I tried to install Slackware, a form of Linux that's supposedly fairly compatible with games and the like. In particular, I wanted to set the system up to emulate SNES and NES games. But there's very little that's intuitive about switching from Windows to Linux. All the terminology is different. There are "kernels," which you can compile yourself. The graphical user interface (GUI) is independent of the operating system (think Windows 3.1 and DOS). The most annoying this is that configuring system settings seems to be done almost entirely at the command prompt. Hey, I used to use DOS, but this is 2006 and I like my control panel. So to configure my video card, I had to go online and look for the command that I could type in to load drivers. Same for my NIC card. I had to know my monitor's horizontal and vertical sync rates, for Pete's sake!
Yeah, I know that Linux users hold people like me in complete scorn - you n00b! Go back to your Micro$oft products! You expect everything to just work like Windows! Here's a sample from a comment thread about Linux v. Windows:
I did an "experiment" over the weekend and asked a friend to launch Firefox from Gnome.
He blankly looked at the screen as said: "Where the hell is the Start button?"...completely neglecting the fact that it clearly says "Applications" up top.
He'll probably be the same person to flame Linux on a comment thread because he can't figure out how to perform a simple function.
But if free software wants to provide a viable alternative to the default option for the general population, it has to be easy. Think Tmobile to your Sprint, Firefox to your Internet Explorer, or AVG FREE Antivirus to your Norton Antivirus. The learning curves are shallow, making switching easy. The general interface is pretty much identical.
Instead, switching from Windows to Linux is like switching from English to Spanish. GUIs become command prompts. Start menus become something else. Double clicks become single clicks. And a lot of Linux users not only expect me to want to learn Spanish, but teach it to myself?
Maybe I picked the wrong Linux package and I should try Redhat, which I've heard is much easier to install. Or I could pick up a library book about Linux to at least get a handle on the commands. And I'll probably try, because - if nothing else - I'd like to avoid a $100 Windows upgrade fee. But until there's a way to install a Linux OS and GUI by primarily clicking "I agree" and "next" - or an English-Spanish interpreter provided for every user - it's going to be a Micro$soft's world.
Update 2/28/07: As I commented below, I've successfully installed Ubuntu Linux on the computer I was working on two months ago and it was an entirely different experience. As the Anonymous (and blessed) commenter noted, Ubuntu is the user-friendly way to go. I've been helped along a lot by Lifehacker's regular updates on how to improve Ubuntu.
Disclaimer: there are many, many lovely Linux users out there who have spent countless hours creating FAQs and online guides for people like me. You're great and I'm sorry you're in such shitty company.
2 comments:
Well.... you might be more successful by not starting with an aggressively negative attitude. That said, you chose a difficult 'distribution' of Linux as your first one. You might try Ubuntu, since it was designed for ease of use and a new users of Linux. I linked to someone who just started using it so you can see his experiences, too.
Thanks for your comment! You were absolutely right about Ubuntu, installation was a snap. There are still some parts that are confusing for me, but it's much easier to get than Slackware! I'm officially switching from XP to Ubuntu for that machine!
Post a Comment