It took me a while to get at what you need and the command details.
Normally, "su" with no command switches will change you into Root.
Smarter distributions will limit "su" to root use but in that case "sudo su" on the command line and you should be good.
"sudo bash" would also be an option similar to Windows "runas /command:cmd.com" (or such).
Mint is derived from Ubuntu which makes some questionable choices in default implementation in this regard. It may have inherited some odd setting Canonical makes.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
First type Su
Then type startx will give me a GUI as root. if true, this would be handy, especially with my upcoming project of turning an old computer into a router. There will be a lot of configurations.
Then type startx will give me a GUI as root. if true, this would be handy, especially with my upcoming project of turning an old computer into a router. There will be a lot of configurations.
I log in as user (startx or GUI directly). X and everything running us working normally under user credentials. If something, somehow, gets in then it's exploiting X as my user rather than my root. If X has a bug and starts eating files, it's limited to what my user can damage rather than system wide corruption.
As I normally have at least four terminals open, I do a "su" in one of them so it's sitting there as root. Not my entire X gui but just the instance of Bash running inside the terminal window.
If I am working at the command line with some Root chores them I'm all set. grep/sed/vim/less/cat to my heart's content but clearly aware of the "#" prompt that means I can break stuff.
If I need a Rooted GUI utility then I can run that command from the open text terminal also. When that GUI app opens, it will open as root but display in my currently active X GUI (a root window running under a user GUI desktop). If I type "Synaptic" then I'm logged in as user with the standard user level desktop plus the Synaptic package manager as root. There is just no reason for the entire session to be logged in as Root. I can be lazy (I'm pretty much always logged in) and practice safe hex (root with least privileged as needed).
As I normally have at least four terminals open, I do a "su" in one of them so it's sitting there as root. Not my entire X gui but just the instance of Bash running inside the terminal window.
If I am working at the command line with some Root chores them I'm all set. grep/sed/vim/less/cat to my heart's content but clearly aware of the "#" prompt that means I can break stuff.
If I need a Rooted GUI utility then I can run that command from the open text terminal also. When that GUI app opens, it will open as root but display in my currently active X GUI (a root window running under a user GUI desktop). If I type "Synaptic" then I'm logged in as user with the standard user level desktop plus the Synaptic package manager as root. There is just no reason for the entire session to be logged in as Root. I can be lazy (I'm pretty much always logged in) and practice safe hex (root with least privileged as needed).
In the same way, I could drive three miles over reving my first gear and no damage may come of it but this is not the best approach available to me. There is simply a better way to do what you are doing while maintaining good computer use habits. It's too easy to log in as user and do whatever you need to as temporary root not to.
Even with Webmin, I use the root account only long enough to create a user account with just the minimum modules enabled for the system. I could simply use the root login for Webmin and always have the full module list while spraying my login across the network but it's a messy view and poor computing habit to encourage.
Even with Webmin, I use the root account only long enough to create a user account with just the minimum modules enabled for the system. I could simply use the root login for Webmin and always have the full module list while spraying my login across the network but it's a messy view and poor computing habit to encourage.
These are things I've been wondering about, as I am definitely a newbie.
It sounds like some of your techniques could be compared to logging in as a "power user" in Windows.
I'm sure I'm wrong, but I really learned a lot in this thread. Thanks!
And thanks to Sinister for bringing the subject up![even if he is ornery! HA!]
It sounds like some of your techniques could be compared to logging in as a "power user" in Windows.
I'm sure I'm wrong, but I really learned a lot in this thread. Thanks!
And thanks to Sinister for bringing the subject up![even if he is ornery! HA!]
Sudo is good for a single command or script call like a daily update started with a single sudo command. In the gui world, there is kdesu and similar that open GUI utilities with root privileged (like osX admin unlock button).
If your going to be working as root or need to open a lot of GUI as root, use "su". Become root in a text terminal and kick open whatever you need or do your long string of commands.
By the time there is real justification to log in as root directly, your probably at the point where you need to do a single user system root shell. There are easy ways to work as root without logging in as root. (actually, having to log in as administrator is a pain but Runas can replicate most of the su/sudo results.)
Now, where I disagree with some distributions is when sudo and a lack of Root account have been implemented the Ubuntu way. It's a horrible example of how sudo can be configured.
If your going to be working as root or need to open a lot of GUI as root, use "su". Become root in a text terminal and kick open whatever you need or do your long string of commands.
By the time there is real justification to log in as root directly, your probably at the point where you need to do a single user system root shell. There are easy ways to work as root without logging in as root. (actually, having to log in as administrator is a pain but Runas can replicate most of the su/sudo results.)
Now, where I disagree with some distributions is when sudo and a lack of Root account have been implemented the Ubuntu way. It's a horrible example of how sudo can be configured.
of course, if you have the root password you can use 'su', or even request the profile with 'su -'; however by default most OS's distributions, scramble the root password for that very reason... in all practice, you should NEVER have to log in as root.. even if you have to boot from disk, and manually mount the drives...you are already root.. even Windows, have you set the Administrator password, which is NOT the same as the user which Windows is actually installing under.
'sudo su -' or better yet just 'sudo __command__'
'sudo su -' or better yet just 'sudo __command__'
If your doing that much work as root that the number of sudo commands is an issue; "su" and get the work done allows you to avoid the bad habit of logging in as root/admin fully.
you can use su -i and you no longer have to keep typing su. Also you can launch the other GUI apps from this new root login and it will work.
http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/misc/51751-login-root.html
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-newbie-8/how-to-login-as-root-371105/
http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/ubuntu-linux-root-password-default-password/
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RootSudo
http://amitech.50webs.com/installing/index.php.html
http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/ubuntu-admin-group-permissions.html
I hope these links help.
http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/misc/51751-login-root.html
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-newbie-8/how-to-login-as-root-371105/
http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/ubuntu-linux-root-password-default-password/
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RootSudo
http://amitech.50webs.com/installing/index.php.html
http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/ubuntu-admin-group-permissions.html
I hope these links help.
>>>Modern Nix prevents you from logging in as root not quite true. The default install of Ubuntu and probably a few others does not allow directly logging on as the root in the default install. But you can simply change that. I will let you borrow my favorite tool. Google. Ahhh! Hmmm! Deep breath. Breathe slowly in and exhale slowly out a few times then hit the command line and type Google. The search for the steps to correct that irresponsible behavior by the developers of Ubuntu.
And then I can learn how to edit config files through the command line... because there isn't a simple checkbox on a screen in a control panel, "Allow Root Login"
This post explains it perfectly, from the Mint forms
"Starting a X session as root is wrong in almost every instance, regardless of how you do it. I haven't felt the need to do that in years. There are better, more secure ways of doing anything that you think you need a root X session for. It isn't a matter of you being in control of your computer. It is in fact the opposite. Running an X session as root means that you don't know enough about your system to do it correctly."
Maybe they just have contempt for users, by why assume everyone must be using it the wrong way, why is it so friggen unbeleivable that I want to login as root, change some apache, php and FTP settings, install some programs, and log off?
In reading more into this, Linux is seeming sadder and sadder.
This post
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=1030&start=15#p233701
Says logging in as root will corrupt your profile. Really, Linux is so unstable you cannot even login as the master user?
Ooooo, Found one for Ubuntu, doesn't help me in Mint, but its a start.
"System --> Preferences/Administration (I can't remember which) --> login windows --> allow administrator logins (or something to that effect, it didn't say root, it said "administrator")."
This post explains it perfectly, from the Mint forms
"Starting a X session as root is wrong in almost every instance, regardless of how you do it. I haven't felt the need to do that in years. There are better, more secure ways of doing anything that you think you need a root X session for. It isn't a matter of you being in control of your computer. It is in fact the opposite. Running an X session as root means that you don't know enough about your system to do it correctly."
Maybe they just have contempt for users, by why assume everyone must be using it the wrong way, why is it so friggen unbeleivable that I want to login as root, change some apache, php and FTP settings, install some programs, and log off?
In reading more into this, Linux is seeming sadder and sadder.
This post
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=1030&start=15#p233701
Says logging in as root will corrupt your profile. Really, Linux is so unstable you cannot even login as the master user?
Ooooo, Found one for Ubuntu, doesn't help me in Mint, but its a start.
"System --> Preferences/Administration (I can't remember which) --> login windows --> allow administrator logins (or something to that effect, it didn't say root, it said "administrator")."
If you need to log into the terminal as Root to edit an apache, php or ftp setting then you are doing it wrong. You are using a dumptruck to move a shovel load of soil around your flower garden.
It conflicts with the concept of least privileged. There is a lot loaded even in a text terminal, let alone an X GUI session, that does not require root. Having all that running with complete unquestioned access to your system is asking for trouble; malware, buggy software, user error.
Consider Webmin which will give you administrative GUI for your apache and such. https://localhost:10000 and your all set to quickly change around your settings. Ideally, learn the command line; apache config is fantastic by text tool. Your GUI tool is not remotely as fast as a quick vim/nano/grep edit.
In my case, I frequently use root requiring tools like nmap. I've always got a terminal open and su to root. But then, the command line is a happy place for me regardless of platform. It takes away the GUI abstraction and obstruction layers where not actually required.
I don't see the quote from the Mint site as user hostile but hostile against the overkill and security error that is "just log in as root". They are very correct by saying that even if one is absolutely sure they need to be logged in as root; they're 98% likely to be not doing something the right way.
It conflicts with the concept of least privileged. There is a lot loaded even in a text terminal, let alone an X GUI session, that does not require root. Having all that running with complete unquestioned access to your system is asking for trouble; malware, buggy software, user error.
Consider Webmin which will give you administrative GUI for your apache and such. https://localhost:10000 and your all set to quickly change around your settings. Ideally, learn the command line; apache config is fantastic by text tool. Your GUI tool is not remotely as fast as a quick vim/nano/grep edit.
In my case, I frequently use root requiring tools like nmap. I've always got a terminal open and su to root. But then, the command line is a happy place for me regardless of platform. It takes away the GUI abstraction and obstruction layers where not actually required.
I don't see the quote from the Mint site as user hostile but hostile against the overkill and security error that is "just log in as root". They are very correct by saying that even if one is absolutely sure they need to be logged in as root; they're 98% likely to be not doing something the right way.
So I don't see why I can't use a dump truck, its not as if I am going to be browsing the web while logged in as root, but also, I don't need any other users other that root, all access to the machine is for configuration changes, requiring admin, otherwise, the machine sits logged out.
"It conflicts with the concept of least privileged"
But that conflicts with my concept of do everything easily and as fast as possible with minimal effort. And I am fairly certain an OS should bend to my will, not I to its
.
"It conflicts with the concept of least privileged"
But that conflicts with my concept of do everything easily and as fast as possible with minimal effort. And I am fairly certain an OS should bend to my will, not I to its
.
I wouldn't recommend it but this is Linux, you can change how it behaves if you so choose. If it's a dedicated server, I'd suggest ripping the GUI off there entirely and using SSH for terminal and Webmin for graphic management unless you go all out with an ISPConfig setup.
Still though, I can pop in remotely and make a quick text change by ssh with the apache service restarted and running long before an admin can log into Webmin and find the apache module (X gui isn't even in this race). It's now to the point that I don't like not managing Apache through terminal and config files simply because it is so much more efficient and accessible. On the local machine, my rooted terminal is the secret; always at least one open sitting at a root prompt. On remote machines, ssh in as user then su to root and I'm golden.
Oh.. it's also about developing good habits. If you don't login as root on your insecure machine then your less likely to do so on other systems where you *really* shouldn't. When I log into a server as user I get the initial SSL tunnel which would give up my user credentials if anything. My root credentials do not go across the wire until after the initial SSL tunnel is established.
Still though, I can pop in remotely and make a quick text change by ssh with the apache service restarted and running long before an admin can log into Webmin and find the apache module (X gui isn't even in this race). It's now to the point that I don't like not managing Apache through terminal and config files simply because it is so much more efficient and accessible. On the local machine, my rooted terminal is the secret; always at least one open sitting at a root prompt. On remote machines, ssh in as user then su to root and I'm golden.
Oh.. it's also about developing good habits. If you don't login as root on your insecure machine then your less likely to do so on other systems where you *really* shouldn't. When I log into a server as user I get the initial SSL tunnel which would give up my user credentials if anything. My root credentials do not go across the wire until after the initial SSL tunnel is established.
After all, my Linux command line is super rusty, and finding the right command-line to type online can be a challenge, as the command has changed many times over. I remember before that startx was discontinued and you had to type "init 5". Now apparently startx is back... That's just one example of online confusion. Trying to find a way to do a surface HDD scan was a good challenge.
It may have flopped around previous to my introduction through Red Hat in the 90s but I've never seen "startx" removed or replaced. The general command line commands have also been consistent. There are distribution specific scripts that may not be universal though.
I perfectly understand you. I feel it is my system and if I ask a simple question of how to login as root, that is answer I want first. You can give the other information and suggestions later. But I do hate when someone asks, why do you want to login as root? You should not login as root. Well I tried login on a DC as a loval user and failed. But I will try and figure out why only an Administrator is allowed to log on to the DC. I will check it out later.
"some stupid reason" is actually how an OS should function. Root/Administrator should not need to log in directly as root. Log in as a user and give the user permission for the admin function if it's just one or two tasks. Switch to root if it's something that needs a full admin profile.
/etc depends a little on the distribution too. Mandriva's /etc was easy enough to navigate but when I switched, Debian's /etc was like walking out of Mandriva and into a clean manicured garden. I love being able to simply edit a text file in a rational location under /etc rather than requiring some utility (or worse, GUI utility) just to change a simple setting.
You've got the three starting point directories though. I actually go a step further and create a /home/user/bin for user specific executables. I'd add /dev containing devices too for those migrating from drive letters or similar device identifiers.
/etc depends a little on the distribution too. Mandriva's /etc was easy enough to navigate but when I switched, Debian's /etc was like walking out of Mandriva and into a clean manicured garden. I love being able to simply edit a text file in a rational location under /etc rather than requiring some utility (or worse, GUI utility) just to change a simple setting.
You've got the three starting point directories though. I actually go a step further and create a /home/user/bin for user specific executables. I'd add /dev containing devices too for those migrating from drive letters or similar device identifiers.
There was also a swap, but I dont remember its name, maybe /swap, And wasn't there one more for system like programs...
And I don't complain about editing a text file vs GUI, but my last venture into etc had just a bunch of flat files with obscure names sitting in a giant directory. And I was expected to remember obscure named to do things like turn on web services and such. In my later, GUI traveled version in Ubuntu, the Apache guides are fairly good and the internet is a great resource, so I just went to the folder it said to go.
BTW, whats the command to immediately end a broken GUI session and go back to command line? My Mint Live USB dies VERY FREQUENTLY when playing legacy games over Wine, so far, only way I know to reset it is a hard reset of the system. So if there is a way to just kill the GUI session, and tell it to relogin as the live user, I'd like to know, cause I tried googling this but with no luck at all.
And I don't complain about editing a text file vs GUI, but my last venture into etc had just a bunch of flat files with obscure names sitting in a giant directory. And I was expected to remember obscure named to do things like turn on web services and such. In my later, GUI traveled version in Ubuntu, the Apache guides are fairly good and the internet is a great resource, so I just went to the folder it said to go.
BTW, whats the command to immediately end a broken GUI session and go back to command line? My Mint Live USB dies VERY FREQUENTLY when playing legacy games over Wine, so far, only way I know to reset it is a hard reset of the system. So if there is a way to just kill the GUI session, and tell it to relogin as the live user, I'd like to know, cause I tried googling this but with no luck at all.
Swap is usually a partition type which I believe mounts to /tmp
/bin - system wide regular binaries or executable scripts
/boot - the boot related files like grub, the kernel image and such
/dev - where hardware devices are listed
/etc - system wide configuration files
/home - user home directories
/lib - system wide program related files (shared libraries and such)
/media - where removable media like USB drives seem to appear now
/mnt - where everything used to be mounted and non-removable still is
/opt - where third party software from outside the distro repository should install itself (Splunk and HP's *nix utilities behave well)
/proc - a virtual file system which is actually the insides of your running kernel (try "more /proc/version")
/root - root's home directory
/sbin - intimate system binaries
/tmp - temp directory
/usr - more localized stuff like /usr/local/bin or /usr/X11R6/
/var - variable stuff like your websites, ftp server, system logs and such
(hm.. swap fits in there somewhere though I think it ends up being a device rather than mounted storage.)
There are others but this would be the extended list based on Debian Stable though I wouldn't suggest that a new user be required to memorize the list.
For finding text, I frequently use grep if I don't know which file has what I need. I haven't really found anything that didn't match up to it's app though. munin.conf relates to Munin. munin-node.conf relates to Munin-node. httpd.conf/apache.conf/vhost-availabe* are under /etc/apache2 which relates to Apache2. But I found Debian's /etc layout greatly rational compared to Mandriva so maybe Mint is doing some funk with there's.
Most of the time, I restart services directly:
/etc/init.d/apache2 restart
if I don't remember a specific service name:
/etc/init.d/a[TAB] and I get a list of file names starting "a".
I don't frequently enable or disable but I'd have that command memorized if I did it more than twice in the last month.
For ending a broken GUI session, control+alt+backspace is the three finger solute for X. You'll end up back at a command line if you boot into a text login but I think X restarts if you default to a GUI login. Alt+F1 to Alt+F5 or so switch between terminals but in X, it often becomes control+alt+F1 and such. F6 to F11 or so should be X sessions and F12 is normally the console window for messages.
Instability under Wine is a little disappointing but then I've never put a lot of faith in it. I'm currently playing with some CEH practice content that comes as a shockwave .exe only which does not render nearly as nicely under WINE. Those programs may be as unstable under the gamer subscription version of WINE but maybe it's better tuned for them.
/bin - system wide regular binaries or executable scripts
/boot - the boot related files like grub, the kernel image and such
/dev - where hardware devices are listed
/etc - system wide configuration files
/home - user home directories
/lib - system wide program related files (shared libraries and such)
/media - where removable media like USB drives seem to appear now
/mnt - where everything used to be mounted and non-removable still is
/opt - where third party software from outside the distro repository should install itself (Splunk and HP's *nix utilities behave well)
/proc - a virtual file system which is actually the insides of your running kernel (try "more /proc/version")
/root - root's home directory
/sbin - intimate system binaries
/tmp - temp directory
/usr - more localized stuff like /usr/local/bin or /usr/X11R6/
/var - variable stuff like your websites, ftp server, system logs and such
(hm.. swap fits in there somewhere though I think it ends up being a device rather than mounted storage.)
There are others but this would be the extended list based on Debian Stable though I wouldn't suggest that a new user be required to memorize the list.
For finding text, I frequently use grep if I don't know which file has what I need. I haven't really found anything that didn't match up to it's app though. munin.conf relates to Munin. munin-node.conf relates to Munin-node. httpd.conf/apache.conf/vhost-availabe* are under /etc/apache2 which relates to Apache2. But I found Debian's /etc layout greatly rational compared to Mandriva so maybe Mint is doing some funk with there's.
Most of the time, I restart services directly:
/etc/init.d/apache2 restart
if I don't remember a specific service name:
/etc/init.d/a[TAB] and I get a list of file names starting "a".
I don't frequently enable or disable but I'd have that command memorized if I did it more than twice in the last month.
For ending a broken GUI session, control+alt+backspace is the three finger solute for X. You'll end up back at a command line if you boot into a text login but I think X restarts if you default to a GUI login. Alt+F1 to Alt+F5 or so switch between terminals but in X, it often becomes control+alt+F1 and such. F6 to F11 or so should be X sessions and F12 is normally the console window for messages.
Instability under Wine is a little disappointing but then I've never put a lot of faith in it. I'm currently playing with some CEH practice content that comes as a shockwave .exe only which does not render nearly as nicely under WINE. Those programs may be as unstable under the gamer subscription version of WINE but maybe it's better tuned for them.
Redhat 7 or something, nasty /etc
I never actually went exploring in ubuntu, just homed right in on the config files I needed.
I never actually went exploring in ubuntu, just homed right in on the config files I needed.
the /etc where probably equally organized. Ubuntu should retain much of Debian's /etc layout though.
OK so I'm an "old" guy (over 40) so I have a different perspective. I learned by basics on command line systems and saw Windows come to the market. I use both and can say that I find each useful and productive.
The fact is Linux IS NOT WINDOWS! It is closer to UNIX which IS NOT WINDOWS. You can't think of things in a Windows perspective when using a Linux OS. It would be like assuming a motorcycle and a car are exactly the same. They do the same function. Each is different looking and operates in a different way, so why be confused when you discover they are assembled differently and have unique requirements? If I follow CreativeBlue's line of reasoning I should expect a car to have a chain drive and a clutch and if it doesn't, it is deficient and unfriendly.
Ask a UNIX dude about a registry hack and I bet you get a blank stare. These ideas and constructs simply don?t exist in his environment. You cannot simply say something like ?Linux is stupid and difficult to use because it?s not what I understand.? I do understand your frustration. I really do but you need to take the time to gain the same level of understanding of Linux that you have of Windows.
Read a basic book about Linux. Really read it? not just refer to it after you cobble an OS onto a box and start hacking at it. There are things to understand, just like with Windows. Find someone you can ask questions of to help you find out how to do what you are trying to accomplish. It may turn out Linux is not the best choice for your goals. Who knows?
If you have any specific questions I would be very happy to answer them. Just send me an email and I can help.
Jim (jbayer at springcm dot com)
The fact is Linux IS NOT WINDOWS! It is closer to UNIX which IS NOT WINDOWS. You can't think of things in a Windows perspective when using a Linux OS. It would be like assuming a motorcycle and a car are exactly the same. They do the same function. Each is different looking and operates in a different way, so why be confused when you discover they are assembled differently and have unique requirements? If I follow CreativeBlue's line of reasoning I should expect a car to have a chain drive and a clutch and if it doesn't, it is deficient and unfriendly.
Ask a UNIX dude about a registry hack and I bet you get a blank stare. These ideas and constructs simply don?t exist in his environment. You cannot simply say something like ?Linux is stupid and difficult to use because it?s not what I understand.? I do understand your frustration. I really do but you need to take the time to gain the same level of understanding of Linux that you have of Windows.
Read a basic book about Linux. Really read it? not just refer to it after you cobble an OS onto a box and start hacking at it. There are things to understand, just like with Windows. Find someone you can ask questions of to help you find out how to do what you are trying to accomplish. It may turn out Linux is not the best choice for your goals. Who knows?
If you have any specific questions I would be very happy to answer them. Just send me an email and I can help.
Jim (jbayer at springcm dot com)
Have you ever programmed? Ansi C, C, C++, BasicA, QBasic, Business basic, PHP, HTML, perl, shell scripting? You want a tough one how about assembly language? Pop, push, peek, poke, Mind boggling!?!? Now there's a steep learning curve!!!
My point here is that there's easy OSes and then there's more difficult ones. With more power comes the availability of more complexity. It's as true for OSes as it is for programming. If you want to be able to do more, you'll have to learn more. If your using a good disto. and want to do simple things you should never need the command line. My sister (barely computer literate) is running Mandriva 2010. The only support calls I get from here are how to reset her cable modem, and where can I get more fonts and clip art for Open Office so I can design more greeting cards,etc...
Windows is made for the masses. Anything made for the masses can't be too complex or it would fail. This has been proven by history over and over. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to open a window. But it does take someone with an open mind, patience, and a desire to learn what can be done with Linux.
Don't get me wrong. I use Windows everyday. I've given up on it as any vessel to get things done in any timely manner as a "power user." I run 10 or more windows all day, every day on my Linux laptop taking care of multiple Windows and Linux servers. I've never been able to come close on Windows and still be able to work. I use it for things that just flat out not available for Linux, which is getting less and less by the day.
I too used qemm-386 as well running DESQview even back then they were trying to be like Unix offering multiple windows. Sharing clock ticks and calling it multitasking. That was about 3 years after I found Unix, then 4 years later, Linux.
I would have switched when I first found Unix, but at $10K or more per seat, it wasn't an option. Once I found RedHat 4.2 I haven't looked back. I have a Windows box at home to program my TV remote, run tax & GPS software, and generally collect dust.
As far as Mac's go, you can't get as much done with them either, and WAY too pricey.
If you have neither the patience nor desire to better yourself... STICK WITH WinDoze!!!
My point here is that there's easy OSes and then there's more difficult ones. With more power comes the availability of more complexity. It's as true for OSes as it is for programming. If you want to be able to do more, you'll have to learn more. If your using a good disto. and want to do simple things you should never need the command line. My sister (barely computer literate) is running Mandriva 2010. The only support calls I get from here are how to reset her cable modem, and where can I get more fonts and clip art for Open Office so I can design more greeting cards,etc...
Windows is made for the masses. Anything made for the masses can't be too complex or it would fail. This has been proven by history over and over. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to open a window. But it does take someone with an open mind, patience, and a desire to learn what can be done with Linux.
Don't get me wrong. I use Windows everyday. I've given up on it as any vessel to get things done in any timely manner as a "power user." I run 10 or more windows all day, every day on my Linux laptop taking care of multiple Windows and Linux servers. I've never been able to come close on Windows and still be able to work. I use it for things that just flat out not available for Linux, which is getting less and less by the day.
I too used qemm-386 as well running DESQview even back then they were trying to be like Unix offering multiple windows. Sharing clock ticks and calling it multitasking. That was about 3 years after I found Unix, then 4 years later, Linux.
I would have switched when I first found Unix, but at $10K or more per seat, it wasn't an option. Once I found RedHat 4.2 I haven't looked back. I have a Windows box at home to program my TV remote, run tax & GPS software, and generally collect dust.
As far as Mac's go, you can't get as much done with them either, and WAY too pricey.
If you have neither the patience nor desire to better yourself... STICK WITH WinDoze!!!
Regarding trying to install apps: I have come across a few apps over the years that aren't available through synaptic, apt-get, or other package manager. You download them, unpack them in your home directory, and the minimal instructions that come with it say to compile it, run make, etc. Which won't work until you become root most of the time. Then the app won't work because, while the instructions tell you to compile with such-and-such flags, they don't tell you the actual flags to include in the command line, you have to track someone down who is familiar with Linux compilers because the you don't have time to go through 660 pages of documentation written for C programmers to find out which flags correspond to the written instructions for that app.
Or you have the case which happened to me not so long ago, where the install instructions tell you that you need to put a certain file with your Apache install, but they don't tell which of the numerous Apache folders in various places in Linux it is supposed to go. And no information online. Gahhh!!! I couldn't use the forums because I was on a very short deadline and couldn't wait.
Then there is the fun of trying to install ATI's drivers for their video cards. ATI's online instructions, still say "The display driver requires POSIX shared memory to be enabled on the system." And weirdly enough, apparently nobody in the Linux community knows any longer where to do this in current distributions. Or even if it is already enabled. I had a FireGL card that had to use the default Linux drivers because of this, because the proprietary drivers wouldn't work until the POSIX shared memory was enabled, and no one knew where to do this anymore.
Regarding Mac OSX, it is NOT true that you never have to use the command line. I have had to use it a number of times to install and run some apps. Once to install a USB wireless NIC, and a few times for security software (I did not realize that the firewall that comes with OSX was that weak in 10.4. Hopefully it has been beefed up in 10.6).
Or you have the case which happened to me not so long ago, where the install instructions tell you that you need to put a certain file with your Apache install, but they don't tell which of the numerous Apache folders in various places in Linux it is supposed to go. And no information online. Gahhh!!! I couldn't use the forums because I was on a very short deadline and couldn't wait.
Then there is the fun of trying to install ATI's drivers for their video cards. ATI's online instructions, still say "The display driver requires POSIX shared memory to be enabled on the system." And weirdly enough, apparently nobody in the Linux community knows any longer where to do this in current distributions. Or even if it is already enabled. I had a FireGL card that had to use the default Linux drivers because of this, because the proprietary drivers wouldn't work until the POSIX shared memory was enabled, and no one knew where to do this anymore.
Regarding Mac OSX, it is NOT true that you never have to use the command line. I have had to use it a number of times to install and run some apps. Once to install a USB wireless NIC, and a few times for security software (I did not realize that the firewall that comes with OSX was that weak in 10.4. Hopefully it has been beefed up in 10.6).
I couldn't agree more with your post. The Linux community seems to be deliberately keeping things difficult and requiring one to learn a bunch of command line codes to actually get anything done. I HATE code. I took programming classes in college and absolutely HATED it. I am not a programmer. I love that others are, but it isn't for me. I stay out of the command line at all costs. What a boring way to work with a computer. I like the pretty interfaces and GUIs that show all my options right in front of my eyes. I can click on whichever one I want to to get my task completed. I do NOT want to be stuck at a command prompt all the time staring at "code". It's annoying. I don't think anyone should be using a Linux distro on their main computer. As a server, sure, they are quite stable and functional but Linux will NEVER replace Windows or Apple as a regular workstation as it currently has been programmed. Plus if someone writes a Linux program, there are hundreds of distros that they need to compile it for and who knows if it will even run on all of them. Linux is purely for code junkies to have something to tinker with because writing and manipulating code gives them a high. Anyway, I'll stop ranting.
Thats just it though isn't it? You like all the pretty pictures and good for you. But don't kid yourself that it let's you do all you want. It just fakes you into thinking you can't do anymore. As you are a self confessed code phobic you really ought to understand that your argument of being scared is not the same as CreativeBlues argument of a useless OS although in his argument he likens Windows to a car and Linux to a helicopter so seeming to agreing it's superiority. Horses for courses.
I've been in the IT field for 23 years now. Back when I was a newbie, getting help with Unix back then was almost impossible. It was like pulling teeth. "How DARE you ask someone how to do something in Unix. Your not a Unix Admin, go away"!!!
Now that I am more versed with many Operating Systems, I have noticed Linux has come a long way in improving its' user interface however, I must agree with CreativeBlue, I too get frustrated with having to hunt and peck using GREP and other commands to find the locations of certain files and/or ways to accomplish something in Linux. It is what has turned me away from Linux and I came from the DOS 1.0 days when all that was available was a command line.
The other thing with Linux distributions I have noticed is the lack of accurate or rather understandable documentation. Sure, it's out there but most of the time if your a newbie to computers, it is overwhelming to learn all of the command line arguments needed to do something in Linux. Windows definitely needs to improve, but Linux in my opinion, is not the answer at this point in time.
Now that I am more versed with many Operating Systems, I have noticed Linux has come a long way in improving its' user interface however, I must agree with CreativeBlue, I too get frustrated with having to hunt and peck using GREP and other commands to find the locations of certain files and/or ways to accomplish something in Linux. It is what has turned me away from Linux and I came from the DOS 1.0 days when all that was available was a command line.
The other thing with Linux distributions I have noticed is the lack of accurate or rather understandable documentation. Sure, it's out there but most of the time if your a newbie to computers, it is overwhelming to learn all of the command line arguments needed to do something in Linux. Windows definitely needs to improve, but Linux in my opinion, is not the answer at this point in time.
So take a look at this then.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/windows-7-memory-usage-whats-the-best-way-to-measure/1786
It's not just linux that can obfuscate and confuse is it. Go on admit it, you'll feel better...
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/windows-7-memory-usage-whats-the-best-way-to-measure/1786
It's not just linux that can obfuscate and confuse is it. Go on admit it, you'll feel better...
I heartily agree with the first paragraph. While I'm a fairly regular linux user these days, I remember trying to start out with it ~12 years ago. I could get the basics going but had a problem with my video card. I went to several online linux communities for help and basically got the same response, "READ THE F#$#$ING MANUAL, NUBCAKES!!!111"
The funny part was there was no documentation for that particular thing...hehe...
The funny part was there was no documentation for that particular thing...hehe...
documentation.... it is more like a collection of notes really... so, went to buy an OS, purchased RedHat 5.0 (actually had a Red Hat on the logo), came with a book and everything.. I spent better part of 3 of 4 weeks reading the first few pages, dealing with disk druid, WTF is /etc /home /var /etc, and calling the experts.. HA, we are sorry sir, but we don't support that version of Red Hat, you'll need to upgrade... last time I ever used red hat.. went from that to Slackware... Now, I recommend Ubuntu, Xubuntu, Lindows..oops Linspire, or Fedora, depending on usage request. And yes, I even recommend Windows and Mac OS from time to time... Gimp is not the same a Photoshop.. sorry
I'm a Windows SysAdmin and I have to use a command line every single day I come to work. It is all part of the job. There are GUI tools for many tasks in Windows, but it is often much faster to simply open a CLI and type in commands to accomplish many of my daily tasks. I have also recovered data from a MacBook by using a terminal window, when the GUI refused to load (we ended up having to completely re-initialize the disk, but the command line allowed us to back up all the vital data in the /home folder before nuking the whole disk).
At home, I use Ubuntu exclusively as my desktop OS, and because I do different things with that system, I don't open a terminal all that often. Perhaps once or twice a month. But I am not afraid of the command line and use it whenever necessary.
You sound like you're under a lot of stress (quite understandable, if you have to use Windows all the time). Relax, take a few deep breaths and listen to some music on Banshee. The command line is your friend, especially when the GUI doesn't give you what you really need.
At home, I use Ubuntu exclusively as my desktop OS, and because I do different things with that system, I don't open a terminal all that often. Perhaps once or twice a month. But I am not afraid of the command line and use it whenever necessary.
You sound like you're under a lot of stress (quite understandable, if you have to use Windows all the time). Relax, take a few deep breaths and listen to some music on Banshee. The command line is your friend, especially when the GUI doesn't give you what you really need.
CreativeBlue ? your comments about command-lines, the ridiculous Linux file system, etc, are right on the money. I haven't looked at responses to your post yet, but no doubt you?ve been howled down by the Faithful.
I'm on your side. I've used Linux for a couple of years now on an Asus Eee. It's been a real up and down experience that only became tolerable when I replaced the original Xandros distribution with Eeebuntu. And it only remains tolerable because I learned to stop tinkering and be happy with a limited range of applications. Even Eeebuntu got so hosed at one point that the only way out was a reinstallation. And what was the root cause of that hosing? I got burned by an update that the Eeebuntu folks hadn?t thought through. Other people got burned at the same time, and the Eeebuntu people were less than sympathetic. They certainly didn?t apologise and actually suggested that users figure out a fix and then let everyone know about it.
In the two years I've had my Eee, it's been seriously trashed four times to the extent that a complete OS reinstallation was the only realistic way out. I spent huge amounts of time talking with people on forums and stuffing around at the ghastly command line. What a time sink!
But I concede it?s a horses for courses situation: there is no doubt that Linux is the perfect OS for people for whom OS tinkering is the point of having a computer. That seems to be most Linux users, and is why the Linux community just can?t understand how its fabulous OS hasn?t made it in the desktop world.
I?ve also played around with various flavours of Linux on my desktops, but I always go back to Windows. Quite apart from the fact that Linux won?t let me use my Adobe Creative Suite apps, and other vital apps for my professional work, there's just very little in Linux OS that attracts me compared with my well-tuned XP systems, and now Windows 7.
I haven?t totally given up on Linux. I still have the netbook, which I use a lot (for the Net and little else). And my main desktop machine actually dual-boots Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04, which the aficionados say is the great new distribution that will finally change the world. But sorry ? Ubuntu is rusting away on that machine. I installed it, played with it for a while, was underwhelmed, and went back full time to Windows 7.
Linux on servers and in specialised applications: great. All power to the Linux-based Android if it can break Apple?s iPhone and iPad fascism and deliver more control to users and developers.
But no ? I don?t seek complete freedom to noodle away all day on a command line.
I'm on your side. I've used Linux for a couple of years now on an Asus Eee. It's been a real up and down experience that only became tolerable when I replaced the original Xandros distribution with Eeebuntu. And it only remains tolerable because I learned to stop tinkering and be happy with a limited range of applications. Even Eeebuntu got so hosed at one point that the only way out was a reinstallation. And what was the root cause of that hosing? I got burned by an update that the Eeebuntu folks hadn?t thought through. Other people got burned at the same time, and the Eeebuntu people were less than sympathetic. They certainly didn?t apologise and actually suggested that users figure out a fix and then let everyone know about it.
In the two years I've had my Eee, it's been seriously trashed four times to the extent that a complete OS reinstallation was the only realistic way out. I spent huge amounts of time talking with people on forums and stuffing around at the ghastly command line. What a time sink!
But I concede it?s a horses for courses situation: there is no doubt that Linux is the perfect OS for people for whom OS tinkering is the point of having a computer. That seems to be most Linux users, and is why the Linux community just can?t understand how its fabulous OS hasn?t made it in the desktop world.
I?ve also played around with various flavours of Linux on my desktops, but I always go back to Windows. Quite apart from the fact that Linux won?t let me use my Adobe Creative Suite apps, and other vital apps for my professional work, there's just very little in Linux OS that attracts me compared with my well-tuned XP systems, and now Windows 7.
I haven?t totally given up on Linux. I still have the netbook, which I use a lot (for the Net and little else). And my main desktop machine actually dual-boots Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04, which the aficionados say is the great new distribution that will finally change the world. But sorry ? Ubuntu is rusting away on that machine. I installed it, played with it for a while, was underwhelmed, and went back full time to Windows 7.
Linux on servers and in specialised applications: great. All power to the Linux-based Android if it can break Apple?s iPhone and iPad fascism and deliver more control to users and developers.
But no ? I don?t seek complete freedom to noodle away all day on a command line.
Your limited ability to grasp basic technology would scare me. I'd hope you are a fashion consultant or something similar.
Not to be rude, But I was working with/on PC since 1982. I saw quarterdeck & never considered adding an unnecessary GUI thing that only sucked up the precious few resources machines had back the.
The fact that you were an early user of it and your attitude & frustration with it speaks volumes about the type of user you are, for better or worse - You are made for windows and should never try anything new.
Not trying to be rude or funny. Your talents reside in Multimeda & you have little time or patience for learning a new command language.
The reason GUI was invented was NOT PRIMARILY to eliminate typing errors, that was a side benefit. The primary reason GUI was invented was the same reason Most Americans were extremely slow to adopt computers: most American people are Lazy & complacent & don't like to have to learn anything new. The find it very difficult to type properly let alone learn a command line language.
Simply; with a command line you have to learn all the commands & their related syntax, as well as avoid typos.... Each alone a daunting task for people who struggled to graduate high school.
People who have a very low desire (& in some cases ability) to learn new technical information, who feel they shouldn't have to, that everything should be done for them, basically, these people are made for windows,& windows was made for them.
Unfortunately, do to that mindset, when things, even simple things do go wrong, they lack the ability to figure out what happened or why.
When windows throws an error msg box, they quickly click ok without even thinking about reading what the error msg said and say "it just don't work". Then when I ask them "well what happened? what did it say" they just say "I don't know, I don't understand that stuff. Here you try it." usually it's something incredibly simple, (like you asked it to read a CD but forgot to put the CD in) But they Just don't want to READ. They NEED a gui BC they Need to click on Icons BC they Can't or won't learn to read.
I know this sounds mean & hard, but It really needs to be said; Our educational system began to seriously fail back in the mid 1970s... I saw this 1st hand and accurately predicted today's results.
JMHO,
JoeyD
The fact that you were an early user of it and your attitude & frustration with it speaks volumes about the type of user you are, for better or worse - You are made for windows and should never try anything new.
Not trying to be rude or funny. Your talents reside in Multimeda & you have little time or patience for learning a new command language.
The reason GUI was invented was NOT PRIMARILY to eliminate typing errors, that was a side benefit. The primary reason GUI was invented was the same reason Most Americans were extremely slow to adopt computers: most American people are Lazy & complacent & don't like to have to learn anything new. The find it very difficult to type properly let alone learn a command line language.
Simply; with a command line you have to learn all the commands & their related syntax, as well as avoid typos.... Each alone a daunting task for people who struggled to graduate high school.
People who have a very low desire (& in some cases ability) to learn new technical information, who feel they shouldn't have to, that everything should be done for them, basically, these people are made for windows,& windows was made for them.
Unfortunately, do to that mindset, when things, even simple things do go wrong, they lack the ability to figure out what happened or why.
When windows throws an error msg box, they quickly click ok without even thinking about reading what the error msg said and say "it just don't work". Then when I ask them "well what happened? what did it say" they just say "I don't know, I don't understand that stuff. Here you try it." usually it's something incredibly simple, (like you asked it to read a CD but forgot to put the CD in) But they Just don't want to READ. They NEED a gui BC they Need to click on Icons BC they Can't or won't learn to read.
I know this sounds mean & hard, but It really needs to be said; Our educational system began to seriously fail back in the mid 1970s... I saw this 1st hand and accurately predicted today's results.
JMHO,
JoeyD
Joey, "they" are not the people online here comparing apples to oranges.
Perhaps I overemphasized the typo aspect of computer command-line usage, but I would argue that in fact, it was Steve Job's purchase of Xerox mouse-tech that led to the widespread use of desktop computing.
Image, if you will, the horrendous and mind-numbing problem of a type font designer having to recalculate the curve of the inside of a font and having to enter that as CODE in a computer language of some flavor, and now all he has to do is point and click and drag? AutoDesk CAD was one of the first programs that I bought when the PCs started being delivered with mouse pointers. Bingo. Thousands of man-hours instantly saved. Microsoft followed Apple with the release of Windows (we'll just ignore the original MS-Apple partnership and leave the corporate BS and IBM's OS/2 out of this discussion, OK?) and the rest, as they say, is history.
The lack of widespread DESKTOP Linux use is not a result of "lack of education" or "laziness." What is happening is that the Linux community is trying to break into a market that has passed them by, by providing unfinished, cobbled-together solutions to problems that were solved twenty years ago, and then hooting at the "ignorant" people who have the chutzpah to point out this sad situation.
I understand you're not trying to be rude, per se, but you are making a lot of assumptions about ignorance and lack of will, time and/or ability not in evidence.
Perhaps I overemphasized the typo aspect of computer command-line usage, but I would argue that in fact, it was Steve Job's purchase of Xerox mouse-tech that led to the widespread use of desktop computing.
Image, if you will, the horrendous and mind-numbing problem of a type font designer having to recalculate the curve of the inside of a font and having to enter that as CODE in a computer language of some flavor, and now all he has to do is point and click and drag? AutoDesk CAD was one of the first programs that I bought when the PCs started being delivered with mouse pointers. Bingo. Thousands of man-hours instantly saved. Microsoft followed Apple with the release of Windows (we'll just ignore the original MS-Apple partnership and leave the corporate BS and IBM's OS/2 out of this discussion, OK?) and the rest, as they say, is history.
The lack of widespread DESKTOP Linux use is not a result of "lack of education" or "laziness." What is happening is that the Linux community is trying to break into a market that has passed them by, by providing unfinished, cobbled-together solutions to problems that were solved twenty years ago, and then hooting at the "ignorant" people who have the chutzpah to point out this sad situation.
I understand you're not trying to be rude, per se, but you are making a lot of assumptions about ignorance and lack of will, time and/or ability not in evidence.
Using GUIs is OK for crafting, for example creating graphics. CLIs are better for repetitive tasks.
I'll try to imagine some counter examples that might be relevant for you. These would be horrendously slow and mind-numbing chores on a GUI but a breeze using the command line:
- Your website is too heavy. Find and downsample all JPGs larger than 200KB. Unfortunately they aren't all in /images
- You are not web standards compliant. Find all malformed XHTML files on the site
- The site is not static, but generated using PHP. Crawl through the dynamic website and do the same check
- Spammers are harvesting email addresses from your site. Find all email addresses on your site, generate a GIF of each address and replace the email address with a link to the GIF
- The marketing guy can't spell. Run a spell check on the entire web site. (Exclude the tags and only check the content)
These are all tasks that require a few minutes to put the command line together. If you're a GUI-only type you'll either spend hours doing the work manually or try to look for an application that does something like what you want to accomplish.
I'll try to imagine some counter examples that might be relevant for you. These would be horrendously slow and mind-numbing chores on a GUI but a breeze using the command line:
- Your website is too heavy. Find and downsample all JPGs larger than 200KB. Unfortunately they aren't all in /images
- You are not web standards compliant. Find all malformed XHTML files on the site
- The site is not static, but generated using PHP. Crawl through the dynamic website and do the same check
- Spammers are harvesting email addresses from your site. Find all email addresses on your site, generate a GIF of each address and replace the email address with a link to the GIF
- The marketing guy can't spell. Run a spell check on the entire web site. (Exclude the tags and only check the content)
These are all tasks that require a few minutes to put the command line together. If you're a GUI-only type you'll either spend hours doing the work manually or try to look for an application that does something like what you want to accomplish.
CreativeBlue's comments about command-lines, the ridiculous Linux file system, etc, are right on the money. I haven't looked at responses to your post yet, but no doubt you've been howled down by the Faithful.
I'm on your side. I've used Linux for a couple of years now on an Asus Eee. It's been a real up and down experience that only became tolerable when I replaced the original Xandros distribution with Eeebuntu. And it only remains tolerable because I learned to stop tinkering and be happy with a limited range of applications. Even Eeebuntu got so hosed at one point that the only way out was a reinstallation. And what was the root cause of that hosing? I got burned by an update that the Eeebuntu folks hadn't thought through. Other people got burned at the same time, and the Eeebuntu people were less than sympathetic. They certainly didn't apologise and actually suggested that users figure out a fix and then let everyone know about it.
In the two years I've had my Eee, it's been seriously trashed four times to the extent that a complete OS reinstallation was the only realistic way out. I spent huge amounts of time talking with people on forums and stuffing around at the ghastly command line. What a time sink!
But I concede it's a horses for courses situation: there is no doubt that Linux is the perfect OS for people for whom OS tinkering is the point of having a computer. That seems to be most Linux users, and is why the Linux community just can't understand how its fabulous OS hasn't made it in the desktop world.
I've also played around with various flavours of Linux on my desktops, but I always go back to Windows. Quite apart from the fact that Linux won't let me use my Adobe Creative Suite apps, and other vital apps for my professional work, there's just very little in Linux OS that attracts me compared with my well-tuned XP systems, and now Windows 7.
I haven't totally given up on Linux. I still have the netbook, which I use a lot (for the Net and little else). And my main desktop machine actually dual-boots Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04, which the aficionados say is the great new distribution that will finally change the world. But sorry - Ubuntu is rusting away on that machine. I installed it, played with it for a while, was underwhelmed, and went back full time to Windows 7.
Linux on servers and in specialised applications: great. All power to the Linux-based Android if it can break Apple's iPhone and iPad fascism and deliver more control to users and developers.
But no - I don't seek complete freedom to noodle away all day on a command line.
I'm on your side. I've used Linux for a couple of years now on an Asus Eee. It's been a real up and down experience that only became tolerable when I replaced the original Xandros distribution with Eeebuntu. And it only remains tolerable because I learned to stop tinkering and be happy with a limited range of applications. Even Eeebuntu got so hosed at one point that the only way out was a reinstallation. And what was the root cause of that hosing? I got burned by an update that the Eeebuntu folks hadn't thought through. Other people got burned at the same time, and the Eeebuntu people were less than sympathetic. They certainly didn't apologise and actually suggested that users figure out a fix and then let everyone know about it.
In the two years I've had my Eee, it's been seriously trashed four times to the extent that a complete OS reinstallation was the only realistic way out. I spent huge amounts of time talking with people on forums and stuffing around at the ghastly command line. What a time sink!
But I concede it's a horses for courses situation: there is no doubt that Linux is the perfect OS for people for whom OS tinkering is the point of having a computer. That seems to be most Linux users, and is why the Linux community just can't understand how its fabulous OS hasn't made it in the desktop world.
I've also played around with various flavours of Linux on my desktops, but I always go back to Windows. Quite apart from the fact that Linux won't let me use my Adobe Creative Suite apps, and other vital apps for my professional work, there's just very little in Linux OS that attracts me compared with my well-tuned XP systems, and now Windows 7.
I haven't totally given up on Linux. I still have the netbook, which I use a lot (for the Net and little else). And my main desktop machine actually dual-boots Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04, which the aficionados say is the great new distribution that will finally change the world. But sorry - Ubuntu is rusting away on that machine. I installed it, played with it for a while, was underwhelmed, and went back full time to Windows 7.
Linux on servers and in specialised applications: great. All power to the Linux-based Android if it can break Apple's iPhone and iPad fascism and deliver more control to users and developers.
But no - I don't seek complete freedom to noodle away all day on a command line.
Given that Ubuntu 10.04 only had its formal release on April 30, it's obviously less than 2 weeks. When I decided to go full time with Ubuntu 8.04, it took close to a month before I was comfortable with it and almost six months before I was fully familiar with it.
You have a valid point about the Creative Suite not being offered for Linux, but any blame for that can be laid at Adobe's feet. The same applies to AutoCAD, SolidWorks, and many other apps; any blame for there not being a Linux-compatible release can be laid at the feet of the OEM.
You have a valid point about the Creative Suite not being offered for Linux, but any blame for that can be laid at Adobe's feet. The same applies to AutoCAD, SolidWorks, and many other apps; any blame for there not being a Linux-compatible release can be laid at the feet of the OEM.
Like Creative Blue, I had to chuckle at the premise of this article.
"Silly damn newbies. We told them how wonderful Linux is, and they're just so stoopid they can't figure it out."
I can understand where the attitude comes from, too. I started on an 8088 running DOS 3.2, and I've worked through every MS OS since, learning the way things work, the new features, all the tweaks, etc.
So I get that same eye-rolling feeling of contempt when somebody who calls himself competent with computers sits down at a Windows box and flails at it like a confused child.
The last several people I've seen do this were longtime Unix admins. And I just sat there thinking "I thought you knew how to use a computer."
So let's go point by point through the article for a while, and I encourage the Linux community to turn their brains on for a moment and try to imagine this experience from the point of view of that poor, stupid noob:
1: Assuming they are using Windows
Perhaps they "assumed they were using Windows" because their Linux advocate friends told them "No, really, you'll like Linux THIS time. It's just like Windows now, only so much better!"
2: Trying to make exe files work
Why wouldn't they? Exe files work on all the computers that MS end users have ever used, and it's still an Intel box, it's just got this Linux thing instead of Windows. Did you tell your poor noob friend that Linux is in fact nothing like Windows under the hood, and it's thoroughly incompatible with Windows software?
3: Choosing the wrong distribution
Take a breath, Linux guru, and forget everything you NOW know about Linux that you didn't know at one time. Just pretend you've only heard the word Linux and know nothing about it, except that you have some buddies who natter about it all the time. Now go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions
...and pick one out. Simple, right? You'll just figure out through osmosis that you want a Debian-based system, and that Ubuntu is popular and reasonably well-supported.
But hey look at this, Parsix says it's optimized for personal computers, and I've GOT ONE OF THOSE, so that would seem to be the logical choice.
WTF is Parsix? WTF do any of the words on that page mean to you unless you are already a Linux geek?
4: Not finding software
Damn those noobs. Here we make it so easy to find software, and they're still trying to do it like they used to, 30 minutes ago when their system was running Windows. Like by surfing around to websites created by the people who wrote the software, downloading a familiar file, and double-clicking it.
I mean, how dumb ARE these people??
I could go all day, but I only want to hit two more:
6: Avoiding the command line
As somebody who learned about computers on a command line, trying to make the blasted things do what I wanted them to do, let me remind you of a very basic fact:
GUIs were invented because the command line sucks for productive uses. If an end user has to use the command line for anything he or she wants to do, then you've failed. I'm not afraid of the CLI, and for some administrative things it's much more efficient, but only because nobody has bothered to develop a tool that'll do it better in a GUI.
Hey I have an idea. Why don't you tell your mom to edit her text files with vi? You know, it's just SOOOO powerful, mom...
And finally...
7: Giving up too quickly
Giving up too quickly means booting a Live CD once, shrugging your shoulders and saying "so what"?
It doesn't mean trying to do the same things you can do on your nice, familiar Windows box and spending days trying to figure out how to do things that are trivial to do on your Windows box;
And when it just plain doesn't work and none of the SOOPER GENIUS Linux people in the forums will answer your simple questions, then finally saying "screw this, I have work to do, back to my Windows box."
That's not giving up quickly, it's entertaining the notion that Linux is suitable for what they need to do, and finding out that it isn't.
By the way, since I can already smell the first wave of "Oooh, another M$ drone!" about to be lobbed my way, I use both Windows and Linux, and I think they're both great, and I think they both suck.
Great for what they're good at, and festering piles of garbage for the really stupid things they make you do in order to get work done sometimes.
"Silly damn newbies. We told them how wonderful Linux is, and they're just so stoopid they can't figure it out."
I can understand where the attitude comes from, too. I started on an 8088 running DOS 3.2, and I've worked through every MS OS since, learning the way things work, the new features, all the tweaks, etc.
So I get that same eye-rolling feeling of contempt when somebody who calls himself competent with computers sits down at a Windows box and flails at it like a confused child.
The last several people I've seen do this were longtime Unix admins. And I just sat there thinking "I thought you knew how to use a computer."
So let's go point by point through the article for a while, and I encourage the Linux community to turn their brains on for a moment and try to imagine this experience from the point of view of that poor, stupid noob:
1: Assuming they are using Windows
Perhaps they "assumed they were using Windows" because their Linux advocate friends told them "No, really, you'll like Linux THIS time. It's just like Windows now, only so much better!"
2: Trying to make exe files work
Why wouldn't they? Exe files work on all the computers that MS end users have ever used, and it's still an Intel box, it's just got this Linux thing instead of Windows. Did you tell your poor noob friend that Linux is in fact nothing like Windows under the hood, and it's thoroughly incompatible with Windows software?
3: Choosing the wrong distribution
Take a breath, Linux guru, and forget everything you NOW know about Linux that you didn't know at one time. Just pretend you've only heard the word Linux and know nothing about it, except that you have some buddies who natter about it all the time. Now go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions
...and pick one out. Simple, right? You'll just figure out through osmosis that you want a Debian-based system, and that Ubuntu is popular and reasonably well-supported.
But hey look at this, Parsix says it's optimized for personal computers, and I've GOT ONE OF THOSE, so that would seem to be the logical choice.
WTF is Parsix? WTF do any of the words on that page mean to you unless you are already a Linux geek?
4: Not finding software
Damn those noobs. Here we make it so easy to find software, and they're still trying to do it like they used to, 30 minutes ago when their system was running Windows. Like by surfing around to websites created by the people who wrote the software, downloading a familiar file, and double-clicking it.
I mean, how dumb ARE these people??
I could go all day, but I only want to hit two more:
6: Avoiding the command line
As somebody who learned about computers on a command line, trying to make the blasted things do what I wanted them to do, let me remind you of a very basic fact:
GUIs were invented because the command line sucks for productive uses. If an end user has to use the command line for anything he or she wants to do, then you've failed. I'm not afraid of the CLI, and for some administrative things it's much more efficient, but only because nobody has bothered to develop a tool that'll do it better in a GUI.
Hey I have an idea. Why don't you tell your mom to edit her text files with vi? You know, it's just SOOOO powerful, mom...
And finally...
7: Giving up too quickly
Giving up too quickly means booting a Live CD once, shrugging your shoulders and saying "so what"?
It doesn't mean trying to do the same things you can do on your nice, familiar Windows box and spending days trying to figure out how to do things that are trivial to do on your Windows box;
And when it just plain doesn't work and none of the SOOPER GENIUS Linux people in the forums will answer your simple questions, then finally saying "screw this, I have work to do, back to my Windows box."
That's not giving up quickly, it's entertaining the notion that Linux is suitable for what they need to do, and finding out that it isn't.
By the way, since I can already smell the first wave of "Oooh, another M$ drone!" about to be lobbed my way, I use both Windows and Linux, and I think they're both great, and I think they both suck.
Great for what they're good at, and festering piles of garbage for the really stupid things they make you do in order to get work done sometimes.
Installing a new icon theme is very simple in KDE using K-Control (use Kubuntu rather than Ubuntu). Installing packages is also fairly easy in Linux, particularly on Debian-based distros like Ubuntu, using the Synaptic package manager.
For an example of slanted, please re-read your post.
The closest the author came to stepping over the line you did in almost every sentence was when he admitted to wanting to boast about his lack of viruses.
Why would Linux want to emulate a machine like Apple? Apple is a trendy but overpriced box with a difficult and unintuitive interface. You and I seem to think different, and thinking differently seems to be a major no-no in the Mac universe.
The closest the author came to stepping over the line you did in almost every sentence was when he admitted to wanting to boast about his lack of viruses.
Why would Linux want to emulate a machine like Apple? Apple is a trendy but overpriced box with a difficult and unintuitive interface. You and I seem to think different, and thinking differently seems to be a major no-no in the Mac universe.
Linux an other Unix like OS's have a well designed and developed file system. That system is well designed enough to keep the system away from the user space so those who obviously don't know the system well enough can easily be kept away from screwing it up (unlike windows), if you want to get the best out of it go away and learn how it works, if you can't be bothered, don't, but if you want to not come across as a bit of a moron, don't make comments that just show your ignorance.
Linux / Uunix OS's are designed to be scalable, multi-user systems, Linux being open source makes it very versatile as those with the knowledge and imagination can hack it into an OS that can be used for many different purposes if you can't ge you head around it, or can't b bothered who cares.
Linux / Uunix OS's are designed to be scalable, multi-user systems, Linux being open source makes it very versatile as those with the knowledge and imagination can hack it into an OS that can be used for many different purposes if you can't ge you head around it, or can't b bothered who cares.
You've obviously fallen for at least mistakes 1 and 4.
So you download a theme package and an application from random websites and blame all developers for releasing their work "unfinished and user unfriendly". Hey, the open source development model works because developers release their work early and often. If you want user friendly you should stick to installing directly from software repositories using the package management tool (see mistake 4).
Linux applications are almost never distributed as single executables - so the very premise of copying your downloaded file to the correct place is most likely wrong.
There isn't a single "applications folder" in Linux. See mistake 1. The file structure may seem bizarre to you, but for me it's no more bizarre than the Windows file structure. Think c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts. "drivers"? WTF?
Nobody is forcing you to use Linux. If you want to use it just to be hip and it's too frustrating, maybe you shouldn't.
On the other hand if you do like it and you have suggestions on how to improve the UI, or would like your favourite software added to the repository, just post a polite suggestion in the appropriate forum or mailing list.
Ubuntu is probably good if you don't like the command line. I myself prefer the command line and find it annoying how limited the command prompt is on Windows.
So you download a theme package and an application from random websites and blame all developers for releasing their work "unfinished and user unfriendly". Hey, the open source development model works because developers release their work early and often. If you want user friendly you should stick to installing directly from software repositories using the package management tool (see mistake 4).
Linux applications are almost never distributed as single executables - so the very premise of copying your downloaded file to the correct place is most likely wrong.
There isn't a single "applications folder" in Linux. See mistake 1. The file structure may seem bizarre to you, but for me it's no more bizarre than the Windows file structure. Think c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts. "drivers"? WTF?
Nobody is forcing you to use Linux. If you want to use it just to be hip and it's too frustrating, maybe you shouldn't.
On the other hand if you do like it and you have suggestions on how to improve the UI, or would like your favourite software added to the repository, just post a polite suggestion in the appropriate forum or mailing list.
Ubuntu is probably good if you don't like the command line. I myself prefer the command line and find it annoying how limited the command prompt is on Windows.
Have you loaded the new, free PowerShell command line upgrade?
Why should I .. my debian adds new cli commands as and when they appear in the main release. I don't need to "load" an extra anything to have a fully functional cli interface. That idea is like everything else microsoft isn't it.. they still haven't got out of the 80's.. install something, reboot, change floppy they mean.
Powershell eh? what's that then.. freedos7??
Haven't you heard the unix world joke? "windows has detected the mouse has moved, you must reboot now to complete the changes"
I think some people have never stepped into the world where systems actually work out of the box instead of needing this "addon" and that "upgrade" and the other "functionality enhancement" .. why not just include it from the start like unix setups have from pretty much day one ? Oh hold on.. I'm forgetting something. We are talking about microsoft here aren't we.. sorry.. that's too obvious and sensible for them... actually giving users the tools they should have from the start at the start not a year later IF they ever find out about them.
Powershell eh? what's that then.. freedos7??
Haven't you heard the unix world joke? "windows has detected the mouse has moved, you must reboot now to complete the changes"
I think some people have never stepped into the world where systems actually work out of the box instead of needing this "addon" and that "upgrade" and the other "functionality enhancement" .. why not just include it from the start like unix setups have from pretty much day one ? Oh hold on.. I'm forgetting something. We are talking about microsoft here aren't we.. sorry.. that's too obvious and sensible for them... actually giving users the tools they should have from the start at the start not a year later IF they ever find out about them.
For some reason the Debian CLI just won't work on the Windows PCs at work. But that could be me.
Just an observation...
Just an observation...
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
