Why don't YOU use *nix, or why have you switched back?

[The Linuxator]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ivwshane

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ivwshane
Untill I can achieve doing everything, right out of the box, through a gui I won't be switching.

That doesn't mean I won't try out linux but I won't be using it for my main OS anytime soon.




I still think a majority of linux users and developers see linux only for those that are computer geeks and for those that like the command line. Untill they start making linux for the dumbest people in the world it won't be gaining any major desktop market share.

That has nothing to do with Linux developers, and everything to do with the GUI developers.

And I hope they don't do anything like that. Screw the stupid.

LOL, you prove my point exactly.

Nah, I was just playing.

One benefit to Linux, BSD, and possibly open solaris is all of the options. You can have a bare bones sort of system, where X is only there to look at pr0n and have multiple command line windows on the screen at once. You can also use different software so that interaction with the command line is negligible (or at least some people are working on that).

And none of it has to do with Linux, the kernel. Hell, it doesn't even have a whole lot to do with Linux, the operating system. It has a lot more to do with the interface software. :shocked:? No, you shouldn't be. ? Maybe a little.

Seriously though, userfriendliness has nothing to do with Linux, or BSD, or Solaris. It has to do with Gnome, and KDE, and XFCE. These are the groups that would have to work on making things easier for people that don't want to know anything about their computer except which icon brings them to thier favorite donkey site.

The Linux and BSD developers (the ones working on the guts) probably don't care either way. They just want a better OS. :beer:

See n0c that's exactly what I am talking about, the problem with *nix in general is that there is this disintegration, why should the user care about all of that, damn! The users that we are talking about don't even know that there is a kernel in windows for that matter!! All they care about is a productive easy to use non time consuming app period.
How can "They just want a better OS. " and not care about it's usefulness?? A good OS for me is like a handy tool that anyone can pick and accomplish a certain objective through it.
If you are going to release an app that doesn't have a GUI at this level of advancement in computer technology then I don't know how much it's bettering the OS. For me the more ppl that are able to use it the more this app is capable of bettering the OS in general, because that way you are able to get more feedback, from ppl at different leves of knwoledge, and you will be able to know what ppl need in reality.
You know that if an app is released a user will want to use it in a GUI. Do you know what else I hate , the fact that GNOME KDE and all the likes of them aren't just a GUI, no they are more than a GUI and I don't think this is right nor good. Those should be an interface period, apps should be able to run on any GUI in any condition with no other software to help accomplish that. Developers should manage a way to make all apps run easily in between all distros and GUIs, we as a *nix community shold stop being scattered all over the place each tweaking a different platform here and there. There should be this common uniform platform that is used by all, and runs independent of the type of GUI and whatever you have on there all you need is have the core (Linux) and then everyone can put there own final touches. Somone might jump and say "well we do all have that common platform you are talking about , what's wrong with you?" Well I still don't see it the way things are going nowadays, sorry if I offended anyone but that's just my opinion.

 

[Nothinman]

Better OS? For who?

For everyone, the Linux kernel developers almost never touch any userland code and when they do it's usually just to support a driver or kernel subsystem. If you have a problem with Gnome or KDE take it up with those developers.

To me the argument seems crazy.. It would be like all the car companies not wanting to put power steering in there cars back in the day because they were to busy working on the rest of the car..

And if you went into GM and started complaining to the body design team about how the car needed power steering they would think you're crazy because you're bitching at the wrong people.

And what most people fail to realize is that in most cases Linux isn't harder than Windows or OS X, it's just different and learning something different always takes time. Of course there are cases where Linux makes you jump through a few extra hoops that you shouldn't really need to, but they will get fixed in time and Windows has similar situations. Hell I can't stand the XP wifi interface, I find it confusing as hell and would much rather just use iwconfig like I can on Linux.

 

[LokeanSon]

Originally posted by: IamDavid

The Linux and BSD developers (the ones working on the guts) probably don't care either way. They just want a better OS. :beer:

Better OS? For who? It doesn't make sense to build on something no one wants, can't use. I know some people use it along with some corporations but in the end wouldn't they all benefit if it was more accessible to everyone?
To me the argument seems crazy.. It would be like all the car companies not wanting to put power steering in there cars back in the day because they were to busy working on the rest of the car..

It is better for many of us, including the people who develop it. You want a precise list of individuals it is better for?
1) Students who want to learn programming. Hobbiest programmers. Just people who enjoy programming in general and don't have the mega bucks required to program under Windows. Sure, visual basic is like 80 bucks, but basic is such a craptacularly limited language.
2) People who want to run servers. The shell scripting power alone slaughters Windows from a sysadmin perspective. Granted, if you don't know your stuff, Windows is easier, but you're asking for arse kicking if you don't know your stuff and you're running a publically accessible server under Windows.
3) People who have old equipment and are financially constrained to get newer equipment.

Now, all 3 of these represent the major segments of individual users who contribute to the development of Linux. That's why it is better in all 3 of these things.

If individual users who wanted a better desktop would at least participate in some form, whether it be QA testing, beta testing, or just filling out bug reports, the progress would be faster. But most people who want a better desktop, want something for nothing and don't contribute anything but whining to public discourse.

Personally, I think people who say that Linux is a poor desktop, are suffering from the same symptom as people who complain about windows stability... They either haven't used a recent desktop oriented version, OR, they're trying versions like Slak or Gentoo.

I use Suse 10 on the desktop almost exclusively, with Gentoo in a dual boot for hacking around with(love Gentoo, but definetly not for the average person). I set everything up on my beast, a dual opteron 248, with sata drives, 3d video card, cdr, dvdr, dvd player, rippers, sound, mouse, keyboard, everything and the kitchen sink... I set it all up without touching a single configuration file.

If a windows user wants to try Linux, there are only 2 distros that come close for desktop ease of use and power... Ubuntu and Suse 10. For anyone worried about editing a configuration file(as simple as that truly is), they should not bother trying any other distro I'm aware of at this point.

 

[thesix]

That has nothing to do with Linux developers, and everything to do with the GUI developers.

It's not just about pretty graphic interface, it's also about integration, especially at the system level. Gnome/kde etc. are looking pretty good these days, you even hear many Linux users say Linux is prettier than Windows or OSX, but once you start operating, start touching different aspects of the OS, you see inconsistency in user interface all over the place, while Windows and OSX provide a consistent view in every aspect (well, almost) of the OS.

I see SuSE's YaST as an effort towards that goal. I am sure there're similar projects in other distributions. However none of them have achieved being as good as Windows or OSX. With the current development model of those GNU/Linux distributions, I don't know if that will ever be achieved.

So don't just blame the "GUI developers".

And I hope they don't do anything like that. Screw the stupid.

Now you're just joking.
By this logic, for example, Sun should just stick to CDE on Solaris and leave the GNOME/KDE to "the stupid"?

Interestingly, Sun seems to be getting their act together on the user friendness.

Last month, Sun published "Solaris Desktop Gap Analysis" on OpenSolaris site.
Darren Kenny, the author, also commented on Solaris-x86 Yahoo Group: Future Solaris Desktop

The "Solaris Desktop Summit" (apprently a Sun internal event) has been mentioned in this blog.

As a Solaris user, I am very happy Sun is making these efforts, which will also benefit other opensource projects, especially GNOME, and therefore, GNU/Linux etc. However, I am not optimistic that these efforts will make a huge leap in the near future. Like I said, the integration and consistency at the system level is not something easy to achieve.

 

[talyn00]

I'm too lazy to learn something new. Plus all the distros I've used had me relying on the GUI too much to configure stuff. I would really like to learn the CLI to do some heavy duty stuff. Plus lack of games for it.

 

[ivwshane]

I agree consistency is very important in the over all user experience. If you have ever used a palm based device (especially a treo) the level of inconsistency is way too high and is one of the reasons I stopped using palm based devices. The same can be said for linux. Whether it's the developers or the GUI guys that are responsible it doesn't matter to the end user, they just want something that makes sense and easy to use.


Linux is very powerful but if only a handful of people can use it then what good is it?

 

[LokeanSon]

Originally posted by: talyn00
I'm too lazy to learn something new. Plus all the distros I've used had me relying on the GUI too much to configure stuff. I would really like to learn the CLI to do some heavy duty stuff. Plus lack of games for it.

That's one helluva mix there. Too lazy to learn something new, yet annoyed with the distro's doing stuff through gui's, while also wanting to learn the CLI to do some heavy duty stuff, despite being too lazy to learn something new...

A trollin' or confused?

 

[talyn00]

Originally posted by: LokeanSon

Originally posted by: talyn00
I'm too lazy to learn something new. Plus all the distros I've used had me relying on the GUI too much to configure stuff. I would really like to learn the CLI to do some heavy duty stuff. Plus lack of games for it.

That's one helluva mix there. Too lazy to learn something new, yet annoyed with the distro's doing stuff through gui's, while also wanting to learn the CLI to do some heavy duty stuff, despite being too lazy to learn something new...

A trollin' or confused?

Those are the various reasons that I've had in the past few years when I've switched back to windows. And I've switched back and forth quite a few times.

 

[Nothinman]

but once you start operating, start touching different aspects of the OS, you see inconsistency in user interface all over the place, while Windows and OSX provide a consistent view in every aspect (well, almost) of the OS.

Huh? Gnome is so much more consistent than Windows it's not funny. Look at MS' own products and you'll be hard pressed to find 2 that have the same UI. Office, WMP, VS, etc all have different looks to them and they even change with each new release. MS provides common dialogs for opening, saving, etc files but why doesn't Office use them?

I see SuSE's YaST as an effort towards that goal. I am sure there're similar projects in other distributions. However none of them have achieved being as good as Windows or OSX. With the current development model of those GNU/Linux distributions, I don't know if that will ever be achieved.

How can they not be as good when they don't have anything that even performs the same job?

I agree consistency is very important in the over all user experience

True but I have to laugh when people start saying that Windows has a more consistent UI than Gnome apps. MS doesn't even follow their own UI guidelines and as you move out to 3rd party developers things only get worse. Gnome, KDE and Apple are lightyears ahead of Windows in the consistency department.

Linux is very powerful but if only a handful of people can use it then what good is it?

So I take it you're also of the opinion that car companies should stop making cars with manual transmissions since only an extremely low percentage of drivers actually know how to use them?

 

[SleepWalkerX]

I have Suse, but it takes too long to install a program (updating all the .configs) and its too much of a hassle if I want to play some CS 1.6. I got it set up with Cedega, but when I updated my ATI drivers due to low fps I couldn't play anymore. I want to go back to Mepis soon to replace it, but I still run Windows most of the time now.

 

[nweaver]

Top reasons for running linux

1. (in a Jesse Jackson voice) Init 3 sets your memory free! (AKA I can choose not to run a GUI, and save those resources/cycles on a box that I never have a monitor on anyways

2. Consistancy across platforms. Want your Sun box to look just like your X86 just like your X86-64? Linux is a good answer

3. package management. Until windows has an answer for apt, yum, synaptic, emerge, it will be an inferior operating system

4. Mascot...I mean, really, who doesn't love a cuddly penguin over a freaking flying window....ok, so maybe those BSD guys, but they are all nuts and masochistics

5. Updates. Windows XP is old, really old in computer years. How fast were processors when XP came out now. if I have you a 4+ year old proc to work on, and said "it's the besteset" you would look at me funny.

6. Press F6 to load scsi drivers...'nuff said.

7. Trollbait. As a linux user, your distro should ship with a flamesuit. Use it wisely young grasshopper

8. Change....don't like what you have, then change it. Rip that kernel image out and compile your own, tweak the sources, add a patch from someone, write a driver to hide your pr0n and put it in the source tree. None of this "You only lease it from us" crap. Note that linux isn't as free as BSD, but it's a hell of a lot closer then windows

9. Geek factor. Compare Bill and Linus, really, who do you want to point to as your holy one of geekness.

10. tuxracer, /thread off

 

[CTho9305]

"To" does not mean the same thing as "Too".

Where's the "multiple of the above" option?

Game Support lacking - most games that runs on *nix run on windows, but the opposite is not true
Program supoport lacking - similar to above. There is no equivalent of Microsoft Visual C++ for *nix... development & debugging tools suck on *nix
Hardware support lacking - the latest and greatest doesn't work as well on *nix. With nvidia cards, you either fight with the binary driver and deal with the incessant crashes it brings, or use the OSS driver and deal with awful performance. From what I've heard, ATI isn't that much better.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: nweaver
9. Geek factor. Compare Bill and Linus, really, who do you want to point to as your holy one of geekness.

Bill is rich. That's enough to persuade me

 

[ivwshane]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

but once you start operating, start touching different aspects of the OS, you see inconsistency in user interface all over the place, while Windows and OSX provide a consistent view in every aspect (well, almost) of the OS.

Huh? Gnome is so much more consistent than Windows it's not funny. Look at MS' own products and you'll be hard pressed to find 2 that have the same UI. Office, WMP, VS, etc all have different looks to them and they even change with each new release. MS provides common dialogs for opening, saving, etc files but why doesn't Office use them?

I see SuSE's YaST as an effort towards that goal. I am sure there're similar projects in other distributions. However none of them have achieved being as good as Windows or OSX. With the current development model of those GNU/Linux distributions, I don't know if that will ever be achieved.

How can they not be as good when they don't have anything that even performs the same job?

I agree consistency is very important in the over all user experience

True but I have to laugh when people start saying that Windows has a more consistent UI than Gnome apps. MS doesn't even follow their own UI guidelines and as you move out to 3rd party developers things only get worse. Gnome, KDE and Apple are lightyears ahead of Windows in the consistency department.

Linux is very powerful but if only a handful of people can use it then what good is it?

So I take it you're also of the opinion that car companies should stop making cars with manual transmissions since only an extremely low percentage of drivers actually know how to use them?

I never said I thought windows was consistent. In fact it's an issue every OS has.

So I take it you're also of the opinion that car companies should stop making cars with manual transmissions since only an extremely low percentage of drivers actually know how to use them?

No but have you noticed that more and more cars have the auto stick feature (you use the gear shift to down shift and up shift the gears instead of using a traditional clutch)?
Instead I see manual transmission the same way I see the command line, those that are die hard car fans or in this case die hard computer users will prefer manual transmission or in this case the command line.
If a small percentage of drivers use manual transmission does that mean car manufactures should spend more time in developing cars to please them? No it doesn't and car manufactures agree (see above example as proof).

However if linux developers have the main goal of pleasing the minority then they should continue what they are doing. And in the end they may create a great OS that's capable of many things but it wont be the best OS.


One thing that I like about windows, XP pro in specific, is that it's actually quite a powerful OS but at the same time it's pretty easy to do the basics on it. If I want to do more advanced things with windows I can and more complex tasks are simply extensions of basic features.
For example: For the basic user loging on to their computer doesn't require much, however the more advanced they get the more options they might start playing with, anything from fast user switching, creating passwords, enabling ctrl+alt+del for logon, etc.
The point being is that it has basic functions but still adds those more advanced functions for the more advanced user. Windows is by no means perfect, like linux it's organization needs work and like all OS's it also lacks consistency.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: IamDavid

The Linux and BSD developers (the ones working on the guts) probably don't care either way. They just want a better OS. :beer:

Better OS? For who? It doesn't make sense to build on something no one wants, can't use. I know some people use it along with some corporations but in the end wouldn't they all benefit if it was more accessible to everyone?
To me the argument seems crazy.. It would be like all the car companies not wanting to put power steering in there cars back in the day because they were to busy working on the rest of the car..

Linux is the second most common OS your going to find anywere.

It's commonly used in embedded enviroments. It's now capable of 'realtime' performance (which means garrenteed latencies, not quickness) with some patches. You'll see it in smart phones and other items. Developers using Linux with it's many variations, commercial and otherwise, outnumber Windows CE and embedded NT users. (VXWorks outpaces it by a wide margin still, though)

It's used in the majority of web servers, it's the second most common system you'll find in servers.. corporate and otherwise. It's going to be difficult to find a corporation that isn't using Linux in some capacity. It's rapidly becoming a standard feature in most datacenters.

It's gaining popularity in telephony, it'll probably be the OS that is used to form the backbone of the the future VoIP world.. just like Unix was used to create the internet.

It's the most popular OS your going to find in hollywood studios as it took over the roles that SGI machines used to play.

Linux dominates the supercomputer and high performance scientific computing. Weather modeling, drug manufacturing, engineering simulations, protein folding, nuclear weapons research, etc etc. Linux clusters form over 70% of the computers that are ranked in the Top500 most power computers in the world (by floating point performance). (Linux is used in the #1 most powerfull floating point calculating computer in the world.. BlueGene/L, as well as #2, #4, #5, #8, #9, #11, #12, #13, #19..) The combination of Linux and commodity-based clustering technology has made HPC affordable for a much wider audiance then what was previously possible.

Stuff like that.

Desktops/PCs aren't even the most common computers everywere.. embedded systems are. I beleive by a long shot, too.

Computers that need operating systems are more then just desktops. Desktops just serve a big role that most people tend to deal with on a day to day basis.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: CTho9305
"
Program supoport lacking - similar to above. There is no equivalent of Microsoft Visual C++ for *nix... development & debugging tools suck on *nix
Hardware support lacking - the latest and greatest doesn't work as well on *nix. With nvidia cards, you either fight with the binary driver and deal with the incessant crashes it brings, or use the OSS driver and deal with awful performance. From what I've heard, ATI isn't that much better.

Yeah, programmer hate linux....

um, if you consider VC++ to be the definitive programming tool, which most people don't.


it took me 30 minutes to install the AT driver in Ubuntu...up from the 10 minutes to install/reboot in windows for my NVIDIA. H/W Support is much BETTER in linux for the most part. Exception is craptastic 802.11 vendors like broadcom. See the reference to F6 above. I don't have floppies anymore, and haven't for years.


If you are a gamer, don't switch to linux, period, it's not worth it to you. If you do any other tasks, there is probably 10 open source apps that can replace what you use on windows easily, often better, and for a better price.

 

[Nothinman]

Program supoport lacking - similar to above. There is no equivalent of Microsoft Visual C++ for *nix... development & debugging tools suck on *nix

KDevelop is close, have you tried it?

Hardware support lacking - the latest and greatest doesn't work as well on *nix. With nvidia cards, you either fight with the binary driver and deal with the incessant crashes it brings, or use the OSS driver and deal with awful performance. From what I've heard, ATI isn't that much better.

A) That's the hardware manufacturer's fault
B) I've had very few problems with the nVidia driver. The only real issues I have are PM related and most people aren't trying to use swsusp or suspend2 on their Linux machines yet.

And I would say that ATI is probably worse, I haven't loked at a recent release but their past Linux drivers were crap.

Bill is rich. That's enough to persuade me

And by using his product you're making him richer, not vice versa.

No but have you noticed that more and more cars have the auto stick feature (you use the gear shift to down shift and up shift the gears instead of using a traditional clutch)?
Instead I see manual transmission the same way I see the command line, those that are die hard car fans or in this case die hard computer users will prefer manual transmission or in this case the command line.
If a small percentage of drivers use manual transmission does that mean car manufactures should spend more time in developing cars to please them? No it doesn't and car manufactures agree (see above example as proof).

Your logic is backwards, car manufacturers have spent a lot of money developing SMG transmissions. You think it was cheaper for them to remove the clutch and still let the driver change gears?

However if linux developers have the main goal of pleasing the minority then they should continue what they are doing. And in the end they may create a great OS that's capable of many things but it wont be the best OS.

Most Linux developers aren't concerned with pleasing anyone except themselves, they work on the kernel because they like to program and they use the software they're writing. If you're worried about the end user experience you should be looking at the Xorg, Gnome, KDE, O, etc developers because they're the ones actually developing the UI that is used on most Linux installations. And they're not even limited to Linux, most of their software runs on every type of unix and sometimes other OSes like Windows and VMS.

One thing that I like about windows, XP pro in specific, is that it's actually quite a powerful OS but at the same time it's pretty easy to do the basics on it. If I want to do more advanced things with windows I can and more complex tasks are simply extensions of basic features.
For example: For the basic user loging on to their computer doesn't require much, however the more advanced they get the more options they might start playing with, anything from fast user switching, creating passwords, enabling ctrl+alt+del for logon, etc.
The point being is that it has basic functions but still adds those more advanced functions for the more advanced user. Windows is by no means perfect, like linux it's organization needs work and like all OS's it also lacks consistency.

I would say Linux is about the same, have you used a recent distribution?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Program supoport lacking - similar to above. There is no equivalent of Microsoft Visual C++ for *nix... development & debugging tools suck on *nix

KDevelop is close, have you tried it?

And Komodo, Eclispe, MonoDevelop, Borland...and others. There are lots of IDE's to choose from. I'd expect that Kdevelop would be a very popular choice for C++ developers.

Although most people would probably still prefer to use Vim or Emacs.. If you think those are just editors then you'd never seen them in at their full capacity.. syntax lighting, autocomplete, ctags, etc etc.

Also you have situations were you have things like Gnome. Gnome considures itself not just a desktop.. but a entire development enviroment.

A person could, if they needed custom apps quick, use it as a rapid application development enviroment.

For instance you can take Python, which is suppose to be the program language that is best for pumping out relatively bug-free programs in the smallest amount of time, and the Glade gui-based xml-using GTK interface builder and get programs out and usefull in a very short amount of time at a very low expense.

Or you could use C# or Java or any other language that has good GTK bindings and Glade support.

You can tie it into whatever database stuff you want.. Postgresql, Mysql, Oracle, embedded Firebird, Firebird superserver, sleepycat db2, or probably even MS SQL.

 

[CTho9305]

KDevelop is close, have you tried it?

When we ran KDE tools at work in the GNOME environment, they had a tendency to cause stuff to crash. That's another reason not to use it. And I have not tried it. I don't know if it's installed anywhere... mabye I'll try it if I find it on a machine somewhere.

A) That's the hardware manufacturer's fault

Why should I care whose fault it is? It doesn't work on Linux, it works on Windows. That's a valid reason.

Although most people would probably still prefer to use Vim or Emacs.. If you think those are just editors then you'd never seen them in at their full capacity.. syntax lighting, autocomplete, ctags, etc etc.

Autocomplete? That I've never seen, and it's one of the reasons I prefer normal IDEs to text editors that have syntax highlighting and tag closing.

Most Linux developers aren't concerned with pleasing anyone except themselves, they work on the kernel because they like to program and they use the software they're writing. If you're worried about the end user experience you should be looking at the Xorg, Gnome, KDE, O, etc developers because they're the ones actually developing the UI that is used on most Linux installations.

Modern Gnome is aimed at even dumber users than OS X - it's difficult to impossible to change the vast majority of things I've wanted to change. Old Gnome was crashy, but at least it was configurable and would do what you want.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

KDevelop is close, have you tried it?

When we ran KDE tools at work in the GNOME environment, they had a tendency to cause stuff to crash. That's another reason not to use it. And I have not tried it. I don't know if it's installed anywhere... mabye I'll try it if I find it on a machine somewhere.

A) That's the hardware manufacturer's fault

Why should I care whose fault it is? It doesn't work on Linux, it works on Windows. That's a valid reason.

It's just you have to pay attention to whome you buy from.

It doesn't make sense to buy hardware from manufacturers that have crappy drivers when there are other hardware that is easily aviable that costs the same amount or less.

Of course if you already own something.. that's to bad. Most everything will work.. it just takes a bit of effort. Of course this is indeed a barrier to acceptance.. but a bigger one is that nobody big ships Linux pre-installed on the desktop. If that happens then hardware support issues are essentially a non-issue.

It's one of those catch 22 situations at the moment.

Although most people would probably still prefer to use Vim or Emacs.. If you think those are just editors then you'd never seen them in at their full capacity.. syntax lighting, autocomplete, ctags, etc etc.

Autocomplete? That I've never seen, and it's one of the reasons I prefer normal IDEs to text editors that have syntax highlighting and tag closing.

In any relatively recent version of Vim.. Open up a file, pick a long word or function or whatever that exists in the file, or any open files, type the first few letters and hit ctl-p. It autocompletes to the first match. You can do it again and again till you get the match you want. Hit ctrl-n to go back through the word search.

If you want to use a dictionary of stuff to be included in your autocomplete search stuff you can go (in command mode):
:set dictionary=file

There are a few other things beyond that, I beleive.

With Emacs you'd have to program it yourself.. which is why people use Emacs I guess.
A example:
http://www.irishblogs.ie/?p=8227

Stuff like that.

 

[CTho9305]

In any relatively recent version of Vim.. Open up a file, pick a long word or function or whatever that exists in the file, or any open files, type the first few letters and hit ctl-p. It autocompletes to the first match. You can do it again and again till you get the match you want. Hit ctrl-n to go back through the word search.

In an IDE, it will autocomplete anything in the project, and any available external APIs, and show me parameters to functions.

 

[Nothinman]

When we ran KDE tools at work in the GNOME environment, they had a tendency to cause stuff to crash. That's another reason not to use it. And I have not tried it. I don't know if it's installed anywhere... mabye I'll try it if I find it on a machine somewhere.

I have _never_ seen a KDE app crash when run under Gnome or vice versa. But I avoid KDE apps whenever possible just because I don't like QT.

Why should I care whose fault it is? It doesn't work on Linux, it works on Windows. That's a valid reason.

Because if the hardware manufacturers aren't going to cooperate there's not much you can do, it takes a lot longer to reverse engineer something than to write a driver from docs. Do you have the same complaint about Apple because most hardware vendors don't support them?

Autocomplete? That I've never seen, and it's one of the reasons I prefer normal IDEs to text editors that have syntax highlighting and tag closing.

Hell even vim can do autocomplete. There's no intellisense in vim for function params or anything, but that's minor IMO.

Modern Gnome is aimed at even dumber users than OS X - it's difficult to impossible to change the vast majority of things I've wanted to change. Old Gnome was crashy, but at least it was configurable and would do what you want.

Yea, I don't like the extra work they're putting into making changing the defaults so difficult either but IMO it's still better than KDE.

 

[ivwshane]

All I hear are excuses for who's fault it isn't, the end user doesn't care, they just want something that works. And they want that same experience no matter what pc they are using.

I know linux can do everything windows can do and more but it can't do it without the user having to do a ton of research to find out what hardware is compatible, what GUI they should use, and then try and figure out what distro is right for them.

I consider myself an advanced computer user and I fix and help a lot of friends and family as well as my coworkers computers, do you know how much work it would be to have them switch from windows to linux? It would be a lot harder than them upgrading to windows vista.

Your logic is backwards, car manufacturers have spent a lot of money developing SMG transmissions. You think it was cheaper for them to remove the clutch and still let the driver change gears?

Who said anything about being cheaper? They do it to appeal to the masses because people want to have a little bit more control of their car sometimes but not all the time. And I'll take a wild guess that in the long run it is cheaper to have one single platform (when it comes to the transmission) then having a separate assembly line for manual and auto.

Most Linux developers aren't concerned with pleasing anyone except themselves, they work on the kernel because they like to program and they use the software they're writing.

That's the problem. Have you ever built a house where the architect and the builder don't work together? Or have you seen a game where the game designer didn't work with the programmer? The results aren't as good had they been working together.
The same goes for software, if you aren't seeing the big picture then you are missing the point and maybe I'm missing the big picture but I thought that a software developers ultimate goal was to create something that many people will use and want to use, after all the more people you have using your software the more money you make. And this isn't just a linux issue, some windows programs and apple programs are designed quite poorly from an end users standpoint.

I'll give you an example of why programmers should focus on the end user.
Let's look at microsofts Word program (and probably any and every other word processing program out there). No one can deny that MS Word is a pretty powerful word processor, it can do a lot. But did you know that a majority of users only use about 10% of it's features? So what's the point of having such a powerful piece of software if no one will ever use most of it's features? Do you think MS should just remove all of those unused features? Microsoft doesn't think so. Instead what MS is focusing on for it's future version of office 12 is a user experience that makes those unused tools more accessible. Whether they can pull this off or not only time will tell. The point is microsoft came to a point and it was to either keep wasting resources on features that a majority of people don't use or make it so that people will and can use those features and do it easily.

And whether you hate them or love them you can't deny that microsoft must be doing something right and if they see an issue with their programs and are willing to fix them or at least try then don't you think linux developers would want to do the same? After all, in the end isn't it really about linux vs microsoft?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

In any relatively recent version of Vim.. Open up a file, pick a long word or function or whatever that exists in the file, or any open files, type the first few letters and hit ctl-p. It autocompletes to the first match. You can do it again and again till you get the match you want. Hit ctrl-n to go back through the word search.

In an IDE, it will autocomplete anything in the project, and any available external APIs, and show me parameters to functions.

Autocomplete? That I've never seen, and it's one of the reasons I prefer normal IDEs to text editors that have syntax highlighting and tag closing.

Hell even vim can do autocomplete. There's no intellisense in vim for function params or anything, but that's minor IMO.

There are people that made intellesense for Vim.
http://insenvim.sourceforge.net/

It's currently only for Windows, but they'll help anybody who is willing to get it to work in Linux.

I don't think there is a big desire for this sort of thing... but whatever. If you want it in Linux you could have it, if you thought you needed it enough.

As for Gnome.. they are trying the 'sensible defaults' route. It's still pretty maliable and you have more standardized interfaces now then they used to have. Standards for menu entries, standards for window managers.. that sort of thing. You can swap out rox-filer for nautilus if you feel like it, or use any gnome program outside of a gnome enviroment, or change out the window manager. They have all sorts of weird stuff like that.

 

[Kibbo86]

2 cents here:

I have a broadcom chipset in my wireless adapter. I wanted to learn how to use linux, but having to reboot everytime I needed to google something was just too much of a hassle.

I will come back, someday. Either when I can afford to waste money replacing a perfectly good adapter, or when I move to a place where I can set up my network differently.