Favorite OS?

[Lunaryn]

Re: Favorite OS?

Nope and nope. Linux is a kernel, nothing more. GNU is a project that encompasses a whole lot of different applications. GNU/Linux is called such because most of the user land are GNU applications over the Linux kernel. However you can get all these GNU components on Solaris for instance, and some ship by default, but you don't call it GNU/SunOS/Solaris.
GNU is working on their own OS called the Hurd. It will not use Linux as a kernel.

If you want to get pedantic, Linux isn't a kernel. The term microkernel was actually invented to combat the language imprecision that resulted from large monolithic system code like Linux and the system-space equivalents of earlier UNIX systems being incorrectly called kernels.

Linux does the job of getting the hardware functioning, constructing a user-mode exectution environment supporting the nice things we all expect like preemptive multitasking, exports system calls to do the tricky low-level system I/O and cope with the requirements of actual devices. It meets the hardware developer's definition of Operating System.

The GNU System does the job of providing a complete toolset and development environment to support the needs of the user (end-user or developer) to interact with the system and perform useful tasks. It meets the application developer's definition of Operating System.

Arguably, to meet the average end-user's definition of Operating System, you do have to get into stuff like GNOME or KDE. But the term Linux is iconic here, and most distributions try fairly hard to make sure things look close enough to Windows that no one thinks too hard about the differences from one UI to another.

The GNU system is arguably the more confusing point in this chain because it was created with the notion of coopting any piece of a working system which was sufficient to the task and free software, so a complete GNU system is comprised of many many non-GNU packages. If Linux had been around when 'kernel' development was contemplated, it would likely have been coopted at least in part. (Richard Stallman has admitted that the Hurd departed significantly from the GNU Project's normal approach of trying to get a replacement written as quickly and easily as possible by going with known methods and techniques, instead shooting for an elegant but previously unrealized design which has proven to be very difficult to implement.) The reasons Linux is not recognized as a GNU System kernel are primarily legal in nature, as Linux employs licensing practices that the GNU Project finds of questionable legal status (The GNU Project/Free Software Foundation actually has a General Counsel to keep track of issues like this, unlike most individual free software projects).

[Mhurron]

Re: Favorite OS?

If you want to get pedantic, Linux isn't a kernel. The term microkernel was actually invented to combat the language imprecision that resulted from large monolithic system code like Linux and the system-space equivalents of earlier UNIX systems being incorrectly called kernels.

You really don't know what you're talking about. Linux is very much a kernel. A monolithic kernel to be specific.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microkernel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolithic_kernel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_...ter_science%29

Linux is just the kernel. The C libraries, compiler and build tools, cli shell and most of the userland apps in a distribution are GNU software, KDE, GNOME and XFCE are desktop environments. WindowMaker, blackbox and the like are window managers. X11 is a windowing system. These are what they are. You can call them anything you want, but anything other then the above is wrong.

And, BTW, why does some crazy bearded man keep calling it GNU/Linux?

[Lunaryn]

Re: Favorite OS?

Linux has never been as user friendly as Windows, even with a shell like KDE. Need the latest drivers? Better wait a few months...

To be fair, this is a question of hardware being Linux-friendly more than Linux being user-friendly. If you're targetting desktop users and you only care about reaching a majority of them, proper Windows drivers will get you 92% or so of the market. Less if you don't manage to make them fairly version-agnostic. This is every bit as much a natural function of a such a near-monopoly as the kind of mass-vulnerability we see in systems where you can co-opt thousands of home PCs to perform Distributed Denial of Service attacks and new worms spread quickly through the Internet in waves upon release. Try looking up the term 'monoculture'.

Do users get frustrated because of things like missing drivers? Hell yes. But users get frustrated because of a lot of things. I couldn't even give you an estimate of how many things frustrate me a month on all sorts of systems. It's merely a question of which frustrations people simply learn to accept, and to a lesser extent where they put the blame for the rest. Lack of analysis in the latter may be common and natural, but it isn't useful.

[HairdewX]

Re: Favorite OS?

To be fair, this is a question of hardware being Linux-friendly more than Linux being user-friendly.

In regards to the platform that Linux runs on, being hardware-friendly and user-friendly goes hand-in-hand. If Linux only came bundled and only worked with set hardware, such as Mac OSX, then they can be seperated easily.

Even then, having to know about command line arguments, having 20 different programs that all do the same things which can confuse people, having to compile things to use them, having to mess with the kernel, etc is not even close to user friendly.

If you're targetting desktop users and you only care about reaching a majority of them, proper Windows drivers will get you 92% or so of the market. Less if you don't manage to make them fairly version-agnostic. This is every bit as much a natural function of a such a near-monopoly as the kind of mass-vulnerability we see in systems where you can co-opt thousands of home PCs to perform Distributed Denial of Service attacks and new worms spread quickly through the Internet in waves upon release. Try looking up the term 'monoculture'.

What does this have to do with what we are talking about? We are talking about what is our favorite OS and why, not about any security vulnerabilities and possibilities of the masses getting affected.

Do users get frustrated because of things like missing drivers? Hell yes. But users get frustrated because of a lot of things. I couldn't even give you an estimate of how many things frustrate me a month on all sorts of systems. It's merely a question of which frustrations people simply learn to accept, and to a lesser extent where they put the blame for the rest.

Tolerating is one thing, but if another product does what I want it to do and better than the one I am using now, then I am going to switch to the other product.

Driver compatibility is an issue to me. I want an OS on my laptop that can utilize my wireless internet card. I want an OS that can play the games I want. I want to browse the internet, watch media, and listen to my mp3's. Linux cannot satisfy all my wants, so I simply will not use it and I'll use something else that can.

It's not even a matter of learning to accept frustration. Why should I do that when it comes to something as simple as my computer?

Lack of analysis in the latter may be common and natural, but it isn't useful.

Lack of analysis? hehe, you probably don't want to know what I do for a living...

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

Linux only came bundled and only worked with set hardware, such as Mac OSX, then they can be seperated easily.

Look up compatibility lists and compare- then you're almost sure to get something that will work. http://www.linux-on-laptops.com/ is a good place to look for laptops.

You can also buy computers with linux preinstalled, such as from System76.

being hardware-friendly and user-friendly goes hand-in-hand.

Disagree. If push comes to shove, a hardware manufacturer can shove a round chip into a square driver, and as long as everything works alright in Pretty-Graphics-Land, and the End User doesn't have a clue, it will all be fine.

Such as in Windows. When I tried to install it (before I got sick of it and chucked it), I had to install graphics drivers to play games. This involved a whole bunch of needless effort and drama, which lead to my getting sick and chucking it. However, if the end user wasn't trying to run games- such as the Grandma-User scenario, it never would've come up.

[Gentoo]

Re: Favorite OS?

Where's VMS on this list? VSOS? Heck, where's Solaris?

Driver compatibility is an issue to me. I want an OS on my laptop that can utilize my wireless internet card. I want an OS that can play the games I want. I want to browse the internet, watch media, and listen to my mp3's. Linux cannot satisfy all my wants, so I simply will not use it and I'll use something else that can.

Interesting that you picked that those. I feel exactly the same, which is why Linux is on my primary computer (laptop).

When I got my laptop, Linux (in the Ubuntu flavor) was the only OS that allowed me to instantly use the internet (via my wireless network card), listen to my mp3s, oggs, and flacs -- straight off the CD.

I find that about the only thing that Linux lacks is a really cushy development environment (that is not to say it lacks a robust tool chain) --- even at the kernel level. In this area, I have to give Windows the nod.

Even then, having to know about command line arguments, having 20 different programs that all do the same things which can confuse people, having to compile things to use them, having to mess with the kernel, etc is not even close to user friendly.

Just because you type the comand in via Start->Run instead of firing up a shell doesn't mean you don't have to know about the command line in Windows.

I'd wager for number of times I've had no other choice but to get into a shell on a *nix (or a VMS ) is easily exceeded by the number of times I've had to open up the DOS-box in Windows, or type in a command via the graphical interface to the command line (Start, run), or navigate around in that application that is the definition of user-friendliness called regedit.

To echo Yellow Mage, every OS sucks. They all have warts, and usually comes down to user perception which one seems less unslightly. For every story that someone comes up with about why <insert OS name here> is [just] better than <insert other OS name here>, there's someone with a counter story.

[HairdewX]

Re: Favorite OS?

Look up compatibility lists and compare- then you're almost sure to get something that will work. http://www.linux-on-laptops.com/ is a good place to look for laptops.

You can also buy computers with linux preinstalled, such as from System76.

Yeah, but the fact that a person would have to know detailed information about their hardware and have to research compatibility already puts the OS at a disadvantage in terms of user friendlyness.

Disagree. If push comes to shove, a hardware manufacturer can shove a round chip into a square driver, and as long as everything works alright in Pretty-Graphics-Land, and the End User doesn't have a clue, it will all be fine.

Exactly, all the user should have to do is click install, next, next,... next, finish, and be done.

Such as in Windows. When I tried to install it (before I got sick of it and chucked it), I had to install graphics drivers to play games. This involved a whole bunch of needless effort and drama, which lead to my getting sick and chucking it. However, if the end user wasn't trying to run games- such as the Grandma-User scenario, it never would've come up.

That scenario happens less in Windows than it does in Linux.

Where's VMS on this list? VSOS? Heck, where's Solaris?

I've used Solaris, and meh, still doesn't do all that I want

Interesting that you picked that those. I feel exactly the same, which is why Linux is on my primary computer (laptop).

Play games too (Wine anyone?)

When I got my laptop, Linux (in the Ubuntu flavor) was the only OS that allowed me to instantly use the internet (via my wireless network card), listen to my mp3s, oggs, and flacs -- straight off the CD.

Hmm... I used Ubuntu as well and no internet luck on my wife's Dell Laptop.

I find that about the only thing that Linux lacks is a really cushy development environment (that is not to say it lacks a robust tool chain) --- even at the kernel level. In this area, I have to give Windows the nod.

Yeah, I agree, there is so much more support on the Windows development platforms.

Just because you type the comand in via Start->Run instead of firing up a shell doesn't mean you don't have to know about the command line in Windows.

You could easily run Windows fine without even knowing command lines exist. The GUI is just a lot better suited to be more user-friendly.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

Exactly, all the user should have to do is click install, next, next,... next, finish, and be done.

Are you saying this can't be done in Linux? Have you EVER heard of packages?

That scenario happens less in Windows than it does in Linux.

I doubt that. I've never had to spend all night downloading one update for linux, just so I could install something that should work by default anyway.

The GUI is just a lot better suited to be more user-friendly.

Bull. Just because you're USED to the GUI doesn't mean it's more user-friendly. I'd like an example of something you'd do in Windows in a GUI that you can't in Linux, where the GUI is significantly more friendly than a command line. The fact of the matter is, computers are unfriendly. If you don't look things up and read a guide or two BEFORE you get started, you WILL NOT be able to do anything you want.

[HairdewX]

Re: Favorite OS?

Are you saying this can't be done in Linux? Have you EVER heard of packages?

Of course I've heard of packages. If I buy a brand new video card, can I just pop in the CD or download some drivers and install them in Linux?

I doubt that. I've never had to spend all night downloading one update for linux, just so I could install something that should work by default anyway.

It's true. Just because you don't believe it doesn't make it any less true.

Bull. Just because you're USED to the GUI doesn't mean it's more user-friendly. I'd like an example of something you'd do in Windows in a GUI that you can't in Linux, where the GUI is significantly more friendly than a command line.

Ok, now you're smokin something . A GUI is always more user friendly than a command line. (unless of course you take an extreme gui that is designed horribly, but we aren't arguing extremes here)

But if you want an example, I can play FFXI in a GUI in Windows that I can't play in Linux.

The fact of the matter is, computers are unfriendly.

Sure they are friendly.

[Mhurron]

Re: Favorite OS?

A GUI is always more user friendly than a command line.

You're wrong. This depends on the user.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

Of course I've heard of packages. If I buy a brand new video card, can I just pop in the CD or download some drivers and install them in Linux?

It depends on the graphics card and the Distro. In something like Ubuntu 7.04, you might not even need to do anything but put it in, open restricted drivers manager, and update it- I actually went through this same scenario changing from an MX440 to a 6200LE.

A GUI is always more user friendly than a command line.

Wow. You've never tried to actually use a command line, have you?

But if you want an example, I can play FFXI in a GUI in Windows that I can't play in Linux.

Sure they are friendly.

Oh nevermind, you're just stupid.

[HairdewX]

Re: Favorite OS?

You're wrong. This depends on the user.

Depends on the what, the 5% of users that like command lines better than GUI's? We can nitpick here but generally speaking GUI's are more user-friendly. Take a random person off the street and a GUI will be easier for them to use over a command line 95 times out of 100.

Wow. You've never tried to actually use a command line, have you?

Oh I have. In fact, I use them everyday. I'm using them right now. I am quite adept at using them. That doesn't make them user-friendly, though.

Oh nevermind, you're just stupid.

And now the name calling.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

GUI's are more user-friendly. Take a random person off the street and a GUI will be easier for them to use over a command line 95 times out of 100.

Like I've said before. Familiarity != User friendly.

Ease of use/memorization = User friendly.

A more accurate test is to take two people who have never used a computer before (and now you see why this test is nearly impossible) and give them each a book on how to do basic tasks within the OS you're testing. Give them 30 minutes to read the book, then give them the computer, and a list of tasks to do.

Such as:
1- Start the computer and login
2- Open a word document and write something with bold, italic, large, and strike fonts.
3- Save the document.
4- Find a web browser and open the wikipedia page on Operating system

etc... Taking two people off the street to test user friendliness is like stopping taking two people off the street and putting one of them in a car and the other on a motorcycle. Chances are, the motorcycle rider is going to get himself f'd-up, whereas the car driver will have no problems with it. Motorcycles aren't really harder to use, they just have different ways of using them that the average person won't know

[Shadowneko]

Re: Favorite OS?

can I say none of the above? XD

but seriously I can't say anything about Mac OS or Linux since I have not really played with those, but I will say this: I HATE WINDOWS!

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

but seriously I can't say anything about Mac OS or Linux since I have not really played with those, but I will say this: I HATE WINDOWS!

So you hate windows... but you haven't even tried Mac or Linux...

You'd better be on FreeBSD.