Quote:
|
Sooo incredibly mistaken, soooo incredibly wrong, sooooo incredibly false, soooo incredibly accusing, sooooo incrediby dissing the better.
|
Why are you being so hostile? Let's discuss our differences of opinion without pettiness. Also, my comments were on the whole, positive. I feel like I would've been vaporized by a laser from space if I were anti-open source! Also, heavily biased comments like "..generally makes 1000 times more sense then Windows." are unhelpful.
I have used Linux/unix variants since before there were usable GUI's. Unlike all the Linux users I know, I exclusively use it - I do not have a crafty dual-booter in the backroom or a Mac lappy. When I speak of user friendliness, I am speaking from the point of view of an average Windows/Office user - so things like command line instructions are out of the question.
My point about retraining is fair - training is a considerable headache and it is necessary for the large jump from Windows GUI and apps to a Linux-based GUI and apps.
My second, compound point is mostly from my own experience. OpenOffice is a very sophisticated suite of products and is the obvious analogue to Microsoft Office. Original derivations aside, it is not as feature rich - it just isn't. Many office workers who exclusively use MS Office (i.e. most of them) are serious power users. The ones I've spoken to especially Excel and Access users simply cannot live with OpenOffice and equivalents. Of course Linux apps are less mature than Windows ones. How long has Office been developed for? Please remember, Word is the standard for Word processing. This is not necessarily a good thing - but it is the standard.
Less mature applications is also a false accusation, there are more products with more support for linux then there ever will be for windows. There are more applications for linux then you can imagine, because there are millions of programmers who contribute to open-source.
How many Microsoft developers do you think there are? A handful?
I find the latest version of Gnome extremely user-friendly but will admit to weird, frustrating areas like the difficulty reordering the main menu e.g. having to install Smeg to get any sort of usability, the nightmare of syncing Palm devices, the slowness of screen rendering etc.
Your point about the Windows registry - what's wrong with it? Linux has a configuration database for all the apps, I even have a GUI for it.
I have used loads of Linux applications which are virtually undocumented, then I had to trawl the internet to find support. I agree however that where there is documentation it is good. My only general criticism of man pages is that there never seems to be enough examples forcing me to strain my brain parsing the switches.
Please point me in the direction of the MS Flight Simulator beater.
Quote:
|
if you read about it, sound like a toy, lol...
|
Did you really find this funny?
Quote:
|
And you are claiming that it is the operating systems fault?
|
No, I'm not claiming that. Manufacturers don't write drivers for Linux because the perceived market share is so small.
Quote:
|
Your Nvidia problems are your fault
|
Are they? Why? As far as I can tell, the xorg.conf is perfectly configured. Wifi cards on Linux - nightmare. SATA controllers with Software RAID - nightmare. Average users configuring these things? Not without a lot of pain. Wifi is standard on new laptops, Unless it's automagically detected during installation, configuring them is pure pain on Linux.
So in conclusion, I think you are needlessly angry and offended. If you are not angry and offended, your general tone cultivates the impression. I generally enjoy using Linux and the available apps. I don't think it's necessarily better than other OS's however, and I'm the first to 'Jesus Christ! How hard is this!' when faced with something that would be simple on OSX. I am always stunned at the brilliance of The Gimp in the face of Photoshop and the speed of Inkscape versus the awesome Illustrator.
For me adherence to 'open standards' is more important that open source. If Word spat out proper XML, then other programs wouldn't have such difficulty opening them accurately. I don't have a problem with locking up code per se, but acknowledge the tendency to hold back innovation of in a position to e.g. Microsoft and the tendency for innovation to blossom if the code is open and subject to peer review e.g. reputations at stake.
Also, let's not forget cost. Everything installed on my computer is free. The proprietary analogues would start at £250 (Windows XP) and spiral quickly towards Jupiter with Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, 3D Studio etc. etc.
