as we have seen with the new ATI drivers) is that things are being made for other versions/distros of X, and things are going haywire. If we coudl get a semi-standard version of X across the board, we coudl again make faster progress and simplify the problems of isntalling programs.. thus making set up easier for your normal linux noob. Also, it'd be a lot faster for admin etc.
well X is a standard. it is not a semi standard. it is real, documented and open standard. if ATI won't release information about their hardware how do you expect Linux to work with it? you have two options: release hardware specifications so open source developers will build drivers themself, release *good* binary drivers. since ATI won't do anything of this two options just it means ATI is crap (at least on Linux as you say). just don't buy ATI - buy nvidia, it works.

Anywho, thats what i think linux is missing. Is it dying, hell no. Its only getting bigger, but i think if it was a little more standardized in the version of X, things would go a lot smoother. I love having both KDE and Gnome, and Fluxbox adn others to choose from, but a standard version of X would be a big help. Anyway, i'm rambling... ok guys, let the flame begin :)
you are missing a point here, nor KDE, nor GNOME, nor Fluxbox is a version of X. and X is standardized and documented, last version is X11R6, go to X site to get specifications (which make standard). I don't get you.

imdeemvp

19th August 2004, 10:42 AM

just one quick note....

a few days i was watching the news and they were talking about war airplanes that will be flown in wars without pilots and one of the OS's under test was linux and the main reason they were trying linux was because it didnt create any crashes or needed to be rebooted.....constally

just imagine getting a the blue screen of death as you are flying over enemy territory :D

if the US goverment is now considering linux there must be a very strong reason behind it....just like it happened it France they change all the goverment windows serves to mandrake main reason stability and security......

now is LINUX diying??......nope!!! .....but MULTIPLYING :D

zjimward

19th August 2004, 02:07 PM

the nvidia_installer is just one script you have to execute, same with the gdesklets sensors... so it's possible, people just need to use it..

however, I don't know what's so problematic with
% ./configure
% make
% make install

sure, 3 commands (or 4, if you need to untar it first) instead of a double-click and there might be headers missing, which you need to install before..

perhaps it could be done so that they (the headers) would be installed by default, but that would leave you with a system like windows, where you don't know what dlls are there, or which could be removed... it's just much more transparent..

besides, the rpm packaging system is a quite good invention.. and you can configure those files to install upon dbl-click (at least suse does that in kde)

about the standartization part.. I think the great thing about linux is, its variety... I mean look at all the shells you got.. to make standards just means to remove 9 out of 10, and than? people need to change in order to cope with the system, not now... what? you don't know bash commands? well, use tcl then!!

I know you talked about X here, but if we start there, where would it end? ;)

There's nothing wrong with:
% ./configure
% make
% make install

I've done it lots of times. I guess it would be like saying to boot your system why doesn't the system boot and then provide a prompt for you to install all your services. They are just simple commands to type. I don't think Linux needs an exe, but there does tend to be a lot of different ways that people package their software for Linux. Those that want to support a distribution use RPM, DEB or other methods, which works great with that distribution. Then others will just provide gzip, tar, makeself or other means. Maybe what's really being said is that there isn't a standard method used. Some times I believe that each project will have to have it's own repository which will support direct distributions as well as just having a source compilable version. Being that repositories like Livna, Dag and others have their own ideas as to what software they want to carry.

Prometheus

19th August 2004, 02:17 PM

I realize that KDE gnome and fluxbox arent versions of X, i know that. thats what i'm saying, i like the variety in desktops, but i think we need a more standardized backdrop for them. and i'm not saying to completely copy the .exe files, but make an automated installed of some kind taht would automatically install the rpm's. Just automate the process we currently have. For a new user, being able to double click and have it auto execute the commade of rpm -Uvh ***rpm instead of having to type it all out would greatly help a noob. BUt whatever, whatever i say im gonna get flameds, so ill just stop here.

Mat

19th August 2004, 02:33 PM

Just automate the process we currently have. For a new user, being able to double click and have it auto execute the commade of rpm -Uvh ***rpm instead of having to type it all out would greatly help a noob. BUt whatever, whatever i say im gonna get flameds, so ill just stop here.

as I said, suse does just that... it all seems just a matter of configuration..

kosmosik

19th August 2004, 02:49 PM

I realize that KDE gnome and fluxbox arent versions of X, i know that. thats what i'm saying, i like the variety in desktops, but i think we need a more standardized backdrop for them.
and how you will to force me to use one standard desktop since I would like to use another one? with Linux you have, a choice. and there is no "standard linux desktop" since Linux is kernel and f.e. KDE also runs on *BSD, Windows, MOX and few other... and what you mean standardized? if you used to work with GNOME I think you'll have no problem working with gnome on MOX or BSD...

and i'm not saying to completely copy the .exe files, but make an automated installed of some kind taht would automatically install the rpm's. Just automate the process we currently have.
yes it is already here, it is named YUM or APT(or few others in different distros)...

For a new user, being able to double click and have it auto execute the commade of rpm -Uvh ***rpm instead of having to type it all out would greatly help a noob. BUt whatever, whatever i say im gonna get flameds, so ill just stop here.
Subject: CHECK OUT THIS COOL RPM!!!

why on earth you want to do this to users? you wan't to allow them to click on *ANY* RPM on *ANY* (posibbly not trusted) site in Internet and allow them to install this? well that is what differs Windows from Linux, in Linux we don't make so stupid design decisions to let somebody harm himself...

Prometheus

19th August 2004, 03:43 PM

screw it, its not worth explaining when im just gonna get flamed

Mat, yeah, i know suse does it, but i was thinking more along the lines of the linux community in general, maybe be able to configure it that way in more distros than just suse, but whatever.

sailor

19th August 2004, 03:55 PM

Promethus I thinks you are right about standardization, but with all the different distros I can't see it happening...linux is as unique as the machine you run it on...and the distro you choose...
bottom line it will require a little more work from the user...(my original point which was also flamed :p...

Prometheus

19th August 2004, 04:04 PM

lol... thats all was getting at sailorsgh, was that we could change things to make it easier for the complete noob. I really like the ability to choose different distros and build my own kernel, but as long as there are so many options, i dont think linux well ever make it into the mainstream desktop world. We can still dream...

earobinson111

19th August 2004, 04:35 PM

well i still think that windows and mac's have better guis, but they just are nicer and easyer to use but then they put lots of money into all that. dont get me wrong i like the control u have over the linux gui, but windows blinds is so much better for windows than anything i have seen in linux, and i do love the mac guis 2, so sleek so pretty, but i make the trade off for a stable computer that works!!!!

cindym003

19th August 2004, 06:08 PM

Hey, I love Fedora Core! I'm a Windows XP user, a pointer-n-clicker idiot.
I can run oodles of applications at the same time in Linux, I don't have to defrag, I can
put /home in a different partition. FC comes with tons of applications. Granted, I couldn't
see my windows partition until I downloaded something for the kernel. I followed the
instructions and voila! Granted, I can't run some multimedia files until I download something
for them.
I'm perfectly willing to learn some commands!
I was just posting for help in getting my linux driver for my modem to work.
You won't believe my ignorance. If I could do it graphically, I could have been surfing in
Linux days ago. But my ignorance of commands has me stymied.
Most of us Windows users won't keep butting our heads against the wall like this. I thought
since the modem came with a driver, I was as good as online in Linux. Linux has to be made
easier for people who simply consider their computer a tool! Don't be a snob, you programmer types! cindy

GreyGeek

19th August 2004, 06:35 PM

just one question: like sysadmin to sysadmin... how do you possibly want to automate (and that is sysadmin job :P) stuff with GUI? I know that it can be done (think Windows Server) but I still can't imagine doing my sysadmin job without CLI. I even prefer CLI on Windows... few times I tried GUI on Linux to configure stuff like printers but I found that it always was broken in some way... I've seen YaST and I don't like it - I don't because it does not make it's job so it is useless to me. try setting advanced web server or anything with GUI, you will end up with tight set of common options, without all the power that some program (name apache, name squid, name ldap, name dozens of sysadmins tools) gives...
You've obviously never seen the movie "Quigly Down Under" ;P

well it IS an option to use ReiserFS - that's what I am using as my data FS... just type
boot: linux reiserfs
on first boot...
I did some research a few days ago and found out about that, and about a fix for certain situations where FC2 messes up the MBR. I used
linux hda=x,y,z reiserfs
and got a clean install of FC2 on my Win2K (Dell GX260) workstation, replacing SUSE 9.0, and still allowing Win2K to boot.

what I love about Fedora is:

* standard (RH)
* well belive it or not it just works for me, never ran on any annoying bugs in software, for me it just works like expected. oh and I only use my base set of programs that I know and like...
* since RHL7 and apt4rpm package management is fun in Fedora I have dozens (and as I've said - I only use stable, well known and working stuff) of software one command away from me...
* anaconda kicks ass, best installer (powerfull) I've ever seen on any OS...

what I dislike with Fedora is:

* total lack of documentation, RHL9 as comercial product has excelent documentation (it is in some way suitable for FC and that is where you would find an answer to this ReiserFS question), Fedora has none :\

well ReiserFS is here from a looong time :) also I think with Fedora kernel is more free - with RHL they panicly port everything back to kernel, as they certify that some version of distribution is with certain kernel version and it must be it - so f.e. during RHL9 line life there was only one version (2.4.20 AFAIR) in use with tons of backports from next versions (stability/security). now with Fedora there is no such pression, FC is not certified anyway and developers can release whichever version they like. and as I see with FC2, kernel numbers change acording to latest stable, AFAIR FC2 comes as vanila with 2.6.5 and when you upgrade it is 2.6.7 now - that is good...
I found that RHEL3 has never failed to install an app for me... like pgadmin3, for instance. FC2, on the otherhand, fails to accept pgadmin3 regardless of the install methods I have tried so far (rpm, apt-get, yum, and tar ball). This morning I did a "yum update" and noticed that the 2.6.7 kernel was installed an offered on the Grub login.

About the CLI .... you'll like this: I've been talking up Linux here, where I work, for the last 5 years (every since KDE 1.0) and was getting a lot of resistance from MCSE's here. That stopped a couple of years ago when I installed a Linux box and three scripts (one page each) to replace a Win98 box running WildCat 4.5 to dispense tax data, which crashed on a daily basis. The Linux solution ran for 18 months without a crash or any data loss. About two months ago our IT boss signed the most Linux resistant MSCE to a week of RH training. When that guy came back he was a confirmed Linux CLI addict!! :-)
GreyGeek

GreyGeek

19th August 2004, 06:54 PM

Hi Cindy!
It would be a big help if you could identify your modem by brand and model .
Reason: there are two kinds of modems: regular modems and "winmodems".
WinModems used to require Windows drivers, but now most of them have Linux drivers available, usually in the form of an rpm file for easy installation.
An interesting msg, which indicates problems getting winmodems working under 2.6.5:
http://www.modemsite.com/56k/index.asp

Some sites to visit for descriptions and downloads:
http://linmodems.org/
http://www.physcip.uni-stuttgart.de/heby/ltmodem
http://www.modemsite.com/56k/ltwin.asp?try=htm

GreyGeek

fjleal

19th August 2004, 08:08 PM

C2, on the otherhand, fails to accept pgadmin3 regardless of the install methods I have tried so far
That was a wxWidgets problem, but its now solved. I just installed pgAdmin3 on my FC2 box.
You can get wxWidgets from http://developer.pgadmin.org/snapshots/wxWidgets/wxWidgets-pgAdmin3-20040711-1.tar.bz2 and pgAdmin3 from http://developer.pgadmin.org/snapshots/pgadmin3-src.tar.gz

To build wxWidgets, follow the instructions in the docs (there are three different installations to do, the main one, /contrib/src/stc and /contrib/src/xrc, if I remember it well...); to build pgAdmin3, follow instructions in pgadmin3-1.1.0/docs/en_US/unix_compilation.html after you extract pgadmin3-src.tar.gz.

Shadow Skill

20th August 2004, 12:20 AM

I have a little bit of programming experience (when I could still remember how to code. :( ) using c++ so I am ok with somewhat lengthy commands. However I am very new to Linux (Fedora has been the least infuriating of all of the distro's I have tried..Go Fedora developers, this is DEFINETLY the right direction to be going if we are going to be freed from windows!! :) ) at this point I can't say that the various gui's (Gnome, KDE) make Fedora easier to use than windows. I am trying to learn how to better utilize the CLI (Is that Command Line Interface?) because I feel that it is the true way to use Linux; however the CLI is not simply a tool but rather it is the end all and be all of the entire OS the Linux community is far too obsessed with CLI commands, to truly be viable as a desktop platform. For example who in their right mind wants to type mplayer -alang eng -slang ger /mnt/windows/d/videos/foobar.mkv to point this particular program to the particular audio and subtitle tracks that it (Mplayer) can ALREADY read on load, and still not be able to switch audio and subtitle tracks on the fly from a keyboard short cut. As far as I know the gui for this program is entirely useless because it cannot change audio tracks or subtitle tracks on the fly. (These tracks are inside the files in the case of ogm and mkv files. [at least if the files are made intelligently.] ) It's this CLI psychosis that hampers Linux, Linux developers must put an end to dependency issues by either :

1. Including all applicable libraries or nessecary config files in source packages, so that configure can compile the program properly without having to do the library hunt.
2. Design configure to prompt the user to install various dependencies or to ask the user to point configure to a given library if it's already installed. (Best of Apt and 100% customization, which apt-get doesn't provide although it is definetly a godsend 80% of the time.) [One would need to include a method to search the entire system and I stress the entire system (As root of course.)

I really want to see Linux become a true alternative to the antichrist known as M$, and of course an alternative to Mac and it's demonic hardware practices.

foolish

20th August 2004, 02:29 PM

Mat

20th August 2004, 02:34 PM

agreed foolish!

Prometheus

20th August 2004, 02:35 PM

How did we get so far away from the topic of is fedora dying?? BTW, i like your idea about installing stuff Foolish... now if we could only find somebody to code your awesome program...

fjleal

20th August 2004, 03:01 PM

Interesting post, foolish. Still I like the tar, tar.gz. tar.bz2, rpm, what-ever-more, zoo. It may be nice for newcomers to make things easy, but the world is a complex place. If you want to learn something, you have to dive in its complexity, not just sit in the corner pretending someone invents a way to make things "easy".
Your "silly example" isn't silly at all, it's a bunch of nice ideas for us to think about. The comparison to Windows is unavoidable, but are we really so much worried about market shares? A Unix-based (or Unix-like) system is far more powerful than a Windows one (Windows is still a "domestic" system), and power always comes with an increase in complexity. Gnome has done an excellent job making things "easy", and it is being developed further more. But honestly, if people don't want to learn, if they just want to play Doom online, wouldn't they be better with a game console? That "just works", there's no need for one to think. Is that want we want?

Shadow Skill

20th August 2004, 04:38 PM

We don't need no exe files. We don't need no downloadable files for installation. What we need, and what we already have, is a system where there's one applications of installing all software. What we need, really need, is for people to understand that we have our way. Linux isn't windows, and it shouldn't try to be. We do not need to copy windows, as windows isn't the ideal operating system, if it is, why are we using linux?

What we need is for you to understand that windows isn't easy to use. Windows isn't the holy grail of easy to use computer systems. Linux isn't ideal either, but as it is open source, and most of the components in a Linux based system are as well, there's great potential for creating the perfect desktop. Much more so than in Windows as there's the commercial applications with their own look, feel and agenda.

Here's how I picture the ideal way of installing software in Fedora:

You want to install some software to use for picture editing. You don't know the name if the application you want to use, and you don't care. You're using GNOME already, as that was the default in Fedora and what your computer came with.

You open "insert name if killer application for installing software" and you're presented with some groups. One of the groups is called "Graphics". You click "Graphics". In "Graphics" you find several choices. The applications in "Graphics" are then automatically sorted, the most used ones are at the top. Since you are using gnome all KDE applications are hidden under "Alternatives". The first 2 applications listed are: gThumb picture viewer and GIMP. Below each is a describtion of the software. You read the first couple of lines and you quickly come to understand that gThumb is for viewing, not for editing. GIMP however, seems to suite your needs.

There's a big shiny "install" button. You click it. A box then appear asking if you want to select more software or install the selected components right away. When you proceed your presented with a nice progress bar that will show you how the status of the downloading and then the installing. When the software is installed you'll get a box telling you how you just install GIMP image editor and if you click details you'll get instructions on how to start GIMP (where to find it in the menu) and links to resources about the new software.

If you're a more advanced user, and you want Adobe photoshop, you can use a similar method of installing. You open the same "insert name of killer application for installing software". You could just use the search, but you'll click "Graphics" once more. In Graphics you see the "Commercial" category below the recommended applications. You click it and you're presented with a list of commercial graphics applications available for your distribution. In this list you find Adobe photoshop. You see no "Install" button, but there is one for "Purchase". You click it, your presented with a web browser like interface within the "insert name for killer application for installing software". There's a form for you to fill in. You fill it in and click send info. Information is sendt to Adobe and they send you confirmation and information about payment. You pay for it like you would using any other webshop. You're then presented with the option of getting a bundled Adobe Photoshop sent to by mail to your address or just download the binary as you did with GIMP.

This is just a silly example I threw together right now to illustrate my point. Installing software, both commercial and open source, doesn't have to work like it does in Windows, there is a much easier, and better way, for everyone. So stop your rantings about copying windows. We don't need that for linux to conquer the world, we need our own way, a better way.

[Note that I am assuming you are talking to me.]

The package manager for fedora is a total piece of crap for one thing. (So no Fedora [and most other package managers I have used.] really doesn't already have anything comparable to what you and I are describing, both our ideas are actually very simillar.) Also compiling from source all but insures a given app will work the way YOU want it to. When did I say that we should copy [the bad things about] windows? What you are actually advocating at the begining of your post is that Linux walk down the road of Apple all for the sake of what amounts to being "Leet." The real problem here is that opensource software often times forces you to do the library hunt. While Apt (and others like it.) is definetly a prototype for both of our idea's the fact remains that if you want your programs to run as best as possible one should compile the programs from the source code. In order for people who are just starting out to really understand that kind of power granted to them by compiling source code one must end the library hunt that plagues the Linux world. I suggested that they put in a searching feature because some distro's have wierd ways of installing software that prevent some packages from finding the nessecary files.

I also feel that the linux world is going to have to adopt a model similar to the one Apple users for it's OSX, to at least standardize the method by which certain things are configured or installed. (I know that this is in alot of ways already present what I am really saying is that we need to see more of it, like apt like console commands for every single distro. I hope you get my meaning.)

I think the linux world needs to obssess less over the CLI and take a look at the good things about windows and adopt those attributes (Without sacrificing the beauties of Linux.) I think we all can agree that windows isn't the greatest but we shouldn't totally disregard the abilities and methods used by windows. The goal here should be to create a system that can truly compete with windows (I'm not too concerned with what one user dubbed the "cult of steve" quite elegantly I might add.) if windows had a real competitor (Macs will never count as long as Jobs runs that company and is so concerned with forcing people to use only his vision.) I doubt windows would be as bad as it is right now.

Ps. We also need to be aware that if a single distro manages to really make it into the desktop world and become a genuine windows competitor, the viruses
will follow. Although it probably won't be as bad as it is with windows at the moment. I don't seem to get too many viruses maybe one or two real viruses since I got my current machine about 3 years ago.

Pss. why isn't ntfs support native in fedora? The new kernel 2.6.8 breaks my ntfs support; do the makers of fedora expect people to totally abandon windows for Fedora at this stage? I for one will probably continue to dual boot long after Linux [hopefully] becomes a real windows challenger, so ntfs (and successive) file system support should be all but a given. (I wonder if Longhorn will be using a new filesystem or if it will continue using ntfs, anyone know?)

Mat

20th August 2004, 04:47 PM

The package manager for fedora is a total piece of crap for one thing. (So no Fedora [and most other package managers I have used.] really doesn't already have anything comparable to what you and I are describing, both our ideas are actually very simillar.)

again, suse's yast has this (not the buying stuff of course.)

Also compiling from source all but insures a given app will work the way YOU want it to. When did I say that we should copy [the bad things about] windows? What you are actually advocating at the begining of your post is that Linux walk down the road of Apple all for the sake of what amounts to being "Leet."

The real problem here is that opensource software often times forces you to do the library hunt. While Apt (and others like it.) is definetly a prototype for both of our idea's the fact remains that if you want your programs to run as best as possible one should compile the programs from the source code. In order for people who are just starting out to really understand that kind of power granted to them by compiling source code one must end the library hunt that plagues the Linux world.

honestly, that's nonsense! if you buy photoshop you can't just expect to be able to do everything it is able to do, w/o reading in manuals etc..

same here, "library hunt" is just a part of the whole, and we all grew accustomized (sp?) to it, so why shouldn't newcomers?

Mat

ps: yes, longhorn will have a new filesystem.. something like a big database of your files and their locations, the aim is, that the user doesn't need to know where the physical location of the data is..

Shadow Skill

20th August 2004, 07:35 PM

The library hunt is a moronic waste of time, no mature OS should have such a problem, it is not efficient in any way shape or form. honestly, that's nonsense! if you buy photoshop you can't just expect to be able to do everything it is able to do, w/o reading in manuals etc.. What does my advocating an end to the library hunt have to do with what amounts to a RTFM comment?

Becoming accustomed to inefficiency is what killed [is killing] windows, why should the Linux world do the same so that some users can pretend to be Leet? I also think the manuals specifically the man pages for console commands need to have non abstract command usage examples..I would imagine that some find it very difficult to grasp something to the effect of rpm [arg] file and yes I know that the example I give is rather simple but I do see man pages as written now as a problem as they are not true usage examples. I often find it very difficult to execute a command if I don't see it written as it is actually used. This site is really great in that respect since every example I've seen is a true usage example and is very clear and concise. (Go Fedoraforum users!!)

Mat

20th August 2004, 08:38 PM

What does my advocating an end to the library hunt have to do with what amounts to a RTFM comment?

What I meant! the complexity that comes with photoshop is widle acknowledged.. and so is the "library hunt" in linux...

no offence intended

crackers

21st August 2004, 05:58 AM

What I meant! the complexity that comes with photoshop is widle acknowledged.. and so is the "library hunt" in linux...
At this point in time.

The situation is improving, but this is one of the aspects of the FOSS-style of development. Some if it is revolutionary/innovative, but other parts are evolutionary, and, as such, may take more time.

This is one of those interesting chicken-and-egg dilemnas: a lot of the work that needs to be done in this area (including getting the vendors to agree on a common format) requires a larger user base to make the evolutionary imperitive larger. On the other hand, though, the user base won't grow because of this problem. We're just starting to see the tipping of the scale - I guessing thing's will get get interesting in the next year or so.

Psquared

26th August 2004, 12:11 AM

Just a general question about the design of Linux.

I just installed FC2 with a recent kernel update on a Gateway P4 2.6. I tried a live version of SuSe 9.1 first and then bought a magazine with FC2 on a DVD enclosed.

The install went fine (I took the recommended precautions for dual booting with XP) and Grub works well.

As an old DOS user I naturally migrated up to Windows XP. I don't like supporting Redmond so I am giving Linux a try. Anyway, am I correct that Linux is Unix with some enhancements that allow GUIs to run as an overlay like the first versions of Windows ran on top of DOS? Is X-windows something runs more or less between Linux and KDE or Gnome that allows the two to interact and control devices?

At one time I knew all of the DOS commands and I am slowly learning the Linux commands. It looks like the file structure and hierarchy is the same as DOS in that you have to be in the directory where an executable file is located in order to run it.

Am I on the right track with these comments or should I forget everything I ever knew and pretend I am starting from scratch? :confused:

fjleal

26th August 2004, 01:22 AM

Anyway, am I correct that Linux is Unix with some enhancements that allow GUIs to run as an overlay like the first versions of Windows ran on top of DOS? Is X-windows something runs more or less between Linux and KDE or Gnome that allows the two to interact and control devices?
Linux is just a kernel that's used to create an operating system Unix-like. The OS is GNU/Linux, for it has a lot of GNU (www.gnu.org) applications and systems running on the Linux kernel.
The X-Windows is a client-server system. The X server serves client applications. So, multiple clients (users) may be working on the same machine, each one with his/her own desktop, and each user may have several desktops - this is something Windows isn't capable of, because it was made with the single-user paradigm in mind.
The X server, like any other application, is just a process running on the kernel. Any resemblance with the old DOS is only on he outside.

crackers

26th August 2004, 05:19 AM

It looks like the file structure and hierarchy is the same as DOS in that you have to be in the directory where an executable file is located in order to run it.
Not quite - both OS's have the notion of an environment variable called the "path" (in Unix-like systems, it's called $PATH, DOS was "%PATH%"). That defines the directories first searched for executables. And both in DOS and Unix-like systems, you can always run an executable by specifying the full-qualified directory path to the executable. Example (not necessarily very good, but it illustrates the idea):

$ cd /opt/java/bin
$ ./java -verson
(stuff printed - omitted hereafter)
$ cd
(this takes you "home")
$ /opt/java/bin/java -version
...
$ export PATH=$PATH:/opt/java/bin
$ java -version
...

There have been a couple of threads recently about modifying a user's path - search for pash_profile here in the forums...

kosmosik

26th August 2004, 10:19 AM

The library hunt is a moronic waste of time, no mature OS should have such a problem, it is not efficient in any way shape or form.
well I don't have such problem on Fedora... do you? you have like 4 different (or more)package/source/build management system and they all work - just pick one that fits you best and no "library hunt" is wasting your time...

I also think the manuals specifically the man pages for console commands need to have non abstract command usage examples..
some of them do have such section... check out "man man" about "EXAMPLES" section :P also most software comes with specific documentation installed in /usr/share/doc - with examples of configs, howtos, books etc. you surely can't complain about documentation quality with Linux. at least for standard and stabilized things.

superbnerd

26th August 2004, 11:03 PM

your right kosmosik the old and tired "library hunt/dependency hell" bit is for the most part just not true anymore. it was a major problem for rh9 and an annoying problem for fc1, but fc2 changed all that with massive repo support. this is the first distro where i almost never have to "hunt" for an rpm and worry about wheter it was built for mandrake, suse, or fedora. now its just as simple as yum update and there is even a gui called gyum (which should be called gumy:)). its just that simple.

Shadow Skill

26th August 2004, 11:21 PM

If I type man mplayer for example I SHOULD see a true to life usage example (like the examples I see on these boards 90% of the time.) I haven't really seen any form of man page (Regardless of whether it was Debian, Knoppix, Suse or Mandrake.) that gave true to life usage examples, all I have ever seen are abstract examples. While Fedora is very nice when it comes to the library hunt I was talking more about compiling from source, it is less of an issue with things like Apt and yum. However some programs are only released as source tarballs. When I used Apt for Suse it was just a pain in the butt. The Library hunt seems to be more of a problem on other distro's however as far as the whole of the Linux world goes this is simply not a thing of the past period.

Ps. does anyone know how to contact freshrpm's.net the videolan-client rpm is broken (wierd things happen with mkv files.

superbnerd

26th August 2004, 11:29 PM

about the man pages:
this is not at all a problem with Fedora or GNU/Linux. the modularity of the GNU/Linux system is a double edged sword, however. the man pages are written by the mplayer (or whatever program) developers, not by the distro. if you want man pages to have documentation, ask the program developers to include working examples. again, this is not fedora/gnu/linux's fault.
about the freshrpms problem:
read this (http://freshrpms.net/about/) for contacting the packager. the section you want to read is the "The author" part.

Shadow Skill

27th August 2004, 08:39 PM

I think you are missing the point I was trying to make about man pages, (It's probably my fault for not being clear in my contention.) what I am trying to tell you is that even with commands that are a part of the OS the same exact problem exists so while you are partially right to say that Linux is not at fault I am not incorect to state that the culture of Linux itself is at fault. My contention from the begining has been that manual pages in general (The same exact situation exists in windows mind you.) simply lack true to life examples of actual command usage, I can say that I am starting to get the hang of some of it thanks to this forum and the users here as well as the fact that just like wirth windows I have banged my head against the wall enough to eventually find the proper way to execute commands. But I still feel very intimidated by alot of this simply because I am not able to picture exactly how a command is going to look when actually called. Man pages seem to follow a very uniform format (This is definetly good.) I just happen to think that the Linux world needs to move away from abstract manuals.

Ps. Thanks for the info about the RPM thing, I hadn't noticed the links on that part of the page, I probably glossed over it a 3am or something. :D

regeya

4th September 2004, 04:20 AM

right, but what i was saying is that the linux world should not bend over backwards to appease the windows/mac idiots (that does not mean or imply that all windows/mac users are idiots). it should stick with its own culture and improve upon that, not windows/mac culture (primarily point-n-click with great fear of cli)
also, (i know its not as great as ad) what about ldap. it offers a similar implementation of ad.

Also, I should have the option of going to buy a new automobile with manual transmission, unpowered steering, old-fashioned brakes, and while we're at it, a spark advance and crank start. Only idiots want power steering, ignition systems, and a starter.

Or, another way of looking at it: okay, so some skr1pt k1dd13 feels l33t when he runs off and edits the config file for Samba by hand, and does so just to set up share-level sharing. Any reason why it should be left at that level just because it makes the skr1pt k1dd13 feel w4y k001 to have to edit the file by hand? Yeah, I know; that's being worked on. Could the "Linux should only be a server" go off and maintain their servers while someone else has a discussion about how to make a desktop-alternative-friendly system? :D

There's the real problem I see with seeing something like FC, Debian, or whatever as the "universal" OS--you're always going to have the l33t d00dz who feel they need to do whatever they can to keep the system from being desktop-friendly. Sure, they can cite concerns that "their" OS will be contaminated, but they never seem to get around to suggesting a way to improve the security for the Joe Sixpack guy who wants the l33t d00d to STFU already and come up with a situation where he can download his friggin' digital pics without a hassle, and get on to whatever he wants to do other than mess around with config files in vi.

If we can't find some way to stifle the l33t d00dz, not even just a little, then there's no need of me ever mentioning to anyone that I use Linux as my desktop, and further, that people might be able to use it someday instead of Windows. People want an appliance OS not because they're idiots, but because they're ignorant. There's a difference, and if you can't comprehend it, then maybe it's you that's idiotic! :rolleyes: Tell someone who works 12 hours a day then runs around doing things for their 2.5 kids that they need to sit down for a few hours and RTFM. I'm not brave enough to. :D

Meaning no offense toward superbnerd, but it's a common misconception that people who won't take time to learn CLI are idiots, and we need to squash it NOW. Ignorance + lack of time != idiocy.

superbnerd

4th September 2004, 05:17 AM

again a total misunderstanding (perhaps I need another speech class to help make my point more clear). linux is a very modular. I said linux should improve upon its own culture. using a hand crank to start a car is hardley improvement by any standard, and the cli (shells) has improved considerably over the years. linux culture is not only the cli. it includes the gui (gnome, kde, etc) and is used on both servers and the destop and embedded devices, and atempt to emulate the leaders (ms, apple, unix) in the respective fields. all this makes up linux culture, and like windows, it started with command line. but unlike windows, it keeps the command line as an integeral interface. In no way was i suggesting that linux give up the gui in favor of the command line. the two can happily coexist (as they are). what I was saying is that linux (gnome) should stop drying to dumb itself down fow the newbies, and instead should provide intuitive documentation to educate them while improving (making it more intuitive) its interface. they tried dumbin it down by making nautilus spacial and a large majority disliked it. the cli is as fast and efficient as the gui, if you know how to use it, and visa versa.
There's the real problem I see with seeing something like FC, Debian, or whatever as the "universal" OS....f we can't find some way to stifle the l33t d00dz, not even just a little, then there's no need of me ever mentioning to anyone that I use Linux as my desktop, and further, that people might be able to use it someday instead of Windows. no there's not. linux distro have done a very good job with this. you can choose a specializes distro for you server or use a panacea like fedora and customise it. as I said, linux is modular and has influences from every computer industry. its modularity allows the server only l33t3st to use the cli to there hearts content while the point-n-clik- drones can use which ever gui (gnome, kde, etc) they wish and you can have this on the same computer. Ignorance + lack of time != idiocy. actually idiot: "An unlearned, ignorant, or simple person, as distinguished
from the educated; an ignoramus."
idiocy: "The condition or quality of being an idiot; absence, or marked deficiency, of sense and intelligence." (curtisy of gnome-dictionary)
need I say more?

neus

6th September 2004, 10:08 PM

Also, I should have the option of going to buy a new automobile with manual transmission, unpowered steering, old-fashioned brakes, and while we're at it, a spark advance and crank start. Only idiots want power steering, ignition systems, and a starter.

Funny you saing that, here in europe almost every car has manual transmission ( some has assisted transmission ), unpowered steering ( preferably semi-assisted steering, smart steering ).

And why is that you may ask ? Because manual transmission saves fuel consumption and improves car performance, unpowered or semi-assisted because it gives you more security and a more efficient steering system, assisted steering in low velocity scenarios and classic/unpowered steering in high velocity.

Damn if you really want a efficient car, you would want to buy a hybrid car !

You can think the same about windows - linux. Not every feature that was been developed to help the Average Joe, is really helpfull or correct. Linux is about choices and evolution, windows developers tend to oversimplify, and oversimplifying tends to morph into usability problems.

APT and Synaptic is a god send, there is only one thing missing to be a complete solution, more apt repositories !

regards,
Daniel

David

8th September 2004, 01:37 PM

it's also worth mentioning that a manual car is more responsive and generally easier to understand once you've become acustomed to its ways. Adjusting the choke yourself, using a clutch, using manual steering all give you a better sense of how the car behaves and works. But many people don't want to get under the bonet on a Saturday morning to try to work out what's up with the ignition. In fact, most people don't even check the tread on their tyres any more.

It's not possible for one OS to be all things to everybody. Speed sacrifices user friendliness; security sacrifices convenience, and so on. It seems like a very good idea to me that there are different strains of Linux to accomodate different people. All sacrifice one thing for the gain of another. Debian Woody, for example, is severely antiquated and a bugger to install, but it's steady as a rock making it ideal for use in a server or for tasks where stability is essential. It's also great for developers, of course. By contrast, Linspire (of Lindows origin) breaks the ultimate rule by logging one in as super user. This is essentially what Windows does and the result is a more conveninet system at the cost of security.

I would have to agree that, at the moment, I haven't found the perfect system for me, but FC1 comes pretty damn close. The major problem I see with making Linux adaptable in this way is that it puts 3rd parties off supporting it because which distro are they going to support?

sailor

11th September 2004, 11:00 PM

"You have to be 'this tall' to ride the linux roller coaster"...(unknown forum user)
the final goal is aways off in the distance, if you take the ride you will be better off in the end...

I prefer manual transmission myself...:)

fjleal

11th September 2004, 11:30 PM

"Linux is user friendly. It is not ignorant-friendly or idiot-friendly."

Taken from fortunes. Manual transmission here also. ;)

sayeeth

12th September 2004, 02:00 PM

Something that is constantly evolving at the current rate of time cannot possible die or in an extreme case, become extinct. Every creation lives for a certain period of time. Fedora has a long way to live and its lifespan will increase as we age. In my humble opinion, Fedora Core is more alive than before and many users have come to like its simplicity and ease of use.

owakroeger

12th September 2004, 03:05 PM

I just read this thread, mostly from start to end, skipping just a few posts which seemed a bit farther towards the fringe than I'm comfortable with.
I'm a Windows convert of about 9 months. I agonized over the 'blue screen of death' crashes of Windows one last time, and made the switch. Freedom of choice! That is the key and operative element in this entire discussion. We are here, participating in this discussion because of it, and as a result, in defense of it.
Will Fedora go away? In my opinion, only when these fertile discussions go away.
Do I bristle when someone refers to a Windows user as an idiot? Or when they imply that somehow they are superior because they know how to use command-line and prefer that? Of course I do, but I console myself by feeling superior, in my own way, for choosing NOT to respond to such an idiotic remark.
When one admits to lack of knowlege in a particular field, he ceases to be an idiot, and becomes a seeker of knowlege. When one claims to have all the knowlege, he becomes an idiot.
So, keep up the discourse! It's good for the community. And, speaking of the community, I continue to be amazed at the vastness of knowlege available and willingly shared within the linux community. Try seeking an answer to a problem in the proprietary world without first opening your wallet.
With a slight adjustment for inflation, my $0.02.

owa

DarkMasterMatt

15th September 2004, 12:36 AM

Fedora won't die as long as it continues to improve.

fimi

15th September 2004, 01:14 AM

The grouth rate of SPAM/AD ware that Windows users are experiencing i'm very positive that if they had an easier OS to use they would switch for sure....

Now, about the GUI of fedora compated to Windows.... i agree with some of you that there are alot of features that i think would need to be improved in order for Windows users to switch to Fedora, first, i would say an easier upgrade/install software tool(graphical one)...
there are others for sure...

i would suggest developers of Fedora keep in mind this rule: KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid

The only way to make people switch from windows is to make Fedora so simple outside so that anyone can use it. As for the other people that know every command they would have no effect on this because they would do this in Terminal.

If the switch happens then there would be alot more software for Fedora and it would be the Best OS.

The best feature i think Fedora has is the install/upgrade software from internet from the Software Manager, it would be alot better if a graphical version existed of yum....

Why don't someone here make a survey on how their ideal operating system would be( speaking of wide range of people who take the survey), this way we would have a very big view how people want to use their computer to operate....

'i think the best way to attract people to some sftware is to listen to what they want' (in general)

sorry my english is not very good

sayeeth

15th September 2004, 02:12 AM

This may be off topic but why the major concern for people to switch? Competition is important and a vital part of economics, so is choice. If people were to start focusing on Windows users to convert the Linux, then the entire economic system will break. Everyone is entitled to a choice here.

Instead of worrying about getting Windows users to convert, focus more on Linux users and their needs. Stop trying to make Linux more Windows-like, defeats the entire purpose of choice and creativity. This makes one still think out-of-the-box and that concept is more than 5 years old. We will still be backward. Sure most of us need a Windows app here and there, blame that on monopolism. We didn't choose for that to happen. For those who really need those apps, let them dual boot. They will be happy about it.

For others who clearly need a change in OS or want to try something new, let Linux be another option, not an only option. Give people the option to choose, that is the beauty of open source. The reason why there are so many GNU/Linux distros is because different people have different needs. It is completely senseless to brag about one's personal distro and bring down another. Where is the friendly spiritedness and competition here?

Stop worrying about making Fedora the Best OS. Let it evolve by itself over time, based on user's needs and developer's brilliance. Its purpose should not be "To Be The Best Linux Distro". Instead it should be "We Are Among The Finest In Class of Linux Distros". Let it be another of the more worthwhile options that people will decide to choose. Just my two cents. :)

imdeemvp

15th September 2004, 07:46 AM

Fedora won't die as long as it continues to improve.

can you say FC 3 already cooking and coming in late october...... ;)

superbnerd

15th September 2004, 10:20 AM

Instead of worrying about getting Windows users to convert, focus more on Linux users and their needs. Thats what this forum is for.

DarkMasterMatt

15th September 2004, 12:51 PM

can you say FC 3 already cooking and coming in late october...... ;)

Yes, FC3 is gonna own. :D

sayeeth

15th September 2004, 06:09 PM

superbnerd, I was making a general remark on what fimi had mentioned. Maybe you should read the post first before quoting? :p Lets not get too nit-picky now and yes I know what this forum is for. :D

superbnerd

15th September 2004, 08:30 PM

yes, I knew you were generallizing. just pointing it out, so newbies don't percieve all linux users as foaming mouthed slasdot/grok lawers (aka religious zealots).

Shadow Skill

18th September 2004, 05:47 AM

Someone just end two things:

1. Dependency hell I want/need to be able to mix source, rpm, and quite frankly any other distro's packages since not everything exists as rpm. (This can come a bit later in the ending of dephell, but it is going to be a definet plus that Distro's will be transparent enough for this.)

2. Understand that these need to exist, no more CLI masochism and fix the gui config frontends and allow BOTH the CLI and the GUI to work 99.9% of the time and not have the CLI be the only real option.

bamboo_spider

18th September 2004, 09:54 AM

Owa has captured a lot of what I wanted to say

but then its worth saying it again.

1. There are lots and lots of types of users around - in an operating system (I think): the easier the front end becomes the more the users. DOS's early versions aren't friendly and windows comes after dos. Users vary from the highly proficient to the ignorant to the lazy. USers have different histories. My job is planting trees, conservation work - my job on a computer is limited I want it done fast, efficiently and well. I don't have time to spend on cli or anysuch stuff - who'll provide it.
Add to this then the economics involved the licensing stuff, my money is btter spent on seeds rather than AV updates and newer versions of a os or related software

add to this the politics : Open Source versus proprietary

add to this choices we make as individuals : our willingness to sacrifice something for the other, the path we choose

I have used windows for 10 years but cannot claim to understand what makes it work and even be able to administer it , linux is less easy because its been just a few months but its getting on and after 10 years i don't think i'll be an expert , i'll just be more familiar.

Quote Owa ;"One admits to a lack of knowledge and is a therefore a seeker " all of us here at this forum is a seeker (though harry potter might disagree) many of us may be less inclined and have less aptitude to some stuff but we are in this together. And in other things we may be experts - or in none at all.

Its not a question of dumbing down Gnome or anything - its getting more people involved. After 3 months of linux i know more about linux then I did in my entire life - I know some commands too but that does'nt make me an expert nor does it make me an idiot.

To draw people in something has to be easy - the hard stuff is alwasy later on - life in the mid ages.:D

Manual Transmission: Its a choice try driving hours at a stretch on bad roads on twisting mountain roads, theres a case here for power steering. Talk to the conservationists : theres a case for manual steering

Finally : Zen and the art of Linux (sorry for the blatant plagiarising) but there are those who will fiddle with the engine and underdstand it , there are those who won't and there are those who are hafl way house. All are riders in the storm - all make the journey enjoyable

sailor

19th September 2004, 04:03 PM

bamboo spider that was very nicely said....*applause!*

gretske

7th December 2004, 02:56 AM

Since the topic has been raised. . . .

I started in computing with UNIX in 1983. A GUI in those days was an 80 column dumb terminal, and you had to have a PhD in Computer Science to bring a new UNIX box up. There was one system, the PC7300, or 3B1, that made a valient effort at being user friendly, but never really caught on. I have watched this for 20 years now, and Linux really stands to make a stab at W*ndows. The time is right. Windows is really a poor performer, and one, aggressive, greedy company has all the keys to the kingdom. They will untimately fail. A bold prediction, but look at the big computer companies in 1984, 20 years ago - RCA, Burroughs, IBM, GE. Where are they today? Gone. Why? Because they fought turf wars, and didn't think about the end users.
Back to Linux. It could easily catch on, but it has to do what IBM did with the PC, and make system administration transparent to the end user. No other way to say this. I have just spent the better part of the weekend struggling with FC3, the latest incarnation. What! No program installer. Have to install from the command line? WRONG! Support about a tenth of the wireless cards in use? MEEP! Time's up!
Forget about the technically sexy stuff. If you guys want the world to use Linux, make it easy.
Last comment, IF YOU NEED DOCUMENTATION, IT DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for listening, I feel batter now.

-gretske

james_in_denver

7th December 2004, 03:25 AM

if you are offended by implied profanity, stop reading here.

ROFLMAO....troll/flame bait.....

Oh sure, Micro$oft will take back the server/web-server market from Linux/Apache??? And Oracle, IBM, Sun, HP, and several other companies will give up their marketshare on Linux????

ROFLMAO again.......

follow the money, and the big $$$$ is on Linux.....maybe not on the destop for a while yet, but certainly in the data-centers.......

Even on the desktop, linux is closing the gap fast. Think of "MS-DOS" 20 years ago or "Windows 3.1" about 17 years ago". It took Microsoft that long to grow from that to XP??? Linux "GUI's" are only a few years old, and have pretty much caught up with Microsoft. (well, almost).

And don't forget, the developing world is not going to shell out several hundred $$$ (U.S.) for "MS-Office"......

like I said, troll/flame bait....

Question:How many people would even OWN a computer if they had to install the O/S themselves????

Answer: Not very many.

gretske

7th December 2004, 03:37 AM

James -

There are two parts to the O/S installation issue. First, is the intitial installation. With most Linux distros that is a disaster today, and most manufacturers of desktops will not do Linux. The second part is the ongoing B/S that has to be done. Linux has problems here as well. But, the biggest fallacy to your argument is the $$$$. That is Microsoft's strong suit. They not only get it for themselves, but they also take care of the chain of distribution. Everybody gets a little. With Linux, there is so much "free" stuff" out there, that it is difficult to build a channel.

Think about it. If you were selling systems, which would you sell - Microsoft, where the use is going to keep back for more "stuff", or Linux, where they would download it for free? The key to the future of Linux, if it is to succeed, is for a strong market leader to emerge, one that will ask for money, and get because they offer value in return. I would pay for a good Linux package right now, but there aren't any that I can see.

crackers

7th December 2004, 03:45 AM

I would pay for a good Linux package right now, but there aren't any that I can see.
You're kidding, right?

Xandros
Mandrake
Novell/SuSE
RH
Lycoris

and tons of others.

gretske

7th December 2004, 03:49 AM

Maybe we don't agree on what "good" means?

james_in_denver

7th December 2004, 04:05 AM

well gretske....

I have to disagree with the $$$ side of your point.....Oracle, IBM, HP and Sun have HUGE amounts of $$$ invested in Linux. In the data-center Microsoft isn't always their partner, more likely their competitor, and for price/performance/scalability, Unix and/or Linux beat MS hands down in every single TCO/ROI statistic I have seen (on similar hardware).

Will that drive marketshare on the Desktop??? To some degree yes (though maybe VERY small). I thought it was most interesting that Sun opensourced their StarOffice that became OpenOffice. Clearly a shot, however minimal, at taking market share away from Microsoft.

The only clear advantage that I see Microsoft having on the Desktop is "pre-installed/bundled" O/S, and the integration of their apps. But think about this...four years ago X-windows was pretty much only good for having a couple of x-terms running, a web-browser, and x-clock....look where it has come in just 4 years......MUCH faster development/test/release cycle than MS can keep up with.

In all truthfullness....Microsoft's only significant advantage over Linux is that MS software comes pre-installed and pre-configured.....

james_in_denver

7th December 2004, 04:17 AM

Since I am on this pro-Linux rant, here's a simple question.....

How many "average" Windows users adequately maintain their systems??? How many Windows systems are secure from virii and other exploits?

How many "average" users can add a new PCI card or disk drive to their Windows systems??? (That's why Best Buy and other reatailers make a KILLING off of "installation for fee" programs)

How many "average" Windows users have even gone into "regedit"???

If you are "geeky" or proficient with Windows how many other "average" Windows users have YOU helped or fixed their system for them?????

Answers: Not many, not many, not many, and every single non-geek friend you have........

crackers

7th December 2004, 06:46 AM

and every single non-geek friend you have........
You forgot to mention my mother... :D

Shadow Skill

7th December 2004, 07:24 AM

You know it seems more like you all are trolling not him..anyway I think his original post does have some merit, particularly his last comment about making things easy regardless of how you may decide to evade the issue by pulling out the usual troll/flame card the fact of the matter is he is absolutely right. Easy for us sure as hell is not easy for say my mom or dad [I'm so tempted to experiment on them too.] it is still the realm of nerds, or are you going to tell me that for example Gentoo is user friendly? [A five hour stage 3 base install is entirely NOT user friendly.]

gretske

7th December 2004, 11:33 AM

Well, at least someone has thought about what I said, and did not just come to the defense of some of the more undefensible aspects of Linux. Believe me, I would love to see Linux or Apple dethrone Microsoft. Someone will. It is inevitable. All I was doing was to point out what Linux is lacking. Face it, no matter how much you love it, it is not at all user friendly. Windows, for all its foibles, looks more user friendly. This is not to say that it is user friendly, but it gives a more friendly face to the user. Yes, Windows has many security leaks, bugs and other serious defects, but what does a user have to do? Deal with a tarball? Go to a command line and enter esoteric programming commands? No, just click on "Windows Update" and the patches are done for you. That looks easier to a consumer, and overcomes the obvious deficits in the O/S in the first place.
My point is, Linux is 99% ready to take on Windows. It is the final 1% that needs help. RH9 was getting close to this. What happened to the RPM Manager? Why can't I find it in FC3? This made installation and updates easy. Why isn't it, or something like it, in FC3? 1%
You may scoff at "point and clickers", but if you want market acceptance, you are going to have to design your product for them. No matter how inane it appears. 1%
Microsoft created an API that any ISV could use to test and package their product. Linux desperately needs that to make the grade. Yes, Linux is a wonderful framework, but until equipment manufacturers offer easily loadable device drivers for Linux with their products, Windows will still rein supreme. 1%
Wow, you are really going to HATE this, but Linux needs marketers, not engineers, if it is going to seriously challenge Microsoft for the desktop. You may consider them insipid, but they have one objective in mind - Get the user what they want. 1%
Think about it. The time is right. The product is better, all we need is a small amount of polish, and Linux could get real market share. It cannot make it if it cannot get out of the back room.
That's just my opinion. I could be wrong. (Apologies to Dennis Miller.)

Psquared

7th December 2004, 02:25 PM

My $.02 worth to this discussion.

The reason Windo$e seems so user friendly is because we have grown up with it. Its everywhere on TV, magazines, Video Professor, etc.

If you took a 50 year old who had never seen a PC before and knew absolutely nothing, and sat him/her down in front of two PCs side-by-side, one loaded with XP and one with a functioning FC2, FC3, SuSe, Mandrake or whatever, gave them basic instructions and then turned them lose which one do you think they would choose?

I know its a ridiculous/rhetorical question but it points out how this must eventually play out.

My feeling is that Linux is able to implement newer technology faster than M$ and will overtake it with features that Redmond will either have to steal, buy or sue to get.

I don't think its there yet, but with the spreading Linux community the personal computer paradigm is changing. That kind of change cannot be stopped.

It is entirely possible that in 10 years you will be able to walk into your office and with voice command tell your Linux FC12 what you want it to do. :D

gretske

7th December 2004, 03:05 PM

Good point, and certainly not ridiculous.

Two questions -

1. Which one do you think the 50 year old would pick? (Consider that the market is not necessarily targeted at those over 50, so would it change your choice if you made it "any adult'?)

2. If you added a Mac to the choices, which one would the user pick?

Shadow Skill

8th December 2004, 12:15 AM

He would probably be quite attracted to the mac which is apparently even easier to use than windows...not realizing he would be pissing his money away for an over priced piece of garbage hardware setup. If he managed to figure that part out he would probably take his chances with Windows, Linux would come in dead last because it will become a nightmare once he eventually does encounter a problem. We have all experienced them at some point in our journey with linux thats why we come here alot anyway. But keep in mind this is your mom, dad or grandfather, grandmother we are talking about who grew up well before the age of computers, so lets not fall into the trap of wishful thinking that they won't experience nightmare issues.

gretske

8th December 2004, 01:35 AM

Yes, that's how I would guess it would come out. If you think about it, with OS X, which is UNIX, and Windows, which is a knock-off of UNIX and Linux, we are talking about essentially the same technical underpinning. The difference is the degree to which the user interface has been refined. With Mac, until OS X. you could not ever get a CLI, with Windows, you could, but the CLI has become less and less useful. This gets back to where I started in the beginnng.

The problem with Linux today is that those who produce software for it assume the end user can use a CLI ,and does not mind doing so. If Linux is to be a serious competitor for the desktop, and not a poor third, as it currently is, the people who make software must protect the end user from the CLI, AT ALL. If they do that, Linux is clearly superior technically, and could make vast inroads.

sailor

8th December 2004, 02:46 AM

THis is an old story, but I think it is important to achieve a common base for linux developement and this hopefully will lead to a solution to some of the problems mentioned:

Connectiva, Mandrakesoft, Progeny and Turbolinux today announce the creation of a common implementation of the LSB 2.0 which will serve as the base for future products. The project, called "Linux Core Consortium" (LCC), is backed by Linux supporters such as Computer Associates, HP, Novell, Red Hat, Sun, OSDL, and the Free Standards Group. All details are in the press-release, read more for the full story:
http://www.linuxlookup.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2794&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

gretske

8th December 2004, 03:27 AM

Sailor-

Thanks for posting this. It is a start. As a journalist, I especially like the comment after the release! I guess we also need some user friendliness in our press communications.

Shadow Skill

9th December 2004, 11:17 AM

Your right we must "protect" the user from the CLI but NEVER cripple it or make it some entirely unknown thing in as is the case with windows where the only real way to diagnose certain network related issues is to use the CLI, which almost know one myself included knows about anymore. The CLI must be regarded as the near all powerful tool that it is but it can't be the first stop for everything remotely important.

Sailor when that common base comes into existence about 60% of the problems we have now will be solved, the rest involve hardware support and user friendliness...

gretske

10th December 2004, 04:34 AM

Shadow -
That's exactly where I started with this. One of the most powerful characteristics of Linux (UNIX) is the wide range of programming tools, from shell scripts to executables. The last 1% I was harping on earlier is the use of these tools to insulate "innocent" users (non-combatants?) from the dreaded shell prompt. I have seen talented people make shell scripts that are a work of art. It is a simple (?!?) matter of setting it up so the user can point and click, if they so desire.

Case in point - bringing up a wireless card that is not supported. This could be offered without having to download ndiswrapper, compiling it, installing it, and doing the byzantine commands to make it work. The average user would rather perform a frontal lobotomy on himself than to compile a C program. A well thought out shell script would insulate the user, and get the job done. Again, the last 1%.

Great discussion, this!

crackers

10th December 2004, 06:25 AM

I have seen talented people make shell scripts that are a work of art. It is a simple (?!?) matter of setting it up so the user can point and click, if they so desire.
...
A well thought out shell script would insulate the user, and get the job done. Again, the last 1%.
The problem is that the last 1% is usually the hardest and the driver guys are more interested/tasked/concentrated on just getting the blasted thing to work. ("What? Write documentation?!?! I write code, dangit!") And, sometimes, the shell wizards don't necessarily talk to the C wizards and vice versa. Not a judgement, just observation.

Heck, why don't you get one of your shell wizard friends to talk to the NDisWrapper folks? You may be the progenator of what you wish for! :D

tkmaster

16th December 2004, 02:00 AM

I've been a RedHat user since 5.2, and I loved it - from the old KDE 2 days (Gnome 1.x wasn't really worth it :) ) to the great Gnome 2.6 that I know use at home and work, but one thing disappoints me - the lack of real innovation in RedHat/Fedora products.

Just looking at RedHat 9, released a LONG time ago and the preliminary shots of FC3 makes me wonder. Nothing has been done to improve the newbie user's experience. I use it for stability and development and OSS-goodness-inside-feeling, but I must agree that if M$ raises the bar for stability and security with Windows 6.0 due sometime late next year or something, Linux will die on the desktop before ever really having been there.

Does anyone out there share my concerns? Fedora developers should round up a great set of packages (Firefox and Thunderbird still missing, I don't know why) and top it with great frontends for everyday tasks like adding hardware, updating said packages, and so on - so that the command line should be needed and wanted only by command line freaks like myself, not people coming from Windows that will never fit in. Why isn't this happening? Why hasn't the BlueCurve look and icons had a simple retouch or something in years?

People who wants a free OS will have no choice but to use fedora or some other free linux distro..

the only way microsoft will be able to beat linux is if they were to offer their os for free.... and i dont see that happening any time soon

Shadow Skill

16th December 2004, 09:32 AM

LOL Tk trust me Microsoft need not do any such thing, if they can pull off Longhorn, which is a long shot [I couldn't resist.] they will be able to deal a great blow buy pulling back in people that were even remotely interested in gaining freedom from the beast.

Lt_Anton

18th December 2004, 12:16 AM

I'm a long time linux fan. The first distro I ever used was RH7.2 at the time I never really had a good enough reason to make the big plung and learn linux. I'll be honest I didn't use Linux because of the steep learning curve that is involved with jumping from windoz to Linux. A short while ago I had a hijacker steal my internet connection I will spare the ugly details but after much frustration I broke out my old RHL7.2 disks and completely wiped anything M$ off my computer. To make a long story short I downloaded the FC3 and I love it. I haven't had any problems. The only time I had any problems was when I had Open Office.org internationalization installed but as soon as I removed that everything worked great. I doubt I will ever have much of a use for windoz unless I am playing WOW!!!

neighborlee

9th January 2006, 03:56 AM

Let's look at the FC2 GNOME out-of-the-box
What do you see?

Computer icon, your home Folder, Trash and the most important thing; Start Here
A person who never used a computer OS before would probably start here :)

You have Applications, Preferences and System Setting here !
Everything you need is one click away. + the nautilus spatial is perfect for total newbie.

Easy as hell

everything is not really easy as hexx. For one thing there is no way to eject media in cd drive without using right click >eject ( not after a standard install that is), and this is so because what developer says it should be ?

fedora embraces OSS and for that i applaud them 100% ( backing ogg/theora which are replacements for patented technology ), but when a user goes to download something not in the repo they are stuck with a CLI session most likely, and thats not the focus of windows or even say mandriva which handles rpm deps during net installs. There are alteratives, but if fedora is to become the best that RHEE can offer, then why the slow adoption of easy to install third party packages not in repo yet ? ( yes I know about the rpm install from internet but it does not download dependencies, it just warns you about themb ).

not having reiserfs as at least a install-time option is odd at best and making assumption that redhat knows best with ext3, when clearly it has its own share of problems from a shutdown that was not planned ( does redhat know better than suse or mandriva or linspire or xandros ? : if so I would like them to share , and yes I know about selinux issues but not everyone is going to want or need selinux ).

Can the nvidia installer be made as easy as it is in suse , and if not how come ? ;-) ( again we are fighting against the CLI to avoid 'im going back to windows screaming all the way cause what is this CLI im told I must learn?' ).

we might agree that mp3's are not legal but many people still use them, so can not we have a form to 'agree' to during install and enable mp3 playback ?

No menu editing still?..even windows has rudimentary menu editing I mean come on. ( ie: it comes as a pre-installed ability and one that is easy as pie because windows knows their market ).

fedora has many good points and should not be diminished, but the original poster makes good points and I wonder what fedora position on them is,,we all want the same thing which is more vendor support, and we wont get it without a BIG user base obtained from easy'' to use components not unlike the ease ( yes we know lacking security ) of windows.

Finalzone

9th January 2006, 08:57 AM

fedora embraces OSS and for that i applaud them 100% ( backing ogg/theora which are replacements for patented technology ), but when a user goes to download something not in the repo they are stuck with a CLI session most likely, and thats not the focus of windows or even say mandriva which handles rpm deps during net installs. There are alteratives, but if fedora is to become the best that RHEE can offer, then why the slow adoption of easy to install third party packages not in repo yet ? ( yes I know about the rpm install from internet but it does not download dependencies, it just warns you about themb ).

You need to learn to use yum which is the default package manager for Fedora.
Yumex is one of GPU package manager for yum, kyum is another.
Concerning about third parties repository, Fedora Core cannot include them being a US distros based. You don't want Red Hat/Fedora to be in court for breaking US laws.

not having reiserfs as at least a install-time option is odd at best and making assumption that redhat knows best with ext3, when clearly it has its own share of problems from a shutdown that was not planned ( does redhat know better than suse or mandriva or linspire or xandros ? : if so I would like them to share , and yes I know about selinux issues but not everyone is going to want or need selinux ).
On boot prompt, use "linux reiserfs" to enable it. AFAIK, the problem is with Reiserfs developers themselves.

Can the nvidia installer be made as easy as it is in suse , and if not how come ? ;-) ( again we are fighting against the CLI to avoid 'im going back to windows screaming all the way cause what is this CLI im told I must learn?' ).
You just violated Fedora policies to not include any proprietary software. Users have fedorafaq.org as a guide.

we might agree that mp3's are not legal but many people still use them, so can not we have a form to 'agree' to during install and enable mp3 playback ?
Ask lawyers about that. Fedora Project cannot provide a software such as MP3 under the risk to be sued. They have to follow laws not breaking it.

No menu editing still?..even windows has rudimentary menu editing I mean come on. ( ie: it comes as a pre-installed ability and one that is easy as pie because windows knows their market ).
SMEG and Alacarte are menu editors available on Fedora Extras.