What I think of Linux users

By f0rk_b0mb
in Jokes & Funny Stuff

 Share

Recommended Posts

Veteran

KiHu

Posted
Posted

Somewhat true for desktop users, you can't ignore it's practical advantages in serverland though. ;)

Can't stand linux on the desktop, but we use it on our servers and equipment at work, and it really works well, we have a few windows systems mounted on..well..places, that unforutnately needs to be windows, they do not work as well. always issues.

Experienced

ShMaunder

Posted
Posted

How old is this image? This may have been true at one point, but not anymore.

I think somebody [the author of that image] needs to compare the latest Windows release to the latest Ubuntu release from installation through to usability.

I say simple tasks include web surfing and word processing. In that case, there really isn't much difference between the start screen and Unity in respect to executing simple tasks - in fact I would say Unity is more simpler (read as idiot proof) than Windows (opinion of course).

Contributor

Dorza

Posted
Posted

Out of the three Windows has by far the most long winded installation process and from a user interaction point of view more confusing processes to (though its obviously still easy). If you have a Linux distro with a package management system (which most do these days) then installing programs is as easy as it will ever be and you don't have to go onto the web to find it if you know the name of the package.

You just type the very easy to understand install command with the program you want to install and it just does it, it will even figure out what dependancies are required and install them to. Windows doesn't do this most of the time. Mac to it's credit (I dislike the workflow on OSX, it's very awkward to use) has the simplest installation method via a GUI, just click and drag an icon and it installs.

On windows you have to click next, click a radio button, untick a box to stop 3rd party programs installing (sometimes), confirm this, confirm that, click yes / no to any popups, its so long winded compared to the other systems I just mentioned.

In defence of the image though the Linux community is it's own worst enemy on times, can by quite xenophobic towards those who aren't as well practiced at Linux as they are. I agree with the above as well; when it comes to servers Linux is untouchable.

Grand Master

Anibal P

Posted
Posted

In defence of the image though the Linux community is it's own worst enemy on times, can by quite xenophobic towards those who aren't as well practiced at Linux as they are. I agree with the above as well; when it comes to servers Linux is untouchable.

I don't blame them tho, with Ubuntu being easier to install and use than Windows, it's only the really lazy types that won't do a quick Google search that ask the noobiest of questions

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

Out of the three Windows has by far the most long winded installation process and from a user interaction point of view more confusing processes to (though its obviously still easy). If you have a Linux distro with a package management system (which most do these days) then installing programs is as easy as it will ever be and you don't have to go onto the web to find it if you know the name of the package.

You just type the very easy to understand install command with the program you want to install and it just does it, it will even figure out what dependancies are required and install them to. Windows doesn't do this most of the time. Mac to it's credit (I dislike the workflow on OSX, it's very awkward to use) has the simplest installation method via a GUI, just click and drag an icon and it installs.

On windows you have to click next, click a radio button, untick a box to stop 3rd party programs installing (sometimes), confirm this, confirm that, click yes / no to any popups, its so long winded compared to the other systems I just mentioned.

In defence of the image though the Linux community is it's own worst enemy on times, can by quite xenophobic towards those who aren't as well practiced at Linux as they are. I agree with the above as well; when it comes to servers Linux is untouchable.

*cough* express installs. *cough*

Mentor

SharpGreen

Posted
Posted

Anyone who has actually used any modern Linux distro (which quite a few have since that includes Android) would know that statement to be completely, totally false, for the mainstream distributions. Now if you some not-so-mainstream distro like Arch or Gentoo...then you have no room for complaining because they don't care very much about the UX

Grand Master

redvamp128

Posted
Posted

I think you need glasses since you seem unable to see the very large very prominent desktop tile.

Not me-- but general users-- I remember the switch from 3.1 to 95 -- where users said -- Where oh Where can I find my programs when they are not on the desktop. THe answer is in the Start menu-- the people are used to the start menu now-- they will say -- Where is the start menu---

that was a joke...

people will still look for the start menu at the bottom of the screen until they get used to it.

No matter if there is a big tile there or not....

That is like when 95 came out -- people still were looking for an icon in a window on the desktop.

Grand Master

Vice

Posted
Posted

Somewhat true for desktop users, you can't ignore it's practical advantages in serverland though. ;)

I see this from a different perspective. To me servers should be more friendly and accessible with well designed interfaces. The command line is used because it's easy for server software developers. Making a sexy interface is difficult. It's a cop out really.

Turn key server functionality would make everyones lives much easier, it would make deployment faster and more efficient. I really feel that we need a shift in the server space towards scalable manageability through a common interface and I can think of no better way to do that than from a web based control panel that uses plugins in standard web languages to add new features. A bit like a cpanel for everything, not just websites and website associative functions.

I'm thinking much broader like file sharing, server upkeep management, rebooting, installing new hardware drivers, partition and disk management, network management, virtualization configuration, setup and access.

Making servers accessible and intuitive would open up a whole new vista of empowerment. At the moment to launch any kind of service or product that has anything to do with computers you need a server and the options out there are just not as good as they could be. Windows Server is pretty good but it falls short in a number of areas and it costs so much that for gestating business ideas it doesn't make sense to put most of your starting cash (which for something new is going to be your own personal funds) in to a server for an idea that might fail anyway. So people turn to Linux which is free but much more difficult to use.

Sorry for rambling I just really believe the current command line dominated server environment we currently live in could be greatly improved with some investment in a standard graphical based control management system. a CMS where the C is for Control and not Content.

  • 4 years later...
Grand Master

adrynalyne

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, kybalion said:

$0 (main Linux distros) vs $120+ any other current OS w/ primarily non-free software... Hmm...

Old thread is old and majority consumer OS distribution cones from purchasing a computer. Then there is the whole truth of Linux only being free if your time is worth nothing. 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing