... longer but once a user understands the underlying concept, they are simple to use and they make the desktop much more efficient.
7. The Linux operating system doesn't work well with others
On the contrary, Linux was made to be online and to talk to other operating systems and devices. And with the later releases of the desktops, even sharing folders with Windows and OS X machines has become easy.
Whether you want to network a Linux and a Windows machine, network Linux and a Mac, or network Linux to Linux, there's no problem. Networking is one of the many strong points of the operating system. Typically, Windows has far more issues connecting to other operating systems on a network.
8. There are no applications for Linux
Have you ever opened the add/remove software utility? Linux has a plethora of outstanding applications, all to be found in one convenient location. You don't have to search the web for applications. Just fire up the tool and look around.
If I look on Synaptic — one of the add/remove software tools for Linux — on my Ubuntu 10.04 installation, I see 30,486 applications to add or remove. All are free. And even if only half of those applications are useful, that's still more than 15,000 applications — and all in one convenient spot.
9. Windows is used on more PCs than any other operating system in the world
Prove it. You can prove how many installations of the various Windows operating systems there are. All you have to do is check the Microsoft records to see how many units have been sold. For Linux, that calculation isn't so easy.
If I just examine my own personal usage, I find that I have downloaded the Ubuntu 10.04 ISO and installed it on numerous machines, and that is typical behaviour. Because of the way Linux is distributed, it's nearly impossible to know just how many installations there are across the globe. Asia and Europe are rife with massive Linux deployments and have been since about 2005.
10. Linux has no hardware support
Years ago, there was a lack of hardware support. When you wanted a new video card, sound card, printer, mouse or scanner, you had to do your homework. You couldn't just buy the hardware, plug it in and watch it work. Fortunately, for the most part, those days are gone. You can now enjoy much broader hardware support than you ever had before with Linux.
You might still have issues in certain areas. But those areas are always with companies that refuse to release the specs on their hardware. Such companies are dwindling in number. Nvidia, for example, offers outstanding support for Linux. And with the help of proprietary drivers, even the wireless issues are becoming a thing of the past.
Is it perfect? No. There are still pieces of hardware that are problematic. But if the trend continues, Linux will soon enjoy as wide a range of support as Windows.
Myth or reality?
Over the past 12 years, I have seen a huge shift not only in support but in perception of Linux, and open source as a whole. What do you think? Are these issues merely myths or are they still very much alive?
Talkback
The one big thing that really does plague Linux is the differences between distributions. Which desktop environment - Gnome, KDE? And now Ubuntu have gone their own way. Which package manager system? There's no single out of the box solution for all of them. Administration - they're all slightly different. For the average Joe, is Synaptics the same as or different to Apt? These are all aspects that the likes of you and me can handle, but there's no hope for the average desktop Joe. And for developers too it's a problem. Apt/RPM/Tarball/Whatever? GTK/QT/Whoknowswhat? Linux can not at this point in time provide ordinary users with the same-all-over-the-globe oneness that you get with Windows or OSX. Ubuntu has gone part way there, not by being the same as other distributions but by trying to make theirs the easiest and hoping to dominate as a result.
Linux's fringe status on the desktop is going to persist until one of the many distributions dominates, and then really starts addressing some of the ordinary end user experience problems that Windows / OSX got sorted out many, many years ago. And yes drivers are a problem. Anyone ever managed to get a scanner working properly in Linux? That is a question unlikely to receive a 100% of answers saying yes. I've never been able to get any mobile phone syncing to any Linux email/contacts client. 3D acceleration only seems to be a sure fire guarantee if you bite your open source tongue and use a proprietary driver... At least printing seems to be OK these days. I'm a bit out of touch, but do app developers still have to know how to write Postscript in order to get their apps printing?
I do use it. I wish it were more coherent.
@bazza1969 - Do you have the same "too many versions" problem when you go to buy a car? It's really frustrating, isn't it? All those different makes and models, how on earth can anyone ever make a choice? And don't even get me started on breakfast cereals! I can only imagine that when you go to the grocery store you just stand frozen in indecision when faced with all that variety!
The truth is, you look at the various choices, you choose one, and you use it. If you aren't happy with your choice, you try a different one. That's exactly the way it is with Linux as well. You don't have to use them all, you only have to choose one. You don't have to make a perfect choice the first time, if you try one and don't like it, then try a different one. It doesn't matter how many different ones there are, you just have to choose, try and decide. Every time I go in the store I am amazed at how many variations of Corn Flakes there are, but that doesn't stop me from buying one, and I don't go to the store manager and complain about the number of choices.
As for the rest of your technical points, the only one that still holds any water is scanners, because some of the major scanner manufacturers still do not either support Linux themselves or provide sufficient technical information for adequate FOSS drivers to be written. But a lot do, and a lot of scanners work with Linux now. You are right, there is not a 100% answer to this, but guess what, there isn't for Windows either. I have a lovely HP scanner which works perfectly with Windows XP, and is unsupported on Vista and Windows 7. The answer from both Microsoft and HP? Too bad, buy a new scanner.
Graphic display support? There are FOSS drivers available now for Intel, ATI and nVidia which include 3D acceleration. The ATI and nVidia drivers are quite new, and might no do everything possible on every different model of adapter, but the proprietary drivers for both of those certainly do, and they are easily available and easily installed, and are often installed by default. So why would the "average Joe" that you talk about care whether he was using a proprietary driver or not, as long as his computer worked? He certainly doesn't care, if his alternative is to use Windows.
jw
@jw Last time I looked most cars came complete with all their wheels and things already attached. Choose one, it'll work. The average person in the showroom can see straight up whether the car is the right one for them. It's there in front of their eyes. Then one can choose from the pick of the oh-so-expensive options list... But within easily discernible specs tyres are tyres, oil is oil, radios are DIN, etc.
See, the difference with Windows / Mac OSX is that it's easy to tell whether your scanner, video card, etc. are going to work with your XP, 7, Leopard, etc. There's no simple way to know whether your hardware is going to work with 'Linux' because there's no such thing as just 'Linux'. Sure, there has been good work with drivers, but there's no definitive list of which version of which distribution with which kernel any particular piece of hardware will work with. You have to try it.
And then there's the problem of distributions dropping support for hardware. For example I've had installations that have gone from being fine to broken merely because someone has decided that no one uses a certain driver any more and removed it, or replaced it. Next auto update, boom! Significant hunting, hacking and hand configuration needed.
But I note that you don't comment on package managers, desktops or APIs. The variety available is interesting, but the mainstream average person and software developer really isn't looking for interesting. For most people boring is just fine so long as there is just one standard for the whole ecosystem that just works without complicated fragmentation issues such as 'does my customer have APT?" Just look at how well Apple have done by being slightly interesting but retaining the uniformity of API, installer, etc. across their entire ecosystem.
Hallo bazza1969,
I don't know about your problems with Linux.
I can only say that so far, also when installing Ubuntu or Suse on brand new notebooks or desktops, I had not problem to have everything working at the first time. And when I write everything, I really mean everything; audio, camera, special feature of the keyboard, etc. etc.
It just works everything perfectly.
Moreover, Linux OS are much faster than ones having Windows...
There is no way. We made several tests and Linux PC always won...and in some cases the gain was considerable high.
In general, if I were you, I would try to learn a bit more about Unix-Linux. In this fantastic world of open source software there is always a solution for any problem. IN the proprietary software no. You just get,what they want you get, and the most of the time the quality is not that high.
bye,
Antonio
Following the car analogy, I bought a new one recently.
1. There were a host of 'optional' extras I had to get.
2. Most of the controls were just different enough to be annoying.
3. I no longer had a convenient place for parking meter coins (closeable ash tray)
Amazingly, I survived this and am enjoying the improved performance, fuel economy and zero tax rating.
@bazza1969 - I'm sorry, but I just don't agree that the breadth or depth of choice available in Linux today is a problem. I see what you are saying, but I think that many of your points are overstated, and a number of them are simply out of date. What I will say, though, is the the PERCEPTION that choice in Linux is a problem is indeed itself a problem. We don't need to reduce or simplify the choice, but we definitely need to do something about the perceived problem with choice.
One other thing I meant to say, in response to your original comment...
"Ubuntu has gone part way there, not by being the same as other distributions but by trying to make theirs the easiest and hoping to dominate as a result."
Let's take that thought just a little further. Suppose Ubuntu succeeds in becoming "the one Linux", and all that tedious choice is eliminated from the market. Then suppose that Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical really have "gone off the track" with their Unity desktop, and changing the underlying graphic code, and increasing use of Mono, and whatever else. What if Ubuntu 11.04, or somewhere further along the line, Canonical manages to produce a "Vistaster" equivalent, as Jake so aptly phrases it? In a market without choices, with all those horrible, confusing other distributions available, your "average Joe" is going to be every bit as screwed as he was when Microsoft foisted Vista on the world.
No, thanks, at the end of the day I believe that variety and choice are good things, period.
jw
does no one question why there are 10 of these articles a week? hard core linux people spend more time preaching about how easy everything is than they do making things easy.
i love linux. i use it every day. if it supported blu-ray and better multi-monitoring i would use it primarily. but it doesnt, and i don't. but its a good thing canonical paid designers for a new font.
plus, these myths are overstated for dramatic effect. here would be your list if it were real ( and they wouldnt be myths )
1. Few companies write device drivers for linux so if you want to use some special product, youll have to write it yourself
2. the admin sections of most distros ive used suck ass. linux has a cli first / gui second approach. which is ok. and makes the cli awesome. but also means youre not going to get too far in some gui's.
3. give me a break. games are a multi-billion dollar business. this is so ludicrous i cant even give any kind of rational response.
4. open source means if someone finds a vulnerability, sure the community can help fix it, but also means someone with ill intentions can find some hole and exploit it before anyone has a chance to fix it
5. try opening a complex excel document or a complicated laid out word document
6.gnome and kde are great but still have a long way to go, like stopping changing shit just for the sake of change ( unity and kde 4 )
7. i actually agree with him on this, but have never actually heard this as a 'myth', or heard it at all
8. i know there are thousands of apps for linux, but they are not the apps that people use. they are not photoshop or quickbooks or steam or itunes. and people are just not going to switch all their programs bc there is a free, open source alternative. they dont give a flying crappola about that. they just want their program to work.
9. do i even have to reply to this?
10. linux is getting better but it doesnt recognize my web cam. or my blu-ray drive. or my fingerprint scanner. or my bar code scanner. and i know im not the only one that has that problem.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
linux needs to spend more time fixing these issues than denying them. and then maybe we'll make some progress
hallo iggy.ma,
I use ubuntu and suse, with both I do multi-monitoring...
ciao
Antonio
once again for iggy.ma...
I bought a brand-new notebook, hp pavillion dv3, i7 720 in may 2010. after the first installation I was able to get all the things you mentioned working, without any problem, except the blue-ray that I don't have. They just works fine.
I really don't understand what do you have against gnome and kde, you can't just compare them to the shit that microsoft provides us...they wonderful. I prefer gnome to kde.
you talk about software that the people commonly use...the people commonly use those software because they are force to buy pc with windows pre-installed since they are ignorant about the existence of linux or lazy to learn new things...and they end up to use only windows applications...that is...
by the way, if among the first 500 fastest computer in the world, only 1 or 2 uses windows, there must be a reason...what do you think? are they crazy to install a shitty OS on a ferrari, or is that shitty OS not so bad??? which is your opinion?
Antonio
@antonio
> are they crazy to install a shitty OS on a ferrari, or is that shitty OS not so bad
windows 7 isnt 'not so bad'. it is great. it is a great os. but then again, so is linux. they are different.
> by the way, if among the first 500 fastest computer in the world, only 1 or 2 uses windows, there must be a reason...what do you think?
it means linux is faster. it has nothing to do with these 'myths' or linux on the desktop. it is the same as the stock market argument. 'oh, linux is being used by the london stock exchange, it must be ready for everybodys desktop.'' no, they are very different things and have nothing to do with each other.
> I really don't understand what do you have against gnome and kde
and i never said i had anything against gnome or kde. in fact i use gnome and ubuntu every day. but that doesnt mean i want them changing things just for the sake of change.
i also didn't say multi-monitoring doesnt work. it does. sometimes. sometimes it freezes my mouse when i move to my right screen ( 3 screens ). sometimes sli works. sometimes xinerama decides to turn off for no reason whatsoever.
> the people commonly use those software because they are force to buy pc with windows pre-installed since they are ignorant about the existence of linux or lazy to learn new things
and this, this is precisely the reason linux will never win on the desktop. until this attitude is changed, 'we are so much better, people just dont know or they are lazy' linux desktop will never go mainstream.
go back and read my post. i would like nothing more than linux to go mainstream. and linux offers a great product and a ton of advantages. but that doesnt mean that we need to write off peoples real concerns as myths. it is a terrible attitude and will only hold linux back.
@ iggy.ma
OK, sorry!
everything is clear now,
Antonio
This post has been removed by a moderator.
iggy.ma:
1) Few companies write the drivers, true. But is also true that is unlikely that you have to write your own drivers. I have a microsoft webcam that worked out of the box in opensuse.LOL. and ALL my hardware works, and there a lot of user cases like mine too.
2) What about Yast?. But if you mean *Ubuntu, of course that its administration GUI sucks! Ubuntu is not meant to be a server, is aimed to be a easy linux distro that doesn't even need too much administrations tools, plus the great online support that it has.. Have you ever tried Mac OS? Windows? its administrations tools sucks too. That's why i love the power of CLI: to do advanced administrative stuff.
3) People don't buy PC's to play hardcore games. True Hardcore gamers use consoles!!!!! And then again, what about Mac OS?
4)You are so ignorant that i wanna puke. There's no exist invulnerable software, but in the open source world, those security holes are fixed faster and better ! because anyone can see security holes in open source software, that's why, so Please, please, don't dear you to say that open source software is more insecure, that would be soooo stupid.
5) well, there's nothing much to do about buggy closed documents formats. If you keep using weird and useless features in microsoft office (where even those complex formats doesn't even works using a different version of microsoft office), there's nothing to do about it. Use latex, xls, csv.. etc!
6)Obviously, you are a gnome user. Gnome 2.x is old dated, gnome-shell sucks, Unity is too immature right now and i hope the best for Unity. Meanwhile gnome is dying, there is KDE wich right now is a stable , fast and modern DE. There's is choice ,there are DE for linux and they must change because we are in a new semi-era that demands change! get used to it.
7)People often thinks that because its linux, you can't talk with other OS'. If you are going to setup a network, with linux servers, then people may think that.
8) I have a macbook and i don't use photoshop, i use gimp! most people install photoshop but don't use all its features: gimp can do the job for most people, and that's a fact!. iTunes? i hate it! is bloated, is a store! and sadly there's no options for mac rather than iTunes. Quickbooks? Steam? i 'd never heard about that specialized software, so those are weak examples. But there is maple, matlab and mathematica plus octave, sage, gsl, python,etc. Software that i use!
9) i don't know what the author means with this, but i don't care neither
10)the fact is that linux is the OS with most hardware support in the world out of the box. everything works for me in linux, even my microsoft webcam (by the way, that webcam doesn't works in windows 7 out of the box LOL). Of course, you must use hardware supported by linux. If linux doesn't support your hardware then you should fill a complain with your hardware vendor, that's how things must be done! or return your piece of hardware to the store where you buy it and change it for a new hardware that is supported by linux. Or, wait till linux support your hardware.
But if linux doesn't works for you, dont' use it, that's all! Really, i don't care , expect or wish to see linux in the mainstream. The only thing that i care is that is better for me and a lot of people out there .
This post has been removed by a moderator.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
"People don't buy PC's to play hardcore games. True Hardcore gamers use consoles!!!!!"
Say what? Why buy a PC AND a console, when you can get a PC for not much more than a top-end PS3 that'll play the latest games AND be a PC? Like I have right here! Plus with a console you're tied up with crappy DRM, horrible controllers, having to actually BUY all your games.... wait, I didn't mean that last one! Just kidding, folks!
@Psalmanazar
I believe the problem here comes from his definition of hardcore games; he probably means big shooters like Medal of Honour and Call of Duty etc. However, many people do buy PCs for hardcore games of a different bent, such as Starcraft 2, Civilisation V and so on. Depends on definitions.
I think the thing that 'plagues Linux' in the consumer world at large is that most 'ordinary' users have never heard of it. I've been using computers since the early 8-bit days, and friends sometimes ask me to recommend a PC to them. If I suggest they get one with Linux rather than Windows installed, they ask me what it is. Then say they'd rather stick with Windows!
Of course, the situation isn't helped by the general lack of advertising, and the lack of Linux-based machines in the likes of PC World, Comet etc.
I've used Linux for about 13 years as well, and I have found the exact same results as you mention in the article. Great article by the way. People that still believe in the myths of your article, probably haven't touched a mainstream Linux distribution within the past 6-7 years. It's really good stuff, and you just can't beat the quality of software available as well as obtain the freedom you get with GNU/Linux. Sure, there are great proprietary products, but it's only skin deep. Once you get into the licensing, cost, maintenance, and all of the additional problems with proprietary software, suddenly it's not so great.
I've used the latest versions of Windows 7 from Microsoft, as well as the latest versions of Fedora Linux. In my opinion, Fedora is much easier to use. Windows 7 requires multiple levels of dialog boxes to get to settings and system items. With Linux, you only need to go 1 or 2 levels deep to get to everything. I've converted users from Windows to Fedora Linux with the Gnome desktop, and they've been able to adapt quite easily. Everything is straightforward and easy to find.
The problem is getting Linux exposed, so that users know what it is. Also, people need the patience and desire to learn something new and better, and get away from Windows.
What I find encouraging is that these days people around me (who are only mildly techie) are quite comfortable with Linux on the desktop. The three machines in the office available to them all have different distros/desktops but people don't seem to particularly favour any one of them (nor the Windows machine for that matter). They tend to go to whichever is nearest.
One of our service engineers had to take my netbook on a job to do some data gathering and a parameter change. After asking which was the capture program (a simple python script actually) he managed it without any prompting from me.
Reading this thread shows "IT Religious fanboyism" at is finest. Talk about user simplicity, and then get into arguments about KDE, Gnome, Ubuntu V10.2.z update 4 versus some other distro 3.2.4.5. This misses the point. To be a consumer product the word “driver" shouldn’t feature. Recommending that the command line is still the most efficient way to do things- misses the point. Linux has had 15 years to flourish. It hasn’t. On the server side it’s found a niche. It is not a smooth integrated consumer product that will sell millions. Look at the financial statements of the companies that sell Linux packaged product. Also, the main hardware OEMs report their OS shipments to Microsoft and to Wall street- more than 90% of them are shipping Win. Apple has 4-6 % The author ignores Netcraft, logs of facebook and sites that track user agent strings. Lastly, most points above are "we can now do it too" its not enough to create a compelling reason to switch. You need a reason. In the business arena, you need a business case. I talk to CIOs daily, none are considering client migrations to Linux - too much risk, abandoning 15 years of process, and training, for no inherent business value. Opening with "open office can now open docx" will get you thrown out of a CIO's office who is worried about much more than desktop.
Linux must become focused and consistent as a consumer, and an enterprise product (they both drive each other). This needs to be at the scale of millions, not dozens. It needs to keep its platform consistent for YEARS - release less updates, not more. It must have a business case rather than "it’s not Microsoft". And needs to get enterprise serious around security and management of its desktop and thousands of machines at once, not assuming each user is their own IT department. As a consumer offering, ultimately the entire OS needs to evolve to an EXPERIENCE comparable to the leaders who cater for a market where users are dumb- and a black screen with a cursor is terrifying - not "more efficient". To continue the car analogy- you have to be a mechanic/car tuner to drive linux, and you pick up Windows 7 and apple vehicles at slick showrooms with 5 year warranties, and free coffee. The linux dudes say their car is faster and has better horsepower per tonne, and can recompile their transmission shift programmes. The mainstream listens to the radio and drives smoothly home...not even knowing what a transmission shift programme is.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
I fully agree that too many distribution may confuse the user who wants to approach Linux fir the first time.
However, as you mentioned, I believe that Linux as improved drastically in the past few years.
What a user really needs is an eas interface, compatibility for exchanging data with other operating system and hardware installation compatibility.
I am using Linux for several years already and I started eveything from fresh but I still have some problems that I could not solve:
- upgrading to a new release sometimes jeopardize the previous release and, frankly speaking, is rather frustrating to start over again a fresh installation after few months of Linux tuning up.
I have my own customized Ubuntu 10.4 installed in my external hard disk and everything works fine except for remote printer and scanner but I din' want to think about starting over again after all I have done. Too much work for a normal user like me!
- Long Term Supported Release: What happens to my Ubuntu 10.4 when Canonical will discontinue to update the distribution?
In conclusion I appreciate the efforts made by all developers around the world but if Linux wants to replace Windows, everything should work fine, else many users will go back to Windows and never come back!
- everybody uses a printer/scanner or all in one. The printing is mostly ok but the scanner configuration is still for advanced Linux users
-
I have been trying Linux every time a new distribution comes up or I have access to a new computer - since waaay back in '96. So far with no success. I have NEVER found a wireless card that works in Linux. 15 years and dozens of computers, this is my one major problem with Linux. And the issue with hunting the 'net for drivers and instructions is that you need to have an internet connection - how do you do that when your card is not recognised by the blooming OS?
Obviously, I have a stack of printers and all are wireless, three of them all-in-one devices. None of them work in Linux. OK, some of them print, over a wire, but none would scan. And it is only in the last two years that most WIRED network cards are recognised and installed out of the box. Or maybe I've been just lucky with my latest hardware.
I like to hear about people having a wonderful Linux experience and I long for the day I'll be able to join them; software is great, I use OOo and the Gimp and a few others originally made for Linux, in Windows - but believe me, I tried, and so far hardware support for Linux is just not there. The moment I install a new distro and my wireless card works, and I can use my wireless printer/scanner, I'll be a convert.
@mariusm: You must be having extremely bad luck with your wireless card. I have at least eight different Linux distributions on my Fujitsu Lifebook S6510 laptop, which has an Intel 5300 wireless adapter, and every one of them works just fine. No hunting for drivers or instructions, nothing else required, just install Linux, click on the wireless icon, enter the WiFi key if necessary, and it connects. Period. I have exactly the same experience with an HP Pavillion dv2-1010ez, which has an Atheros wireless adapter. Load, click, connect, done. In fact the only wireless adapter I have had trouble with is Broadcom - I have written about it here several times - and that is in the process of being taken care of because Broadcom has finally released an open source driver.
jw
I agree about scanners that may be a problem with Linux, but as printing is concerned, I have never encountered any difficulty.
However, as far as beginners are concerned, Linux is not very user friendly yet, even though enormous improvements have been made.
I use the 3 major operating systems in 3 different computers such as Apple Mac Os, Ubunt 10.10 and Windows 7.
All of them work perfect but before Linux can overcome Apple and Windows there is a long way to go even though I will be the happiest man should the case that my prediction is wrong.
Galactica 48
@ J A Watson I think my laptops are just ordinary run-of-the-mill ones. What I have at the moment is a Dell Inspiron 1764 (my main laptop), with a Dell wireless card (yep, Broadcom chip); also a Dell Inspiron 1545, a HP Pavilion DV8 something, two Toshibas and a Gateway. And two HP desktops. Yup, lots of hardware, I'm a programmer and I tend to get a lot of boxes. In the past I also tried a bunch of other Dell's, HP's, Compaq's, the odd Acer or two and a few self-built desktops. As far as I am aware Dell and HP are two of the main PC and laptop manufacturers, so if their hardware is not recognised by Linux, there is little hope for smaller brands.
I keep a memory stick with an installation of Ubuntu, which I use to get into clients' computers when their windows system goes belly up - and I used that on literally dozens of computers. As I said, so far I have never found a wireless card that was recognised and installed by Linux. Wired ones are generally OK nowadays, but around here most people use wireless networks.
Well, it is just a case of difference in experience, or extremely bad luck on one side, or good luck on the other. I can certainly state that on at least six or eight completely different systems, from Fujitsu-Siemens, HP, Lenovo, Dell and one self-built, using at least six different Linux distributions, in at least the past two years (possibly longer), I have not come across a single one on which the wireless adapter was not either automatically recognized, configured and worked with no manual intervention, or it took two mouse clicks (on Ubuntu with Broadcom adapters, up to and including the latest Broadcom 4313), or in very rare cares it required installing one more package (Fedora and openSuSE with the Broadcom 4313).
I'm sorry to hear that you are having so much trouble.
jw