Productive Linux
ACPI administration advocacy advocacy advocacy opinion apache audio authentication bash cache calendar commandline cron database debian desktop development disk dvd economics emacs email exim files firefox firewall flash foss freedom ftp fun grub hardware hardware html images installation ipod kde knoppix laptop latex longlines mplayer multimedia mysql network nfs openoffice opinion opinion pdf perl php politics postgresql printing rant script scripting scsi security shell sitenews skype skype slackware spam ssh subversion svk swap t23 t43 text thinkpad thunderbird time ubuntu users video windows wine wordpress wordprocessing xwindows xwindows youtube
Since the rather moronic posts of LinuxHater have spread across the internet, the meme that Linux is not easy to use has started to proliferate, once again.
LinuxHater pointed to this four-year old post, which ridicules Eric Raymond and his difficulty in setting up a shared CUPS printer. I remember when I couldn't set up a CUPS server either and abandoned it in favour of good old lpd.
That ridicule is just stupid. It was stupid four years ago, it is even more stupid now when CUPS is a breeze to set up and Linux is being installed by newbies around the world every day.
With KDE and GNOME, a system can be administered with point and click. And it is certainly no more difficult than Windows or Mac.
As to the Mac, yes, the OSX interface is beautiful. Yes, for most simple tasks the icons are there for people to click and set up. But that's where it ends.
Most people prefer Firefox to Safari; they have to find it, install it and make sure there's an icon they can find easily when they want to run it. It doesn't come with an office suite. Microsoft Office is expensive. And when you install it, it doesn't quite integrate with the Apple desktop experience.
Then there's Windows. Normally, you don't install it, because the PC you buy has it already installed. Which is lucky for you, because I find installing Windows a nightmare.
Windows in itself does nothing. It has Internet Explorer, Microsoft's rapacious, buggy, standards-noncompliant browser. It also has a cut down mail client in the form of Outlook Express. But it doesn't do anything else. How do you make it do something? I presume Aunt Tillie calls up her geeky nephew to come around and install Microsoft Office.
Then we have 'configuration'. Some seem to believe that Windows' 'Control Panel', makes it easy to configure Windows. Nonsense.
The 'Control Panel' is badly laid out, unintuitive and confusing. Usually, you are looking for some 'properties' panel and even when you find it, you are still confused as to what to do with it.
If people like Windows' Control Panel, it's only because after scaling the sheer mountain face of figuring out how to configure something in Windows, they don't see why they should learn another way.
Nowadays, of course, you can configure by pointing and clicking in Linux too, if you want to.
But Linux gives you the option of editing text-based configuration files. Granted, if you're not used to it, it can be confusing. And there's more of a chance you could enter some value that could crash your system, that a point and click configuration wouldn't allow.
But text based configuration files are easier. Not sure what config file you're looking for? Try 'locate'. Want to find a configuration file that contains a certain option? Use 'grep -r'. Want to know what config file a particular service uses? Try 'man'.
Once you know a way around the system, you will find that text-based configuration files are far better than point-and-click. Complaining that 'Aunt Tillie' or 'Grandma', or whoever can't get her head around text based configuration files is a red-herring. Aunt Tillie, doesn't configure servers. Sure, the things she wants to do - connect to the internet and share a printer - should be easy, but that's where it ends.
As far as configuration goes, the "Windows-is-easier" meme put out by the astroturfers should be consigned to the waste bin.
You know, while I do not disagree that linux is not hard to use, I have to say your tone does more damage to your cause than your point. I use all three major OS's in both client and server capacities. All three have strengthes and weaknesses. None are inherently bad or good. Your analysis of Windows is silly though. YOU may havea hard time finding your way around Xp or Vista, but most people do not. They do on the othe rhand struggle with where to find things in Linux if they are not used to a certain distro. Mandriva, Ubuntu, Suse and Fedora are all similar yet not. You may think they are perfectly easy to get around in (and I can get around just fine) but many people would think this is more frustrating than Windows or Mac.
You can also do a lot more than just use "IE" and Outlook Express in Windows. It has a built in IM client, a built in movie maker, a Media player on par with anything I use on KDE or Gnome (with the exception of VLC, which is cross platform). I can VPN to my office, I can use RDP to connect to other machines. If you have a Windows MEdia Center Computer you can record TV shows, watch movies, stream audio and video etc much much easier than you can with Myth (which I like, but it isn't easy). You can do a lot out of the box. When you want more you can find just about anything and free to if you look.
No it is not as easy as using a package manager (though ha the last "stable" update for Mandriva Spring 2008 trashed my computer) but using Google isn't exactly hard... Going to the store may not be your cup of tea, but at least that option is available under Windows.
I'm not arguing that Windows is better. I'm not arguing Linux is hard or worse. I like both. I use both (OS X leaves me cold, it's like a pretty but boring date - but that is just me). On my work laptop I have Linux installed as a virtual machine and on my home machine I have XP installed virtually in Linux. Both have their place and both can provide the end user a satisfying experience. Both can be easy (or hard) to use, isntall, update, secure etc. You belittle Windows out of bias not facts and it weakens your effort to convince people. You sound like one of THOSE guys, and Those guys kept me from trying to learn Linux for years.
Stumble It!
Digg it
Reddit
Nokia is easier because i use Nokia as my first phone. If otherwise, i'd say Nokia is difficult. Give somebody who haven't tasted any OS a Linux distro. Let him use it for a year or so and then give him Windows. Hey, now Windows-is-not-easier.
Posted by Edgar on 2008-08-12 10:33:58.