Posts in by tag
Recent Poll's
User login
Navigation
Recent Comments
Syndicate
Why Linux sucks----and the opportunity it presents.
Sat, 06/13/2009 - 13:41 — linuxchallenger
I have not tried Linux as yet. I, however, did research in order to decide which distribution to try, but seem to the destined to be the Linux user all Linux experts dread. I have an old desktop with 256MB RAM with Windows XP, ATI graphics card, use Iburst to get onto the internet and a Canon printer. From what I have read so far in forums, I am going to have difficulty to get each of these to work.
I also like trying out new software to do things, and use Flash heavily to play chess and watch Yahoo music videos. There are problems here too...
When asking for help I found there is no organized list that gives the main features of each of the most popular distributions in table form. For a good example of this, I like what http://www.toptenreviews.com did to compare browsers.
I also found as stated in previous posts that you have to install software from a pre-made repository, not directly off the internet as in Windows and that Openoffice cannot do certain things that Windows Office can, such as have an equivalent to Microsoft Access.
What I do not understand is why the Linux experts on the forums become impatient and tell you to use command line or compile from source to solve problems. They also get irritated if you point out how certain applications are deficient compared to their Windows counterparts.
My other gripe is: there are several extremely smart and computer savvy people involved in Linux, both amateur Linux users who are virtual programmers and professional programmers. All these problems other people mention, should to my mind be seen as opportunities to design new software applications that equals or surpasses Windows. Why do several of these individuals not rise to this challenge? Also why not develop an installer that lets you install predetermined programs, but also gives you an easy way to download and install software directly from the net? To my mind, this is the key reason why game and software developers are not creating stuff for Linux.
I'm just making a very quick
I'm just making a very quick comment here as my time is limited today.
I wrote a longer post a couple weeks ago on basic thoughts and philosophy, if you are interested.
It covers a number of the things you addressed.
http://www.whylinuxsucks.org/i039ve-watched-gnulinux-remain-perpectually...
The main thing that I wanted to comment on is that, with your older desktop, you definitely will want to go with one of the more streamlined GNU/Linux distributions. The tendency with new GNU/Linux users is to install the kitchen sink with distributions such as openSUSE, Fedora, etc.
Ubuntu does a base install, leaving you with the option to do guided live repository application installs once you are up and running. It is a great model that "makes sense", but read my posting about some of thoughts on Ubuntu. Regardless, I still would recommend Ubuntu for you as a new user, however having only 256MB of RAM is going to be an issue. Expect your swap partition to be constantly grinding. If you want to still give Ubuntu a shot, get more RAM. RAM is dirt cheap these days, especially for your older desktop. You didn't give your hardware specs, but I'm sure you can find RAM for it dirt cheap on Ebay. Max it out.
Until then, you should check out the streamlined GNU/Linux distributions. There are more streamlined GNU/Linux distributions out there than one person can keep track off. http://distrowatch.com ,(even though I find them biased), if you aren't aleady using it, will guide you along. If you just want to "play" for now, perhaps something like Puppy GNU/Linux (its runs entirely in 64MB RAM) would be something to consider. As for installed streamliners, I'm a "slacker" (Slackware), so I've used Absolute GNU/Linux (based off Slack) on older computers before with great success, but I'll leave it up to you to find something that fits your taste.
Have fun. Don't get frustrated. Remember, you didn't learn MSDOS, Windows, etc, in a day either.
Puppy is a good distro, but
Puppy is a good distro, but I must recommend against just 'playing' with a distro. I don't know how you 'play' with it, as you just really want to run the apps and use the hardware you want to use, right?
The problem is, each distro is subtly different, so you can get used to one, then have to re-learn quite a few things moving to another. I've made a point not to switch distros, as I can't be bothered having to learn again. I've tried a few others to see what the fuss is, like Vector Linux, and frankly, you become a beginner all over again. It's a real PITA.
I recommend that sticking to a distro is more important than choosing the right one. The 'choosing' experience is more of a detriment than a benefit.
Linux evangelists do themselves no favours in expounding the virtues of choice. Far better to prescribe one distro which will be good for the user for years, and tell the user to become acquainted with it.
The other problem is, that slimlined distros lower the available software to you, especially software that isn't packed for your particular distro.
Windows users have the option if simply continuing to use Win2000 or XP, which runs on old hardware, without sacrificing much.
I have to pipe in here,
I have to pipe in here, because Linuxchallenger's conclusions are just wrong. As a long time user of Ubuntu, Linux Mint and Windows (98,2000 and XP) I can say that I have done my share of comparisons. I dual boot XP and Ubuntu on my desktop, and use Mint on my laptop.
1. As you said, you haven't even tried any kind of Linux, so all of your opinions are based on the opinions of other people. How do you know they are right? Try for yourself.
2. Next, it seems that you are comparing Linux to Windows, which is in error. Linux is not an operating system. There are countless distributions of Linux -- over a hundred -- and all are different. A handful of the Linux distros are popular, but that is still a handful versus one OS called Windows. What you are doing is comparing all vegetables to one type of fruit...that you only heard about.
3. Next, you mentioned the repositories as if they were a bad thing, and that Windows can just download programs off the net.
What? All of my major Windows based programs have to loaded in by disc. Including the bloody Office XP, Norton, my DVD player, drivers, internet drivers, etc. etc. That blows. I hate wasting my time with installing all this crap. In Ubuntu, Open Office is just THERE. I don't do anything. It is free and works like a champ. If I need to buy Office XP?!?! Holy crap I just lost how much money? In Osaka, it costs $500, and I am not kidding. ANY of the programs I use in Ubuntu are free -- not pirated free, legally free -- and in the repos (repositories) waiting for me. Except Skype, which I go online to get...just like in Windows.What is convenient about going online to a website to get a program, when I am in the repos already, downloading everything I will need? Nothing convenient there at all.
In Ubuntu I am hooked up to the Net right away, without doing a thing. In XP, I need to install the drivers first, then go through a ruthless install with my ISP disc, etc. No comparison.
Windows comes pre-loaded with a load of stuff that I do not need, or will ever use. It is excessively heavy and sucks up space on my computer. When I reinstall both systems, it takes half a day to get XP in there when I consider the time it takes to load in all those program discs. Ubuntu takes me 20min. to install and more than half of my programs come pre-installed and ready to rock.
Part of the great thing about the brands of Linux which I use -- Ubuntu mainly is that it comes with only the basics. Programs that almost everyone uses, not the ones that half the people want. Mint, comes with a little bit more because it comes installed with propriety codecs.
Codecs...that reminds me. You were talking about Flash. When you first installed Windows and went to a site that uses Flash, you were prompted to install Flashplayer, or whatever. Same thing in Ubuntu. Firefox helps install the proper files. I use Flash all the time. No grief.
"What I do not understand is why the Linux experts on the forums become impatient and tell you to use command line or compile from source to solve problems. They also get irritated if you point out how certain applications are deficient compared to their Windows counterparts."
1. There are only some experts on the forums, more of us are just users.
2. It is not impatient to tell you to use the terminal. If you think about it, many of the Linux users were using Linux when there was ONLY the command line. If one knows how to use it, it is exceptionally faster than using anything else. Sometimes people wonder "why wouldn't you use the command line?" and you might think "why would I?" For them, the command line it easier. I don't think that equals "impatient".
3. Of COURSE people are irritated when you compare to Windows. Go up to a guy who has been riding a motorcycle for the past 10 years, and tell him how deficient it is and unsafe compared to your old car. You will get a confused response.
Linux was not built to replace Windows. Ubuntu is here because people like computers, and people like me, are sick of paying for programs and systems when there are other options available that are just as good, for FREE.
I could go on and on, but I am tired of typing. So, you can try a distro of Linux if you want or not. But formulating opinions about what you have not tried is pretty ignorant.
I enjoy Ubuntu Hardy Heron, and Mint "Gloria". All you have to remember is, when you started in Windows you had no idea what a "install Wizard" was, or what a "Start" button was for. You won't know anything about your Linux distro, but you will learn if you just put some effort into it.
Motorhead Kaze
Don't know abot iBurst, it
Don't know abot iBurst, it might work, might not. Seems there are drivers out there though.
As for the Canon printer, depends on what type. I've successfully used a colour canon printer before under Linux and it worked OK without any hassle. There are a heap of printer drivers built in, so it was just a case of selecting the right printer model. Your mileage may vary.
Flash. I use Firefox with the Adobe Flash plugin and it works. I think a lot of Linux users don't use the Adobe one because its 'non free', or just have an aversion to flash or this software so either don't use flash, or use a different 'free', but incomplete driver. Seems to work fine for me, there might be cases where it doesn't work, but I haven't come across them yet. Youtube & Facebook work, but thats all I really use it for.
You're right however, about there being no clear way to differentiate between the distros. Probably because often the differences are subtle and largely pointless. It makes choosing hard, and really the only way is to try it for yourself. The live distros don't give you a good idea, because they run SOOO slow and dont give you an indication as to how fast they run when installed. In the end, all you can do is choose the one the works the best, ie, supports your hardware.
Lastly, you dont HAVE to install from the repositories. The repositories are just a way of trying to overcome, or hide the issue there is binary incompatibility. The problem is that if you install software outside of the respository, you will have different levels of success. For instance, Google Earth will install fine and so will Firefox or OpenOffice, but other software may not be so easy. If you are using a DEB system, what about RPM's, or vice versa? and if you want a newer version than what in the repository, you may have dependancy issues, or have to compile from source.