Ubuntu's Lucid Lynx stalks PC and Mac converts Canonical says that with the latest release schedule this Thursday, it will win your love for Ubuntu. If not immediately, give it a year - but Canonical will get you. And by 'you', Canonical means Mac and Windows users. Chief operating officer and blogger Matt Asay told The Reg that changes in the consumer-oriented Ubuntu 10. …
The ones I'm looking forward to most are:
OMG! Ability to press the enter key without getting logged out! WOW!
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plymouth/+bug/516412
OMG! Connecting to a wireless network with SSID broadcast turned off! ( this not working in Vista is what initially prompted me to try Ubuntu ) WOW!
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/468741
Both of these bugs exist on my 9.10 Ubuntu. They weren't there when I installed 8.10. They've been introduced with successive updates.
The reason I know the bug urls is because I've spent a fair bit of time searching for solutions.
I like Ubuntu, but I'm not going to be impressed by new features when previously working ones are broken.
...when I don't have to edit some kind of script file to get something simple working, like changing the OS boot menu order or installing a TV tuner.
Ubuntu is fine (even fun) for people who want to fiddle, but those days are past me - I just want an OS that works and lets me get on with my job or leisure activities. So I'll stick with OSX, even if it means I'm shelling out a fortune on propietry hardware.
The only thing I'll consider Ubuntu for is a netbook with everything pre-installed.
"...when I don't have to edit some kind of script file to get something simple working, like changing the OS boot menu order or installing a TV tuner."
Not sure about the TV tuner, but I'm pretty sure there are graphical GRUB managers out there. Look in synaptic for "startupmanager" or "kgrubeditor". Okay, maybe one or both of these should come pre-installed but still, compared with doing the same thing in Windows it's hardly rocket science.
The various Linux desktops have long since passed Windows in utility and usability; they are actually catching up on MacOS and have surpassed it in places. I have been using Linux as my platform of choice for over a decade now, have managed to avoid Windows (which is just another desktop environment and _not_ an operating system, as which it is marketed -- the OS it runs on is called NT, which isn't all that bad).
But I still have one niggle with all current desktop environments. Which is that there was a desktop on the market in 1996 the handling properties of which makes all current contenders look old. It's called the Workplace Shell (WPS). It runs on OS/2. It may take a few moments to get used to, but it's logical. You don't have to click the "Start" button to stop your computer. When you put files in the Shredder, they'll get shredded (and not get stored for future misuse). When you click on a process in the process viewer, you can rename it right there, and it'll stick, right back down to the file system -- object orientation at the highest level. And so on, ad infinitum. When will anyone finally get their thing together to build something that can match the WPS? I have been waiting for more than 14 years by now...
I admire your optimism and while I sit in front my Ubuntu work desktop all day and I can't wait for the upgrade, at home I paid a bucket load for Lord Jobs overpriced, locked-down kit, including a license to use OSX, so until it goes *poof* in a cloud of electrical smoke, I am sorry, but I am not shifting!
Back in the mid 90s, some german IT discounter like ESCOM or VOBIS sold PCs with IBM OS/2 Warp3 preinstalled. Almost all customers returned the PCs, simply because these did not boot Windows.
The customers did not even performed a log in. They just did not see Windows starting up and returned their machines. The customers where happy to hear Windows could be installed for a premium.
"The sun rose early and Troll lumbered out bed, dragged his knuckles across the floor. He took one peek round the corner of his bridge and went back to bed, safe in the knowledge he was right and everyone else is complete prat for trying something else other than the brain-washing Troll was used to!"
Goodnight children everywhere.
( Written from Firefox on Ubuntu 10.04 beta! )
Yes, just double click the .deb and ity opens a GUI installer, click install, enter password, job done.
BTW its been doing this for a couple of years now.....
If you are talking about compiling from source then no, you need a CLI for that but I'd love to see a non geek complile a windows app to put up the comparison.
TBH you are better off using repos stuff as all updates will be managed automatically, if you install manually then you can't expect it to know about new releases. "with power comes responsibility"
In 2006 I dual-booted my work laptop, desktop and home laptop with Ubuntu and Windows (I'm a manager in a large organisation liberal enough to let us take responsibility for our own working environment so long as we do our jobs). Since 2008 I have removed Windows simply because I rarely found cause to boot into it (and as a result each instance became increasingly unpatched). There are two corporate applications that still require Windows and for those I now have a VM that I use about once a week. I now have Ubuntu throughout the office and home. One huge advantage, which I daresay is possible on Windows too, is that I don't have to carry work home on the laptop -- I can wake-on-lan my office desktop and effectively use fuse to seamlessly access my work files. I guess I have simple requirements though at home I also run MythTV on the home desktop, connected to a WD box by the telly; my daughter edits video with Cinelerra. So, I'm looking forward to the next Ubuntu release. And my point? That Ubuntu is a viable solution for both home and office -- you don't need to be a techie but you do perhaps need a reasonably progressive workplace and a willingness to take an active interest in something many are already probably using for at least 5-8 hours of their working (and relaxing) day.
Sadly Robert is right.
I use Linux a lot, I have a Linux (Ubuntu) only netbook, which I love and use quite a bit. When I want to read email and surf the web then Linux will almost always do what I want and OpenOffice reads most M$Office docs.
There are even apps that I use regularly that are only on Linux or primarily on Linux.
But too many things I need to use just aren't and like the rest of the world I continue to suffer Windows.
Stick it in seamless mode and off you go. Windows apps on your Linux desktop. The only thing is a performance hit on heavy weights such as Photoshop CS4, but Office and iTunes type apps run very well. If you buy VMware then even Photoshop is pretty good.
If only Adobe would port to Linux. They have Mac OSX versions, so they're a good way there.
Adobe, to having a Linux port ready, that is.
OS X is an operating system with a POSIX layer. The system libraries are primarily Objective-C, with those that need to operate at a lower level or are imported standards (eg, OpenGL) being in C. The full POSIX stuff is in there, but it's not the only way through to things and most of the time it's not even the 'real' way to things that the other stuff sits on top of.
Key point: Creative Suite was a Carbon application. So lots of Apple proprietary C stuff. Apple have deprecated Carbon and declined to port it to 64bit, so now Creative Suite is a Cocoa application. Which means lots of Apple proprietary Objective-C stuff.
Either way, they're nowhere near having a Linux version.
Clearly users of Windows and Macs (I'm assuming the fanbois simply haven't had chance to post the objections to this article yet) aren't that interested in stability, security and features. They can't see past the colour of the desktop.
Perhaps some stronger marketing around the idea of being able to change the desktop colour/background would help.
Then again, people like Tom Maddox obviously aren't prepared to even look at the system to find out just how wrong they are.
What can you do?
<sigh>
But not in the sense that people don't care about OS stability, security and features because they've a vested interest in a particular OS, more because they don't care much about the OS, they care more about the applications on top. And the various Linux applications either don't exist or are functionally worthless (such as for video editing, desktop publishing) or are stuck behind 90s-style user interfaces (OpenOffice, GIMP). Plus, you never get any decent fonts in a Linux distribution, so the typography everywhere always looks horrid.
I'm expecting the following: (i) the usual Linux diehards to shout that I'm wrong on a subjective level; and (ii) in a year, still nobody from wider society to want Linux on their desktop.
I like Ubuntu, I use a live cd for my online banking. My son has ubuntu on his computer (it runs flash as used by cbeebies and playhouse disney websites).
However I won't be overwriting my windows xp install until I can get games I want with linux installers!
I know I can use wine and cedega but they both have rather a large performance hit.
Having itunes itelf would help given I have an ipod too.
So come on, get the games industry on board!
They're going to shoot themselves in the foot with this release. Plymouth is buggered on half the machines I've seen it on, which isn't a nice first impression. Graphics drivers (think ATI) don't support this version of X properly yet, etc, etc. I had to mess with Grub2, fglrx-installer, amdcccle and so on before I could even get KDM onscreen.
Once I actually got in, it was bloody lovely (though ATI have been lying through their teeth about Eyefinity support). Initial installation, however, was the worst I've seen on Ubuntu since 7.10.
So some people have bought Ubuntu-running machines and been shocked when they realised it was a different OS?
What a surprise. Maybe the salesmen didn't know what they were talking about.
As for the hassle for a software producer to properly set up their product to install on Ubuntu, there's a lot of frantic, out-of-sight, work in running a Windows installer.
We're used to the hassles of Windows. We've forgotten the costs.
I wiped Win 7 last week and installed the Netbook Remix on My N110 and while the UI is looking a lot better since I last used Linux (think it was Red Hat and a good 15 years ago), and it has all the drivers for the function keys, webcam, audio etc etc.. It still isn't as easy to use as Windows.
I am finding it difficult to connect to my HP printer installed on the XP machine and have to now go off and download the HPLip package then use the command line to install. That is ok for me but I can't recommend this to friends and family as they want things to just work and shouldn't have to be mucking around on the command line to install a pretty common HP printer.
Also the built in Email client closes every time I click to view an email so I need to sort that out as well.
I'm trying to love it and will continue to use it but I was really hoping for an out of the box working system my friends and family would be happy to use and sadly, it isn't Ubuntu.
Just to setup, plug the HP printer into your Ubuntu machine.
When I installed 10.04 Lucid here a few days ago it spotted the HP printer plugged in and just told me which command to type I think it is "hp-plugin-ubuntu" .. It will then install it all automagically, I don't recall it asking anything else.
Sure it would have been nice if it ran itself, but it was still a ton simpler than windows generally is, where you have to identify your device, then go and get the driver yourself, and finally install it.
Good luck.
Actually install the multifunction printer driver, or just let windows get it's Generic HP, 'at least it will print if nothing else' driver.
Windows isn't designed to have a driver for everything built into it, it has a pluggable driver model, it detects your specific hardware and only installs the drivers for it. It has a library of common drivers to look through, but will use a generic one to get it working at a basic level if it doesn't have the specific one it's looking for.
Manufacturers are responsible for drivers within windows, if your device doesn't have a driver, it isn't microsoft's fault the manufacturer didn't write one.
Similarly with Linux, it is really the manufacturers responsibility to provide them, but as they don't, and as the model for updating drivers isn't exactly user friendly, your average punter will make do with whatever is preloaded.
...if the newer editions of Ubuntu need you to type in a command to install an HP printer, they've taken a step backward.
Last time I went to try an HP, there was no CLI involved at all. Plug printer in. "Hi. The HP Linux Imaging and Printing System has detected a printer. Would you like me to download and install the drivers? (Y/N)"
Step 2? There was no step 2. Not even a reboot.
Been running 9.04 on an Aspire One, having tried, Win7 Mini, OSX as well as the nasty Linuix build it ships with, and it beats the pants off of all of them.
Easiest install of all, ALL drivers included and devices detected on both the Acer and a Dell mini.
Mainstream OS? Well no, but it's not aimed at Reg readers who probably are IT professionals or enthusiastic amateurs. It's aimed at folks who just want to do the online basics, and it does that very very well and the difference is amplified when running on a low power platform like a netbook. It can do more, and yes the "more" is still easier on Windows than on Linux, so Windows isn't going away for those who need more. But most people don't, so I think Ubuntu has a good chance of making inroads into the home user and netbook market.
Oh and too brown? Either the irony is too subtle for me or you need a little assistance with the basics there chief.
The fact that this guy talks of 'winning over' Mac and Windows users shows that he is totally deluded. No matter how wonderful it is, compared to other versions of Ubuntu. No matter how 'free as beer' it is, it still suffers from the same 'rose-coloured spectacled view' that these people exhibit. It's the 'user experience' that counts and by user, I mean my Aunt Elsa, not some guy with a propellor beanie.
Is using Ubuntu without any problems at all. Needed some help with the transition, but seems to be getting along fine. Since he only needs email, webbrowsing, photo managment, Office equivilents (and he used OO anyway on his previous Windows system), he is well supported by the standard install. The machine is faster than his old one, more secure and more robust, and being an Acer Aspire One bolts to the back of his monitor.
If its installed and checked its working properly, your Aunt Elsa with have far less trouble with Ubuntu than windows. She is actually a perfect type of person to run linux. Someone with fairly simple needs, web browsing, email, facebook but importantly no photoshop needs, no requirement to run games.
Its people with specific software requirements that are problematic, unless they don'tmind relearning another package. Like The Gimp to replace photoshop... And yes it can replace photoshop, you know that super new content aware fill CS5 just got, The Gimp had a plugin called resynthesizer doing that for the last 3years.
...I reboot into a Windows partition. It helps to remind me of why I switched.
Boot up times? Go get a cup of tea while it switches on why don't you?
Simple? Hah. It's only simpler to people who can't equate a cartoon fox to a blue "e".
No CLI involved? Please, feel free to ask your Auntie Elsa to do a bit of registry hacking next time a "free" application makes her computer run slowly. You'll wish for an eternity of BASH over that.
Rose tinted spectacles? I'd suggest you take yours off.
Until Linux can appeal to the gamers who, after all, are the second most likely group of people to actually perform OS and driver installs and tweaks then it will never get a decent market share.
Macs get away with weaker games support than Windows because they look trendy and "just work" -- which appears to be what Ubuntu is going for -- trouble is that without dedicated cool-looking hardware and products like the iPhone to plug into it Linux falls short of the ease of use and "trendiness".
OK, people do buy computers to do things other than games but outside the corporate market most people either want to be able to do what Linux has been able to do for ages, but lack the motivation to install it, or they want to be able to play at least a couple of off the shelf games.
Plus, if the teenage homebuild games fanatics start using Linux then they'll be a lot more likely to get mum, dad and granny to use it -- especially if they're also IT support for their family.
So, please, rather than integrating FaceBoSpaceWitter type shit that half the people using it will uninstall or not use -- work on games support for Linux.
(I should declare my interests here and point out I only use Linux on my own machines and I'd love to be able to play a few games)
As has been mentioned, Steam is coming to the mac, and with it the source engine (whether any non valve games will switch to this version is another matter), it shouldn't be a stretch to do the dosbox emulated games too, plus unreal, etc. This shoudl massively expand the availability of well known and popular games.
Although not officially announced for linux, things are moving to webkit & opengl so it shouldn't be a big step from mac to linux. I'd imagine it will be running with a bit of fiddling in no time, and officially before too long.
I may try again with Lucid on my netbook, as i've been trying to like linux enough to switch to it for years, it's just a few annoyances that have put me off, and lack of games.
I've not played games on a computer in years (other than solitaire or minesweeper type stuff).
The XBOX and Playstation do all that malarkey perfectly well and I don't have to 'sit at' the computer to do it - just sofa and 42" TV with wireless controller.
Console games are perfectly cheap secondhand from eBay or your local game shop.
It still uses Gnome, I never liked Gnome. Even Linus has been critical of Gnome in the past.
KDE was always my preferred Linux desktop.
No amount of slick GUI and desktop software will hide the fact that behind the scenes is a monolithic kernel. If your hardware isn't supported then you can forget downloading a driver and installing it, it's time for a new kernel or hope there's a compiled module for your exact version of the kernel.
Years ago rolling your own kernel was pretty easy, these days there are just way too many options in the configuration screen. Menus and options for everything from embedded devices, to phones to washing machines (I'm joking, but if the Linux kernel team accepts it then it'll be there as an option).
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
