Greg's Head - Linux Distributions

• Why does my choice of distribution determine my hardware compatibility?

          It doesn't though it may make detecting your specific hardware easier because diffrent drivers come with diffrent distributions.

• Why do I have to download 5 CD's if the install only uses 2?

          That really depends on what distribution you use and depending on how much packages of the 5 CD distribution you install you could very well use all 5 cds.

• Why are there so many distributions that are seemingly identical except for the logo?

          Because there are only a few magor desktop enviroments that are used (Mainly GNOME and KDE) and their can be quite a diffrenence among the distros. For example on Redhat based distros you go yum install <package name> for Debian based ones its apt-get install <package name> and while that looks similair they are quit diffrent.

• Why do I have to burn a CD at all? It is possible to install an OS without a CD. Physical media is so 1990.

          How do you install Windows? With a CD. Though if you want to you can install it over a network just like Windows.

• If you type "Install Linux" into Google. The first 20 or so pages are unhelpful and likely to scare users away. Compare this to the results when you type "Install Firefox" into Google.

          Thats because there are a bunch of diffrent Linux distributions varying from hard ones to install like Gentoo to simple ones like Ubuntu. There is only one firefox. Try searching for install <insert distro> instead.

• Why do I have to choose between so many platform choices? AXP, SPARC, PPC, etc. The server can tell I'm running IE 6 on Windows XP. Just give me the obvious choice.

          Because some people are using a x86 when they are downloading the ISO but are going to install it on a SPARC or PPC. What your saying sounds like a good idea but it could be a pain to other people.

• Most sites assume I know what a Torrent is. Several clicks estimate 2 days to download the 3gb download using Torrent. Very few tell me where I can get torrent software.

        Valid point.         

• I have yet to see a distribution that packages up my email settings, IM settings, browser settings and hardware configuration to ensure that my transition to Linux is smooth from Windows.

          Not quite sure what you mean by that.

• Several installations kick me into a login screen with no user name and password. I'm supposed to know that the password is 'root'. I guess I didn't get the memo.

          Well distributions vary in how they handle this. Yes that is one problem with Linux, the diffrence in distributions. But once you learn your way around one distribution using (Or setting up)  any other one should be a snap.

• Most distributions don't separate the idea of software and platform. This is really surprising since many people in the Linux community came down hard on Microsoft for bundling IE and Media Player. Many distributions bundle everything. I haven't decided if this is a good or a bad thing.

          Ok.

• The Linux software world seems to be 'free.' While this is great for the end user who likes free things it's hard to convince developers to write software for a platform where the users have an expectation of everything being free. I haven't found any obvious Linux shareware sites or resources for Linux sharware authors.

          I don't agree. Their are alot of commercial packages for Linux (I don't know about shareware things.), UT2004, Maya, Slickedit, etc.

• Why isn't WINE part of most distributions? This seems like an obviously useful tool that would ease migration and provide specialized applications that aren't found on Linux.

          Because diffrent distributions have diffrent philosophies and include diffrent things.

• Overall many applications feel rough and un-polished. This may be partly because I'm not used to them but OpenOffice, Gimp, Gaim and others don't feel like refined polished applications. In the words of Tyler Dyrden ... Everything is a copy of a copy of a copy. The applications just look dull, muted and faded. There is no 'new car smell.'

       I don't think GIMP and Open Office are as good as photo shop and MS Office but they are coming along (I like gaim...). I think there are alot of tools that are polished though, GCC, GNOME, Firefox, and much more.

• Multiple desktops - A nice concept but should probably be turned off by default. It's too easy to loose your stuff and not know where to find it again.

          Personaly preference, I can't live without multiple desktops.

• Accessibility is really bad. I can't believe that the windows keyboard button doesn't open the primary application menu in either KDE or Gnome by default. This was really surprising. I assume that most advanced computers users are far more productive with a keyboard then with a mouse. In windows I have keyboard shortcuts, tab, ctrl+tab, shift+tab for every single feature. In Linux I can't even launch an application. This button is printed on every keyboard so even though it has a picture of a windows flag there is no reason not to use it. (Draw a little penguine in white-out if it makes you feel better.)

          GNOME and Linux have diffrent keyboard shortcuts then Windows because they are NOT WINDOWS. Same thing with Mac.

• Both KDE and Gnome seem similar enough on the surface to warrant a unification effort. Each has it's pros and cons but since both offer a fair amount of customization the idea of having both and encouraging users to choose seems misguided.

          To bad KDE and GNOME vary alot on beliefs. GNOME are die hard FSF guys and KDE are more pragmatic, GNOME was started becayse KDE was using QT and the FSF guys didn't like it.

• I couldn't figure out the namespace. It seems that in some builds my CD rom is in one location and in others it's in a totally different place. There's no global 'network browser' but in some areas I can get to a network folder list. Weird. What's even stranger is that the guts of the OS are there to see in all their glory. /bin /etc /mnt. This is about as bad as C:\ System32 documents and settings. I understand these files need to be somewhere but most users shouldn't ever see them. That pesky 'soft barricade' screen in windows that says you shouldn't mess with certain folders actually helps keep beginers out of trouble. On Linux it's the wild west and if you screw something up, good luck.

          I think the user should be expected to know how his system works and should have access to everything he can. This isn't windows and if you want to use windows use windows.









Im home sick and very bored.

Bottom line, he sounds like he wan'ts a free version of Windows and not a diffrent OS. Why doesn't he just use Windows?!?!
I also thinks comparisons about Linux and Windows shouldn't exist they should be more along the line of
Debian VS Windos, Fedora VS Windows, <insert distro name> VS Windows. Because while the kernel is a big part of the OS his complaints arn't about the Kernel, they seem to be about a lot of the way the distros he is using are set up.

Michael Griffiths wrote:

Explaining what he can do to FIX the problems he's having is not helpful.

It isn't?

Michael Griffiths wrote:

If Linux is ever to become a "Desktop" OS, and not simply a Server OS, than some things need to change.
[quote]
It's my desktop OS and it's alot of other peoples desktop OS. If it is to become more popular then yeah some things have to change but I don't care if it becomes more popular or not, just as long as it works for the intended audience.

[quote user="Michael Griffiths"]
Criticizing people who critique Linux - particularly if what they have already written proves they are not anti-Linux - is deeply twisted behavior.

Didn't read that article, I only read the one that was linked to in the beginning.

Michael Griffiths wrote:

IRenderable wrote:I think the user should be expected to know how his system works and should have access to everything he can. This isn't windows and if you want to use windows use windows.

... and that attitude why Linux will never challenge Windows/Mac OSX on the desktop.

For the people who do use Linux they think it challenges Windows and won for them, thats why they are using it. Not everyone thinks that everyone should use Linux or Mac. I really don't care what people use, just as long as they use something that works.

Why won't that challenge Windows and Mac anyways? For people that want a Unix like desktop it will. Yes things can get better and yes things can get polished for Linux distros but he wants things Linux to behave in ways that Windows behaves in instead of the way Linux behaves in, for example:

"That pesky 'soft barricade' screen in windows that says you shouldn't mess with certain folders actually helps keep beginers out of trouble"

Michael Griffiths wrote:

Which is why ignoring context leads to pointless comments.

Looking at his previous article, his position becomes obvious.

I was trying to refute ONE article of his. Because I got linked to one article on his blog you think I should read every single article on his blog? Sorry but no. Though now that I have read that article I understand more where he is coming from.

You don't need an faq to install most versions of linux. The install process is guided. Unless you went and installed Linux from scratch, in that case you should have ordered the book first.

Have you ever done that before? It looks fun I am thinking of trying it out.