I think I'm moving to Linux...

[Sky-Knight]

No sir, I used Rufus to put an Ubuntu ISO on a thumb drive, I installed the default desktop experience, logged in with the user account that was created during setup, opened the package manager, searched for and installed gCompris, opened the user manager, created an account for my three year old, logged out, logged in as him, searched for gCompris and dragged and dropped it onto his desktop.

Then I handed him the mouse and walked away.

I did end up hitting the command line later, because the wifi wasn't working and I had to force feed it a different driver. Linux doesn't really have a device manager, so... I'll concede that one.

 

[Kirby]

@Kirby: You're absolutely right that some things which we find intuitive in Windows are a little bit harder in Linux, but if you watch anyone using Windows for the first time you'll quickly see that "intuitive" just means "I've done this before". Once you've used Linux for a while it'll probably seem intuitive to you too.

Let's be honest, that's not a fair assessment. Linux is "a little bit harder" than Windows like a rock is "a little bit harder" than a sponge. And intuitive doesn't mean "I've done this before", it means "I can figure out how to do this because I've done similar tasks before". That means a more robust context menu. The vanilla Ubuntu context menu is pretty pathetic. I can't speak to other versions.

It seems that you're someone who would like to see more people use Linux. It would take 3 things to make that happen, realistically, and Linux people don't like either one.

First, drop the command line. It can still be there like the command line or PowerShell in Windows. But no serious programmer writes for them, at least not for anything a standard user would do. Everything has to be "doable" through the GUI. Everything. That means a more robust context menu, NOT a hundred little programs that do specific tasks.

Second, things need to be automated intelligently. When I connected a second drive to Ubuntu, I go into the file manager and there it is. I click on it, there are my files. That is automation, but it's bad automation. I didn't tell it to connect to the drive. It's actually mounting the drive when I click on it. Why? I didn't tell it to mount the drive and, alarmingly, there was no indication it was mounting the drive. But when I reboot, the drive isn't mounted until I go into the file manager and click on it again. "Managing files" and "mounting drives" are two very different things which should not be linked through the file manager. Why is that drive even showing up in the "file manager" if it's not yet mounted to show files? But more importantly than that, doing this taught me "This is how you mount a drive". But it's not. The drive isn't mounted after a reboot. You can't get to it again through, say, another program, until you've gone back into the file manager and mounted it again. So now I THINK I know something, but what I think isn't right. That is not the proper way to mount a drive.

This is the best example I can think of where the Linux programmers tried to make something simpler, but in doing so they actually added confusion; a second way to mount a drive, but one which only mounts it temporarily. And Linux is full of that. There are several ways to do multiple things and they don't all work the same. They need to. If it doesn't make sense for it to work the same for a particular case that probably means you shouldn't be doing it at all in that case. Devices should be cordoned off from files, each delegated to their own, specific section.

And that brings me to the third thing, and this one is a bitter pill to swallow for Linux people. Things need to be hidden from the user. "Device ST3100528AS" needs to be "C drive". A device which isn't a mounted drive should not show up in the file manager. The user should not see the device name in the file manager, they should see something simple. If it's not a mounted, partitioned, formatted drive they should see nothing at all in the file manager to indicate it's there. It's the "file manager", not the "device manager".

This is something which Windows has done very well in the past, but now has gone way too far on. Hiding things from the users is essential to simplifying the OS. Of course you should have access to all of the information, should you want it. But even that, at the highest level, should hide things. For example, my hard drive in the Device Manager in Windows shows only the model of the hard drive, not the specific mount point. I can right-click and get more information on the drive than what is shown by default. It should be a gradual evolution from simple information to the complex nitty gritty of what's under the hood. Things need to be hidden from the user unless the user goes looking for them.

And one fourth thing, which probably already exists in Linux but I don't know enough about it to be sure, some sort of control panel with every possible "under the hood" thing in it. A device manager as easy to read as the Windows device manager, for one. A simple list of installed programs with uninstall options for another. And maybe that's already there. I don't know. But it needs a simple, centralized place where you can go if you say "I don't know how to do this" and, for most tasks, you need to be able to find it there without a search.

But that's my 2 cents. Maybe I'm way off. But I certainly couldn't be any more wrong than the people who have been saying that Linux was ready for general use for 25 years now.

 

[Kirby]

No sir, I used Rufus to put an Ubuntu ISO on a thumb drive, I installed the default desktop experience, logged in with the user account that was created during setup, opened the package manager, searched for and installed gCompris, opened the user manager, created an account for my three year old, logged out, logged in as him, searched for gCompris and dragged and dropped it onto his desktop.

Then I handed him the mouse and walked away.

I did end up hitting the command line later, because the wifi wasn't working and I had to force feed it a different driver. Linux doesn't really have a device manager, so... I'll concede that one.

I believe, and forgive me, but I can't remember for sure, that the shortcut I wanted to create was for a web page. Specifically, I had installed a media server and its interface was web-based. So I needed a shortcut to something like http ://127.0.0.1ortNumber/SomePage. I was able to create it, and through a GUI (the one pictured in the first link you gave), but it took the command line to bring up that GUI. Which is a shame because it's a perfect GUI for doing what I wanted to do. There is no reason it shouldn't be in the context menu by default.

 

[Sky-Knight]

I hadn't tried it until just now, but on the left side of the address bar of every major browser, there's the favicon. If you click and drag that you can drop a shortcut to a website straight out of a web browser into a desktop. This works on all major platforms, including the Ubuntu station my critter uses.

And I'd never actually tried it before on Ubuntu, so I went in there and did it just to see.

I still think the suggestion to use Mint is a good one if someone is more familiar with Windows, the UI on that is somewhere between XP, Win10, and OSX in the way it works. It's such a strange thing... but it works.

 

[Kirby]

I hadn't tried it until just now, but on the left side of the address bar of every major browser, there's the favicon. If you click and drag that you can drop a shortcut to a website straight out of a web browser into a desktop. This works on all major platforms, including the Ubuntu station my critter uses.

And I'd never actually tried it before on Ubuntu, so I went in there and did it just to see.

I still think the suggestion to use Mint is a good one if someone is more familiar with Windows, the UI on that is somewhere between XP, Win10, and OSX in the way it works. It's such a strange thing... but it works.

And right there is the problem. This kind of shortcut uses these instructions, that kind of shortcut uses those instructions and the way to create any kind of shortcut uses the command line instructions. Even just from a support standpoint that's a nightmare. The lack of centralized planning really shows in Linux. There's no cohesion; no unification in how things are done. If there's a way to do it, good enough, never mind making it intuitive.

I chose Ubuntu at the time because it is currently the most popular flavor of Linux. I've never even heard of Mint.

You keep going back to this idea of familiarity, a mistake most "Linux people" make when trying to understand why someone doesn't like Linux. It has nothing to do with what I'm "familiar" with. You put a noob on Windows and say, "Here's the wifi password. Figure it out" and, while it may take a while, there's a little icon right there you can click on which automates the process. All the user has to do is find it, and it's RIGHT THERE. This is a "possible task". The user can just "figure it out". But you had to go to the command line to connect to your wifi. EVEN IF the user knew they had to use the command line there is no possible way they could "muddle through" connecting to the wifi with the command line. That is an "impossible task". The user CANNOT just "figure it out". Ever.

Familiarity is not the problem. I know you don't want to hear this, but usability is absolutely the problem. If there is ANY common task which requires the command line Linux is just not "usable" by the general populous because, once you need to open the command line, simply figuring it out on your own becomes absolutely impossible.

 

[Sky-Knight]

What right where is the problem?

Browsers have a bookmarking system, all of them work a little differently. Every last one of them has one GUI process in common for making a shortcut to a currently viewed page, drag and dropping that icon.

The process is identical on Windows, so once again you're ranting about a process that's identical on the platform you claim is "better".

Finally, fixing device drivers isn't a "common" problem for end users, that's why we get paid to fix things. OEMs solve that junk, normal end users do not install their own operating systems. This is the purview of the power user, the very few that are left. So knowing how to support the OS is something we're paid to do. How that support is delivered? You can make arguments on both sides of the GUI wall. But even Microsoft is starting to abandon the GUI on the servers. So you can either get comfortable with a command line, which oddly enough is where all this started, or you can get left behind. I cannot imagine managing my Server 2016 stuff without powershell. You know, the same shell that can also manage Azure and Office 365...

You are starting to sound like someone that never updated their GUI brain after Windows 2000 released. Somewhere along the line things just stopped making sense. As a result you're over thinking the nature of how the GUI on Ubuntu is designed. It's very similar to Windows 10 in some ways, and MacOS in others. And yes it is quite intuitive. It's just different, and it requires training to use it properly, just like Windows does. The only difference here is, everyone has to know how Windows works or they cannot do their jobs. So when you swap to another platform, things feel funny. And don't read that as an insult, because I made the exact same mistakes when I decided to make myself more familiar with these platforms to expand my knowledge of my craft. Along the way I actually learned enough about GUI design to have a 100% success rate deploying Windows 8.0, not 8.1... EIGHT POINT ZERO. You know that abortion of a GUI that everyone hated? Yeah... not my users. 8.1 and 10 are superior products obviously, and no one wants to go back... but I didn't have people raging because their machines didn't work either.

So if you want Linux that smells and feels like Windows, install Mint. That's what that entire OS's designed purpose is for, it's to be the Linux version of Windows. And it's derived from Ubuntu, which is derived from Debian, so it's really strong and stable stuff. Debian is everywhere, that OS is used for all sorts of things. Sadly, it doesn't get the OEM support that Red Hat does. But now we've wandered into the ecosystem, wherein Microsoft rules the roost! Which is why my desktop is Windows 10, because of that ecosystem.

 

[Kirby]

What right where is the problem?

Browsers have a bookmarking system, all of them work a little differently. Every last one of them has one GUI process in common for making a shortcut to a currently viewed page, drag and dropping that icon.

The process is identical on Windows, so once again you're ranting about a process that's identical on the platform you claim is "better".

And we were doing so well. I'm done. I'm not reading past the point where you get your feathers ruffled, yet again, and I really have no interest in an argument with an unreasonable person. You have a nice day.

 

[Sky-Knight]

And we were doing so well. I'm done. I'm not reading past the point where you get your feathers ruffled, yet again, and I really have no interest in an argument with an unreasonable person. You have a nice day.

Your loss, but from my perspective you're the one being unreasonable. I suspect you have a problem communicating clearly in a written format, a failing we share honestly.

Your example of expecting an end user to figure out how to join a wireless network is poor, because once again, there's an icon in the corner of the screen that performs the same function as the Windows GUI does. You click it, select the network you want, feed it the password, and off it goes.

I had to use the command line because the driver that was automatically installed didn't work with my card. (Ever had Windows update screw up a driver? Yeah, it happens) I had to install another driver. A driver by the way that wasn't provided by the hardware manufacturer, it was hacked together by the people maintaining the OS. NOW we're into the reasons Linux suck... You cannot just go get a working bit of software and double click it into a working condition. The only vendor out there I'm aware of that fully supports Linux is Intel, and even they often require you to compile drivers so they can work. No end user is ever going to do that. But interesting point... Microsoft doesn't have to do that either. They tell Intel to fix it, and Intel fixes it, or they don't... and when they don't we have Windows 10 feature update installing automatically that bricks stations. So it's not like Windows exists this nightmare smelling like a rose.

 

[Kirby]

Your loss, but from my perspective you're the one being unreasonable. I suspect you have a problem communicating clearly in a written format, a failing we share honestly.

Your example of expecting an end user to figure out how to join a wireless network is poor, because once again, there's an icon in the corner of the screen that performs the same function as the Windows GUI does. You click it, select the network you want, feed it the password, and off it goes.

I had to use the command line because the driver that was automatically installed didn't work with my card. (Ever had Windows update screw up a driver? Yeah, it happens) I had to install another driver. A driver by the way that wasn't provided by the hardware manufacturer, it was hacked together by the people maintaining the OS. NOW we're into the reasons Linux suck... You cannot just go get a working bit of software and double click it into a working condition. The only vendor out there I'm aware of that fully supports Linux is Intel, and even they often require you to compile drivers so they can work. No end user is ever going to do that. But interesting point... Microsoft doesn't have to do that either. They tell Intel to fix it, and Intel fixes it, or they don't... and when they don't we have Windows 10 feature update installing automatically that bricks stations. So it's not like Windows exists this nightmare smelling like a rose.

Blah, blah, blah, whatever fanboy.

 

[JoeTech]

 

[mike78]

Well, ok there goes my opinion on this warming topic....

First of all I am not a Linux, Windows, MacOS or <insert what you want here> fanboy. I'm just throwing some inner thoughts. Ther are tree great operating systems for sure.

I have been using Windows since version 3.1 (yeah that **** was cool haha) and I was a Debian testing user (mainly) for many years and sometimes I had to use a MAC to setting it up for someone else or do some things. I am mostly a software engineer these days but I still do a lot of technician work outside my software job. One thing I've learned by now in this profession is that we have to be platform agnostic. There is not a best OS or best Program or best programming language but the best tool for the specific job.

Also, if something exist and has its followers, is globally used and well maintained is for something (OK, all but FORTRAN LOL). Linux is a great Operating System which has improve A LOT over the years (the very first time I used It barely had a GUI and was very difficult to install (Debian was a pain years ago, even Torvalds said it). Nowadays most of the distros are incredibly easy to use and you can do all the basic/average things through a GUI (but you have the terminal way to do some really cool magic or even improve the efficiency of the basic tasks). Linux is in everything (your android, electronic devices, vehicles, the ISS, servers, TVs, planes...) and you don't have to use a shell in any of them (but is running in the background).

Nowadays, the arguments about the Linux kernel and the shell are not valid. In fact Windows and Linux kernels has a lot of in common since the 6.1 kernels (search for A tale of Two Kernels of Mark Russinovich). About drivers, if you use the right distro you are not gonna have problems in 95% percent of the cases. About software, you are gonna miss some apps (depends of your use). Yeah it is annoying at the beginning but you can do the change or use both: Windows for gaming and Linux for anything else!. Personally I only miss the Sysinternals tools from Windows (more monitoring tools of that quality), I miss Sumatra pdf reader and better benchmark tools for my hardware (especially graphics).

The thing is, Linux is a different OS so is normal if you are get use to something (especially Windows) to do the change (I've been there too) but I can guarantee you is quite easier than it looks, but you are gonna have to learn some things at the beginning at the time you meet some minor problems (what software does this?, how i do this in Linux?...). It's completely normal! It's been in a relationship with someone and then you flip the switch (or the girl, you get it?) and then start a new one with another different person (at the beginning you are gonna compare new with old one no matter what.

The very first thing to do if you are gonna do the switch, is to start for choosing the appropriate Linux distro (according to your knowledge) and the use you are gonna give it. Choose a distro with good support, great community, lots of documentation available for it, a great user database. You can always test it in a Virtual Machine before installing it in your production/day-to-day machine

For starters, I recommend this distros:

• Ubuntu LTS or anything based on it
  • Is the most user/company-friendly distro so it has lots of drivers and a very straight desktop. If you are gonna play, probably is the best distro for this very reason (a little bit better than Debian for this propose; without additional configuration I mean).
  • Ubuntu Mate is probably the best bet for a new Linux user. Actually, any distributions which uses Mate as its desktop is gonna be more user friendly.
    
  • ElementaryOS is based on Ubuntu LTS and inspired on MacOS's GUI. I didn't use it but it looks cool and the people like it
    
  • When you master it you can do the transition to Debian

And AVOID this ones (not beginner friendly at all):

• Arch (I love it: great community and wiki but is focused to build your own linux environment from the bare ground).
  
• Gentoo
• Slackware

PS. The future of Linux games looks very promising with Vulkan. I think we are gonna have some serious changes on the market in the years to come (more ports of Windows games).

 

[Kirby]

I didn't want to do this, but...

Hitler.

There. It's over.

LOL, you lose the Internet! Them's the rules!

 

[mikeroq]

nano is better than vim...and fight!

 

[Kirby]

...

I don't disagree with most of that except that Linux does have more problems than just "getting used to it". Unless someone sets it up for you and you never diverge from the original path on which you were set, you're going to need the command line. It is as inevitable as the sunrise. I don't hate Linux. I really don't. It infuriates me that it's not better after all this time and all these promises and yes, it is A WHOLE LOT better. And, I suppose, I have to get used to the fact that there is no single "solution" to a Linux problem as it depends on the flavor of Linux you're talking about. That's just the nature of the beast. But, the command line needs to die. For Linux to be a serious contender, that has to happen. It died in Windows years ago and guess what? You can still do scripting and BAT files and all the little geek stuff you used to do. That needs to happen in Linux before it is, for general purposes, "Usable".

To that point, people here keep mentioning that Android is Linux and it's popular. But think about that. What's different about Android that it's so popular? The command line is dead in it. It is all GUI. And it took off. Of course, when I'm talking about "Linux" I'm generally referring to the PC. Yes, Android is Linux, but not for my computer.

But as long as there are times when you absolutely need the command line, or for that matter, when Google searches are more likely to return command line than GUI answers, Linux will always be, for the general user, useless. Yes, you can train a monkey to search web pages on Linux, and if that's all you ever do, it's great. But that wouldn't be most users.

As for drivers and software, all that will come. If Linux picks up in popularity any issues with drivers and software availability will fix themselves. To me, that's not even an issue. It's something that will work itself out. That's not "the problem", it's just the icing on the cake of Linux problems.

At this point I think all it would really take is some minor tweaks and even I would have to agree, Linux IS ready for prime-time. It really is very close. Killing the command line, which would necessitate more intuitive context menus and the like, is just about all it would take.

 

[Kirby]

nano is better than vim...and fight!

Hey, my wife swore by her Zune. Not even the handful of money I showed her that I could have saved her on a superior product changed her mind. Because for some reason NONE of my family comes to me for computer advice. Literally none. They don't go anywhere else either. It's not that I'm a pariah or anything. They just buy Dells and HPs without even asking my opinion. Except mom. I take care of mom. Even my wife doesn't seek an opinion before purchasing. Not that she purchases PCs. They just show up at our house like magic and she never has to worry about them. It's the PC fairy.

 

[Sky-Knight]

Blah, blah, blah, whatever fanboy.

You guys hear that! I'm a fanboy because I have 1 working Ubuntu box in my house that my three year old uses! I've got well over 300 Windows stations in the wild kicking around, 20-30 Windows servers, most of them defended by an Untangle router (Debian).

And I haven't cracked a terminal open in any of my Linux boxes for over a year...

But I'm a fanboi! Yay!

Oh, and the command line on Windows? Yeah... it's the primary interface of the next server release. Have fun with that!

And Linux will never kill the command line, because the entire point of the OS is to be modular. Command line for what needs it, GUI for what needs that.

 

[Alexey]

OK, all but FORTRAN LOL

Don't you dare.

 

[GTP]

Ther are tree great operating systems for sure.

Four if you inlcude BSD...

 

[Sky-Knight]

BSD, because nothing saw raw computational power than I can recompile the ENTIRE OS, and support software with a single command!

Kidding aside, the BSD kernel's ability to just crush network packets through at near impossible speaks with almost no RAM has me really wishing more routers used it. Packet Filter eats IPTable's lunch...

 

[NJW]

I did end up hitting the command line later, because the wifi wasn't working and I had to force feed it a different driver. Linux doesn't really have a device manager, so... I'll concede that one.

Ubuntu 'Additional Drivers' or Mint 'Driver Manager'. Distro specific, I know (but we were talking Ubuntu), so I think you conceded unnecessarily.