Why is Windows more popular then Linux

My experience of using Linux was and still is a frustrating one. I'm afraid that I can't give it up, as it is going to be a part of my future work. But I think there a few reasons, why Linux is not getting very popular. I saw a lot of opinions on this subject. Defending Windows or Linux alike. I don't want to be doing any of that. There is why I think Linux is loosing out.

1) Linux is far from the simple system to learn to use. I found that often, to do the simplest thing, one has to know a lot of advanced topics. Most of the general users don't want to have to spend hours of studying,just to install any other program they need.

2) There is not much official support from the hardware vendors for Linux. And as nice as the theory of Linux supporting tons of hardware, we all know this is just a prety dream, there is enough of not supported hardware out there. Let's be honest, most of the common users will not go out to buy new hardware just to use an OS.

3) One will say that they can get many drivers online. I am afraid it's not quite like this. Many people won't know where to start looking. Also, not all of users will have an unlimited access to the internet. And again, usual users will not want and often won't have time to go through all this.

4) And I'm afraid that the Linux comunity is far from friendly. An unfortunate fact. As much as there are people willing to help, often they can't. They also automaticaly asume that they are speaking to technicaly aware people. This means that for a usual user their answer is just a whole pile of giberish. And we shall not forget a whole pile of "wiz kids" that hang around and trying to be smart.

5) One will say that there are a lot of tutorials, yet again they were intended fot technicaly proficient people. And again, we are at the same point, any general user will want the OS to do the job in an easiest way possible.

6) One more factor is that there isn't as much software support for Linux. And yes, there are some opensource programs, but they are not always suitable for the job, and they can be accuired only from the net. Again, not everyone has an unlimited access to the web.

I know that there are a lot of Linux users here. I also know exactly what some of them will say. I don't even have to point them out ;) .

So: "Come out, come out" and give us your opinion :D . We'll be glad to hear it.

you are right about alot of the above. But windows is also more popular becasue Microsoft has done a damn good job of shoving it in peoples faces. It is what just aboout everyone is used to, a lot of people dont like change. This is why Windows is more popular then Macs also (aside from the price difference). MS is great at marketing their product, and even better at getting rid of competitors (both ethicly and non-ethicly). If MS wasnt the product so many people were used to then the work you put into linux wouldnt seem like so much.

just my $.02

Right...right...and...right !

But aside from marketing etc...the main reason why more people choose Windows is because, like myself, they started out with nothing and wanted the easiest system to work with...

as the schools at the primary and secondary levels become more involved with computers ( which, at most schools, this has only happened in the last few years ) you will find more and more people, having been raised on computers, looking for more advanced systems...

in twenty years when everyone has been exposed to computers at an early age and throughout their school life...I think you will see a decline in those seeking Windows and more people looking for the more advanced systems.

nightcat: I have to agree with you on some of your points.

Learning linux was difficult in the beginning. But, as I've stayed up studying and learning the OS, it has become easier and easier. You're just using a different platform. Of course its going to be different. One of the biggest gripes I have is installing software. Try to install a peice of software just to end up downloading a dozen conflicting dependancies...

Hardware... I have no complaints here. I've found linux to support all the hardware that I've tried to load it on. I've even gotten tv tuner cards and web cams that were no long supported by the manufacturers to work.

Drivers... same as hardware. I've found everything I've needed. (sometimes with some intensive searching)

As far as support... You don't get much better support for Windows either. I'm a technical user... I can't interpret the "english" that "Habib" at Dell in India is speaking.

Ever try calling your ISP with a problem. They ask you the OS... if you tell them linux, they'll try go get off the phone as quick as possible. Even if you aren't using the linux box to connect. I called with a dsl problem that had to do with my router not authenticating. They asked me what I was running and I told them a Cisco router. They wanted to know my computer OS... which doesn't matter. "We don't support linux". No duh! I want support on why my username and password isn't authenticating using my router... not my desktop.

The linux community has been pretty friendly. Granted, they are quick to flame... but they will help. Look into a LUG around your area. The university by me has a nice mailing list and meets every Tuesday. They have some very interesting presentations and discussions. I've never had a problem that they couldn't help me with. Like you indicated... the responses were technical.

IMO- Linux and Unix are technical operating systems. They were not make for grandma.
There are some distros that have tried to make things easier... Lindows (or whatever its called now). They sell them at Wallmart. I spoke quickly with a sales person at Wallmart a while back... he was surprised at how many of them they sell... I didn't get any numbers.

For software... I've found everything that I've needed and eventually gotten it to work. But, I really only use linux for servers or security tools... not so much my everyday stuff.

I tried to switch over... but school and work require me to use windows. I can get some of the software to work on linux, but some just won't. Plus, I like video games. gaming on linux really sucks. I don't have the patience when it comes to games. I use games to relax... the last thing I want to do is spend 4 hours trying to get a game to work. I still keep linux on servers, and my everyday workstations/laptop dual booted. I even have linux loaded up in virtual PC, or load the knoppix ISO in virtual PC when I need *quick* access.

Windows really is easier to use. If I wasn't a technical user... then I wouldn't even try using Linux. Its not a Desktop OS, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by nightcat
My experience of using Linux was and still is a frustrating one. I'm afraid that I can't give it up, as it is going to be a part of my future work. But I think there a few reasons, why Linux is not getting very popular.

---

The desktop market is the only place Linux isn't getting popular. A HUGE part of the Net runs Linux and UNIX based systems and almost every web site in the World runs on Apache.

Quote:

---

I saw a lot of opinions on this subject. Defending Windows or Linux alike. I don't want to be doing any of that. There is why I think Linux is loosing out.

---

While I understand your point, the main reason I for one stand up is because very few people ever take the time to learn how to use the Os they have. Windows can be made stable, I've done it, and Pooh has mastered it. However in my view, Windows is NOT more stable than a UNIX based OS, and there are reasons for it. On the desktop, Linux and BSD give home users a chance to do things they just can't do with "Soho" OSs, like setting up servers without a GUI. The GUI only gets in the way.

Quote:

---

1) Linux is far from the simple system to learn to use. I found that often, to do the simplest thing, one has to know a lot of advanced topics. Most of the general users don't want to have to spend hours of studying,just to install any other program they need.

---

that would be mainly opinion. When I first installed Slackware I hadn't read a manual. The start up screen at the end said use CFDISK or Fdisk to set up partitions, I used CFDIsK and set them up and read the screen, I set the type and figured all of this out myself. After that, well, typing start did not work, but typing setup did. It made sense to me. I managed to install it without reading a manual. I did the same for Free BSD and now I've written docs for both.

Installing software on Linux can be a breeze or a pain. Dependency Hell exists but for the most part that isn't as much of a problem like it was 2 years ago when I first started using it. I installed software last night for example.

I wanted to delete the version of Xine I had on here and install the copy from the Xine web page. I opened YAST2 with a Mouse click, gave the root password, clicked on install / Remove software, clicked on Multimedia, clicked on Xine to delete it, and clicked accept.

without a GUI I would be using the SpaceBar to do this and the arrow keys.

After that I opened a terminal and CD into the directory I had the RPMs for it all in. rpm -U xine*

rpm -U

the Uppercase use is easy to remember, "Upgrade" "Uppercase" easy.

After that I wanted to have the Windows 32 codecs to watch video for Windows.

rpm -i w32*.rpm

done

This would have taken about 30 minutes for Windows and then needed a reboot. I still haven't rebooted and I used the codecs last night.

Quote:

---

2) There is not much official support from the hardware vendors for Linux. And as nice as the theory of Linux supporting tons of hardware, we all know this is just a prety dream, there is enough of not supported hardware out there. Let's be honest, most of the common users will not go out to buy new hardware just to use an OS.

---

I have 3 desktops and a Laptop. All have Nvidia video cards except my Compaq which has a shitty integrated Video card, and all have Integrated sound cards the machine came with except this machine which has a Sound Blaster Live! card. All machines have sound and work fine even though they are integrated and all machines get #d graphics so I can play UT and all I had to do was download a driver and type

sh NVIDIA*.sh

except on SUSE Linux, YAST2 Downloads the driver for you.

this is actually better than Windows, on Windows you need a CD to install it, or hope you can getonline to update it after you install the drivers for the NIC and reboot for them. In Linux, all NICs work without me having to touch them. I boot up and they are already ready to play and online. In Windows, I install, reboot a few times for drivers, reboot for Installation of other software, then hope I haven't been wormed by things that aren't even a threat on my other boxes.


My Laptop is brand new from Dell. I got SUSE 8.2 Professional installed on it without a problem the first time I tried it. SUSE 8.2 is over a year old but I had everything working fine. I have 3D, sound, Network, everything.

If I reformat and reinstall XP on that box though WOOOOO boy better find the drivers CD, because NOTHING is going to work.


So anyway I'm wondering what hardware isn't going to work. I haven't found any yet.

Don't name of Win Modems or Win Printers, those aren't hardware, they're plastic software modules. If you knew exactly how they worked, you'd be shocked they did at all and you can STILL USE THEM in Linux sometimes. Not bad considering they make the OS do the work and the driver..... Seriously read up on this, it's amazing what Hardware people do to save money.

Quote:

---

3) One will say that they can get many drivers online. I am afraid it's not quite like this. Many people won't know where to start looking. Also, not all of users will have an unlimited access to the internet. And again, usual users will not want and often won't have time to go through all this.

---

I've never once needed to look online for drivers. I install, and all done. The only driver I download is the Nvidia one which can't be placed on Linux CDs for legal purposes.

However I've spent quite a while online looking for a printer driver for Windows 2000. A printer which is like YEARS old, and Windows 2000 couldn't find it.

Quote:

---

4) And I'm afraid that the Linux comunity is far from friendly. An unfortunate fact. As much as there are people willing to help, often they can't. They also automaticaly asume that they are speaking to technicaly aware people. This means that for a usual user their answer is just a whole pile of giberish. And we shall not forget a whole pile of "wiz kids" that hang around and trying to be smart.

---

A community helps because they want too. Call Microsoft and ask for free support. I bet you could understand what THEY said to you. It would be loud and clear.

irc.freenode.net

Go there. I've seen them spend hours helping someone new.

Quote:

---

5) One will say that there are a lot of tutorials, yet again they were intended fot technicaly proficient people. And again, we are at the same point, any general user will want the OS to do the job in an easiest way possible.

---

READ MINE. If you can understand what an arrow key is, you can install an OS with what I have done. I made them for people like you mention, and I am going to bet you could install Free BSD and Slackware with what I wrote.

Click on my profile, go in there, and click on "Other tutorials by this user" under my pic. After that, start reading.

Quote:

---

6) One more factor is that there isn't as much software support for Linux. And yes, there are some opensource programs, but they are not always suitable for the job, and they can be accuired only from the net. Again, not everyone has an unlimited access to the web.

---

this may be a shocking secret but you can BUY Open Source software. I know this is hard to think of at first, but you to can use software like this without a net connection.

For software itself and sheer volume..... Linux has you. There is more software vailable for Linux and BSd than any platform, you just have to look for it, it's not in stores.

And that no support, well do you mean calling up and asking questions? Or there is no support like software vendors don't support it?

Real Player 10 is now on Linux, with Wine most Windows programs are, and with WineX, you have Windows Games. Doom and UT all run under Linux, and don't get me started on Oracle.

Quote:

---

So: "Come out, come out" and give us your opinion :D . We'll be glad to hear it.

---

All done.

Windows is more popular because it was here first. Back in the days of *gasp, dare I say it? I'll say it softly* command line os, there came a demand for graphic user interface. This demand became a huge cry and hewe when Apple released McIntosh, and the first Mac *was* fully GUI and *was* run by a mouse. PC users thought it was cool. Along comes Bill with his (now firmly imbedded and rapidly growing but still hungry corporation) Mouse programs for dos - remember, MSDos was the most widespread os at the time; everyone who built PC's or PC compatibles for the most part used it. Bill decided to take it a bit further and somewhere in the latter part of the 1980's (1985 or 6 I think?) Win 3.10 was released, starting on new systems (8087's) and slowly working its way through into 'off the shelf' sales as well. By the time he released 3.11 (about 2 years later) his was not only the most widely used OS in the industry (MSDos still) but also now the most widely used GUI. From there it was a matter of changing with the times, which MS has tried to do - and succeeded quite well according to their phat profit$. There were other GUI's around the time of Win 3.1, but none had the industry support or industry's trust like Bill. Now the windows we use today has about as much semblance to its ancestor as we do cro-magnon man, but there you have it, why Windows is as popular as it is today.

I'm more curious along this line of thinking...

Bill bought Dos from an old Unix progger who wrote it as a more portable version of Unix - all its commands are based from Unix, and the way it did business was as well. Why didn't Unix come with the first GUI? Somebody *had* to have dropped the ball on that one, else the powers that controlled Unix way back when just didn't have any sort of business savvy...

Being able to set up a server without a GUI is an advantage how exactly? I fail to see why that "feature" would make an OS more stable... and there's a bunch of servers that can be installed on Windows without a GUI (MySQL comes to mind) - nobody does it, though, because it's retarded :)

And if you need 30 minutes on Windows to remove a proggy and install some codecs, you've got problems, gore :p

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Negative
Being able to set up a server without a GUI is an advantage how exactly? I fail to see why that "feature" would make an OS more stable... and there's a bunch of servers that can be installed on Windows without a GUI (MySQL comes to mine) - nobody does it, though, because it's retarded :)

And if you need 30 minutes on Windows to remove a proggy and install some codecs, you've got problems, gore :p

---

For one who cares how pretty something is when it's sitting in a telco closet sopmewhere without even a monitor attached to it?

Next, GUI, wastes RAM. A Server should be using RAM for clients, not a stupid GUI.

Two, GUI again, BSOD. Takes the whole system with it. In Linux, if the GUI crashes, it won't take the whole system with it.

GUI may not make it less stable but it sure as hell could reduce chances of crashes taking the whole thing with it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by |3lack|ce
Bill bought Dos from an old Unix progger who wrote it as a more portable version of Unix - all its commands are based from Unix, and the way it did business was as well. Why didn't Unix come with the first GUI? Somebody *had* to have dropped the ball on that one, else the powers that controlled Unix way back when just didn't have any sort of business savvy...

---

Actually they bought it from Tim Patterson? I believe that was his name and he worked for Seattle computer products. It wasn't UNIX per se, it was a rip off of CP/M. It was called Q-DOS (Quick Dirty OS).

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by |3lack|ce
Windows is more popular because it was here first. Back in the days of *gasp, dare I say it? I'll say it softly* command line os, there came a demand for graphic user interface. This demand became a huge cry and hewe when Apple released McIntosh, and the first Mac *was* fully GUI and *was* run by a mouse. PC users thought it was cool. Along comes Bill with his (now firmly imbedded and rapidly growing but still hungry corporation) Mouse programs for dos - remember, MSDos was the most widespread os at the time; everyone who built PC's or PC compatibles for the most part used it. Bill decided to take it a bit further and somewhere in the latter part of the 1980's (1985 or 6 I think?) Win 3.10 was released, starting on new systems (8087's) and slowly working its way through into 'off the shelf' sales as well. By the time he released 3.11 (about 2 years later) his was not only the most widely used OS in the industry (MSDos still) but also now the most widely used GUI. From there it was a matter of changing with the times, which MS has tried to do - and succeeded quite well according to their phat profit$. There were other GUI's around the time of Win 3.1, but none had the industry support or industry's trust like Bill. Now the windows we use today has about as much semblance to its ancestor as we do cro-magnon man, but there you have it, why Windows is as popular as it is today.

---

Windows wasn't here first.... I think I mayb be mis-reading you, but umm, It wasn't the first. For command line OSs, a GUI already existed long before Mac. WIMP ;)

And you didn't mention Windows 1.0 or 2. ;)

it was first in a sense that it came before linux on the x86 architecture. Who remembers the GUI called GEOS? The same reason gore hates windows versus the command line version of Linux is the reason I hated the MAC. Who needed a GUI? And the reason why Linux has gained ANY ground outside of the geek lab is BECAUSE of it's GUI - not command line and them incorporated in X-windows and then later refined. My opinion. :)

Well, looking around my local community at those who got new computers for Christmas, they all got Windows.

Partly this is MS marketing, in that they supply bulk OEMs at really knock down rates, and the market is familiar with MS products. Stores and OEMs like that because the chances are that users will talk to a friend, who will solve simple problems, thus cutting their helpdesk/support costs.

Another factor is that most of the local purchases I refer to are what one might call "family computers" by which I mean that they were purchased by older and wealthier members of the family unit, with little or no computer knowledge. They just walked into the local store and bought what was within their price range, so they automatically got Windows.

To be honest with you I don't think that most of the people I am referring to were even aware that their was a choice.

Just my thoughts/recent observations.

I few years ago Dell and other big companies sold linux desktops with their normal support contracts. They no longer do that, so in reality perhaps therereally isn't a choice? That is outside, building your own system and taking the next step in geek revolution... deiciding with complete control what goes on your box. My take is that Dell and others couldn't really support the desktops as easy and effectively as windows, at least for the masses. I am not talking servers here, desktops aka workstations etc.

Now guys. I'm glad that there is a discussion going on. I'm also glad to read a well presented arguments.

Hell, even Gore is beign civil :D

There is my experience of using Linux. I'm not sure what did I do wrong in the stuff I've done.

I got a Fedora Core2 Linux. I also got about a 1000 page book on the OS. Around 400 pages are required to be learned by a basic user. I am sure that a business manager wouldn't want to do that instead of doing his job (I was a business manager, I valued my time then so will others).

I got that a couple of month back, as Core 2 was a later releas of that OS. Now they already got Core 4 coming out in a couple of month. And of course they want me to upgrade, Wasn't XP around for a couple of years nows :confused:. I don't mind downloding some patches, but 2 completely new releases? Isn't it a bit to much?

The OS was instaled on a dualboot laptop. Yes all the hardware was suported, exsept for my wireless USB card. It is Netgear card. Netgear doesn't suport Linux. Unfortunately due to circumstances I have only wireless at home. So, I can not conect to the internet. As it was a dual boot I had a greate idea; "Why not use XP to find and download drivers and then mount XP from Linux?"

Greate idea, don't you think so? Ofcourse Fedora didn't have support for Windows filesystems, none of them. I needed to, guess what, download them. And my system can not be conected to the internet :( . What do I do now?

Well, after asking here and in a few other places, pluss doing some reseach of my own, I found the drivers I need.Downloaded them and copied on to a CD.

So far I managed to install a support for FAT32. That's the windows partition where I keep my work. And that's it. I didn't even found a way to mount the partition so that I could work with the files on it. I have to copy them on to my Linux partition, which renders them useless unless I find an acceptable way of transfering them back. I also cannot print them out, as the printers are a network resource and I can not conect to the network. These circumstances make an OS useless for me in an everyday life.

If it is useless, why would one desire to learn it?

For me, it is a desire to become good at what I want to do, which is Information Technologies. Most of my coursemates at Uni, wouldn't bother going through that. As well as 12 hours in lectures, we are expected to do at least 30 hours of private study per week. I know that I often do even more.

Gore, the matter is not in whether people want to do something, the matter is in whether they've got time and resources to do it.

I could keep on giving the examples from other people I know. Most people want and need "Plug and Play" OS. They simply don't have time or resources for 400 pages or internet downloads.

Microsoft manages to provide an easy to start system. Even my Win 98 ran greate as long as I didn't try any unnecessary extras. Unfortunately Linux is far from that.

I hope it won't turn in to a worse - better issue as we go allong.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by nightcat
I got a Fedora Core2 Linux. I also got about a 1000 page book on the OS. Around 400 pages are required to be learned by a basic user. I am sure that a business manager wouldn't want to do that instead of doing his job (I was a business manager, I valued my time then so will others).

---

the things you need to learn are no different than what you have to with Windows. I have a HUGE doubt 400 pages were "Basic user".... I could write a basics for Linux book that would be about 50 pages. A basic user only uses certain applications, and never needs to open a command prompt.

And don't say they do either, I've never seen a basic user touch DOS from Windows.

Quote:

---

I got that a couple of month back, as Core 2 was a later releas of that OS. Now they already got Core 4 coming out in a couple of month. And of course they want me to upgrade, Wasn't XP around for a couple of years nows :confused:. I don't mind downloding some patches, but 2 completely new releases? Isn't it a bit to much?

---

Open Source moves faster than prop. software. Bugs are fixed fast as hell and new features are added up each week. It's the nature of the computer world. 20 years ago you wouldn't know I exited, now you do. so that shouldn't be a valid arguement that it moves to fast.

Quote:

---

The OS was instaled on a dualboot laptop. Yes all the hardware was suported, exsept for my wireless USB card. It is Netgear card. Netgear doesn't suport Linux. Unfortunately due to circumstances I have only wireless at home. So, I can not conect to the internet. As it was a dual boot I had a greate idea; "Why not use XP to find and download drivers and then mount XP from Linux?"

Greate idea, don't you think so? Ofcourse Fedora didn't have support for Windows filesystems, none of them. I needed to, guess what, download them. And my system can not be conected to the internet :( . What do I do now?

---

Ummmmm, Linux has supported Windows file systems for as long as I can remember using it. You worded that in a way Microsoft would with their security reports on Linux. What I think you meant to say was NTFS was a little less supported.

I have a Laptop with XP and SUSE 8.2 dual booting. Even though it isn't the new 2.6 Kernel, I STILL booted up to see my windows Partition mounted and ready to be used and I had no problems grabbing video I had on there and using it on Linux. Hell I was playing video on that partition BEFORE I had ever moved it onto the Linux partition.

Here is something to do:

Open your Linux partition in Windows. ;)

Really I'm not sure what made you say " Linux had no support for Windows File Systems...None of them"...... Seriously, you have to be joking or lying.

Quote:

---

So far I managed to install a support for FAT32.

---

Ummmmm can you explain what you mean here?

Quote:

---

I didn't even found a way to mount the partition so that I could work with the files on it. I have to copy them on to my Linux partition, which renders them useless unless I find an acceptable way of transfering them back. I also cannot print them out, as the printers are a network resource and I can not conect to the network. These circumstances make an OS useless for me in an everyday life.

---

Take that "Big huge manual" And open it. You can't tell me you learned all Windows tricks by yourself and you've never once had to learn to use Windows and Windows ships with manuals too, and You've HAD to have opened something to learn to use it.

Quote:

---

If it is useless, why would one desire to learn it?

---

Before you desire to learn Linux I think you should try to desire to learn at all.

Quote:

---

For me, it is a desire to become good at what I want to do, which is Information Technologies. Most of my coursemates at Uni, wouldn't bother going through that. As well as 12 hours in lectures, we are expected to do at least 30 hours of private study per week. I know that I often do even more.

---

wow, I need to enroll here. That's easy.

Quote:

---

Gore, the matter is not in whether people want to do something, the matter is in whether they've got time and resources to do it.

---

OK, tell you what, I'll find someone who has used UNIX their whole lives and NEVER used Windows and you sit them down at a Windows box and see how well they do.

And then grab a Mac User, one that has never used Windows, and sit them down at a Windows box, and tell them they can do it without learning.

My point with that:

You and Microsoft assume EVERYONE uses Windows and nothing else. I don't use Windows, unless I have to because some software I use at school needs it. There are people who have never used Windows before, and like them, you have never used an OS before, and you aren't giving any credit to the fact that Windows users had to learn to use Windows as well.

Quote:

---

I could keep on giving the examples from other people I know. Most people want and need "Plug and Play" OS. They simply don't have time or resources for 400 pages or internet downloads.

---

I just plugged in my External ZIP drive and it popped open a Windows showing me what was inside it and I could copy things to it and from it. On my Compaq I put a NIC in the machine, rebooted and Linux found BOTH cards right off the bat. No driver installs needed.

Windows, I would have been rebooting and loading driver disks.

Quote:

---

Microsoft manages to provide an easy to start system. Even my Win 98 ran greate as long as I didn't try any unnecessary extras. Unfortunately Linux is far from that.

---

A Drooling half wit could use Linux. My cousin did and he can't use Windows at all.

My Mom isn't a computer person, I installed SUSE on the computer that is her machine and it worked fine and she got around just fine, I didn't say a word, I just watched.

Quote:

---

I hope it won't turn in to a worse - better issue as we go allong.

---

That is up to you. after reading how you complain about how "hard it is" I don't think you're up to it. You seem to forget you had to learn how to use XP at one point as well. You just didn't think anything of it because it was windows. Now you have something that isn't Windows, and you say it's hard.

I've read your posts and from what I see, you're making it harder than it needs to be. RTFM already.

Why doesn't someone start an organization that provides free classes to learn linux? Probably has already been done, but if not I think it's a good idea. I pick up things very well from classes. I'm not very good at reading a book and getting stuff, mainly because I don't like to read and I get distracted.

As for normal users not using the command line, that's probably true in windows, but I think there are a lot of things on linux that are much easier to do on command line, and maybe even can only be done on command line.

And the BSOD with GUI. I don't think many people get those anymore, I haven't in a really long time.

But, someone start those free classes. They can even be a combo of linux and windows. They are both useful, and windows isn't as easy as it may seem :p.

Gore, I am by far trying to stay as fair as I can. I gave here my experience, not the things that were told to me by others. I don't need to lie about anything. And I don't asume any OS.

If FAT32 was installed, it definately wasn't switched on. Didn't make any difference to me, I still couldn't use it :( To use FAT32 i had to install a separate program/driver, you can call it any way you want.

NTFS is not naitively supported by Fedora Core. I'm definite about it. One can get a software to enable this support, but even that is buggy and doesn't work properly.

As to your Video. Did you try editing it? That's what a general user would ask: "If I can not edit my files on that partition, why do I need to use that OS?"

Gore, did your mother attempt to install a wireless support on to Linux? I don't think she would be able to hack kernel and config files to get it to work. Mine sure as hell won't. And if wireless is required, then it's not exactly the beginer topic, is it?

And yes, I never used any books while learning Windows as a user. I needed them as I ventured deeper into OS.

And you still missed the point of what was said in my previous post.

Just for you Gore I'll try puting it in simpler form.

I was trying to say, that by having all the small problems, like installing proper software, having the software readily available. Having tutorials writen in easier to understand language, Linux could gain more users. Most of the people will not get the system which is not going o be doing exctly what they need straight away.

If I want a bike, I won't get a car, even if it's the best car in the world.

If I could use Linux formy everyday work, I could of learned it faster. So far I'm limited to a fewhours here and there. And I only do it,because I want to do, no matter how hard it is. Many people I know won't do it, because they can learn Windows faster and it will do what they need it to do ain a shorter period of time

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by nightcat
[B]Now guys. I'm glad that there is a discussion going on. I'm also glad to read a well presented arguments.

I got that a couple of month back, as Core 2 was a later releas of that OS. Now they already got Core 4 coming out in a couple of month. And of course they want me to upgrade, Wasn't XP around for a couple of years nows :confused:. I don't mind downloding some patches, but 2 completely new releases? Isn't it a bit to much?

---

You don't HAVE to upgrade. I don't upgrade for every release. I just make sure I stay up with patches. Just because its released... doesn't mean you have to upgrade. When 2k3 server was relesaed... did you rush around right then and start replacing your 2k servers? You can't blame the OSS developers with doing their job. Their job is to create a better operating system. They don't have to wait for every 3 years to make releases. They release as they are ready.

Quote:

---

The OS was instaled on a dualboot laptop. Yes all the hardware was suported, exsept for my wireless USB card. It is Netgear card. Netgear doesn't suport Linux. Unfortunately due to circumstances I have only wireless at home. So, I can not conect to the internet. As it was a dual boot I had a greate idea; "Why not use XP to find and download drivers and then mount XP from Linux?"

---

What netgear card were you using? I've gotten my netgear cards to work.

Quote:

---

Greate idea, don't you think so? Ofcourse Fedora didn't have support for Windows filesystems, none of them. I needed to, guess what, download them. And my system can not be conected to the internet :( . What do I do now?

---

You can mount any m$ filesystem in linux. NTFS was and still might be experimental. But I've had no problems when using it.

Quote:

---

Well, after asking here and in a few other places, pluss doing some reseach of my own, I found the drivers I need.Downloaded them and copied on to a CD.

So far I managed to install a support for FAT32. That's the windows partition where I keep my work. And that's it. I didn't even found a way to mount the partition so that I could work with the files on it. I have to copy them on to my Linux partition, which renders them useless unless I find an acceptable way of transfering them back. I also cannot print them out, as the printers are a network resource and I can not conect to the network. These circumstances make an OS useless for me in an everyday life.

---

I don't see how you can blame linux because you don't know how to use it. I managed to mount my filesystems, flash memory, network cards, etc.

there are how tos out there for just about everything that you'd want to do.
everything else will be on www.google.com/linux

Quote:

---

If it is useless, why would one desire to learn it?

---

It is useless in your opinion. There are plenty of us who put it to use quite well.

Quote:

---

For me, it is a desire to become good at what I want to do, which is Information Technologies. Most of my coursemates at Uni, wouldn't bother going through that. As well as 12 hours in lectures, we are expected to do at least 30 hours of private study per week. I know that I often do even more.

---

Same here. I'm always working on, reading about or thinking about IT.

Quote:

---

I could keep on giving the examples from other people I know. Most people want and need "Plug and Play" OS. They simply don't have time or resources for 400 pages or internet downloads.

---

No need for more examples. We see you've had bad experiences with it. I've never had to read 400 pages to get something to work. Most of the time I have to read 2 paragraphs at most. Linux isn't the only OS that has 400 page manuals... I've got plenty of windows books here that are far thicker than my linux books. Heck, I even have a Windows XP registry book that is about 500 pages all in itself!

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by nightcat
And I don't asume any OS.

---

From the looks of it you don't use any of them but Windows.

Quote:

---

If FAT32 was installed, it definately wasn't switched on.

---

Fat32 isn't "Installed" .... Type man mount

See that? That is what you use to add things on the fly. And even add new HDs.

In your defence, I don't like Fedora either. SUSE is much better. Go and read my tutorial on installing SUSE with XP as dual boot. When you install that way, you boot up and when you select SUSE you have a desktop Icon of your C Drive. No "Installing" needed.

Quote:

---

Didn't make any difference to me, I still couldn't use it :( To use FAT32 i had to install a separate program/driver, you can call it any way you want.

---

No you did not, you only did because you're mis-informed that it's harder than it really is. Again crack that big huge scary manual open.

Quote:

---

NTFS is not naitively supported by Fedora Core. I'm definite about it. One can get a software to enable this support, but even that is buggy and doesn't work properly.

---

If you did a custom install somewhere it should be on the disks, when you install Linux most users get something they don't really want: Choice. As for not working, I think the error is in the chair. I read the manual, I've had no problems.

Quote:

---

As to your Video. Did you try editing it? That's what a general user would ask: "If I can not edit my files on that partition, why do I need to use that OS?"

---

I don't have a need to edit porn so no. And if you're in video editing where your users have a valid need for editing video what the HELL are you using Windows for in the first place?

Quote:

---

Gore, did your mother attempt to install a wireless support on to Linux?

---

I don't allow wireless on my LAN.

Quote:

---

I don't think she would be able to hack kernel and config files to get it to work.

---

Ummm, what in the bloody depths of hell are you trying to do? SUSE 9.2 Profesisonal. Support for wireless cards not only comes with it but the prop drivers are downloaded FOR YOU in the online update. who the hell would "Hack" Kernel configs.... OK I'm trying to get what you're saying because that made no sense, no one hacks Kernel configs to make Wireless work.

Quote:

---

Mine sure as hell won't.

---

http://www.RTFMAlready.com

Quote:

---

And if wireless is required, then it's not exactly the beginer topic, is it?

---

Uhhhhh sure.

Quote:

---

And yes, I never used any books while learning Windows as a user. I needed them as I ventured deeper into OS.

---

the things you're complaining about in Linux aren't any "Less Deep". You're whining because hardware wouldn't work because you don't know what you're doing.

Quote:

---

And you still missed the point of what was said in my previous post.

---

I know, I have trouble speaking in ignorance but I'm working on finding a translator.

Quote:

---

Just for you Gore I'll try puting it in simpler form.

---

If you tried as hard to read the manual for Linux as you are to explain this to me you'd never need to post this in the first place.

Quote:

---

I was trying to say, that by having all the small problems, like installing proper software, having the software readily available. Having tutorials writen in easier to understand language, Linux could gain more users. Most of the people will not get the system which is not going o be doing exctly what they need straight away.

---

I told you in my post a while back to read MY tutorials. I know you haven't because they don't get any simpler. Good Lord if you can't understand "Press the left arrow key 3 times" you sure s hell shouldn't have a computer. I need windows to come with more software than it does, but it won't, maybe I'll start bitching about that.

Quote:

---

If I want a bike, I won't get a car, even if it's the best car in the world.

---

after this thread if you could ride a bike or drive without killing anyone I'd be shocked. All that manual labor shifting gears and moving your legs, that has to be a bitch when a terminal is giving you ****.

Quote:

---

If I could use Linux formy everyday work, I could of learned it faster.

---

If you spent half as much time reading the manuals for it as you did complaining about it you could as well.

Quote:

---

Many people I know won't do it, because they can learn Windows faster and it will do what they need it to do ain a shorter period of time

---

That's super. The more people that think that way, the higher my pay will be for the skill I have. Go ahead and let them stay ignorant, I could use the extra 10Gs a year.

Just a few thoughts:
* Writing to an NTFS volume isn't bug free. I'll mount an NTFS fs read only, but that's it!
* Watching DVDs. I don't have a TV, and as we all know SuSE (et al) won't play DVDs by default.
* Video editing. Not everyone just has porn videos, some people want to edit stuff they're recorded with their little camcorder. Now, I don't have a camcorder so I don't know if there are any issues with this, but if there are....

The newest incarnation of any OS generally has enough drivers to keep you happy. Windows does have the problem that you're expected to reboot *far* too often, but we're used to it! Unless you're running a server this won't cripple you.

Well, as far as rebooting is concerned, windows xp doeesn't really require as much rebooting as 98. Most of the times, if you installed an application (that doesn't need to stay memory resident all the time like an AV) and it asks for a reboot, you can just ignore it and go ahead and use the program. Issues with windows xp (from my point of view) are mainly:

1.Viruses: You have to keep updating AV sigs to be on the constant look out for new strains of viruses. Especially if you're on a big LAN in a univ or something. This is something that you don't have to worry about in linux (not much anyway) because there aren't that many potential viruses for linux.

2.Networking:Setting up shared resources in windows doesn't really have many options. Maybe it does but i've tried my ass off in trying to set individual passwords for different users and never got it. This is something that's very easy to do in linux using swat or by editing the smb.conf file.

3.Firewalling:Agreed that linux may require firewalls but the inbuilt firewall works fine for basic users. I've put up a password for the smb shares and that's all i need.

Issues with linux are:

1.Games and application:It's a very big pain in the ass to get a windows game to play in linux. Even some applications are very difficult to configure to run in a linux machine (if anyone has configured AutoCAD 2000, please pm me). This is the main reason that I use windows.

2.Command Line:This is something that i'm not really against. I mean I actually like to use the command line. But there are times when you would really like to just have a simple click and use kind of thing. In windows, the standard user would never require to use the command line interface at all.

3.NTFS write support:I haven't found any write support to ntfs for sp2. This is a major problem for me because I've got 130GB out of 150GB in NTFS (I first installed windows and windows does very badly with fat32 partitions bigger than 32GB or so it says in the manuals). But this is something i've kind of compensated for by having a 15GB fat32 partition to swap files between linux and windows.

So I'm kind of right now sticking to a dual boot because both of them have their advantages and disadvantages. I'm just giving my opinion and if anyone can resolve these issues, please pm me.

I guess it's a bit strange to read for any other person.

We've got Linux defenders here who keep on thinking that Linux is being attacked. They also assume that anyone who had bad experience with Linux are good for nothing lazy bugers who can't be asked to study.

Once again, this thread is not an attack on Linux. I am sure that if there are any Linux coders in here they will unerstand this.

As idmismatch said, most of the people are not using their computers to watch porn. Many of us do have girlfriends ;) . Me personaly, I usualy use my computers for my uni work, I do need to edit it.

Gore , I know how to work with "mount" comand, I also can work with comand line :p And guess what. When I was checking suported filesystems, FAT32 wasn't among them. Now it is ;)

And if the manual on installing wireless suport were more clear, I would know what am I doing with them, so far you areright, I don't and I don't have much time to devote to this question. Wich means I won't know it for a while longer.

I chose Fedora, 'cause it's a spin off of the RedHat. And RedHat is the more popular Server Linux so far.

All the stuff I described is my experience. I'm far from complaining about it, but trying to look at it from a general user point of view.

Gore and phishphreek80 Just for one minute try sugesting that over 80% of PC users don't have an unlimited internet conection with a set monthly fee. How many of these people will be able to use the resources given by you two? Hell, around 40% of PC users stil don't have any internet access at all. What should they do?

I already mentioned this to be Linuxs limitation.

[QUOTE] Originally posted here by nightcat

Quote:

---

Gore and phishphreek80 Just for one minute try sugesting that over 80% of PC users don't have an unlimited internet conection with a set monthly fee. How many of these people will be able to use the resources given by you two? Hell, around 40% of PC users stil don't have any internet access at all. What should they do?

---

I never sugested that linux was for 80% of PC users out there. I stated in my first reply that Linux is not a desktop OS, IMO. I use it for servers and for security tools. The last line of my first posts reads:

Quote:

---

Windows really is easier to use. If I wasn't a technical user... then I wouldn't even try using Linux. Its not a Desktop OS, IMO.

---

My second post was merely a follow up to your experiences suggesting that I've had quite the opposite experience as you. I'm not bashing linux or windows. I use both.

Quote:

---

They also assume that anyone who had bad experience with Linux are good for nothing lazy bugers who can't be asked to study.

---

I'm surely not calling you an idiot or anything. Maybe you just need to practice up on your search engine and information gathering skills first? I've found no shortage of documentation for anything I've needed to do. For most simple tasks, I've had to read very little. When you get into configuring services and servers, then you've got to read a lot more.

Quote:

---

I'm far from complaining about it, but trying to look at it from a general user point of view.

---

I'd be scared at what would happen if I sat a "general user" down at a linux box. All the lusers on my network are far to ignorent (and I'm being nice here... I could be mean). Most of them are too ignorent to even use the windows 2000 and windows xp workstations. Go talk to some people in tech support and see how well these users put their systems to use.

I would never expect them to work with linux. But then again, I'd never expect them to know how to use 2k3 server. I can barely expect that they'll be able to turn on their computers properly. All my users need to know how to do is launch shortcuts to office, a couple of other business programs that are neatly organized on their desktops. We all know how difficult it is for a luser to get a program to start if it isn't on their desktop!

http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/linuxbeat3.htm

Since there are, and always wil be, more morons than intelligent
people in the world, you can expect windoz to be more "popular".

Examine for a minute what this means to long term productivity.
I think it's proven that initial "ease of use" causes people to
become "productive" almost immediately, without training.

But it is almost impossible to move most of them to the next
level, to use, or write scripts or macros that would essentially
put the computer to work for you, instead of you
"working on the computer".

Quote:

---

Ease of use has produced legions of folks who really are
computer illiterate but don't know it. They think they are
"using" their computers, but they really aren't.

---

http://aplawrence.com/Bofcusm/1019.html

I've been fighting with this in my own work. I'm just a regular
user, not in IT. I use an app to open files, do some manipulating,
and send them to a printer. I have to do 3 mouse clicks to open
the file, two or three more to select some options, a couple more
for final setup, a couple more to send to the printer.

I have to go through this moronic series of actions for each
and every file, because I haven't yet figured how to script
the program and give it a list of files to work on.

If I could do that, the whole process would be done in 5 minutes
while I drink my coffee. As it is, it takes a half hour.

But the real sadness is that no one else ever imagined that anything
was wrong with this time-wasting procedure. After all, they get paid
by the hour, and they are not paid to think.
:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by idmismatch
Just a few thoughts:
* Writing to an NTFS volume isn't bug free. I'll mount an NTFS fs read only, but that's it!
* Watching DVDs. I don't have a TV, and as we all know SuSE (et al) won't play DVDs by default.
* Video editing. Not everyone just has porn videos, some people want to edit stuff they're recorded with their little camcorder. Now, I don't have a camcorder so I don't know if there are any issues with this, but if there are....

The newest incarnation of any OS generally has enough drivers to keep you happy. Windows does have the problem that you're expected to reboot *far* too often, but we're used to it! Unless you're running a server this won't cripple you.

---

Just a few more:


No Software is bug free.


DVDs are supported right out of the SUE box, learn what you speak. The Encrypted DVDs are not allowed to be supported because it's actually against the law for some stupid reason.

Video editing:

SUSE comes with MainActor and about 5 different other video editing programs.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by nightcat
I guess it's a bit strange to read for any other person.

We've got Linux defenders here who keep on thinking that Linux is being attacked. They also assume that anyone who had bad experience with Linux are good for nothing lazy bugers who can't be asked to study.

Once again, this thread is not an attack on Linux. I am sure that if there are any Linux coders in here they will unerstand this.

Gore , I know how to work with "mount" comand, I also can work with comand line :p And guess what. When I was checking suported filesystems, FAT32 wasn't among them. Now it is ;)

And if the manual on installing wireless suport were more clear, I would know what am I doing with them, so far you areright, I don't and I don't have much time to devote to this question. Wich means I won't know it for a while longer.


All the stuff I described is my experience. I'm far from complaining about it, but trying to look at it from a general user point of view.

Gore and phishphreek80 Just for one minute try sugesting that over 80% of PC users don't have an unlimited internet conection with a set monthly fee. How many of these people will be able to use the resources given by you two? Hell, around 40% of PC users stil don't have any internet access at all. What should they do?

I already mentioned this to be Linuxs limitation.

---

Don't say Linux has limitations because of your own.

The resources I gave, could be PAID FOR. That's right, just like you do with Windows, they could buy a BOOK. I know this may seem odd, but a book, is a device with paper in netween. You open it and there are words there!

Windows is more popular and will probably stay because most people are too lazy to try something else. Most won't even take the time to change a password unless you beat them over the head. How many people do you see who haven't even taken the time to turn off the annoying Office paper clip?

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by gore
Just a few more:


No Software is bug free.


DVDs are supported right out of the SUE box, learn what you speak. The Encrypted DVDs are not allowed to be supported because it's actually against the law for some stupid reason.

Video editing:

SUSE comes with MainActor and about 5 different other video editing programs.

---

Fair enough about video editing, I just assumed from earlier posts that it was a problem. Mea culpa.

Ho ho, I know DVDs are supported by SuSE, that's pretty obvious. Of course I'm talking about encrypted, I have no TV but I like to watch movies. I understand and dislike the legal reason for SuSE not decoding such stuff, and only hope that with Novell's ownership this might one day change. Until then even using lovely YaST to install packages on the OS won't let me use my PC for its secondary purpose.

As for all software being buggy... well, yes, I agree with you, but there's buggy and there's critically buggy. Actually, maybe this isn't buggy, maybe it's just plain lacking functionality. See http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/ntfs.html#3.2. As I choose to use NTFS it means I have to have a separate fat32 fs to share between SuSE and XP. Yes, you could say that's a fault with XP in that it can't read/write to reiserfs, but strangely enough most people won't see it that way... ;-)

Now, using books to learn Windows? Never had to, I started playing with a university PC and went from there. I'll admit I used a book when I first encounteered linux, but that was a fair while ago when things weren't quite as user friendly! All the same, if I was setting up a new type of server (like a dedicated mail server) I'd seek help first.

EDIT: No, that's a little arrogant and bullshitty of me. I've used books for NT4 Server quite a bit, and referred to a number of howtos for all sorts of linux server bits. Like I'd work out how to set up samba/ldap on my own!

One of the main reasons, that I didn't mention, Linux is gaining momentum slower than it probably should is... the Foo Fighter. No not the band but the elite who think that since they can mount a device through the command line or follow a HOW TO they are gods. So when a windows guy comes along and says they don't like linux because they can't read a drive that didn't mount for some reason by the default install and they mention that fact, the foo fighters band together and call them ****ing morons in defence of their chosen mantra. Perhaps they are FMs, but hey even the foo fighters had to figure out some basic principles on their own. Not everyone wants to dig under the OS hood for hours, like we think is fun. And THAT is where Linux fails and perhaps will NEVER catch up.

As for FREE classes... type "How to" into google: "how to mount NTFS drive in Fedora" or "NTFS How To" etc. I have been playing with an issue for days now that took about 10 minutes to get up on windows. There are 2 sides to every coin. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed
There are 2 sides to every coin. ;)

---

That's what you think. I have a coin here, want to place a bet on what lands?

lol, even if both sides of the coin are stamped exactly alike, the minute they touch your hands (the operator/administrator) either side begins to change. For every flip there are subtle differences in the surface as it hits a counter or the asphalt or toilet water. I take heads.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by gore
Don't say Linux has limitations because of your own.

The resources I gave, could be PAID FOR. That's right, just like you do with Windows, they could buy a BOOK. I know this may seem odd, but a book, is a device with paper in netween. You open it and there are words there!

---

No offence, but do you actualy read the stuff you reply to?

If one doesn't have an internet conection, one can not get any help for Linux.

If this is not a limitation, then what is it?

Windows on the other hand\has a very handy "help" option, stuck in the top line of every folder. One doesn't need internet for it to work. It is writen in simple enough language, and it's free

I never used SuSE, so I'm not speaking about it. :p

I like diging under the hood of the system, but only after I know that it already does what I want it to do. I don't want to dig under the hood just to get it to do the besic tasks.

when you will buy your first car, which car will you prefer, the one that can go over 200, but doesn't go at all untill you tweak the engine? Or will you prefer the one that does a 100, but goes straight away no problems encountered?

Quote:

---

If one doesn't have an internet conection, one can not get any help for Linux.

---

Before there is another round of head spitting, linux has a built in manual. try it.

type "man" or "man ?" and play.... of course you must be in a terminal shell.

That is alot of "help"

/EDIT Actually the best place to start is typing "man 1 intro"

Read it. Its a nica ah. In most cases you can man a command and get info. like say you have trouble with grep so you "man grep" and viola! Oh and ya typa "q" to quit man.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by idmismatch
EDIT: No, that's a little arrogant and bullshitty of me. I've used books for NT4 Server quite a bit, and referred to a number of howtos for all sorts of linux server bits. Like I'd work out how to set up samba/ldap on my own!

---

Don't appologize to me for arrogance, nothing wrong with that. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by nightcat
No offence, but do you actualy read the stuff you reply to?

If one doesn't have an internet conection, one can not get any help for Linux.

If this is not a limitation, then what is it?

Windows on the other hand\has a very handy "help" option, stuck in the top line of every folder. One doesn't need internet for it to work. It is writen in simple enough language, and it's free

I never used SuSE, so I'm not speaking about it. :p

I like diging under the hood of the system, but only after I know that it already does what I want it to do. I don't want to dig under the hood just to get it to do the besic tasks.

when you will buy your first car, which car will you prefer, the one that can go over 200, but doesn't go at all untill you tweak the engine? Or will you prefer the one that does a 100, but goes straight away no problems encountered?

---

One, as already pointed out all UNIX systems come with man pages which are thousands of manuals. Two, Linux has a strong point with the amount of Docs RIGHT ON THE CD YOU INSTALLED WITH.

Two, I'd thake the McLaren F1 that does 0 - 100 in 4 seconds and can go 240 MPH and requires no tweaking. Just like SUSE Linux.

Don't try that reverse **** on me talking about cars it doesn't work. I stand by what I use and yes I would in fact take the car that needs tweaking. I understand that speed and stability sometimes come at the price of ease of use. Like how a stick shift of any model of car would kick the **** out of the automatic version because you can control the RPMs.... Funny how I said RPMs, just like what Linux uses, and you can control them.



In other words:


If you don't like Linux then stick with your Pinto that blows up everytime you throw a bump or back door at it ;)

Well, if Pinto gets me from A to B, then yes, I'll stick to it. The speed limit is 70 here anyway :p

Just a question.

How many people will know that one can get to these "man" page through comand line?

I didn't.

At the moment I've got Linux in front of me on the second mashine.

I did what RoadClosed advised. The problem is, that to get the answer I migt be looking for, I have to read through the whole manual and most likely more. Do I want to waste my time on this? No, I don't. I've got other things to do and I've got only 4 hours left to sleep.

So, guys . For an average Joe, your advise is no good. He will stick to Pinto, same as me. Although, personaly, I prefer Honda Civic sedan or even better Jaguar X Type , with semi automatic gearbox.

Good night :)

Then why do you bother to continue this when you're to lazy to read? **** man no one cares that Linux might be odd to some jack ass who drools on the keyboard. And who know what the man command does? Anyone who's ever read that oh so huge user basics thing you were bitching about. 400 pages for basic users my ass. Recompiling the whole Kernel doesn't need more than 8 pages, and a home user would never do that.

Why not dump fedora and get Linspire, it's made for those who need their hand held when Fedora gets to hard.

You are right, you are not worth arguing with :) .

It's been told many times here, that nobody, I repeat NOBODY is trying to say which one of Linux or Windows is better. And you keep on trying to prove the point NOBODY here is arguing about.

When I started the thread I produced an "average user's point of view, as I saw it.

Let's agree, that neither of us is an "average" user, that's why we are willing to learn new things about computers. It is and is always going to be our job to provide "average users with the tools they need and want to have.

Unfortunately, so far Linux is falling well short of being a usefull tool for the "average" user. And no matter how many arguments you will try to produce to prove that it is a good OS, which it is, it still won't become any more useful.

What linux needs now, and slowly goes to, is a well thought through usability requirements and well designed user interface.

To give you an example:

I just signed a contract for a website. There is a team of 5 profecional designers working on the way the site should look and work, there's only 3 people coding it. And that's just a small website.

Linux is an OS, it requires much more work then a website. Windows has got thousands of people working on it, they are highly qualifyed profecionals, they can not get it all right.

Linux has got a bunch of volunteers, who are as good as people working for Microsoft, but care only about the functions of the OS, not how it is presented.

If the Linux goes the way it is, it'll get to the point of being usable in about 3 - 4 years. I am sure that will make my life more interesting :D .

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by gore
Then why do you bother to continue this when you're to lazy to read? **** man no one cares that Linux might be odd to some jack ass who drools on the keyboard. And who know what the man command does? Anyone who's ever read that oh so huge user basics thing you were bitching about. 400 pages for basic users my ass. Recompiling the whole Kernel doesn't need more than 8 pages, and a home user would never do that.

Why not dump fedora and get Linspire, it's made for those who need their hand held when Fedora gets to hard.

---

One more thing,

What was it that I said about Linux users friendliness :confused: :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed
Before there is another round of head spitting, linux has a built in manual. try it.

type "man" or "man ?" and play.... of course you must be in a terminal shell.

That is alot of "help"

/EDIT Actually the best place to start is typing "man 1 intro"

Read it. Its a nica ah. In most cases you can man a command and get info. like say you have trouble with grep so you "man grep" and viola! Oh and ya typa "q" to quit man.

---

Code:

---

# man tar
....
BUGS
      The GNU folks, in general, abhor man pages, and create info documents instead.
      The maintainer of tar falls into this category. This man page is neither complete,
      nor current, and was included in the Debian Linux packaging of tar entirely to
      reduce the frequency with which the lack of a man page gets reported as a bug
      in our defect tracking system.

      If you really want to understand tar, then you should run info and read the tar
      info pages, or use the info mode in emacs.

---

There's a better example (as man tar is actually quite helpful, despite that warning), but I don't recall which man page it is.

I use man a lot of the time, as I don't remember every command line option of every program I use. Many man pages are fantastic (like sudoers), but some aren't so much help. Windows help isn't always that much help, but it is often more solution based, rather than a reference guide. I think both systems work well for the environment, but I do have to use online help more for Linux than for Windows. Mind you, I use Linux more than I do Windows so that's not much of a revalation.

EDIT: Another example is man diff - just gives you a list of command line options. Doesn't actually tell you what to do with the results, what this < and > is all about, not the 29,30c29,30 **** is for. That's not help. I'm now waiting for somone to point out that only an idiot would have difficulty working out how to use the diff output... which would kind of prove my point...

Hang on, why am I arguing? Mr avarage user shouldn't need to be in the command line anyway, there's probably a decent graphical diff program out there anyway - and many KDE apps at least do have good help!

Sorry to make this post so long, but I've just come back from a long lunch where they screwed about with our booking and gave us free drinks....