Linux is nothing but a massive headache of trying to get part X to work with part Y and having to remember a billion different commands for fixing something that is a menu option in Windows. Better hope that your compiler is working properly and that you don't have a catch-22 dependency issue, since nobody fucking provides binaries!
I'll stick to Windows, thanks. This whole "free software" movement is frustrating and aggravating because 99% of the time the utilities are some weird weird mashup that doesn't even goddamn work for anybody but the author, or requires you to self-compile and download 27 different components to work.
weighted by importance it's different IMO
Audacity, Firefox, FFMPEG, the GIMP, Inkscape, AbiWord, OpenOffice.org, Azureus, SciTE, VLC, GCC, PeaZip, and TCC work rather well; or course these have various degrees of "free"-dom, but all are open-source.
Also for the better-maintained packages that most people use, most Linux distributions do distribute binaries, although not all are kept up-to-date (like SciTE, TCC, and UPX, which has dependencies that are a bit annoying to satisfy), and I believe it is possible to repair your GCC installation with a binary package, but I've never had such a severe problem with GCC.
BTW, for those of us who use Windows most of the time (like me), it's even easier, because most developers of open-source software that works for Windows do release at least Windows binaries (MinGW cross-compilers FTW), because unlike Linux you can't assume all Windows users even have a C/C++ compiler (although GCC is bundled with several freely-available IDEs...).
Joined: 11/30/2008
Posts: 650
Location: a little city in the middle of nowhere
As far as I'm concerned, the best operating system is irrelevant to the one I use. The "best" operating system is highly debatable because it is highly dependent on the individual user's needs. For me, this is generally work and games. And by games I don't just mean emulators. The fact that I play PC games pretty much limits me to some kind of access to a windows environment, and my other need. To work? That can be done on any OS.
As far as the average Joe (and by that I mean someone off the street. not a gamer or a power user or anything) is concerned, It really doesn't matter which operating system to use, because all commonly used operating systems can do what the average Joe needs, and as long as the average Joe's needs are fulfilled, a better OS falls under the category of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Do I need security? Not particularly because I don't store anything of monetary value on my computer. Do I need configurability? Not really. Do I need aesthetics? Fuck aesthetics. The only thing I do to make my computer experience prettier is change my background once a year. For me, I've always used windows. I currently use XP. It does what I need it to do, so I don't see any particularly good reason to change. But that's just my opinion. feel free to have your own.
Johannes wrote:
Ooh, you're so objective. Ever heard of a package manager, btw?
You haven't come across as particularly objective either. I'm not particularly objective, but I try not to leave any illusion that I am. Let's face it, with that particular example, if it takes more than two clicks to install a program, it's more complicated than windows. Also, Xkeeper was using a technique called exaggeration.
Apparently for everyone else, Linux is a simple deal of learning a few bits and pieces to be able to make everything work, but for me, after weeks of frustration not even being able to get the OS installed (in one case it took me a week to get past the boot screen on my install CD), I realised that someone neglected to mention that the "little bits and pieces" was actually a shitload of unnecessary work. (If it ain't broke...)
I was, at the time suffering from what I like to call, new Linux syndrome. which is an exited rush after realising that there is this whole world of free stuff out there which you can just get your hands on. It's beckoning, and you are powerless to stop it. You just want to scream "I USE LINUX!" in some kind of public shopping mall. It's like getting a new puppy, or a new iPod, or a new fucking anything. It's exiting at first, but the novelty wears off eventually, and I'm not saying that you'll stop using it. It just won't be as exiting to use. Once I did get some distribution installed, I spent a week just messing with screensavers, because that was the only thing I knew how to do, and it was freaking exiting while it lasted.
Basically what I'm trying to say is this: Linux didn't fit my needs, I mean, it probably could, but it would require learning a few "bits and pieces" beforehand. Dromiceius, I can't believe that you said learning C would be a short process. Yeah, it's free, and has a lot of freedom associated with it, and you can sleep soundly knowing that you're not a corporate whore, but as far as I'm concerned, all that's unnecessary. My computer works, and it does what I need it to do. I sometimes have the occasional problem, but otherwise, I'm fine.
You haven't come across as particularly objective either.
I know, but it's really easy to install software in normal distributions. In Arch, a pacman -S name is all it takes to download and install a program, as long as it's in the main repos. Many obscure programs can be found in the community-operated AUR. I've yet to compile anything except MPlayer, FFmpeg and x264. For those, I used yaourt -S x264-git ffmpeg-svn mplayer-svn to automatically download and run build scripts that check out the latest source, install dependencies with pacman and build and install the programs. So trouble obtaining programs is not really a valid reason to bash on the OS.
Easy and fun way to install programs for the whole family!
(If you would have wanted to make a real point, then Ubuntu's built-in package manager (aptitude?) is a superior example due to it's simplicity and capable search. And it's indeed usable by mostly computer-illiterate people, unlike command line tools.)
"Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home."
( Pratchett & Gaiman: Good Omens )
Joined: 11/30/2008
Posts: 650
Location: a little city in the middle of nowhere
Well, I have to say it now: Johannes, you are experiencing new Linux syndrome. You have publically announced many times that you have installed a particular distribution. The fact that you have a link to it as your forum signature at a certain forum at which you administer and your active participation in this thread to defend your beloved operating system is indicative of your inability to control your exitement. Hey! It's a joke, but you have to admit, you pretty much walked yourself right into that one.
OpenSUSE had some command-line version of the package manager as well, but I don't even remember its name since the graphical version in Yast2 has sufficed for everything. It's quite easy to search software and see info about them (eg. which version you have installed, which version is available, and so on).
The days of command-line apt-get are long gone, even though most linux-prejudiced people won't accept that, and probably won't for another decade.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
The days of command-line apt-get are long gone
I don't know about that. I found every GUI based apt-get to be annoying.
With apt-get, I can ask it to upgrade my software, and I can see all the packages about to be upgraded on a single screen, and quickly spot if there's something I don't want upgraded.
The GUI versions on the other hand, while they allow me to easily click on one for more information instead of using another command, to read an upgrade list, I feel like I have to keep scrolling for an eternity.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
I don't like apt-get very much, but I find Arch's answer, pacman, to be great once learned. It's very fast, has clean, readable output, and is very versatile. It sports remote db search, package info lookup, removing skipping dependency checks, removing along with dependencies, removing all files the package created, checking which package owns the specified local file, and so on. And a full system upgrade is as simple as issuing pacman -Syu. Also, zsh features elaborate tab completion for it, including completing to available remote packages. I have no need for a GUI.
I don't like apt-get very much, but I find Arch's answer, pacman, to be great once learned.
Huh? Interesting. I wonder what you like about it, and whether or not dpkg and apt support it.
It's very fast, has clean, readable output, and is very versatile.
Yes, yes, yes, and yes.
It sports remote db search, package info lookup, removing skipping dependency checks, removing along with dependencies, removing all files the package created, checking which package owns the specified local file, and so on.
yes, yes, yes (though it's a bad idea, and I cannot fathom why you would want to,) yes, yes, yes.
And a full system upgrade is as simple as issuing pacman -Syu.
aptitude full-upgrade <- it's readable in english :O
Also, zsh features elaborate tab completion for it, including completing to available remote packages. I have no need for a GUI.
zsh also supports very nice tabbed completion for dpkg/apt packaging.
So.... what exactly do you not like about apt?
Build a man a fire, warm him for a day,
Set a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.
I can understand Johanne about how much he love the ArchLinux package manager, because I mostly act the same as him, some year ago.... and even thought I love the archway.
Apt-get is good and easy, only thing that I can complain is dependency issue, that seem to be a bit more frequent for a "multimedia-desktop-station", because some unknown raeson and lot of patching. But since there is alway a way to fix the problem, this shouldn't be a problem.....
Johannes wrote:
I have no need for a GUI.
Still, there is shaman for eye candy sake. But it won't beat yaourt, since there is an embeded compilling user-friendly interface for complling the pkgbuild(simple script) from the arch depot... thought your better to look how the script was writed first, if you want to keep a stable system.
By the way, ArchLinux isn't the only distro with pacman, Frugalware have it too. If your looking to introduce new people to a good linux distro(I don't say that Ubuntu is bad, but my previous experience would say that it's not "that good" either) you may want to give them something familliar with windows and GUI right at the beginning...
People that drop linux very quickly, must time is because something din't work well like huge gnomish bug, loosing his windows partitions, etc..
Joined: 10/28/2007
Posts: 1360
Location: The dark horror in the back of your mind
Warp wrote:
The days of command-line apt-get are long gone, even though most linux-prejudiced people won't accept that, and probably won't for another decade.
Show me a GUI which lets me carry out tasks as efficiently as I usually can from the command line, and I'll start using it...
I personally rely on the command line much more than I do any GUI tools - given a sufficient level of familiarity with what you're doing you can perform everyday tasks significantly faster.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Kuwaga wrote:
Sounds like it was the fault of the designers of the GUI version, not the idea of GUI versions itself.
Very true.
And it's quite sad, but there's now roughly 10 different GUIs to perform the same functions as the command line version, and they all have ridiculous design issues.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
The days of command-line apt-get are long gone, even though most linux-prejudiced people won't accept that, and probably won't for another decade.
What I meant, but worded poorly was:
The days where the only way to manage software packages was using cryptic command-line tools (one of the most common ones being apt-get) are long gone. Nowadays many Linux distros offer, besides the basic command-line tool, GUI alternatives which are way more approachable to new users (and even more experienced ones). Regardless, many people who are prejudiced against Linux still refuse to acknowledge this, but instead persist in claiming that even today the only way to manage software packages is through cryptic command-line tools.
sgrunt wrote:
Show me a GUI which lets me carry out tasks as efficiently as I usually can from the command line, and I'll start using it...
Nowhere did I claim that the GUI interfaces were better than the command-line tools. I simply stated that nowadays there are graphical alternatives which are much easier for new users to use.
I personally rely on the command line much more than I do any GUI tools - given a sufficient level of familiarity with what you're doing you can perform everyday tasks significantly faster.
Personally I find Yast to be a much more efficient way of performing system configuration than trying to do it on the command line. It's easier to find what you are looking for, and the configuration files are often better and more clearly formatted, and often each configuration option has a ready-made list of options to choose from, so you don't have to read man pages or online documentation to find out what is it that you can write there. Yast already knows which files must be modified and how, so it saves me the trouble of having to find out. Thus Yast allows me to configure the system significantly faster.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Man some distributions are stupid.
I can't believe this is going on.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
That's exactly what came to mind when I first saw it.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I don't think he wants anyone to think that.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Easy and fun way to install programs for the whole family!
Ubuntu Software Center, however, should be quite usable by computer illiterates :)
