Everything just works with Windows, when will linux catch up? - Page 3

Heh e17 is an alternative to Gnome or KDE, see the sticky thread up top for ABFs brief summary on it. I like it myself because it has a great balance of eye candy and performance, namely good eye candy without the overboard crud you get with beryl, vista, etc. and performance that can(And already does) run on embedded devices like my n800.

www.enlightenment.org (Official site, but not much there for non-programmers)

www.get-e.org (Themes etc.)

Ubuntu has a variant working on intergrating e17 in the same way KDE or Gnome with KUbuntu or regular Ubuntu, but I haven't tried it yet to tell you if it is any good.

Seablade

Alright looking into that here is why I am asking:
http://www.notebookforums.com/thread202097.html

yes- most people do not know what they want out of linux... i myself am one of those people. really i just want to expand my knowledge of operating systems because work at the IT department of my college.

that having been said i have played around with a very old distro of redhat (2.6 or something of the like - mom bought it for me in 2002 or so) as well as ubuntu/kubuntu. the biggest difference i have noticed about linux is that it is actually more based around itself than windows. if you want to find a program that didnt originally come with linux you have to go through the OS itself (terminal, deb packets, adept installer, etc...). With windows you have simply the OS, and whatever program you deem worthy to install on top of it (drivers, games, ext. programs) the second major issue to be found with linux is that it was (and still is in a sense) very command based. how often do you open up terminal? how often have you ever opened up the command prompt? i myself find that the most confusing. there is a whole other language i need to learn in order to begin to customize my computer - the way i want (which takes me 20 minutes on XP).

still, for what i saw linux as (my old red hat distro) and what i see it as now (ubuntu/kubuntu) i am quite impressed. it has caught up with windows (which is why they offer it as an alternative at dell) and may just be able to surpass it.
thats just my .02 anyhow.

No need to go through that most of the time. That is why many distros now come with things like synaptic, open up synaptic, choose your program, click install. Seablade

but it still isnt like windows... or least im just confused (probable)

my current problem: i had originally toyed around with redhat on both KDE and gnome, KDE being my personal favorite. i wanted to get back into the gist of things, so i got the free cds from ubuntu, decided to give it a go. works fine. everything, right out of the cd case. yay. i go to find a program to monitor my laptops temperature, i find one - install via a debian client (much like a .exe) - and whats this, where did it go? i cant find the program, or anything that would "turn the program on" - ok... i saw kubuntu, remembered my favorite KDE - and installed it. im in love. works great with my home network (xp gaming rig with 800 GB of accessable (on my laptop) data) and everything else. i go to find a temp monitor program via add/remove programs - and tada! installed, found the icon in "lost & found" - easy enough, but the program dosent work. OK, i will just find another... (any recommendations - im on an old C610?)

my point remains that in order for a newbie to install a program, they must first go through the adept installer programs. i had a small issue while installing thunderbird/firefox in which the java client never fully installed, kept getting an error message that there was another adept program running - though there wasnt. i went through apt-get instal in the termanal, ended up running a root install via termanal (im proud of myself :-D ) and fixed the problem manually. this is exactly what i mean though... more command prompt usage / more inside OS installs and less "search the internet - find program - download - install - run - configure - done." which is better depends on the user, and what program they are running...

though i will say my next big task is installing quake III to get more experience in the area...

After doing multiple installs of XP/Vista & Ubuntu - the one thing that sticks in my mind is the ease in which I could get Ubuntu up and running. All of my devices were working out of the box, and after updating the device driver for my video card it to was running fine.

The harder part I found was - how the hell does this thing now work, and this took some time to figure our - how the synaptic manager works etc but most users for work including myself could go to Ubuntu. After all for work I use e-mail, Excel, Word - and a couple of other programs like Baan (Linux compatible) etc. The biggest issue is really the fact that 99% of the population are simply used to what they are using. I mean look at the issues office 2007 is causing with the new ribbons - I have had numerous people simply stumped because the layout changed - but the functionality within the program increased.

Overall Linux distro's like Ubuntu are getting pretty darn good - but companies are used to running the system which causes the least problems for users and hence the ongoing dominance. Lets be real of the companies I deal with I have yet to see a work computer purchased with a vista licence actually running it - they are all running XP Pro - and I can't see the trend changing.

All the time. 1 of my desktops is just a fullscreen terminal; moving files, ping, traceroute, ssh, dling/ftp, IRC, killing a process if necessary, etc
Not as often, ftp, moving/copying lots of files/directories, ping, tracert.


Using the terminal is easier for me. Most of the stuff i dl that's in the repos just apt-get install, faster than loading synaptic, searching for name, finding right package, then download and install. that and lynx is still the best browser ever

Nobody likes change. Linux will catch up if it hasn't already with ubuntu being sold in dell laptops

all the time for networking (ifconfig, iwconfig, dhcpcd), killing processes, package installation (apt-get), moving file (cp, mv, ln), editing config files (nano, vi), adjusting alsa sound levels (alsamixer), launching apps not listed in menus (i use fluxbox)

still use terminal but no where near as much as i used to.. still use it for copying files and apt-get but other than that, ive been using the gui more...

*old windows habits*

I hear you there. As much as I disliked the GUI back in the olden days, I have come to rely on it quite a bit. D@mn my lazy ways...

I rarely drop into command line. Only for the occasional configuration or command that there isnt a GUI equivalent to.