[techtalk] Desktop OS?

[Michelle Murrain]

At 12:39 PM -0400 6/4/01, Martin.Caitlyn at epamail.epa.gov wrote:
>   OK, I had to download some drivers and recompile the
>kernel to make the PCMCIA floppy work on the two Librettos I have, but even
>that wasn't hard with the tools and instructions Red Hat kindly provides.

Please listen at what you just said. For most people on this list (me 
included) doing that is a cakewalk, or close to it. For how many 
people is this true?

This is not to say that I think Windows is *better*. Far from it. But 
you have to admit, that for just about everything, windows is 
*easier*. That's the kicker. And if you buy a new model of laptop, or 
new hardware, you have to wait around a bit before all of the drivers 
you might need are available.  Is this Linux's fault? Of course not, 
it's because the hardware manufacturers generally don't release Linux 
drivers, and you have to wait for some driver-hacker to 
reverse-engineer the hardware first.


>Also, your "of course the internal modem is useless" is *not* an of course.
>IBM has released drivers for their Winmodems, and there are other winmodem
>drivers as well.  I know the Lucent winmodem in my Mom's desktop (it came
>with it) *does* work, although I think it negatively affects her system
>peformance.

Well, from what I've read about the winmodem issue, the percentage of 
winmodems that are supported are a small minority. Yes, it's a 
growing minority, but at this point it's still quite small.

>Does Linux work with everything in a Windows-oriented world?  Of course
>not, but it works with most things, and if someone does a little bit of
>smart shopping before they buy, or better yet, buys with Linux preloaded,
>there are a whole lot of options out there.

There are far more options out there than there were even a year ago, 
I'll grant that.

>The only area where Linux is still lacking apps is in the area of
>children's education software.  The certainly is no lack of quality office
>suites:  KOffice is really impressive,

KOffice is impressive? From what perspective? My experience of 
KOffice is that it sucks rocks. It doesn't have that many features, 
some features are pretty strangely implemented, it crashes at the 
drop of the hat (I've tried this with a couple of different distros, 
so it wasn't the installation), and it can't deal with MS files, 
which for most people is essential, since they share files with folks 
who use MS office.

>StarOffice isn't bad (if a bit slow),

I agree - I've used Star Office quite a bit, and have been pretty 
pleased with everything except the speed.

>  ApplixWare isn't bad either, and the WordPerfect 2000 Suite (the
>standard where I work) is tolerable, though WordPerfect 8 was certainly
>more stable.  The Gnome Office suite is in development, too, with AbiWord
>already quite usable, with Dia as an acceptable alternative to Visio, and
>with a first class spreadsheet in Gnumeric.  By my count that makes five
>office suites to choose from.  The only thing missing for some people is
>the "Microsoft" name on the front of the box, and the matching high price
>tag.

I have to say, that as much as I don't like M$, and I think Access is 
the database from hell that should have been killed off years ago, 
and Word is a bloated excuse for a word processor,  Excel is a damn 
good program, as is PowerPoint. Although I like the spreadsheet and 
presentation packages that go with StarOffice, it's pretty hard to 
beat those two in quality.

To say that there are "five office suites to choose from" is beside 
the point if they aren't near as good.

>Linux passed the Mom test for me:  my non-technical Mom could use it and
>have no problems with it.  The thing is she did not have to install it.  I
>set up everything for her.  She hasn't even had to pop up a terminal
>window.  She lives in KDE, and runs her WordPerfect, her Netscape 6.01, and
>not much else.  She uses the character selector applet and the keyboard
>mapping applet, both of which come with KDE 2.  She isn't exactly a power
>user.  Still... it made her system faster and did away with hanging
>problems she had in Windows, so she's happy.

See I think that this is part of the problem. It passes the Mom, or 
Grandma test *if we set it up*  and they never have to install or 
upgrade anything. (In fact, windows has a harder time passing this 
test because it's so much less stable) It passes the geek test, 
obviously. Is there any other test it passes, *honestly*? Can 
semi-savvy non-geeks deal?

>Will Linux make it as a desktop OS?  Yes, if Microsoft gets too greedy and
>more companies switch over.  People use what they use at work, for the most
>part.  Also, it's going to have to get to the point where you can walk into
>CompUSA or even Best Buy and have a choice between a Windows or a Linux
>system.  Honestly, we're a long way from that yet.

I agree, people do use what they use at work, and once companies 
begin to put linux on the desktop, that's going to make a big 
difference.

Part of this is not about defending Linux. I don't think it needs 
defending. It's about an honest assessment of its weaknesses, so that 
it *can* end up managing to make it on the desktop. I figure that if 
I am getting frustrated enough with it, and spending more time 
futzing with my installation (which I happen to enjoy), than getting 
work done, how are people who are already pretty sold on Windows 
going to look at it?

Michelle
--