Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Some Flaws and Truths, and advantages Linux has
panic8:
With all this talk of making Linux "idiot proof" etc. I think that should not be the goal. The aim should be to make a usable, logical, well-organised, integrated, complete (you get the message) environment that a newbie, a pro, an average user could use. And all this "it must look like windows" I don't like that either. In fact if I go to Linux and see an obvious windows clone (like KDE) I'll be disappointed. Mac is different (as seen on ads), BeOS was different, but that doesn't mean I won't like them or couldn't use them. A bit of copying *ok*, when the exercise is to create a clone *why bother*. Why use a clone of windows when you can just use the real thing?
And jeez, how sloppily some so-called "desktop" distributions are put together, and then you use the programs and find the GUI text is full of typos, poorly constructed sentences and misspellings. And the missing software. I'd like to set up a dial-up account oh yea go to bash shell root vi /etc/ppp.00da ... hmh? Why isn't it printing this text? Ahhh... Or how about changing the resolution... /etc/X11/xf86.. oops, the GUI doesn't start up anymore....
Then try installing some software for Linux. No I didn't say Red Hat or Debian, Linux. Oh yea, there's no standard installer, let's compile from source.... what a pain!! Y'no I think source installation might be the way forward but we need alternatives to GNU make, so that there is a definate procedure for compiling, and copying, and installing and integrating.
Sorry if I'm just bashing the Linux desktop here but I'm telling it like it is and I think it needs to be said. A newbie would put it in harsher language.. I'm just venting some frustration on using Linux here
:mad: :mad: :mad:
:cool:
hm_murdock:
RPM is not the easiest way. As mentioned above, OS X has the lead in software installation. There's NO WORRIES of dependency. OS X apps don't run at the UNIX level, they run much higher up, and include all required support files inside a private folder tree. You see an icon that really contains the entire app, never having to worry about whether it put a bunch of bullshit in /bin or /lib or anything like that. You can move the icon around, you can toss it in the trash to get rid of it. How is RPM better than that?
The thing I've always said is that to succeed, Linux is going to have to not just hide, but supplant all of its UNIXness. Just as OS X is five or six layers all atop Darwin, there needs to be someone develop a layered system atop Linux. Users should be fully shielded from ever having to see a console message or a terminal screen. The option should still exist to use it, but that's all it should be... an option for those of us that are competent enough to use it.
something has to be made that's noticably better than Windows, not just "as good but different"... it has to be better at the same things.
panic8:
quote:In fact it should be the other way around a realy dumbed down help center with an animated penguin instead of that MS dog
There would be a text field beside wich the penguin would say "Ask me a question about Linux!".
--- End quote ---
Hmmm... that sounds good. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE, if your reading, implement something like this in your distro.
psyjax:
I really think that all Linux needs IMHO, is a better installer!
I mean, installation is a Pain. That is it, if they fix that I'm sure people will look past everything else.
It is my firm belief that if linu gets a user base of newbs, the OS will flesh itself out acording to theri needs, The problem is that right now it's user base mainly consist of a bunch of geeks who don't realy care weather they are clicking a menu or configuring a .conf file in vi.
The system needs to be more modular. Components for software should be mainly restricted to the application, it's folder, and ONE system directory, not smeard acress the entire filesystem.
But that last bit I'm sure users will bite the bullet on as long as the install process is refined and standardized. Windoze suffered from file vomit and still does.
file-vomit n. - case in which an application install regurgitates large amounts of obscure files across a gamut of equaly obscure system directories makeing it difficult, if not imposible, to deinstall without specialized software.
GoodwillMan:
Im thinking of writing some scripts and my own .uef package. It will stand for Unix Execting Package.
When you run the package, what will happen is the program files will be extracted to a tempory area. Config files will be put in a users home directory. This way users can run there own individual programs without intefereing with the rest of the system.
When you finish with the program, the tempory directory is deleted. The config files still remain on the desktop.
Then you could have a system that has GNOME/KDE/ECT using def files, and just have all the programs in one "Programs" folder which all users have accses to, and you could drag whole programs around like on a macintosh.
You could still have the Unix Filesystem underneath, just a nice inteface (simlar to what M$ Windows does, but totally different).
Instead of C/D/E/F it would have a few Desktop Folders, and/or a menu called Programs, another caller Personal Files, and a Shared Files folder.
Of cource you would still be able to accses it like a UNIX system if you wanted, it just has a nice chocolate coating.
DEF's could also just be installers for programs. The programs could then install to your Personal Files or Shared Files.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version