Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:07:59 05/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 20, 2002 at 15:41:08, Guido Schimmels wrote:
>On May 19, 2002 at 11:49:18, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>BTW I'm trying Linux too, but I can't get used to it. I thought it was small and
>>elegant, but actually it is as bloated as Windows and quite slower.
>
>Try WindowMaker or XFCE (which I prefer) as a desktop environment.
>You can boot in both of them with <30MB total memory usage, which
>isn't too much nowadays.
>Then try ROX-Filer as a file-manager and prefer gtk/gnome based apps.
>Problem is, I admit, there is no real alternative to Star Office/OpenOffice
>and Mozilla/Netscape/Galeon, which means you still won't get very far with
>64MB, if you want to do professional text-processing and painless web-browsing.
>
>>And too hard to use. The guys who write programs for Linux only have the
>>experienced users in mind. Fatal mistake.
>
>Maybe that's still true for too many open source projects, but
>in general this is no longer true. Example:
>GNOME 2 will add lots of support for disabled people.
>
>>Shit. I really hoped to get rid of Windows, but Linux is still not ready.
>
>Ok, Linux is not perfect in respect to ease of use, like MacOS(X), but not
>much behind Windows I find. And some things are now even easier in Linux
>than Windows.
>
>Real issues are:
>1. The latest or exotic hardware will often not work with Linux - and that won't
>change until Linux is mainstream.
>2. Lack of apps in some fields
>3. Proprietary data-formats, like btw. Acrobat Reader 5 for Linux and Solaris
>has just been announced, one year after the Windows and Mac ports. Again, won't
>change until Linux is mainstream.
>
>> Christophe
>
>I'd like to ask, what exactly you found so hard or didn't get working in Linux ?
Ok a lot of things are still solved in a big nerd way in linux.
Let's give some examples.
I'm using linux since its first version, nowadays i boot it nearly
every day. Recently i installed redhat 7.2. Compared to the early 90s
it's working very well. I used to use linux in the early 90s only
in textmode. Never got X to work in these days.
Problems a normal user will have with linux:
- soundcard doesn't install by default, not all
soundcards are default in kernel. I happen to have a soundcard
which by accident gets supported now, because it is an expensive
soundcard. But most $10 to $20 soundcards do not get supported that
easily. Then if it works the next problem is: HOW do you run your
MP3s which are on the NTFS partition?
- NTFS partitions do not get recognized. Someone who installs linux
in 2002 is very likely to have more than 1 OS under linux. Default
kernel of redhat doesn't have NTFS. Most kernels do not have NTFS
support by default, which is pretty idiotic as it is the default
partitioning format from win2000/XP and a very GOOD file system format
which both Linux and windows should be able to use. Note that linux
is doing a read only on NTFS if you compile it in the kernel.
Compiling the kernel??????? Do you really think a normal user can
compile a kernel? Though i happily compile kernels. Normal users can
not. So default kernel MUST have all compatibility inside
- getting files from and to a floppy drive.
In windows you click on 'my computer' then on the floppy drive. In
linux it is NOT so easy to transfer files from and to floppy
- getting files from a CDrom. Default the cd drives aren't automounted.
Note it is good the cddrives are installed. I remember a time that
you had to compile in ISO9660 or whatever the protocol from normal
cdroms.
- network (interface) cards do not work. Especially the cheapest
NICs do not work by default. In fact RH7.2 isn't recognizing my
NIC. It's a cheap $12 card, which is produced in such quantities
(zillions) that it is pathetic that it works in all OSes by default,
except linux. Of course i know how to recompile the kernel and i know
how to figure out which network card it is. I already did this before,
but the average user?????????????????? How the HELL do they find out
which network card they have? Answer: never.
- Scanner. Could *anyone* tell me how to get to work my HP scanner under
linux? I do not know it at all. I would appreciate if someone knew.
So after nearly 10 years of experience with linux, i still don't know
how to get a scanner to work!
- capitals versus lower case. This is IMHO the biggest mistake in the
unix world, which Bill didn't make. Linux sees a difference between
Linux and linux. It is called linux, not Linux. Because linux sees
a difference between lower case and capitals. So please spell it as
linux. Not as Linux...
- knowing 1000s of commands. I know several thousands of commands under
linux, but i'm not a holy man. In fact i'm a poor idiot when we talk
about linux, because i keep forgetting even how to compile the kernel,
as i don't do it daily. Is it make xconfig; make dep; make modules;
make; make install, or did i forget something or is the order not
correct?
- i regurarly rename files to other files and the 'mv' command AFAIK
only can move 1 file at a time only. It's sick. Even DOS is better here!
'rename a?.* b?.*' works great there. Try this within 1 command
in linux!
- default prompt at all distributions sucks. To get technical:
I want
PS1="\$PWD/> "
- yesterday when installing a program i got 4 errors which prevented it
from getting installed: "missing blabla.so.4"
Even as a freaking nerd i don't know how to find out which RPM is
having this file. Yes, with some help i managed to list all files
in my RPMs at the RH7.2 cdroms, but it simply wasn't there. So i
need a file which is
in some for me unknown RPM, but god knows how to find it. This program
needs it though!
- Now i talk about Redhat of course, but compared to redhat other
distributions with exception perhaps of Debian (Suse doesn't count
as you can't download that for free, i need to BUY it in a shop
in order to get a legal working copy), they suck ass anyway, but
there are major problems with the size it needs.
When i install win2000 i wonder why it is so big, but Redhat7.2
default install even needs more from my harddisk and it even complains
my swap size isn't big enough.
If you have 512MB ram, already the swapsize gets a seperated partition
which directly is thrown away and eats up 1 Gigabyte. Then another 2
gigabyte for install of redhat. That's 3 gigabyte together!
That's pretty much for a free system from which i at most use a few
command line commands.
Of course i install X-windows too. Only idiots
nowadays do not install it. That's like getting back to DOS!
- easy installing applications. In windows you click on the application
in your email box and DANG it installs, or 'install from location'
when downloading it from homepage. DANG installed the program.
Not in linux... ...difficult command line commands you need in order
to install a program.
If i get a new program on a cdrom all i want to do is put in the cdrom
then it must autostart something which asks to install itself!
Other ideas about how software must install itself for the average
user is complete nonsense. The average user is still getting overestimated
by current distribution makers, and we have to say it, they already
DID a great job. Compared to the mess of installing packages and stuff
yourself by difficult command line, what they did so far is arleady a
good job, but it simply is in no way good enough yet for the average
user...
What the average linux-nerd is forgetting is that basically normal users
buy software. If those can't work with the software, then forget commercial
linux plans.
Just a few points where average users will fall over... ...if the above
points aren't adressed (and another few) then not a single normal sane
user should get a try at linux.
>Guido
>e-mail: guido.schimmels@freenet.de
This page took 0.06 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.