What the Linux desktop gives that Mac OS X and Windows don't
Lest someone accuse me of disliking the Linux desktop (which, by the way, I do :-), I thought this post was interesting, as it details things that Linux can do but Windows and Mac OS X can't.
Not all the distinctions are accurate (at least, not for the Mac), but on balance it's a good list. Here are a few of the most significant (in my opinion):
- Linux doesn't need defraging [Nor does the Mac - not really]
- Upgrade to the newest version legally and without paying money
- Have the latest version of the OS run faster than the previous version on the same hardware
- Install twenty programs with one command [I can't remember the last time I wanted to do this, but presumably it's important for some...?]
- Have the system automatically update all installed programs [There are open-source programs for the Mac that do this, too]
- Being able to install/uninstall everything, even if it comes embedded in the system
I particularly like that last one. Linux is very good at separating components of the system and of keeping track of which applications need which components so that you can skinny down your system without threat of lobotomizing it.
Where Linux could use serious work is in the installation of programs. Granted, I haven't put myself through the ordeal in three years, but the last time I tried to install something as simple as Firefox was an exercise in senseless frustration. I'm sure things have gotten better since then. If not, none of the above benefits even remotely redresses that grievous installation experience.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay. 
Kind of bad for a linux hater to be writing about open source. You're about as good as a politician lecturing about honesty. Install and work with ubuntu, opensuse, and Fedora; then talk to us about firefox issues(btw, the fox is included with all linux installs).
NVIDIA does not have OSS drivers. They have Linux drivers, but that is not the same as open source drivers.
Huh? Reading on...
>Granted, I haven't put myself through the ordeal in three years, but the last time I tried to install something as simple as Firefox was an exercise in senseless frustration.
lol, Matt - heaven forbid you would actually *try* it now, after all these years! But FYI, yes, it's still as difficult as going to Applications -> Add/Remove Programs -> Firefox -> Install.
If you aren't giving a major Linux distro "another try" at least once a year, you don't understand the speed of development we're talking about.
># Install twenty programs with one command [http://I can't remember the last time I wanted to do this, but presumably it's important for some...?|http://I can't remember the last time I wanted to do this, but presumably it's important for some...?]
It was great when I bought my new Linux laptop from Dell. I had a list of programs I wanted, from Inkscape to Scribus to Amarok.... I wanted them all to install by themselves. While I worked. I copied the list from my other Linux desktop, hit "enter" and about a half hour later, my jive had been completely transferred to a new machine. :-)
I think you owe us a year of Linux use on your own desktop.
Get a pc, get a copy of Ubuntu or Fedor and install it, take notes, time how long it takes and how much it costs. Do the same with Vista and report honestly back on that. You seem to be a Mac guy, that's cool, I love Macs. I just can't afford $2,500 every time I want to replace my system, and unless you are a digital artist you don't really NEED a Mac, they are just cool.
1. Insert Ubuntu CD
2. Boot
3. Answer questions like "What is your name" and "What is your timezone".
4. Wait for OS to install (less than 30 minutes)
5. Already have Firefox and Open Office installed, since they come default with the operating system.
If you have trouble with this long and arduous install process, I can't imagine how in Windows you ever got the 4+ antivirus/antispyware programs you need running at all times.
There are thousands of linux distributions, let's focus on ubuntu as it seems the most easy to compare with Windows or Mac. I won't talk about Mac as I don't know it well enough.
Windows does not need defraging anymore, not with NTFS (you can do it, but you don't need to).
Ubuntu is not faster on every new version, it's slower. Of course you can tweak to be faster, as you can with Windows and Mac.
Of course you can install twenty programs in one shot in windows, it's not as easy as in linux but it can be done without much effort. Any IT admin knows how to do that.
About uninstalling everything ... really irrelevant. Anyways, it can be done with a little effort in any operating system.
There are a lot of more important things to talk about when we compare Windows, Mac and Linux: Easy of use, number of available applications, game compatibility, security, etc. Any of those require a full article to cover them up.
HUH? What are you talking about? NTFS in fact does require defragging on a regular basis to maintain disk performance. In fact, that issue is covered on the MCSE test for NT, XP, and Servers 2000 and 2003.
HUH? again. what are you talking about? Have you benched the last three Ubuntu distros? And there is no way to tweak OSX10.5 to be faster than 10.4 similarly configured, and there is no way to tweak Vista to be faster than similarly configured XP.
As for "installing 20 programs at once in XP", I have been an MCSE since NT 3.5 - setting up group policies and scripts in Windows OS's is no task for noobs. Even experienced Sysadmins have difficulties. The newest Linux distros, esp. Ubuntu 7.10, is much easier than either Windows or Mac to configure and support. And for anyone that has to distribute and/or support multiple desktops, the ease with which Ubuntu allows that is a Godsend.
I am a systems engineer for a larger group of medical facilities, and formerly with a major uiniversity. I have worked with all three since they were all "born." I think I know what I'm talking about.
And what do you do? What I really find utterly discraceful is the number of posts from persons who very obviously have little more than superficial knowledge of what they are spouting off about. And I include the Matt Assay in that group.
This really represents the "dark" side of the net. In an academic or peer-reviewed setting, gross misinformation is simply not tolerated; and every Matt, Dick and Harry is not allowed to call themselves an "expert" on something that they obviously know very, very little about.
About uninstalling everything ... really irrelevant. Anyways, it can be done with a little effort in any operating system.
Sometimes it's nice to get rid of useless components (if your OS comes bundled with them). Even though Ubuntu is bloated, you can remove whatever you want. With Windows, let me ask you this: have you ever tried to remove Internet Explorer from XP or later? You can't, at least not with "a little effort".
The GUIs have advanced so fast and so much that Vista doesn't even match up to them. Even in the looks division Vista falls flat on its face. Linux with distros like openSuse, Ubuntu and Fedora and apps like Beryl Manager, you can make absolutely stunning desktops. So awesome that my friends installed it just to be able to do that on their laptops and show off to others. And they found Linux so much better that they got hooked onto it. And here you are telling that "Where Linux could use serious work is in the installation of programs." And that too, when you haven't tried a distro in 3 years! This isn't the Windows world pal, this is Linux, things don't wait to be released in an "oh-so-spectacular" fashion and announce to the whole world about the OS's capabilities (aherm , Vista). Things get released AS THEY HAPPEN. And in three years, the whole face of Linux changes.
Installation is a breeze now, Word or Excel just doesn't crash for the fun of it. I can do my work safely and don't need to act paranoid and hit the Save button every other minute. I don't need to have 10 applications specifically catered for Virus, Trojans, Malware, Spyware, Worms and God knows what else. Just one or two or even none is just fine. Linux doesn't treat you like an idiot and prompt you for every single stupid thing.
On my ubuntu systems, "sudo aptitude daily-upgrade" is a much much easier way to ensure all of your applications, the system software (including libraries etc.) are updated in a reliable way.
I agree with you that there are certain high-end applications that a distro like Ubuntu 7.04 cannot handle and Apple is the way to go for these. Apple (and not just mac mini) is much cheaper than people think but they're not shopping in the right places. If you live in or near a large city like most Americans do, go to the Apple store and have a chat with an Apple salesman. Tell them what you'd love to own but can't afford and ask their assistance. I got a system they advertise on their site for $2,500 for about $1,400.
That is completely independent of the OS. Install Linux on FAT32...
That makes as much sense as installing Vista.
package mangers my friend, just search for the program you want, check the box and its as good as done, i use Ubuntu gutsy, and i couldn't live without multiple desktops, and many other features that windows doesn't.
Mark Shuttleworth is a personal friend. I like some of his ideas as to where to take the desktop. I'm glad he has made it easier. I still wouldn't wish it on family members. You guys seem to forget just how easy something needs to be to justify a switch. The Mac is easy. Linux is not. I know because I read articles walking through how to migrate. If it requires instructions, it's not easy enough. Not for personal computing.
I sell open-source software for a living. I'm an advisor to 10+ open-source companies and am currently a board member for the OSI. That doesn't mean I have to worship every line of code that carries an open-source license. Nor do you. Take the criticism and improve the product. I'm not going near another Linux desktop distribution until I stop reading how-to's written by Linux experts about how easy it is "except for...x."
Get rid of the "except for" and it just might be worth it. Maybe.
No one is asking you to say great things about linux or windows or mac, just fair ones.
I guess I could talk about Windows 95 and its complete joke of a security setup when talking about Windows today?
How do you expect to be taken seriously when you write an opinion piece on Linux, and then claim you haven't used it for years?
What is funny is that you really do think it is OK to talk about something that your knowledge of is lacking, to say the least.
Liking Mr. Shuttleworth and working for an open source company doesn't make you qualified to talk about an OS you know little about.
I'll give you a couple more things Linux can do that neither Mac nor Windows can do, without a lot of hacking, that is: Remaster the installation, and use the OS as a LiveCD while it's installing the OS on the hard drive.
I use PCLinuxOS. With it, comes a nice little script named Remasterme that calls up an application called MkLiveCD that takes your completely configured Linux installation, and using your configuration, creates an ISO file with a new LiveCD of your current installation. You can then transfer it to any other computer you want, or simply use it as a backup.
Another thing that PCLinuxOS is so great at is that I can fire up the LiveCD, click on the installer icon on the desktop, and go through the install process, all while still having complete access to the LiveCD. I can surf the web, work on some graphics in Gimp, and even get my email while I'm waiting for the installation to finish. Try this in either Mac or Windows... Gone are the days that you just have to stare at a progress bar.
This is good to know - next time I meet an open source evangelist, consultant, salesman, whatever, I'm going to ask him to pull out his Linux laptop or tell me about his Linux desktop deployment at work. If he pulls out a Mac story, I'm walking. :-)
What a feaking n00b. Idiotic FUD. Call it what you like. You can't say "Where Linux could use serious work is in the installation of programs" and at the same time say "I haven't put myself through the ordeal in three years"... Three years is a long time in the FOSS world, so basically your passing judgement in an area your knowledge is so out of date in that you might as well be saying "Windows needs to improve alot though the last version I used was Windows2000". Bloody hell I get so sick and tired of this kind of self contradictory idiotic drivel. Do you actually get paid for this crap ?
(Shrug) I really don't care whether you like the Linux desktop or not. Just don't waste my time writing about it if you don't know anything about it - and if you think installing programs on modern distros like Ubuntu or openSUSE is difficult, you obviously don't know anything about it.
I've always thought that a common characteristic of those who enjoy using Linux is a willingness to "get their hands dirty" and learn how Linux's plumbing worked, because they find it interesting and challenging. But these days, there are distros like Ubuntu that do 99% of the work for you during installation. (Ubuntu also seems fixated on making a GUI-based configuration tool for every system file you might need to hand-edit.) Linux on the desktop's gotten a lot simpler to install and use.
Old news really.
http://news.opensuse.org/2007/08/21/sneak-peeks-at-opensuse-103-1-click-install/
As for installing 20 programs at once, that's required just to set up a dev environment for a web server with Apache + PHP + MySQL + Quanta + wine (for ies4linux) + VMWare server for testing IE7 and Safari for Windows + modphp + phpMySQL + 30 - 50 odd autochecked dependencies.
PS. Seeing as you're buddies with Mark Shuttleworth, give Gutsy Gibbon a go. Sad to say, but it's been a hocking great dissappointment compared to the previous efforts, the graphics drivers support isn't as up to date as OpenSuse (meaning the Intel 915GM drivers are still bugged), compiz is positively unstable and for some reason when all updates are applied and you reboot, you're dumped in XFCE instead of Gnome without any warning. Makes me look like a right berk for recommending it to people as the user-friendly choice. Ah well, at least the WiFi DHCP timeout is at a more sensible level.
"Have the system automatically update all installed programs". Is only true if the 'installed programs' come from repository - and in the case of fully 'free' distros like Ubuntu, that becomes limiting. Or "Update the system software without having to restart", which is plain untrue. But as an Ubuntu user, I agree it's nice to see positive evangelism rather than dissing the oppo.
But Matt.. a point to add to your earlier post on how to blog' - if you're having a problem getting readers to feed back - write a post comparing Windows and Linux desktops.
3 years? Death Valley has more high ground than that. "Oh no, can't beat up the installer? I know, drivers! What? Vista's much worse? Okay, okay, the wallpaper is the wrong color!"
- by darkone778 February 11, 2008 12:26 PM PST
- Oh Lordy Lordy Matt,
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(35 Comments)Ya know if find it interesting how you equate the how to guides for switching from Windows to Whatever Linux distribution as a sign that its not ready for grandma ma there to use. If you truly are essentially a retail seller of any open source then having dealt with customer you should know as well as I would with working retail or customer services in general, That while the customer should be respected at the end of the day we have to treat them like idiots. You are right in saying that Linux as its issues. I wont dispute that fact. But I will also point out the facts that every product has its issues be it window or osx as well. Now I personally run a integrated network of various OS's BSD server my main machine is a dual boot of ubuntu and xp my laptop runs strictly protech one and my gf runs on the network with a Mac. So needless to say while you might be friends with Mark Shuttleworth the point remains with you commenting a a topic of linux installs when you havent done one in 3 years in your own accord. You have about as much knowledge on the current situation in the linux os world as someone who would be commenting on windows xp running on sp1 talking about sp3 so your grips are moot. And this is why people lose more and more respect for cnet as you guys go on. Know the actual fields you are in before you open your mouths will help you guys look alot more credible. Unlike right now where you should be removing your foot from your mouth for your lack of knowledge on a topic that you are suppose to be an "EXPERT" in