Is Linux Its Own Worst Enemy?

26

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Trooper_One

I you want to learn the Linux environment, Ubuntu is a good start.  I come from DOS/Windows 3.1 background and thought I might try my hands on it.  As friendly as it is, there's still a lot to learn in Ubuntu.  For now, I still do most of my work/gaming on Windows XP/Vista/7.  I only use Ubunu when I'm bored or if all my comp is being screwy and I need to log on immediately.

avatar

Jox

I (successfully) installed Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex on a seperate partition of my main machine.  Install wasn't too hard (though ensuring I"d selected the correct HDD to install to was tricky), and everything ran smoothly.  I was browsing the web in no time and playing around with some of the programs that came with the distro.  I would still be using it today were it not for 3 things:

1)  No sound.  My Soundblaster Xtreme Gamer card had no Linux drivers (at the time, at least).

2)  Gaming in Linux is dodgy.  WINE works with many games, but many more simply do not function.

3)  Shortly after installation, a popup window  asked if I'd like to run an auto-update to patch my system.  I figured "updates are good" and clicked ok.  All the downloads were completed and I restarted (as instructed) and the system would not boot.  Auto-update bricked my install.

I was a DOS user back in the day, and a windows user today.  I'd LIKE to be a Linux user, but the number of hoops I have to jump through to play games on it, plus sketchy driver support plus the general difficulty involved in learning a new OS means I'll stick with windows for now.

-Jox

avatar

Edwincnelson

I do a lot of things with my rig, and I would do them all with linux if I could, but until linux can run games without WINE or a similar workaround I can't switch. Any OS has its flaws, and as long as my computers are all windows at least I only have to identify and troubleshoot one OS's flaws. However, with some boxes running Linux and some running Windows I have two unique sets of machines to maintain, with very little gained for the inconvenience.

People that game upgrade their rigs yearly and spend hundreds of millions of dollars doing it. Give them a few reasons to switch to linux (lower OS demand on system resources is a good start) and I think you would have something.  

avatar

mattman059

just a thought...run both lol...im running win7 pro on my main gaming machine and Mandriva Linux on my programming, development box

avatar

gendoikari1

I put Linux on my parents' laptop, and they liked it better than XP. They liked the fact that it was free (even though my father is vehemently against the free software movement for reasons unknown), and that it runs faster than XP on the paltry 1.6 GHz Pentium DC and 512 MB RAM. I liked the community support aspect (Ubuntu Forums>some random Indian dude), and, contrary to the CW article, they were not dicks. And besides, who really cares what Richard Stallman thinks?

avatar

JohnP

 See, this point like other Linux myths always crop up. Yes, Linux will work fine AS LONG AS you stay in its sweet spot of Email, browsers, and some common apps like word processing. Using Linux at work or home when you need it to do a lot of apps that are not supported or have a bunch of devices not recognized really sucks. Simple users, common tasks, one major app= Linux. Complex operations, lots of devices, easy gaming= Windows.

avatar

gendoikari1

Gaming on it in XP was impossible anyway (Mobile Intel 915GML, anyone?)

avatar

dag1992

Exactly, most people you find out there will help you with your respective problems, especially if you use the official forums and such.  Even so, some are very overzealous when it comes to Linux being their turf.  Sure openSUSE and Mandriva are installed on a couple of my pcs, but they sure as heck won't be my main OS anytime soon.

 

avatar

w2ed

You have Overzealous idiots all over the computing spectrum - Some are Mac Zealots, some are Linux Zealots, but there's a lot of Windows Zealots too.  You shouldn't dislike something because of what a few die-hard idiots think.

avatar

foamcup

The 'Linux shortcomings' meme has been around for over a decade and it always points to the same 'shortcomings.'  You'd think that would hint at something.

 

Yeah, it hints that there are problems that need to be fixed if Linux desktop is to be viewed as an alternative to Windows or OS X.  It's obviously not though, so why do people keep pushing it as if it is?  I've spent enough time with desktop distributions to know that they are not worth my time or consideration, or anyone's for that matter, unless you get off on compiling drivers from source.  Even the commercial ventures know this, that's why they only push the servers.  I love my Linux server box, but I'll never touch a desktop distro again.

avatar

Modred189

There is ONE thing that keeps me from using Linux on any of my non-gaming machines: The command line.

The day that I can install a wireless driver without accessing the cli is the day I switch.

It's almost 2010 after all, it's about time to move to a truly GUI. 

avatar

willsmith

For what it's worth, I haven't installed a Wi-Fi driver using a command line in years, when using Ubuntu. Most wireless cards work out of the box, and the ones that don't can be enabled using a control panel applet.

avatar

mattman059

Ubuntu is notorious for not workign with broadcom wireless adapters, and it would not work with my Linksys WUSB300N adapter either..Mandriva however installed it during setup.

as for the CLI issue...it's called NDIS-GTK. 

avatar

Who

Agreed that it's no good for mainstream users.  CLI is not intuitive or user friendly at all.  They are getting better, though.  I actually haven't had to use CLI at all for Karmic.  I don't think it's really a problem anymore, unless something goes terribly wrong with your system.  I'm not hating on CLI btw, I need to know it for my job and it makes a lot of things easier and faster.  :) It's just not ideal for the average user

avatar

1337Goose

The CLI naturally lends itself to simplicity and although it requires more effort up front from the user, it really helps the developer. 

When I first installed Ubuntu, I must have killed my install six times before I got something stable and workable. The average user doesn't have the time or patience to reinstall his/her OS six times within the span of a week.  

~Goose

avatar

Who

Also I don't see any advantages of windows for anything other than popular application support.  I like the customizability in linux waaaay more. Mostly my windows machine is just for gaming.

avatar

Jipstyle

There are two things that I dislike about that article.

First, we read it roughly every twelve months.  The 'Linux shortcomings' meme has been around for over a decade and it always points to the same 'shortcomings.'  You'd think that would hint at something.

 Second, it demonstrates an astounding ignorance of the linux community.  This is made more obvious by the fact that the author missed (again) the hint mentioned above.

 Linux is not a for-profit project.  Things like marketing are completely irrelevant to the linux community.  It is relevant to those who are attempting to monetize the project, however, and this type of article should be aimed specifically at those companies.  Tarring 'linux' with the same brush makes as much sense as criticizing the entire Microsoft development staff for the outrage that is the Office 2007 ribbon UI.

Linux is not interested in making a single product.  Criticizing 'linux' because there are multiple projects working on similar tools ignores the point of an open-source project.  Yes, it would be more efficient if all of the volunteer developers working on GUIs chose KDE or Gnome rather than splitting their time between them.  However, the point of these projects is not to release a product to market in a timely fashion in order to capitalize on their work.  The point of these projects is for developers to work on a project that they enjoy and to product the product that they want.

 In the professional world, we (developers) are told what to create and how.  In our volunteer time, we'd rather make those decisions ourselves.  That is one of the main reasons we enjoy open-source projects.  Criticising us for our choices is childish and ignores (again) the purpose of open-source:  if you don't like something, go home and improve it or write your own code.

 Linux isn't shooting itself in the foot anymore than I did when I was 8 and decided to paint my model airplanes the 'wrong' colour.  My project, my hobby, my choices.  If you don't it, feel free to create your own.  

 If there isn't a paycheque with your signature on the bottom, feel free to keep derogatory opinions to yourself.  Change requests will be dealt with in an 'as interested' basis.  Thank you. 

 

avatar

nightkiller

That any comments made by individuals [pleading] to give Linux a chance on the desktop as a replacement for desktop operating systems do not have your support because, as you admit, it is a hobbyist enterprise and could not rightly be viewed as a general purpose operating environment. Only those who have the knowledge, the time to spare and the will to follow through to completion should offer to help.

 

You choose a flightless bird as a mascot and wonder why it doesn't take off?

avatar

JohnP

 I have spent years learning UNIX at work and a have fooled around with Linux over the years. Yet I am always using Windows on my computers. Why, because it just works. Nothing more frustrating than to have an app or device that I like that will not run or takes forever to tweak. I do not care WHAT Op Sys I run, as long as it has the ability to do what I ask of it. An alternative op sys has to be practical, easy to use, and have drivers for my stuff, not faster or use less memory. I too love Win7!

avatar

laynlow200

+ 1

I couldn't have said it anybetter

avatar

DOOMHAMMA

Such rabid fanboyism. Sure your points are true to all Linux users. But the criticism still rings true from a public, mass-use viewpoint. Linux isn't going anywhere or ever going to gain mass appeal, and they listed why. Thank you for the long, and irrelevant rant.

avatar

comptech08

Linux is going somewhere.  It has gained mass appeal.  Over the past few years it has slowly gained some popularity.  Linux is not being developed to gain huge mass appeal and become a cash cow like closed source OS' are.  Jipstyle's comment was true not a rant.

avatar

snapple00

Where would it be going then?

 

Last time I tried desktop linux, it was still just a copy of windows. I tried upgrading to firefox 3.5 from the central 'package manager' and it installed something that had a completely different name than firefox. So i tried to download it from the firefox website, but their version wasn't for my version of linux.

It seems like its still just an operating system for geeks, trying to make it look and function like Windows as much as possible.

avatar

DOOMHAMMA

It doesn't even have 10% of the market. How is that mass appeal?

avatar

Modred189

It doesn't even have 1%!

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.