Well unfortunately more games are going DirectX and it sucks having to pay for Cedega or play around with wine (or cvs cedega) just to play those games. I'm glad that some game developers use OpenGL and port their games over to linux (Epic, Ravensoft, iD, etc), but I wish there would be a higher demand for games, or a bigger market..
If I want to play games, I use a console. If I want to work, I use a computer. If gaming is the big reason to no use linux, then there is no reason (imho)
Well, I haven't tried it in Suse. But when I tried it in Ubuntu about eight months ago and Fedora Core 2 a couple years ago, it didn't.
If my experience was "wrong" then so be it. But that's what it was.
Well it may vary from distro to distro, but when you said linux, I assumed you meant all linux distributions.
My Microsoft 5 button Intellimouse Explorer works with all buttons right out of the box. And it's a MICROSOFT mouse! However, like Nothinman said, button mappings are not what I prefer, and I have yet to change them (I believe I read for gnome, it's a rather simple text file edit).
I think Windows and Linux are comparable products for the desktop. What you need to ask yourself is your life going to alter if you switch or not and if so will it be worthwhile.
If you are a desktop user that will not be doing a lot of inter-office work that relies solely on the latest MS Office then I think Linux is a better, safer solution.
If you are a hardcore gamer then I think Windows is the better choice.
If you are a casual gamer and use Nvidia tech then Linux could be the better choice if you can live with Cedega and OpenOffice.
If you are an up and coming geek who seeks the grapes of knowledge of the innards of an OS then any of the Unices will be worth your time.
If you are willing to put up dual booting and the initial setup... and have a legit liscense for XP then yes... Dualbooting is smart.
etc etc etc
If you are a desktop user that will not be doing a lot of inter-office work that relies solely on the latest MS Office then I think Linux is a better, safer solution.
If you are a hardcore gamer then I think Windows is the better choice.
If you are a casual gamer and use Nvidia tech then Linux could be the better choice if you can live with Cedega and OpenOffice.
If you are an up and coming geek who seeks the grapes of knowledge of the innards of an OS then any of the Unices will be worth your time.
If you are willing to put up dual booting and the initial setup... and have a legit liscense for XP then yes... Dualbooting is smart.
etc etc etc
I can play every game I have in Linux. Some with Cedega and some that are Binary. Neverwinter Nights also has native client. Most of my games do not have EAX so no real biggy there. SM 2.0/3.0 is lacking in Cedega but I don't care.
I don't care about those money managers.... GNU Cash is superior. Give it a try... last app you will every use for money management and its price is amazing ( free ).
Windows XP is fine as it is. It is the ISV's that make crap software that run on it and charge an arm and a leg for it because it has a "Made for XP" logo on it. There is nothing special about Linux OR Windows. In my experience the only difference in the user experience comes COMPLETELY from the result of illegal distribution of the Windows product.
In that I mean both Linux and Windows can be headaches for new and old users a like. The only difference is how many people get a headache. You could also relate the Windows Experience to American Education.... Everybody has to go... some people might make straight A's but miss the whole point or can't adapt when things go outside of the established parameters that has been taught. Some people never make it out of kindergarten and wind up being fast food service. Some people just drop out and become fortune 500's because they see outside the box.
I find a lot of the initial linux adapters the latter. And the community that sprout up around them are akin community colleges that take the University overflow for one reason or another.
I think the biggest shock for people going from Windows to Linux is program installation. Windows lets you go around, download anything off the web and double-click it to install it, and 99% of the time it will work.
On Linux you have to go through your package manager, which while it isn't very hard to do at all certainly, is just really different from what you do in Windows. And sometimes the version of the program you need isn't in the default repositories and you'll have to add new ones. Even then, sometimes what you're looking for just isn't available in a pre-packaged form for your distribution. Sure, there are downloads of binaries or source available on the web for programs, but for those it sure as heck isn't a "double-click to install" situation.
So that's an initial shock there. Plus program names sometimes. People know, generally, what Windows Explorer is. But if you're a total in-the-dark Linux n00b using the either the KDE or GNOME interface, I'm pretty sure you would have a hard time finding out what the graphical file browser is in the menu... but I suppose the desktop shortcut to your home directory helps a lot in that regard.
And the display system is totally foreign for Windows users. Windows users are used to right-clicking on their desktop and selecting Properties, clicking the Settings tab, then setting a resolution. From what I remember about my Linux experience with FC2 and Ubuntu as desktops, the GNOME GUI was completely unhelpful in getting the resolution I wanted. And refresh rates too. Most Windows users are like, "I want 75 Hz," and they just go to the Settings' Advanced button, then Monitor, and select the refresh rate you want from the list (which is usually detected via Plug and Play) But in Linux you have to consult your monitor's documentation and set ranges of both horizontal and vertical refresh rates that the monitor can do. In fact, if there is a way to set a specific refresh rate like in Windows (60 Hz, 75 Hz, 85 Hz, etc.), I never figured it out.
It's that sort of thing that I think makes it harder for Windows users to adjust to on a Linux desktop. Like I said, Linux makes for a truly great server. Easy to setup. Easy to manage. As a desktop I think it still has some ways to go from a user-friendliness standpoint.
On Linux you have to go through your package manager, which while it isn't very hard to do at all certainly, is just really different from what you do in Windows. And sometimes the version of the program you need isn't in the default repositories and you'll have to add new ones. Even then, sometimes what you're looking for just isn't available in a pre-packaged form for your distribution. Sure, there are downloads of binaries or source available on the web for programs, but for those it sure as heck isn't a "double-click to install" situation.
So that's an initial shock there. Plus program names sometimes. People know, generally, what Windows Explorer is. But if you're a total in-the-dark Linux n00b using the either the KDE or GNOME interface, I'm pretty sure you would have a hard time finding out what the graphical file browser is in the menu... but I suppose the desktop shortcut to your home directory helps a lot in that regard.
And the display system is totally foreign for Windows users. Windows users are used to right-clicking on their desktop and selecting Properties, clicking the Settings tab, then setting a resolution. From what I remember about my Linux experience with FC2 and Ubuntu as desktops, the GNOME GUI was completely unhelpful in getting the resolution I wanted. And refresh rates too. Most Windows users are like, "I want 75 Hz," and they just go to the Settings' Advanced button, then Monitor, and select the refresh rate you want from the list (which is usually detected via Plug and Play) But in Linux you have to consult your monitor's documentation and set ranges of both horizontal and vertical refresh rates that the monitor can do. In fact, if there is a way to set a specific refresh rate like in Windows (60 Hz, 75 Hz, 85 Hz, etc.), I never figured it out.
It's that sort of thing that I think makes it harder for Windows users to adjust to on a Linux desktop. Like I said, Linux makes for a truly great server. Easy to setup. Easy to manage. As a desktop I think it still has some ways to go from a user-friendliness standpoint.
You could be right. You probably are right, in fact. But the average person probably doesn't know what Linux is either. I'd be surprised if they'd even heard the word before.
But my point was that "Windows Explorer" gives a better indication as to what it is about than does "Nautilus" or "Konqueror."
As for my mention of refresh rates, I was just pointing out that I think they are a lot easier to deal with in Windows than in the Linux distributions that I've had experience with.
I completely agree, but they are barriers to entry just the same which is what my point was.
And while I think many things on a Linux desktop are easy once you understand that things may be different and how they work, I still think that setting up the display on Windows is easier if you wish to change the default.
Edit: Look, I know this Windows vs. Linux ease-of-use argument takes place daily here. But one thing the pro-Linux crowd does here is always bring up the fact that Linux isn't hard to figure out if you aren't so used to Windows. Well, that's the problem isn't it? Aren't most people very used to Windows? You can't just assume that everyone has or should have no "training" in terms of how any operating system works, because that just isn't reality.
In any case, I love messing around with Linux. I find it very pleasing to solve a problem with an unsupported piece of hardware or learning about iptables rules or how to improve security on a default Linux installation. I'd love to use it as a desktop and would be currently if I could get my Broadcom-based wireless card to work.
Still, I'm not blind to the fact that there are some things Linux could use some improvement on to make some more inroads in becoming a great desktop operating system. Not necessarily to make it more "Windows-like," but to improve user-friendliness in general. Program naming conventions and display configuration are two that I think could use some work.
Remember, these are just my personal opinions and observations, yes as primarily a Windows user, but also as a user.
I don't understand why people say it is confusing to the non-techie users. When I was playing with using Fedora Core on our home desktop, I told my wife she can just use the laptop if I'm not around, until I can answer any questions she has. But she just started using the linux desktop, didn't even have any questions. She said the stuff was obvious. She guessed correctly first try on clicking the gnome foot to get a menu and the layout and program names were obvious.
For some reason it seems, techies have more trouble with it then non-techies. My wife is as non-techie as they get. Granted, she could not have done the initial setup, but then she would not be able to set up Windows either.
I think it's because the basic user that is just using the operating system to browse the web, create documents, change their background image, etc. Thery aren't really doing anything but opening and working with programs. And that in that case working with a Linux desktop like GNOME or KDE isn't all that dissimilar from working with Windows.
"Techies" are generally going to be more likely to want to install new hardware, install new programs, remove programs, reconfigure settings, explore the file system, etc. And this is where you start to see the differences between Linux and Windows. I don't have any Mac experience so I can't say anything about that.
"Techies" are generally going to be more likely to want to install new hardware, install new programs, remove programs, reconfigure settings, explore the file system, etc. And this is where you start to see the differences between Linux and Windows. I don't have any Mac experience so I can't say anything about that.
Yeah. I think people like whoever Nothinman was quoting above say linux is ready for the average user, because it's not ready for THEM. The average user can use linux just fine. Skilled techs can figure out linux. It's the psuedo-techie-wannabes that linux is not ready for (guys like Seeruk fall perfectly into this category).
Linux is my OS of choice now for everything except gaming. I have a Gentoo box for dev work + keeping current on administration, an Ubuntu box for web surfing and A/V, and a Windows laptop for school work/gaming. Not having to reboot everytime that you install a program is nice, I have 189 days uptime on my Gentoo box right now, and it's a p3 550 with 512 RAM that was given to me "broken" (a cd exploded in the drive so the law firm threw it away) and now it runs Apache, MySQL, SAMBA (its my PDC for my home network) my firewall (iptables FTW!) and a variety of other things.
SSH tunneling of ports alone almost makes it all worth while (only port 22 is forwarded on my edge router to my gentoo box, then from there I can tunnel any traffic I like through ssh to anywhere that I have an Internet connection)
I've been a windows tech for a long time (since I was 12 or so I've been repairing windows boxes for family and friends + several years as a windows tech/ system admin) and Linux has only helped me to better understand the ways that things tie together, and opened my eyes to an entire world of free and customizable software. (open source roxors my boxers) Whereas I used to search for commercial solutions to problems, now I think about how I would accomplish something in Linux, and if the tool that I want to use doesn't completely fit my needs, I can always modify the code.
SSH tunneling of ports alone almost makes it all worth while (only port 22 is forwarded on my edge router to my gentoo box, then from there I can tunnel any traffic I like through ssh to anywhere that I have an Internet connection)
I've been a windows tech for a long time (since I was 12 or so I've been repairing windows boxes for family and friends + several years as a windows tech/ system admin) and Linux has only helped me to better understand the ways that things tie together, and opened my eyes to an entire world of free and customizable software. (open source roxors my boxers) Whereas I used to search for commercial solutions to problems, now I think about how I would accomplish something in Linux, and if the tool that I want to use doesn't completely fit my needs, I can always modify the code.
It's tough to switch.
Seriously.
Say your a technically inclind guy a few years ago. You wanted to learn a bit about programming, a bit about setting up a server.
So a 'server'. Pretty impressive stuff. Ohhh... 'ENTERPRISE'. Rooms full of computers with mainframes and terminals and all sorts of wires and beeping things in dark rooms. Grumbling adminstrators with keyboards in dirty little rooms with odd sorts of chairs and multiple displays listenning to odd rock music and wearing hiking boots. Either that or suites with professional degrees walking around talking to each other in rooms full of large machines buzzing around with tape reels and der blinken lighten.
So ya go to school or work for some small business some were and you learn about computers. They teach you that computers count in 2's and that a megabyte is slightly more then a thousand killobytes among other things. Then you get to the point were you get past the b.s. 'lets learn how to use excel spreadsheet' computer fundamentals 101 classes. Then you get to have the painfull experiance of installing Windows NT.
As you move on you learn more stuff. Get a job and you have these books, these bibles and manuals and other stuff that you look at. As you mature so does the platform. You learn a bit how it works it gets more stable, more usefull. You grow in capabilties, the computers increase in capacity, OSes increase in stability, everything works out. As you grow the platform grows.
Then you go into a online forum and somebody tells you that it's nothing but a pile of ****** and that people have been doing better stuff for a decade before Windows NT ever existed and it's all aviable at completely no cost. It's better, it's faster, and it has this crazy guy that tells you that producing closed source software is immoral. Except that you have to learn a bunch of odd command line stuff, which is better anyways then that grandma gui crap.
You'd think that that guy was a loony too.
i am currently using UBUNTU and i love it, i use windows only for games and linux for everything els the only thing that doesnt work on linux is my MX510 the internet buttons back and forward dont work YET, but ill get them to work one day, and its definatly with it i got tired of looking at the same thing every day it was time for a change so i moved to linux
Honestly, though. I don't think Windows is crap. I also don't think they are innovative, and I don't think they are perfect. I used Windows for years, and I liked it. I DO have a problem with Windows however and that is that they are spending too much time worrying about pirates and things like DRM, than they do about making quality software. They could do other things better, but this is the one thing that is unnacceptible to me. I want to reinstall my OS as many times as I want, I want to change my hardware as many times as I want, and I at least want the allusion that what I've paid for belongs to me, instead of feeling like my computer and everything on it belongs to someone else and I'm lucky I get to use it for what they let me use it for. Anyway, I'm going off on a tangent...
Other than that, I think Windows is fine. Windows zealots seem to think that just because someone likes linux then they must be on a jihad agains Windows, which 99% of the time is not true. I think that linux is fine for the average user, that doesn't mean I hate Windows. They both have things they do better than the other. What I think is crap, is the techies who wipe out and reload Windows once a month because of all the crap they get, and then spend one week trying out linux and exclaim "IT'S NOT READY" or "IT SUCKS" because they run into a little glitch that they didn't even take time to look in the FAQs for their distro to see it can be fixed with a single command line statement.
Other than that, I think Windows is fine. Windows zealots seem to think that just because someone likes linux then they must be on a jihad agains Windows, which 99% of the time is not true. I think that linux is fine for the average user, that doesn't mean I hate Windows. They both have things they do better than the other. What I think is crap, is the techies who wipe out and reload Windows once a month because of all the crap they get, and then spend one week trying out linux and exclaim "IT'S NOT READY" or "IT SUCKS" because they run into a little glitch that they didn't even take time to look in the FAQs for their distro to see it can be fixed with a single command line statement.
A reminder to read my signature Brazen.
How come all the other zealots manage to play nicely and you just come over as a 15 year old kid just got home from a fresh day of being bullied?
I would call trying to excuse your complete inability to construct an intelligent argument
I was trying to do you a favour but hey...
I was trying to do you a favour but hey...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter