Miguel de Icaza On Usability and Openness 349
doperative points out comments from Miguel de Icaza on the struggle for usability in many software products:
"De Icaza uses OpenSUSE as his main desktop (with the GNOME interface, of course), says he likes Linux better than Windows, and says the Linux kernel is also 'superior' to the MacOS kernel. 'Having the source code for the system is fabulous. Being able to extend the system is fabulous,' he says. But he notes that proprietary systems have advantages — such as video and audio systems that rarely break. 'I spent so many years battling with Linux and something new is broken every time,' he says. 'We as an open source community, we don't seem to get our act together when it comes to understanding the needs of end users on the desktop.'"
More FUD (Score:2, Informative)
Sound and video is broken on open systems because of the RIAA/MPAA and Microsoft with their protected pathways, encryption, patented interconnects and tilt bits.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's broken because there's an infinite number of tiny little parts that usually don't work properly together.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/28/vista_drm_analysis/ [theregister.co.uk]
Vista's content protection requires that devices (hardware and software drivers) set so-called "tilt bits" if they detect anything unusual. For example if there are unusual voltage fluctuations, maybe some jitter on bus signals, a slightly funny return code from a function call, a device register that doesn't contain quite the value that was expected, or anything similar, a tilt bit gets set. Such occurrences aren't too uncommon in a typical compute
Re: (Score:2)
How does the existence of tilt bits in Windows affect the stability of drivers in Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Then it would no longer be open source, since you can't show anyone the source to those things.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Nvidia seems to have no problems, you speak of things you know nothing about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I will be glad to try, I charge $150/hr with $300 minimum. Feel free to contact me about this.
Re: (Score:3)
For $150 and 2 hours I can buy windows home edition and have it installed.
So why should I pay you $150/hr to make something work that I can do in the same time for less?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:More FUD (Score:4, Insightful)
There goes the lower TCO I guess.
I think you exemplify the fundamental open source attitude, namely that only people who know how to code deserve to have a working computer, and everyone else has to pay through the nose that the coders may deign to help them. The fantasy is world where the IT dweeb becomes the overpaid fat-cat and the right to compute is really a privilege delegated by a priesthood.
Re: (Score:3)
Your argument is with capitalism - not some imagined cabal of geeks plotting against you. Open source is not guaranteed to cheap, and given your line of business I doubt you'd typically settle for bus fair and lunch.
You're not looking for a coder; what you need is a serf with decent technical skills. Developers are not some kind of communal resource to be called on when people can't be arsed to pay someone to fix a problem they themselves can't solve. I can't speak for the entire open source communi
Re:More FUD (Score:4, Insightful)
My argument is that I want a product that has one predictable price, and once paid it works like any other tool. The open source business model is about selling services to make products that only work well enough to keep you buying more services -- Shuttleworth can engage in all the altruism he pleases but eventually someone needs to pay their bills, and for devs services on Linux are the only option. I don't want a serf, but if you decide a priori that shrinkwrapped software is forbidden, it becomes impossible to retail a "just works" solution; you're stuck paying the $100/hour guy who rolls his eyes at you all the time. I mean, this is your pitch for consumer Linux: it's free but your costs for support of X that Windows and OSX have will either cost you $unknown or $MAX_INT, if the feature is in forbidden by "stupid laws." Why would anyone take that deal? If you cannot yourself code, the continuing free-as-in-freedom benefits of Linux are meaningless.
Everybody here assumes I'm using Windows, which is interesting. I've never used a Windows PC outside of a Kinkos, let alone owned one...
Re: (Score:3)
I think you exemplify the fundamental open source attitude, namely that only people who know how to code deserve to have a working computer, and everyone else has to pay through the nose that the coders may deign to help them.
Which is why Ubuntu is dedicated to making a simple Linux desktop that "just works" and requires no programming or even enthusiast system administration knowledge, and is still free in both senses of the word.
Go ahead and criticize how they're doing at attaining that goal, because it doesn't change that they are working for it and thus your characterization of "the fundamental open source attitude" is wrong.
But on the subject of reaching that goal, my ex-roomate, a complete computer neophyte, has been using
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, sure, in Fedora it seems to work fine, but it turns o
Re: (Score:2)
I have less problem with my ubuntu system (with very few fiddling) than on windows 7 (with starter edition
Is it a troll ?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and use Ubuntu as my primary OS, but I have to dual boot Windows in order to play games at anywhere close to decent performance.
Re:More FUD (Score:4, Informative)
Oh hi, I see you are an ATI/AMD video card user trying to use the ATI/AMD drivers. Haven't you heard? Their drivers have been crap from the very beginning.
Want to be up and running playing games within an hour and a half of starting? Here is what you need:
(Prerequisites)
* PC utilizing NVIDIA video chipset
* Ubuntu or OpenSUSE install DVD (either one - if your interest is saving time these are the only two distros worth your time as an end user)
* Internet connection
(Procedure)
* Install your desired distro (it's stupid easy) - including kernel source packages
* Install NVIDIA drivers (slightly less easy; you have to shut down X and run one command line to install the drivers
* Download and install Crossover Games
Now, you can install many, many Windows games, including Rift
Re: (Score:2)
We as an open source community, we don't seem to get our act together when it comes to understanding the needs of end users on the desktop.
One of those "needs" is the ability to use an ATI card (since a lot of people have them). Your reasoning that everyone should just use an NVIDIA card just doesn't fly. The OS needs better ATI drivers, stop making excuses.
Re: (Score:3)
Running through Wine frequently means a loss of performance.
For WoW in particular, to get it to work stably and with everything looking correct you need to use the OpenGL render path, which Blizzard did not optimize as well as the DirectX path. People running WoW on a Mac have essentially the same problem.
For those few games which have native Linux versions, and where the OpenGL render path is a first-class citizen, Linux has been roughly equal to Windows (sometimes a little worse, sometimes a little bette
Re: (Score:3)
But even that is just a result of people using a proprietary, Windows-specific API (DirectX) which then has to be completely reimplemented while working blind in Linux. Games that use OpenGL often have superior performance when ran in Linux, even when they have to go through WINE. And as for linux-native games, I don't think that "sudo apt-get install some-game" is really "hours of config time."
Re:More FUD (Score:4, Insightful)
At this point one might point out that if you can't watch Hulu or Netflix (we're talking about OpenSUSE here), cannot put in a credit card number to buy or rent a movie from Amazon Unbox or iTunes, and must install separate pieces of software in order to watch DVDs, this OS may not be "broken" but it might not really be meeting modern consumer expectations.
Of course you could argue they shouldn't be paying money for content, and that the DRM is illiberal or something, but you're still keeping the customer from doing what they want to do and what other platforms don't think twice about forbidding for what are essentially elitist moral reasons.
Re: (Score:3)
At this point one might point out that if you can't watch Hulu or Netflix (we're talking about OpenSUSE here), cannot put in a credit card number to buy or rent a movie from Amazon Unbox or iTunes, and must install separate pieces of software in order to watch DVDs, this OS may not be "broken" but it might not really be meeting modern consumer expectations.
So there exist Linux distributions that don't include Flash player or libdvdread in the default install. Either install them or use something like this [linuxmint.com] that includes them by default.
As for Netflix and other Windows-DRM-using things, you might as well complain that you can't watch over-the-air TV on YouTube. You can't do it because Hollywood bought some legislation that prevents honest people from doing reasonable things. The only way to fix the problem is to fix the law.
Of course you could argue they shouldn't be paying money for content, and that the DRM is illiberal or something, but you're still keeping the customer from doing what they want to do and what other platforms don't think twice about forbidding for what are essentially elitist moral reasons.
In actual fact it has nothing to do w
Re:More FUD (Score:4, Informative)
So is this the year? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe there will never be a year of the Linux Desktop... There'll just be the Year of the Linux Smartphone... The Linux Embedded Device... The Linux tablet...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, I'm pretty fed up with OSS attitude toward usability. Apparently you just don't get it.
There needs to be a way to use the software on my machine that doesn't require me to open a MAN page and edit a config file. There's a simple reason for this; people do not have TIME to do these things. The utopian world of thousands of sweaty, Cheetos-encrusted Metallica T-Shirt-wearing geeks the world over writing code that will break the Microsoft monopoly is permanently doomed to failure because you all t
Don't complain about poor mainstream adoption (Score:4, Insightful)
I thought the discussion was about mainstream adoption of open source software.
Re:So is this the year? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not "his personal problem" with open source. It's A LOT of people's problem with open source. Plus, anytime someone actually dares to say some interface is, shall we say, less than optimal, someone like you comes out of the woodwork to say "don't you dare tell me what to spend my time on! If you want it fixed, why don't you lead the effort to fix it yourself!"
Therein lies the problem. You want desperately for Linux to succeed, but you don't want to actually spend the time and effort working on the things that ordinary users care about.
Hasn't used RealTek (Score:4, Insightful)
Closed source audio can break too. My last motherboard had onboard RealTek audio. Worked perfectly in Linux. Under XP, it crackled endlessly. Ended up buying a discrete sound card.
Re:Hasn't used RealTek (Score:5, Interesting)
I had an el-cheapo HP notebook that had absolutely horrible video playback under Windows, just terrible. Put Ubuntu on it, and other than having to download the WiFi drivers (ethernet worked fine), it ran waaaay faster... Could watch DVDs, hidef, you name, but under Vista it was just a horrible dog.
Of course, being an el-cheapo HP notebook, it fried itself.
Re: (Score:3)
...Worked perfectly in Linux. Under XP, it crackled endlessly. Ended up buying a discrete sound card.
I think you ended up fixing the wrong problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I know. But I wanted to play some games that weren't supported in Wine. The discrete sound card gives me less noise too, so it was a worthwhile purchase.
Re: (Score:3)
Have you tried turning it off and on again?
Re:Hasn't used RealTek (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I had issues with Ubuntu not playing well with my bluetooth keyboard. I could use it with grub, but the log in screen wouldn't detect it. So, I had to log in with my wired keyboard. I suspect that there's a way of making the change permanent, but I don't have that problem with OpenSUSE or any other OS I've used.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure why it worked in grub, but i suspect the reason why it did not work on login (if it was graphical) is the age old problem of X going its own ways when it comes to hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
I had a similar thing with a few versions of Ubuntu about two years or so back. Had to compile ALSA from source to get it to recognise the headphone jack on my laptop. And recompile every time I updated.
After a couple of cycles I switched back to debian (which I first used in 1995!) and all has been well ever since.
Well, mostly. As much as any computer ever is. Right now my hackintosh is having boot problems and Win 7 is infected with god knows what so debian Linux is currently getting the 'just works' awar
Re: (Score:2)
Realtek drivers are notorious for this. I had this same issue too until I found juuuust the right driver version that worked. Windows 7 resolved the issue too.
Windows is popular because it works. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Windows is popular because it works. (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows 'works' largely because it comes pre-installed. Try taking any random PC, wiping the disk and installing Windows on it from an official Microsoft install CD and you'll find it at least as hard to get working as Linux.
Though personally the last few times I've installed Linux I just stuck the CD in the drive, selected a few install options and half an hour later I had a working system sitting at the logon prompt. Finding, downloading and installing all the correct updated drivers for a fresh Windows install would probably take longer than that.
Re: (Score:3)
As for download time, both require lots of updates to be downloaded.
Given the amount of crapware bundled with most laptops, wiping and reinstalling Windows from scratch might actually be a good idea. Just most people can't do
Re: (Score:2)
That describes how I have installed every Windows PC I've ever used, from the days of 3.0 onwards.
I'm not talking about installing, that's relatively simple although Windows is still easier to get installed than Linux, if only because of better driver support. I'm talking about wanton breakage like when you upgrade a package for a security issue and find it borks all the other stuff it talks to in a majorly problematical way - eg Pulseaudio, or when someone decides to implement a better power saving schem
Re: (Score:2)
That's more of a Linux problem. Since there's a kernel with no definite userland, that sort of thing happens. I haven't had the problem with FreeBSD or Windows because there is a much greater degree of separation between the base install and any 3rd party applications. Windows was having similar problems to Linux in the past with 3rd party libraries getting mixed in and replacing system ones, I think they've mostly got that sorted out in recent versions, but that was a large part of the stability problems o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Windows alone does not works, a new laptop or desktop with Windows and every driver needed and applications installed just works. Do not compare a tested hardware and software configuration with using Linux in any crappy hardware you could have. I am a ThinkPad fan and even when I received my free upgrade to Windows 7 for my small Windows partition (Fedora is my distribution of choice) I needed to use for a clean install the extra DVD with the Lenovo Updater, to download a lot of drivers and applications t
Re: (Score:2)
Youre also comparing apples to oranges. Drivers are contained in the Linux kernel; they are not contained in the Windows kernel (though windows does prepackage and ship with many drivers in the base install). Windows gets a new version every 3-5 years; Linux distros every 6mos-2 years (sometimes more tho). So Windows is more likely to have out of date or missing drivers... but when both Linux and Windows are missing drivers, Windows is almost always easier to install said driver with-- mainly because Dev
Re:Windows is popular because it works. (Score:4, Insightful)
For using the computer more as a commodity tool for email/word processing/video watching etc Windows still is better presented and more importantly doesnt break grotesquely with every new update that appears like Ubuntu does (and yes I'm looking at 9.10) Until Linux, or more strictly I suppose GNOME/KDE etc get over this then I suspect that further adoption of linux on the desktop will stall.
That's something that a lot of people seem to miss.
If you need to get at internals, Linux is the choice. If you want a workhorse back-end system, Linux is the choice. If you want a desktop with great cutting-edge features, Linux is the way to go - KDE betas are best for that ;). On the other hand -- if you want a desktop system that stays out of your way, Just Works, and requires little maintenance beyond letting an auto updater do its thing... Windows or OSX are your only real options.
When I use my computer to get a task done, my time is valuable - and I increasingly resent time I am forced to spend fixing or working around issues that are not immediately germane to the task at hand. That task might be browsing the web, editing a document, writing code, watching a video, debugging, etc. I have consistently found that I can't simply do that on the various flavors of linux - there's always something that seems to need adjusting, or stops working correctly, or doesn't work at all.
The problem is that people will often start blaming at this point, when they hear these statements. They'll say, "It's nvidia's fault for not doing X" or "it's your fault because you didn't do Y" or "it's the upstream maintainer's fault because he didn't do Z". Which is, unfortunately, completely missing the point: when you are using a system to get a task done, fault does not matter.
I, as a user of a product, want to simply use the product -- and spend zero time hunting down answers that I shouldn't need to concern myself with. As a developer and a tinkerer I understand why doing this is necessary, and can even enjoy it sometimes. But as an end user, I experience a ridiculous level of frustration and exasperation when I need to devote MY time to working around somebody ELSE's issue - no matter whether we're talking about operating system, development tool chain, pc games, the amazingly badly designed FIOS TV interface, or anything else.
In recent years, I also find that the desktops are experimenting with increasingly weird crap - things that are both fun and frustrating. (Fun because they look like good concepts. Frustrating because the deviation from the familiar means less time Just Working even as I enjoy playing with them.) I will keep trying every few months, and I certainly have more than my fair share of back end linux servers and dual boot desktop systems - but for the forseeable future, Linux just isn't there.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny. My work osx laptop has apps that stop working at every significant point release, while my desktop linux install has had only one or two 10 minute problems in the past 12 years of continuous upgrades.
I don't believe you.
Re: (Score:3)
Funny, my linux installs have continually been plagued with problems.The worst one was the time I once installed the latest Ubuntu update and - due to a bad Xorg driver - Xorg stopped working completely. Even better, because by default on most distros, wireless network login is attached to your desktop shell and not your system boot... I couldn't get online to track down the reason for the failure without using another
Re: (Score:3)
- if you want a desktop system that stays out of your way, Just Works, and requires little maintenance beyond letting an auto updater do its thing.
Funny, this is exactly how I'd describe my Debian Sid box.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Windows is popular because it works. (Score:4, Informative)
- if you want a desktop system that stays out of your way, Just Works, and requires little maintenance beyond letting an auto updater do its thing... Windows or OSX are your only real options
Theres truth to all of what youve said, but youre simplifying things waaay too much. There are times Windows will just refuse to work with a system (ie, shipped with vista, provides no XP drivers, nothing works in XP, and Vista SP2 hasnt shipped yet), and Linux will land you with a beautifully configured and funcitonal system out of the box; there are times, conversely, where nothing you do seems to get Pulse to work with flash, or theres no driver for your wifi card, but Win7 just nails it from the get go.
Ive stopped using Ubuntu for the most part for a few reasons, but the main one was that I used to do a lot of WoW and used ventrilo for it, and one of the upgrades finally stopped working quite right with wine, and I was just tired of having to make each and every proprietary, windows-only thing I did work right on Linux. It was doable, and fun and instructive for a while, but after a while the excitement fades and you tire of pushing so hard against the reality that you really do need Windows-only apps (Evolution's OWA integration SUCKS compared to real MAPI support from Outlook!).
But I can fully envision someone who really does need only the web and a few other things and for them Linux Just Works in a way Windows cant-- fully integrated updates, general freedom from the spectre of malware (the reason is irrelevant)
They'll say, "It's nvidia's fault for not doing X" or "it's your fault because you didn't do Y" or "it's the upstream maintainer's fault because he didn't do Z". Which is, unfortunately, completely missing the point: when you are using a system to get a task done, fault does not matter.
There is a lot of truth to this, but people forget about these incidents on Windows because theyre considered part of what you have to do-- XP didnt come with passable nVidia drivers worth gaming with, nor did Vista; you had to hunt them down and install them. But when you have to do the same on Linux-- which is basically an identical experience with a single binary that you run and does all the work for you-- all of a sudden its "too much of a burden on the user".
Its also worth mentioning that comparing a preinstalled OS with preinstalled drivers to one that you install from disk post-factory is apples-to-oranges-- If / when Linux is preinstalled from an image onto HP or Acer laptops, they wont have driver issues-- they wont ship until they are fixed. See for example the instant-boot varieties like Acer's and HPs preboot web-browsing-only Linux distros-- the wireless works flawlessly on those, because the manufacturer took care of it.
In usability and out-of-box-experience, Windows and Linux (generally) are getting closer and closer; I rather suspect that as that continues, the complaints about Gnome and Ubuntu's changes will be rather more vocal.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is that people will often start blaming at this point, when they hear these statements. They'll say, "It's nvidia's fault for not doing X" or "it's your fault because you didn't do Y" or "it's the upstream maintainer's fault because he didn't do Z". Which is, unfortunately, completely missing the point: when you are using a system to get a task done, fault does not matter.
Yes, it does. If it's NVidia's fault, then bitching to your distro's packagers about it is as useless as complaining to my waitress that my car broke down on my way to the restaurant: it may serve to take out my own frustrations, but it'll do nothing to solve the problem at hand on addition to causing an unrelated person unnecessary grief.
No, it's more like complaining to the waitress that your eggs are runny and your toast is burnt -- she's not the one who made them, but she did deliver them to you.
Re: (Score:2)
I beg to differ actually. I do not think the interface is the main problem. If the machine is properly installed then people use gnome very easily without much trouble. In my experience, the problem mainly comes from hardware support and installation. Getting a graphic driver to work just correctly can be a major PITA. I stumbled yesterday on someone with a laptop with hybrid graphic card: an intel for low power consumption and an nvidia for performance. It just does not work. The user would be happy with g
Re: (Score:2)
I have a Thinkpad with switchable graphics - integrated Intel for low power stuff and an ATI discrete chip for real graphics. I'm running Ubuntu 10.10 on it. The way it works is basically Ubuntu doesn't support on the fly switching so you select in the BIOS which setting you want "on" and it uses that. Every Ubuntu seems to detect there's proprietary drivers for the ATI stuff just fine - but every time I've tried using those and using the discrete graphics, it reboots and just comes to a blank screen. I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You must have missed the part where I said I preferred Linux in the datacentre back end.
I never said pretty beats functionality - in fact I kind of said the opposite. For some usages Linux beats Windows, and also the converse holds true. Yet you choose to pick one situation and compare it against another - I'm sorry but the comparison simply doesnt hold true. If you had wanted a solid stable backend system then you should have researched and picked a better one than persevere with a broken one.
This, is esse
This is why consoles sell ... (Score:2)
.. I don't have to far around with trying to find/install having the latest DirectX or GPU drivers because they fixed a bug that the latest game exposed.
Well, at least they used too ... until game developers realized they could "patch" on day-0. :-( So much for quality assurance / control. QA is ignored because management needs a game out THIS quarter.
--} Thinks just work out of the box. {-- I wish the customer experience was the forefront of ALL technology -- sadly it is all-too-often tossed aside at th
Is there ANY real news here? (Score:3)
I mean, what would you have expected De Icaza to say his preferred OS was? Yeah, the fact he said it was Linux didn't exactly shock me....
But his other statement is equally "non news". Yep, "proprietary systems" (commercial OS offerings) are far better at supporting random hardware. Linux will NEVER really win that particular battle, because too many companies release a new product (such as a video card) where the driver software is just as critical a component as the chips soldered onto the board at giving the advertised video performance. The video performance is what people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars for. Otherwise, everyone would just be happy with whatever on-board video was provided with their motherboard, or whichever card was the cheapest. When you as a video card maker are in this situation? You're going to be struggling enough to make it perform reliably, as-intended, with just ONE operating system. The motivation to go through all that work again for a free OS like Linux just isn't really there. #1, Linux won't have the number of 3D game titles that actually make good use of such a card. But #2, you don't want to risk releasing the source code to those proprietary drivers that make that new card go, because doing so would be like inviting all your competitors into your factories to take video and photographs, or make copies of all your engineers' design notes. So any Linux drivers provided will have to be binaries only, leading to a lot of hassles providing ones that work with various distros and Linux releases. And don't forget #3 - when you re-release the SAME card with re-worked drivers for Mac OS X, you get to sell the thing at close to full retail price for far longer than you'll ever fetch that price with the Windows crowd. Do you think the Linux community would pay those prices for a "Linux edition" of a given Windows graphics card, just because good Linux drivers were offered? (Maybe a few die-hards would, but just as many would get indignant about having to pay inflated prices for a card with drivers they don't even get the source to.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The basic thing I'm noticing is that for a guy who in his history of GNOME [ximian.com] describes himself as a "free software entusiast" [sic], he seems awfully disinterested in making Gnome better, or if the Gnome devs don't like his ideas forking off something of his own.
The other fascinating point I see in your second statement is that it's not the open source world's fault that the latest and greatest high-performance video and audio cards aren't supported as well as they are on Windows. Microsoft, Apple, etc have v
Hardware: Really depends.... (Score:3)
Yep, "proprietary systems" (commercial OS offerings) are far better at supporting random hardware. Linux will NEVER really win that particular battle, because too many companies release a new product (such as a video card) where the driver software is just as critical a component as the chips soldered onto the board at giving the advertised video performance.
In my past experience ( ~15 years of penguin usage ), the situation isn't so black and white.
What you say is typical for graphic cards : there are only a couple of big companies in the market, churning new hardware and software on a regular basis, and putting lot of resources to make suitable drivers for windows.
On Linux you're left with either sub-par open-source drivers (which some time have to be reverse engineered [Nouveau], although some company have started to release infos or even actively support th
By nerds for nerds ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You see this come in to play with de Icaza himself. Just look above in the comments. He's a "sell out" even though he probably has written more software for Linux than anyone here. So here he is trying to make Linux better and he's been cast as an outsider because he wants to make it mainstream and now works for a company that took money to make that happen. These guys must eat ideology cereal or something.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's impossible he did it because he truly believes that .net is a superior development environment?
Linux is supposed to be open, yes? What's *wrong* with taking something Microsoft invented and using it in Linux? As long as that thing is good, and as long as Microsoft is ok with it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>Linux is supposed to be open, yes? What's *wrong* with taking something Microsoft invented and using it in Linux?
According to Microsoft, EVERYTHING.
Microsoft does not play well with its competitors. It doesn't even play well with its partners. Where the hell have you been for the past 20 years? Eh?
Seriously. Did you not notice any of the threats from Microsoft about patents over the last decade? Did you not notice Microsoft funding its lawsuit-by-proxy against IBM through SCO?
Incorporating Microsof
Re: (Score:3)
And what happens when someone implements part of .net (ado and asp) that is not part of the promise?
Eh? Do you mono cheerleaders ever think about that? No, you skip right over that as if it doesn't matter.
It matters.
Mono is a poisoned apple. Do *not* bite into it.
--
BMO
Re:By nerds for nerds ... (Score:5, Insightful)
What's wrong? You answered it yourself:
> and as long as Microsoft is ok with it.
We don't need anyone to be ok with anything (technical) we would like to do - especially since there's no telling if they're still going to be ok when what we do actually becomes a success and starts to threaten their business.
It's not just my knee-jerk reaction. It's history. But if you didn't know that by now, you're never going to know it.
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely. Which is why it does some "desktop user" type things much better than payware alternatives.
However, some people would rather just repeat FUD from the 90s and ignore the current state of things.
Linux will dominate the desktop one day. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But let me guess... you're an Android fanboy.
I think it's more likely... (Score:4, Interesting)
... that certain components (for example, audio) take a long time to figure out how to make work, and end users tend to get impatient about such things. That doesn't mean no progress is being made, or even that good progress isn't being made.
I've used Linux since about 2000-2001, and I'm not really an expert. From my perspective, Linux of today is leaps and bounds over what it was then in terms of user friendliness, configurability, etc. And in terms of multimedia, well... it's somewhat usable but not there yet. But it gets closer constantly. That doesn't mean it isn't frustrating, and I still cuss out pulseaudio (and eventually uninstall it) every time I try to get it to do things that seem intuitively obvious to me... but each time I've used it I notice improvements, and I'm pretty confident that one day it will just work... at which point there will be something ELSE that everyone complains about.
Because Linux developers don't have direct access to proprietary information, progress on proprietary-heavy aspects of an operating system (like audio, and video, etc.) is unfortunately slower than other areas. Nothing can get around that other than companies open sourcing their drivers and putting patents in the public domain (which is a longer way of saying "nothing can get around that.") But the progress is still both remarkable and laudable. Though I still reserve the right to cuss out the parts of Linux that don't work when I want them to. It's nothing personal, guys, it's just a pain in the ass.
Why, I wonder. (Score:3)
But he notes that proprietary systems have advantages — such as video and audio systems that rarely break. 'I spent so many years battling with Linux and something new is broken every time,' he says. 'We as an open source community, we don't seem to get our act together when it comes to understanding the needs of end users on the desktop.'"
Is it because the open source community fails to get its "act" together? Or the audio and video codecs are encumbered with so many dubious patents and intellectual property claims. And the closed source vendors are using that to create walled gardens?
I have to wonder (Score:2, Insightful)
Ubuntu? (Score:2)
Perhaps if he used Ubuntu, the distribution aimed at making sure the audio and video stuff works for end users he wouldn't have this problem as much? I only have video problems with Ubuntu when I'm installing alphas. Otherwise Ubuntu has gotten really good at just working. When I compare the people I've interacted withs experiences installing Windows 7 vs. installing Ubuntu. It's pretty much a wash. They both pretty much work most of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
HTML 5 is going to help Linux quite a bit in the video department.
I use Linux as my default desktop. I will only use Windows to crank out a resume/CV because the free office suites still don't hold a candle to MS Office. Other than Office, I shun Windows.
MS Office runs well under Wine. In fact, in my experience, it crashes more often in Windows (occasionally) than it does in Wine (almost never).
That's completely counter-intuitive of course. One would reasonably expect a Microsoft program to run better on a Microsoft OS than anywhere else. Yet at least with MS Office that has not been my experience.
Anyway if this is the only reason why you are dual-booting into Windows then you shouldn't really need to keep Windows around at all.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>MS Office runs well under Wine.
WINE must have improved a lot since 2009, because when I tried it, Netscape Accelerator Software refused to operate. Microsoft Explorer 8 also was unstable.
I guess I need to give the new 2011 version a try.
What I'd really like is a Windows Clone OS to boycott MS completely.
Re: (Score:2)
Netscape Accelerator Software probably still won't work. You might want to upgrade to a real internet connection, or at least report bugs about it.
If you want a clone windows why would you want to boycott MS?
Windows is braindead in many ways, like not replacing files that are in use for one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been watching the ReactOS project since the first announcements on here, probably almost ten years.
Is it even in beta yet?
I like the idea, always have, but AFAICT it's never really even been ready for the hobbyist, let alone the mainstream.
Re: (Score:3)
...yeah, msoffice for just a resume.
There were consumer word processors that predated msword that were quite adequate for that sort of thing.
Never mind 2011. If you were some sort of advanced corporate user that had to play nice with the rest of their Borg collective (company), then your remarks would make a bit more sense. WP style overkill is simply not needed in many cases.
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu? I think you can definitely build a distribution that's user friendly, but the problems most people have are support for certain kinds of hardware and availability of certain applications. In both cases, proprietary OS vendors basically pay off hardware vendors or make partnership deals to make sure hardware isn't
Re:Bigger Question (Score:5, Insightful)
You know Miguel works for the GNOME project, right?!
Joking aside, it's perfectly possible thanks to open source's inherently modular structure. Someone makes an idiot-proof GUI, distro X bundles it as the default and only option. Someone makes a uberhacker GUI, distro Y bundles it as the default and only option. Distro Z prides itself on being able to switch from newbie to expert and back again in less than three seconds.
IMHO, GNOME tries too hard to lower itself to the lowest common denominator jack of all trades - look at the recent decision to remove the "minimise" button from the taskbar because it's apparently not useful and not optimised for touchscreens. But neither is the rest of GNOME, or all the apps it's going to run. Sorry, if it's touchscreen users you're after then I'm sure GTK is perfectly capable of having a new UI constructed from the same frameworks.
Similarly, KDE often gets flak for having too many confusing options. It's personally the UI I prefer (after I've spent forever configuring it) in *nix but it's not without its own share of problems either, and much like GNOME they seem to have some project heads who are entirely convinced that theirs is the One True Way of doing it. KDE remains more usable to me because of its configuration flexibility though, but it can be baffling if you don't already know your way around, and they make fewer stupid choices than GNOME.
The problem with both KDE and GNOME's approaches (and windows as well for that matter) is people who are convinced that one tool can be everything to everybody (this goes for almost every DE I've seen in the PC world), and that the inherent differences between, say, a 5" touchscreen and a 60" TV warrant completely different approaches. So to answer your question: yes, Linux can (and does) cater to computer novices (I'm not aware of anyone needing to use the CLI in ubuntu for example, but I could be wrong) and still leave all the juicy stuff available to geeks like me. I'm no fan of apple, but when they released a phone they were smart enough to realise it would need a brand new interface, not a badly screwed fork of their desktop OS as MS did with WinCE. This supposedly revolutionary idea has netted them billions because it's the only approach that makes sense. Tightly coupled with the need to have differentiated UI's for different purposes is the attitude some people take is that theirs is the only way to do something, anyone not doing it their way must be stupid. This is tragically false - everyone has a different way of working, and what works for one person doesn't work for another. For instance, I can't live without focus-follows-mouse, despite the fact it took a lot of effort to get working in windows 7, but almost everyone else hates it. Some people just don't want the options to be there because they don't think they're important, and this stops people from finding tricks and tweaks that may help them work better; some bury the config panels with boxes and the user often doesn't have a clue what options to start with.
Off my high horse now. All YMMV, IANAL, IMHO, etc. I just think all these "there is one best way" arguments are detrimental to the computer experience as a whole.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, I don't think anyone has a problem with the GUI anymore, not even our grandmas (mine certainly doesn't). Even GNOME and KDE are pretty damn good for most users these days, and for us part of the geekier crowds we've still got projects like Openbox and Awesome marching ahead.
The problems, rather, lie in areas such as solid OOTB support for hardware both popular and obscure, and various kinds of software and codecs with problematic licenses. Meaning, even grandma can easily play a Theora movie on th
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, no one could ever be successful in selling a Unix certified operating system to the non tec
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say it's perfectly possible. I used to be a tinkerer-type, but I just don't have the time anymore. I don't use Linux anymore because I had to choose between "tinkering with my computer" and "doing what I wanted to do in the first place". So I will demote myself from "technically inclined" to "average user who wants his machine to work"
And here's all I need - I need to install Ubuntu, and it just works. Video cards, sound cards, all the peripherals. I wish I had time to tinker with config files and setti
Re: (Score:2)
I for one am fine with that. To me the bigger question is: can Linux systems cater to the average end-user who has no intention of ever understanding how the system works, without losing everything I love about Linux? You just can't do that without dumbing-down the system. Not "dumbing-down" like smart people vs. stupid people, but "dumbing-down" like technically inclined versus not technically inclined.
It's really ok if Linux never becomes the next Windows, if you never see it on 90%+ of desktops. The 90% of users who are not hobbyists and are not tinkerers and do not find the technology fascinating already have several companies that are happy to meet their needs.
Yeah, that's generally how I feel.
I don't think it's necessarily even a question of "dumbing down" - it's just a different set of needs and expectations. Personally I believe making a good system for hobbyists is a lot tougher: building interfaces for the "average user" is how most people think about UI design, I think, and if you're making a more complex UI, you're also creating more ways to trip yourself up in the design process... "hobbyists" needs are less clearly defined at this point, and possibly (
Re: (Score:2)
For example my brother's Ubuntu 9.1 laptop still doesn't play flash videos (except youtube), and I can't figure out why.
Duh, Flash is the poster child of proprietary technology: you are not supposed to "figure out" anything about it. People who bitch about video and sound in Linux should stop blaming the community and direct their anger at those who are directly responsible for the poor state of affairs: hardware manufacturers and content providers.
Re: (Score:2)
Flash is the poster child of proprietary technology
Flash and flex are completely open source. Download the sdk from adobe [adobe.com], and you can write flash and flex programs with nothing more than vi and a shell to run the compiler.
What's NOT opensourced is Adobe's tools. Not the same thing. You don't need a clicky-pointy interface to make flash swf files.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm confused. I thought that Flash was the greatest thing in the world?
Oh my bad, this article isn't about Android versus Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, in true /. spirit, I DNRTFA, but I'm pretty sure he's talking about the mess of audio layers.
I mean, it's actually pretty simple, right? You have the ALSA driver running on the bare metal, then the PulseAudio daemon giving you individual mixing channels per app, except for Flash which doesn't use PulseAudio and needs to be processed as an exception to go directly to the ALSA interface instead so that the AV sync sort of works, maybe, but only if you're on a 32 bit system or installed 32-bit flash on a
Re: (Score:2)
Lay off, some people happen to like working with the special needs population. And I for one think they should be commended.
Re: (Score:2)
...because Oracle is so much better, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, we know, you don't like anything related to M$, MicroShaft, or Micro$oft, and de Icaza is a total sellout. Having choice is great, as long as you choose (insert technology here), amirite?
Here's a thought: maybe wait until someone actually posts something along those lines before you start bitching about it?
'Cause I seriously haven't seen any of that so far...
Re: (Score:2)
This guy is gushing over a closed proprietary product that isn't even supported on the desktop he's alleged to use.
How does that work exactly?
It's because Novell is in the process of being bought, and he's hoping to get Canonical to hire him to replace Matt Asay, who left in December (didn't even last the whole year). So what better way than to rant about linux user interfaces - Shuttleworth's current hobby-horse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I've got 855GM Integrated Graphics on my laptop. It has always worked well on Windows and never on Linux despite the drivers being open sourced and the hardware specs being available. I'm using Lucid, but it's still a problem today See Lucidi8xxFreezes [ubuntu.com] for a list of the workarounds.
The truth is that even with hardware specs, it takes people with both the required skill and motivation to make things work and keep them working.
Re: (Score:3)
1) Use Debian.
2) Never seen this with any OpenGL software.
3) Tried Scribus?
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry Miguel, but the subject says it all.
Perhaps you should give kde 3.5.x a whirl and find out what an actual pleasant UI is like.
<shrug> I switched from KDE to Gnome and I love it. I'm not real clear what KDE has to offer that's better...