Linux’s Free System Is Now Easier to Use, But Not for Everyone
This column is written for mainstream, nontechie users of digital technology. These folks aren’t necessarily novices, and they aren’t afraid of computers. They also aren’t stupid. They simply want their digital products to operate as promised, with as little maintenance and hassle as possible.
So, I have steered away from recommending Linux, the free computer operating system that is the darling of many techies and IT managers, and a challenger to Microsoft’s dominant Windows and Apple’s resurgent Macintosh operating system, OS X. Linux, which runs on the same hardware as Windows, has always required much more technical expertise and a yen for tinkering than average users possess.
Lately, however, I’ve received a steady stream of emails from readers urging me to take a look at a variant of Linux called Ubuntu, which, these folks claimed, is finally polished enough for a mainstream user to handle. My interest increased when Dell began to sell a few computer models preloaded with Ubuntu instead of Windows.
I’ve been testing one of those Dell Ubuntu computers, a laptop called the Inspiron 1420N. I evaluated it strictly from the point of view of an average user, someone who wouldn’t want to enter text commands, hunt the Web for drivers and enabling software, or learn a whole new user interface. I focused on Ubuntu and the software programs that come bundled with it, not on the hardware, which is a pretty typical Dell laptop.
My verdict: Even in the relatively slick Ubuntu variation, Linux is still too rough around the edges for the vast majority of computer users. While Ubuntu looks a lot like Windows or Mac OS X, it is full of little complications and hassles that will quickly frustrate most people who just want to use their computers, not maintain or tweak them.
Before every passionate Linux fan attacks that conclusion, let me note that even the folks who make and sell Ubuntu agree with it. Mark Shuttleworth, the South African-born founder of the Ubuntu project, told me this week that “it would be reasonable to say that this is not ready for the mass market.” And Dell’s Web site for its Ubuntu computers warns that these machines are for “for advanced users and tech enthusiasts.”
So, what do I mean when I say Ubuntu is too rough around the edges for average users? Here are some examples.
There is no control panel for adjusting the way the touch pad works, and I found it so sensitive that I was constantly launching programs and opening windows accidentally by touching the thing. Every time the computer awoke from sleep, the volume control software crashed and had to be reloaded.
When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be “bad” or “ugly.”
To get the computer to recognize my Kodak camera and Apple iPod, I had to reboot it several times. When it did find the iPod, it wasn’t able to synchronize with it. Playing videos was a bad experience, with lots of flickering and freezing. Oh, and there’s no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.
The Ubuntu-equipped Inspiron 1420N starts at $744, but the configuration that Dell lent me for testing sells for $1,415. The same unit equipped with Windows Vista costs $1,524. The Ubuntu version includes OpenOffice, the free office suite that competes with Microsoft Office. Dell charges an added $149 for Microsoft Office.
Ubuntu and other versions of Linux have several advantages. Unlike Windows and OS X, they’re free. Unlike Mac OS X, they can be run on the least-expensive popular hardware configurations. Unlike Windows, but like the Mac, they are essentially free of viruses and spyware. And unlike Windows and Mac OS X, they are built and constantly improved by a world-wide network of developers, professional and amateur — the so-called open-source concept that produced the excellent Firefox Web browser.
It makes sense that all the best software brains can’t be located in just two places: Redmond, Wash., where Microsoft is based, and Cupertino, Calif., Apple’s base. And plenty of people reading this have had lots of frustrations with the two better-known operating systems, especially Windows, whose latest iteration, Vista, is disappointing in many ways.
But open source is a two-edged sword. While it draws on smart developers from many places, nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product, and open-source developers often have an imperfect feel for how average people use software. A European company called Canonical is the “commercial sponsor” of Ubuntu and provides support. But it’s largely focused on corporate and techie users. Average Ubuntu users are likely to have to wade through online forums, often written in technical language, to get help.
Dell and Canonical tell me there are complex workarounds for some of the problems I encountered, and that built-in improvements are planned for others. But for now, I still advise mainstream, nontechnical users to avoid Linux.
Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. Find all my columns and videos online free at the new All Things Digital web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.
Comments
My first love is the Mac and OS X, but I do also use Windows and other OSes at work such as Solaris and OpenVMS. I have tried Ubuntu several releases ago and I have to say that I was quite impressed with how much better the experience was than other Linux boxes I’ve tried in the past. While it’s no Mac or Windows it’s a whole lot closer than or Linux systems I’ve tried.
My recommendation is to not be afraid to give it a try. It’s pretty easy but does have a few slighty rough spots.
If Dell fixes the driver issues like were mentioned in Walt’s review then it could be quite usable if purchased from Dell in such a combo.
Posted by Michael Wheeler at September 13th, 2007 at 6:36 amGood review of Linux Ubuntu, but I don’t fully agree. I use the Ubuntu and Red Hat distributions of GNU/Linux, like them both and find them easy to use. I also use Vista Business on a tablet PC that I just bought and XP Professional. I like them both.
Of all I find the Ubuntu OS the best overall, requiring virtually no technophilia to use effectively.
Posted by Wendell Murray at September 13th, 2007 at 7:02 amI think Walt Mossberg knows what he’s talking about and is on-target that Ubuntu (Linux) is not ready for mainstream users, and I doubt that any Linux users would give that comment a second thought. However, consider that Linux is not ready for the “mainstream” user because the “mainstream” user is by definition a former Windows or Mac user. Has anyone done a review of OSes with first-time computer users to truly determine what terms like “user-friendly” even mean? The term is thrown about like the definition is clear, but if you talk to people to determine what they would consider a user-friendly OS, you’ll get as many different responses as there are personal preferences. Let’s face it: A computer is a multi-purpose device. It’s not a word processor, although it can be used as one. It’s not a jukebox, although it can be used as one. To the end of driving a multi-purpose device, the key consideration for an OS should be flexibility, with reliability and ease of use as lesser considerations. With that definition, Linux stops the competition cold in its tracks.
Posted by Geoff Mossburg at September 13th, 2007 at 7:09 am“…But open source is a two-edged sword. While it draws on smart developers from many places, nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product, and open-source developers often have an imperfect feel for how average people use software….”
True.
But have you ever tried making Microsoft or even Apple responsible for “quality” of the software they provided you with (and you paid quite a load of money for, after all)?
And, being a completely “non-techie” user, what do you do once you encounter one of these “rough edges” in Microsoft Windows? Reinstall your system and hope for the best?
I am not sure this is an issue related to Linux but to the basic philosophy “software” is treated right now: I think looking at software as a “commercial product” you just take and use without thinking twice is basically wrong, simply because this “product” is way too complex, too difficult to be fully comprehendable by someone who is just a consumer. Perhaps we should rather focus on “software” as a “service” again - and, talking about that, once you do have someone who takes care of your system, who makes everything the way _you_ want it, I bet you won’t have a Linux environment worse than a Windows or MacOS X one.
Posted by Kristian Rink at September 13th, 2007 at 7:10 am“… The Ubuntu version includes OpenOffice, the free office suite that competes with Microsoft Office. Dell charges an added $149 for Microsoft Office.”
This is a bit off-topic, but you should give requesting a refund of the money a try. It might be easier than you think as this story shows: http://www.thealternative.ch/t.....-Refund-en
Posted by Maik Beckmann at September 13th, 2007 at 7:37 amIMHO, you can’t have an accurate picture of the state of GNU/Linux by testing a single distribution. There are other distros for new users coming from Windows. Try, for instance, PCLinuXOS (now rising to the top in DistroWatch) . It uses KDE (more similar to windows and easier to configure than GNOME, the default Ubuntu desktop environment) , it has a full-featured control center (taken from Mandriva) and Synaptic, the graphical frontend of apt (but adapted to rpm packages) and a big unified repository with local mirrors, so installing programs is very easy and reliable. Nearly all the codecs you may need are included, and those which are not included (w32 and libdvdcss) can be downloaded from the official repositories .Hardware recognition is also very good. You can try it and even use it in live CD, before installing. It’s a community distribution without corporate backing, that’s why you can see a “donate” button in their website, but donating is completely optional.The only difference is that it gives you access to faster download servers (they have to pay for them, that’s why they charge you for that) , but regular servers are just fine. Their forums are smaller than Ubuntu’s, but very helpful, and even better are their irc channels in freenode (#pclinuxos and #pclinuxos-support). Their internationalization is not as good as Ubuntu’s, for the moment, but I’ve found it good enough (my first language is Spanish).
Posted by Martin Obal at September 13th, 2007 at 8:01 amI certainly agree that setting up one’s own Linux installation has more hurdles than setting up a Windows installation. Most Linux distributions come with a wealth of options (both in terms of configuration and in terms of freely installable programs), and only a small subset of these options are wanted by any given user.
So far, Ubuntu is the closest to having a default installation that “just works” — but it’s unfair to pin blame on Linux alone if the laptop sold to you doesn’t function “out of the box”.
Most people use Windows systems that are either actively managed by an IT department or that were configured and (hopefully!) tested by the OEM from which they purchased their computer.
I’d assert that the average Windows or Mac user never installs his or her own OS, and therefore never does the base configuration that is required to make all of the hardware work correctly. If a Linux machine that you purchased isn’t working “out of the box”, then your OEM has failed you. They’re supposed to configure it — that’s what happens with Windows.
The reality is that an unconfigured Linux system is a) scarier and harder to configure for a non-techie and b) can be configured in many more ways than an unconfigured Windows system. However, “average users” flourish when using a Linux installation that they don’t have the manage or configure — I’ve seen it happen many times. Average users don’t like to mess with settings, and they shouldn’t have to.
In a managed environment, the Linux desktop is ready. A single system administrator can configure an army of desktop computers to be more usable than Windows or OSX _and_ require no user-based management. Likewise, OEMs can definitely do a better job of determining with what default configuration their computers should ship. In the interim, it’s up to techies like me to make the online forum support experience both pleasurable and expedient.
Posted by Brendan Ribera at September 13th, 2007 at 8:23 amNot only is the Open-Source-Idea a double-edged sword, but also this review.
As I understand it, you need only one click to install the required codecs. Much simpler than on Windows or Mac, where you have to search, download and install these things. In Ubuntu you have the Synaptics Package Manager, where you can download almost all of the available software for Ubuntu. It is simply a matter of a hand full of mouseclicks. Uninstalling: the same procedure. More centralized and understandable than on other systems.
I remember my last encounter with windows, where I had to downgrade DirectX, because it blocked an application – I don’t remember being more annoyed sitting on a computer. My otherwise ever trusty iBook annoys the hell out of me, because the DivX-Player for OS X is simply the most horrible piece of software I have ever used. In comes the VLC-Player, with which I don’t have any trouble at all (Open Source). I don`t expect the DivX-Player to be better in the future, but I do know that VLC is getting better with every release.
And so is Linux/Ubuntu. While it might be true that Linux is not for everyone, I find some points in this review quite irritating, because Ubuntu even explains to the user why something must be downloaded and installed and can not be included by default – a thing I rarely find on Windows or even the Mac (and when I do it is almost always Open Source Software that explains itself in clear terms).
But I think it would be interesting to see reviews of future versions of Ubuntu or other distributions and see what and how it has changed.
Posted by Jan Lüdeke at September 13th, 2007 at 8:38 amI’ve been using Ubuntu on an Averatec laptop for 11 months. Yes, there are issues with some multimedia, and I can’t use that notebook with a projector, but I get all kinds of work done, and I have only locked-up once.
I have written my Windows to Linux experience when I used Xandros Linux to save my desktop computer that Windows could not recover no matter what I tried. Xandros gave me access to my NTFS partition when Windows wouldn’t even boot on the same computer.
http://members.whattheythink.c.....m?id=30033
In the end, open source software is rather marvelous, and I find it far more sturdy but with fewer exotic features. Many of my Windows programs work smoother and faster in the WINE package in Linux. In fact, some of the Windows versions of Linux programs work better in WINE than their Linux versions do in Xandros Linux.
As far as recommending it, Walt is right. If I was to start today, but had some cash to spend, It would be on a Mac.
But if a computer was to be used to just surf for business and not entertainment purposes, and to get basic documents done, there is no reason not to recommend Linux for desktops. Notebooks are flaky things, for sure, which is one of the reasons why Dell’s efforts are critical to Linux adoption. It’s not like they don’t tweak Windows to get optimum performance out of the box. But Dell’s participation, and others, like HP and Lenovo, will get the attention of peripheral and software makers who will finally start addressing connectivity issues seriously.
Personally, I have been testing Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon test releases, and I expect that I will make a 90% switch to Linux at the time the final release is made for my work. I will retain a Windows “entertainment” computer.
In the end, I would recommend Linux to my mother, who just surfs, IMs and prints things out. I would not recommend it to my wife, who does lots of digital photography and like using the office software for which she is most familiar.
Most important, I recommend it to me, as I’m tired of lockups, slow-downs, and other various bad behavior that Windows provides as a product feature.
Posted by Joe Webb at September 13th, 2007 at 8:40 amUnfortunately, I have to agree with Walt’s conclusions. I’m an Ubuntu/Dell user who blogs about Ubuntu daily at http://www.allaboutubuntu.com“. My family loves Ubuntu. My wife and three sons all use the Ubuntu PC at home every day. But we still have a second system for videos, iPod/iTunes and other consumer-oriented applications.
I would definitely buy additional Dell PCs with Ubuntu pre-installed. But I wouldn’t recommend the systems — not yet, anyway — to neighbors who are basic Windows users. Instead, I’d tell them to go get an iMac or MacBook. You just can’t beat Apple for everyday consumers at this point.
Posted by joe panettieri at September 13th, 2007 at 12:35 pmI’ve been using some variant of Unix as my desktop operating system for roughly 23 years now. During that time I’ve also used CP/M, VMS, MSDOS, MacOS, and a succession of Windows variants. There hasn’t been a moment in those years when Unix wasn’t superior to all of its competitors in stability, expressive power, performance, versatility, ease of learning, and ease of use. When Windows 3.0 came on the scene, it was inferior to the version of MIT’s X window system I was using on a Sun.
In 1994, after trying Linux at home for a while, I happily retired the Dec workstation on my desktop at work in favor of a Linux box. My wife and kids, in spite of preferring Windows for entertainment, still use the Linux email accounts I set up for them. We haven’t had a virus in our household since the boot-sector virus I inadvertently brought home on a floppy disk ten years ago.
Is Linux different from Windows and MacOS? Sure. Is it harder to install from scratch? No, in spite of the fact that Dell routinely bungles the job (I’ve had several Linux machines from Dell). Is it harder to learn? No. Switching from Windows to Linux is certainly no harder, and arguably easier, than switching from Windows to Mac. It’s probably easier to learn Linux as a first OS, though it might be hard to find research subjects between the ages of five and 80 who have never been subjected to Windows.
Is it ready for the average user’s desktop? Certainly! But will the average user make the switch without strong motivation? Probably not; bad habits are hard to break.
Posted by Steve Savitzky at September 13th, 2007 at 1:07 pmI’m a retired engineer and I spent my entire career in various parts of the computer industry. I first used Unix in the early 1980s and used it occasionally later but never enough to become truly proficient.
A few months ago I decided to try several versions of Linux to see how user friendly they were. Ubuntu hung during the install on two of the three PCs where I tried to do a clean install, I never figured out why. On the third computer it went better until I tried to surf the web and got to sites that require Java or Flash. I couldn’t figure out how to download either Linux plugin to Firefox.
I was rather dismayed that so many of the Linux evangelists that I found didn’t realize how user-unfriendly it is. Their solutions to problems usually consisted of a series of command lines. That’s not user friendly and I can’t ask non-techies to do it.
The only flavor of Linux that I found that comes close to being user friendly is Xandros Home Edition-Premium. That version is rather harshly panned by many Linux purists, however, because Xandros has the audacity to charge for it.
The business model for companies like Red Hat is to give the software away free and hope they can make it up by charging for support. I don’t think that will work in the consumer market.
There are thousands of free Unix applications available but few have adequate documentation.
Posted by Gary Welch at September 13th, 2007 at 1:20 pmAs Open Source Software in general and Ubuntu and other linux flavors in particular attempt to go ‘mainstream’ with the non-technical user, there are definitely issues they are going to run up against, several of which were outlined above. A lot of times, the rougher edges have not been smoothed out, but the good news is that with open source, anyone can ’scratch the itch’ and put out a fix. With a vibrant community behind Ubuntu and several other flavors, we can expect fixes and enhancements to be released rapidly, and have them be far more stable. The Mozilla projects, amongst others, have shown that great consumer-facing products can be built to overtake the functionality of existing products from companies like Microsoft. At our Open Source community site, OurVox, we are seeing a lot of users wanting to find Open Source alternatives to proprietary source applications (e.g. LAME instead of Winamp, or Spark instead of Yahoo/MSN Messenger). The problem with Open Source is that anyone can put out a product, and the quality and usability (depending on user skill) of a lot of these applications is unknown. You want to use the wisdom of the crowd, and of your trusted network to find and evaluate the best products for your needs. Though Ubuntu might not be there today, it is going to be very interesting to see how it stacks up the next time Microsoft releases the next version of their Operating System. And, let us not forget that Mac OS X is built on top of BSD, so great products, including OSes are being built on top of Open Source apps.
Posted by Arjun Chopra at September 13th, 2007 at 1:36 pmDecent enough review, but there are two issues that stick out to me.
“When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be “bad” or “ugly.””
The same could be said for a Windows machine and playing anything outside of wm* and mpeg file. Try playing a quicktime or divx file on a fresh Windows install and you’ll have the same problem. Personally I think it’s nice of Ubuntu to get the codecs and warn the user of possible legal issues, rather than ask the user to hunt down and install the codecs manually.
“Oh, and there’s no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.”"
Any operating system will have this issue. Decrypting DVD’s without paying for a license is possibly illegal, so neither will play an encrypted DVD without installing additional software.
Automatix is a utility that will fix most of these issues for you, apparently Michael Dell has used it himself.
http://www.getautomatix.com/
Posted by Rob Nix at September 13th, 2007 at 2:05 pmLinux still has the potentials, but the problem is many of its developers are not getting it. I can share some of the experience I had three months ago trying Ubuntu, Fedora and others dist.
For example, configuring setting for the touchpad or mouse was like hell when I used Gnome as my desktop environment. I can see that Gnome developers don’t want users to deal with trivial setting and assume that the system will get it right at once. However, the system didn’t and I had no easy access just to configure a simple touchpad/mouse.
Another thing was in many Linux dist NetworkManager was turned off by default… for what? And it actually took three command lines so that it will be turned on I log in. Also, it wasn’t easy to setup NetworkManager if users need to configure WEP/WPA settings and such.
Another “amazing” thing was that Fedora Core 6 failed to install 2200BG properly. It took a very big effort just to get it right, such as updating the Linux Kernel. I don’t get it… 2200BG had been out for at least two years by that point and 2200BG is definitely a popular wireless chip even today. The good thing was that Fedora 7 got it right at once afterwards.
Also, I see that both Gnome and especially KDE have inherited many of the dumb designs from Microsoft Windows, such as putting the configurations in many different places that people won’t think of. I know that the developers are doing this for the sake of Windows converters, but that is definitely not a smart way. Please, learn the mistakes that Microsoft Windows had done and correct it!
Posted by Roger Chu at September 13th, 2007 at 2:13 pmBased on my experience of following the discussions surrounding Ubuntu and Linux on the desktop, there is clear absence of forthright communication in regard to the appeal of Linux. In my opinion the reason that Linux has such an ardent following is not that it is free or offers compelling user benefits beyond those of Microsoft’s Windows or Apple’s OS X, but that it is not developed exclusively by a US company. Linux on the desktop will never attain the ubiquity of Windows in the U.S. nor the offer the seamless ease of use provided by the OS X ecosystem, but does provide the hope that one day it may break the United States hegemony of global desktop computing. Which is fine if that’s your goal, just don’t try to convince me it’s a superior OS to either Windows or OS X in their present state or even the foreseeable future.
Posted by Clement Galluccio at September 13th, 2007 at 4:23 pmDo I understand what Rob Nix means by the following:
Rob quotes this from Mossberg: “Oh, and there’s no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.””
And responds thusly: “Any operating system will have this issue. Decrypting DVD’s without paying for a license is possibly illegal, so neither will play an encrypted DVD without installing additional software.”
On a Mac you pop in the DVD, Apple’s DVD Player opens, and the movie plays. I don’t imagine it is much more difficult on a PC, is it?
Posted by Nicolas Martin at September 13th, 2007 at 6:39 pm“On a Mac you pop in the DVD, Apple’s DVD Player opens, and the movie plays. I don’t imagine it is much more difficult on a PC, is it?”
Apple pays a licensing fee for CSS to the DVD Copy Control Association so you can legally decrypt DVD’s. Microsoft does not, so on both Windows and Linux systems you can only watch unencrypted DVD’s without the need for any additional software.
Posted by Rob Nix at September 13th, 2007 at 7:18 pmFirst of all, let me say, I have no idea why anyone recommends Ubuntu. It’s Gnome based, which is very unfamiliar to either a Mac or Windows user, and not very user friendly at that. Second, Ubuntu is an OS that requires you to do a lot of command line stuff. Just to get you nVidia graphics card to use 3D acceleration, you must install the proper package, go to a terminal and type ’sudo nivia-glx-config enable’ to get it running. How many new users can figure that out?
Honestly, someone coming from another OS will feel more comfortable in the KDE environment. Also, there are much friendlier distros out there like PCLinuxOS. It has a nice Control Center that lets you configure most of your computer via the GUI. It has a small, but well thought out package selection. It’s probably the easiest Linux distro out there to get setup.
Lastly, in reference to Rob Nix, most Linux distros have access to libdvdcss2, which is what one needs to get Linux to watch unencrypted DVD’s. Some distros hide it from you in a repository not setup by default, others let 3rd parties provide it, but it’s still free and out there for the taking.
Posted by Ruel Smith at September 13th, 2007 at 7:30 pmLike Ruel Smith, I also think Ubuntu is not the best choice for beginners.
I would personly recommend Mandriva Linux for mostly one tool : The Mandriva Control Center and the drakwizards.
I use it without writing any line of code in any configuration file.
regards.
Posted by jean dupré at September 13th, 2007 at 7:44 pm“Second, Ubuntu is an OS that requires you to do a lot of command line stuff. Just to get you nVidia graphics card to use 3D acceleration, you must install the proper package, go to a terminal and type ’sudo nivia-glx-config enable’ to get it running. How many new users can figure that out?”
Ubuntu has a nice gui with checkboxes for this now. No need for command line to do this.
“Lastly, in reference to Rob Nix, most Linux distros have access to libdvdcss2, which is what one needs to get Linux to watch unencrypted DVD’s. Some distros hide it from you in a repository not setup by default, others let 3rd parties provide it, but it’s still free and out there for the taking.”
True, but because of the DMCA, it’s still legally questionable to provide this library in the U.S.
Posted by Rob Nix at September 13th, 2007 at 9:18 pmHaving watched this whole review he brings up some good points, the problem is two-fold though with it.
First of all hes using a laptop. Linux as an operating system is still in terms of support Server > Desktop > Laptop.
Laptops have well known support issues that all people with any sense of the OS (any distributions) bemoan, both inside and outside the Linux userbase.
Second of all hes making complaints about things that are simplistic to fix and often do so automatically. I think Windows and Mac users are used to downloading additional software for system updates and updates for other software.
Linux in most cases will do this automatically, if you try to play Quicktime video it will direct you to the codecs (which contrary to what their name suggests tend to work well) and they are SMALL updates, under five minutes to download if you have a decent connection at all.
DVDs may not automatically grab the updates but you can sure as heck use Synaptic Package manager and look for “DVD” in the search box.
Guarantee you that you’ll find multiple suggestions (which explain themselves when you highlight them). Linux can not by law include in a distribution any software that has a paid license thats not something you can hold against it as a free OS (free as in beer).
Its funny that he complains about downloading “codecs” really, because Windows makes it far harder to get Ogg codecs for instance than Linux does to get MP3 codecs.
In fact, Windows and Mac both make it harder to get additional software than any Linux distro with Synaptic does. Basically if you can read the box and realize you don’t have a particular operating system you can run Ubuntu on desktop hardware without too many issues.
Posted by Samuel Woods at September 14th, 2007 at 4:35 amI think Walter is spot on, on this topic. Having 20 years experience in this industry and working with many different OSs, I still can’t recommend Ubuntu (or other Linux OSs)to other members of my family and friends for the very same reasons Walter mentioned. I love that part “open-source developers often have an imperfect feel for how average people use software”.
Posted by shahram Mirkazemi at September 14th, 2007 at 8:11 amI’m a free/open source software advocate and must agree wholeheartedly with much of what Walt Mossberg has written. I’m a technie and am afraid that Linux just ain’t ready for the rest of us on the desktop, and even less so on laptops (where you see the worst-case behavior when it comes to user experience).
Over the years, I have inhabited corporate and academic spaces only to find that there is a general aversion to using Unix in a desktop setting. While Linux has made tremendous strides forward as a desktop environment, I think the overall progress has been hobbled, paradoxically, by trying to make the experience Windows-like, because in most cases, people “in the know” will compare the Windows UI to the Linux UI. There is no comparison in reality, the Linux UI has even farther to go before it reaches the level of even better UI experiences as found on Mac, which has been more innovative in the UI space than Microsoft, even if you’re not a Mac fan.
In the interim, I truly think the best choice for most folks who might be interested in Linux is to run it on a Mac or Windows using virtualization software. This is what I do, because my work and research is aimed at all viable computing platforms. There is great value, Walt, even for non-techie users who might be maintaining small business/personal web sites to ensure their sites are usable on all platforms. Ubuntu, while not perfect, is probably the best play for personal use (even if “rough around the edges”).
I’ll also add that there is a difference between being “rough around the edges” and reliability. We use Linux in a production server environment. Most of our critical servers have been running for years without requiring a reboot. The availability of free/open source software is a competition that is worth waging, and should help to keep the rest of this industry honest. Better yet, it has allowed us to put our money where it matters most (e.g. better hardware).
Keep hope alive!
Posted by George Thiruvathukal at September 14th, 2007 at 10:12 amHello Walt,
thanks for your review.
I have different experiences with “newcomers” and Linux. Both my brother and my son started with Ubuntu some while ago, and they never complained about doing so. Both have used Windows before. We have a 67-year-old aunt, who never used a computer, and on her system we installed Debian. She is happily using it since then. And even our daughter (2 years and 8 months old) is using programs like “Childsplay” or “GCompris” (which are also availabe in some flavor called “Edubuntu” AFAIK) on my Debian Etch machine here without any problem.
Since I didn’t know of a better way of “giving back” to the community, I started “TheDebianUser.org” a year ago, mostly “targeted” to users. If you look for beginners’ advice, there are tags like “Level: Beginner”, or “Level: All”. Recently, I wrote some stuff for Ubuntu users as well - since this is, mostly, Debian.
Concerning hardware: maybe you should have had a look at one of ZaReason’s machines as well. They are in the Linux business longer than Dell, and according to third-party comments, they “live and breathe” free software.
Anyway: thanks for your review again, and keep up the good work. Your column is appreciated here in Germany as well.
Kind regards,
Posted by Wolfgang Lonien at September 14th, 2007 at 3:20 pmWolfgang Lonien
http://wolfgang.lonien.de/
http://blog.thedebianuser.org/
I have a dual-boot system on my HP Pavillion. I agree totally with this article, but add one comment:
Linux does not crash.
As I migrated back to Windows, I get very aggravated with the constant crashing that I avoided in Ubuntu.
A few more years, and we should all be able to rid ourselves of Windows.
Posted by Stuart Preston at September 15th, 2007 at 10:03 amI switched from Microsoft to Linux about two and a half years ago. I’d started with MS DOS 5.0. I just got tired of trying to maintain four computers in the house and deal with spyware, viruses and the BSOD, for no apparent reason, and continual reinstalls to get rid of the BSOD.
The bottom line is that Linux is easier to deal with by far and I’m no brilliant kid…I was 60 years old before I tried Linux the first time. Linux does everything I want and more, so I have no complaints.
My only gripe is all the glowing stories about Ubuntu and how easy it is for any beginner. I’ve tried installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu for the past year or so…on several occasions. Each and every occasion has been met with utter frustration, for one reason or another…usually hardware related.
My latest attempt, this past week, was with Kubuntu 7.04. Sure, it installed easily…too easily for me…I had nothing in the way of choices during the install, as I have with OpenSUSE or Fedora, during the install.
Then, the big problem! Just try to get Kubuntu to install an Nvidia driver and set up the display for a 1440×900 LCD widescreen monitor! Good luck!
I even tried the “easy to use” Nvidia installer, called “Envy.” It did install the driver, but I was unable in any way to get the screen resolution to remain at 1440×900. I spent two days trying. Often, if I’d reboot, the resolution would go back to 800x something…making further action difficult, or even better…to just a flashing cursor on the screen with a completely borked system. Six reinstalls and several trips to the Ubuntu forums, seeing numerous people with the same issue told me I was in good company. The best forum response I found was, “If you figure out a solution, please let us know.”
Well, with either OpenSUSE or Fedora, all hardware is recognized right off and I can manually install the Nvidia driver in OpenSUSE in three minutes or less, including download time…and I have the screen resolution set exactly right. I’d recommend either distro to a beginner in a second! Forum help is much better, too.
Further, I agree that Gnome is a poor choice for a Windows user, as it’s going to be unfamiliar. I’ve used KDE from the beginning and it’s much more user friendly for customizing choices.
Posted by Stan Kain at September 15th, 2007 at 10:09 amExcuse me for stating the obvious, but Walt is very wrong.
The blame on Walts laptop experience being so miserable, belongs solely to Dell.
No polish, no fine tuning as is done with every MS branded PC Dell offers.
Dell failed to make Ubuntu work well for the consumer here. This failure belongs only to Dell. It is very clear that all of the issues Walt experienced have resolutions that any QA program inside Dell should have rectified before product release.
Dell needs to be scrutinized for its motives and lack of execution.
Posted by Zeke Dawdy at September 15th, 2007 at 9:04 pm&
Walt needs to point the finger at the source of the problem. Clue, it is not Linux or Ubuntu.
Hi Walt,
Posted by kevin matthews at September 16th, 2007 at 11:51 amYou know it’s funny you use linux for a while you don’t notice the rough edges as much. The more technical you are the less likely you are to see these problems. This is why linux needs non-tech users to tell the techs when something is too hard, counter intuitive, or just plain cryptic.
Also you might like linux mint or the sometimes shunned linspire both come with more codecs by default leading to less setup hassles. Both are based of Ubuntu right now. Linux mint is questionable legally in the states because the codecs aren’t licensed. Mint is very polished and I feel you may have better luck with it. Linspire licenses codecs and is not free but some people enjoy it. You will sacrifice some money and free software rights for convenience thought.
I have been using linux for about 5 years. While it is interesting, I have to say that I am exhausted trying to find just one that will do what I want without any tweaking. Lately I started using Vista, and I wonder what element of paranoia prevails in the way Vista gets knocked about. For me, it has been like a rest period. The OS is slick, looks good, Windows Media Player is beautiful. I have not had to go looking for codecs, adjust screen resolutions, find good fonts etc. Supporting software is great. By the way, let’s not make such a big deal about “free” things like OpenOffice. I use OpenOffice, Mozilla, SongBird, Thunderbird with windows, so what is the compelling need to use Linux with all its attendant aggravations??
Posted by Ron Powell at September 16th, 2007 at 3:46 pmDon’t get me wrong. I will be a very happy camper if and when Linux gives me the seamlessness of windows. I will even pay for it (at a reasonable price, of course).
I’m a blogger who spoke with Dell’s Linux team on September 14 to get an update on the company’s Ubuntu strategy. Sounds like Dell is trying to keep a low profile with Ubuntu, and largely agrees with Walt’s perspective that the operating system certainly isn’t ready for all consumers yet.
Posted by joe panettieri at September 17th, 2007 at 10:26 amWalt -
It’s a fair review. Linux does have warts, but you need to remember that it’s a free OS, created without the support of the major corporations that grease the wheels of consumer technology (while at the same time, controlling its direction). So, you would expect things like DVDs not playing, as they’re encrypted to prevent you from playing them without buying an “approved” player from someone “in the club”.
By the way, Windows Media Player always seems to want to search for codecs, and I can’t play DVDs on my Windows machine without purchasing “PowerDVD” or some extra-cost decryption module for Media Player.
That being said, I (as a working engineer) don’t have any problems *using* Linux, I find it no more difficult than any other OS. What I *do* like about it, is that it’s not subject to unanticipated “updates”, and it provides me with the features *I* choose to install. Linux gives *me* far more control over my “computing experience” than Apple or Microsoft appear to be willing to allow.
As the big players work to position the personal computer away from being a general purpose tool, and more towards a locked down “content delivery platform”, I see Linux as an opportunity to take back control. I can rip my CDs and DVDs to smaller files, which I can then view on whatever platform I wish. I can use Open Office, knowing that I’ll never be locked out of my documents by a format change. I can create and edit video files in open formats, viewable across Apple, Microsoft and Linux platforms.
As to ease of use by those who are not Linux enthusiasts, I offer the following examples: my brother (a complete computer novice) and my daughter (art history graduate student). Neither has any trouble using Linux for their daily computing needs. I do get the odd “how do I do this” call, but the issue is usually easy to resolve. And, for the tougher ones, there’s a secure remote desktop tool. IBM actually supports Linux on their laptops. My daughter’s T40 works better with Linux than with Windows XP (there’s a USB bug under XP that prevents her iPod from working…Linux fixed it!). My brother’s only comment, after I substituted Linux for Win2K on his PC, was that it seemed to run faster (probably because I removed not only Windows, but the anti-virus program that was using up CPU cycles checking every file and web page for nasties).
So, I guess the rough edges (plenty of help available with Google, by the way) are the price you pay for the freedom of controlling your own computer. And Linux is an order of magnitude better and easier to use than it was 10 years ago. I think we need to be glad that the choice is available for those who want an alternative to Microsoft (and their constant upgrade cycles) or Apple.
Posted by Peter Simpson at September 17th, 2007 at 10:47 amI have to disagree with your whole slant on this issue. At this point Dell hasn’t taken enough steps to show it really supports GNU/Linux. What it has done is put on a show for users who do not want to pay for Microsoft Windows or are technical and experienced GNU/Linux users. It would be wrong to assume that this means GNU/Linux is not ready for the masses. All this shows is Dell & GNU/Linux are not ready for the masses. I have worked with GNU/Linux for 10 years and all the issues you pretty much describe have been solved with Freespire 1.x and Linspire 5 provided you obtain it from a company that actually supports it. At this point that is still a little difficult to do. The operating system is however ready for the masses and has been for quite some time if a company like Dell chose to take it up and actually support it like it does Microsoft Windows. My 60 year old father has used Linspire 5 for the past year without incident at home. He even required IBM Lotus Notes and Cisco VPN support and we had him up and running without problems. My mother is a elementary school teacher who also was running Linspire 5 for several months. About the only thing she needed was FirstClass, an email client and your normal set of programs like OpenOffice, and Firefox. To tell me it isn’t ready blows my mind. You can even get commercial support for it. Mirus & Linspire sell the Koobox and have a toll free phone number with in-home support options. I can’t say the service is totally satisfactory, but overall the peaces exist to make it so. Linspire does include all the proprietary codecs that Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X include. It also has available for purchase separately commercial DVD software if you do not purchase a computer with it bundled.
Posted by Michael Roberts at September 17th, 2007 at 10:50 amWhile I disagree that the problems you mentioned are simply unsolvable, I will agree that the average windows user (as example) migrating over will not be able to find/fix the problems as easily as someone who is not somewhat more familiar/more prepared with Ubuntu.
I think your article was an excellent review. I see why people respect you as a reviewer, and look forward to when we can all agree that Ubuntu is simple enough for the average user to use, and am curious if you think any other distro is more headed in that direction.
I love Ubunutu but it was indeed a learning process to adjust to.
Posted by Matthew Reingold at September 17th, 2007 at 10:56 amI enjoy Walt’s articles and think he is one of the best technical writers out there and mostly offers an unbiased view compared to some others whom I won’t name here.
I have an Acer notebook on which I installed Ubuntu and use primarily to read e-mail and browse the web. I have had almost the same exact experiences as Walt, my touch pad is almost unusable; web plug-ins either don’t work or requires hours of troubleshooting to get working; getting my wireless pc card working took almost a week of research and trial and error to get working; overall just not a great experience.
I’ve finally have it working like I want it to, but this is definitely not a setup for a novice or even intermediate computer user. Ubuntu however is the best distribution I’ve tried to date and gives us a good idea of where Linux is going in the future and the future looks good.
My background: I’m a System Administrator with over 15 years of experience managing Windows, Macs, Unix and Linux based systems.
Posted by Tim Boyden at September 17th, 2007 at 11:45 am1. No, gsynaptic or ksynpatic will let you configure your touchpad trought a GUI…wow
2. Everything in linux don’t just go inside, there is always someone to test if something is ready to go in the main trunk of developpement.
3. If your Ipod or Camera don’t work great inside linux…Go and ask Kodak or Apple what they made to make it work.
4. Asking non technical users to avoid linux is the worst thing i ever heard. If there is non technical users…how would we know how to make softwares for them…Thats simple…frequent question mean there is a problem…See the next version of Ubuntu will come with a xorg Gui…why? Not everybody likes to use command line…Same if command line is more effective in many ways, Gui are fun to use when we are lazy enough to just use the mouse…
But telling people to avoid their problems is just stupid….
Posted by Loïc Faure-Lacroix at September 17th, 2007 at 1:31 pmAh and Ugly and Bad are names for package…these codecs aren’t actually bad…
thats probably just the kind of codecs they have that are bad…ugly for proprietary codecs (if i’m not wrong)
Posted by Loïc Faure-Lacroix at September 17th, 2007 at 1:34 pmbad…i cannot remember why…wmv are probably in the “bad” package. These codecs actually do works great. they aren’t just in the same category of codecs as ogg would be!
Walt, probably you have several points here. But I am on the other side of the fence. I am an IT person and my daily work involves SUN Solaris, Linux and Windows. My family and I use several flavours of Linux since 2005 (I use Ubuntu as my only OS, my wife uses Opensuse and switches sometimes to Windows, my 5 years old has a Xubuntu-only PC, all handcrafted by me). Recently I purchased a DELL Inspiron 1501 laptop (a cheapo) and as soon as it came with MS Vista (I choose to shed some more cash and got the Business edition). As soon as I booted MS Vista Business I was deeply disgusted with the way it works (annoying confirmation messages all the time, wireless networking through USB dongles associate preferences to the USB ports and not to the MAC addresses so if you plug the same adapter in a different port you will have to reconfigure it) and I have a long list of other problems including mixing up French and Dutch languages in the localised Belgian version Setup (so I get help calls from my friends asking what to do with their new PCs). For this reason, it really bothers me directly, as I am nearly forced to waste time on it. So, on my laptop I relegated Vista to as little as 20 G of HD space giving all the rest to Ubuntu, that runs happily and is doing much more of what I want compared to what it thinks is necessary. I think that Vista has become un-ready for teh masses while Linux is becoming ready for the masses. Of course I do not pretend to be a average user. And I also must admit that I have worked 2 years for MS (1992-1994). However, I think that the design choices of the Ubuntu team are excellent and the direction taken by this distribution is the correct one when compared to Vista. On Linux, software is excellent, when software exists for the task at hand (Openoffice, Firefox, Thunderbird, Amarok, K3B, Audacity and even Gimp are world class applications). More applications are being developed to cover more gaps. True, Drivers are not always available and sometimes you have to fight quite a bit to get your devices working. However, this is not a fault of the OS but of the vendors not willing to support the OS (they will change their mind). The forums are of great help in resolving HW problems. I am sure that in the long run the market share of this OS is going to grow dramatically. On final thing: Personally I really think that my laptop and desktop Ubuntu PCs are more usable and useful than if I was running windows. Having said this, I have a question: how long did you run Ubuntu for and did you actually install it or only had a go at it using the live CD? (In fact you cannot do that with Windows). Did you have a look at how easy is to get some (open source) applications installed with Synaptic? How does that compare?
Posted by Antonio Ferraro at September 17th, 2007 at 2:36 pmI must say, I disagree. I feel that Ubuntu is very close to ready for the mean stream market. (At least as much as Windows latest failure, Vista). Ubuntu is my default system on all my machines, and I have found it very stable on the laptop as well as desktop hardware.
Many people say the Linux requires too much knowledge of the command-line, but I haven’t found anything in Ubuntu that cannot be done with a GUI program. Sure, the command-line is often easier for those of us with command-line experience, but far from necessary.
There are programs such as Synaptics which download and install all your programs, and getting qsynaptics, or gsynaptics to configure a touchpad is no more difficult to understand and do then installing custom drivers for hardware in Windows.
There few areas I feel that Ubuntu may be lacking, and they are the ATI video card department, and some wireless network cards. (But even the wireless cards are somewhat difficult to install drivers for in Windows, and the progress the Ubuntu/Linux community is making is amazing.)
Posted by Alex Smith at September 17th, 2007 at 3:49 pmI was looking at Ubuntu for family members on some of our PC’s, and I confess, I pretty much agree with his assessment.
It’s not *quite* ready for the non-technical user. My bigggest gripe was wireless cards - I couldn’t get my Linksys wireless card to work with it, even though it detected it, detected the network, and was listed as being compatible. I eventually got it working without WPA encryption (Which, since I live in the boonies, I am living with, but unhappy about), My printer still is working right, and a host of other minor complaints. Plus it actually seems a bit harder on my PC than the (Heavily tweaked, with large amounts of stuff ripped out) XP pro I used before Ubuntu.
On the other hand, it’s really competing with Vista in terms of it’s equivalent, so it’s running on equipment Vista wouldn’t deign to touch.
And it *is* better (Barring WPA and a printer), once it’s going. I had to make a decision as to whether I was upgrading to Ubuntu or Vista, and it wipes the floor with Vista - it’s better on my ‘not sota when it was built two years ago’ machine than Vista is on the machines that are sold now. It’s got great programs, and if I can get qemu and/or wine runnning the few items I miss from windows will be resolved.
But it’s not yet as close to ‘just works’ as XP was.
Jonnan
Posted by Jonnan West at September 17th, 2007 at 4:54 pmFair review. I’ve been playing with computers for 20 years now and I am so impressed with Ubuntu. As you pointed out though, the wife couldn’t,wouldn’t try it. Her loss in my opinion. One the most impressive things about Ubuntu to me is the forums, so helpful they are unreal. Have yet to come up with a problem I couldn’t sole in minutes with the forums help. Can’t really say I miss Microsoft. Again though nice review.
Posted by ted trujillo at September 17th, 2007 at 6:58 pmBecame tired of Microsoft and their constant updates (read need for me to purchase the “new and improved” I oopted to go with Ubuntu. I purchased a laptop from System76 with Ubuntu installed as well as with a load of drivers, etc. Out of the box the laptop booted up, recognized my wireless network, found my printer and I was ready to go. This impressed the heck out of me.
I was able to immediately create a presentation using Impress and that also impressed me.
I did work with System76 support to get the machine to recognize a projector. Once we looked at the nVidia-settings and did the appropriate thing I can now project the image as well as see same on my screen.
I believe the secret to my painless transition to Ubuntu was due to buying the laptop from a company that specializes in Ubuntu and takes the time to provide the drivers, etc.
Dell, in my opinion, is offering Ubuntu (can’t find reference to that in their literature)as a way of hedging their bets on the future of operating systems.
China, the largest market in the world, is not interested in paying for an operating system when they can get one that does all things well for free.
I’m a 78 year old who, as a volunteer, teaches senior citizens to use computers. Sad to say, they buy Windows machines. So I’ll have to remain conversant with Windows 98, Millenium, XP and now Vista. However I’m not buying the latest iteration, Vista. I’ll catch up with it at our community computer lab.
Posted by Henry Juelch at September 17th, 2007 at 7:46 pmI agree that Ubuntu isn’t ready yet, but for different reasons.
All of the reasons mentioned in the article (except the comments on open source) are problems that Dell have not fixed before shipping. By default Windows XP or Vista Home won’t play DVDs and won’t allow customisation of a touchpad, those things would be installed by Dell. And the volume-manager crashing can also be fixed quite easily, why didn’t Dell do this? Apparently Dell didn’t even install proper graphics card drivers, which is ridiculous.
And why was there no mention of all the free software that comes with Ubuntu, compared to a windows machine?
The reason I don’t think Ubuntu is ready is because hardware support still a bit flakey. A user couldn’t easily go out and buy something and expect it to work with Ubuntu. You have to be careful. The same goes with software, naturally.
It’s so very, very nearly there though!
Posted by Karl Buckland at September 18th, 2007 at 5:51 amIMHO, as seen from near a 50 years perspective, the “mainstream user” is a moving target, as elusive as “artificial intelligence” or a “walking robot” are.
Posted by Alfredo Perez at September 18th, 2007 at 3:34 pmOnce upon a time the only things a “mainstream user” will need were a text processor (WordStar, Word Perfect, or a dozen others) and a spreadsheet (VisiCalc, MultiPlan, or a dozen others), only a “power user” will ask for a DBMS with a report writer (dB2, Clarion, Clipper, or a dozen others).
Once a “walking robot” could displace itself (crawl) on a horizontal, rigid plane we begin to ask for up/down a stair, up/down an inclined plane, dirt surface, etc. up to the lunar/mars rovers.
So the “mainstream user” has to be provided with a modem, a GUI (with its pointing device aka mouse), presentation editor, sound and video signal processors, drawing editors, renderman, etc. etc.
So, what if Walt’s new laptop doesn’t play DVD or MP3? Let a laptop do the jobs it is intended to, and let the DVD player, music center do their own plays.
In Walt own words, a stated in his Ethics Statement “For instance, my personal and work computers, my digital media players, digital camera, and cell phone, were all purchased this way, as are my Internet service, cell phone service, and cable TV service.”
I still prefer my Philips player to see DVD’s, my Sanyo VHS to record/play CATV programs (like World Rugby Championship on ESPN) and my PC to run, well, PC programs.
I don’t find to see a movie in a laptop alongside my wife to be a enthrallig experience, once (or both) will get a stiffneck before the movie ends.
Ok… maybe in Ubuntu you have to do extra steps to make an mp3 play, but come on… its just 2 cliks… or do you prefer paying some extra money to Ubuntu to allow it play mp3 by default? just like you are doing with your mac?, and what about openoffice? what about pidin?(gaim) what about firefox? Evolution?
Posted by Igor Guerrero at September 21st, 2007 at 7:18 pmFor those of you unfamiliar with and confused by the idea of differing distros of Linux it may be easier to think of Linux as if it were a car.
There are different manufacturers of cars but the basic idea remains the same. Tires, seats, radio, doors are standard parts that most car companies include.
Linux is the same in that there are different manufacturers (distros) of Linux but the basic idea remains the same. OpenOffice.org, GIMP, Rhythmbox, Evolution are standard parts that most Linux companies include.
Also the title of this article is silly. It does not make sense to say Linux’s.
It’s clear to me that Walt is not yet qualified to write an article on Linux.
Posted by Robert MacEwan at September 23rd, 2007 at 3:56 pmI think this review fails completely to see some extreme benefits of Ubuntu. I’m an all-rounder: I mainly use Ubuntu (after a total Win XP virus havoc), now work on my home iMac, and occationally use Windows (but keep off Vista 100% until service pack 2…).
First, I really cannot understand how it can be that this Ubuntu distro could not play a regular DVD or mp3 file. I’ve never tried that, and I’m running Ubuntu on many machines. May it rather be Dell than Ubuntu that is the fault here?
Second, let’s not forget the BIG positives here: no viruses (yet), better security, and not to forget a whole library of freeware at your choice. best of all, Ubuntu sees to that not only your OS but also your programs are fully up to date. Automatically (well, you do have to approve…) and 99% of the time without reboot.
And please do not forget that Mac is more or less the same thing as linux, only better integrated. But with the latest Ubuntu distros, who’s to tell the difference? I must even admit that I’ve been partially dissapointed with some aspects of my new and lovely iMac. Just simple things such as copy and paste between programs is not error free. Programs may be buggy, clitches occur, and web interfaces are not always optimal with the built-in Safari Browser — I sometimes have to turn to other browsers such as Firefox or Opera.
So what’s the best choice for a regular PC user? I guess the thing is that as long as people expect to see their MS Word icons on the screen, or internet Explorer, we’re not going to see many changes yet
Posted by Thomas Z. Ramsøy at February 4th, 2008 at 11:47 amI think that people must give other OS a chance. My favorite is Mac OS X, but as I prefer not to pay for something that is not windows compatible, I use Ubuntu. I tried linux some time ago, and I liked it, but I thought that it was too difficult. So I came back to windows. However, the distro I’ve tried was KuruminLinux, and this year when I tried Ubuntu, one of the well supported distros, I simple loved it. I thought that it was extremely easy, and to install something missing I had just to go in Add/Remove programs. Any problem that I had I solved simple going to google and searching for it, and in two minutes I solved, and never had to fix again.
As it’s a Open Source project, it don’t come with the proprietary software, so I had to install flash, the win32codecs, and some more things. But to install my nVidia driver, I simple had to go in Hardware Drivers and activate it.
I sometimes use the terminal, but a completely non-experienced user can do 95% percent the things in a friendly graphic way. Actually, one non-experienced user that don’t want to use the terminal, can just don’t use, as the only things that requires that are out of the Ubuntu support, as installing programs with a generic binary program. And these programs are not necessary at all.
But I still use windows, unfortunately, as I love computer games and most of them are only windows compatible. I can use wine, but I love using all of my machine power. But wine works for simple windows applications very well.
And finally, Ubuntu and most distros are extremely easy to install. It detects all of your hardware, and installs the needed drives. For using internet it’s simpler as it detects automatically how your internet works. And you can even install Ubuntu inside your windows as any normal program. The only bad thing is that for a normal installation (without installing inside windows) you have to use partitions, the installer detects the best way to do that automatically, but if you want something different can be a bit complicated. Anyway, everyone must give other OS a chance.
Posted by André Mello at July 1st, 2008 at 8:40 am