Sould Linux be harder or easier? Poll

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: aka1nas
I think that having a fully featured CLI is definately a good idea, but having a GUI to get your feet wet in is very nice. I'd rather get acclimated to using the CLI slowly, and having the ability to alt+tab and beg for help on the AT forums while im still learning is a plus. If you get stuck in the CLI and have no clue what to do, you have to restart and login again.(at least I had to cuz I was mucking around with X and my video drivers and couldn't change stuff while I was in the GUI.)

But if you learned to use the cli instead of just a stupid gui, you would have known how to fix the problem instead of stopping the work to waste time logging in and out.

CLI 1
GUI 0

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
guis are well and good for downloading porn or browing a forum. For work, there is a the command line. Take away the cli in linux and what do you have? You barely have half of a freaking OS. There cli is where the power is. The notes of those that came before you is the best way to learn. Forget this hand holding crap. Learn to think, learn to read, learn to comprehend and stop expecting people to hand you an answer.

My thoughts exactly. Man, I use the command line like every day for all kinds of things at work and home. You can't beat it for administration and customization.

While not a command line guru like some posters here, I have found that if one really wants to earn something (in this case knowledge and problem solving skills), one goes out and gets their hands dirty. Yes, the *nix distros can be intimidating to those who cut their teeth on Windoze and not DOS or Solaris 2.3 like some of us old timers. Back in the day, we didn't have online forums to go to for answers in a couple of hours. I remember hating life while installing and configuring a 9600 modem on ttya for a Sun box running Solaris 2.3. I could not leave until the job was finished. The things we had to do was either read the very "generalized" manuals and work it out or fail. Usenet was around, but not as popular or comprehensive for finding out information as nowadays.

Many good resources now exist out there on the web and in books. Work with command line enough and you OWN the box. It doesn't own you.

Linux is a very powerful OS. Again, I ain't a *nix guru and still learn everyday at the age of 40. One makes peace with the command line and, after a while, it becomes a very good, trusted friend.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Debian or Slack are great once you get the hang of Linux, but as an introduction to Linux they can be quite overwhelming.

I started out with Debian 1.3 in 1997. My friend told me to edit the afterstep code to get it to work on my computer.

I just stared blankly at him...

Anyway, I think it worked out well. I've yet to find another distro that I like better. Debian seems to have a loyal user base.

Edit: I think someone broke n0cmonkey.... He's right though.

 

[tart666]

guis are well and good for downloading porn or browing a forum. For work, there is a the command line. Take away the cli in linux and what do you have? You barely have half of a freaking OS. There cli is where the power is. The notes of those that came before you is the best way to learn.

Exactly!

• - Except the GUI covers about 10% of the OS the way things are now[
  - I (and most people) don't do WORK. Most people use PC to browse a forum and download porn
  - I do not advocate removing CLI tools, I just want the GUI to grow to 50% of CLI power(like win)

USERs unite! demand user-friendliness

T

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: tart666

• - Except the GUI covers about 10% of the OS the way things are now[
  - I (and most people) don't do WORK. Most people use PC to browse a forum and download porn
  - I do not advocate removing CLI tools, I just want the GUI to grow to 50% of CLI power(like win)

USERs unite! demand user-friendliness

T

I may be wrong, but I think that you can do most "non-work" things in Red Hat from the GUI.
Personally, I hate using the GUI to configure things.

Edit: By the way, you should put a "It's fine, if you choose to use it don't complain" option on the poll so that I can vote.

 

[tart666]

I may be wrong, but I think that you can do most "non-work" things in Red Hat from the GUI.

perhaps I am out of touch, but how about :

• - Enabling / Disabling DMA
  - Change drivers from the GUI. Btw, are drivers still kernel-specific these days ? (minor version specific)

By the way, you should put a "It's fine, if you choose to use it don't complain" option on the poll so that I can vote.

There you go. and btw, this poll is not about complaining, it's simply market research to figure out if there are more USERS interested in Linux, or the "hardcore" workers interested in keeping everyone from linux.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: tart666

I may be wrong, but I think that you can do most "non-work" things in Red Hat from the GUI.

perhaps I am out of touch, but how about :

• - Enabling / Disabling DMA
  - Change drivers from the GUI. Btw, are drivers still kernel-specific these days ? (minor version specific)

Ok, I'll admit, I don't know if those exist. I'd imagine it would be a breach of security, but who knows. You can run make xconfig (something to that effect) to configure the kernel in X, but I don't think it's particuarly spectacular.


There you go. and btw, this poll is not about complaining, it's simply market research to figure out if there are more USERS interested in Linux, or the "hardcore" workers interested in keeping everyone from linux.

I think that the problem is that people want another Windows without using Windows. "Linux" is a popular word to throw around, it seems to convey technical prowess. I have no problems with anyone doing anything they want with any software, within the bounds of law, but it seems to me that people should choose their tools according to need, not according to whatever stature they may think that comes with it.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: tart666

I may be wrong, but I think that you can do most "non-work" things in Red Hat from the GUI.

perhaps I am out of touch, but how about :

• - Enabling / Disabling DMA
  - Change drivers from the GUI. Btw, are drivers still kernel-specific these days ? (minor version specific)

You have a gui to do this, its called an xterm.

By the way, you should put a "It's fine, if you choose to use it don't complain" option on the poll so that I can vote.

There you go. and btw, this poll is not about complaining, it's simply market research to figure out if there are more USERS interested in Linux, or the "hardcore" workers interested in keeping everyone from linux.

If you want something better, make it.

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Debian or Slack are great once you get the hang of Linux, but as an introduction to Linux they can be quite overwhelming.

Uh huh .. I've been using debian CLI for like two years now, on and off. I have had a debian box in my house for that long, and thanks to it's incredible stability, I never have to do anything. When I do though, I get stuck every time and have to run here to beg n0c, nothinman or any of the other guys for help. IRC can be a good resource as well, but now, I have two boxes running .. my debian server and my redhat desktop. That way, for browsing forums, pr0n and samba, I have my redhat box, while ipchains and the rest is taken care of by my debian box.


Just a question though tart666; why do you insist on using linux if you can do
"- I (and most people) don't do WORK. Most people use PC to browse a forum and download porn"
all of that on windows or maxOS?

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: tart666

I may be wrong, but I think that you can do most "non-work" things in Red Hat from the GUI.

perhaps I am out of touch, but how about :

• - Enabling / Disabling DMA - Change drivers from the GUI. Btw, are drivers still kernel-specific these days ? (minor version specific)

Ok, I'll admit, I don't know if those exist. I'd imagine it would be a breach of security, but who knows. You can run make xconfig (something to that effect) to configure the kernel in X, but I don't think it's particuarly spectacular. There you go. and btw, this poll is not about complaining, it's simply market research to figure out if there are more USERS interested in Linux, or the "hardcore" workers interested in keeping everyone from linux. I think that the problem is that people want another Windows without using Windows. "Linux" is a popular word to throw around, it seems to convey technical prowess. I have no problems with anyone doing anything they want with any software, within the bounds of law, but it seems to me that people should choose their tools according to need, not according to whatever stature they may think that comes with it.

Agreed! I started with Debian, cause I heard it was teh best and I knew it would be hard (boy was that an understatement) but I figured if I messed with it for a few years I'll catch up. I'm still learning and my level of skill is still newb. However, I use that debian box to serve web pages, act as a router etc etc .. these things are much better suited to linux than to windows. I wouldn't call myself a "worker" like you seem to call it, I am a "user" but I don't use the command line .. just cause I don't use linux to surf for pr0n doesn't mean that I'm not a user. Also, I think that redhat is mighty easy, comparable to windows easy ... man, I didn't even know what DMA was for a long time using windows, windows is just as hard as redhat, only you grew up with it since 95 probably and it's second nature to you. I garauntee that if you grew up on nix you would be saying the same things about windows.

 

[tart666]

GoldMember (Chaotic42) nailed it:

I think that the problem is that people want another Windows without using Windows.

I think me (and the people, judging from the polls) want Windows, but without the vole (Mr G). Seriously, Open Source is great, and it does not have to be free. As long as the price is right. And price control should work, since competition is much stiffer when the source is free.

why do you insist on using linux if you can do [..] all of that on windows or maxOS?

Two reasons:

• - Because I have 5 pc's in the house. The OS will have to be upgraded sooner or later. And I will not get the academic discount forever.
  - I have a lithography simulator program I have to use for my thesis that only runs on Linux. And I seriously don't wanna spend 3 or 4 years learning Linux with the rest of the responders to this post before I can use the software.

So for these reasons I am hoping that there will be a reasonable distro and software suite by the time I graduate. Not expecting, just hoping (quote: "If you want something better, make it. ")

And apparently most people are hoping with me.

 

[Nothinman]

The big problem with this thread was that you chose a known hard to use distro when there are alternatives that handle things much easier. Linux is all about choice, stop whining about the last one you made and try again.

 

[stash]

windows is just as hard as redhat, only you grew up with it since 95 probably and it's second nature to you. I garauntee that if you grew up on nix you would be saying the same things about windows

This is an excellent point...for all of the FisherPrice'ness that is Windows XP, there are plenty of people who still have no idea what they are doing on a computer. Case in point...EFS. Look how many people lose data on their windows boxes because they encypt something, then format without exporting the key. There are plenty of questions from people about converting from fat32 to ntfs. People lock themselves out of the Administrator account all the time. And with all the networking wizards in windows today, there are still lots of people having trouble setting up home networks.

Every OS has a learning curve. Thats part of what makes computers fun. If you don't have the time or the patience to make a commitment to learning linux, then you should stick with what you know. If you do take the time to learn, there are plenty of resources available to you, and you never have to worry about shelling out $200 for a tech support call to Microsoft. People in this forum and countless others on the web know what they are talking about when it comes to linux. Hell, even the man pages will tell you a ton (sometimes maybe too much).

The topic of this thread is dumb...should linux be harder or easier? Whose standards should we use? What constitutes an easy OS? Although nobody has come out and said it, I think many of you who want an "easier" linux are really asking for another windows. And what is the point of that? There already is a Windows...if thats what you want, use it.

 

[Abzstrak]

Exactly!

- Except the GUI covers about 10% of the OS the way things are now[
- I (and most people) don't do WORK. Most people use PC to browse a forum and download porn
- I do not advocate removing CLI tools, I just want the GUI to grow to 50% of CLI power(like win)

USERs unite! demand user-friendliness

WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO DEMAND ANYTHING? If you want it to be more user friendly, then fvcking write it yourself. Linux is developed to be a CHOICE... A CHOICE, do you understand the meaning of the word? None/few developers give a rats ass about making it a user friendly GUI... ITS NOT A GUI, it just offers that interface as a CHOICE.

THE whole point is to ffer you choice and to let you do anything you want with it (more CHOICES)... if you dont like it then you obviously can make the choice to go back to using windows (probably what you should do).

 

[tart666]

None/few developers give a rats ass about making it a user friendly GUI

That's exactly what I suspected. While the users want the friendly environment (see the poll, eh), the developers don't give a rat's ass.

WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO DEMAND ANYTHING

I am a customer. I am always right. in this world, if I demand it, they will come

Apparently Linux is an anomaly in this capitalist world, where DEMAND drives products. I was wrong in my expectations about linux on the desktop. Apparently that hype was purely mass-media created. The linux developers and the turbo-dorks will make sure it stays as a niche curiosity of a code. not quite as good and stable as commercial unix, FreeBSD, etc, but cute, and customizable.

I pity the linux biggots. They will bring their own obscurity to themselves. Pretty soon they will disappear from the radar just like VMS biggots before them.

I am bored with this thread. I got everything I wanted out of this: the Demand for user-friendly linux is there, but the developers "don't give a rat's ass". Consider the discussion closed.

T

 

[GonzoDaGr8]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO DEMAND ANYTHING
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I am a customer. I am always right. in this world, if I demand it, they will come

Don't hold your breath about that...Even with Windows, you get what you are given...NOT what you want. Microsoft just happens to have what YOU want.

I can scream, shout, pout and wine to want OSX ported to x86 platform, but I know that it will never happen. And believe you me, no polls or studies that say that the majority of PC owners WANT OSX for PC will change Apple's minds about porting it.

 

[IcemanJer]

Originally posted by: tart666
Apparently Linux is an anomaly in this capitalist world, where DEMAND drives products.

That's quite true. Economists haven't found a way to properly model the open-source market behaviour where production isn't linked to profit.

 

[Nothinman]

That's exactly what I suspected. While the users want the friendly environment (see the poll, eh), the developers don't give a rat's ass.

99% of the time in Linux the users are the developers, and for most of them the current state of UIs is good enough. Linux is "for the people, by the people", if you want something done do it yourself or pay someone to do it for you.

I am a customer. I am always right. in this world, if I demand it, they will come

You actually believe that? Did you demand the XP PlaySkool theme? Did you demand TCP/IP integrated in Win95? Did you demand scrollwheel support?

I hightly doubt you thought of any of those before MS did, most likely MS packaged them up, sold them to you and you decided you liked it. MS gives you what they think you'll like, and even if you don't where can you go? Buy a Mac? Too expensive. Install Linux? Too hard, apparently.

The linux developers and the turbo-dorks will make sure it stays as a niche curiosity of a code. not quite as good and stable as commercial unix, FreeBSD, etc, but cute, and customizable.

Now you're showing even more ignorance. FreeBSD uses the same development model as Linux, run by an even more elitest group of uber-geeks and frankly Linux is more stable and faster than commercial unix in some circumstances. I know where I work one of our business units began developing on Linux and our $1M 12-way HP box is barely 2x as fast as a Dell 2-way Linux box, when given the hardware it should be 6x or more faster.

They will bring their own obscurity to themselves. Pretty soon they will disappear from the radar just like VMS biggots before them.

Pretty much noone in the Linux community asked for all the attention and most of them will be happy hacking on Linux until something more fun to hack on comes along. It's not about marketshare or money, it's about doing what they/we like to do. I myself am not a kernel hacker yet, but you never know and if I ever do become one it won't matter if Linux is on 10M desktops or 100.

And frankly the VMS biggots are just quieter now, they're still around. I know, we employ a number of them because the majority if our business is housed and run on a VMS cluster on Alpha and VAX hardware.

I got everything I wanted out of this: the Demand for user-friendly linux is there, but the developers "don't give a rat's ass".

You can't expect everyone to drop what they're doing because you want a few GUI tools developed. It's my time so I'll do what I want with it, if you want to pay me I'll develop whatever you want.

 

[IcemanJer]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
I know where I work one of our business units began developing on Linux and our $1M 12-way HP box is barely 2x as fast as a Dell 2-way Linux box, when given the hardware it should be 6x or more faster.

As a seasoned developer, clearly you should know that a 12-way box isn't 6 times faster than a 2-way box, right? Right? Because having more processors means you can do more tasks in parallel, so therefore your throughput is higher, but your performance isn't just a function of throughput but a function of clock speed, throughput, Instruction Set Architecture, and every piece of hardware in the box. Right?

 

[aka1nas]

Like I said earlier, I have no problem learning the CLI to do things. What I would like to see is maybe easier GUI driver installation. Once again, I think my problem was mainly X related as it was the video card driver and an upgrade of Xfree86 that I was installing, which I can sorta understand not allowing you to install while in the GUI. It also doesn't help trying to learn a new OS when you're monitor is stuck in 640x480 @ 60Hz and it starts giving you a headache while you attempt to read the extremely aliased text that tells you how to edit your config files to make your video drivers work.😀


BTW, are fonts in Linux not antialiased? Im running at 1024x768 now and they still seem extremely aliased compared to windows. Its noticeable in both Konquerer and Mozilla, as wel as the desktop and text files.

 

[n0cmonkey]

First, I believe Linux on the desktop is primarily media driven. They are looking for a story, and everyone loves a "David vs Goliath" story. The little pengiun going after the big bad borg. It is however, an alternative for many people.

Second, this could be broght up to the Kompany (or whatever KDE's group is now) or Ximian, since this is one of their goals. The whole gui thing is the responsibility of the gui people, not the kernel hackers, and this fact may have brought us off course (myself included, I seem to be the biggest "Linux biggot" [sic] here, which is funny because Im pretty anti-linux most of the time (which is probably why I wasnt introduced to the RedHat guy that was in the office a couple of weeks ago 😉).

Which brings me to number 3. Why not talk to RedHat or SuSE? Both are doing fairly well in their markets (US and EU respectively). They would be more than happy to help you out.

And forth, I have changed my mind. I want Linux to be easier. In fact, I will offer up my time to make this a reality. What I require from you, tart666 (if you are in the uk did you choose that on purpose? I cant help but laugh everytime I see your nick), customer, potential linux convert, oh wise one who starts threads on the basis of starting a flame war of epic proportions, is a little help. Im making a list of things I need *your* help with:

• What do you want to improve? I will need specifics like the graphical driver installation thingy.
• Time. It would take me no less than 6 months to get alpha quality software ready for testing.
• Funding. I would need no less than $60,000USD for the period of the initial 6 months, not including expenses.
• High speed bandwidth, my 768/128k DSL is feeling a little slow 😉
• Hardware. You cant expect me to do a bunch of software delopment on my slow Athlon 1800+ can you? Or on my 500mhz iBook? That would be rediculous!

If that meets your approval, oh great "customer," please pm me for payment details (sorry, no paypal). If it does not meet your approval, and you want to help make Linux less powerful by diluting it in gui stuff, let me know, I will *help* you develop it (for free :Q).

So I guess if we all talk calmly things can be worked out, let me know what you think of the proposal.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: aka1nas
Like I said earlier, I have no problem learning the CLI to do things. What I would like to see is maybe easier GUI driver installation. Once again, I think my problem was mainly X related as it was the video card driver and an upgrade of Xfree86 that I was installing, which I can sorta understand not allowing you to install while in the GUI. It also doesn't help trying to learn a new OS when you're monitor is stuck in 640x480 @ 60Hz and it starts giving you a headache while you attempt to read the extremely aliased text that tells you how to edit your config files to make your video drivers work.😀


BTW, are fonts in Linux not antialiased? Im running at 1024x768 now and they still seem extremely aliased compared to windows. Its noticeable in both Konquerer and Mozilla, as wel as the desktop and text files.

If you are having trouble (or had trouble) with the nVidia driver installation, complain to nVidia. They dont play well with others and that is where the problem comes from.

 

[drag]

I beleive very much that the whole Windows is easier to use than Linux thing is partly a myth. Sure Windows is much more easier for grandpa to get on the internet or my sister to get her e-mail. In this Windows wins hands down. However anything over the most basic features of a modern OS the lead that Windows has over Linux in terms of ease of use quickly deteriates.

Try to install a server on XP? how easy is that compared to Linux? Is NT easier to install than Slackware? Realy?

It's just that most everybody is used to the conventions that Microsoft inflicts on all of us. Think about it. If a person has been using a OS for the past 6 years and suddenly switches to a completely alien way of doing things... How easy is that?

I have been using Linux for nigh on 2 years now and compiling a kernel is a easy 1 hour-tops project. Installing a new tarball'ed program source is a breeze. Usually just: ./configure (enter) make (enter) make install (enter)... How easy is that?!

Every once and a while I go back home and help my dad with his XP or ME box. And I have to say that even though I am fairly computer literate and know my way around a microsoft's regedit.exe as well as anyone XP makes my head spin with it's maze of menus/dialogs/icons. Nothing makes that much sense and all of the settings seem to be scattered around in a somewhat random manner.

Why can't microsoft just put all of it's administrative menus and programs settings in just 1 folder? like a c:/windows/etc?

Different Distros serve different markets. Slackware is for classical Unix-type users that want what Linux has to offer. Debian is for networks and servers that have well-educated admins that want ease of use and want to know exactly whats going on. Openbsd is for utimate security. Netbsd is for ultimate portability. Redhat/Mandrake and others is for users and bussiness that realy on good tech support and want something easy and trouble free
to use.

It would be silly to expect Slackware to try to go directly after the same user market that Microsoft dominates by tring to dumb down it's interfaces and make menus and programs that do the thinking for the users. It would actually make it harder for people like me to use! I like command prompts! I think they are easier to use than most gui interfaces. Hell since I quit using windows my words per minute has gone from 15 to 40 and I can now type without looking at the keyboard. I've gone from using a device with 2 buttons to a device with 105. It's like going from a 8 bit operating system to a 64 bit OS!(or a 8088 to a alpha server.. same thing) 😉

 

[drag]

Hells bells...

ease of use with Unix underpinnings....

THATS WHAT THEY MADE MAC OS X FOR!!!

you don't even need to press any buttons! just let the weight of your hand press the mouse down! (the new mac's mouses: Look ma no buttons!)

hehe

 

[Nothinman]

As a seasoned developer, clearly you should know that a 12-way box isn't 6 times faster than a 2-way box, right?

A) I'm not a seasoned developer
B) yes I do know that scalability isn't linear and CPUs aren't the only factor.

But you have to admit, a $1M box should be more than just a little more than twice as a $4K box.

I beleive very much that the whole Windows is easier to use than Linux thing is partly a myth. Sure Windows is much more easier for grandpa...

So which is it?

IMO Windows isn't easier, it's just that it's the defacto-standard and too many people have grown up with a start button and control panel.

Try to install a server on XP?

The server version of XP isn't released yet.