Is Linux ready yet for typical home desktop users?

[WildHorse]

Informed opinions, please.

Is, say maybe Ubuntu Linux, ready now for the typical non-networked home user on a desktop machine for ordinary office applications (not running a server)? Ubuntu seems to be the most popular distro.

Or is Linux still a challenge best left to those with significant tech savvy?

About how risky would it be to switch over from Windows XP Pro SP2 to Linux at this time?
Is it better to continue waiting awhile for Linux to mature more before switching?

I had a go at Suse Linux about 2 years ago, but it proved daunting back then.
So sick of Microsoft's stuff, now Windows "Genuine Advantage" phones home to Bill Gates at every user logon.

 

[doornail]

I dumped Windows when they began product activation so I understand how you feel.

If you can walk away from Windows applications, then yes, Linux can be a very pleasant and usable desktop enviroment. Web surfing, email, and word processing are a breeze. Since you can download Ubuntu for free, there really isn't any risk to trying it out. Do give it a about a week to become familar though.

I'm a fedora user but I'd recommend the latest Ubuntu, 6.06. The installer is very good, as are the support forums. Plus, it's a single CD download.

Good luck.

 

[Nothinman]

In many ways it's 'more ready' for the desktop because it's harder for regular users to break things and easier to automate things and fix remotely. As long as semi-cluefull person sets up the box it'll be just as good of a system, if not better, than Windows as long as you're not tied to some Windows-only application.

 

[DasFox]

scott, I've been running linux around 7 years now, I'd say it is a very advanced desktop OS, even for the beginner user.

Of course depending on your software needs there could be a bit of a let down, but given the amount of software and support Linux now has, there is a lot going on with it.

Linux has a lot of great things to offer!

ALOHA

P.S. Be sure to check out all the different distros --------> http://www.distrowatch.com

 

[Bateluer]

Unfortunately, still a windows world. 80% of the hardware on the market won't work under Linux without lots of 'coddling'

 

[Looney]

Nope, it's not ready. Maybe if Vista had a catastrophe and won't be released for another 3-5 years, Linux/ubuntu would stand a fighting chance for a piece larger than Apple, but with Vista less than a year away, no chance.

 

[pcgeek11]

Yes Linux is ready for the average user, if the average user is ready to use his head just a bit. and I have to say that I disagree with this statement.

80% of the hardware on the market won't work under Linux without lots of 'coddling'

This just isn't true, IMO.

pcgeek

 

[Trevelyan]

How are drivers nowadays for Linux?

Especially for chipsets and newer video cards.

 

[bersl2]

A typical one? No. Then again, IMO, typical home desktop users shouldn't even be using a general purpose computer in the first place.

Of course, desktop Linux doesn't need the typical user. It needs the hardware support. FOSS drivers can come with time, as long as devs don't become complacent about this eventual goal.

 

[OSX]

Linux is in fact rather user-friendly. It is not, however, idiot friendly. Linux works fine with most of the hardware on the market anyways. Fine, you might not get 100% 3D accelleration out of an i810 graphics chip in linux, though if memory serves, Intel's linux support is quite good. But what 3d accelleration are you going to get out of an i810 anyways?

The point is that any hardware without adequate linux support can easily be replaced with a Linux supported version.

 

[drag]

The best answer is 'It Depends'

Does the end user have to download, burn the install cdrom, and then install it themselves with random hardware?

Well then the answer is 'NO'.

Does the user have to deal with custom windows applications and have to have a very high degree of compatability with Microsoft Office centric applications and file formats?

Then the answer is 'NO'.

Does the end user want to have compatability with DRM-protected Media (Itunes, WMV pay for items), or have compatability with Shockware or Flash 8.x stuff?

Then the answer is 'NO'.

Does the end user want to be able to go to Walmart or Gamestop and buy the latest PC games and have the best drivers for the the latest features on the latest video cards?

Then the answer is 'NO'.

If the end user finds the concept of Freedom attractive, wants to play regular videos, listen to music, surf the internet, do their email, play video games, do homework/research, do some programming, do some 2d art, do some 3d art, mess around with making video games/modding video games, make music, etc etc..

Then Linux is fine. If they have a friend or buy a computer that is have hardware specificly choosen for high linux compatability then installation posses no problem. It's actually pretty easy.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: pcgeek11
Yes Linux is ready for the average user, if the average user is ready to use his head just a bit. and I have to say that I disagree with this statement.

80% of the hardware on the market won't work under Linux without lots of 'coddling'

This just isn't true, IMO.

pcgeek

Half the parts in my system won't work under any linux distro. 99% of my software currently installed won't run reliably under linux either. Granted, for an office machine where the user only needs a word processor and spreadsheet program, linux is a far better option than windows. For a user who wants to do more than type and work with spread sheets, linux doesn't cut it.

I cannot simply power down a linux machine, install a new piece of hardware, turn it back on and expect it to work. With windows, 9 times out of 10, it works.

I cannot simply double click on a setup file and have an application install under linux. Even with the most user friendly RPM files, this isn't the case.

As much as I like alternative OSs, linux included, its simply not ready for the average user to use as their primary OS. And it won't be ready until distro developers make their driver installations, software installations, and hardware installations as easy as they are under windows. Hardware makers aren't off the hook either, few take linux seriously. ATI's linux drivers are far behind their windows drivers, and most linux distros will default to VGA mode under ATI's latest VPUs.

Regarding the statement that you want get 100% 3D acceleration, I don't get any of my X1900XTs features under linux. The 7800GTX in my notebook has most of the 3D features, but there's nothing on linux to actually use those features. Aside from the Quake/Doom3 engine, a few side scrollers, a few puzzle and simplistic strategy games, linux gaming is stagnant.

It simply isn't ready for the big time.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: OSX
Linux is in fact rather user-friendly. It is not, however, idiot friendly. Linux works fine with most of the hardware on the market anyways. Fine, you might not get 100% 3D accelleration out of an i810 graphics chip in linux, though if memory serves, Intel's linux support is quite good. But what 3d accelleration are you going to get out of an i810 anyways?

Intel 810 stuff is their old stuff. Now if you buy a intel motherboard or laptop you can expect to get a 915 or 950 chipset. This will provide enough horsepower to play Wolfenstein level-of-complexity games.

I cannot simply double click on a setup file and have an application install under linux. Even with the most user friendly RPM files, this isn't the case.

Who installs software by downloading individual RPM's anymore? Not me, not any Linux user I know.. Unless it's special software that isn't supported by any distro or third party repositories.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: drag

I cannot simply double click on a setup file and have an application install under linux. Even with the most user friendly RPM files, this isn't the case.

Who installs software by downloading individual RPM's anymore? Not me, not any Linux user I know.. Unless it's special software that isn't supported by any distro or third party repositories.

Thanks for highlighting the problem in further depth for me. Multiple file installations. Yet another hurdle.

Joe Bloe can't handle that. We must remember that for a OS to succeed Windows, its going to have to appeal to the masses.

 

[Nothinman]

Unfortunately, still a windows world. 80% of the hardware on the market won't work under Linux without lots of 'coddling'

Oh please, these days just about any hardware not in the $5 bin at BestBuy will work without too much work.

How are drivers nowadays for Linux?

Especially for chipsets and newer video cards.

Chipsets don't need drivers, AFAIK all those 'drivers' do on Windows is work around bugs. And nVidia and ATI both have Linux drivers available, I don't have much experience with the ATI drivers but the nVidia ones have worked fine for years.

Half the parts in my system won't work under any linux distro

If the system you're talking about is the link in your sig, I don't see anything that won't work in Linux.

99% of my software currently installed won't run reliably under linux either.

So? 99% of my software currently installed won't run on Windows.

I cannot simply power down a linux machine, install a new piece of hardware, turn it back on and expect it to work. With windows, 9 times out of 10, it works.

Sure it does, if it's supported. There are some odd things that need extra work, but they're usually subpar parts anyway. And in Windows fighting with drivers is a lot more work than it is in Linux. Hell if you move a card's PCI slot it'll need reinstalled in Windows, that doesn't happen in Linux.

I cannot simply double click on a setup file and have an application install under linux. Even with the most user friendly RPM files, this isn't the case.

I find it much simpler to use APT for software installation, all I have to do is open up aptitude (or synaptic if you like GTK stuff), search for the app and click install. That's much simpler than searching the Internet, most likely filling out some form, downloading a file and running it. And then if you're really lucky that executable will tell you that you need to hunt something else down too like the .Net framework or a JRE.

As much as I like alternative OSs, linux included, its simply not ready for the average user to use as their primary OS. And it won't be ready until distro developers make their driver installations, software installations, and hardware installations as easy as they are under windows.

It's all perspective, I find all of the stuff you mentioned much, much simpler on Linux than on Windows.

It simply isn't ready for the big time.

And you're qualified to decide this how?

Joe Bloe can't handle that. We must remember that for a OS to succeed Windows, its going to have to appeal to the masses.

Joe Bloe can't handle Windows as it is, as evidenced by all of the successful worms, phishing programs, viruses, etc. The only advantage Windows has is that people already know it.

 

[nweaver]

Dell D810 Laptop, fresh installs

Windows: Missing Vidio, Wirless (intel), NIC, Sound

Ubuntu (5.10 & 6.06) Missing: 3d accelerated support (but native 2D resolution, on an odd res laptop, 1280x768)


but yeah, linux has crappy drivers support, go windows.

 

[loup garou]

Until it comes preinstalled on Dells and the user can bring it to Best Buy to get problems fixed (I know, I know, shouldn't happen, but I never put anything past the "typical home desktop user"), no, it isn't.

 

[CTho9305]

Quicktime 7? Flash 8?

I find it much simpler to use APT for software installation, all I have to do is open up aptitude (or synaptic if you like GTK stuff), search for the app and click install. That's much simpler than searching the Internet, most likely filling out some form, downloading a file and running it.

Sure, unless you want something new or less popular or both, e.g. SeaMonkey.

 

[Robor]

I would say yes but it's not an easy adjustment going from Windows to Linux because they are 2 different animals. I've been running Linux (Ubuntu) on my laptop for about 6 months and I'll admit it was a big change at first. And it's not that Linux is harder, it's just something I hadn't used before so it took some time to learn. The applications are different, the GUI is different, the file system is different, software is installed differently, etc. We all think Windows is so easy to work with but it's because we've been using it for 10+ years. I think the average user would have just as much if not more trouble installing WinXP from scratch and adding on the additional drivers and programs to get their system up and running.

I installed Ubuntu 6.06 on my IBM T42. The install took maybe 45 minutes and when it was done I had to install exactly zero drivers. Everything worked out of the box - even my wireless adapter and the IBM onscreen buttons (volume, brightness, etc). I downloaded Automatix from UbuntuForums.org and ran it to add the extra programs, plugins, features, etc. Reboot and I've got a fully functioning laptop. Start to finish maybe 90 minutes.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Half the parts in my system won't work under any linux distro

If the system you're talking about is the link in your sig, I don't see anything that won't work in Linux.

Oh right, need to up date that. Thats my old system, which would have worked fine in Linux becauseof its NV graphics card and other old hardware. Cutting edge hardware takes a lot of effort to work in linux.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

How is ACPI and power management for the Ubuntu 6.06? Will probably give Ubuntu a try this summer since I've a little more time. My first try with Mandrake 10 wasn't too good with power management. The processor seemed to run at full speed since the fan ran ever-so often. I've an Inspiron 700m Centrino.

 

[Nothinman]

Sure, unless you want something new or less popular or both, e.g. SeaMonkey.

Yea, there's exceptions to every rule. But I prefer to use Galeon over both Firefox and Mozilla/SeaMonkey since it mixes better with the rest of my system. I'm a little surprised the mozilla-browser package hasn't been transitioned to SeaMonkey yet though.

Cutting edge hardware takes a lot of effort to work in linux.

That's a pretty vague statement. And I've seen some of the fun problems on Windows a friend of mine has because he always buys crap as soon as it's released, it's safter to wait a little while no matter what OS you're running.

How is ACPI and power management for the Ubuntu 6.06? Will probably give Ubuntu a try this summer since I've a little more time. My first try with Mandrake 10 wasn't too good with power management. The processor seemed to run at full speed since the fan ran ever-so often. I've an Inspiron 700m Centrino.

Centrino CPU frequency scaling has been in the kernel for quite some time now, if MDK10 didn't set it up for you that's a bug in their installer.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Cutting edge hardware takes a lot of effort to work in linux.

That's a pretty vague statement. And I've seen some of the fun problems on Windows a friend of mine has because he always buys crap as soon as it's released, it's safter to wait a little while no matter what OS you're running.

True. But my Radeon X1900XT worked in Windows the day it was shipped. It still doesn't work in Linux. And by work, I mean at the same level of functionality it has in Windows.

When you are an early adopter, you pay the price. But, improved windows drivers are released fairly quickly, and are a snap to install. Last time I fooled with linux, driver installation was a royal pain involving the command line. That may have changed a little though since the last time I played with linux.

Speaking of command lines, thats something that has to go before Linux can make it as the majority desktop OS. As powerful as the command line is, the average computer user wants everything GUI. If it can't be done in GUI, they're not going to bother with it.

 

[Nothinman]

But my Radeon X1900XT worked in Windows the day it was shipped.

But that's usually only true for varying levels of 'worked'. Yes, it's no secret that most hardware manufacturers support Windows better than Linux by shipping Windows drivers right away and waiting to release Linux drivers if they do it at all. But that will never change as long as people keep using that as an excuse to use Windows, the more people that ask ATI for better, faster released Linux drivers the better chance it has of happening.

Last time I fooled with linux, driver installation was a royal pain involving the command line. That may have changed a little though since the last time I played with linux.

I don't have any ATI hardware so I haven't messed with the fglrx drivers, but the nVidia drivers are packaged just like any other piece of software and can be installed via Synaptic inside of Gnome.

Speaking of command lines, thats something that has to go before Linux can make it as the majority desktop OS. As powerful as the command line is, the average computer user wants everything GUI. If it can't be done in GUI, they're not going to bother with it.

It doesn't have to go, infact if it does go Linux will most likely die as it's core userbase would leave with it. Adding more functionality to the GUI isn't mutually exclusive to having a proper command line. Hell look at MS, they recently released Monad (with a really gay marketing name) which is their next generation shell for Windows. MS is finally realizing that cmd is crap and is working to make their command line more useful.

 

[drag]

I don't have any ATI hardware so I haven't messed with the fglrx drivers, but the nVidia drivers are packaged just like any other piece of software and can be installed via Synaptic inside of Gnome.

I bought a ATI card a little bit ago.. Actually a used X800 card with 256megs of RAM. This is about the highest level card currently supported by Free software drivers. I am using CVS versions of the drivers and get pretty good performance. (DRI mesa drivers) They are still a bit flaky though.. I haven't tried (and don't want to try) the propriatory ATI drivers.

Anybody wanting good 3d performance and high compatability should buy:
If they have a AGP system get a ATI 8500 card. Maybe a bit hard to find.. Has a 275mhz cpu and ram compared to later R200 models like the 9200 that have 200mhz cpu and ram speed. These are stable and have decent performance. Better then the onboard stuff you'd find on a Via motherboard.

If they want dual cpus then get a Pentium-D system with a 915g or 945g chipset. Intel has paid Tungsten Graphics to develop drivers for X.org/Xfree. The 945G offers the 'GMA 950' chipset and is the fastest, if slightly less well supported, of the bunch. I expect that people using X.org 7.1 should have good experiances, and these are stable. They are fast enough for Wolfenstien-level games or Quake3 level games. (100fps and stuff like that). It's about the right level of card for people who want to do limited gaming or stick to most Free software games (not fast enough for some.. like the FlightGear flight simulator)

Avoid Nvidia or ATI motherboards if you can. Although it may be hard to find a non-nvidia motherboard in the configuration you want if you want to use a AMD proccessor.. Via has kinda dropped the ball when it has come to keeping up with modern motherboards. ATI motherboards should be avoided if at all possible.

My personal favorite is now Asus motherboards with Intel chipsets.

For high end graphics if you want to risk it then R300 or R400 series video cards have good performing, if a bit flaky, open source 3d drivers. Otherwise Nvidia with their propriatory drivers are much preferable to ATI based items. ESPECIALLY on both company's latest stuff.