What Would You Like To See In Linux? - Page 2

of course. It's the classic catch 22, developers wont write for it until there are more users, and more people wont use it until there are enough apps, but frankly there are very few needs that cant be met on linux now. It's a slow process, but I believe it will pick up speed, and gain momentum.

again, I'll say try ubuntu or pclos and see if the video, sound and WiFi don't work right out of the box. all 3 did for me on multiple machines.

I think that linux will be a major comptetitor in the future

Ok somewhat concious now, for the time being anyways, so on to the fun.

xcess21, first and foremost there is a LARGE difference between a distribution of Linux, and Linux itself. In your post you are confusing the two quite often, and is leading to a lot of your arguments not being very good to say the least.

Distributions of Linux are what Red Hat Enterprise, Suse, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc. are. These are where most people look for numbers when they discuss market share. These also are not Linux as a OS, but rather GNU/Linux combined with a variety of tools and software packages. It is an important distinction, as there are very different goals between distribution maintainers, which is what you have been referring to mostly, and Kernel Programmers, which is what you have been stating.

That out of the way....

Good to know. I don't think you have a very good picture personally, but still good to know.

Kinda like what is stated here?

http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org...neric/etc.html

Linux Standards Base documentation is a good thing. It is also something that has been in existance for several years now and for the most part is now followed in most, if not all, major distributions. Whereas 7-10 years ago I might have experienced what you described, in every major desktop distribution of linux I have used in the past many years that standard has been followed pretty well.

No. The MEDIA has been making a lot of noise over this. And in several areas Linux HAS overtaken MS, webservers are most notable, but embedded applications are just as notable.

Lets see, Typical Windows application Install...

Put in CD...
Launch installer if AutoLaunch is not enabled on CD...
Click through lots of things saying you want to install X program without really reading them
X Program installs 5 other programs in the process resulting in quite a few more clicks, downloads, or even in some cases the installer just failing until you actually install other things manually.
Finally you are done, reboot
And now launch program

Typical install for a decent package management system(Apt, Portage, etc) in Linux?

apt-get install X-Package

Or...

Open synaptic
Find package
Click install
Enter password

Now if you are talking about running windows applications that is something else entirely. Why? Because it has NOTHING to do with Linux development, it has everything to do with WINE development.

Ignorance can be bliss

You obviously haven't used Windows enough. Aside from that, in the past several years I can't say I have run into any problems you mention, no. In as far as pretty interfaces, I believe Aero to not be pretty. I also believe it to be a huge waste of resources for nothing more than showy flashy shiny to distract those with a short attention span. I think the same thing of a lot of Complz and Beryl personally. Does any of this make an interface look pretty? Heck no. That is an artistic taste, that a lot of people credit Apple for having, and they do have a more artistically pleasing default, but I still think it could be better. But hey that is a personal opinion anyways.

Try telling that to the many people I have already had to tell couldn't do so. Or a friend of mine that works with a company that develops specialized applications, but will refuse to do so for Windows Vista because it is to much of a pain in the arse for them to do remote administration on it. Or to those people that have hardware that will NEVER work in vista because the companies either don't support it anymore and as such don't want to pay for the driver to get signed and approved by MS, or the company no longer exists. People still run DOS for this very reason.

I will take a quick side to say, as ABF mentioned, it is NOT Cedegar. There are many things in your posts that make me wonder exactly how much experience you really have with Linux as you have misspelled MANY basic things.

Cedega is an option, whether you choose to get it or not is completely up to you. Personally I have much better luck running games and applications in Wine myself. And yes I do run applications in Wine when the situation warrants. Can I run the latest and greatest including a game I am currently one of the level builders on? Nope. Have to install Windows for that. But I also do not in any way blame WINE for that, I blame the company I work for because they have decided it is not worth it for them to develop for Linux. Do I think they are wrong? Not sure, in this case likely not.

See above. Media != Linux

Its funny, We put Ubuntu on a computer in a public lab I work in. The 'average joe' as you mention has no problem walking in, typing up their papers, or browsing the web, or doing half a dozen other things on it, and for several months with many hundreds if not thousands of visitors I only had 2 people even notice it was a different OS("It looks different") and one person ask what OS it was.

I did the same thing for a short while with eLive on another computer. I also got more compliments on how it looked with eLive actually along with a similar story to above.

Did you REALLY expect otherwise? If you did I would wonder how you keep a job. Really, lets think about this. A program is written for a specific set of Libraries and Operating system. Another piece of software is reverse engineering all of that from scratch, without the code to either the original environment, or the software you are trying to run. ANd on top of that is doing so to a moving target. There is no way in hell that anyone with half an ounce of understanding of programming would expect, based on that, that the translation software would run every peice of software better than on the native environment.

You might want to define 'production environment' there.

Or, like most people, want an OS that you can write emails, papers, browse the web, and watch a movie on or play music on....

Gamers, while a large group, are still a small portion of the total population, even in the US, much less worldwide. And actually, while I have no evidence to back this up, I would wager they would be the more likely to pick up a new OS(Especially a FREE OS) to play the game and do all of the above. The status quo is that they haven't because the game development has not been done to give tham that choice.

Ok first correction here, Linux has not 'lost' market share. As was mentioend market share is kind of a meaningless number here, but aside from that they have ONLY gained market share since its inception, It used to have 0 compared to MS's near totality on the desktop. Now it is the majority of web servers, a chunk of the desktop, a lot of embedded, and the list goes on.

That entirely depends on your market. For the desktop market where the 'average joe' is involved, that is at least partially true.

And they did not play to the 'average joe'

Another example, it would be Irix OS I believe is what you meant. Iris was the name of some of their hardware, not their OS.

You are misinformed if you believe that SGI's current status had anything to do with them not listening to the 'average joe'. Actually on the contrary, why SGI lost so much in the graphical workspace had much more to do with the advances of the competition they didn't even realise existed. Mac OS and Windows both started to take up some slack. Products like 3DStudio got developed for Windows, and suddenly SGI had actual competition whereas previous they did not.

The intel processor combined with the 3D processing card was suddenly capable of competing with them on a much cheaper scale than they were used to dealing with. They couldn't adapt. Their MIPS based, and other custom processing based systems couldn't compete on terms of scale. They switched to intel, but it was to little, to late.

That had little to do with listening to the 'average joe' and actually little to do with litsening to their target market or not. It had everything to do with them being complacent and comfortable, and completely missing that competition was growing until it was to late.

You install WINE like you would anything else. On Ubuntu this is with Synaptic. Windows applications might or might not work in Wine. They make no guarantees about their software. CrossOver office on the other hand does, but they are specific about which versions and of what software. If you do follow this and it doesn't work you email them for support, like you would anything. I can't say I have ever heard of a common problem though when doing what they state will work.

And it is MUCH harder to keep working in Windows.

Skipping a bunch of stuff Dr Louis and ABF have answered very well and I would add nothing....

See above. You are talking about DISTRIBUTIONS of Linux, NOT Linux itself or even GNU/Linux itself.

Or maybe they like the ability to be able to FIX their own bugs because many companies won't? Let me give you an example. I was working on a CD mixing it down. I ran into an obscure bug that caused the program to crash, everytime at a certain point. At this point with a proprietary program I would not have been able to continue(ANd YES this has happened to me with Proprietary programs as well) and wait for them to get around to fixing it, and then releasing an update. This could, and probably would take months.

However with the open source program in a matter of two days, even with how rusty I am on C++, I went in, troubleshot, and wrote myself up a temporary fix while emailing the developer, who fixed it better within two days and gave me a patch. WIll the average user care about this? Absolutely not. But this is why many people prefer open source.

Or for example, when purchasing a peice of software that is closed source, you are not purchasing the software. You are purchasing a license to use the software, and use it how they wish. Want to take one piece of that software and use it with another piece of another software? You are out of luck.

Heck lets take an even more basic example. I purchase software. I run software. I go through the DRM checks etc. I then have my computer crash on me. I have to replace the MB. I get HD working again. I can't use software due to DRM crap that says it is now on a different computer. Call the manufacturer? No luck.

And I am not making that up either, that has happened to MANY people I know, in fact in some cases people will buy the software, and then download a pirated version specifically because that happens. And this is thousands of dollars in software I am referring to.

Or some piece of software that I want, but the developer no longer supports it and it doesn't run on my system. I can chose to update it myself with the source code. Proprietary software I owuld be out of luck. This is part of WHY many people still use DOS etc. especially in research situations.

Because what YOU need is completely different from what I need. And is different from what ABF needs.

You have completely overgeneralized distributions at best. A distribution aims to fulfill a purpose. That purpose may be to run on a desktop and do web/email/etc. It may be to play games. It may be to run a motorized arm as part of a machine plant. Not one distribution wil cover ALL of those flawlessly. I need a realtime preemption enabled kernel for my work. Most people do not.

Because, and please read this carefully, LINUX IS NOT WINDOWS.

People have software they wish to run. That software is only available to them to run in Windows. They use the tools available to them to do they work they wish. Linux is NOT for everyone. Neither is Windows. By your logic, if it was, why are there still some people that dual boot Linux?

Than either find a replacement, in the case of OpenVPN that should be VERY easy, or write one yourself. Not only that, but chances are others have probably already done the majoirty of that for you, and you would not need to fill in much in comparison. That is the beauty of Open Source, is that you are FREE to write things yourself very easily. And use what others have written and contribute freely.

Seablade

target Enterprise ? hello ? please show me a company have only Linux desktop running as a primary OS

ok maybe I am wrong, but explain to me why they have gazillion distro out there? everyone just try to reinvent the different OS which base on the same kernel. don't you think it would be better off if they put time and effort on enhance what already have out there ?

your respond well is written, however, You need to understand this, English is not my first Language, so I could be mistake Iris for Irix, or Cedega for Cadager..I am not go on and on about this and that respond to your post, however, when there are OS debate, you realized it just got no end to it, it like a religions thing for people.


you are right about a few thing, but, just like Linux, Vista work for some people and don't for other. Like I said before as much as I hate Windows, but I can't replace it as my primary OS. with Vista, I just install game, VPN, and some of the application I need, and it just work. I don't want to sit there and play with the commands line when I already had enough of it from work

I can sit here and debate with you on some of the pointer you had point out, but again, it's just no end to it. My point is, what Linux had really been doing for last 20 years on the desktop market? bottom line is, get the OS that work for you best, because there is no one size fit all. For me I will stick to Windows until Linux able to support and run what I need

In which case I will apologize.

And that one line sums up the entirety of the solution that anyone here believes.

It just happens that many here believe Linux a very viable OS for most people these days. There are certain groups that will not be able to be supported, Gamers included, at this time. But give it time.

You asked what linux has been doing for the past 20 years? Well I will try to sum up...

It the past 20 years it has gone from being a side project for a finnish comp sci student to learn OS design and oepration from, and running only on the then high end 386 computer, to being one of the most flexible OSes around. Not only flexible in what it can do, but also what it can run on. It has grown to accomodate applications from Enterprise Data Server, to Desktop computer, to Workstation, to mobile phones, to routers, to other embedded systems that I can't think of right now, to running full clusters of computers.

In the desktop specifically it has gone from a system that you had to compile yourself from 12 floppies, to one that can run from a floppy to a cd to a hard drive, withor without compilation. It has gone from a market share of one(The developer) to obtaining a following of many thousands at least, possibly millions given the number of Non-US countries picking it up(China, third world countries, etc.) It has taken this marketshare from Microsoft primarily. And while in percentages it is still a small number(.5 - 2 in general) that is still out of billions of people, meaning a large number have picked it up. In recent years that I have helped folks the number of people asking about it and trying it has only grown in my personal experience, and with the XO project might very well get a huge boost in numbers soon(6 Million confirmed orders I believe at last count).

In the past several years Linux has gone from something that OEMs refuse to touch, to something offered by major OEMs including Lenovo/IBM, Dell, and ASUS(Eee). In one such case it was the result of an online poll that caused Dell to realise the potential it was missing out on. Will they succeed? No clue, but I will wait and see.

So in the past 20 years I would personally say Linux has made TREMENDOUS growth. It went from non-existant(Linux was started in 1991 if memory serves) to something that is talked about on a regular basis amongst tech circles at least, but even mass media now. It has become a common name in several markets including web servers and embedded development. It has indirectly put a major licensor of Unix out of business, and has the attention as one of the primary competitors to a company that used to have nearly all of the desktop computer market.

It is growing. Not nearly as fast as the media would like us to believe, but they need a story and decide to hype this one on occasion. But it has grown, is growing, and will continue to do so.

Seablade

just pointing out that i realize the "argument" is over, so that don't take the following as me missing my cue.

Seems to me as x21 is well... installed ubuntu, (tried to) install wine, and then proceed to load a default ubuntu config with Windows apps (and we are talking regular stuff here like trying to load Nero instead of Brasero, and Winamp instead of Audacious). Of course that would be a linux experience from hell. As long as you find a distro you like (or LFS), load it up with (native linux) apps, and not try to do anything it wasn't designed for (play DX9/10-based games), then you will be just fine.

Yes But I need Steam to work on VAC severs with TF2 why can't I have that?

I dont care what companies have linux as a primary/only desktop OS. that's not at all the point. The point is that IS their target market, and they do want market share, and they couldn't care less about game development because their target market isn't interested in games. But then a unix admin for 10 years would surely know this...

THEY have a multitude of distros because (as seablade already went over much better I'd likely do on my own) their are a gazillion different needs, just like the OS that works best for me (Linux) very possibly wont be the one that works the best for you (windows?) the distro that works best for me will likely not be the one that will work best for you. As the open source community likes to say: choices are good.

have you tried just turning off your hacks?

My hacks are the only reason I play.

you are correct, Linux had make a huge impact on some area where windows can't touch. Yes I do remember the Linux back in 1991 or some where pre-public internet(meaning before netscape 1.0 was available), I remember back in those days only "Compuserv"(spell?) was the only form of Email you can communicate to someone out side of their company or Prodigy on line service beside those BBS broad with full of porn half of time if you know what I mean. However, my point is after 20 years, thing had change we had more advance hardware and software, but, Linux still seem to lag behind on alot of thing in the desktop market, now I am not saying it is Linux fault, but to me, if they have all these developer written different flavor of Linux, at least get the basic stuff working like Wi-Fi, VPN....etc without hassle.

You keep going back and contradict yourself, first you say they don't want market share, now you say they want the market share, which is which ? Also this is not just game I am talking about, I am talking about basic application for every days used, for example OpenVPN and didn't work with the Nortel stuff and I had been play around with it to alot and still try to make it work. One of my application was written under Java and should be working with Linux, but when I load in Linux, it complaint about missing this and that library where on the Windows I just hit a few click and I am up running.

I realized there are different need for different user, but would you think it would be better to put it in under one root so user won't have to go to different distro and also as a same time allow them to pick or choose what to install which I am sure some of the Linux already done this, but it just too many distro out there for different thing, it create masses headache for the administrator some time.

Windows sucks. I tried to get Exaile, Konqueror, and Frozen Bubble running on it and it was awful. I needed to try and install cygwin and a bunch of other crap and compile everything just to get it halfway working! What the hell is Microsoft thinking! They need to pull their heads out of their ass and work on this instead of all the different versions of xp and vista and server...

That is the difference between the makers of distributions, and the makers of Linux. Certain distributions, like the ones you mentioned, are targeting the enterprise. But the makers of Linux are just making a good OS, they don't care so much about Enterprise vs Desktop vs Embedded marketshare. This is a gross oversimplification on how kernel and GNU development work, but unless it is needed going into the entire process might be overcomplicated for what is needed here.

OpenVPN has a direct Linux client availiable.

http://openvpn.net/howto.html

Not only that but a large number of distributions have packages availiable...

http://packages.ubuntu.com/edgy/net/openvpn
http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_OpenVPN_primer
http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/35

And there are also RPMs availiable.

My first thought is that you are having problems with configuring it. To be honest configuring VPN even on Windows is not simple. Personally I find configuration in general easier to do on Linux. Maybe instead of saying they don't work, you would get a better response by just asking for help getting them to work?

I use OpenVPN in Windows for a game development job I work. I haven't had a need, yet, to use it on Linux, however i have been looking at it and wouldn't mind giving you a hand if you start a thread on it.

Because on Windows you installed the Java Runtime Environment most likely. On Linux you STILL have to do this. Again ths comes down to your choices, either your software choices, your distribution choices, or whatever. Java is not perfect cross platform, but it is pretty good. And I haven't had much problem getting something to work across platforms myself, so again I would start a thread and we can give you a hand with this. My first thought is that you must not be using a decent package management system, as installing most software in a decent system will install all dependencies. Or if there is not a package available for it, you can install dependencies with ease, especially compared to Windows.

And what you are describing is the differences between distributions. Suse, Red Hat Enterprise, CentOS, etc. are geared towards the enterprise. The point is to install one distribution and manage one distribution across the enterprise. Ubuntu, while geared some towards the enterprise, is more on the small business and personal desktop level. eLive is certainly on the personal desktop level. You will get different experiences with each of them depending on what oyu are using it for.

If you are running an enterprise and looking to have hundreds of desktops running the same OS, in Windows you have a single OS image you build with all the software you need and you clone it to each of your desktops. It is the same thing in Linux, except you are building a distribution to do this. Or using one that is already available and geared for the enterprise. There really isn't any difference there except that Linux is designed to do that and is much easier to create custom builds of.

And this is something else I think you are missing here. Most distributions of Linux are NOT written by kernel developers. Those that have Kernel Devs involved the devs generally have little to do with the packaging of the distro. Heck I don't believe Thanatermasis for eLive is a deveoper at all if memory serves. I could put together a distribution, but that doesn't make me a developer. And even though I CAN program in C/C++, Java, etc. I wouldn't touch kernel development or module development as I am just not that good.

There is a large difference in the skills used that make up the Linux development ecosystem. Some of us are programers, some (Very few in comparison) kernel hackers, some artists, some specialize in UI design, some just use it and provide feedback. It doesn't mean that we can all do each other's jobs.

Seablade

*sigh*
I am not "going back and contradicting myself". *I* would like to see linux gain market share, so would the 'for-fee' distros aimed at the enterprise (Suse, Red Hat, etc), the linux developers (a different group of people) dont care about market share. *They* just care about making linux as good as they are able. and the openVPN developers are NOT the same as linux developers - You're confusing groups a lot, and I think that's the base of most of our disagreements.

nice analogy! I was trying to come up with good one earlier in the thread, it just wouldn't come to me.

You try to be funny, but you are not, there are native application was written Linux won't install without a fight.......I knew when I started say something about Linux, there will be hardcore Linux fan boy come out and defense it or flame me, but the fact still remain that only small percent of people will use it for their primary desktop..... if they were so good why can't they beat Apple in the desktop market ? never mind about the Windows market, why is that most studio still using Apple ? where is Linux ? if they are a superior OS, where is the application for the studio? Apple OS was base on BSD kernel. What happen to Linux ? they all have a different distro base on the same kernel, but none of them was replaceable as primary OS for a lot of people, at least Apple can... explain that

Actually to many of us he really was while making a very strong point that you missed.

And that was exactly his point. Why is this any different from running Windows Applications on Linux? It is the same situation in reverse, and to be honest guess which one works better. Even with much of the software he mentioned being Open Source and you can(And people have) port it to windows. Even on top of that try it with closed source software, like we are discussing here. Try taking a completely closed source application that was written entirely for Linux, BSD, OS/2, BeOS, Mac OS(Pick a version) or half a dozen others, and run it on Windows.

You expect the one way to work, but not the other, for no reason.

I will save you some dignity on this and let you know you don't want to ask this around me.

Please do a search for my screen name on the Linux forums with the text Apple. You will find several posts where I assess the strengths and weaknesses of Linux in general with Apple.

To put it shortly, Linux's strength, and its weakness, is it customizability. This is frightening to many people because they have never had so much choice. Instead many people prefer to be led around by the hand in what they can or cannot do. That is where Apple fits in, as it is a stable computing system, but in as far as ability to customize it, it is a pain in the arse. I can say this with quite a bit of firsthand experience on all three Major OSes.

See here is the thing, you seem to think that because we are saying that Linux is good, we are attacking other OSes. That is not true, we may attack them on specific points, and especially I will attack MS OSes on MANY points. But again do a search and you will find that I have repeatedly said that Linux is NOT for everyone. That is the beauty of it, not that it is there, but that it provides choice, even if that choice is not to use it. For many people I think the Apple Mac OS X OS works fine. It is a pretty stable OS with a good backing, well set up, and much cheaper than MS for many people.

Some people would rather sit mindless and click away their life. They would rather do this because it is easier in the short term as it is the status quo. To Them I offer MS. Some people would rather have their software work when their computer runs, and risk having their computer not work than their software. To them I offer MS.

Some are unhappy with the status quo. But some are happy with the click it till it works. To Them I offer Apple. Some are unhappy with their computer not working, but don't want the choice that comes in running Linux. To them I offer Apple.

For some people it is to restricting, and for them I offer Linux. Some people want to continue using their old computers and don't want to be forced to upgrade. To them I offer Linux. Some people want the freedom of being able to see what each peice of code is doing, fix it themselves, or continue to keep it working on their computer. To them I offer Linux.

Three different groups of people. Three different products to offer. Very simplified.

Seablade

Theatrical Sound Designer, Audio Engineer, System Design Consultant....
Noise Boy. Uses Linux in his studio. Loves it. Has ProTools and Mac OS X, Windows, etc. Still uses Linux software.

I say it before and I will say it again, when it get into the OS debate, everyone will try to point out certain thing that would have no end to the debate. and I will say it again, different OS for different thing, there's no one size fit all, however, when we talking about the desktop mark compare between Linux, Apple, and Windows. Linux still have a small market share, why because people afraid to touch them due to lack of knowledges and complication come with Linux. Part of it I think the Linux developer just didn't care, and when they don't care, people will ignore them. The hardcore so call Linux fan boy can come out and try to defense at much as they want, but the fact still remain that very small group or company willing to support Linux.


There had been alot of talk about Linux being use in the data center from IBM, Oracle.....etc, but until today, I still have not seen any fully use Linux as replacement OS for data center let alone the desktop side. Hell IBM, recently announce they will support Solaris on the IBM server, my questions is, if Linux was so good run everything as everyone brag about, why haven't it pick up in the desktop market or the data center? why would IBM put Solaris, another competition OS on the IBM server ? why are we still having people using dual boot between Windows and Linux ? for last 20 years, the only thing I see vast improve on Linux for the desktop is easy to install and that if you don't swap out the graphic card or change your audi card, perhap the new DVD?

Also, if you break that so call Xwindows under Linux, you better know the commands line to run and go through the whole X configure to get it back, if you lucky and select a right options, please don't tell me there's no point in your life time that you had run Linux and never have to use X configure, because you either change the graphic card, or something mess up in your X windows server. I think those are pretty much basic stuff there, what about the audio card? there was option to configure in with kernel for ALSA, and sometime it not work correctly, guest what ? I end up compile all over again out side the kernel.


You can say media make alot of noise for last 20 years, but media must have the source for them to make noise, and Linux been singing alot of different tune. I for once like to see more support for Linux, but until then, if I can't get what I need to run for my daily computing then I will stay with Windows or Apple for that matter. Sure you can say open source code is great, it's free, but free don't do me any good if I can't get it to work with my audio card, graphic card, or SAS.

Bottom line is, what work for you may not work for me, and for last 20 years, I would think Linux will have this basic function down to the core.

didn't read thread


what would i like to see? better laptop support
what else would i want on a notebook? !

EDIT: all right skimmed thread and realized it has turned into a war. and also that seablade writes way too much.

SECOND EDIT: yea linux has its issues, but it takes time to learn. imagine giving an operating system to someone brand new to computing (aka someone who has never touched a computer) i guarentee they will be able to work out linux before windows... its just that most people grew up on windows and knew the platform well..