• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Is Linux Ready For Prime Time?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Bad Maniac

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2001
This article I think was a very good example of how far Linux has come, however calling it 90% ready for prime time is to me complete ignorance.
Sure it's 90% ready for prime time to a guy with eleven degrees in IT and stuff. But what about granny Joe who wants a first PC to search for knitting online? Linux is still too technical for Joe average, without a shade of a doubt.

Try plugging in your cheap Belkin USB Wireless adapter in your Linux box and we'll see how prime time it is. Yeah I tried the very same, not a pleasant experience.

Linux HAS come a huge far way, but it's not 90% ready for Joe's primetime. All technical details need to be totally removed or hidden. Any hint of a text prompt needs to go, and the fanboys need to burn. Then maybe it's ready.


I'd also like to leave you with one last word to explain why Linux is far from ready for prime time:
Gaming.

Thank you.
 
I'm getting a little tired of the articles written by people who throw in copies of distros that have been well criticized for refusing to change certain aspects of their functionality to a system that is more user friendly.

Lets face the facts. Games aside, linux is extremely close to being ready for everyone's every day use. Ubuntu would surpass that mark - if and only if it wasn't based on Debian. Debian's apt-get repository package management system is a step forward, leaps and bounds ahead of Mandrake/SuSE/Fedora and RPMs...but they need to move to a central system like Gentoo's (like FreeBSDs).

Portage is capable of making Linux ultra user friendly. It has most of the software you could ever want, and I don't have to hunt to down a repository that has the software I want like I do with Debian/Ubuntu. It's only fault is that there are not many binary packages (that don't have to be compiled). They do have several already - and more could easily be added.

As far as your granny Joe analogy goes ... a Linux I described could actually make her life EASIER. On Windows ... she has to have a Firewall to protect her - one that bugs her about allowing her AOL access to the internet...she has to have an anti-virus and update it regularly...she has to run Windows Update regularly or fear being hit by the latest trojan to take advantage of a bug MS has known about for years but refuses to fix...she even has to PAY for it all! With linux, the OS is free, the anti-virus would be unnecessary - but free if she decided she wanted it anyway...and all of the rest of her software would be free.
 
I'm not big on the arguments that Linux doesn't require AV/Firewall software. The simple fact is that virus makers; either out of ego, malice, or some other driving factor, want to hit as many computers as possible. That requirement alone is the reason you see so few on Linux or even OSX. Now if/when Linux becomes mainstream (IE >%25 of homes PCs run it) you'll see a major uptick in the amount of malicious software (spyware, virus, worms, etc) written for that OS. Just because they aren't there now doesn't mean they won't be there a few years from now.

Oh, but the OS is open source. So when an exploit is found you have an entire community working to fix it. True, but that's a double edge sword. Since the OS is open source, every possible exploit is out in plain day for anyone with enough ambition to find. So while it does have some upsides (free is always good), saying you won't need AV/Firewall/Spyware software is pretty short sighted. When it becomes favorable for the people who write malicious software to start writing it for Linux, they will.
 
maybe this is just my ignorance here, but it seems to me as soon as linux goes "prime time" or a large percentage of people are using it, so follow the crackers and malicious code writers ready to exploit the new flock. besides that, the damage is done, so to speak, in the public view that they need all this security crap. i mean if say my mom wanted to use linux from now on, one of her first questions/impulses is "how do i set-up norton on this thing". people will want to put that stuff on their computers still, it makes em feel safe. and where theres needs and wants theres some guy(s) there fulfulling them, for a price. i doubt most people would even realize its(linux) free. theyed still go to bestbuy or wherever and buy it. pay for it.
 
Like the others say, if Linux goes Primetime so will Linux hacking and Linux viruses.

That said, seeing how awful Vista security is, Linux better be ready for prime. Legit AV software can't gain access directly to hardware in Vista, but Illegit software can easily circumvent vista security already. Symantec and McAffee recently both highlighted this problem, and MS responded with total silence...
So if MS cuts XP support and Vista isn't sorted out, Linux will be the only alternative.

But still, gaming will suffer. Portability needs to become a top priority in the game industry. If Linux played games, I'd be all over it.
 
Not to mention I have yet to ever got a linux install to go off without a hitch. I have tried Suse 9 and 10 , Linspire, Mandrake, Mandriva and now xubuntu. There is ALWAYS some piece of hardware that won't work or worse than that the install hangs for no appearant reason or just won't continue. In fact I am trying to load xubuntu and have only got one pc out of four to make it all the way into the live cd.
 
maybe this is just my ignorance here, but it seems to me as soon as linux goes "prime time" or a large percentage of people are using it, so follow the crackers and malicious code writers ready to exploit the new flock.
Well, that sort of depends on how the user-friendly versions are implemented. The simple fact the the normal user doesn't automatically have root priviledges makes Linux much more secure. It's not *just* a marketshare kind of thing - the way Linux is designed is inherently more secure. I didn't say completely secure, now...
 
Bad Maniac said:
Try plugging in your cheap Belkin USB Wireless adapter in your Linux box and we'll see how prime time it is. Yeah I tried the very same, not a pleasant experience.

I'd also like to leave you with one last word to explain why Linux is far from ready for prime time:
Gaming.

Thank you.

Your first comment is seriously flawed as by the same method you would conclude that Microsoft WindowsXP is also not ready for the prime time as when you plug a SATA hard disk into a Windows PC you do not have a pleasant experience.
What the Microsoft SATA situation and your experience with the Belkin Wireless Adapter have is common with each other is the fact that they have nothing to do with the OS - the problem is related to driver support from the product manufacturer, nothing more and nothing less !!

In terms of worldwide sales of computers, (office, mobile, servers etc) the gaming market is minimal...(expecially when compared to console gaming)... Its worth noting at this point that the macOSX platform which also has poor gaming is steadily increasing its worldwide market share which currently suggests that this is not something that ceases enterance into the market.
 
I'd recommend trying PCLinuxOS- the latest release (.93a Big Daddy) is very easy to install, even a "Granny" could do it.

I won't knock other distributions (as I've tried many) but only hope that those frustrated by difficult installs will give it a try.

If a member cannot burn the file to a disc, PM and I'll mail one to you.

http://www.pclinuxos.com/page.php?7
 
Not sure where the Sata drive on Windows comment came from I do that daily at work for backups and I've never had any problems, it works fine on XP SP2. Only problem I ever had was on 2K, where I needed a driver, but that was it.

Yeah ok, so the USB thing maybe wasn't the best example, but it was what I came up with at the time, get over it. Want to pick a fight? Ok, go play Oblivion or Call of Juarez on your linux box.

Nitpicking isn't going to change the fact that Linux has come a long way, but still has a long way to go. And as long as Microsoft has money, they'll stay the top OS for gaming, so only very few games will ever have *nix builds.
I want this to change as much as the rest of you, but I just can't see it happening anytime soon.
 
I think it is hard to say that a distro like Ubuntu which is very easy to install, use, and manage isn't good enough for an average computer user. They can do all their email, web browsing, office work, music, etc, etc, and have fun by playing the games already available with Linux (open source and commercial).
 
From using Ubuntu personally I don't think it's ready. Things like changing repository list, or installing programs through terminal is not what most consider easy. Why would the avg joe try linux when simple things like listening to MP3s is not possible (without codec) or where you cannot run your favorite programs.(.exe) I have been using Ubuntu purly to learn, and so far I am finding it partially a pain. There are alternatives to every program but so far they seem a bit weak compared to the real version. Then I keep having hardware problems, my volume controls randomly work. A lot of the problems I have with Linux are not it's fualt. Simply though it is smaller, the programs are not being designed to run on it. So stable or not, it's still not friendly for everday use in the world we are in.
 
Bad Maniac said:
Not sure where the Sata drive on Windows comment came from I do that daily at work for backups and I've never had any problems, it works fine on XP SP2. Only problem I ever had was on 2K, where I needed a driver, but that was it.

Yeah ok, so the USB thing maybe wasn't the best example, but it was what I came up with at the time, get over it. Want to pick a fight? Ok, go play Oblivion or Call of Juarez on your linux box

The SATA comment was attempted to clarify that even Windows encounters issues with hardware, it is well known that XP has issues with SATA support out of the box which can clearly be seen by googling for 'Windows SATA Issues' and as such the problem encountered with this hardware with Windows is driver related as is the USB issue with Linux... it simply states nothing at all about the OS but more about industry support.

juvenile comments suggesting that I 'get over' expressing an opinion other than yours are really not warrented and offer nothing to further the discussion, they could also be considered flamebaiting which is against forum rules, at no time did I express a need to 'pick a fight' with anyone yet the evidence you present to back up your statements is seriously flawed because known facts such as the Apple Mac for many years has been the dominent platform in graphical and artwork industry yet this has poor gaming support... this alone suggests that Gaming is not a concern for all users of computing systems. Other information such as my local university having over 700 computer systems of various Operating Systems with no games enforces the point that games in terms of the PC market is a very small slice

I neither any games on my Linux box or Windows boxes in my family... We have a Playstation for that purpose and this is the same situation for many offices and home users worldwide which is why suggesting that a OS is not ready for the prime time by using gaming as an example is simply flawed.

Nitpicking isn't going to change the fact that Linux has come a long way, but still has a long way to go. And as long as Microsoft has money, they'll stay the top OS for gaming, so only very few games will ever have *nix builds.
I want this to change as much as the rest of you, but I just can't see it happening anytime soon.

Expressing an opinion is not 'Nitpicking' yet I have no doubt that Linux has come a long way and in some manner has even surpassed techically what Windows is.. This Thread I started a while back expresses this view and states why.. But do I personally believe that Linux is ready for the current Windows consumer, of course not although for reasons different to yours.
 
I would guess that the average home computer user does a few things with their computer-

1- Surf the web
2- Use an Email program
3- Edit photos
4- Use a wordprocessor

More advanced users might edit video, create web pages, edit music.

Linux can do all of the above, and do it quite well.

And then there are the gamers- high end hardware/software users, a segment dominated by a MS based operating system.

So the average user, IMHO, can use a Linux distribution, it just needs to be bundled correctly as an OS. When we start seeing more OEMs using Linux, the "scarryness" of Linux will fade. But it will take time.
 
Bad Maniac said:
This article I think was a very good example of how far Linux has come, however calling it 90% ready for prime time is to me complete ignorance.
Sure it's 90% ready for prime time to a guy with eleven degrees in IT and stuff. But what about granny Joe who wants a first PC to search for knitting online? Linux is still too technical for Joe average, without a shade of a doubt.

Try plugging in your cheap Belkin USB Wireless adapter in your Linux box and we'll see how prime time it is. Yeah I tried the very same, not a pleasant experience.

Linux HAS come a huge far way, but it's not 90% ready for Joe's primetime. All technical details need to be totally removed or hidden. Any hint of a text prompt needs to go, and the fanboys need to burn. Then maybe it's ready.


I'd also like to leave you with one last word to explain why Linux is far from ready for prime time:
Gaming.

Thank you.


I think Linux has become alot more user-friendly, depending on the version you choose.I would say its ready for prime time.China has adopted it as their national OS, and developments in Linux are happening more and more frequently.I think only people that cant use their PC's "outside the box" would have a tough time with Linux.A first time user would pick it up just as easily as they would pick up Windows.Linux seemed easy enough to learn in school, and repetition just makes it easier to learn.Forget this codependent relationship between Windows users and Windows, and shuttle in the OS of the future---Linux.
 
I agree with unseen on the gaming comments, however that leaves the business users. I have tried every version of openoffice in hopes that our compnay could start saving money over buying MS Office. I have several employee's that expressed an interest in testing for me in their daily activities. It never takes more than an hour after the install of OpenOffice for them to be e-mailing me about files and especially templates that do not open correctly with openoffice. I realize that openoffice is not all of linux but for a typical business user it is the primary function of their pc.

P.S. I am usuing OpenOffice on windows XP machines. If the windows version has issues that the Linux version does not then I would love to know. It might be worth setting up a few users in Dualboot with a Linux OS.
I really want to use Linux in the office , I just have to know it will work for everyone.
 
hkgonra said:
I have tried every version of openoffice in hopes that our compnay could start saving money over buying MS Office. I have several employee's that expressed an interest in testing for me in their daily activities. It never takes more than an hour after the install of OpenOffice for them to be e-mailing me about files and especially templates that do not open correctly with openoffice.

No im afraid that this situation is also with the Linux version of OpenOffice... The worst thing is Excel which in all honesty does not translate to OpenOffice at all well.
The biggest issue that I have to resolve is respective to templates that contain macro's as the languages are different between OpenOffice and MSOffice. ODC compatibility between applications should help with this issue greatly and further the compatibility between Office Applications. Here is a good article explaining how OpenDocument will help things in the future. Some interesting perspectives on why we should not use Word formats can be found here and here

I attempt to educate people rather than get them onto OpenOffice and give them the choice of what applications they use and with what formats, you can even use Microsoft Word with OpenDoc, I often export templates to OpenDocument format using the OpenDoc MSOffice filter which can be found here which is actually sponsored by Microsoft as noted in this report... its not perfect but its getting there.

Its also worth considering looking at StarOffice the sister product to OpenOffice which you have to pay for, however you recieve support and Improved Microsoft Office compatibility and conversion.... I have this and produce OpenOffice compatible templates with it from Microsoft Templates (however if the template has macro's you still have issues)
 
Back