3 ms·

I'm glad you agree with my conclusion. What you said about drivers is defensible; it was just the first thought that popped into my head. Nowadays linux has pr

I'm glad you agree with my conclusion. What you said about drivers is defensible; it was just the first thought that popped into my head. Nowadays linux has progressed enough to bypass that usually - but what about being required to use the terminal just to install? Most users don't know what sudo, wget, make, or apt-get commands are, just to start. Most users don't know what commands are, in fact. They don't care about root access or custom options. They need and expect a graphical wizard to walk them through the core basics of their programs, and even then they shouldn't try to perform anything other than the checked box "basic installation". Perhaps that's a better example? Now, you can blame this on third party developers not packaging their applications as handily as they do for Mac or Windows, forcing people to gather and compile sources themselves. But this doesn't change the bottom-line - linux is not convenient (which we agree on). And I have used iTunes on Windows, and I found it wasn't bloated. It seems to be more or less on par with my Mac to be honest, though frankly I haven't used it for that platform except to help other people in the past year.

Dylan16807 13y ago
Only the most terrible of (graphical) distros would require you to use a command line to install things. I'm not aware of any. So no, it's not a better example. You open up your designated package manager and pick what you want, like an app store where everything is free.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  But that's not true, what if I want to install third party applications not listed in (for sake of example) Ubuntu's app store? Sure, Firefox and popular community apps will always be either pre-installed or easy to install with a GUI. But what about fringe applications that not enough people use to merit a spot in the repository of available apps?
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    Often it's just a case of downloading and double clicking a .deb. Though I do agree that the UI for the software store as well as the process for adding third party repos could be made a lot smoother and the release codenames are confusing,
  - Dylan16807 13y ago
    http://askubuntu.com/questions/4983/what-are-ppas-and-how-do-i-use-them http://askubuntu.com/questions/4983/what-are-ppas-and-how-do... All the third party software I've seen for ubuntu has had a PPA, and those are simple to install via GUI. If an application is so fringe that it's source-only you might need the command line, but that's nothing compared to the pain of compiling programs with dependencies on windows.
jiggy2011 13y ago
To be fair, if you use a friendly distro like Ubuntu you don't have to touch the command line unless you want to or you're trying to do something reasonably advanced. Ironically I also find that I can often get things to work much more easily too. Tried to setup a printer the other day under Windows 7 and went through a process of faffing around with HP drivers, updates and weird dialog boxes. Under Ubuntu I told it to print and it basically said "on this printer?" , I said "yes" and it printed. Also trying to share files between 2 computers on a LAN is an order of magnitude easier. The bigger problem is that lack of strong options for certain types of software (e.g Music editing, Graphics editing, Games) under Linux and also support for some types of hardware. Though these would be quickly rectified if it had marketshare.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  The problem with marketshare is that it's a cycle. Getting marketshare requires those kinds of features (generally), which requires paying your engineers a better salary (again, generally, there are exceptions). But that won't happen without a marketshare to bankroll better engineers. And at that point, you might as well be proprietary.
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    Not sure what salaries Canonical pay , but I assume that they are competitive enough. I have heard that the perks are good, work from home etc. So I doubt that they have a problem attracting good talent, I would wager that their average level of developer skill is significantly higher than the average devshop. Of course they are a smaller company (than say Apple), so may not have the resources to build every single program people want. OTOH third party vendors can certainly fill this gap, but then you hit the chicken and egg problem that third party vendors don't want to develop for it (at least desktop software) because marketshare is low. Web based and cross platform software alleviates this problem significantly though. Of course it depends if you are Richard Stallman and must use 100% GPL software for everything, or whether you are happy with certain compromises. I would say that having your core OS as 100% open source software even if you run proprietary apps on top is a significant step forward.
SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
>Most users don't know what sudo, wget, make, or apt-get commands are, just to start. Have you used Ubuntu recently? Or Mint? They've made a lot of strides in that direction, including fancy graphical package installers. On the other hand, when I use any Linux, I typically drop to the shell and edit config files, but that's because I'm always trying to do something unusual. Otherwise I wouldn't be on Linux to begin with. But for the 95th percentile of what typical people use a computer for (basic email, web browsing, maybe basic text editing), Linux is as easy to use as a Mac or Windows. In fact, Windows and OS X only recently are catching up to how easy it was to get software on the popular Linux desktop distributions: It was a matter of running the software installer app and selecting the programs you wanted. Now Windows and OS X each have their own "app stores", but Linux had that bit of convenience first. The only thing that prevents Linux from being on more personal computers is the fact that it doesn't ship on them. Consider Android, which is a Linux fork, is on millions of devices (a million a day are shipping now), so there's nothing wrong with Linux that can't be fixed with a few apps to smooth the edges. No, being a power user is what keeps me on Windows. There are no sufficiently good replacements for: * Adobe Photoshop/Lightroom (and Creative Suite in general) * Sony Vegas Video * Corel Draw Suite * FL Studio * Visual Studio * Microsoft Word & Excel (don't get me started on how badly OpenOffice sucks...I've tried to use it for years, and they just can't get even close to "It Just Works.") * Netflix and Amazon streaming Any one of these would require I keep at least a virtual Windows instance around, and some (like FL Studio) really need you to be running on the raw hardware. I've tried, again and again, to use free versions of all of the above, and the usability and feature set is nowhere near what I need in the free offerings. I've given up at this point; there are just too many critical apps on Windows for me to jump ship. >And I have used iTunes on Windows, and I found it wasn't bloated. In my experience, iTunes on Windows is one of the most hated pieces of software around; probably second only to QuickTime. I hate it with a passion, and I hate the fact that I can't use other software instead. I'm running 16Gb of RAM, an i7 with 8 threads, and a fast SSD hard drive, and yet it's still slow and frustrating, not to mention awkwardly designed and buggy. Not sure what you're running that it doesn't seem bloated, but it absolutely (and frequently) screws up in talking to iPads. And the fact that it considers every new upgrade a "new computer install", threatening to lock me out of my content and devices if I don't "uninstall" it first from the older computers (that have been reformatted) is absolutely infuriating.

Dylan16807 13y ago

Only the most terrible of (graphical) distros would require you to use a command line to install things. I'm not aware of any. So no, it's not a better example. You open up your designated package manager and pick what you want, like an app store where everything is free.

dylangs1030 13y ago
But that's not true, what if I want to install third party applications not listed in (for sake of example) Ubuntu's app store? Sure, Firefox and popular community apps will always be either pre-installed or easy to install with a GUI. But what about fringe applications that not enough people use to merit a spot in the repository of available apps?
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  Often it's just a case of downloading and double clicking a .deb. Though I do agree that the UI for the software store as well as the process for adding third party repos could be made a lot smoother and the release codenames are confusing,
- Dylan16807 13y ago
  http://askubuntu.com/questions/4983/what-are-ppas-and-how-do-i-use-them http://askubuntu.com/questions/4983/what-are-ppas-and-how-do... All the third party software I've seen for ubuntu has had a PPA, and those are simple to install via GUI. If an application is so fringe that it's source-only you might need the command line, but that's nothing compared to the pain of compiling programs with dependencies on windows.

jiggy2011 13y ago

To be fair, if you use a friendly distro like Ubuntu you don't have to touch the command line unless you want to or you're trying to do something reasonably advanced. Ironically I also find that I can often get things to work much more easily too. Tried to setup a printer the other day under Windows 7 and went through a process of faffing around with HP drivers, updates and weird dialog boxes. Under Ubuntu I told it to print and it basically said "on this printer?" , I said "yes" and it printed. Also trying to share files between 2 computers on a LAN is an order of magnitude easier. The bigger problem is that lack of strong options for certain types of software (e.g Music editing, Graphics editing, Games) under Linux and also support for some types of hardware. Though these would be quickly rectified if it had marketshare.

dylangs1030 13y ago
The problem with marketshare is that it's a cycle. Getting marketshare requires those kinds of features (generally), which requires paying your engineers a better salary (again, generally, there are exceptions). But that won't happen without a marketshare to bankroll better engineers. And at that point, you might as well be proprietary.
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  Not sure what salaries Canonical pay , but I assume that they are competitive enough. I have heard that the perks are good, work from home etc. So I doubt that they have a problem attracting good talent, I would wager that their average level of developer skill is significantly higher than the average devshop. Of course they are a smaller company (than say Apple), so may not have the resources to build every single program people want. OTOH third party vendors can certainly fill this gap, but then you hit the chicken and egg problem that third party vendors don't want to develop for it (at least desktop software) because marketshare is low. Web based and cross platform software alleviates this problem significantly though. Of course it depends if you are Richard Stallman and must use 100% GPL software for everything, or whether you are happy with certain compromises. I would say that having your core OS as 100% open source software even if you run proprietary apps on top is a significant step forward.

SomeCallMeTim 13y ago

>Most users don't know what sudo, wget, make, or apt-get commands are, just to start. Have you used Ubuntu recently? Or Mint? They've made a lot of strides in that direction, including fancy graphical package installers. On the other hand, when I use any Linux, I typically drop to the shell and edit config files, but that's because I'm always trying to do something unusual. Otherwise I wouldn't be on Linux to begin with. But for the 95th percentile of what typical people use a computer for (basic email, web browsing, maybe basic text editing), Linux is as easy to use as a Mac or Windows. In fact, Windows and OS X only recently are catching up to how easy it was to get software on the popular Linux desktop distributions: It was a matter of running the software installer app and selecting the programs you wanted. Now Windows and OS X each have their own "app stores", but Linux had that bit of convenience first. The only thing that prevents Linux from being on more personal computers is the fact that it doesn't ship on them. Consider Android, which is a Linux fork, is on millions of devices (a million a day are shipping now), so there's nothing wrong with Linux that can't be fixed with a few apps to smooth the edges. No, being a power user is what keeps me on Windows. There are no sufficiently good replacements for: * Adobe Photoshop/Lightroom (and Creative Suite in general) * Sony Vegas Video * Corel Draw Suite * FL Studio * Visual Studio * Microsoft Word & Excel (don't get me started on how badly OpenOffice sucks...I've tried to use it for years, and they just can't get even close to "It Just Works.") * Netflix and Amazon streaming Any one of these would require I keep at least a virtual Windows instance around, and some (like FL Studio) really need you to be running on the raw hardware. I've tried, again and again, to use free versions of all of the above, and the usability and feature set is nowhere near what I need in the free offerings. I've given up at this point; there are just too many critical apps on Windows for me to jump ship. >And I have used iTunes on Windows, and I found it wasn't bloated. In my experience, iTunes on Windows is one of the most hated pieces of software around; probably second only to QuickTime. I hate it with a passion, and I hate the fact that I can't use other software instead. I'm running 16Gb of RAM, an i7 with 8 threads, and a fast SSD hard drive, and yet it's still slow and frustrating, not to mention awkwardly designed and buggy. Not sure what you're running that it doesn't seem bloated, but it absolutely (and frequently) screws up in talking to iPads. And the fact that it considers every new upgrade a "new computer install", threatening to lock me out of my content and devices if I don't "uninstall" it first from the older computers (that have been reformatted) is absolutely infuriating.