Come on now, let's be fair. I don't think installing an OS period is end-user material.
The concept of mount point escapes a lot of people, especially since DOS/Windows has been hiding that process since forever.
The concept of mount point escapes a lot of people, especially since DOS/Windows has been hiding that process since forever.
Cerb
Elite Member
- Aug 26, 2000
- 17,484
- 33
- 86
Not really. I don't know how many I can speak for, but I've restrained from making a few replies just because I didn't want to feed him. I actually thought I had a fairly nice one about Linux and BSDs now offering very good systems, but much of the horizontal integration being a barrier to adoption...but I then saw so many good holes to poke into it that I decided to let it be, because I wouldn't have time or motivation to detail the summaries in an argument over them.Originally posted by: bersl2
Why does this entire thread leave me with the feeling that several months' worth of at least basic understanding between our various factions has been suddenly undone? Yay, regression.
Mission Accomplished for Chosonman?
I don't think we lost much. Most of the ones poking holes at each other use both, and most realize that they are just tools, a vehicle to get somewhere. Some are more suited for you to do your task, based on availabilty, cost, knowledge, etc. Doesn't mean we are going to let the fanboi fud go past. If I pull out the old lines "Linux isn't user friendly, stuff is too hard" or "Linux is more secure the windows" i'm asking for trouble, as neither of those is truely accurate.
Again that is a user interface design issue that has no relation to drive letters. Debian could design an installer that doesn't give that option just as easly could MS ask where would you like to store documents and settings. Debians users seem to care so the installer asks, but window users don't care so the default is not to ask.
Of course software raid could be implemented during set up in a system that uses drive letters. What would prevent such an implementaton?
Drive letter represent the physical location that data is stored.
No they don't.
You call it a 'drive letter' and it's not even a freaking drive. It's a partition on a drive.
Drive A is usually a floppy. Drive B is usually a floppy. Drive C is usually the main partition on which the operating system is installed and that is about it.
What is drive D:? Drive E:? Drive F:?
Drive letters bear no resembalance to the physical location of your data in any such way. The drive letter could be a network share. It could be a cdrom drive. I could be a partition on the same drive as C, or it can be on a completely different drive. I can be anything.
All drive letters represent are just abritrary way to name aviable file systems. The 'C drive' represents a file system, that's all. Calling it a 'C drive' just confuses people and they get odd ideas on how a computer works based on that bit of misinformation. It should be the 'C filesystem' and that would be entirely more accurate.
In Linux you have names for physical devices. /dev/sda is the first scsi or sata drive. /dev/hda is the first ide drive. /dev/hde is 5th drive. /dev/hda1 is the first partition on the primary drive. This is something that drive letters don't do for Windows.
A single directory tree structure like what is used in Linux/Unix systems is vasty superior for many techical reasons. It's most flexible, more robust. It's easier to setup distributed user preferences and files in Linux then it is in Windows via making the /home directory a network share. It's easier to setup applications to run off of networks or be shared between computers. All sorts of reasons. Booting operating systems off of the network is easier.
This is why Microsoft copied the Unix way of doing things for it's DFS stuff for NT-based workstations and servers. They know that drive letters are limited and obsolete and directory system that is independant from file systems (relatively) and physical devices is inherently superior way of doingthings.
But as far as directory structures go... None of this matters to home users. It's not going to matter to the majority of people here either, unless they have to manage a bunch of Windows or Linux systems.
Come on, there has to be a standard for these things. It can't be completely random. That'd be stupid.
Why linux? Freedom (in a political sense). Can you really know what your closed-source system is doing behind the scene? Nope. Theoretically, anything you do on a closed-source system is subject to the eyes and control of third parties. In a democracy, this is a problem.
Why not linux? Right now it takes a significant amount of time to develop and maintain the expertise to manage your own OSS desktop multi-purpose system.
Why not linux? Right now it takes a significant amount of time to develop and maintain the expertise to manage your own OSS desktop multi-purpose system.
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,571
- 17,102
- 136
Why linux wont be a successful desktop OS any time soon.
Here is the issue with linux and every fan boy pointed it out.
If you want to use linux you have to have hardware that supports it and if your hardware isn't supported then the fan boys blame the hardware manufactures and tell you to complain to them. How many joe smoes pick and choose their hardware? How many would even take the time to email the manufacture requesting linux support? How many joe smoes even know who the manufacture of their components are? Even if hardware manufactures started offering linux support there would still be a ton of hardware out there from manufacture that no longer exist and therefore will never be supported.
Secondly, how is joe smoe supposed to know what linux distro to get? Are they expected to research fully to find what is right for them? How will they know what to look for or what questions they should be asking themselves? The fan boys will tell you that people should do their research before they make any purchase. That's great! and people should do their research before making purchases but that doesn't mean it's going to happen.
And lastly, from comments I have seen in every linux discussion, fan boys point out all sorts of programs that make using linux simple, that's fantastic! but how is joe smoe going to find those programs or even know about them? The problem is that linux itself is separate from the GUI and linux software developers generally do not care about usability and instead rely on a third party to provide that (gnome, kde, etc). So linux usability is left to a separate entity and that in of itselfs has it's own issues. Unless linux developers fully integrate the gui it will never be perfect and seemless to the end user.
Do I use linux? Yeah I do. I use it as my firewall, email, web, and print server. Have I ever used it as a desktop? I've tried and I always keep a live cd handy. Would I ever recommend linux to a family member? Hell no! Why not? If there are things I can't figure out or cannot do easily how am I going to expect my relatives to figure it out. And I would never install it for them because then I would constantly have to help them, whether it's troubleshooting or finding/recommending them a piece of software to do what they want. It's not worth my time.
Every argument for linux I have ever seen are generally supported by excuses why something isn't a certain way or whose fault it is for it not being a certain way.
"With windows you have to use a third party program to change the themes" not really but you have to do the same thing for linux (kde, gnome, or edit/create some file), again that wont fly for the average joe who will have no idea wtf you are talking about.
"What are the c, d, e drives for?" asking that to a computer noob would pretty much get you the same answer if you were to ask them, "what is /usr, /tmp, /home, /var. /usr/local?" just because you may understand it doesn't mean joe smoe will.
"Try updating a windows box" yeah I'm sure joe smoe will care about that or even be aware of it (luckily automatic updates is on by default), "using apt-get/synaptic update/upgrade is way easier" yeah because joe smoe the computer noob is going to even have a clue what that means.
"linux is free" yeah if you know how to get it. Can joe smoe go to a store and pick up a copy of linux? Yeah they can but it's not free. Will they know what to get? Probably not. "but you can download any distro free" sounds easy to you and me but do you think the average joe will know not only where to get it and how to get it but what to do after they download it? I think not. (usually the linux fan boy response to this is, "well if they don't know how to download and burn an iso file then they shouldn't be using computers" wouldn't that be great if it was true...)
So where does that leave us?
To become a successful desktop OS (20-30% market share would probably be considered successful) linux would need:
Ubiquitous hardware support, new and old.
A unified distro, one where when someone mentions linux only one "desktop" distro comes to mind.
Availability of said distro in easily reachable places as well as easy to use media (ie found in stores and on a cd).
A unified architecture, where the OS, GUI, and hardware are seen as one in the eyes of the end user.
Can this be achieved? I think so but I think the attractiveness of open source and the plethora of developers developing for it is also one of the biggest hurdles facing linux, there is no common goal between them all (and if there is it's sure isn't to make the end user experience great).
Sure with closed source innovation takes longer to achieve but you can be sure that there will always be a common goal and a unified common user experience.
Here is the issue with linux and every fan boy pointed it out.
If you want to use linux you have to have hardware that supports it and if your hardware isn't supported then the fan boys blame the hardware manufactures and tell you to complain to them. How many joe smoes pick and choose their hardware? How many would even take the time to email the manufacture requesting linux support? How many joe smoes even know who the manufacture of their components are? Even if hardware manufactures started offering linux support there would still be a ton of hardware out there from manufacture that no longer exist and therefore will never be supported.
Secondly, how is joe smoe supposed to know what linux distro to get? Are they expected to research fully to find what is right for them? How will they know what to look for or what questions they should be asking themselves? The fan boys will tell you that people should do their research before they make any purchase. That's great! and people should do their research before making purchases but that doesn't mean it's going to happen.
And lastly, from comments I have seen in every linux discussion, fan boys point out all sorts of programs that make using linux simple, that's fantastic! but how is joe smoe going to find those programs or even know about them? The problem is that linux itself is separate from the GUI and linux software developers generally do not care about usability and instead rely on a third party to provide that (gnome, kde, etc). So linux usability is left to a separate entity and that in of itselfs has it's own issues. Unless linux developers fully integrate the gui it will never be perfect and seemless to the end user.
Do I use linux? Yeah I do. I use it as my firewall, email, web, and print server. Have I ever used it as a desktop? I've tried and I always keep a live cd handy. Would I ever recommend linux to a family member? Hell no! Why not? If there are things I can't figure out or cannot do easily how am I going to expect my relatives to figure it out. And I would never install it for them because then I would constantly have to help them, whether it's troubleshooting or finding/recommending them a piece of software to do what they want. It's not worth my time.
Every argument for linux I have ever seen are generally supported by excuses why something isn't a certain way or whose fault it is for it not being a certain way.
"With windows you have to use a third party program to change the themes" not really but you have to do the same thing for linux (kde, gnome, or edit/create some file), again that wont fly for the average joe who will have no idea wtf you are talking about.
"What are the c, d, e drives for?" asking that to a computer noob would pretty much get you the same answer if you were to ask them, "what is /usr, /tmp, /home, /var. /usr/local?" just because you may understand it doesn't mean joe smoe will.
"Try updating a windows box" yeah I'm sure joe smoe will care about that or even be aware of it (luckily automatic updates is on by default), "using apt-get/synaptic update/upgrade is way easier" yeah because joe smoe the computer noob is going to even have a clue what that means.
"linux is free" yeah if you know how to get it. Can joe smoe go to a store and pick up a copy of linux? Yeah they can but it's not free. Will they know what to get? Probably not. "but you can download any distro free" sounds easy to you and me but do you think the average joe will know not only where to get it and how to get it but what to do after they download it? I think not. (usually the linux fan boy response to this is, "well if they don't know how to download and burn an iso file then they shouldn't be using computers" wouldn't that be great if it was true...)
So where does that leave us?
To become a successful desktop OS (20-30% market share would probably be considered successful) linux would need:
Ubiquitous hardware support, new and old.
A unified distro, one where when someone mentions linux only one "desktop" distro comes to mind.
Availability of said distro in easily reachable places as well as easy to use media (ie found in stores and on a cd).
A unified architecture, where the OS, GUI, and hardware are seen as one in the eyes of the end user.
Can this be achieved? I think so but I think the attractiveness of open source and the plethora of developers developing for it is also one of the biggest hurdles facing linux, there is no common goal between them all (and if there is it's sure isn't to make the end user experience great).
Sure with closed source innovation takes longer to achieve but you can be sure that there will always be a common goal and a unified common user experience.
yukichigai
Diamond Member
- Apr 23, 2003
- 6,404
- 0
- 76
You had me up until the part where gaming on Linux is either sub-par in terms of performance or needlessly complex, and often times both.
One of the risks of being a diehard gamer I suppose. Otherwise I'd run Linux on all my machines. Until game companies start releasing versions of games for Linux -- or Cedega/etc. comes along far enough to run games just as well as proper Windows -- I ain't budging.
I'm hoping that day comes tomorrow though.
One of the risks of being a diehard gamer I suppose. Otherwise I'd run Linux on all my machines. Until game companies start releasing versions of games for Linux -- or Cedega/etc. comes along far enough to run games just as well as proper Windows -- I ain't budging.
I'm hoping that day comes tomorrow though.
Originally posted by: yukichigai
You had me up until the part where gaming on Linux is either sub-par in terms of performance or needlessly complex, and often times both.
One of the risks of being a diehard gamer I suppose. Otherwise I'd run Linux on all my machines. Until game companies start releasing versions of games for Linux -- or Cedega/etc. comes along far enough to run games just as well as proper Windows -- I ain't budging.
I'm hoping that day comes tomorrow though.
Before games are going to become widely avaible in linux, linuxs is going to have a portable installation method.
Generally people buy a computer and the OS is pre-configured and pre-installed with their computer. Nobody expects regular people to pick out what distro to use or what hardware to use on their computer.
That's why they pay Dell or HP to do that for them. For a average person who uses the computer for browsing, email, and other normal tasks linux is easy to deal with.
Beleive you me, if your goal is to run a Linux install without dealing with hardware problems it's very easy to acheive. However you have to make sure to tailor your computer for the task at hand.
This is how it goes:
HP and friends ain't going to sell Linux boxes until there is a big demand for Linux.
Application and game designers aren't going to support Linux until there is a big demand for it.
The average user isn't going to use Linux unless it's easily aviable and all their games and applications they use work with it.
It's a catch 22 situation.
For Microsoft they avoided this by simply being around and being the OS that was sold with 97% of personal computers for the past 20 years.
Think about this for a second. Every single PC your going to run across is going to have Microsoft's operating system on it. If your a hardware vendor you have to make sure that Windows works with your hardware, otherwise you fail. As a OEM style vendor (Dell, HP, et al) you have to make sure to kiss MS's ass and make sure that every computer you sell uses Windows. Out of PC-land with razor thin profit margins the majority of money that Dell and friends make of the actual computer sales go directly to Microsoft. Dell even doesn't realy make money off of computers anymore, but probably make much more money off of providing financing to people buying their computers.
This is the sort of enviroment that your dealing with. Moving to Linux is going to add on hardships in certain ways simply because everything in the personal computing industry is geared directly towards a working with Microsoft. When your using Linux your on the outside of things and in a tiny minority.
So obviously Linux isn't right for 'joe shmoe'
The question is weither or not Linux is right for _YOU_.
For some people this is true, for other people it's not.
If you want to use Linux you have to buy hardware whose vendors support Linux. Not all of them do.
Vendors like Broadcom aren't just not supporting linux because Linux is the minority.. Their hardware isn't supported due to 'linux being hard' or linux lacking in some technical manner. They don't support it because they find the idea of Free Software abhorent and have a big 'IP' stick up their you-know-what. Other vendors selling equivilent hardware don't have this problem and support Linux fine, so what other reason does broadcom have for it's behavior? (and sometimes it seems that they take specific steps to avoid compatability sometimes)
Don't use hardware from them and try to avoid them as much as possible, if you can. Use Intel or Ralink-based cards for wireless cards, for instance. They 'just work'. Motherboards, video cards, drive controllers. It's relatively easy to find stuff that works in Linux that is fast, inexpensive, and compatable.
Lots of other stuff are like that.
It's very true that if you don't know much about computers, linux is going to probably be a pain. It's very true that Linux is going to have a more limited selection of games.
Oh well, that's just life. And Linux is going to increase in it's usability, but it's probably never going to be much easier to adjust.
It's probably going to actually get worse.
Look at what is going on with digital rights, copy protections and other things like that. A whole industry is gearing up to make it so that your buying your own cage.
Newer HD-DVD (or whatever wins the 'hd wars') probably won't play full resolution on most televisions sets because the hardware will be designed to lower the resolution and quality of the image when being outputed on analog outputs. This is designed into the hardware you own and is used against you because the MPAA doesn't trust you not to copy the output in a manner that they think is wrong.
Television stations and media companies want to pass federal legislation that dictates hardware and software design so that they can control what programs you can record and when and how you are allowed to watch them.
Game designers build complex restrictions and copy protections into their installers. These often require special drivers to be used on your system to deal with these protection scemes. These are not wanted or desired by the vast majority of people that want to play these games and often they are not going to tell you that they are purposely installing software to restrict the amount of control you have over your own computer.
Apple with itunes sells people songs in a file format that are specificly designed only to work with special programs and only work with special hardware.
Google wants to sell you reruns of tv shows that you can only watch a certain amount ot time or have a time limit on their validity. Software your using to play these things are designed with the specific intention on removing control from you and placing it in the hands of strangers and big corporations.
There are hundreds of examples like this and it's going to continue to degrade along this path. Many corporations don't want you to control your PC, they want to turn it into another simple delivery mechanism for items and advertisments you have to purchase directly from them. They will dictate hardware and software design and use federal laws such as the DMCA to make sure that only a very tiny minority of people with skills and capabilities will be able to work around them. It's not about stopping 'piracy', it's about increasing profitability at the expense of other people's freedom.
Now except for the Federal Government passing laws to restrict what you can and cannot do it's perfectly voluntary on weither or not you want to join in on this whole fun.
Using Linux and depending on Free software is going to be the best way, that I know of software-wise, to ensure personal independance for your information-technology-related parts of your life.
If you don't care about this and it doesn't matter to you, or you don't think that any of the above things are a problem for you, then that's fine, that's your choice. This is fundamentally why I use Linux (or more properly Free software, since if Linux didn't exist I'd probably use a BSD. I don't have any real special attatchment to the Linux kernel other then that I think it's a great peice of software) though.
Another couple reasons to use free software is that you don't have to deal with spyware, adware, and viruses. As well that you have access to a crapload of software at no cost and with very very little in the way of restrictions.
Most of the good stuff works on Windows also, though. So it's not like you have to switch to Linux to use Blender or Firefox.. however it's often easier to deal with Linux distros when you have a good package management system.
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,571
- 17,102
- 136
You are definitely right about that which is why linux would have to appeal to joe smoe. Linux has advantages that the average joe might like but it's not as accessible as joe smoe needs it to be. When linux becomes more accessible to that average joe, it will then become an option. People will start to ask about it, for example, when I build a pc for a family member they want to know if it will have the latest windows on it but as linux becomes more accessible they might ask, "what about linux? should we use that instead?". If linux has achieved those other goals that I outlined in my previous post then I might say, "yeah, lets put linux on there, it has these advantages". But right now linux isn't even an option, average joes aren't even considering it let alone thinking about it. Linux desktop adoption wont/can't start at the oem level it needs to start smaller than that and build up it's demand, once the demand is high enough then the oems will follow.
Unfortunately, by using linux or some other open source OS you may be independant but it will also mean you don't get to use the newest technology. In order to use the latest and greatest you will have to accept drm and if corporations can't get drm on linux you wont have access to that material. It's a trade off and there will be a time when we all will have to make that decision.
True, for now anyway.
And just for clarification my post was geared more towards the question of whether or not linux will be on the desktop in any significant percentage. When it comes to "why should we (as in the visiters of anandtech) use linux?" it's just a matter of what works for each person. I use windows because it works and I know how to use it. It's secure, stable, and it supports the programs I want. For some that may not be true but it's true for me and that's all that matters.
I understand your point but it's not totally correct.
For me, I installed SUSE and it found every single piece of hardware and I didn't have to install any drivers or anything else other than update my security settings.
You can't do that most times with MS and those same people that don't know what hardware they have or the manufacturers of it will have one hell of a time going all over the net trying to find out which drivers to use with their Windows boxes.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
Really? What am I missing out on by not using Windows? Windows users are missing out on a lot of cool sh!t too, have you seen the XGL demo at http://www.freedesktop.org/~davidr/xgl-demo1.xvid.avi ?
Latest maybe, greatest I'm not so sure. But anyway, there is nothing stopping corporations from implementiong whatever DRM they want on Linux. Infact Linux has had drivers for just about all of the TPM chips available today, it's just a matter of the companies producing the necessary software.
Dell may be solving the hardware problem.
DRM'd HD content isn't touching anything I own, because nothing I own will be allowed. I just bought an HT ready tv (it was a great deal), but it doesn't have the right connectors to watch the upcoming stuff properly. And I'm not going out to spend another metric assload of cash for a new tv.
I'll be "missing out," but it won't matter to me for several years (long enough for the technology to get more ingrained and cheaper). I can diggit.
DRM'd HD content isn't touching anything I own, because nothing I own will be allowed. I just bought an HT ready tv (it was a great deal), but it doesn't have the right connectors to watch the upcoming stuff properly. And I'm not going out to spend another metric assload of cash for a new tv.
I'll be "missing out," but it won't matter to me for several years (long enough for the technology to get more ingrained and cheaper). I can diggit.
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
Non sequitur. Can you name something other than games that I'm missing out on by using Linux?
Everyone's stuck no matter what OS they run if they want to view that media at a high resolution. I'm not more dependent on DRM than I am on the Internet, if I use them it's because I made a conscience decision to do so. The companies using the DRM will be the ones becoming dependent on something because they'll be locking their media into a format most likely owned by another company.
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,571
- 17,102
- 136
It still wont help linux into the desktop market, the average joe wont be buying those systems any time soon. In fact if joe smoe's company started using linux as a desktop replacement it could hurt linux, if it isn't properly implemented and the end user experience is a negative one (the opposite could be true as well though, a good user experience with linux at work would also help linux become an "option" for the average joe at home).
While I do have an hd tv with hdcp I'm still very leary of jumping into hd. If fair use turns out not to be "fair" I will be boycotting it as I have done other technologies before. Will me boycotting make a difference? No, but if everyone had my attitude it would. Would I switch to linux? Not for that reason. MS isn't the one calling for DRM, they are doing it because that's what the content providers want and people want content and if MS can't give them the means to get it they (the consumer) will go somewhere that can. Boycotting MS products won't do anything since they aren't the ones requiring it, boycotting the content providers is what needs to be done.
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: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter