Why Linux isn't ready for desktops..

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

So your saying, windows doesn't look, act, feel or work like windows. And to fix it, we need to make linux into windows.

I got it, users can not learn anything new, nor do they want to. I understand your point about installing software, but strides are being made in that by debian, ubuntu, and even gentoo (if you disregad the compiling).

I disagree with the statement that linux needsto look and feel like windows (well, not entirely, but I don't want to argue that point). The real problem is the inconsistency of apps. Been using KDE apps for the past couple months? Fire up a gnome app and see how many times you hit the wrong button because the options were reversed. Note that the app doesn't fit in look-and-feel-wise. With *nix, you have interfaces ranging from xclipboard to Kwrite, gedit, and OpenOffice.org - all of which are different.

Having different looks-and-feels is a feature. Most apps have matching functionality in another L&F. If O's not matching KDE matters that much to you, use KOffice.

, Linux's device support is unmatched anywhere else. We support, out-of-the-box, more devices than any other operating system

The thing they fail to mention is that as a user, I don't care if every 15 year old tape drive is supported, if my graphics card doesn't work as well. I know there's nothing they can do about it, but drivers ARE a legitimate complaint.

Yes, they're a legit complaint. But we're not the ones holding up this process (though they would probably dispute that); the hardware and chipset companies are. We want them to either put in first-class effort in making their own driver (discouraged but acceptable if really good), open up the hardware specs so that we can make a driver (preferred; NDA requirement discouraged), or combine the two and create an open source driver and let us assist with it ( :thumbsup: ). Believe me, if it's demanded-enough hardware, somebody will want to write the driver.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: P0ldy
Firefox 1.1 is supposed to support SVG, and that will probably gain support for the format. Flash can definitely be pushed aside if enough people take SVG seriously.

Having embedded SVG will be awesome, because it is XML and can be manipulated like anything that manipulates XML. All we need is for someone to make an environment that can tie together multiple W3C formats (SMIL appears to be able to sequence any kind of animated document together with sound, and XForms will take care of the widgets, but Javascript might have to be employed for Flash-like games, etc...) together so that Flash-like capabilities can be achieved. f4l is an open editor for Flash, so it looks like it would be the logical choice for this functionality.

In a related story, it looks like GPLFlash is coming along nicely. The faster I can be rid of the Macromedia plugin, the better.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Zebo
Linux is elite customizable complex OS, by definition will always have single digit market share. It's users don't help matters either, understandably they don't want to re-hash a complex RTFM task to a total MS noobie who won't take time to read and learn so they are a bit standoffish.

For me it's just games keeping me in MS land.. already use open office for a couple years now which I find much superior w/o all the MS noise automated BS. Use SSH for mail and third party browsers, media players etc.

Can you blame Linux users for being a bit "standoffish?" I mean, these dweebs pop their heads in, ask the most basic of questions without trying a goddamned thing, and expect to get their butts wiped in the process. Screw that, I'd rather write decent documentation.

Well, in their defense, they aren't used to having to use their brains; I'm thinking that many of their cortexes have atrophied from years of Windows use.

 

[ch33kym0use]

lol wouldnt be suprised, a likely scenario

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

So your saying, windows doesn't look, act, feel or work like windows. And to fix it, we need to make linux into windows.

I got it, users can not learn anything new, nor do they want to. I understand your point about installing software, but strides are being made in that by debian, ubuntu, and even gentoo (if you disregad the compiling).

I disagree with the statement that linux needsto look and feel like windows (well, not entirely, but I don't want to argue that point). The real problem is the inconsistency of apps. Been using KDE apps for the past couple months? Fire up a gnome app and see how many times you hit the wrong button because the options were reversed. Note that the app doesn't fit in look-and-feel-wise. With *nix, you have interfaces ranging from xclipboard to Kwrite, gedit, and OpenOffice.org - all of which are different.

There are a lot of inconsistancies to Windows programs as well.

Not as bad as it is in Linux, to be sure, but it's pretty bad sometimes.

Compare:
Windows Explorer vs Nero Burning rom vs Windows Media player vs Firefox vs Halflife 2 vs Search tool vs Control Panel (classic mode) vs Control Panel (XP mode)

And I am sure that I could come up with more if I was a regular Windows XP user. But those are all very commonly used Windows applications and their UI's are all different in many ways. Some subtly different, some very different.

However in Linux you have 2 seperate Desktop enviroments... KDE and Gnome. 90+% of everything you need to do for everyday desktop-related activities can be contained in one enviroment or another.

Gnome has it's own Office apps that are decent.. and KDE has it's own Koffice stuff (and neither of them include OpenOffice by default), for example.

Depending on how you look at it Linux apps are very consistant as long as you stick to one enviroment or another and the quality of the UI and consistancy has improved and is improving at a fairly constant state.

One way to look at it is that Gnome and KDE are their own tailored operating enviroment and developement platform that both just happen to share a common GNU/Linux base. They are compatable in the fact that you can run KDE apps under a Gnome enviroment and they get along ok, but they are their own distinct platforms.

For further illistration it's also worth noting that KDE is working on a native Windows port of the KDE desktop enviroment and is working on a native port for OS X.

, Linux's device support is unmatched anywhere else. We support, out-of-the-box, more devices than any other operating system

The thing they fail to mention is that as a user, I don't care if every 15 year old tape drive is supported, if my graphics card doesn't work as well. I know there's nothing they can do about it, but drivers ARE a legitimate complaint.[/quote]

Your both right.

Realise that your talking about default out-of-the-box configurations.

I know that originally Windows XP didn't support my ATI Wonder VE tv tuner card (NOT all-in-wonder card, btw!) at all. I had to go online and search thru ATI's website for drivers. And even then it wouldn't work properly because I had a nvidia video card isntalled with it's own conflicting drivers. I am sure that it's improved since then, and possibly Windows XP SP2 added support for the card by default.

For Debian Linux, though, the card works just fine by default. The drivers are included with the kernel at isntall time. The nvidia card worked just fine by default using the 'nv' drivers that are supplied at install time. In order to get 3d acceleration working properly, though, I had to go to nvidia's website, but I have to do that in windows, too.

So he is right because by default Linux supports lots of hardware that require add-on drivers for Windows. This is because all those drivers are free software and are included by default with the kernel for convienience sake.

However with specific hardware it's very difficult for Linux users. For isntance many Wifi cards are difficult to get working in Linux.

So your right, too.

All I know now for Linux-on-the-desktop is that right now, if I give a pre-installed machine to somebody, they can use it to watch videos, play movies, surf the web, do email, do word proccessing, and many other things quite easily under either KDE or Gnome.

As for getting a ATI card running well thats a completely different story. PITA

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Not having flash is a good thing.

We all know you have a taste for the under-functional Not having a choice is a bad thing (of course, in this situation, doing it on linux really isn't any harder than doing it on windows).

What choice? There is only 1 plugin. There is no choice when it comes to flash.

You were implying that his inability to install flash was a good thing because he shouldn't want to have it. I said that the choice to either have it or not have it should be equally easy to achieve.

Installing the Flash plugin for Firefox should be as hard as clicking "Install missing plugin" and accepting a license agreement.
Worked fine enough for me.

Of course, that pretty much requires you to install Flashblock as well, since the vast majority of Flash stuff on the net is nothing but annoying and useless crap.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Not having flash is a good thing.

We all know you have a taste for the under-functional Not having a choice is a bad thing (of course, in this situation, doing it on linux really isn't any harder than doing it on windows).

What choice? There is only 1 plugin. There is no choice when it comes to flash.

You were implying that his inability to install flash was a good thing because he shouldn't want to have it. I said that the choice to either have it or not have it should be equally easy to achieve.

Without an open solution there isn't really much of a choice.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: kamper
You were implying that his inability to install flash was a good thing because he shouldn't want to have it. I said that the choice to either have it or not have it should be equally easy to achieve.

Installing the Flash plugin for Firefox should be as hard as clicking "Install missing plugin" and accepting a license agreement.
Worked fine enough for me.

I know, I gave him the same directions in another thread but he didn't seem interested...

 

[Kaido]

If you're hungry and you want fast and easy, you go to McDonalds. If you're hungry and you want a hamburger made to your exact specifications and are willing to put in the work to get it, you make it yourself on your grill at home. Hence Windows and Linux, respectively. "Why Linux isn't ready for desktops" is a very subjective title for an article, because different people want different things in a computer (or hamburger). By "desktops", the author probably had moms and grandmas in mind - in that case, a desktop should probably be easy, should probably be Windows. In which case, Linux is not a good solution for them.

Narf!

 

[TGS]

More often than not the complaints against Linux are directed at third party applications. So far I see Firefox, Office type suites, and games. All of which have nothing to do with the capabilities of Linux.

One again it's a third party developer support issue. People have complaints for nVidia or Ati, support you need to lean on the developer to put ou the binaries, or source if the methodology won't infringe on their practices such as the stated case by nVidia and Ati.

If anything, why I dislike some Microsoft products is they go out of their way to create non-interoperable products and force you to use their own version of open source applications. MAPI vs IMAP, OpenGL vs Direct3D, file systems to a lesser extent.

One particular thing that is bringing ease of use on the Linux side up is the package managers. Bar none one of the biggest improvements in the quality of life issues with administrating a linux box. Though the applications you manage on a linux box( or don't) isn't a by product of a poorly designed OS.

For example, take the age old hammer and nail. How long was the development on the modern hammer, to get it to the point where the cast of the head was complete. I'm certain that quite a few hours were invested in making that particular piece along with the nail remover on the same device. Someone who walks into the hardware store doesn't have to be bothered with any of that background development. They just go in grab the tool, plunk down the cash, and head home.

That's exactly what most people expect from computing. Command line, editing files, most configuration is beyond the time investment most people are willing to spend or learn about. Windows doesn't market itself based on ease of use, it markets itself based on what you can accomplish with it.

People flock to what appears to be easier, and without a doubt Windows has long been that beacon. Though Linux is making strides to become the latest OS to provide full functionality, without a lot of "fuss" out of the box. Some installers are so basic it's a three click process. Sure to everyone that doesn't like their drives being wiped and a new partitioning scheme overlaid on them might not go for a three click process. Though by not falling into that sort of process we automatically take our selves out of Joe Sixpacks shoes.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Alright, I'm gonna chime in again.

I consider myself smart, and able to google the hell out of any problem that I have. But I STILL have MAJOR difficulties with plenty of things on Linux. And yes, simple things. Mp3 support does not come standard in Linux (Yes, I know, because of Licensing Issues), and I had a hell of a time getting that to work.

(Using Fedora). Go to my yum.conf file, add more repositories. I didn't have permissions on my own machine, couldn't add anything even as root. Had major problems there. Then, installing new programs that had mp3 support, and it still won't work! I mean, I googled for a LONG time on that problem alone.

I mean, I have to agree that I don't see it being a very *easy* desktop replacement for a lot of people. If I have that many problems, I don't see how more people that know considerably LESS about computers would have any success at all.

But I am sticking with it, because I want/need to learn it. I truly hope to be able to have Linux fully implemented and my primary OS by th the time Longhorn comes out. (I'm not liking these restrictions that are going to be tied in.) And I do like playing around, to me it's fun.



KS

 

[Nothinman]

Mp3 support does not come standard in Linux (Yes, I know, because of Licensing Issues), and I had a hell of a time getting that to work.

MP3 support isn't standard in Fedora, it works fine out of the box in other distributions.

(Using Fedora). Go to my yum.conf file, add more repositories. I didn't have permissions on my own machine, couldn't add anything even as root. Had major problems there. Then, installing new programs that had mp3 support, and it still won't work! I mean, I googled for a LONG time on that problem alone.

I thought the last time I looked that repos like liva had an RPM that you could install to add their repositories to /etc/yum.d.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Mp3 support does not come standard in Linux (Yes, I know, because of Licensing Issues), and I had a hell of a time getting that to work.

MP3 support isn't standard in Fedora, it works fine out of the box in other distributions.

(Using Fedora). Go to my yum.conf file, add more repositories. I didn't have permissions on my own machine, couldn't add anything even as root. Had major problems there. Then, installing new programs that had mp3 support, and it still won't work! I mean, I googled for a LONG time on that problem alone.

I thought the last time I looked that repos like liva had an RPM that you could install to add their repositories to /etc/yum.d.

MP3 support wasn't standard in Ubuntu either. (This was about a month and a half ago, so if something has changed, then I don't know about it.)

I'll have to look into the RPM/yum issue.

EDIT: Actually, Nothinman, do you have a link to what you are referring to with the reposotiries and RPM issue? Thanx.



KS

 

[Zebo]

Here's a good example.. Supposedly the simplest verison SuSe, is inacessable to me and I'm a geek...what's grandma to do.

After I finally made it to a mirror which hosts the OS
http://suse.cs.utah.edu/suse/i386/9.3/iso/

I'm trying to DL the 64-bit version which s supposed to be 4.2G iso, file called SUSE-9.3-Eval-DVD.iso, but every mirror I'm at it's only 182MB and the file does'nt burn.

too small and currupt.

And yes I read everything
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/downloads/suse_linux/
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpro...oads/suse_linux/instructions_eval.html

 

[eminemrh25]

I personally don't like Linux all too much... I've tried SuSE and Redhat, both of which took too much work to get running. I'm not talking generally, I'm talking about getting XPde installed, for those who don't know what that is, it makes Linux look like windows for people who liked the look of Windows.

It took me twice as long to install linux on my PC and it took me about a day of reading to install ANY program. Yet somehow, I have a DVD with Windows XP on it that will install in 2-3 Hours, install Office, McAfee AntiVirus, and a lot more programs, while only requiring me to chose which partition to install it on, I perfer that over everything. Installing XP alone only takes about 20mins on my PC...

I don't care if Linux is free, to me, it is only half working... I'd rather shell out some money and get a fully working desktop, cause I didn't spend around $800 on hardware for a half working OS on it. I don't like linux, needs to much work to get running...

 

[Nothinman]

MP3 support wasn't standard in Ubuntu either. (This was about a month and a half ago, so if something has changed, then I don't know about it.)

My experience with Ubuntu was very brief, I just assumed that since it's in Debian it would be in Ubuntu too.

EDIT: Actually, Nothinman, do you have a link to what you are referring to with the reposotiries and RPM issue? Thanx.

http://rpm.livna.org/configuration.html

I'm trying to DL the 64-bit version which s supposed to be 4.2G iso, file called SUSE-9.3-Eval-DVD.iso, but every mirror I'm at it's only 182MB and the file does'nt burn.

If the mirrors are corrupt you can't blame the software, that would be like saying that Windows sucks because you can't find a good copy of a game to download.

I don't like linux, needs to much work to get running...

But once it's running it runs forever. As I mentioned before, I've had the same install for 6 years and it's updated multiple times a week.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: eminemrh25
I personally don't like Linux all too much... I've tried SuSE and Redhat, both of which took too much work to get running. I'm not talking generally, I'm talking about getting XPde installed, for those who don't know what that is, it makes Linux look like windows for people who liked the look of Windows.

It took me twice as long to install linux on my PC and it took me about a day of reading to install ANY program. Yet somehow, I have a DVD with Windows XP on it that will install in 2-3 Hours, install Office, McAfee AntiVirus, and a lot more programs, while only requiring me to chose which partition to install it on, I perfer that over everything. Installing XP alone only takes about 20mins on my PC...

I don't care if Linux is free, to me, it is only half working... I'd rather shell out some money and get a fully working desktop, cause I didn't spend around $800 on hardware for a half working OS on it. I don't like linux, needs to much work to get running...

Good point of view. I prefer Windows for basic day-to-day activities like surfing the web, listening to music, watching DVDs, working with Office, etc. - easy to setup and use. I like Linux for server applications - email, web, filesharing, etc. More stable. I think Linux on the desktop is more for a hobbyist, because it requires so much knowledge to function properly. You can get it to work great, you just need a huge time investment to learn everything that you need to get to that point. I enjoy doing it sometimes, but most of the time I just want to flunk out on my computer and play, rather than tweak continually.

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Here's a good example.. Supposedly the simplest verison SuSe, is inacessable to me and I'm a geek...what's grandma to do.

After I finally made it to a mirror which hosts the OS
http://suse.cs.utah.edu/suse/i386/9.3/iso/

I'm trying to DL the 64-bit version which s supposed to be 4.2G iso, file called SUSE-9.3-Eval-DVD.iso, but every mirror I'm at it's only 182MB and the file does'nt burn.

too small and currupt.

And yes I read everything
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/downloads/suse_linux/
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpro...oads/suse_linux/instructions_eval.html

Some programs have trouble handling files larger than 2 or 4 GB. I think Firefox (and Mozilla) might have issues with files >4GB - if you're using them, you might consider trying a different app.

 

[TGS]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Here's a good example.. Supposedly the simplest verison SuSe, is inacessable to me and I'm a geek...what's grandma to do.

After I finally made it to a mirror which hosts the OS
http://suse.cs.utah.edu/suse/i386/9.3/iso/

I'm trying to DL the 64-bit version which s supposed to be 4.2G iso, file called SUSE-9.3-Eval-DVD.iso, but every mirror I'm at it's only 182MB and the file does'nt burn.

too small and currupt.

And yes I read everything
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/downloads/suse_linux/
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpro...oads/suse_linux/instructions_eval.html

I try to avoid browser based downloads on large files. Try it through an ftp client, and make sure to run the hash against it after the download completes. If it doesn't match then it isn't worth cd/dvd to test it on.


forgot to add,

Originally posted by: KeyserSoze
Alright, I'm gonna chime in again.

I consider myself smart, and able to google the hell out of any problem that I have. But I STILL have MAJOR difficulties with plenty of things on Linux. And yes, simple things. Mp3 support does not come standard in Linux (Yes, I know, because of Licensing Issues), and I had a hell of a time getting that to work.

You can always download the plugin for the music player. I ran FC2, and I downloaded the plugin to play MP3s in the default music player. It's no different than downloading the dvddecss to play DVDs on the multimedia players.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

Originally posted by: Zebo
Here's a good example.. Supposedly the simplest verison SuSe, is inacessable to me and I'm a geek...what's grandma to do.

After I finally made it to a mirror which hosts the OS
http://suse.cs.utah.edu/suse/i386/9.3/iso/

I'm trying to DL the 64-bit version which s supposed to be 4.2G iso, file called SUSE-9.3-Eval-DVD.iso, but every mirror I'm at it's only 182MB and the file does'nt burn.

too small and currupt.

And yes I read everything
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/downloads/suse_linux/
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpro...oads/suse_linux/instructions_eval.html

Some programs have trouble handling files larger than 2 or 4 GB. I think Firefox (and Mozilla) might have issues with files >4GB - if you're using them, you might consider trying a different app.

Oh I'm getting it after:

1 Start > run > CMD

2. ftp then open mirror.colorado.edu (anonymous/email)

3. ls -l

4. cd pub

5. ls -l

6. cd suse

7. ls -l

8. cd 9.3

9. ls -l

10. cd x86_64

11. ls -l

12. get Suse- prof_eval etc etce tc...


Grandma got run over by a linux:music:

 

[sourceninja]

I'm one of the lucky ones, I just downloaded and install ubuntu, then followed the instructions at ubuntuguide.org and boom, I was golden. Everything worked. In the past I had to work hard to make linux work, but that isn't the case for me anymore.

Of course I've moved on to gentoo to customize my pc the way I want it, and i'm back into the "lot of work" category, but I like it this way. After about 3 days of work, I've got a box 100 times better then anything I've ever used. And I dont mean faster or any of that gentoo ricer stuff. I mean that its stable, has everything I want and nothing I dont want installed, and may or may not be faster due to my make.conf settings. I've got gnome, abiword (I dont need an entire office suite just word), firefox, evolution, cedega, neverwinter nights (I found a really nice install script for it that makes it a breeze), UT2004, HL2 and CS:S (via cedega), all my nintendo, Snes, sega, genisis, playstation, and n64 games work fine with emulators, mplayer plays all my media files (except dvd's I use xine for that, it just works better), gaim, powernowd (for processor speed scaling so durring idle use), my perfered syslog (metalog), etc.

My dell 2001fp works fine and uses the correct resolution. Also sound works great. Except hardware mixing isn't supported for the nforce4 onboard sound, but software mixing works fine with little cpu overhead. nvidia driver install was a breeze (just emerge nvidia-glx and change the xorg.conf from driver nv to driver nvidia). Sure it took more work to get my gentoo system working, but I am way happier then my ubuntu system, and everything in ubuntu just worked out of the box. For a normal user having problems with ubuntu something must be terribly wrong. I've setup about 12 people with ubuntu for both servers and desktops. I've never had hardware problems, driver issues, or problems with them learning to use synaptic to install software.

Is it ready to replace windows? Why do you want to replace windows? If windows works for you, why change? When windows stops working for you, then change. So yes, linxu is ready to replace windows, so is mac osX, so is BSD. If the OS works the way you want, then it is ready to replace windows. I find linux easier to maintain and update, easier to install software, easier to configure new hardware, and easier to develop for. So linux is ready to repalce windows for me. My grandma needed to ugprade from windows 98, but linux was not ready to replace it for her (she had no major problems, but she had a hard time with accessablity features) Mac osX proved to be the desktop replacement for her, and she couldn't be happier. For my wife, linux is not ready for the desktop. She love MS money, and doesn't want to switch to gnu cash. So its windows for her. For a lot of my friends, linux is ready because they only use the pc for school work, or for web browsing. For my gaming friends, its about 50/50 (most of the games we play work under cedega properly) Is windows ready to replace the linxu desktop? The answer for me is No. Windows doesn't have the features, programs, and ease of maintence that linux has. A lot of the work I do has no easy comparison in windows, or do not work anywhere near as well on windows.

So my answwer is Yes.

Linux is ready for the desktop.
Windows is ready for the desktop.
Mac is ready for the desktop.
BSD is ready for the desktop.
Amegia is ready for the desktop.
OS/2 is ready for the desktop.

If it meets your requirements, its ready. I dont care if a million people use it, or if one person uses it. Personally, I wish linux was a little more complicated because I dont really want to see a mass migration to linux. This will cause more exploits to be targeted at linux and require more attention to upgrade cycles and security. But I do feel that with the proper desire or training, the majority of buisness users could migrate to linux with little difficulty. I dont think home users really need to move to linux until a lot of buisness users move. Because until the buisness users move, gaming wont be that great on linux.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by: TGS

Originally posted by: Zebo
Here's a good example.. Supposedly the simplest verison SuSe, is inacessable to me and I'm a geek...what's grandma to do.

After I finally made it to a mirror which hosts the OS
http://suse.cs.utah.edu/suse/i386/9.3/iso/

I'm trying to DL the 64-bit version which s supposed to be 4.2G iso, file called SUSE-9.3-Eval-DVD.iso, but every mirror I'm at it's only 182MB and the file does'nt burn.

too small and currupt.

And yes I read everything
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/downloads/suse_linux/
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpro...oads/suse_linux/instructions_eval.html

I try to avoid browser based downloads on large files. Try it through an ftp client, and make sure to run the hash against it after the download completes. If it doesn't match then it isn't worth cd/dvd to test it on.


forgot to add,

Originally posted by: KeyserSoze
Alright, I'm gonna chime in again.

I consider myself smart, and able to google the hell out of any problem that I have. But I STILL have MAJOR difficulties with plenty of things on Linux. And yes, simple things. Mp3 support does not come standard in Linux (Yes, I know, because of Licensing Issues), and I had a hell of a time getting that to work.

You can always download the plugin for the music player. I ran FC2, and I downloaded the plugin to play MP3s in the default music player. It's no different than downloading the dvddecss to play DVDs on the multimedia players.

I feel like a LOT of my frustration will be gone once I can just make sure my yum.conf file is fine with the right reposotories. AND then fully understanding how to execute programs once they are installed. (As opposed to a nice little shorcut already being there for you once you install a program.)

Don't give up on me fellas! :thumbsup:

Also, any Linux Guru's care to share their AIM SN's with me for help when I get stuck


KS

 

[Zebo]

Why do you want to replace windows? I

Cost, spyware/malware/viruses, so many reasons..as I said a gamer should be the only people using windows... just the MS basic packages, the OS and basic office productivity in office costs well over $600.

 

[Nothinman]

I feel like a LOT of my frustration will be gone once I can just make sure my yum.conf file is fine with the right reposotories. AND then fully understanding how to execute programs once they are installed. (As opposed to a nice little shorcut already being there for you once you install a program.)

Most programs should add themselves to the menus once they're installed, if not it's most likely a bug in the package.

 

[Zebo]

Oh and sourceninja, I'm giving http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu a shot now too. thanks for the heads up.. (not to mention another daunting expericance for grandma is like 400 "disros")