Linux is not ready for prime time

You are just too funny... Seems like you have been living in the woods for the last few years..

Lets talk about just Ubuntu...
1. You do not need to know a single command if you don't want to. Everything from software updates to system-configuration is available via the "easy to use" gui's. I myself prefer command-line since i know what i'm doing and it goes faster instead of clicking in 10 different windows just to change a simple setting.. But as said, it's optional

2. And lol about the software quality-statement... How come i never have had a system-crash or needed to reboot when installing some simple application in linux but when doing something similar in windows it always wants to reboot or crash...
That statement is utterly and complete FUD!

3. Customizing is good... My dad don't have a clue about how to do anything on a computer (even have problems understanding a folder-structure)...
What i did for him was to install ubuntu + the supplied digikam support etc.
Now all he has to do to get all images imported into the gallery (and automatically uploaded to a ftp-server) is plugin the camera and wait for the progress-window to close... Everything except the automatic ftp-sync was already included in Ubuntu.

4. They are not poor clones of windows... Actually Windows have been stealing most things from Apple and originally from Xerox so... Xerox/Apple/AmigaOS was way ahead on the current window-design, and it seems to be the easiest to use atm... And btw, have a look at the videos of "compiz" on youtube and then compare that to vista... And also remember that you can run compiz on a P3@1Ghz/256Mb-ram with any old 3d-capable card...

5. Viruses and worms do exists for gnu/linux systems but they are quite rare since security-holes are fixed quite fast and these systems don't usually come with every service available started like in windows.. Ie we don't expose every single hole automatically so less chance for a worm to spread. And if a virus then those would first need to gain root (administrator on a unix system) before it can spread to other users on the system.

6. And the same can be said for free windows-support-forums =)... And there is commercial support available from a number of different companies..

7. Doing a Ubuntu install is faster and requires less user-interaction than doing a windows xp/vista install.. (and you already have all drivers included on the install cd)
"automatic or manual partitioning, ask what keyboard you have and what language you want to use, ask what timezone, ask what username you want and done... takes less than 10-15 minutes while a vista install easily takes up to an hour...

So before writing such statements please get you facts straight and stop writing FUD......

I don't say that Ubuntu is better than windows but I'm saying that for some tasks a Ubuntu system is better and for some a windows system is better and for allot of tasks it does not matter what you choose. (except for the price/price for future upgrades and stability)

Lots of FUD and contradicting arguments here...

"gazillion commands": FUD++

People that want to know the gazillion commands have time for it, and they're really the only ones that really *need* to use it. The "prime time" users won't need to know any of them if they don't want to. They can continue to click around in folders and such just as they have in the past. Power users will use the command line just like windows power users use command.com or regedit. Is it so much easier to dig through a gazillion registry keys to find the one that turns off the Documents menu item? Those that can will. Those that can't will just live with how the system is. Linux doesn't make this any more difficult than Windows.

"apps ... second rate": FUD++ applesToOranges++

Which apps are second rate compared to which apps? Are you comparing open source tools to tools written by companies that

I can do more with my Linux system out of the box than I can with a windows system. Even if one tool is lacking, I can install as many as I like to get things working the way I want.

"customizing does not seem to [make] the apps any better" FUD++ sameEverywhere++

If you change the wallpaper in Windows, do you expect Outlook to magically stop executing every virus it can find? Customizing the desktop look and feel isn't supposed to change the functionality of the applications running on it.

"poor clones of Windows and counterintuitive"

As Windows was a clone of apple, etc, etc,... Xerox, PARC. Are we done with this now? This is a pretty tired, old, and self-defeating argument - especially for a Windows user to initiate.

Without any specific examples, it's hard to determine if you actually mean "counterintuitive" or what most people mean: "not like windows". If it's the latter (which is usually the case 98% of the time), then you're simply arguing against yourself. A valid argument wouldn't contend that being a windows clone is a bad thing then contradict itself by admitting that linux is not enough like windows.

100% agree, though, that clonnig the look of Windows quite a wasted effort. One could do WAY better than cloning Vista.

"downtime"

is an administrator issue, not a "prime time" user. The discussion regarding downtime and training time costs seems to confuse the user and admin roles - almost smells like intentional ambiguity... Quite a few of these, arguably the ones with real skills, already know linux or at least some form of *nix. It was a requirement for being hired. These people are adept at handling the sort of issues that could lead to downtime. They have far more power to handle it with linux than they do windows. And btw, in this sense, linux is the leader, so we might want to put the argument of "prime time" for corporate purposes to rest. Quite a few of the huge names out there run their sites and services on Linux and Open Source apps. Even this website is using Drupal. I didn't poke down far enough to confirm that it's running on Apache (and probably Linux).

"extra learning time, research time, and other chores": FUD++ sameEverywhere++

The author also neglects to mention another issue that plagues Windows users - Microsoft incompetence (as well as the opacity of such). This could be in the coding or it could be in the management (which may prevent coding eg. bugfixes). That is what leads to issues such as an interesting one I've seen in Windows Vista where all browsers work and connect to the internet - except for IE7. Another disadvantage of Windows is that each virus and malware that makes it onto your system either by a blackhat or Microsoft is that you have to figure it out each time since each one is new. The Linux "chores" mentioned are out of a finite set of tools that are reused over and over again (eg. piping through grep) for many different purposes. So the knowledge learned to fix Windows malware is disposable while adapting your Linux system is "permanent". It's just like learning to drive a manual transmission: it gives you a lot more power and control which just takes a little more time to master.

Another great feature of Linux is the community. When you have an issue, the "extra learning time and "research time" are greatly reduced if you just try to look them up first. Pasting an error message into your favorite search engine will turn up a fix 90%+ of the time. The author doesn't want you to know this, but you don't actually have to know how the whole system works to fix one thing. You don't necessarily even need to know how the one thing you're doing works as long as it does what you want. I'll admit that I have at least one "just works, don't know exactly how" fix on my box.

"frequent need to repartition and/or format hard disks": FUD++ wtf++

Someone who has "frequent need to repartition and/or format hard disks" doesn't actually know what (s)he is doing and should learn to plan better or consult someone that actually knows what is happening. This is one of the most dangerous people to allow to use a PC: someone that thinks (s)he knows a lot more than (s)he actually does. A normal user (which is what this post "prime time" is about) will not need to do this once linux is installed sanely (see below about where it should be installed) and won't be doing the sorts of things that would require a repartition or reformat.

"arrogant Linux users": FUD++ sameEverywhere++

I have yet to see a Linux person get angry or arrogant about a real situation that's a significant, real issue. I've seen less than pleasant replies to people that march in and demand that the "arrogant linux people" make their system do some certain thing that the user don't understand (which might already be working), not bother to give enough information, ask how to do something illegal, or fix something that they broke and act it isn't their fault. It's basic politeness: when you want help from someone, you don't approach them with comtempt. Based on the tone of this post, readers can probably imagine how the transaction that lead to went down that lead to the label "arrogant Linux users". This isn't specific to Linux. If a Linux user went into a windows support forum and started talking about how "stupid windows" doesn't do this right or doesn't do that right, then wants to know how to clean all the viruses, it would be the exact same thing.

"no real professional help available": FUD++

Just out of curiosity... What's the toll-free Windows (or Office) help line where you can get immediate tech support 24/7/365? Since you're a licensed user of their OS, you have the number, right? Surely a company with 40B+ just sitting the bank can afford to provide help that's readily available to its users with operators standing by. No? On #fedora, I can talk to any number of *developers* that actually work at RedHat. I can also talk to any number of admins (ie. professionals) or other power users that have the answers that I need. Just yesterday I did something stupid and had an answer that fixed it within a matter of minutes.

Companies like RedHat offer support packages and would be more than happy to sell them to you, though I don't know the specifics.

"free is not the same as cheap": FUD++ applesToOranges++

You couldn't have got this more wrong if you were reading a script from Redmond (you're not, are you?). Linux is free as in beer because it's free as in freedom. The price is a byproduct of the development model.

If you want to compare what's "cheap", let's get a copy of the bottom rung of Vista, Home Basic, and see how much it actually does out of the box.

"expense attached to a Linux install": FUD++ applesToOranges++

How many people actually install windows from scratch? Even the people that upgrade from ME to XP or XP to Vista aren't doing a real install. Comparing the work that you *didn't* do for the prefab windows box you bought isn't an accurate comparison to installing Linux. Either compare the complete install for both or compare prefabs that have each OS installed. Comparing two systems that both come with OSes installed would be the comparison that would fit this post about "prime time" Linux. I hear you can get one at Wal-Mart for under $500. Use that to make an actual comparison.

SUSE, I believe, has a four-click install. How can you screw that up? Perhaps your $30 cookbook wasn't the right one.

"balance from people": sameEverywhere++

Wherever you live must be a nice place. Here, I'm constantly seeing Microsoft "studies" about how Windows or their server products are "better" based on poor metrics or half-baked (or incomplete) data. I'd love to see the balance of which you speak. Microsoft has even tried to start "grassroots" campaigns (apparently, they didn't get the memo about how grassroots works), but they can't even get their own fans to support them the way they want. They still have to resort to bribing governments and showing up at anti-trust trials (including the two NEW ones that just popped up).

I have tried to install Ubuntu and Fedora Core 8 on my system, which is a 64 bit one.
To my suprise my videocard (ATI Radeon x1950pro) was very tuff to having running. I actually failed to get it running.
THe biggest challange was even to have the x64 version to get my ethernet working (Marvell). In the end i had to use the the 32bit version instead.
Oh boy, i really like to have linux running since there are so many good programs available. But i am far off to have it running by having to tweak the system over the shell.
So far, i am back to windows which is a breeze to install and everything runs out of the box.
Thing is, the linux community should deceide where they want to be with the system.
A windows killer, as good as windows or just plain for nerds.
I am still hoping to see once a linux version what works out of the box without tweaking the system to have everything running right away.
I tried to compile the kernel a dozen times and always something was going wrong with the installation of a driver.
to this moment linux is still the nbr.1 choice for torcher. if you want to spend hours of pain, your home.
otherwise you better off with windows. sadly.
if someone knows a distro what achives all that what i am asking for, please let me know. i still like to have linux running. but i just don't have the patience anymore to sit at night at the computer and staring at the screen and finding out that nothing gets accomplished.

I've been using Linux as my sole operating system since 2001 and have come to the following conclusion: most of the people who say Linux sucks are the same folks who are either too stupid or too lazy to actually learn how the operating system works. And please keep in mind that operating a paper airplane is much different that operating a real airplane due to the power/benefit/security difference inherent in each of those.

I don't use Windows because it's closed source and a virus/trojan/worm/malware magnet. A closed source operating system could be grabbing every key stroke you make (online banking, social security number, date of birth, mother's maiden name, etc) and sending it all home to be added to a huge database. The problem is you'd never know it because you don't really know what the system is doing behind your back.

Windows operating systems are plagued with viruses/worms/trojans/spyware/malware and things like that don't exist for Linux. Read this article to find out why those bad things likely wouldn't exist for Linux even if Linux were the most widely used OS: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/

I can do things with Linux that Windows simply can't do because Linux is more secure/stable than Windows is.

Please take a few moments to read my Linux page instead of blindly posting myths/misunderstandings/lies/garbage when it comes to Linux: http://ardchoille42.googlepages.com/linux.html

You mention less viruses etc... Well yea, part of the reason MS has so many issues is because so many people use it, they become more apparent. Take Apple's iPhone, it was super popular since its inception, and therefore cracked in one day. All of these products are all susceptible to the same problems. If Linux was as popular as Windows I suspect many problems would come out of the wood work. I have nothing against Linux either. I think its great for some purposes, but as a workstation, its not. Boot up, login, ok what can I do? Can I use Adobe Photoshop CSS2/3 to work on a web site? No. Can I play that brand new Bioshock game? No. Can I make a Powerpoint presentation required for class next week? No. Can I create a word processing document with auto formatted MLA style citations? No, but I can create a document inferior to other options. Basically all I can do right now is browse the internet.

Faaaark. What can I say?

I have hope for Kubuntu and Xubuntu. Except that installer still really, really, really, really fucking SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKKKSSSSSSSSSSSS.
But at least they are onto it, there are people apologizing for the installer and focussing on it as a project in its own right.
That's actually pretty good!

I think the death of Fedora will improve things a lot.
Fedora is a steaming, steaming, steaming, rank, steaming (repeated) pile of crap, it really is.
"An experimental Linux?" - no, guys.
"A Linux I pulled out of my rectum so I could call it a distro?" - yes, guys, that's right!

Ubuntu is getting adoped at a scary rate actually, and its accelerating. All it needs is a tickbox "Break copyright laws I don't care about written by luddite wankers from the 1950's and install every media codec the system can find that works? (y/N)" - Y ! - vrrrrooooooooooommmmmmm......
Instead of that pox shyte 'Universe' system (spits). Then it will probably eat everything else just on media playback alone.

I love that fact that the Holy Trinity - VLC/Mplayer/Xine - can play ANYTHING, whereas in shitdos I'll fight with codecs, sometimes for days, and under OS X I just end up crying because its so hard to get a spanner onto anything in the system.

Damn, better get back to work.