backtop

Print 89 comment(s) - last by Icelight.. on Jul 15 at 10:57 AM
Linux enters the corporate world again... but are consumers ready?

Popular electronics retailer Best Buy now has Ubuntu Linux version 8.04, known as Hardy Heron, available for sale for $19.99 along with additional open source software.  Best Buy hopes working with Canonical will help expand the use of Ubuntu Linux to a new crowd it hopes is ready for Linux.


Ubuntu has quickly become one of the most popular Linux distributions, overtaking the likes of Mandriva, Red Hat, and Debian.  Other Linux distributors have attempted to bundle a Linux OS and additional software for retail sale, but have had little success due to the open availability of the OSes over the Internet.

Hardy Heron has OpenOffice, Mozilla Firefox, Thunderbird, and additional free software features.  Most important for new Linux users, the Ubuntu Wubi feature was designed to install Ubuntu through the Windows GUI without going through the trials and tribulations of partitioning the HDD.

Customers who purchase Ubuntu from Best Buy will receive 60 days of free support, which may end up not being enough for completely new Linux users.  It's possible to download Ubuntu for free through the ShipIt service and use the Ubuntu support forums to receive help from Canonical staff and other Ubuntu users.

Some news articles indicate Ubuntu has been available in Best Buy for at least two months, though it may have been in select stores before being rolled out nationwide.  

Wal-Mart attempted to sell low-cost PCs and notebooks pre-loaded with Linux -- Linspire, Xandros, and other OSes designed for new users -- but the products have not been well-received as of late.  Ubuntu's blend of advanced functionality for experienced Linux users mixed with a friendly installation has made it popular for new and experienced Linux users.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
.exe
By rudolphna on 7/12/2008 4:12:09 PM , Rating: 4
You know, i would like linux alot better (ive tried ubuntu) if they would make .exe files for it, instead of wading through command line. Took me 3 hours on support with someone online to get my wireless card to work. Then, i had to download hacked drivers so i could use 1280x1024. It was too much of a pain in the rear. Make wireless work automatically, and create .exe type files work with it!




RE: .exe
By anotherdude on 7/12/08, Rating: -1
RE: .exe
By Schadenfroh on 7/12/2008 10:07:21 PM , Rating: 3
Ha, your rating is negated when you post


RE: .exe
By Clauzii on 7/12/2008 10:42:23 PM , Rating: 2
That's right, but OP was rated down to 1 at that point in time. The other had 3, so people rated it down.


RE: .exe
By xRyanCat on 7/12/2008 4:37:21 PM , Rating: 3
You make a point on .exe files, but I'm not quite sure you know what they are used for. They are complex containers for many different parts of a single program. So while it's essentially a single executable there are images, libraries, and other resources contained within it. Regardless I'll take apt-get over .exe anyday.

Wireless support isn't the fault of Linux but rather the manufacturers'. While still a bit crummy, in the past couple of years support for many wireless drivers has expanded greatly.

Video support has also been very nicely streamlined. I remember having to tediously edit .xorg files (which I'm guessing is your "hacked drivers") to change my resolution. Now, my monitor is automatically detected and the proper resolution is set.

I recommend you try the latest version of Ubuntu. You can now even run Ubuntu inside your Windows installation as an application via Wubi.


RE: .exe
By SavagePotato on 7/12/2008 6:16:42 PM , Rating: 1
For the sake of giving it the benefit of the doubt I have tried every version of Ubuntu to come along since it's initial release.

It has made great progress but it still just lacks. The latest version I decided to load on a work machine and see if I could make due using only ubuntu as a work machine for a week. In the end I had to remote desktop to a Vista machine for a few things I use.

Inexplicably after a few days (at least to a non linux guru like me) I noticed oh, look theres updates, so I go to download them and for some reason it tells me I don't have access with the same password that worked fine before, and used to log onto the machine minutes earlier, then the package manager starts crashing when I try to even bring it up.

Thus the experiment ended. I'm sure there was an answer out there and an ubuntu guru could have solved it in minutes, but I didn't have time to muck around with it so I plugged my Vista hard drive back in and went back to work problem free.

In the end it has come a long way, but it has a long way to go as well.

Oh and PS the fonts are just ass ugly, even when you isntall the mst core fonts package.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/12/2008 9:39:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Inexplicably after a few days (at least to a non linux guru like me) I noticed oh, look theres updates, so I go to download them and for some reason it tells me I don't have access with the same password that worked fine before, and used to log onto the machine minutes earlier, then the package manager starts crashing when I try to even bring it up.


I've installed Ubuntu on more than just a few machines even on pieces of crap and the package manager (which is within Debian so you know it's stable) has never crashed repeatedly.... also the whole my password didn't work is also something that never has happened before you create an account on Ubuntu it's either blank, the default debian password or the one you set it isn't going to be anything else. Find that bug in launchpad on the current version of Ubuntu and I'll concede.


RE: .exe
By VooDooAddict on 7/14/2008 8:45:35 AM , Rating: 2
Last 2 times I've tried Ubuntu for personal use I've had the same experience with the package manager. Once was 6 months ago and another was about 2 years ago. The update manager used to crash all the time, this most recent attempt the update manager refused to install updates due to missing dependencies. I managed to get the dependencies installed using some command line fun with the help of a few google searches. Then what happened? The next set of updates also had a dependency issue.

At that point I said the hell with it. I've still got it installed (P3 1GHz Laptop / 768MB) but will likely only use the system once or twice a year.

As a competitor to Win9x or Windows 2000 on aging PCs I've recommended it. I just can't see recommending as the only OS it for a new system at this point.

On a side note I typically give people a copy of the latest Ubuntu DVD for booting into the Live OS in case of a hard drive crash. Love the Bootable DVD for letting people still use a system while the HD is busted.


RE: .exe
By Filibuster on 7/13/2008 6:15:59 AM , Rating: 2
I'm going to say that I am right there with SavagePotato on this one. The first time I tried Ubuntu (a few years ago) the package manager did not -crash- but when I tried to install a package I wanted, a dependancy for it was missing for several days. I finally gave up messing with it - this was almost the entire point of trying it out. A friend from work was hyping Ubuntu to me and I was interested to see how smoothly it worked...

Recently I used it almost exclusively at home for a few weeks due to my main computer motherboard dying. I had much better luck with it, but it is still way beyond the capabilities of a normal user. One example: Pidgin worked fine for a few days out of the box and suddenly the ICQ function just stopped and said it was too old. Then while I'm trying to figure that out, Pidgin started running but not coming up on the display...the process was running but no GUI. I had to update Pidgin, but this required going to getdeb and manually downloading/installing 3 packages and removing the Ubuntu package first. Oh and I had to manually clear the .purple folder out. Not difficult...for someone who does this stuff for a living...AND once you figure out what the heck is going on by reading forums for a while. Way beyond what the average Joe is going to be able to do. A typical, non-technical user has a hard enough time going to a website to download one file and install it - its really amazing, trust me, but I deal with this all the time.

I've used various distros over the years but they are all still way behind OSX and Windows - I expect that because these are commercial OS's - but everyone who laughs at a Windows user misfortune and tells them to just use Linux has no idea what they are talking about. The ideas in Ubuntu (and other similar distros) are awesome but it is just not there yet.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/08, Rating: 0
RE: .exe
By jvillaro on 7/13/2008 1:26:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
A few years ago??? Do you know how much things have changed in Ubuntu within the past few years????


I tried Ubuntu's latest version YESTERDAY, video drivers for the geforce 9500m GS do not work.
I'm not a linux expert by any means but I do know my way around in other cases (and ubuntu is supposed to be user friendly and can now replace windows in the average Joe's pc right?). So I try searching on the web and many people (even so called gurus) are having the same problem.
There are new divers so I download them...OK, try to install... NO, Try again... NO, Have to login as root... OK, Try to install... NO, Try again...NO, Have to run the SH NVIDIA_____ from the console but not while running an Xserver... DO that... NO, Have to change the level of whatever so do some telinit 3 or something... NO it just boots up again the xserver... WTF???
Ok I gave up, maybe to soon but i thought I'd try later. So maybe play around with some packages see what apps I could install and give a try and maybe give it a shot sometimes just to mix some things up. I see what I intuitively think is an upgrade for Firefox. I tried that... NO, It damaged it, tried to reinstall... NO, some dependencies are something... Tried to fix the dependencies... NO
Next step bye bye ubuntu for now, thank God for Wubi. Maybe I'll give it a shot later today, maybe in a month maybe in a FEW YEARS, with all it has accomplished linux has a lot a work to do. Maybe a better way for a linux newbie to install a driver, is that to much to ask?
I'm not a hater, I actually like to have the opportunity to play with linux sometimes (never going to change Windows for it though as I'm a .NET programmer and like it a lot, maybe some MONO experience would be nice).


RE: .exe
By jvillaro on 7/13/2008 1:26:22 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
A few years ago??? Do you know how much things have changed in Ubuntu within the past few years????


I tried Ubuntu's latest version YESTERDAY, video drivers for the geforce 9500m GS do not work.
I'm not a linux expert by any means but I do know my way around in other cases (and ubuntu is supposed to be user friendly and can now replace windows in the average Joe's pc right?). So I try searching on the web and many people (even so called gurus) are having the same problem.
There are new divers so I download them...OK, try to install... NO, Try again... NO, Have to login as root... OK, Try to install... NO, Try again...NO, Have to run the SH NVIDIA_____ from the console but not while running an Xserver... DO that... NO, Have to change the level of whatever so do some telinit 3 or something... NO it just boots up again the xserver... WTF???
Ok I gave up, maybe to soon but i thought I'd try later. So maybe play around with some packages see what apps I could install and give a try and maybe give it a shot sometimes just to mix some things up. I see what I intuitively think is an upgrade for Firefox. I tried that... NO, It damaged it, tried to reinstall... NO, some dependencies are something... Tried to fix the dependencies... NO
Next step bye bye ubuntu for now, thank God for Wubi. Maybe I'll give it a shot later today, maybe in a month maybe in a FEW YEARS, with all it has accomplished linux has a lot a work to do. Maybe a better way for a linux newbie to install a driver, is that to much to ask?
I'm not a hater, I actually like to have the opportunity to play with linux sometimes (never going to change Windows for it though as I'm a .NET programmer and like it a lot, maybe some MONO experience would be nice).


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/08, Rating: 0
RE: .exe
By riku0116 on 7/13/2008 7:04:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Who does that????? No Linux user will say ... "you know what pick up any hardware you want and Linux will just work 3d effects and all" Why do you have that expectation?


Maybe not you, or me, or any other Linux veteran out there, but the general public, who are accustomed to the level of driver support in Windows, WILL expect perfectly working drivers for every piece of hardware in their computer to be available.

quote:
I'm sorry but Linux community doesn't have a lot of work to do but you do.. so far without understanding how Linux works you've tried to update video drivers to add 3dfx within the command line which you didn't bother to research before using it, and with all of that you are attempting to do it on hardware that is for all purposes pretty new and barely supported by Nvidia....and you're disappointed in Linux??!?!


Again, the average Joe wouldn't bother with "understanding how Linux works" before attempting to install drivers. You and I both know that it's not Linux's fault, but that won't stop most people from blaming the OS for driver issues (especially if they paid money for it). Remember Vista?

quote:
Do us all a favor when you "try it in a few years" buy a Mac. You don't have to read a manual. You won't be able to really update too many drivers and any important system folders will be hidden from view that way you won't have to type 'sudo' before writing into a system folder.


I think the point everybody is trying to make here is not that Ubuntu is not a good OS, just that it is nowhere near ready for the retail market, where the general expectation for an OS IS that it will work intuitively and handle most hardware without too much effort on their side, à la XP, Vista, and even OSX (sort of).


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 9:13:37 PM , Rating: 1
You do bring up a good point. However, just because people have become accustomed to something doesn't mean that's the right thing to do. OSX doesn't even have that capability if for whatever reason people are still running around with G3 towers or if they have a Mac Pro tower you cannot just grab a video card off the shelf and install it in a Mac.

So why is the expectation not only at the level of Mac OS support but higher than that???

As a user, trust me Linux has it's limitations, but video driver support within Linux from Nvidia or ATI cards is better than what can be had on a Mac. But that doesn't mean you can go into it without at least checking.

When I bought my wireless card a couple of months ago, not only did I check Linux compatibility but I also wanted to know what the Windows XP experience would be. From the manufacturer that I bought my card, some were good for XP, some were made for Vista, which meant that driver support wasn't exactly the best depending on model.

While I don't expect consumers to write a white paper, you should take a common sense approach to at least understand what the experience is going to be like.

Is this card going to work?? What kind of programs do I need? Do I want my network infrastructure to be NFS or CIFS/Samba ? By doing this it makes moving to Linux far easier and a much better experience.


RE: .exe
By SavagePotato on 7/13/2008 7:16:28 PM , Rating: 2
See this is why Linux will never be mainstream in the desktop space. The attitude of the people behind it.

Honestly, why should I spend my time pouring over message boards or howtos for a desktop os when I can use osx or windows which work perfectly and don't require a month of reading?

The answer I shouldn't, I should continue to use Windows. The point advanced Linux users miss in the quest to make it a mainstream desktop OS is that people will not bend over backwards to learn to conform to the OS the OS will have to conform to them.

Linux is fine in the server space for admins who know what they are doing, but so long as that nature of it comes over to the so called "mainstream" that Ubuntu is aiming for, it's going to miss.

THAT is why it is moving forward so slowly.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/08, Rating: 0
RE: .exe
By jvillaro on 7/14/2008 2:43:55 AM , Rating: 2
First off, about my double post... It was just an error when posting, if your a frequent reader you've seen that happen here to other people before.

Now please get of that pedestal you put yourself on, my intention as the other gentleman did notice was to respond to what you where saying and that linux distributions are not up to being mainstream just yet (remember that the article is about ubuntu in bestbuy?).

I did not say or imply linux is bad or the community for that matter. Just needs more time to become even more user friendly and win some love from hardware and software vendors.

Dude do you really think I did not do my homework? Did you think I did not know that there was a possibility that this new card would not work? Guess what... there is a driver (By Nvidia) that maaaaybe will work, for some it has for others not so much. There are posts of walktroughs which some people and I followed but did not work. It's easy to do a search on google see a couple of hits and think "problem solved, that guy that complained did't even google it, poor newb".

I did not buy a $100 to $500 card without checking if it was supported, I have my laptop running just fine on Vista and just wanted to give ubuntu a try. Thanks to Wubi it's really easy (I haven't installed linux since I used a SUSE 5 distro I think back in collage, oh yeah and a version of red hat some years ago when it was supposedly dash!t).
I did try at least 3 different methods, but the point is that in this day and age it shouldn't be that hard to do, specially if they want to sell it a bestbuy!!!

It didn't work? Big deal i was giving it a test drive... But unfortunately it's leaves a bad impression on some people. I do recognize it impressed me by making everything else work or at least letting my use the laptop pretty much ok even the wifi, but silly me I wanted a little better than 800x600.

Maybe I'll install ubuntu again and leave it there waiting for a solution that doesn't imply me having to do so much to make it work. Or maybe a linux guru friend will help me out. Either way would be cool for me, but if I have to research to much to make it work though gratifying, it won't do much in the way of convincing me linux has stopped being a "pastime" or project and become a viable mainstream alternative.

Mac?? No thanks. Never liked them never will, no ipod nor iphone either. Guess I'm just a lame PC guy.
So long man sleep tight with that penguin pillow.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/14/2008 9:44:32 AM , Rating: 2
Look while I understand your frustration, this problem you are having is NOT the fault of Linux. You are having a driver issue, please don't tell me they don't exist for Vista. I'll say this again, the Linux community didn't design the driver. Nor the video card. So exactly how are they responsible? If you can make that argument for Vista than you can for Linux especially since it's open source. If Nvidia didn't fully support that card for Vista you would be SOL. There's no terminal, there's no patching the kernel, you would be sitting there waiting for someone to fix it. Here you have a problem and an entire community is working together to get it fixed when the manufacturer screwed it up and it's Linux's fault??

I replied to one of your previous posts where you said something that was completely incorrect. It's not a small error either. You said that Linux has all of these confusing distros (true) and they haven't even decided on a main package system , which is incorrect.

Now how I am suppose to react? You made a statement that was incorrect. Big Time. So if someone corrects you they are "on a pedestal"? Give me a break. It's obvious you didn't do your homework to make a statement like that. Imagine if you told a Mac person that because there wasn't an eject button a iMac CDROM drive that not only was it not intuitive but it "wasn't ready for mainstream" all because you didn't bother to find out that dragging the CD icon to the trashcan would eject the disk.

Just so you know the walkthrough I found was pretty precise with more than just a handful of people saying it worked for them. I made sure of it before saying anything just to see how ubiquitous the problem was. Here is the link: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=167...

You might scream out that it didn't work for you, but this is the same walkthrough I'm finding on other sites so there should be a high success rate.

My anger is you obviously don't understand the nature of the problem but then you come on a board and say "Linux is not ready for mainstream" how big of a pedestal do you have to be on to make a general statement like "it's not ready for mainstream" without understanding the simple stuff like packages?

Also regarding your laptop, do you actually think Dell or whomever installed Vista on it just grabbed a disk and installed the software and shipped it out to you? You don't think that there were drivers that needed to be installed?? No one made sure it worked. No one requested from nvidia to make a driver for the card and Vista?

That 9500 GS Mobile chip is new ... really new from an OEM standpoint. If you installed Mac OS on it do you think it would work? Would you say it's not ready for mainstream if it didn't? My point of contention is that you have a chip that isn't very well supported and you are attempting to white wash and critique a distro with your myopic experience.

As far as research I don't care what OS you are moving to, there's a learning curve of some kind. Probably one of the main reasons why you have a disdain for Macs is that when you got on it you probably were like what the hell... Where's all the games? Where's all the products I'm accustomed to??? Lost you would be as would I. But no one could say it wasn't ready for mainstream because you didn't know how things were done or it required research to find out how to do certain things. Just make sure if you going to make a general statement about an entire OS you make sure your expectations are the same as when you first sat down with Windows.


RE: .exe
By jvillaro on 7/14/2008 2:51:06 AM , Rating: 3
Preach on brother! And you forget to mention the madness of all those different distributions and can't even have a single common package, installer or whatever standard method to help people out.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/14/2008 8:42:14 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Preach on brother! And you forget to mention the madness of all those different distributions and can't even have a single common package, installer or whatever standard method to help people out.


See this is the type of stuff that makes users mad... this statement is completely false. There are standard packages for distributions.


RE: .exe
By ioannis on 7/12/2008 7:16:26 PM , Rating: 4
One piece of advice I give to people switching to Linux from Window is 'don't think Windows'.

People think it's 'intuitive' because Windows does it that way. Windows has made people accustomed to the 'stand-alone installer' paradigm (I presume that's what you mean here by ".exe"). They are used to 'clicking the next button' through several pages, to install an application or driver into their system. They are used to inserting a CD/DVD to install an application or driver. Many like the fact that there are many PC related magazines to buy that offer a large collection of software (demos, some shareware, some trial versions and some free). They are used to searching software on the internet or going to websites of hardware vendors to get the latest drivers for their system (often needing to check their individual manuals to see what model/version of the hardware they have).

The matter of fact is that Linux distributions don't follow that paradigm and that alienates those people. Linux usage model is based on 'repositories'. Your distribution offers a huge collection of software on their servers that you access through your 'package manager'. You can search this 'data-base' by function and install or remove one or more applications at the same time, by simply selecting them. Your package manager provides automatic updates, but unlike Windows, that includes all the applications (and drivers) you have installed in your system. This is a much more convenient way to manage your software. As for drivers, if your hardware is supported, they are pre-installed and automatically updated by your package manager. No interaction required.

There are shortcomings to this model though. It works as long as you have internet access. Unfortunately, that's not always the case, if you are relying on Wifi or a win-modem (Ethernet is rarely a problem). Hardware support for things like WiFi or win-modems has gone a long way. As more vendors release open-source drivers (or specification of their hardware for developers to write such drivers), things became much better on that front as well. There are still some vendors that don't play along, or others that only offer 'binary' drivers (like nvidia for instance). Distributions like Ubuntu try to smooth things up a bit by offering such drivers via their repositories as well (but not pre-installed, since they are in violation with the General Public License).

It's not surprising that most people are not aware of the convenience the 'repositories' offer. The Linux community is at fault here, for not advocating Linux's strengths...


RE: .exe
By Reclaimer77 on 7/13/2008 10:03:32 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
One piece of advice I give to people switching to Linux from Window is 'don't think Windows'.


As if its even possible not to 'think Windows' and compare it to other OS's ?

quote:
The Linux community is at fault here, for not advocating Linux's strengths...


Oh they sing Linux's strengths just fine. So good they completely turn off the average user by refusing to admit things could be easier by being more " windows like ".

Linux is great. Its just not ready for prime time on the desktop.


RE: .exe
By jonmcc33 on 7/13/2008 12:53:08 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The Linux community is at fault here, for not advocating Linux's strengths...


Actually, the Linux community is at fault for not creating a polished product and for being very hostile.

I tried to switch to OpenSUSE because it's the most polished out of all Linux distros. Certain things were great but other things just left far too much to be desired.

Then there were certain people in the Ubuntu community that were hostile to me because I used OpenSUSE. Then there were people in the OpenSUSE community that were hostile to me because I still used Windows Vista on my primary gaming rig.

I couldn't take all of that hostility from paranoid open source fanatics. So I dropped OpenSUSE and Linux altogether since it will never be what it needs to be. Instead of 800 different distros they need to all come together and make something worth switching to. Until then, it will never replace Windows and never convince any decent majority of people to switch to it. Apple OS X has far greater chance of people switching, at least it's 100% user friendly (even though it costs money just to get a Mac to use it).


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 1:00:57 PM , Rating: 2
I completely understand....although we aren't all that way....most Linux users dual boot for playing games ...that's really common.... I would say always try out a Linux distro at least once a year... it's free and if you actually like it you end up the winner by not having to pay for more software....


RE: .exe
By Zoomer on 7/14/2008 10:33:19 PM , Rating: 2
And why would they care if you even used Linux?

Remember these are end users; not company reps. Changing stuff around to be more Windows-like? If the community thinks that the current way is superior, why change? They would lose usability for nothing.

The open source response to your post: Don't like it? Create your own fork. ;)


RE: .exe
By jonmcc33 on 7/15/2008 8:09:17 AM , Rating: 2
And your post here is exactly why Linux will never take off like it could. It will always only have it's small little niche of fanatics that use it. You might have the occasional person introduced to it but they will just be lost in the giant mess that is Linux.


RE: .exe
By bluetickle on 7/12/2008 10:14:01 PM , Rating: 5
1st - Install Ubuntu Hardy LTS and all post-install updates.

http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download

2nd - Add medibuntu repository.

(code below is all one line)
sudo wget http://www.medibuntu.org/sources.list.d/hardy.list -O /etc/apt/sources.list.d/medibuntu.list

(code below is all one line)
sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install medibuntu-keyring && sudo apt-get update

3rd - Add DVD decryption, add support for Flash, Java, and many other formats, and enable web based play back of medi formats in FireFox.

(code below is all one line)
sudo apt-get install libdvdcss2 ubuntu-restricted-extras mplayer mozilla-mplayer

4th - Get the FireFox addons "addblock plus" and "customizegoogle"

5th - If you have a high performance Nvidia video card, then check out this web page to get the best video driver:

ENVY: http://www.albertomilone.com/nvidia_scripts1.html

-----

I did this for my 80 year old neighbor and setup gmail for her and she loves it.

No antivirus to pay for. No antispam to pay for. No antispyware to pay for. No need to pay for firewall software. No need to pay for defrag and no need to defrag at all.... it is free, stable, and secure.

If you don't try it you'll be missing out.


RE: .exe
By Reclaimer77 on 7/13/2008 10:08:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I did this for my 80 year old neighbor and setup gmail for her and she loves it.


Hardly singing the praises of Linux on the desktop is it ?

When your senior citizen neighbor starts playing off the shelf 3d games, installing software, installing hardware and new drivers, etc etc under Linux without your help, then call me.

Anybody can surf the web and use Gmail in any OS. So what ?

quote:
If you don't try it you'll be missing out.


I'll keep that in mind...


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 12:42:51 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
When your senior citizen neighbor starts playing off the shelf 3d games, installing software, installing hardware and new drivers,
What senior citizen does this for Windows??? How many case modding -- Crysis playing grandmothers do you know??


RE: .exe
By jonmcc33 on 7/15/2008 8:12:51 AM , Rating: 2
I'd love to see it when that grandmother tries to install a game to play with their grandchild. It's going to be a trip!


RE: .exe
By bluetickle on 7/13/2008 12:48:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anybody can surf the web and use Gmail in any OS. So what ?


"surf the web and use email"

That's what a majority of people only do with there computers... really!

I fix/build computers and I ask the person who asks me if they should buy a new computer or fix their old one... "what do you use your computer for?"

a great majority of the time there response is: surf the web and use email, maybe word processing...

I tell them I can fix their old computer by putting Ubuntu on it for free or I can build them a new one with windows for money...

When money is involved, the "what they use there computer for" answer becomes more refined and specific.

Word of mouth spreads quickly about my services...

I would be more than happy to build you a super overclocked water cooled SLI pc gaming system... for a fee.

Otherwise I'm happy to throw Ubuntu on it because it's easy and simple and just works and everyone is happy.

My wife loves Ubuntu on her laptop.

I'm just doing my part to help Linux reach critical mass and become more viable in the future for things like gaming... Linux certainly has the potential to be a gaming platform, I know if there was real effort to make a Linux gaming platform.... it would ROCK!

Just think, FireFox has at least 20% or more of the browser market, and now it is common to see the phrase "compatible with FireFox."

FireFox has made Linux Desktop possible.


RE: .exe
By Icelight on 7/15/2008 10:57:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I tell them I can fix their old computer by putting Ubuntu on it for free or I can build them a new one with windows for money...


So, basically instead of giving them the option of just plain reinstalling their copy of Windows for them you outright lie in a vain attempt to install Linux (instead of having to buy a whole new computer that is obviously still working fine if you can put Linux on it).


RE: .exe
By Hare on 7/13/2008 12:41:48 PM , Rating: 2
What you just wrote is basically what many think is "wrong" in Linux. You have to do stuff in command line and when you look at the empty command line you absolutely have no way to do anything intuitively. In MacOS X if you want to install lets say Ms Office, you insert the CD, grab the folder and drag it your applications folder. That's it. How could it be more intuitive?

The command line allows extremely fast use and it's easy to simply copy paste directions for modifying the system etc, but at the same time it makes "non-pro" users want to run away.

Ps. I'm currently running Vista with Ubuntu running in a virtual machine on my other display. Both have great strengths and weaknesses and which one is "better" depends on the user and usage.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 12:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
The great thing about linux is you dont' have to do it that way. Most of what was previously posted can be handled through the package manager GUI thus avoiding command line... also Envy comes in an deb package so it's click and go....


RE: .exe
By Hare on 7/13/2008 1:47:20 PM , Rating: 2
I've been hearing that argument as long as I remember. If you are not happy with the default installation the chance is pretty high that at some point you need to open the terminal window. I've been running Centos for ages on my server and I currently have Ubuntu and Debian on my workstation and there's absolutely no way I could have accomplished anything without using the command line.

It's getting better all the time. At least on my latest installation I didn't have to spend ages trying to get my two monitors to work properly not to mention my soundcard...


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 2:56:31 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If you are not happy with the default installation the chance is pretty high that at some point you need to open the terminal window.
Hare that's crap...

You have the Synaptic Manager that will allow you to install WAAAAAAAAAY more then the default installation and if you are using Ubuntu or any debian based distro there's a pretty high chance there's a deb for it.

I use Linux EVERYDAY.. I only go to command line when I'm configuring Apache, MYSQL, Postfix, hmmm maybe Mythtv when I'm at home... other than that what is the average user going to command line for??? Mixing NFS and Samba networks..... yeah I can see Grandma doing that crap on Windows without help. Oh you know she might be telnetting into her local 1950 Cisco switch.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 2:59:59 PM , Rating: 4
They need to label "Synaptic Manager" Add/Remove Programs cause that's pretty much what it does.


RE: .exe
By bluetickle on 7/14/2008 12:51:01 AM , Rating: 1
"Synaptic" is a much much better sounding name!

I think of neurons which intuitively leads to the analogy of the programs function.

"Synaptic" is a very unique sounding name.
Once you know what it does, you won't forget it.


RE: .exe
By Hare on 7/13/2008 3:19:40 PM , Rating: 2
I quess I'm not an average user since I have a two monitor setup, a wlan card and a curious mind...

I'm talking from experience. I've had to do tons of stuff with terminal which is just fine. The worst was with Debian and Ubunto on a PPC machine. It took tons of hacking just to get my machine to drop clockspeed when idling and to get a decent resolution.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 3:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
No you are definitely not. You are doing things that the average user would never even try or would call technical support to fix. Being curious within Linux can get complicated very quickly it's not a bad thing, just be aware that you will have to go to terminal for that kind of stuff but for adding programs or removing them it really can't get easier than apt-get /deb / Synaptic.


RE: .exe
By bluetickle on 7/13/08, Rating: -1
RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 1:17:16 PM , Rating: 2
That's why Linux offers both............ eventually most users will eventually get more accustomed to the terminal as their desires increase but for the novice they do have the GUI where you can do a lot.


RE: .exe
By Hare on 7/13/2008 1:43:34 PM , Rating: 2
I would appreciate a few reasons why? Obviously you are entitled to an opinion but as a usabilty person, I would disagree. Let's say I'm looking at an empty command line and I want to copy a file to another directory and change its permissions. In a command prompt I have to google the command because I didn't know it was "cp". After that I googled the attributes required to automatically replace the files in the target directory and how to use wild cards to select only certain files. Know I need to google the way to change permissions... In a WIMP UI you would try to drag and drop or explore the menus for a copy command and answer yes to the "replace" dialog. After that open the files info windows and check the wanted permission instead trying to remember was it 644 or 755 that I wanted...

Obviously the command line is a powerful tool in the hands of someone who appreciates it (I know I do) but it definately isn't as intuitive as WIMP UI.

WIMP = Window, Icon, Menu, Pointing device.

Ps. I couldn't think of a better example than the copy command, sorry...


RE: .exe
By Reclaimer77 on 7/13/2008 8:21:48 PM , Rating: 2
Don't bother. KC77's argument seems to be that everyones Linux experience that doesn't match his is either wrong or they are lying about it.

Classy.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 10:12:55 PM , Rating: 2
Um no, what I'm saying is there are things that Linux will do and there's stuff that it won't. Often times people regurgitate what they heard someone say without checking it themselves (i.e I had to go to the command line to install my nvidia card driver).

When that happens it's bad because it markets to those people to forgo giving Linux a try, which is bad as the OS market needs competition.

Some of the issues you can tell are legit. But the whole "I had to go to command line" argument is tired and really doesn't hold up anymore unless you are doing some really advanced stuff.

I've tried Linux back in the day when there was a good chance after installation that you wouldn't be able to connect to the Internet so I had to go to command line ...compared to now... it's a wholly different game. Yes there are some things (like wireless cards) that will make you go to command line, but every day its less and less mandatory. If people also check compatibility before experiencing Linux they just may be able to avoid command line completely, or at least be prepared when they do.

What I'm saying isn't "classy" but it's the truth.


RE: .exe
By bluetickle on 7/14/2008 12:41:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ps. I couldn't think of a better example than the copy command, sorry...


Well "you couldn't think" why couldn't you think?

how about: mv, tar, chown, chmod, ln, apt-get, cd, ls, sudo, su, passwd, smbpasswd, htpasswd, and on and on... from the top of my head in 30 seconds.

It's not that hard to learn something new. You just got to do it... if you don't want to learn then go pay for Windows. But, you'll find out that Windows isn't perfect either and requires lots of learning too. I feel that my learning is so much more valuable and long lasting in Linux.

Every time I have a problem with anything such as some particular aspect of a Linux setup... I embrace it as a learning experience and overcome it. Then I accumulate a bag of tricks called experience. If I hit a wall, I take a break and come back to it later or wait for the next version ;)

Anyway, I have been installing Ubuntu at various times since version 5 and right now version 8 is very solid and smooth from installation to usability... from an aesthetic point of view. Version 8 of Ubuntu fits on my wife's laptop like a fine leather glove.

After you get to post installation of Ubuntu and if you want the icing on the cake, then a quick copy and paste of these three lines into a terminal does the trick:

sudo wget http://www.medibuntu.org/sources.list.d/hardy.list -O /etc/apt/sources.list.d/medibuntu.list

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install medibuntu-keyring && sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get install libdvdcss2 ubuntu-restricted-extras mplayer mozilla-mplayer

If you want to know (you should want to know) what the above commands do then look below:

They: add medibuntu repository, add DVD decryption, add support for Flash, Java, and many other formats, and enable web based play back of medi formats in FireFox.


RE: .exe
By jonmcc33 on 7/13/2008 4:04:14 PM , Rating: 2
Why Ubuntu though? It has by far one of the most plain and uninteresting interfaces I have ever seen in my entire life.


RE: .exe
By Hare on 7/13/2008 4:16:33 PM , Rating: 2
The interface is called Gnome... The other choices would be KDE or Xfce. Both look quite pain... Besides it's quite easy to skin Gnome to look like Mac OS X or some other OS.


RE: .exe
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 4:41:16 PM , Rating: 2
KDE is less so ... but the default installation of Gnome is pretty bland however in it's simplicity it means that it can be more configurable while being more stable than KDE once you start customizing the look and feel.

As far as why Ubuntu, right now it's the most popular distro.

Although KDE 4 which is still under development is as flashy as any OS out there.


RE: .exe
By Solandri on 7/14/2008 6:34:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why Ubuntu though? It has by far one of the most plain and uninteresting interfaces I have ever seen in my entire life.

Ubuntu ships with Beryl, but doesn't enable it by default (kinda like Aero isn't enabled by default in some Vista installations). Once you enable it, it has far more eye candy than Vista or OSX.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYgV2GlsufI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYsxaMyFV2Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0ZtcxHUSDQ


RE: .exe
By adinsx on 7/12/2008 10:28:40 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think you quite understand what an exe is. exe is the windows executable format, and .exe is just an extension. In Linux, an executable can be named anything, and in fact usually has no extension at all. The reason .exes don't work natively in Linux is because the format is specific to Windows, and the data stored within an exe stores windows-specific metadata and such. Linux, on the other hand, uses the ELF executable format. And even then there is Wine, which lets you run windows executables (exe) in Linux.

Also, wireless works automatically for almost all wireless cards. In the cases that it doesn't, that is not the fault of of Linux, it is the fault of the wireless card manufacturer for not releasing Linux drivers and not releasing hardware documentation (which would enable Linux developers to write their own drivers).


RE: .exe
By cochy on 7/13/2008 12:42:13 AM , Rating: 2
.exe is just a binary executable file, Linux has those just not called .exe . I assume you mean installers? setup.exe?

In that case .rpm or .deb are pretty much that. The only problem when trying to install something in Linux arises when the program is missing another program it depends on to work (ie. dependencies). It's up to the OS to figure out and automatically download and install the dependency, but if it can't for some reason ie. license won't allow, then frustration will occur, understandably so. Gentoo, besides the fact that it is the "hardest" Linux to use, does have the easiest and best package system that normally figures all dependencies automatically.

On to the driver issues. Linux was never ment to use 3rd party drivers. Support for hardware is supposed to be hard coded into the Kernel, this is contrary to Windows where it's up to the vendor to make it work with Windows. With Linux, it's up to the Kernel developers to make hardware work. This is obviously a tough job as there's so much differing hardware out there. Once you try adding 3rd party drivers into Linux you're asking for problems.


RE: .exe
By ricegf on 7/13/2008 11:33:43 AM , Rating: 2
You believe that renaming .deb files to .exe would do it? That just seems too easy, for some reason...


RE: .exe
By zshift on 7/14/2008 9:51:19 AM , Rating: 2
the main problems with this statement is that you are running a version of linux, not windows. linux, like macs and every other unix based os, does not run .exe files by itself. there is a program out there called wine that makes them work for linux though. if you have the latest version of ubuntu, simply go to synaptics package manager and download it. note, though, that it is still very limited as to what it can do, but many programs run off of it. some games work with it, such as WoW and some steam games, but not at the best graphical settings, due to issue with directx as well as linux video drivers.

As for wireless and "hacked" video drivers, you must remember that you are getting a program for $19 (free if you download it) compared to the $200+ for any microsoft os. One benefit not mentioned though, is that you can go to ubuntuforums.org, which has thousands if problems already solved, several dealing with video and wireless issues. Give it some more time and you'll see that linux will eventually surpass windows with its usability and support.


commercial failings
By Screwballl on 7/12/2008 4:32:58 PM , Rating: 1
1)
Ubuntu is available free online and support is free through multiple forums.

2)
quote:
Ubuntu has quickly become one of the most popular Linux distributions, overtaking the likes of Mandriva, Red Hat, and Debian. Other Linux distributors have attempted to bundle a Linux OS and additional software for retail sale, but have had little success due to the open availability of the OSes over the Internet.

This is because they were either priced too high or people buying an OS/PC want what they are familiar with: Windows. even if the alternative will do what they want, it is not Windows so they return it or refuse to buy it.

3)
quote:
Customers who purchase Ubuntu from Best Buy will receive 60 days of free support, which may end up not being enough for completely new Linux users. It's possible to download Ubuntu for free through the ShipIt service and use the Ubuntu support forums to receive help from Canonical staff and other Ubuntu users.

Customers can buy it from multiple stores or online sources, they can get it free via ShipIp, or they can download and burn it to CD themselves, or they can install Wubi via Windows and have it install using Windows FAT/NTFS file system (instead of the dedicated XFS, NFS or EXT2).

4)
quote:
Wal-Mart attempted to sell low-cost PCs and notebooks pre-loaded with Linux -- Linspire, Xandros, and other OSes designed for new users -- but the products have not been well-received as of late.


See #2 above... also WalMart did not advertise these computers (or if they did it was some small print at the bottom of a page: $299 AMD based PC, pre-installed with Linux). Anytime you saw an ad anywhere, it was for Windows based computers. WalMart failed to properly support their sales (their employees are cashiers or shelf stockers, not techs).
By having one real basic simple PC at the low end and not stocking multiple base systems, some with higher end video cards and processors and more memory, it leaves Windows to handle the mid to high level PC sales in their stores.

5) Education:
The number 1 reason people buy a PC, they see Windows/OSX, they buy for Windows/OSX and refuse to even think of anything else. Yet for a majority of computer users out there, Linux can handle everything they need (web browsing, email, family pictures). Yet the lack of education on the subject leave people to buy the "advertised" systems with Windows and OSX... hey their ad on TV said it can do all these things, this Linux thingymajig can't because I haven't seen a commercial or ad or anyone talk about it.




RE: commercial failings
By Joz on 7/12/2008 5:14:16 PM , Rating: 2
thingy majig.

lol.


RE: commercial failings
By TomZ on 7/12/2008 5:51:33 PM , Rating: 2
Required reading for you: http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/

Note, the linked site uses "colorful" language, so if you are easily offended...


RE: commercial failings
By wien on 7/12/2008 10:48:33 PM , Rating: 2
I must say I find is hilarious that the number one Microsoft defender here on Dailytech links to a page called "linuxhaters". Don't you see you're being just as irrational/ignorant as the very people you bemoan when they complain about Vista?


RE: commercial failings
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 7/13/2008 12:28:22 AM , Rating: 2
I dunno, I always kind of thought of myself as the #1 Microsoft defender here.


RE: commercial failings
By krwhite on 7/13/2008 9:29:42 PM , Rating: 2
Qui Gon is


RE: commercial failings
By SiN on 7/13/2008 7:09:43 AM , Rating: 2
Firstly i use windows. And after careful reading of the article ad comments, i now feel like a knob! I've tried using linux (albiet without success), and i've never really had something bad to comment on about linux.

But now i see how windows makes things so easy (i knew it did this already but not to the extent as the .exe problem here) and user friendly. Its sad that it is hard to transition from windows to linux for most people. Isn't there a friendly, easily digestable, one stop source i can use to help in the transition from windows?

I see the similarity between window fanboys here and OSX fanboys.

Im switching to linux...


RE: commercial failings
By SiN on 7/14/2008 2:22:48 PM , Rating: 2
Just as i suspected, the linux crowd is stuck up its own ass and wont let anyone else in because they feel superiour knowing that they can run linux. i knew there was a 3rd stereo type.


RE: commercial failings
By bluetickle on 7/14/2008 1:20:34 AM , Rating: 2
A little story:

A poor black friend of mine that works for nearly minimum wage asked me to build him a new computer because his old one didn't work anymore.

I asked him what he wanted: he said, just something to check his bank account online, do his online classes, write his papers, and listen to music.

I asked him what he could afford: he said, maybe $200 or so. After talking to him further, I realized that he couldn't afford really anything actually. And, I couldn't let him throw his money away on Microsoft rather than feed his family. So, I taught him how to install Ubuntu Linux on his old computer. He actually really enjoyed learning how to do it. He seemed to feel really empowered.

His old computer was fine for his needs. All the hardware was fully functional and the performance level was adequate. It was just a corrupted windows setup. And he did not have his system restore disk, because he bought the computer second hand.

He seemed to be a sponge for knowledge and was able to learn how to setup his computer very quickly. I felt like I had planted a seed into his community. Now, he's the "computer guy" for his friends and family.

It was really funny when I told him it was free - he thought I meant pirated. I asked him why he seemed so nervous, and when he explained what he thought I meant by "free" I couldn't help but laugh...

Free, Open Source?

How could there be such a thing?


By deadrats on 7/12/2008 9:40:37 PM , Rating: 3
even though i use XP64 as my primary OS, i am not adverse to linux or freebsd, hell i personally really like opensuse 11 and pc-bsd, it's just that i am of the school of thought "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", since i've been using XP64 all this time and i have no problems with it i see no reason to switch to anything else, be it Vista, Linux/Unix or even OSX (if it suddenly became available for the generic pc market).

having said this, i personally think AMD and Intel are missing a golden opportunity by not releasing a custom distro for their specific platforms.

imagine if AMD included with each of their Phenom cpu's a custom compiled distro, with all the software, from the kernel to KDE to the video editing suite to the browser compiled to take full advantage of it's "Spider" platform. taking it a step further, they could release "Spider Linux", a distro meant to be installed on a pc equiped with an ATI video card, AMD chipset and quad core cpu, all the necessary driver modules statically compiled into the kernel (for maximum performance) and all the non-required support for legacy hardware removed from the kernel.

Intel could take a similar approach...

and for those of you that think such a custom compiled distro wouldn't make that much of a performance difference, i recommend you try running solaris on an ultra sparc cpu vs running it on an x86 cpu and watch as the ultra sparc runs circles around a much higher clocked x86 cpu, and it's not because the x86 cpu's are inferior (well not by much anyway...)




By drebo on 7/12/2008 11:48:00 PM , Rating: 2
The problem with this is that when people buy a new PC, it's generally to make use of a new application that just came out that doesn't run (well) on their current PC.

When was the last time a new main-stream application came out for Linux?

Oh, wait...never. Games? Nope. Photoshop? Nope. Office 2007? Nope.

Linux will never catch on in the commercial world until people realize that Windows' simplicity is the reason it sells. People don't want to have to edit xorg.conf files to get their video cards working properly. They don't know what apt-get is, and they certainly don't know that mplayer has five dependencies that they need to install first before they can play DVDs. Linux suffers from a case of being over-engineered. There's simply TOO much that you can do with it, and that's its failing point.

ASUS got it right with the eeePC, I think. Linux is only useful in an appliance-type situation. Don't require anything but application settings to be changed, don't touch the underlying OS, and you're fine. As a general purpose OS? Not a chance.


By kc77 on 7/13/2008 12:01:05 AM , Rating: 2
Nero for Linux I would think is a mainstream application that can be found for Linux and Windows. Doom 3 ...I would call that a game and definitely mainstream. Photoshop works on Linux. Office 2003 does as well I haven't tried 2007 yet.

Also all of the latest distributions don't have a xorg file anymore.


By mmntech on 7/13/2008 12:21:38 PM , Rating: 2
I remember hearing Microsoft had added a script to the latest versions of Office to prevent them from running on compatibility layers. I could be wrong.

Linux does have many comparable applications. Many agree that GIMP is just as good as Photoshop. As for Games, PC gaming has been in decline for a while now. There aren't a lot of games for Mac either but it does just fine. Most every day software is already preinstalled.

When most people buy a computer, they are basically just getting an internet box that can run office software and play their media files. With the economy the way it is, people aren't going to want the $1000+ computer anymore. In this day and age, people don't need a system like that. I agree Linux does certainly have some major issues with user friendliness but those are gradually being solved. I've been using Hardy Haron since it came out and it's my first long term use of Linux. I find it better then Windows XP when I'm working since it has similar desktop enhancement features that my Mac has. Plus the computer boots faster and runs apps faster. My only issue is the way it handles ATI drivers for newer cards. The package Xorg drivers crash the OS so I have to use ATI's proprietary ones.


By deadrats on 7/13/2008 12:53:40 PM , Rating: 2
"Also all of the latest distributions don't have a xorg file anymore."

yes they do, the use of xorg.conf is deprecated as the xorg people tried to make the server as self configurable as possible but it's still there for times when it's absolutely needed.

check /etc/X11 (it may be different in some distros) and you should see it.


By kc77 on 7/13/2008 1:25:10 PM , Rating: 2
I should have double checked. Beta versions of Hardy absolutely had none.... eventually they changed this and gave a minimal xorg.conf file which is vastly different compared with earlier versions of X11.


By deadrats on 7/13/2008 12:43:19 PM , Rating: 2
you have made a number of wrong assumptions:

claim: "When was the last time a new main-stream application came out for Linux?"

fact: it really depends how you define "mainstream application" but updated open source apps are released all the time. as a matter of fact nearly all the software i use on my XP64 system, with the obvious exception of the OS itself is all open source, from the firewall to p2p to anti-virus to the browser to the office suite, the list goes on.

claim: "Oh, wait...never. Games? Nope. Photoshop? Nope. Office 2007? Nope"

i will grant you that gaming is all that great on linux but i would argue that it's not all that great on windows either. most pc games seem to follow the same basic formula, but they try and add some pretty graphics. the last truly compelling pc game i played has to be max payne 2 with it's excellent story, awesome musical score and film noir theme. for pure fun postal 2 comes to mind, other than that most of the games suck. you want great gaming? buy a PS3 hook it up to a nice 1080p 50" hdtv, buy a nice reclining chair and game away. i personally can't wait for resident evil 5 (RS4 on the gamecume rocked, as did RS Code Veronica on the dreamcast) and quite frankly i would rather invite a couple of friends over, have a few cold beers and some basketball or racing game on my PS3, but that's just me.

as for office 2007, i fail to see why anyone would spend about $300 on a microsoft office suite when you can get open office for free (i use it all the time and for most uses it works just fine) or if you need a bit more "power" you can buy star office for $70 and star office is easily the equal of microsoft's office suite.

claim: "Linux will never catch on in the commercial world until people realize that Windows' simplicity is the reason it sells."

simply not true, windows is not as simple as people make it out to be. i provide tech support for a number of people and you would be suprised at how many times i get calls from people that have a problem with windows. windows has the market penetration it does because microsoft has cut special deals (the most infamous being with dell) were they practically forced pc makers to install windows to the exclusion of any and all other OSes.

claim: "People don't want to have to edit xorg.conf files to get their video cards working properly. They don't know what apt-get is, and they certainly don't know that mplayer has five dependencies that they need to install first before they can play DVDs."

you are correct about having to edit .conf files to get a video card working properly, but that is a failing of the people that design the installs for the video card drivers, not linux. windows requires that the registry by edited after a driver is installed, including video drivers, but because you can totally screw up the entire system if you modify the registry incorrectly, it was decided long ago that the installation routine would modify the registry for you, which is also what happens when you change any setting from within explorer. for what ever reason this type of mentality hasn't been embraced in the linux world.

as for dependencies, all package managers in the linux world take care of dependencies and if you want to see just how far linux has come check out open suse 11, in some ways, especially when you need to do a system recovery it's way ahead of windows.

but the alternate OS that does it the best of PC-BSD, they have embrace the windows world's way of package installation and removal and in addition to the bsd ports they also have what's knows as PBI's, a single package with all dependencies and binaries that's installed and uninstalled with just a mouse click.


Isn't Ubuntu suppose to be free?
By konman795 on 7/12/2008 8:32:06 PM , Rating: 2
I thought Ubuntu was free??

How is Best Buy allowed to package free software and sell it to people for money? Shouldn't they just put it on the shelf and charge only the package and disk fee.




By deadrats on 7/12/2008 9:45:56 PM , Rating: 2
best buy isn't packaging the software, Ubuntu is and selling it through best buy.

as for whether or not Ubuntu is free, yes it's open source software and it's released under the GPL, meaning you are free to download it, free of charge, legally. the article even makes mention of the fact that this is one major hurdle in actually selling any linux distro.

incidently, Ubuntu is nothing more than Debian remastered with some customization, quite frankly i have tried it and i don't see what all the excitement is about.


By bunnyfubbles on 7/12/2008 10:03:12 PM , Rating: 2
The pretty packaging, the disc, probably some sort of manual, and the 6 months of special support cost the $20, you can still get it for free though.


By Screwballl on 7/12/2008 10:06:43 PM , Rating: 3
Don't think of the term free as in money... think of it as free as in freedom... you are free to burn as many CDs as you want and charge $5 or 10 or $50 per disc if you want. BUT - you cannot place any limitation on what the users of that OS/software/disc can do with it.


By krwhite on 7/13/2008 9:18:51 PM , Rating: 2
That's so dumb. These people need to eat too, and shelf space costs COIN.


ubuntu really nice
By dare2savefreedom on 7/12/2008 3:03:39 PM , Rating: 2
ubuntu is pretty easy to use.
I was running debian, gentoo, mandrake, fedora, etc...
but now that I'm lazier i run ubuntu right now.

I have my box setup with atari400/800 c64, amiga, dosbox,
and other work junk.

the best part - it's free & there are no pimps and virus scanning.




RE: ubuntu really nice
By gerf on 7/12/2008 4:04:22 PM , Rating: 2
I've been using Kubuntu on and off via wabi or whatever that inside-windows install is.

There's still a few things I think should be implemented before releasing mom and dad on it though. I'm thinking that 8.10 should start adding new features that ease usage and conversion, as 8.04 was mainly bug fixes and the such (for LTS support)


RE: ubuntu really nice
By RjBass on 7/12/2008 4:50:39 PM , Rating: 2
I tried Ubuntu from this very machine Im on now, but coming from a Windows world, I found myself very frustrated with it as I couldn't install some normal programs needed without having to go to the command line. From there it was a mess as I learned very quickly that Linux commands are not nearly the same as old DOS commands.

Of course this was over a year ago, so things with Ubuntu may have changed greatly since then. I really want to be able to switch to a different OS without having to pay the enormous price premiums for a Mac to use OSX, but I also don't want to have to work for it like it seemed I was going to have to do with Ubuntu.


Ahh, Linux
By larson0699 on 7/13/2008 2:33:50 AM , Rating: 2
A lot comes to mind.

One: I know this is -1 already, but fuck Best Buy. I'm not to say that anti-retail shoppers are elitists, but that the general public is ill-informed and either doesn't know they're ^overspending on ^poorly-handled product only to receive ^terrible service when it dies (three strikes), or just doesn't care (sad but what can you do). I've also worked there as well as other electronics giants, and theirs is a shady game. The customer is only as valuable as he is spendy. In light of this, I've at least steered some close friends to greener pastures, but in the end, the big guy still thrives. I see this as just another opportunity for BB to bank on hefty margins. They might have a smart kid or two give his insight on Linux being free, but the salesmen'll just give some BS on how the computer only costs $50 less than the Windows machine because of its added value and customer support. Dell already does it.

Two: ioannis is bang on with the Windows-'intuitive' connection. I myself came to Windows from DOS and had a little adapting to do in the process. I don't know why so many people expect Linux to be naturally easy to maneuver perhaps because of their long familiarity with Windows. If Linux was meant to be like Windows, I think it would have used the Windows codebase, you know, just to have Start menus and .EXE files and the like. It is an acquired taste like any other OS (try Mac OS sometime.. The last version I used was 8.5, I'm sure something has changed since) and takes patience, practice, and an open mind to really understand and enjoy. After ten years of using Linux, I run through the command line like it's DOS. More often than not, I find myself typing 'ls' at the commandline in Windows trying to list a directory. Probably for my best, I should really write a set of batch files in spare time to translate those commands.

Lastly: I am uncertain whether Linux has any real future in its current form. I have a few favorite distros, and when I get bored, I'll install one for play. But they all share the same limitations. I won't take their word for absolute, but I've read that the Mac devs abstained from using the X server because it wouldn't (and can't) satisfy the visual element of their OS. (Forgot specifics, but it was rudimentary things like object animations that X places entirely on external processes while any modern Windows or Mac interface handles everything internally) I personally think their standards are high, as they should be. I wouldn't give up on Linux entirely, but I wonder if any major evolution is in order as far as interfacing goes, or if it's really all on the DE/WM to provide useful (and usable) audio and visual standards. (I'll say, KDE 4 really shines here)

In the meantime (millennium ahead) the sure bet is the sub-$1000 Windows machine. Don't worry, BB, it's business as usual for you.




RE: Ahh, Linux
By krwhite on 7/13/2008 9:15:05 PM , Rating: 2
If Apple proved anything, it's that there can be an entirely unique operating system (based on Unix) that can succeed. OS X threw everything out, and adopted BSD. Today, there are plenty of apps that run on it, and the market share for the OS is now pretty decent. Their machines have everything they need for Mom & Pop's out there. The gaming argument doesn't work for non-PC gamers. Most people who have computers don't game.

Tell me how an install of Ubuntu is really that much different than what Apple did? Their system, however, is open and free. No chance of succeeding? It takes giant leaps every year. Considering that it's not really produced as a whole from one central organization, that's pretty impressive.

As a developer, I can tell you that it's now possible to streamline the development process to code applications to run on ALL OS's. Most new applications being written are taking this approach. They're using the libraries that were developed on Linux. Linux, today, is the developer-centric OS that glues together the different systems.


RE: Ahh, Linux
By bluetickle on 7/14/2008 1:34:42 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
More often than not, I find myself typing 'ls' at the commandline in Windows trying to list a directory.


LOL!!

Amen Brother!


Linux has come a LONG way..
By krwhite on 7/13/2008 8:40:10 PM , Rating: 2
It's absolutely amazing how quick and smooth a modern distro of Linux is today (namely Ubuntu), with the new 3D effects and all..

The package managers out there work beautifully, especially the one in Ubuntu. I see alot of talk in here about problems with it. Typically, you'll usually only get problems when you install software from source, which seems to create an out of sync picture for the package manager, whom doesn't actually look at what 'exists' on the computer, but what it's actually installed itsself. Going around the package manager is basically throwing a monkey wrench at your OS, from my own experience anyway!

The only REASON I'm not running it now, is it can't run Photoshop. WINE can run alot of Windows programs pretty fast, but not CS unfortunately. I would really prefer not to have a virtualized XP/Vista machine running, taking up cycles. Afterall, those programs are the main reason I bought a fancy computer. I would prefer them to run natively.

I would suggest everyone write letters to Adobe, and tell them to get off their lazy butts and create these builds. There's money to be made! It's not the drivers that hold Linux back, it's the lack of the 'main' programs such as Photoshop and others that seem to contradict the would-be user-base. If Adobe can't do it, then we need a revamp of GIMP. ;)

But anyway, if you're a user who mainly uses applications written for all OS's, and isn't much a PC gamer, then you'll have a blast with Ubuntu. It's faster (feeling) than XP or Vista, by far.




RE: Linux has come a LONG way..
By kc77 on 7/13/2008 8:56:52 PM , Rating: 2
Make sure you upgrade to Wine 1.0. You should be able to install CS2 out of the box without any text editing or modifications. As far as CS3 haven't tried.


RE: Linux has come a LONG way..
By Eri Hyva on 7/14/2008 7:38:26 AM , Rating: 2
You can use Windows-versions of Adobe Photoshop CS2, Excel Viewer 2003, Word Viewer 2003 and PowerPoint Viewer 2003 and play World of Warcraft with Wine 1.0 in Linux (like in Ubuntu)

CS2 support was the requirement to achieving 1.0 from previous 0.9x versions.

http://www.winehq.org/


nope
By Chiisuchianu on 7/13/2008 10:18:35 AM , Rating: 2
linux blows and the average person definitely isnt ready. the only people who seem to be ready are the "FIGHT THE MAN" type or the noobs trying to earn geek cred for using linux.




RE: nope
By bluetickle on 7/14/2008 1:40:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
linux blows and the average person definitely isnt ready. the only people who seem to be ready are the "FIGHT THE MAN" type or the noobs trying to earn geek cred for using linux.


You're a slime ball pig! How dare you insult us.

What are you? A corporate thief or a mindless sheep?


On the other hand ...
By wordsworm on 7/13/2008 6:34:02 AM , Rating: 2
On the one hand, why would someone pay for something they can get for free. On the other, maybe it will pay for advertising. Finally, it may even make people associate Linux as valuable software. You never know!

The thing about this whole affair is that the more people who use Linux, the more volunteers and support it will get. It's been slowly snowballing. Let's hope one day it will be worthy to supplant Windows altogether so that we can topple this MS monopoly.

Long Live Linux!




woot |\|o085
By dare2savefreedom on 7/12/2008 2:56:39 PM , Rating: 1
woot |\|o085 t4k3 th4t

- posted from an ubuntu box... haha!




"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins









botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki