Is Linux there yet?
RSS feed
Email alert
You must sign up or login to contribute to the APC forums
 First |
 Previous page |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
Next page |
Last |
New user
42 posts
Posted: 08/06/2008 1:06 PM
|
I read the APC article on the state of Linux as a viable desktop replacement for Windows. Games aside i think that a hallmark of a modern operating system is that you DON't have to resort to the command line to do things, that you can do EVERYTHING you need via a GUI. Unfortunately with all Linux distro's i've tried, they require you to do at least SOME CLI interaction. In fact the most popular Ubuntu does this a lot: have a look at the forums, virtually every solution requires cutting and pasting of CLI commands that most users would have no idea about.
I just tried Mandriva 2008 spring and its the closest I've got to have a gui-only Linux. Except the package manager disappeared and had to be restarted by...executing some commands in a terminal...
My opinion is that issuing text commands in a terminal is ancient technology and not user-friendly: thats why the blokes at Pallo Alto created the mouse and the GUI, thats why Apple, Commodore, Atari, MS, Acorn. IBM BeOS adopted the GUI: why does Linux persist with it?
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
Windows-free since '06
New user
58 posts
Posted: 08/06/2008 10:06 PM
|
Quote:
issuing text commands in a terminal is ancient technology..........why does Linux persist with it?
a) because it always works
b) because its closer to what is happening "under the hood" and Linux (well, most distros) doesn't try to hide what is actually happening in your computer.
c) it is a more precise and powerful way to control what happens. You either appreciate that level of control or you rely on designers of GUIs to determine what you can and can't do. Even some of the best Linux GUI tools (eg. Synaptic) are a simplified shell over their command line base.
It is only seen as "old fashioned" because corporate-backed OSs took your freedom away and you are now used to it. And they do it more and more with each new version. Look at the way their applications close out competition (iTunes, DRM, Word) - if they don't want you doing something, they don't provide the tool on the GUI. If you can't even access a cli, you learn to live with what's given.
As for being "not user-friendly" - well that depends on the user. I agree that new Linux users may find it strange and off-putting but there are many users who will reach for the command line for many routine tasks.
As for Ubuntu and other modern distros being still DEPENDENT on the cli, I disagree. I find it difficult to think of many things that can't be done with a gui. The reason a lot of forum answers are given as cli commands is that the more knowledgeable users tend to think that way and it is far simpler to tell someone to type (or copy) a simple command (eg. sudo apt-get install blahblah) than it is to describe in words a series of mouse clicks on different buttons on a gui.
I'm always a bit amused by posts such as this - if you read many computer help forums about Windows issues there is lots and lots of editing of registry entries, changing settings in obscure dialogs etc, etc. One thing that Windows and Linux have in common is that they are both designed to work with many types of hardware and the base install does not always get that right - leading to configuration issues. After 15 years of Windows and now 3 years of Linux, I know which one I'd rather setup and tweak - and its not Windows.
Macs OTOH, are just great at this - if it doesn't work first time, it doesn't work (or go buy an Apple device that does).
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
User
77 posts
Posted: 10/06/2008 9:06 AM
|
CLI (is the best solution) in the 21st century ? ......................... You are kidding yourself !
You are probably still playing text based games too .......... because that's all Linux can handle !
" ... One thing that Windows and Linux have in common is that they are both designed to work with many types of hardware .."
Linux designed to work with many types of hardware !!! ...... LOL !
Try getting ANY of the Linux distros working with any vanilla flavoured sound cards !
I don't know of any Linux geeks that haven't spent frustrating days getting their "FREE" OS to work properly and still having to compromise ! Spending all of their broadband on forums and downloading scripts, mods and emulators just to get their LAN and Networks up and going.
Get into the 21st century Linux !
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
Windows-free since '06
New user
58 posts
Posted: 10/06/2008 11:06 PM
|
Very persuasive post, Me In Oz, and clearly based on many years of experience with different OSs. I am reinstalling Windows and I now wonder why I ever even tried Linux. Silly me. All those thousands of lost hours and terabytes of downloading "scripts, mods and emulators" trying to get my hardware to work!. Are there really games that are NOT text based? Is that like PacMan but on your computer screen? How can that be? And can Windows computers really play sounds? What's that like? And what is a LAN? or a "network"? I have missed so much! Damn you Ubuntu!
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
User
77 posts
Posted: 11/06/2008 8:06 AM
|
As a matter of fact, Aubrey, I retail IT hardware and software.
I run windows and mac os at home and work and have tried ubuntu, mandriva and suse ...... and I still stand by all my comments !
Most people will read your post and think it sarcastic parody...... but I know it is the truth ... LOL
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
New user
29 posts
Posted: 11/06/2008 10:06 AM
|
stefcep gave us...
stefcep wrote:
hallmark of a modern operating system is that you DON't have to resort to the command line to do things, that you can do EVERYTHING you need via a GUI. Unfortunately with all Linux distro's i've tried, they require you to do at least SOME CLI interaction.
And
stefcep wrote:
My opinion is that issuing text commands in a terminal is ancient technology and not user-friendly: thats why the blokes at Pallo Alto created the mouse and the GUI, thats why Apple, Commodore, Atari, MS, Acorn. IBM BeOS adopted the GUI: why does Linux persist with it?
So Windows doesn't make it as a modern operating system either!!
I still have to resort to a command prompt to do things like ipconfig, ping, tracert and other fun things.
At least I guess I don't have to hand edit plain text configuration files, hacking the Windows registry is so much more fun.
You're welcome to your opinion!!!!
Norm
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
Windows-free since '06
New user
58 posts
Posted: 11/06/2008 3:06 PM
|
Me In Oz wrote:
As a matter of fact, Aubrey, I retail IT hardware and software.
Then I assume all your stock comes preloaded and configured by OEMs. (If you really are so put off by command lines and configuration issues and aren't just trolling.) Or does "I retail IT hardware and software" really mean you are shop assistant at Harvey Norman? In which case your views are understandable and you have my condolences.
"Most people will read your post and think it sarcastic parody"
I hope so. And yours wasn't?
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
User
77 posts
Posted: 11/06/2008 4:06 PM
|
I've been around long enough to remember how to edit config.sys and autoexec .bat files ............................... I want to be able to offer my customers something better and more user friendly that this archaic interface. But if you feel otherwise I have a few Commodore 64 machines for sale with accompanying tape drives in case the text editing gets a little too much for you :)
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
New user
42 posts
Posted: 11/06/2008 8:06 PM
|
Ok Here we go:
1. Aubrey wrote:
a) because it always works
This of itself indicates that there are problems with Linux GUI or the GUI's used by Linux apps, not GUI systems in general. Why shouldn't the GUI approach work just as well?
2.Aubrey wrote:
b) because its closer to what is happening "under the hood" and Linux (well, most distros) doesn't try to hide what is actually happening in your computer.
see 1.
3. Aubrey wrote:
c) it is a more precise and powerful way to control what happens. You either appreciate that level of control or you rely on designers of GUIs to determine what you can and can't do. Even some of the best Linux GUI tools (eg. Synaptic) are a simplified shell over their command line base
see 1.
4.Aubrey wrote:
It is only seen as "old fashioned" because corporate-backed OSs took your freedom away and you are now used to it.
WRONG. Whether the OS is corporate backed or not is irrelevant. It seems to me that your views are badly tainted by Windows or Mac. Go and buy a cheap Amiga A1200, with a 50 mhz 68030 (Cost you $250) and 8 meg ram running a program called Directory Opus. Or go and get a P3 650 with 128 meg ram and run BeOS (a trip to the tip). You will find that EVERYTHING that can be done by CLI can be done faster and more simply via the GUI systems employed in these ancient systems, with a damn more responsive and better mutitasking system than anything you can get on a current Linux or Windows Or Mac. These two ancient examples give you the choice to use a cli if you want but 100% of what you do with the CLI at the OS level can be done with a mouse and GUI. 95% for Apps. And you can increase this to 100% by using a free app called Directory Opus. And these systems let you view and access all core OS libraries, devices, startup-scripts, filesystems drivers, all with far more sensible names than Linux or Windows.
I can recall in the earlier nineties download Amiga shareware where it was standard that a programs functions were fully available from a configurable gui, it was a given, along with the comment " no need to learn arcane commands and switches". Today i can download LAME for the amiga which comes with a GUI that gives access to all cli functions to encode an mp3 (slowly though). Why can't all Linux programs do what 20 year old GUI system could?
Aubrey wrote:
And they do it more and more with each new version. Look at the way their applications close out competition (iTunes, DRM, Word) - if they don't want you doing something, they don't provide the tool on the GUI
yes thats what Mac and Windows do, i agree and i hate it. But the CLI IS NOT the answer: the answer ts writing software from the ground up to be full GUI driven. I think any Linux programmer who submits software that doesn't come with a GUI should be told to go and do it again until they do. The maintainers of the repos should refuse to make that package available until it has a fully functioning GUI: gnome AND KDEand Xfc. For F_ck's sake its 2008, not 1968.
The problem is that at their heart Linux, OS X and Windows are not GUI systems from the ground up: underneath them all is the command line, with the GUI acting as wrapper to hide it all: ie click this button on the GUI carries out a cli command. It comes down to design
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
New user
42 posts
Posted: 11/06/2008 9:06 PM
|
[ Norm wrote:
stefcep wrote:
My opinion is that issuing text commands in a terminal is ancient technology and not user-friendly: thats why the blokes at Pallo Alto created the mouse and the GUI, thats why Apple, Commodore, Atari, MS, Acorn. IBM BeOS adopted the GUI: why does Linux persist with it?
So Windows doesn't make it as a modern operating system either!!
err MS= Windows
But on my list of user-friendly OS's Windows is down the bottom two or three. I am not anti-Linux- i just don't think its there yet for me and 90% of other users that might try it in preference to Windows. That doesn't mean i endorse windows. it means i want Linux to succeed but its got problems that hold it back at this point in time. And it pisses me off the way Linux-fanboys won't acknowledge it has a problem when it does, but rather tell you its a "feature" or the user borked it up. Reliance on the CLI to execute core OS functions is NOT a feature, its a failing, a throwback to a time in the past when we didn't have fast graphics displays and fast cpu's and mice to communicate with our computers. Mandriva is the closet to getting rid of this archaic way of interacting with our computers.
|
|
permalink
Digg
Slashdot
send to a friend
|
| First |
Previous page |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
Next page |
Last |