Which OS

[Griffinhart]

Originally posted by: nerp
I don't buy protected content, so I'm not worried about losing any access to my media.

QFE...

If you are worried about DRM protected content, don't buy it. If consumers want to send a clear message to record/movie companies that they don't like it, they should just not spend the money on it.

I have an absolute ton of media that I move around PC to PC, install to install without a problem. I simply don't buy DRM'd content.

The only DRM'd content I even consider are movie rentals. Even then I don't use them much since the selection is still pretty weak.

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: gsellis
BTW, this quote

If I put Ubuntu on the secretary's machine at work, and gave her a blank check to buy the software she needed to do the job she'd be crying before the day was done.

If you do that, you are not doing your job. This is the job of IT. The secretary was not hired as an IT person. We provide the tools for folks to do the job we hired them for and assist them to get there. That has been one of my main arguments for years on why we needed to spend money on server space so My Documents could be redirected to a server. No AA/Sect, should be responsible for running a tape backup or backup schedule on important data because it was in their documents folder (or be aware that we are backing it up!) It just gets done. Not ideal, but automagic for the user if they use the defaults (and they usually do - it is a little bit of knowledge that starts getting dangerous ). How to use the tools provided is good, but being IT is why we get paid.

The things you mention are indeed in the realm of IT. Being able to just buy some software to do a secretaries job shouldn't require an IT staff though. These are "Personal" computers.

A secretary should be able to power up a PC and install some software. If they can't then user friendliness is very poor. You can do this just fine on Windows and OSX.

I just ran this by our directory of IT. He laughed his ass off. You show me a 'regular user' who has admin rights, let alone installs his own software on windows and I'll show you one screwed up computer.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: sourceninja

I just ran this by our directory of IT. He laughed his ass off. You show me a 'regular user' who has admin rights, let alone installs his own software on windows and I'll show you one screwed up computer.

Every regular user has admin rights. "Regular users" don't have an IT help desk to install their software. Regular users buy a computer at Best Buy, take it home, and use it best they can.

 

[sourceninja]

And regular users hose their machines and call me constantly asking why its slow, why this program crashes, what this error means, etc.

Simply put, modern computers are too much for 'regular users'. They do not have the desire or perhaps even the ability to learn how to use them properly.

I can't tell you how long it took me to teach my sister that removing an icon off the desktop does not equal uninstalling an application. Or how many times I've had to go 'speed up' her computer because its 'grinding'. Other gems I've had to teach people is that clicking the x does not close OSX apps, and holding in the power button is not the proper way to turn off windows machines. I'd venture to say that if I went to 10 peoples houses right now and checked their computers I'd find spyware, programs that they installed and have no idea why or when, large sections of normal maintenance left undone, and probably a multitude of problems I haven't even considered yet.

So yes, a normal user should not be managing their own computer. If they are stupid enough to run as an admin for day to day tasks, they have already proved my point.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: sourceninja
And regular users hose their machines and call me constantly asking why its slow, why this program crashes, what this error means, etc.

Simply put, modern computers are too much for 'regular users'. They do not have the desire or perhaps even the ability to learn how to use them properly.

I can't tell you how long it took me to teach my sister that removing an icon off the desktop does not equal uninstalling an application. Or how many times I've had to go 'speed up' her computer because its 'grinding'. Other gems I've had to teach people is that clicking the x does not close OSX apps, and holding in the power button is not the proper way to turn off windows machines. I'd venture to say that if I went to 10 peoples houses right now and checked their computers I'd find spyware, programs that they installed and have no idea why or when, large sections of normal maintenance left undone, and probably a multitude of problems I haven't even considered yet.

So yes, a normal user should not be managing their own computer. If they are stupid enough to run as an admin for day to day tasks, they have already proved my point.

The ones that call you are probably the lowest 10%. Most of the "regular users" I know can use a computer just fine, they might occasionally ask for help when they want to do a hardware upgrade or whatever, but they know enough to get by in general. Maybe you are just surrounded by idiots.

 

[Markbnj]

And regular users hose their machines and call me constantly asking why its slow, why this program crashes, what this error means, etc.

Simply put, modern computers are too much for 'regular users'. They do not have the desire or perhaps even the ability to learn how to use them properly.

I think you're being a little absolutist here. The average user is not in a professionally-staffed environment with IT ready to help... well actually maybe the average Windows user is, but the point is that there are millions of home users who have to admin their own machines, and they manage to for the most part.

 

[sourceninja]

Joe Stewart is the director of malware research at SecureWorks, and presented a dire view of the current botnet landscape at the RSA conference this week. He conducted a survey of the top spamming 'nets, extrapolating their size from the volume of emails that flow across the internet. By his calculations, the top 11 networks control just over a million machines, hitting inboxes with some 100 billion messages a day.

There are at least 1 million people out there who probably concider themselves average computer users, but don't have a clue what they are doing.

Getting by and using a computer properly are two very different things. I mom's mother gets by. She does what she wants, for the most part her computer is fine. Every now and then something blows up. But she does not run windows updates, ever, she installs anything that meets her fancy at the time, and she buys software without reading requirements. The last time I used her computer it was because she was getting virtual memory errors. The amount of crap running and installed blows my mind. She had 3 weather programs!

So I guess you must define a regular or normal user. If that person knows how to install software there is no reason they would be confused by linux. Installing windows software is a task:

1) go to a store or search on the internet to find software
2) READ system requirements and make sure you meet them
3) download/buy software
4) Run setup.exe. setup.msi, install.exe, install.msi, autoplay.exe, etc, maybe just put the cd in, maybe not, you get the picture
5) click though (and god I hope actually read) all the screens of the random multitudes of installers out there (ok, there is probably 4 or 5 I can think off ). In some cases this is where you will get asked questions that seem very dangerous (Do you want to install directX 9c?) I hope you know what that means. Some cases you will get prompted for missing dependancies and the installer will fail (you must have .NET 3.0 to contiune).
6) Now you are done, enjoy your software.

That took some learning for the regular user to do. It is not intuitive. Now lets look at ubuntu.

1) fire up add/remove software
2) search for the application type you are looking for
3) click the recommended program
4) tell it to install
5) read and accept the license
6) sit back and wait
7) Now you are ready to use your software

or if you need more choice, fire up synaptic and search that. Ubuntu will handle any dependencies and in 99.9% of the cases you already meet teh system requirements out of the very basic nature of being able to use linux.

Mac is mostly easier then that, I just hope to god you don't want to cleanly uninstall anything. However you are still faced with a problem with mac, finding software and making sure you meet the requirements. This means searching stores and the internet for the apps you want.

So if we are going to say an regular user can go to best buy, find and install software, then there is no reason to claim an average user can not install software on ubuntu.

 

[Oyeve]

Any OS not connected to the 'net is secure.

 

[Tempered81]

Best OS?

OSX or XP Pro SP3

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
Best OS?

OSX or XP Pro SP3

Reasoning?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: sourceninja

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: gsellis
BTW, this quote

If I put Ubuntu on the secretary's machine at work, and gave her a blank check to buy the software she needed to do the job she'd be crying before the day was done.

If you do that, you are not doing your job. This is the job of IT. The secretary was not hired as an IT person. We provide the tools for folks to do the job we hired them for and assist them to get there. That has been one of my main arguments for years on why we needed to spend money on server space so My Documents could be redirected to a server. No AA/Sect, should be responsible for running a tape backup or backup schedule on important data because it was in their documents folder (or be aware that we are backing it up!) It just gets done. Not ideal, but automagic for the user if they use the defaults (and they usually do - it is a little bit of knowledge that starts getting dangerous ). How to use the tools provided is good, but being IT is why we get paid.

The things you mention are indeed in the realm of IT. Being able to just buy some software to do a secretaries job shouldn't require an IT staff though. These are "Personal" computers.

A secretary should be able to power up a PC and install some software. If they can't then user friendliness is very poor. You can do this just fine on Windows and OSX.

I just ran this by our directory of IT. He laughed his ass off. You show me a 'regular user' who has admin rights, let alone installs his own software on windows and I'll show you one screwed up computer.

My grandma's computer is running fine regardless of what your "directory" says.

There are certainly stupid users out there but the point is that Windows is very user friendly and installing an application doesn't take an IT department to accomplish.

How far is this stupid side discussion going to go? You'll eventually win of course simply because I'll tire of it, not because your point is valid.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: sourceninja

Originally posted by: jaredpace
Best OS?

OSX or XP Pro SP3

Reasoning?

I'm entitled to my opinion on this matter. I like those two the best. The only others i've ever used are Vista HP, ME, 98, 98se, 95, 95+, 2k, NT, BE0s, some linux version, and older OSx versions. Most of my time was spent on 98, 2k, xp, vista

 

[sourceninja]

But what about them makes them superior to you?

Its like asking who makes the best car and I just say BMW. Without going into detail why I feel it is that way I'm not having a discussion (which is kinda the point)

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: sourceninja

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: gsellis
BTW, this quote

If I put Ubuntu on the secretary's machine at work, and gave her a blank check to buy the software she needed to do the job she'd be crying before the day was done.

If you do that, you are not doing your job. This is the job of IT. The secretary was not hired as an IT person. We provide the tools for folks to do the job we hired them for and assist them to get there. That has been one of my main arguments for years on why we needed to spend money on server space so My Documents could be redirected to a server. No AA/Sect, should be responsible for running a tape backup or backup schedule on important data because it was in their documents folder (or be aware that we are backing it up!) It just gets done. Not ideal, but automagic for the user if they use the defaults (and they usually do - it is a little bit of knowledge that starts getting dangerous ). How to use the tools provided is good, but being IT is why we get paid.

The things you mention are indeed in the realm of IT. Being able to just buy some software to do a secretaries job shouldn't require an IT staff though. These are "Personal" computers.

A secretary should be able to power up a PC and install some software. If they can't then user friendliness is very poor. You can do this just fine on Windows and OSX.

I just ran this by our directory of IT. He laughed his ass off. You show me a 'regular user' who has admin rights, let alone installs his own software on windows and I'll show you one screwed up computer.

My grandma's computer is running fine regardless of what your "directory" says.

There are certainly stupid users out there but the point is that Windows is very user friendly and installing an application doesn't take an IT department to accomplish.

How far is this stupid side discussion going to go? You'll eventually win of course simply because I'll tire of it, not because your point is valid.

Can you at least try to make a counter argument. I am basically arguing that finding and installing software on linux is easier then windows and that it is bad for people without technical backgrounds to be running as admin. I have explained my reasoning, you have just said I am wrong. I really wanted to explore this reasoning such as why you feel installing programs on windows is easier then linux. I guess I was wrong, I'll quit.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Try an ASUS P5Q Pro (the non-pro, the deluxe, and the E might user different NICs), if you get the NIC working, let me know how you did it... still waiting for ASUS to return my inquiry about it.

Send me one and I'll let you know =)

FWIW, I finally got it to work, I posted the instructions on the OpenSUSE forum. Now that I have installed the third-party driver for the Atheros and the latest proprietary driver from nVidia for my GTX260 (the one in the repository did not work with the new card), it appears that all of my relatively "new" hardware is fully supported by linux.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: sourceninja
Can you at least try to make a counter argument. I am basically arguing that finding and installing software on linux is easier then windows and that it is bad for people without technical backgrounds to be running as admin. I have explained my reasoning, you have just said I am wrong. I really wanted to explore this reasoning such as why you feel installing programs on windows is easier then linux. I guess I was wrong, I'll quit.

No. There are some arguments that are just too stupid to have. Arguing with someone that says it's difficult to install software on Windows is one of those. You quit or I'll quit, doesn't matter to me. I'm done too.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: sourceninja
Can you at least try to make a counter argument. I am basically arguing that finding and installing software on linux is easier then windows and that it is bad for people without technical backgrounds to be running as admin. I have explained my reasoning, you have just said I am wrong. I really wanted to explore this reasoning such as why you feel installing programs on windows is easier then linux. I guess I was wrong, I'll quit.

No. There are some arguments that are just too stupid to have. Arguing with someone that says it's difficult to install software on Windows is one of those. You quit or I'll quit, doesn't matter to me. I'm done too.

The thing is, when you are used to software installs being as simple as typing in a single line of "sudo aptitude install softwarename", installing software on Windows does seem comparatively complicated.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: sourceninja
Can you at least try to make a counter argument. I am basically arguing that finding and installing software on linux is easier then windows and that it is bad for people without technical backgrounds to be running as admin. I have explained my reasoning, you have just said I am wrong. I really wanted to explore this reasoning such as why you feel installing programs on windows is easier then linux. I guess I was wrong, I'll quit.

No. There are some arguments that are just too stupid to have. Arguing with someone that says it's difficult to install software on Windows is one of those. You quit or I'll quit, doesn't matter to me. I'm done too.

The thing is, when you are used to software installs being as simple as typing in a single line of "sudo aptitude install softwarename", installing software on Windows does seem comparatively complicated.

Consumer wise: aptitude, apt get all that is pretty nifty but most people wouldn't know the command. A double click is easier.

Corporate wise: just click the program in add/remove programs to make it install. Short of just rubbing your temples and having it appear I'm not sure how much easier it could get.

Installing software on Windows is NOT difficult. Jesus H, people.

 

[Nothinman]

Consumer wise: aptitude, apt get all that is pretty nifty but most people wouldn't know the command. A double click is easier.

Which is why most will use whatever the Add/Remove programs tools is called in the System menu in Gnome.

 

[sourceninja]

You can also (Although I have no idea why) download a deb file and double click it in ubuntu and have it install. The difference, windows has a bunch of next next next screens and a deb just 'installs' 9 out of 10 times.

It's just a fact (as far as I can see) that installing software on ubuntu is easier then windows.