Windows is just not ready for the desktop

[Nothinman]

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

Which is the point. Everyone bitches about how Linux isn't ready for the desktop because it requires you to understand a bit about how it works in order to install and set things up but Windows requires that you understand just as much. The only reason that Windows is ready for the desktop is because most people already understand how to work around it's BS which is obviously an impossible criterion for any other system to meet.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

I use Firefox as my primary browser due to AdBlock Plus and a few other plugins, but I do have to use IE 7 sometimes due to the occasional website being lazily coded with Frontpage (and thus sometimes does not display properly, although this is getting a lot better) or when I use Microsoft update.

Hmm, you use IE 7 as a fallback from Firefox? I don't use IE 7 much but in evaluating it here at work, it seems IE7 doesn't work correctly on the same websites that Firefox does not work correctly on, and vice versa. However IE 6 WILL display those sites.

I'm not saying you are wrong by any means, I've just been keeping _IE6_ as my fallback, because IE7's rendering seems to be close to Firefox's rendering - in the good and the "bad" ways, though I use the term "bad" lightly because sites that don't render correctly are using IE6's bastardized specifications instead of legit w3c specifications that Firefox and IE7 conform to.

That would probably be the same thing that tech support at Dell would hear if someone was to install Linux for the use of average Joe, "Hey tech support, I bought {x} at Wal-Mart and when I try to put it on my computer, it gives me some strange pop up about displaying and running and then it says invalid when I run it, I think I might need to redownload to the internet maybe?"

This may come as a a shock to some people who have already labeled me a linux-fanboi (since if you say _any_one_thing_ positive about linux, some people automatically label you a Microsoft-hating communist linux-zealot), but... I actually like Vista's UAC much much better than Ubuntu's prompting for root access.

Reasons (you can skip this part if you don't care why
----------------------------------------------------
Vista: an administrator only has to click ok to get admin privileges
Vista: admin access doesn't require your own password (obviously I know my own password, I logged in with it).
Vista: when supporting limited users, if I need to do a quick something as admin, I can.
Ubuntu: Must type my own password, again, and again, and again.
Ubuntu: caches sudo access for a time, leaving a window for the 1337 haxxx0rs, theoretically.
Ubuntu: if working with a limited user, I have to log out to do a quick admin thing.
-----------------------------------------------------

UAC is so easy to work with and is a big step in security. I cringe every time I see these Vista "guides" and the first thing they tell you to do is to disable the UAC.

How the hell can you put up with UAC?? Am i missing somthing about UAC here? Dosent it simply ask you to confirm basically every second thing you do? I turned it off after 2 minutes with vista ultimate, i found the help and support useful quick and informative for that But seriously, people with UAC turned on will eventually get fed up with it and either disable it entirely if they know how or just click ok to everything without reading it effectively rendering it useless. UAC is horrible, besides i personally think its a scapegoat theyve put in so microsoft can blame security holes that get exploited on UAC being turned off, no sane person would have that thing activated.

User - double clicks install speedfan.exe
vista UAC - you sure you want to install this?
User - ok
vista UAC - really sure?
User - ok damnit!
vista UAC - super sure?
User - NO f**k it... im going outside to sit in the sun and read a book, screw windows :frown:

Thats not the kind of scenario that should be typical of using windows.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

Which is the point. Everyone bitches about how Linux isn't ready for the desktop because it requires you to understand a bit about how it works in order to install and set things up but Windows requires that you understand just as much. The only reason that Windows is ready for the desktop is because most people already understand how to work around it's BS which is obviously an impossible criterion for any other system to meet.

Linux does catch a lot of crap just because people are unfamiliar with it but in the OPs case it's ludicrous. Printer drivers are "download and double click" for Windows. Don't give me any "Windows is just not ready for the desktop" if you can't "download and double click". That falls into the "pack up your computer and take it back to the store because you're too stupid to own one" category.

Same thing with "I got over 200 virus trojans and other malware." You gotta be a tard. You gotta take some effort to disable your firewall and antivirus that the computer ships with enabled. Don't blame the OS for PBKAC.

If I have trouble getting a video driver configured on Linux I'm not going to blame the OS. Clearly others have it working; the problem is me. Most of the people on this thread appear to be heavy linux users so you're used to seeing this. I would think you guys would be more intolerant than most of the "not ready for the desktop" BS that this dude is spewing.

The activating windows drama is so worn out too. My Grandma could definately do this. If this guy can't... geez.

 

[stash]

UAC is horrible, besides i personally think its a scapegoat theyve put in so microsoft can blame security holes that get exploited on UAC being turned off, no sane person would have that thing activated.

A sane person would leave it on. I feel like a broken record, but UAC is more than a dialog box. You turn it off and a lot more than the dialog box goes away. You lose low rights IE. You lose file and registry virtualization, which will really make a person insane when they can't install all their sh1tty apps.

The claim that UAC will train users to click OK blindly is flawed. You're assuming (or parrotting FUD) that UAC throws up these constant roadblocks. Which, unless you base your life off an Apple commercial, is untrue. Do you think users sit around and install apps all day long? Or continually change settings in a control panel applet that requires elevation (which, contrary to yet another piece of FUD, is not ALL of them)? Or edit the registry?

Remember that when we talk about users, we're not talking about people who post in online tech forums. We're talking about people like my mom, who has only seen one UAC prompt since getting her new Dell a couple months ago, and that was to install the printer she bought separately. When she calls me about computer issues now, she doesn't call about her Vista machine. She calls about her laptop that still has XP on it.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey


sudo isn't gnu.

Well, I almost said linux, but people like to say "that's not linux." *shrug*

I don't care which one people cconsider better for whatever reasons. I have no opinion in the matter (having never used UAC I'm not entitled). I just wanted to point a couple of things out, none of which take more than 15 seconds to impliment.

Well the su admin_user -c "sudo command" is certainly nice to know now

 

[Nothinman]

Linux does catch a lot of crap just because people are unfamiliar with it but in the OPs case it's ludicrous. Printer drivers are "download and double click" for Windows. Don't give me any "Windows is just not ready for the desktop" if you can't "download and double click". That falls into the "pack up your computer and take it back to the store because you're too stupid to own one" category.

Printing is also one of the worst parts of both Windows and Linux. And the crap from HP isn't always just download and doubleclick, the stuff they give you for their non-PS/PCL printers is absolutely horrible and barely works most of the time.

Same thing with "I got over 200 virus trojans and other malware." You gotta be a tard. You gotta take some effort to disable your firewall and antivirus that the computer ships with enabled. Don't blame the OS for PBKAC.

Well someone else got all of that malware, he was just trying to fix it. And you don't have to disable the antivirus or the firewall. The firewall won't protect you from evil downloads, plugins, etc and if you don't keep whatever antivirus subscription current it'll never update. Running with definitions from 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, etc ago isn't very useful.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: stash

UAC is horrible, besides i personally think its a scapegoat theyve put in so microsoft can blame security holes that get exploited on UAC being turned off, no sane person would have that thing activated.

A sane person would leave it on. I feel like a broken record, but UAC is more than a dialog box. You turn it off and a lot more than the dialog box goes away. You lose low rights IE. You lose file and registry virtualization, which will really make a person insane when they can't install all their sh1tty apps.

The claim that UAC will train users to click OK blindly is flawed. You're assuming (or parrotting FUD) that UAC throws up these constant roadblocks. Which, unless you base your life off an Apple commercial, is untrue. Do you think users sit around and install apps all day long? Or continually change settings in a control panel applet that requires elevation (which, contrary to yet another piece of FUD, is not ALL of them)? Or edit the registry?

Remember that when we talk about users, we're not talking about people who post in online tech forums. We're talking about people like my mom, who has only seen one UAC prompt since getting her new Dell a couple months ago, and that was to install the printer she bought separately. When she calls me about computer issues now, she doesn't call about her Vista machine. She calls about her laptop that still has XP on it.

Basically Stash has said exactly the same things I was thinking when reading that response to my post. And I think it bears repeating: a sane person would leave it on. Now, I am not using Vista currently, but I did devote a couple weeks to it and after the initial setup and configuration of the system, I would have barely known UAC even existed. Even during setup, clicking an extra 'ok' button is a small price to pay for the added security.

But then, I'm also an IT administrator who uses a limited account for normal usage, both at work and at home, so UAC is much easier than logging out and logging in as an admin. Plus, I'm not sitting there getting twitchy, thinking "OMG I can't wait 1 extra second to play WoW!!!!11!!1"

 

[bsobel]

How the hell can you put up with UAC?? Am i missing somthing about UAC here?

Yes you are. Once configured, UAC prompts rarely. Even in the (poor) example you used, installing a SERVICE RUNNING AS SYSTEM WITH COMPLETE ACCESS TO THE SYSTEM (speedfan.exe) it only prompts you when installing.

 

[Maximilian]

Well you guys stick to your UAC, ive been fine for years without it in XP and days without it in vista, ill continue like that.

 

[stash]

Originally posted by: Soviet
Well you guys stick to your UAC, ive been fine for years without it in XP and days without it in vista, ill continue like that.

Originally posted by: stash
Remember that when we talk about users, we're not talking about people who post in online tech forums.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: stash
Remember that when we talk about users, we're not talking about people who post in online tech forums.

[/quote]

You might want to go find his Office 'text' file post before saying that

 

[daniel49]

I don't mind using either and although I am on the same xp install since 04 and really have had no virus/malware problems.
the main problem it seems to me is not so much windows as people who are to lazy or uninterested to learn how to take care of thier systems properly.

Regardless , I am experimenting running windows on a virtual machine inside my distro just because dual booting is a bit of a pain.
and considering that the experiment is on a test release of the distro it really has gone quite well so far.
hopefully pclos 2007 final release will be out by the end of the month.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, dude do you really want to pull me into this thread? It sounds like you and your user are not ready to own a Windows computer. I'm going to go help some folks on some other threads then come back if I have time. For now, the cliff notes:

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

1. Nah, this thread was fine without you.
2. Oh very well, seeing as how you insist, a clarification has been posted for you in the OP.
3. Yeah? Well I bet I could kick her ass.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Linux does catch a lot of crap just because people are unfamiliar with it but in the OPs case it's ludicrous. Printer drivers are "download and double click" for Windows. Don't give me any "Windows is just not ready for the desktop" if you can't "download and double click". That falls into the "pack up your computer and take it back to the store because you're too stupid to own one" category.

Printing is also one of the worst parts of both Windows and Linux. And the crap from HP isn't always just download and doubleclick, the stuff they give you for their non-PS/PCL printers is absolutely horrible and barely works most of the time.

Same thing with "I got over 200 virus trojans and other malware." You gotta be a tard. You gotta take some effort to disable your firewall and antivirus that the computer ships with enabled. Don't blame the OS for PBKAC.

Well someone else got all of that malware, he was just trying to fix it. And you don't have to disable the antivirus or the firewall. The firewall won't protect you from evil downloads, plugins, etc and if you don't keep whatever antivirus subscription current it'll never update. Running with definitions from 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, etc ago isn't very useful.

Your reading comprehension is beyond reproach. Thank you for understanding.

The HP drivers certainly are not download and double click. It's still pretty easy, but it is a little bit involved.

There was an antivirus program running the entire time (two maybe), but the definitions seemed out of date and it looked like some of the viruses had crippled what meagre protection the old definitions provided.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, dude do you really want to pull me into this thread? It sounds like you and your user are not ready to own a Windows computer. I'm going to go help some folks on some other threads then come back if I have time. For now, the cliff notes:

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

1. Nah, this thread was fine without you.
2. Oh very well, seeing as how you insist, a clarification has been posted for you in the OP.
3. Yeah? Well I bet I could kick her ass.

and who said the Linux community is cold and unhelpful

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, dude do you really want to pull me into this thread? It sounds like you and your user are not ready to own a Windows computer. I'm going to go help some folks on some other threads then come back if I have time. For now, the cliff notes:

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

All my problems are solved now, thanks!

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, dude do you really want to pull me into this thread? It sounds like you and your user are not ready to own a Windows computer. I'm going to go help some folks on some other threads then come back if I have time. For now, the cliff notes:

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

All my problems are solved now, thanks!

I'll tell her you said thanks.

 

[bsobel]

Which is the point. Everyone bitches about how Linux isn't ready for the desktop because it requires you to understand a bit about how it works in order to install and set things up but Windows requires that you understand just as much. The only reason that Windows is ready for the desktop is because most people already understand how to work around it's BS which is obviously an impossible criterion for any other system to meet.

This is an old debate and you obviously have your view on it. But as Windows, Lunux, and Mac user (and developer) I strongly disagree with thte statement that 'Windows requires you understand just as much'. The people posting here are PC experts (or in some cases, aren't but think they are). Regardless they do not represent the largest consumer portion of the desktop market in any way. Those are the users that vote in this debate (vote with their money and time). Many of us want to see a viable Linux desktop market (I certinaly do) and it's certianly come a long way in the last 5 years. But there is a good deal of additional work left to do. Those that can't or won't accept that reality resort to arguing in these threads over and over. Time better spent improving the platform, not trying to win converts.

This is the reality of the situation, all the rest (sudo vs UAC) is religion...

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, dude do you really want to pull me into this thread? It sounds like you and your user are not ready to own a Windows computer. I'm going to go help some folks on some other threads then come back if I have time. For now, the cliff notes:

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

1. Nah, this thread was fine without you.

Yeah, you were getting punked without my help.

2. Oh very well, seeing as how you insist, a clarification has been posted for you in the OP.

I see now. You were trolling. Not sure if you noticed or not but when the "linux isn't ready" threads pop up, none of the knowledgable Windows users from this forum really participate. We tout the strengths of our OS. We don't need to point out the shortcomings of yours.

3. Yeah? Well I bet I could kick her ass.

You sure? You thought you were smart enough to use Windows too.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, dude do you really want to pull me into this thread? It sounds like you and your user are not ready to own a Windows computer. I'm going to go help some folks on some other threads then come back if I have time. For now, the cliff notes:

1. My Grandmother knows more about Windows than you and could have gotten this working.

1. Nah, this thread was fine without you.
2. Oh very well, seeing as how you insist, a clarification has been posted for you in the OP.
3. Yeah? Well I bet I could kick her ass.

and who said the Linux community is cold and unhelpful

lol this thread is comedy gold

Imho, opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one, and noone will change their mind about anything, 99% of the time.

Personally, I like Linux pretty well, though admittedly trying to make my way around the OS to change things that I do all the time in Windows takes some getting used to, and I don't use the OS daily.

WinXP has been great, though with some major limitations looming in the near future, it looks like the masses will be more or less forced to move to Vista. Speaking of Vista, bleh. I'm happy for those that like it, but around here, it seems that very few do. Today, I'm doing yet ANOTHER Vista to XP conversion for a customer. On the plus side, antipathy towards Vista has brought me more business, and plenty of people are more than willing to shell out the $$ for an XP license.

UAC does seem to annoy the crap out of users, and is definitely the most hated Vista element next to 'my program doesn't work in Vista'. When an app doesn't work in Vista, the OS doesn't prompt you with a list of possible solutions and a click-through process, which I think would be a significant boost to the OS. Maybe in SP1 *crosses fingers*. Also, a more intelligent security management system instead of UAC nagging the pee out of you for simple tasks.

To each his own

 

[bsobel]

WinXP has been great, though with some major limitations looming in the near future, it looks like the masses will be more or less forced to move to Vista.

As I've posted before, the push to 4gig (of usable memory) and beyond will be a primary driver for Vista 64 (XP64 is just plain orphaned, and Xp32 isn't an option).

I'm happy for those that like it, but around here, it seems that very few do.

It would make sense your experience with Vista would be negative since you are and helping users downgrade. Overall Vista adoption seems to be ahead of target (MS's quarterly numbers where a surprise as Vista gave them an unexpected boost). When you say 'around here' Im not sure if you mean where you live/business or Anandtech. If you mean Anandtech I disagree, the majority of the posts have are positive. There are a few people here who just plain hate it (some of which have never run it, and most of the others are repating fud they've read from the remaining posters).

UAC does seem to annoy the crap out of users, and is definitely the most hated Vista element

I presume you have focus group information which confirms this? If not, what quatifiable data (hint your opinion isn't data). This simply does not match the data we have on this. Bear in mind MOST users will be getting Vista preinstalled so they have even less UAC issues to deal with (UAC is certainly noisy during install, and I understand the gut to turn it off for a few days during setup. Then again, look at the thread here where the friend installed Windows and got the trojan before activation....).

Also, a more intelligent security management system instead of UAC nagging the pee out of you for simple tasks.

That is my point, Vista 64 is my primary OS now and I get UAC prompts rarely. What users are being nagged and why. Some usefull examples would be nice. There was one example earlier in the thread, installing speedfan. Installing speedfan installs a windows service running as SYSTEM, so if you don't think THAT should require elevated rights, may god have mercy on your box

 

[Arkaign]

Hehe, hey Bsobel. By 'around here', I am in a mid-size/smallish Texas town. We have a lot of oil/gas contractors and other people running brand-new hardware who aren't what you'd call computer geeks

I own a PC/Network shop on the downtown square, and do work for the city (mayor/chamber of commerce/sheriff's dept), as well as many local businesses. I probably split home users / businesses about 50% each for my workload. I talk directly to 20+ people a day regarding a variety of issues, and maybe 10-20 pcs see bench space here each week.

That being said, of all of the people who have come through my door over the past few months, I have YET to hear a positive comment about Vista. Most people regard it with mild curiosity or indifference, but there remains a group of people who REALLY don't like it. These are usually the people who ask me if I can get XP on the system for them. First, I attempt to explain the quirks of Vista, and that they may be able to work around whatever problems they are having, but frequently, they insist on paying me to get XP + drivers on the system for them. Well, that's what I'm in business for, to fix things for people, so I do.

Focus group information? I don't have to challenge what appears to be a nearly universal dislike for Vista locally. It's tempting to take down my Vista marketing materials around the shop. Oh, and I know 'my opinion isn't data', but thanks for the snide remark anyway. It speaks volumes on your character and general attitude. Condescending comments always make you look smart, eh?

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Hehe, hey Bsobel. By 'around here', I am in a mid-size/smallish Texas town. We have a lot of oil/gas contractors and other people running brand-new hardware who aren't what you'd call computer geeks

I couldn't tell from the context what you meant, that makes it clear (thanks)

but frequently, they insist on paying me to get XP + drivers on the system for them. Well, that's what I'm in business for, to fix things for people, so I do.

I don't blame you, but it does remind me of when XP came out and we heard the same from the W2k users (I'll never upgrade, XP sucks, etc). I'm willing to bet most if not all of them (sans the server folks) have upgraded to XP now. But if they want to pay you for XP now, by all means

Oh, and I know 'my opinion isn't data', but thanks for the snide remark anyway. It speaks volumes on your character and general attitude. Condescending comments always make you look smart, eh?

My comment was in no way meant to be snide. You made a statement that UAC was the most hated Vista element. I am asking what data your basing that on, as I've seen lots of studies on this and they don't agree (it's not the most loved either, btw) I don't agree with you, but I'm posting 'UAC is the most loved Vista element' either, I'm just asking for your data source. Sorry if you took it as more than that. For the record, generally speaking most users don't really notice or care about UAC. Its folks like us that talk about it

 

[Smilin]

You are a repair shop after all, right? Do people with perfectly functional computers that require no upgrades, maintenance or repair really come to your shop?

What he's saying is your views don't really match reality as a whole. If you are hearing NO positive comments regarding Vista then people with the positive comments aren't coming in your door... or are you really saying that there isn't a person on the face of the planet that likes Vista?

Maybe he sounds condescending because he thinks what you're saying is ridiculous. Dunno. Ask him in a less condescending tone and he might tell you. :thumbsup:

 

[Arkaign]

Heh I know what you mean about the people who always want to stick with the old stuff, it happened with every Microsoft OS. UAC isn't exactly rolling off of people's tongues, but I hear stuff like 'in Vista I have to click through tons of pop-ups', which I usually confirm is UAC poking it's little head into every thing they do.

I admire UAC as a concept, I just with it could be a little more transparent. Like :

Set a 'clear-list' of basically harmless common actions, and have the PC connect to Microsoft for the current 'clear-list', so the user isn't pestered for doing something like moving a start-menu item to a different location. It just seems that there must be a solution that isn't as intrusive. Combine that with improved compatibility-management, and I think Vista can grow into a real winner, particularly as average hardware catches up. As it is, I only recommend Vista for high-end systems (2+gb mem, dual-core, etc). I had a customer who was livid at me because he bought Vista Home Premium upgrade (from BBuy, I think), and it basically killed his Compaq desktop, which used a crap ATI chipset that took 128mb of his 512mb memory for video, and it was somehow MY fault that he did this. I'd never met the guy before, but he saw my Vista marketing posters and whatnot, guess it was guilt by association Luckily I sold him a 1gb stick and calmed him down with some Vista tweaks, so he is ok for now.