[Phoronix] Canonical: Ubuntu To Soon Ship On 5% Of PCs - Page 5

I'm aware of all this, and I reiterate, I am in no way opposed to Linux. I'm referring to the ones who do not use Linux and other Unix-based operating systems to utilize those advantages. The ones who blindly step into a pair of Linux shoes, so to speak, and then begin to act as if they and their operating system of choice is ultimately superior and jump on the Windows hating bandwagon for really no good reason.

I just really don't like that Ubuntu will probably be the one to break the mold and become more common among average users. There are so many better distros out there.
Edited by metal_gunjee - 5/8/12 at 5:56pm

I see a lot of people in here who really talk about things they don't actually understand. We have the software, and the distributions, so that you don't ever have to use a terminal. Not to setup anything, although I do send my regards to AMD GPU owners. Those can be a PITA, what can ya do. To just about anything else you have various package managers, all graphical, all without CLI. =O If you want to get more adventurous you can, and that's the whole point. I don't think I ever had to touch CLI for this install of Ubuntu, with one exception but that was my choice to get my TV to display 1080 for the AGP input (voluntary, had to tweak windows too).

I used the software center to install Synaptic, used Synaptic to install Nvidia-Current, ran jocky, rebooted, everything else worked.

That was the extent of me setting up Ubuntu, outside of the install process itself. That's actually much less painless than in Windows. I have to setup sound if I want it to work properly (download/install drivers, means finding them). I have to go grab Nvidia drivers, as well as go and download all the programs I need to install. Before you think ,why not save them, if I'm installing I might as well find the latest version.

Oh wait, with linux I can search synaptic for all my programs without browsing web pages and dealing with that (Latest version). Honestly, setting up a linux system is blissfully quick if you just read the screen. If you have hardware problems, take the advice billions of people have said and get a different distro or version. I've never seen Suse, Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian, or any of the major distributions all fail on a machine at the same time. So I don't really see the complaint.

I've used Ubuntu once and it was TERRIBLE. Deleted it immediately and went back to my good ol W7.

The terminal is neither inefficient nor outdated. When you learn it you can do so much with such little effort you start to go to it for the simple actions.
The support issue is for AMD to solve with their drivers.
Music is there, so is video, the gaming is the only thing that seems to be lacking.

Yes it is and yes it is. If the terminal were superior we wouldn't have developed graphical interfaces and we wouldn't be using file explorers today. The only thing I use the terminal for is to execute stuff. Everything else from creating/moving/copying stuff to editing files I do with external programs that have sftp built in. To be honest I even avoid doing stuff in Ubuntu as much as possible. Run it in a virtualbox with shared folders and I can jump into Windows with one click, use quality commercial software, and then jump back into Ubuntu to do whatever I need to do.
Edited by dr/owned - 5/8/12 at 7:14pm

Great news. I really liked a few of the Linux distros I tried out but I did not like the Linux alternatives for some Windows programs at all. Hopefully we start seeing some programs being ported from Windows to Linux.

When you say used...what do you mean? Did you do an actual install and try it out for a week? Or did you expect it to be free windows? Did you dislike Unity and therefore judge the whole system on a DE that unlike OSX or Windows can easily be replaced? I'm not badgering but rather curious as to why you didn't like.

^Better is subjective. I think the only area Linux can truly claim to be "better" is just in giving the user freedom. There's really no one size fits all mantra so Linux can be every bit as good or bad as you make it. That doesn't exists with Windows or OSX.

As for why people may jump on the Windows hating bandwagon; it might be they have some repressed anger over finding something that was better than it for them. Who knows or cares. There's plenty of extremely vocal Linux bashers and OSX bashers as well.

This. I won't touch Linux as a main OS until they add a few things, one of which is installers. You shouldn't need to add repos, download packages, build them, and manually install them only to be like "uh now how do I launch it and where did it install to?" I know my ubuntu virtualbox right now has programs "installed" that I have no clue how to run because they didn't add anything to the menu bar. Want to uninstall them? Oh sorry, they add 15 entries to Synaptic and removing the main one leaves an ass-ton of orphans that requires ANOTHER program to clean up.

The second thing that linux needs to fix is their absurd file system structure. /etc and /bin and / blah blah blah are fine and good if you're coding something in your spare time and you're the only person going to use it. But it doesn't work when other people try to decode what the hell you were thinking and have to play whack-a-mole trying to find where a program's configuration files are.

What the HELL DO YOU NEED INSTALLERS FOR! This isn't windows. Linux =/= Free Windows. Seriously...what is so hard to understand...the package manager does what? MANAGE the packages for you so you don't have to bother with the crap you're complaining about. What the heck did you do? (No...seriously because I hate it when people get wrong impressions about things and need/want help).

Honestly, you should check out Lattyware's Linux challenge and read up on how to do things in the Linux world along with ask for help in the Linux section on here. If people go into it expecting windows like ways of doing things they are missing the point and will get extremely dissapointed. I mean do people go into OSX and expect to run exes(don't judge...I tried to once)?

The terminal bashing and jokes about dealing with code really make it clear who has any idea what their talking about.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1174529/linux-essential-threads

http://www.overclock.net/t/115329/show-your-linux/3110#post_17150308

Check those out people.

The GUI was designed to be easier for new people to get into computing. The largest limitation of the Terminal to people is the fact that you need to know the commands to use it. Once you learn them though, it becomes extremely easy to use and is much more efficient than using the GUI.

I have never had a program that was designed with a GUI not show up once it was installed.

If you spent the time to learn basic commands in the terminal orphans wouldn't matter and to the average user, they won't care about orphans as long as it doesn't directly interfere with the functionality of the OS.

The file structure makes a lot more sense than Window's registry.