Arch Linux

Romashka

Forum Fellow

Registered: 2005-12-07

Posts: 1,054

Re: Linux is not ready for the desktop - Mandriva devs

Sure many things work on Linux as they do on Windows, but without any hassle is another story. Open-source drivers don't holdup near as well as closed-source. From ALSA mixing (oh boy did I have fun with that) to display drivers, installing and configuring drivers on Linux IS A HASSLE! It is not near as easy as it is on Windows to install drivers (thank God).

Heh, yesterday I had to manually install driver for Canon Pixma because vendor's installer could not do this simple task.

I have no hassle with hardware on Linux. What I do wrong?

The open-source drivers may be in comparison to the SP2 drivers, but nothing to closed-source drivers. Windows expects users to install specific drivers for certain hardware such as video cards.

Open-source driver for SoundBlaster Live! 5.1 i way better than official.
And do you know that even USB 2.0 works faster in Linux than in Windows? I even did benchmarks with my external USB HDD.

I love configurations too, but most Windows users don't. They don't want to configure anything, they want it to work the way they want after installation. They don't want to install a program, install 3 other programs so the program they want can work, than configure it and possibly the other programs that came with it, then run it.

So, most Windows users don't install anything at all?
What about finding cracks/serials? Applying game mods?
Most Linux users just install a program too, and all dependencies will be installed automatically.

As I said above there is a difference between horizontal and vertical management. Most PC users want consolidated programs that work out of the box. They don't want to install x, alsa, gnome, gdm, and tons of other applications (and their dependencies) just to get an average GUI up. And they sure as hell don't want to configure all of that. Sure there are different installers on windows, but they all are consistant. I cannot say the same about Linux. There is pacman, portage (oh dear God that word makes me tremble), RPM managers, and just compiling the stuff yourself.

Man, forget about dependencies, it's not your job to install them.
Don't want to configure? Most GUI programs have nice defaults.
Installation of X and Gnome is easy. Users may try "user-friendly" distros if they want (Ubuntu, Freespire, Mandriva etc. I don't know what is better, `cause I don't use them).

Some of you may see me as a Windows lover and Linux hater. This is not true. I love both OSes, and I use both. I just dislike a few of the following things:

People who use Linux on the desktop just do not understand why other people cannot do what they do. I don't think it is hard opening xorg.conf in vi and editing it so my ATI 9800 can display correctly. I also don't find it hard to edit my fstab when I add a new hard drive to my system (which I will be doing soon). But when you think about the type of people who use Windows, you have to see that this would be near impossible. My parents have a hard time using Internet Explorer.

Then install Arch + Gnome for them and this system will work forever (you may even don't update it).

I hate fanboys who spout bullshit about Windows crashing left and right, and how Windows just gets viruses and spyware out of the blue (screen of death !).

Who are you calling fanboys? Arch Linux community is not fanboys place.

Just like in Linux, I am a poweruser when it comes to Windows. I really can't remember the last time I had a popup, spyware, virus, or a trojan. I also get incredible speeds out of my Windows porgrams, and video card. I don't remember the last time I had to manually reboot my PC either. Programs that crash are a different story, but Windows is not as bad as everyone says it is.

I'm power user on Windows too, so what?
I also didn't see any viruse on my box for about 5 years. Oh, I have assembler sources of Win32CIH virus somewhere.
I didn't get any spam on my personal box (not the Gmail's one which is public) from its creation few years ago.
I don't reinstall Windows at my personal PC at work for years.
But I don't like Windows. If it will broke in the future, I will not have the tima and motivation to do reinstall and reconfiguration for my needs again.
Windows is har to customize for my needs.
Windows is not better than Linux for "average user", except that gaming in Windows is easier. Users just need to select the right distro for their needs.
Or install x86 version of Mac OS X

IMHO Linux is superior to Windows in almost all areas.

EDIT: very nice said, Cotton!

---

to live is to die

sarah31

Member

From: Middle of Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 2,975

Website

Re: Linux is not ready for the desktop - Mandriva devs

i heart the word troll many times without getting to understand it.

Is this a troll?

It is when a forum member follows a specific person around the forum and responds to them in a negtive or personal way. Sometimes trolls will pick specific types of posts to respond to. Again usually in an insulting way aimed at starting a flame war.

In the end it is an accusation used to try and drive away that member without actually banning them. I have been accused and accused people of trolling in the past.

IF you still have any questions I would recommend googling for a definition that may give you a better answer.

---

AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

McQueen

Member

From: Arizona

Registered: 2006-03-20

Posts: 387

Re: Linux is not ready for the desktop - Mandriva devs

Mac and Windows know how to make desktops work.

Mac knows how to provide officially tested hardware and drivers, and Windows knows how to get outstanding vendor support so that users encounter seamless transitions between systems. Linux knows how to win my heart, and for now I consider that to trump any other concern.

---

/path/to/Truth

Pajaro

Member

Registered: 2004-04-21

Posts: 884

Re: Linux is not ready for the desktop - Mandriva devs

Just to add to this, I hate Linux and sound support. The whole mixing sounds has always been a hassle for me.

Did you try this?

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/All … ing_system.

I agree with you that sound is too complicated. It would be nice to have to have a way to know if the sound card supports multiple channels or not, and the create the asound.conf automatically.

It would be also really cool to have a nice gui for asound.conf, letting you et up some of the basic cool things that alsa can do: redirect sound to many different soundcards to get sorround with two old soundcards, change the buffer when using dmix, setting your webcam as your default recording device, adding global equalizations, etc, etc.

Thought I checked many times asound configurations, I still don't know much.

sometimes I think that asound.conf was designed by aliens for aliens

lumiwa

Member

Registered: 2005-12-26

Posts: 712

Re: Linux is not ready for the desktop - Mandriva devs

Just to add to this, I hate Linux and sound support. The whole mixing sounds has always been a hassle for me.

Did you try this?

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/All … ing_system.

I agree with you that sound is too complicated. It would be nice to have to have a way to know if the sound card supports multiple channels or not, and the create the asound.conf automatically.

It would be also really cool to have a nice gui for asound.conf, letting you et up some of the basic cool things that alsa can do: redirect sound to many different soundcards to get sorround with two old soundcards, change the buffer when using dmix, setting your webcam as your default recording device, adding global equalizations, etc, etc.

Thought I checked many times asound configurations, I still don't understand much.

Sometimes I think that asound.conf was designed by aliens for aliens

As someone said: Geeks writing drivers for geeks.