Fedora it is aimed to more advanced users.

Ubuntu it is used by 75% of the desktops so it does not make much sense to discuss something about the desktop while talking about a distribution that it is not aimed at the desktop.

Apart from that, Linux works for me in many places where Windows fails, and it fails nowhere where you said it failed to you.

One more thing… my girlfriend and my mother use linux, and they think it is the same, they do the same thing.

The only excuse is photoshop. Ok, if you need photoshop (or autocad or any other program that 1% of the population needs), then you cannot use linux. But for the rest it is ready.

You mean “Fedora still not ready for Prime Time”, because Ubuntu IS. Ubuntu works great on my hardware (desktop and laptop), suggests all the necessary drivers when necessary, and installation of software is simple, because I can find .DEB files (the files from which installation is simple) or find software in repositories.

As a matter of principle I do not touch terminal and I do not install software from sources or .tar.gz. I found my way through the User Interface, I hate those forum “advices” to use terminal when the UI exists (for example, to install from .DEB files by running a terminal command instead of just double-clicking the .DEB file).

So what does Ubuntu logo do in your article when you say nothing about Ubuntu in it???

Fedora is Red Hat’s playground to test bleeding edge technologies, so no wonder that you say so.

I completely agree with you. I have been trying for years to find a Linux replacement for WinXP but give up when the hassles begin. Disasters include: Wifi, mp3, mpg, sound card… It is not just Fedora. The current Ubuntu release makes audio/video codec’s a challenge. Yes, if you know what you are doing you can fix it, but why??? I gave Ubuntu 9.04 to a ‘normal’ person and they COULD NOT use it.

I do not see Linux getting better because there are too many, redundant distro’s with incompatible functions/features.

A couple of comments on your article:

Firstly, I’d love to see you install Windows from a CD/DVD, and then get it to immediately play your MP3, DivX, Xvid and h.264 files. Yeah thats right dude, by default, even Windows will not play those files.

By the way, have you actually used Ubuntu, if you have, then you’ll notice that if you try to play those files then Ubuntu will automatically install the required codecs for you so you can play them.

What you’re probably forgetting is that all those lovely computers you buy with preinstalled Windows have already got the codecs installed on them by the manufacturer. Did you know that Dell’s computers that they sell with Ubuntu will play your audio and video/DVD’s by default out-of-the-box too?

You’re simply talking about a manufacturer problem. Anyway, you can just install VLC on any Linux distro and never worry about any codecs ever again. When I say install, I mean, a few simple clicks of the mouse – no command line.

Which brings me to my second point:

Why on earth are you bitching about having to use the command line when in reality everything can be done in a nice GUI? Why the frack are you complaining that you had to “download and install dependencies one by one” when EVERYONE knows that in any modern Linux distro ALL the dependancies are handled for you. As in, you click the software you want to install and the ‘package manager’ does the rest – *that simple*.

Also, you say that Linux “doesn’t support all hardware”. Big deal, neither does Windows. But I will tell you something – out-of-the-box, a Linux distro like Ubuntu or Fedora supports more hardware than Windows.

Give it a go – seriously, install a fresh copy of Windows on a computer, then go ahead and install a fresh copy of Ubuntu. Then come back, after you’ve done that, and tell us which OS supported the most hardware out-of-the-box. Plug your printers, cameras and other peripherals in.

As an example, if someone at work has bought a new camera, they plug it into their work Ubuntu machine and it instantly works flawlessly. We’ve never come across anything that didn’t ‘Just Work’. The same can’t be said for Windows – we always have to install some driver from some website or off a CD just to get the thing to work.

Lastly, “It may never be the “alternative to Windows” that Microsoft haters hope for”.

Don’t take it from us, take it from Steve Ballmer. He himself said that Linux was their biggest threat.

Go ahead, take a look: http://www.osnews.com/story/21035/Ballmer_Linux_Bigger_Competitor_than_Apple

are you saying microsoft windows -which is used by more than 90% desktop users- is ready for prime time?

I happen to agree with the OP. I use Ubuntu as my primary environment and am very satisfied with it. I play with other distros inside of VirtualBox and run Windows inside of Virtualbox and I tell you for me as a computer geek, it’s heaven. I don’t mind having to get this package to enable these codecs and tweaking this and that. Unfortunately, I agree that (and this is regarding any distro) as soon as you mod something, user-friendliness is not quite up to par to the Windows experience (esp. for someone who’s only used Windows) Although I do agree that *I* can do everything I could do on Windows on Linux and even do it better/faster/more efficiently/with more flexibility, I don’t think that the person who still has the meadow wallpaper (I’ll venture a 75% of the people guess) or who have had the courage to change it to their pet/kids/better half (another 20%) on they Windows XP desktop will.

I submit that any Linux distro is ready for primetime for people who know or who want to know more about their computers (a small minority of computer users) but for true dumb consumers — I use dumb not pejoratively but more as a general — I agree that no Linux distro is ready for primetime yet.

Next questions are: 1) who cares and corrolarily 2) is that such a bad thing?

@ mahfaan: sorry, what’s the challenge with codecs? Try to play an mp3 file, get suggestion to install them and follow the prompts, is that hard? Another way is just install VLC (Add/Remove)

Oh, found that the commenter above said the same

Why Windows XP is not ready for prime time.

Installing XP is a long tedious process requiring inputting of long serial numbers. When you finally get a desktop after 45 mins there are few drivers installed. You then have to find driver disks or get on the internet and look for them. After getting you hardware to work you must protect yourself from viruses and malware. This requires you to pay for software or accept reduced free protection. The setup is so bad that most people are incapable of doing it and have to buy computers that are preconfigured by an expert.

Then we have the update situation. Windows Update updates the core OS and if you have also paid for MS Office it will also also update that, thought the one system. All the other programs and drivers you use must be independently updated. Many have a daemon run at boot to check for updates. The more software and hardware you have the more system resources are used. With anti virus, anti malware, and update programs half of your resources are gone before you start anything. Over time as your registry grows with more and more entries the system slows.

The design of the OS is so poor that it is easily comprised by malware. Installing new software either requires more money or downloading software from the internet from places that you cannot know for certain are trustworthy.

All in all Windows XP is not ready for the desktop. The average user cannot stop security problems and performance degradation is inevitable for all but the most advanced users.

What is needed is strong built is security within the OS, a central repository for all software that is known to be trustworthy and free of malware. And it needs one update manager for everything installed. And finally it needs to stop charging so much money for a flawed system, then requiring more money to patch up the problems.

With Windows if you change your motherboard they will want you to buy a new copy because it is no longer the system the OS was purchased with, although sometimes it will work with a complete reinstall. It should just restart and go on as before.

I am sorry but I cannot recommend anyone use Windows at this time, there are just too many issues requiring attention.

Addendum

Just for completeness. Windows XP is incapable of playing DVDs without installation of Power DVD or the like. It is just that in most preinstalled systems someone has done it for you. Also divx, flac, ogg, mpeg4, aac, Quicktime etc etc all have to be added after the fact. Only a few multimedia codecs are installed in the plain OS install.

With Linux they are all in the repositories, guaranteed to be free of malware. Open up Synaptic, select for install, done.

@ Wikinoticia
I stand corrected. I thought RHEL was Redhat’s business OS and Fedora was the desktop. As for your other comments, words of a linux fanboy. I have never really gotten into Ubuntu. I downloaded the live cd of the version that was receiving buzz at the time and it was just the same gnome/X/kernel with different themes.

@Dim So your point is to bash Linux that isn’t Ubuntu. I tried the previous version of Ubuntu and it was just gnome. Same as Fedora, but with deb files instead of rpm. Looking forward to Fedora 11 though to see how the new differential RPMs speed up updating. As for the command line, you do realize that most all linux software that has a GUI is really just a pretty wrapper for the underlying command line utility. This is why most help forums suggest fixing the problem directly from the command line (you’ll need root access to fix anything in Linux anyway).

@mahfaan Does Ubuntu do the two step with trying to download codecs as well? I know in Fedora 10, every bit of media software begs for a codec, then either complains that what you are trying to do isn’t licensed, or points you to a page to BUY the codec.

“I believe in keeping data on a seperate drive and doing a fresh install whenever the computer slows to a crawl or has an OS glitch.”

Said the Windows user. Use the repositories for crying out loud. All this stuff about installing dependencies and compiling from source is just more FUD.

Please stick with writing about Windows because clearly you have demonstrated how Linux is not worth using. You would be much better off telling the world about how easy it is to run Windows – just keep everything of value on a separate drive isolated from the OS. That way when Windows inevitably slows to a crawl, develops a glitch or gets the inevitable worm, trojan or virus you experience the ease of use that comes from wiping the drive with Windows on it and losing all the data there. Don’t forget to tell Windows users how Linux is not ready for prime time because in addition to not slowing to a crawl, it allows users to reinstall or install a new version without forcing the user to wipe all data on the drive.
For the Windows impaired, the previous paragraph was sarcasm.

@Socceroos

Firstly, I use Windows 7 and the first time I inserted a cd after installing it, it played, as well as MP3. My laptop has minimal software installed on it, but it plays DVD fine. As for Divx and Xvid and h.264, they are proprietary formats. The second thing I install by nature with Windows (after antivirus) is Xvid, which includes the codecs for most any video I would play. It only takes a minute to do so, as opposed to your Linux alternatives. Setup repos and download VLC or install a gui frontend to yum and install it through that. With Windows, I just open IE, go to the xvid site, click the link and click open and when it downloads, it starts the install. Simple. I’m sure Mac does it in an even easier way, but those are expensive toys for the trendy.

Used the last version of Ubuntu to see what the fuss was about. It looked like just another flavor of Gnome so I went with Fedora. Probably does the same two step of saying it will download a codec and then sending you to buy it.

You would really pay more for a Dell with Linux than a cheap PC with free Windows on it. You should try Mac OS, I hear they’re the same way. But seriously, those pre-built Linux PCs are a joke because they match specs with Windows. If I wanted a free OS, I wouldn’t pay good money for it.

Why complain about the command line. If you ever REALLY get into using Linux, you’ll have to use it all the time. Everything that is in the GUI is just a front end to the underlying text based program.

Downloading dependencies. You should know by now that Linux will mess up just like Windows once in a while. Something will fail during an update and then you’ll have to fix it manually. At least with Windows, you can either use system restore or just uninstall/reinstall drivers/software to fix. With all the software using shared libraries in Linux, one botched install/update hoses everything and leaves you in what used to be termed “dependency hell”.

Linux will support more hardware huh. Well, well. The first time I installed Linux on my laptop, had to uninstall it because of a lack of wifi drivers. The first time I tried to use my generic USB webcam in the latest release, no drivers. Printer support is spotty and I’d be willing to bet that with winmodems, modem support is still spotty. You can’t claim that Linux would support hardware when drivers are what allows hardware to work. Hardware manufacturers know that over 90% of PCs are Windows PCs so they have to support Windows. Linux support is either voluntary or throught the community reverse engineering Windows drivers. Some companies even make strong efforts to keep the open source community from doing that. When it comes down to it, I can go to Wal-Mart and buy the $5 gadget from Hong Kong and know it will work. With Linux, you have to research what works and pay more for it, or take a chance.

As for hardware support out of the box, Windows 7 even recognizes my Android phone out of the box and syncs its music to Windows Media player. Camera, check. Yeah, pretty much everything works. Legacy hardware, maybe or maybe not, but that’s what legacy means, it’s old and not supported. Funny thing is with Windows 7, I don’t even have to install any software to do things like transfer photos or sync an Mp3 player, or get photos from a camera. Unless its an exotic piece of hardware, it works, and if it is, it comes with a Windows driver cd. You pop it in, it starts its installer, then you install the hardware and it works. That’s so old school though. Most Windows peripherals these days tell you, with any version of Windows since say Windows 98, you don’t need to install drivers.

About Linux being the bigger competitor, duh! Microsoft’s biggest business is selling to businesses, not consumers. Apple’s biggest business is schools and consumers. For the most part Microsoft doesn’t actually compete with Apple. Apple sells its small portion of overall consumer PC sales, but the majority of PCs come with Windows. Heck, you can’t even buy a Mac anywhere but a Mac store, which is only in the biggest markets in exclusive locations. In my area of 1.5 million, there are two Mac stores in the upscale areas. But you can go to Walmart, Radio Shack or any other major retailer and find all different types of PCs (No Linux by the way). Linux is a true alternative OS for businesses and servers because they generally will have set things they allow on workstations (word processing, email, internet browsing). Linux also is a server OS for FREE, with free upgrades, and you can buy support. Windows on the other hand is expensive as a business OS, versions come out every few years and adopting requires investing in new hardware as well as retraining people. I’d be willing to say that Linux is probably the best business OS, but then you have to find people who do Linux and Windows to be in IT because if you’re a business, you’re probably gonna have Windows somewhere. I applied at a Linux webhosting company and when I went to their interview I noticed Vista everywhere.

But to the core point of the article. I may know how to get Linux to do what I want 99% of the time and you may know, but we’re obviously savvy. The average user doesn’t know what a codec is. They just know the movie they downloaded won’t play when they double click it and Windows says they need to download Divx, and even links them to the site to do so.

To be a consumer OS, you have to be affordable and easy for most people to use. Apple keeps itself out of the loop by making their products expensive and then keeping a strangle hold on how its customers can use it. Linux, it will never just simply work or be made to work simply. But then, you’ll never accept that.

@makkay

It’s BETA OS is the most impressive thing I’ve seen. If it had Compiz-Fusion’s cube and wobbly Windows and window transparency, it would be perfect. I hear MacOS is nice, but damn expensive computers and tied to Apple’s collective hitleresque decision making on what the user should or should not be able to do.

@haritia That’s the point I was trying to make. Not everyone can use Linux. We can figure it out, but the person who can barely figure out what a double click is in Windows will be lost in Linux. Especially back in the days of dialup and winmodems when noone had broadband at home so you couldn’t get slackware to get online for help.

@GregE
Why would anyone still use Windows XP? Really, Vista is out, and Windows 7 is available. One fundamental flaw to your argument is that you start from setup. At least you can do that as a new user. If you’re a new user, you can’t even install Linux without first installing Windows to download Linux, then installing CD burning software to burn the install discs or DVD. Then if you’re like most new users, you put the cd in containing installer.iso and nothing happens. Then you notice Windows still boots and works. Why not just use it.

Oh and if you call MS and explain, the Indian on the phone will allow you to switch your Windows activation to your new motherboard. You have a legit copy of Windows and obviously you’re original Windows PC isn’t calling home anymore for updates.

As for viruses/malware. It would be just as big a deal on MacOS or Linux if over 90% of computer users used those platforms. In Linux, the first thing that would happen is the new user would get tired of getting prompted for the root password when they try to do something advanced and start logging in as root, assuming they don’t do so from the start because it lets them do what they want on THEIR PC without asking questions. Then with over 90% of users having those Linux PCs, hackers would hunt for holes and exploit them daily, and listen to the open source community for update information and attack the holes that will be patched with the latest updates. Look at Mac. They are getting close to 10% market share and surprise, surprise, people are starting to write malware for MacOS.

People who write software for Windows, would be writing for Linux so of course instead of using the free built in utilities, people would start using the name brand software they’ve heard of. Photoshop instead of Gimp is an example. That or, the governments would wonder why the OS vendor distributes all the software for its monopoly OS, and force them to unbundle things like the browser or media players (sound familiar).

@timdor

You should really download Windows 7 beta and install it on all your Linux PCs. Don’t use a seperate partition, allow it to wipe the drive. That’s not sarcasm.

@theblagman

XP still has twice the market share of Vista, Microsoft hopes Windows 7 will do better. XP must be reinstalled a lot, I gave that example as the article used it as an example of easy. The only people who think it is easy are those who have never done it. It takes hours by the time everything is in place. Ubuntu takes about 25 minutes.

Your example of setup is odd. With either OS you would start with a CD. You either pay for Windows or use a pirate copy, or you use a free copy of Ubuntu or whatever distro. Where that copy comes from is irrelevant. Linux it is on Magazine covers, get it from friends or go to the Ubuntu home page and they will post you one for nothing – you do not need Windows to download it. You can even download a newer version using an older live CD, although that takes an advanced user.

As for prompting for a password – have you used Vista? Prompting for a password to make a system change is a security issue, one of the reasons Windows is in such trouble with viruses. In Ubuntu there is no root account, so they cannot circumvent the system. Only a Windows user would see this as a problem instead of a savior. Market share or not, it is much much harder to write Linux viruses and the security holes are rapidly fixed and the auto update system makes sure it happens.

How many people who use Photoshop would continue to do so if they had to pay for it. Not Photoshop Elements or whatever it is called now, but the real deal. What home user would spend more on one program than they spent on their whole computer? It is piracy that keeps the Windows ecosystem afloat. Only professionals will pay thousands for the software they need to get their work done.

Linux is not for everyone. Linux users use Linux because of freedom, the freedom to use their computers as they see fit. You either get it or it means nothing to you. No matter how good Windows 7 may be, it is still closed and so the same rules apply.

Clearly the problem is that you are using Fedora. You say you are a fan of Fedora, but you hate it. Ubuntu is not just Gnome. The goal of Ubuntu is to make it easy to use, have everything preinstalled, no driver issues, etc. Basically, address all your complaints about Fedora. With Ubuntu, you should NEVER have to use a command line. Everything can be done through menus. All major programs that you need, (web, email, office, music player, chat, bittorrent, etc.) have been selected and preinstalled for you. No extra research needed.

Then there is Linux Mint, which takes it even a step farther and ignores all the legal issues and installs all the popular codecs by default. They make the menus even easier to use and emulate the Windows start menu style. Linux Mint is based off of Ubuntu so all the drivers will just work.

Please, at least have an informed opinion of Linux. Fedora =/= Linux!

Linux Mint, it just works and elegantly, too.

Here is an article that may help you realize find a better distro for you.

http://www.tuxradar.com/content/how-choose-best-linux-distro

Fedora is known for not being easy to use. It’s not designed for the average user.

Ubuntu/Linux Mint are. This is why Ubuntu has become the most popular version of Linux. It solves all your complaints about Linux.

@GregE

I never mentioned XP in the article. Said Windows multiple times and mentioned Windows 7, but if you read the previous blog enties, you’ll realize my stance is that people who are still using XP are way behind. I basically say that Windows 7 is Windows.

As for how the setup goes, you still never mentioned where the cd comes from. The average new user gets it with a new computer, or the computer comes pre-installed with a recovery partition. You can’t get Linux on the $400 dollar computer you buy from Best Buy on Black Friday. This is the real world. No-one who doesn’t know about computers really would even hear about Windows so I guess it’s all a moot point, but in the end, you can even buy Windows in major retailers. You can’t buy Linux at most of them and these mystical magazines with the cd, you’d really be a techie and not a newbie if you have one. So in basic, you still need Windows to get the install cd. I recommend people who are in IT try Linux, because it leads to Linux server support jobs, but how could you feel comfortable giving a noob a copy of Linux.

No root account in Ubuntu? How do you su or sudo into root account priviledges to make changes? As for passwords, that’s why there is UAC, and I’d suggest you wipe a Linux install to try Windows 7 and see how the more adaptive UAC works. Less prompts for familiar responses. But hey, you should know, if 90% of computer users used Linux, an OS developed for free by volunteer effort, hackers would have a field day. Microsoft can barely keep up with them and they are very used to matching wits with hackers.

So you’re a piracy advocate? You do realize software has nothing to do with the OS. It is a market to make money. People may use the gimp, but it is no Photoshop. Just like my Linux based smartphone, the free software was ok and served a purpose, but once they made it possible to sell apps, the payed ones are such better programs.

Your final paragraph means you ALMOST get it. Linux is not for everyone. It is free, but you get what you pay for. Windows 7 may be closed, but its the standard and it plays Games For Windows wonderfully, is supported by everyone and just works. I’ll give Fedora 11 a shot though to see whats on the edge. Linux has a lot of little usability issues that never seem to get addressed. I guess it’s because it would require reworking the ENTIRE OS to be more like Windows.

In case you can’t be bothered to read the article that I linked, here is the relevant review of Linux Mint:

“There are many computer users that are moving to Linux because they are becoming dissatisfied with the cost and the lack of freedom in proprietary operating systems. Over the last few years, thanks to the graphical frippery introduced into both Apple’s OS 10.5 and Windows Vista, computer desktops have gone through a visual makeover.

And it’s for this reason that eye candy and a fine attention to detail have governed our choice of migrant Linux distribution, and the winner is Linux Mint. Mint is another distribution built on the strong foundations of Ubuntu. It takes the good points, such as the excellent hardware compatibility and easy installation, and performs a facelift on the weakest points, which is the muddy ambience of the Ubuntu desktop.

Usability has been enhanced by removing the top menu bar and replacing the themes and palette of the original distribution with a tub of choco-mint ice cream. But what makes Mint most effective for a recent convert to Linux is its excellent support for codecs. Most music and video will play without any further requirements, and Adobe Flash and Sun’s Java are installed by default.
Mint has quite a light-hearted approach to Linux, which is welcome and fun.

Mint has quite a light-hearted approach to Linux, which is welcome and fun.

Another neat addition is the Mint-only package installer, which sits alongside Ubuntu’s Synaptic. The Mint installer is better, though, as it embeds screenshot, ratings and and user reviews directly into the package list, turning package installation into an adventure. If you have no other option than to run the original Windows application, the Windows emulation layer, Wine, can be installed with simple wave of the installer’s wand.

All this creates a perfect ‘out-of-the-box’ experience. The launch menu has been configured so that the variety of tools and applications on offer, and the way they’re organised into the menu, should feel very familiar. The default desktop doesn’t include any virtual screens, which can confuse the newcomer, and it’s this refined design and attention to detail that makes Mint the perfect candidate for all Linux converts.”

http://www.tuxradar.com/content/how-choose-best-linux-distro

From the same article. The best Linux for everyday use is…

» Everyday Linux: Fedora
There are some great aspects to Debian – its packages are very stable, the desktop is fine-tuned and familiar, and the breadth of software available in its repositories is second to none. But there are certain aspect to Debian that we feel Fedora does better.

Firstly, Fedora just looks better, despite being built around the same Gnome desktop as Debian. The astronomical theme that accompanies you while you launch the operating system is carried on to the blue desktop, and there’s a distinct feeling that a lot of love has gone into Fedora’s default theme. Secondly, Fedora manages to include OpenOffice.org 3, while Debian is still a revision behind, and Fedora’s version of Firefox keeps the original branding, rather than the confusing rebranding of all things Mozilla insisted on by the Debian developers.

Both desktops take a hard line against including non-free open source software, and we greatly admire this stance. Both desktops prove that a purely open source desktop is just as functional as a hybrid desktop, even if you do have to make certain compromises. We feel that Debian’s compromise of using the vaguely Adobe Flash-compatible Gnash, though admirable, confuses things slightly.

Maybe you should consider switching to Fedora.

Linux just needs to find its niche, but they let Apple take it. lol.

You forgot the very last line in the article:

“Fedora might not be the easiest distribution to use, or the one with the largest package repository, but we feel it represents the very best that open source software has to offer.”

Your complaints are that “Linux” is not easy to use and the codecs are not installed by default. Lucky you, there is a Linux distro that will solve that problem for you.

Personally, I want an OS that’s easy to use and “just works” on my hardware. And I don’t care if my OS includes non-open source software. That only leaves me with Ubuntu and Linux Mint as options.

But for the everyday Linux geek who doesn’t mind digging through a command line, sure, Fedora is perfect. But their hardline of not including open source software makes it more of an unnecessary challenge.

Here’s another article for you:

I’ve included the summary since I thought it was rather ironic with your post.

“The Verdict
I like Linux Mint a lot. In some ways it’s what I wish Ubuntu itself had been. If I had to choose between the two of them, I would pick Linux Mint because it’s Ubuntu but better. While I noted a few things that could be improved, Linux Mint is definitely worth a download.

I really like the look and feel of Linux Mint. The artwork and the overall aesthetics of this distribution are very easy on the eyes. In an odd way it reminds me of Mac OS X without all the overbearing Apple glitter or the Apple tax. It’s slick.

And don’t just run it in Live CD mode either. Give it an install on your system. If I were in the market for an alternative to Windows, Linux Mint would definitely be at the top of my list. I still hear some people say “Linux still isn’t ready for the desktop” and stuff like that sometimes.

Well these people clearly haven’t used Linux Mint.”

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2345944,00.asp

The interesting thing about your article is if you replace everywhere you use “Linux” with Fedora, it would be much more accurate. Especially since that’s the only OS you are familiar with of the Linux family (Linux is a kernel, not an OS).

TJ…Question. So you’re telling me you can install Ubuntu, and within 5 minutes find and install say a user enhancement like AWN, then in 10 minutes get movie transcoding software alka dvd fab, followed by software to create DVDs from video files. I’ll just go down the list of my everyday Windows computing. Have to be able to video chat using windows only software. Occasionally use manycam and Ustream/LiveVideo to chat with people doing internet shows. I video chat using yahoo messenger, and use log me in to connect remotely over the internet. I use U3 on my thumb drive for certain apps. I play Netflix instant movies daily (Is there Silverlight for Linux?) and I’m addicted to WOW.
Can all of this be done in Ubuntu out of the box. These are just the normal user things that I do. I won’t burden you with the IT related things I have to do, like Use MS Project (specifically) or SQL Express or Adobe Actionscript, or Dreamweaver.

I’ll try Ubuntu again to see if it does everything I want automagically, and then allows me to easily find new software when my needs change, and I’ll definitely give Fedora 11 a try, but really, you use it for a while and realize you still need Windows for something, so its just a hobby.

TJ, I guess that makes the point though. If Linux is still trying to be an alternative to Windows, it never will be. Over 90% of people use Linux. Worst case, I’m sure Microsoft would just buy whoever got it right and put their stuff into Windows.

Maybe if there was a concerted effort with a commercial focus. Maybe you get all the people at Gnome and Ubuntu to go work for Redhat and then you begin licensing with hardware vendors (you’ll need money), and you create OS/2 Warp.

@theblagman

Your replies show you are a Windows evangelist. For your information there is deliberately no root account in Ubuntu, to stop the misinformed “just running root all the time”. You sudo to gain root privileges, but that times out after you finish whatever task you used it for. An advanced Linux user can add a root account, but very few would bother.

“So you’re a piracy advocate?” You have a gall accusing me of advocating piracy, for it is I who advocate Linux. Piracy is for Windows people, all my machines only run Linux, a mixture of Debian and Ubuntu, thus piracy is not only laughable, but almost impossible in a system where everything is free.

The funny thing is yes, Ubuntu does let you do all that very quickly. A part of the beauty of Ubuntu is it’s “Add/Remove Applications” feature, where it lists all the available software that you can install with a single click.

When I first heard about AWN, it took me 2 minutes to find and install it.

Though if you really want to evaluate a Linux OS for ease of use, I’d recommend Linux Mint first. It’s even easier to use and their specialized “Add/Remove” program is even nicer and easier to use. And their integration with Wine is pretty good if you just have to use THAT windows executable and not the linux version.

As for some of your other misconceptions, there is no root account in Ubuntu and Ubuntu will mail you a free CD if you ask them to. And yes, there is Silverlight for Linux.

However, now you are making a different argument. Is it a replacement for Windows for all users? Or is it ready for primetime? Two different questions.

Many users have to run a specific Windows application that just doesn’t work well in Wine (I do hear that WoW does work well though). Obviously, they can’t replace their Windows machine. But that would be true if it was an Apple application for an Apple user.

But is it ready for primetime? If you mean is it easy to use enough for a casual user? Then yes, Linux Mint is very easy to use for casual users.

For example, I have an aunt who is extremely computer illiterate. Using Windows is very challenging for her. Linux Mint is a far better option for her because it’s not like it’s any harder and she can’t get infected. I can rename all the standard icons to something she recognizes and everything works out of the box saving me time. Her computer runs faster since she doesn’t have to run virus scanners and her computer is no longer slowed by adware.

Is it a replacement for my work computer? No, I develop in .NET, so of course I’m going to use a Windows machine. Do I run another Linux machine? Yes, it has its applications.

“Maybe you get all the people at Gnome and Ubuntu to go work for Redhat and then you begin licensing with hardware vendors (you’ll need money), and you create OS/2 Warp.”

LOL, I think you mean if Redhat buys out Canonical (the makers of Ubuntu).

Do you know that close to half of Google employees use Ubuntu for their work OS?

I guess you just don’t get that Redhat focuses on Linux for servers and Canonical focuses on Linux for desktops. You use the desktop version of an OS built for servers, and you don’t even bother to try the OS built for desktops. Of course you are going to have those problems.

And eegads, who watches Netflix on their computer? Only geeks do that. Casual users would watch it on their TV through their Xbox 360. So casual users won’t be complaining about that. If you are geeky enough to do that, I’m sure you can figure out how to get it to play on Linux.

These tutorials have been on Internet for years, for practically every version of Fedora: http://www.howtoforge.com/the-perfect-desktop-fedora-10

A simple google search “fedora 10 desktop” results in this being on the top spot. If you would have done that you wouldn’t end up in some for your needs odd strange behaviour of extracting tarballs, compile and install. I’ve worked with Fedora for some time, even though my main OS both home and at the work place is Arch, and I’ve on request installed to several non-savvy users just because it despite initial hiccups because of its nature is very stable in the long run. Still Fedora’s focus is writing code upstream and not to deliver a “safe” desktop experience, hence a lot of Fedora’s work eventually show up in other distributions.

The examples in the article is very unfortunate and difficult to take seriously. On one hand Compiz is a serious obstacle for success and then you conclude in the end that “Linux is a hobbyist OS”. Didn’t you get a bit confused there about what makes an OS a serious working environment? The reasons for proprietary media formats not being included in the bundle of Fedora is so obvious that I can’t believe that you dare to publicly publish this article. Fedora is closely linked to Red Hat, a company with its base in the US. Go figure what would happen if Fedora would take some liberties… Fedora would for sure, and probably also Red Hat, never become a stumbling block for you since they would vanish in a judicial massacre.

The media codec stuff is boring, since it’s not an issue any more. It’s not a more serious obstacles than to get Windows to play ogg and flac. For many flac has become the de facto standard and learnt how to make WMP play flac (even though that possibility seems to be broken in latest versions of WMP) or that Foobar is a perfect player for the task.

No operating system of today is even close to be viewed as perfect. Linux has flaws just as the others. Many who use Linux do it with the pretext of “Linux sucks but it sucks less”. Your scheme to sell Linux computers isn’t new and have been tried, but you have to realize the market force that works against any such success. In 2002 Windows was estimated to control 97,5 % of the desktop market, now it’s 10 % less. Even if Linux only has 1 % in some parts of the world it’s already ready for millions and has taken its niche. In most other markets where you see more healthy competition 1 % of the worldwide market is huge. Linux wasn’t created to compete with Windows but to create a tool taking advantages of what some viewed as better computing. If only 1 % have that goal, even though it’s around 2 % where I live, it’s amazing to see how a small movement can be one of the fastest in technical advancements. To use or not to use it is and shall always be a free choice.

Overall your “prime time” come across as a somewhat obscure label with no obvious substance. I’m probably a savvy Linux user but I’m surrounded by many non-savvy Linux users in the ages 7 to 75. One thing for sure is that they’re not in the limelight writing blog entries, and maybe that’s why they’re not “ready” for “prime time”?

@theblaqman: I do not bash Linux, this is what you actually do. Ubuntu works for me and is much more usable than Vista or XP. Ubuntu is not just Gnome, it’s not the same as Fedora, but as I see from your other comments, there’s no point in explaining you this.

You say:
“As for the command line, you do realize that most all linux software that has a GUI is really just a pretty wrapper for the underlying command line utility”. So what? I work with the UI, and don’t care about the stuff behind the scenes.

You say:
“you’ll need root access to fix anything in Linux anyway”. First, I do not fix anything in Ubuntu, because as I already said, everything just works. And no, I don’t need to login as root (if that is what you mean) to do advanced things because Ubuntu asks for my admin (non-root) password when necessary.

So here in this article and comments we have another FUD. You install codec packs in Windows – good for you, but how many moms and dads can do that in Windows, do they know what a codec is? While in Ubuntu they can just try to play a file and follow the prompts.

You say that it’s hard to install VLC, which is NOT true, because VLC is in the repositories and all you need is to check a checkbox next to it. Probably your Fedora doesn’t put it to repositories (like many drivers and other software), and you still say that Ubuntu is just the same Gnome???

You bash Linux based on your Fedora experience and I still don’t get why you’ve put Ubuntu logo to this article.

Once again, Fedora is a good distro, but it’s purpose is to test different bleeding edge things on a community before Red Hat puts them to RHEL.

The (***) about codecs is probably the last hope of Windows lovers, because codecs are the only thing modern Linux distros don’t provide out of the box (though they provide the necessary tools to make codec installation a breeze). But if we remember about Linux Mint which includes codecs by default such Windows lovers are unarmed completely.

Imagine a mom sitting with a fresh intall of Windows (let’s even assume that the installation, activation and driver installation has been done by a geek for her). Read PDF files? Nope. Open RAR archives? Nope. Talk to friends on Yahoo? Nope. Read a book in Djvu format? Don’t even think about this. Got a .torrent file to mp3 download? Forget about this. Want to install a new application? Too risky without a virus and malware protection, unless she is sure that she downloads from the right website (and she is not a geek to be sure). Want to see a video file? In most cases – no. Hey, she needs a geek to help her do all these things, while in Ubuntu she could do them either out of the box or by following prompts.

See why its never a good idea to call it linux? because it create a misconception that linux is the OS which is not true. Linux is just a kernel. Its like someone saying NT is not ready for the desktop or Darwin is not ready for the desktop. Linux is just a kernel. your post should have been Fedora is not ready for the desktop. which is not even true because i know lots of people who run Fedora on a desktop and never had a problem with it. Fine its comes with a higher learning curve compared to say ubuntu, but that does not mean that its not ready for the desktop. its just not ready for the Noob user. There are legal reasons why linux doesnt ship with multimedia codecs installed by default. If you had done your research you would have found out about this and probably your rant would never have been written. Its the Typical Window user attitude. You see some cool “linux” video on Youtube, next thing you are downloading the distribution and expecting to work on your hardware which was built for windows… you arfe not ready to learn the linux ways but you expect it to just work for you? Linux as its ways mate. u have to first read about it and found out if its for you before you make the jump.

Grab a copy of Linux mint http://www.linuxmint.com/download.php Then follow this guide http://www.howtoforge.com/the-perfect-desktop-linux-mint-6-felicia and stop spreading FUD

No I shouldn’t because with Windows I would have to protect the data from the OS. With Linux I don’t. In fact with Windows, I can’t even be guaranteed I have the right to access my own data. After all if the data is in a closed proprietary format, and the software needed to access that data is not even owned by me, (See the Eula on any Microsoft product) my access to that data is at the mercy of the owners of the OS namely Microsoft. Stick with writing about Windows.

Is the bigger sign that zealots have to actually defend a free hobby, or the fact that only a handful of them actually existed to leave comments and the Windows users don’t even know what Linux is to comment, unless they have a G1.

i am only using free virus scanners like avast and avira but they seem to be great tools though`*-