From
Windows
To Linux
The Bottom Line
(Or, How I Came
To Love The Penguin)
(Updated December 2008)
A System For Aunt Maude?
Years ago, Bill Gates announced that he would
create an operating system that was so easy to use, his dear mum would
have no trouble with it. He could have expected this from his mother.
For that matter, my own mother can plod along just fine in Windows.
But I certainly wouldn't have expected this of
my late Great Aunt Maude, who was barely capable of changing television
channels without serious injury. Maude's technical skills were limited
to using an old ringer-dial telephone and making fruitcakes that were
bioweapons.
It was the latter that endeared her to most
people; certainly no one enjoyed getting a call from her. She was a
harridan with a voice like a garbage disposal. The cakes, on the other
hand, were trussed with so much rum that they could anesthetize an
elephant. They were especially popular with the kids.
Hold that thought.
So, is everyone ready for Linux?
Folks, let's put this in perspective, OK? Some
people aren't ready for Windows.
The truth is, some people aren't ready for pocket
calculators.
Some folks have this fantasy that computers are
for everyone; that all God's Chillin's should be browsin' the Web,
enjoying their daily ration of Spam in the inbox and chatting
inconsequentials with people all over the world.
Great Aunt Maude, may she rest in peace, was
barely ready for light switches and running water. If she were alive
today, the very thought of giving her a computer, Linux-based or
otherwise, would have made me itch.
(Shoot, some people shouldn't even be allowed
to buy paint without close supervision, if the caution-light yellow,
pinkish-purple and turd brown house that I pass every morning is any
indication.
(But that's an aside.)
|
Before
We Start: A Big, Heartfelt THANK YOU
One must feel for all of the
FSF/OSS developers worldwide who toil -- usually for free -- on the
software that goes into a typical GNU/Linux distribution. The folks at
the Free Software Foundation
have been producing GNU software for decades with little attention
beyond geek circles. The Linux kernel was started in the early 90's as
a project by Linus Torvalds and some friends on the Web. The first
kernels were combined with GNU's BASH shell and the GNU utilities to
provide a complete, if text-only, operating system.
Who knew then that
these things would one day provide the backbone for something that
would challenge Redmond's hegemony?
But challenge it has;
with the addition of X-Windows, Linux can offer complete GUI
environments like KDE, Gnome, Windowmaker, Enlightenment and others.
The utilities have been tweaked and refined, and advanced file system
support, server support and dozens of other features have been added.
GNU/Linux is a world-class enterprise operating system now. Who'da thunkit?
And who knew, back
then, that these poor programmers would be hit with millions of
requests: change this, change that, why won't this work? These come
from all quarters; from Windows users who want to know why Linux won't
act quite the same way, to newbies who really ought to unplug their
keyboards before they hurt themselves. It's a madhouse.
This deluge has caused
some developers to become quite surly. So, believe me when I say that I
appreciate their efforts. I have tried not to criticize here; what
little I have done should be considered constructive, not a complaint.
I deeply appreciate what they've done and how far they've come in just
a few years.
Even if you can't send
money to support your favorite project, you should go to SourceForge at least
once a week, pick a development team at random and just send them a
"thank you." Tell them that you appreciate their hard work.
I'll say it here:
thanks, folks.
|
|
Who
Am I?
It's considered obligatory in a screed such as
this to state one's experience. OK, I have been working with computers
and microprocessors since 2048 bytes of RAM was quite expensive and
cassette tape backup was bleeding-edge.
My job as Chief Engineer for several radio
stations in the Birmingham, AL market requires me to be the
prototypical jack of all trades. Today I might set up a new workstation
for the network; tomorrow, I might write a program to do something at
one of our stations. The day after, I might repair some lightning
damage to an antenna tuning unit or build a microphone preamplifier.
You just never know.
When I started in the business, I certainly
never expected to become a programmer or system administrator. While
broadcasters have been using computers for decades and I met them early
in my career, they were either big, expensive mainframes or little
peg-programmed jokes that (barely) managed to play a few songs in the
correct order.
Nowadays, of course, computers and related
technologies are everywhere in a large market station. We use digital
editing software for the audio, big file servers to store it, and
NT-based workstations to play it over the air. We transmit audio and
control signals entirely in the digital domain over ISDN, T1 and
microwave. The transmitters are almost completely controlled by
computers now.
The biggest difference between me and the
hard-core OSS/FSF/GNU/Linux types is that I didn't come up in a Unix
environment. My first personal computer was a Timex/Sinclair 1000. I
graduated from that to a Heath Z80-based computer, and from that to a
PC. When I got the latter, the first things I did were (in no
particular order) (a), take the cover off and peer inside and (b),
obtain copies of Intel's 80x86 Programmer's Reference and Microsoft's
Macro Assembler (MASM). I began tracing through the DOS kernel. I began
writing my own hardware drivers, usually to do things that neither
Microsoft nor IBM had ever anticipated.
Later, I moved to Windows and began doing
unprintable things to that kernel, writing my own VxDs and causing more
Blue Screens of Death in a single evening than most users might see in
a month.
(To establish my geek bonafides: back in the
early 1990's, I made a little extra money repairing a transmitter that
had been badly damaged by lightning. I decided to treat myself to a new
computer. I passed on a PC loaded with DRDOS and Win3.1 solely because
I didn't like DRDOS's version of DEBUG!)
Ah, those were the days, and ah, the stories I
could tell.
But let's stay focused here. The purpose of
this screed is to inform you that I have switched from Windows to
Linux, and to tell you why. In the process, I will try to help my
fellow Windows lovers to see whether they should
make the switch. I'm going to give you the bottom line,
politically-incorrect, religiously-neutral skinny on Linux here.
|
Disclaimer
For People Who Already Use Linux:
In case
you missed that, the following is specifically for Windows
users who are contemplating the Big Switch. I am sidestepping
the religious arguments about "pure" open source, KDE vs. Gnome, etc., ad
nauseum. I have a specific audience in mind and I shall give
them specific recommendations based on my experience ... which includes
introducing Linux to many different Windows users, both friends and
co-workers, and carefully watching how they respond and closely
listening to what they think.
A
true OSS geek, especially one who has grown up with Linux since its
inception, will be completely comfortable with compiling her own
software. She'll be used to editing configuration files and piecing
together a Linux system that does precisely what she wants. If she uses
a GUI, she may prefer a "lighter" one such as IceWM, as opposed to the
"heavier" (but more Windows-like) KDE or Gnome.
A
Windows user will not; she'll want something that
pretty much runs out of the box with minimal fuss. The Windows user
will be looking for something familiar, something that she can use from
day one to keep browsing, writing and working, without a
steep learning curve.
In
plain Ingles: she's not going to go without email
for a week while she learns how to use Mutt!
Please
keep this in mind. I have specifically targeted the Windows user here.
You have been warned, and your mileage may vary (that's "YMMV," if
you're a geek).
|
|
Exactly
What Is Linux?
Even though I'm using the term "Linux"
generically to save time and space, if we're splitting hairs, that's
actually misleading. Linux is nothing but the operating system kernel.
On top of that, you need at least a command environment (such as the
BASH shell), and/or a GUI such as KDE or Gnome, to get a usable system.
If you want a crude analogy ("crude" because
GNU/Linux is considerably more advanced), we can look at the old
MSDOS/Windows 3.xx model. In this analogy, Linux is the operating
system (the "DOS"), BASH provides the command prompt (same as
COMMAND.COM did for DOS) and KDE or Gnome provides the windowed,
graphical desktop. But just as complete WinTel systems are usually
referred to as simply, "Windows," so will I use the term "Linux" here.
You have been warned. (Again.)
Far more confusing to the average Windows user
is the fact that there are so many different distributions (versions)
of Linux. In the Windows world, there are different versions, each
(allegedly) better than the last -- Win98, Windows NT, XP, etc. -- but
they're all "Windows" from Microsoft in Redmond, WA.
Not so in the GNU/Linux world! Some releases
are designed for and by hackers; others are for enterprise servers and
still others come with graphical environments that are pure eye candy.
Some standardize on Gnome, others on KDE. Some have wizards and widgets
that make Linux a breeze to set up; others require a PhD in Chaos
Theory just to get a command prompt.
(There are also the BSDs, such as FreeBSD,
which are separate Unix-type projects. To keep this simple, I'll ignore
these, with apologies to their adherents.)
What's
In A Distribution?
In the early days, if you wanted to use
Linux, you'd download the kernel and compile it. Then you'd download
some GNU utilities and a shell and compile those; after assembling
everything, you'd get a working GNU/Linux system. Not everyone likes
compiling their own software or scouring the Web for each little
package, though; to address this need, many vendors have pre-compiled
and collected everything that you'll need in a single package called a distribution.
Distributions come in all sizes, from tiny
versions that will fit on a pair of floppies to full-blown distros with
hundreds of software packages. You're going to want the latter, so
that's what I'll focus on here.
If you're brand new to Linux, let me clue
you in now on a very pleasant surprise that awaits: a typical
full-blown distro includes TONS of software. Gobs and gobs of stuff,
from editors to games to Web browsers to file and Web servers to
(Microsoft-compatible!) office packages. The most amazing thing of all
is that you can download complete Linux distributions for nothing!
That's right, a complete operating environment with everything you need
for free!
(To put this in perspective, suppose you
could download a complete Windows XP system with Office and
tons of other stuff -- for free. Well, you can
download the equivalent with Linux!)
Will
I Have What I Need For My Office?
A good Linux distribution will satisfy many
businesses, especially small/home offices that are looking for
enterprise-level goodies on a budget. IBM, Hewlett Packard and a number
of other vendors have jumped on the Linux bandwagon because it
represents such a great bang-for-the-buck for people with shrinking IT
budgets. Here's a quick lookie:
- Servers - this is
where Linux is making the biggest splash at present, because it can do
just about anything that you want here. A good distribution will
include standard file servers, the Apache Web server, email servers,
you name it -- for free. You can even create a
Samba (SMB) server that will work with Windows machines.
- Word processing, spreadsheets - KOffice (free),
OpenOffice.org (free) and commercial products such as Hancom Office and
Star Office will satisfy most business users. These packages can read
and write most Microsoft Office file formats -- particularly Word and
Excel, with limited support for the others.
- Communication - several good Web browsers, from Mozilla to
Konqueror, the browser built in to KDE. KDE also includes built-in
calendar and email stuff, but I prefer (and suspect you will, too)
Ximian Evolution, a free Outlook-style info manager. Also included:
stuff for Internet chat, Netmeeting clones, etc., etc. (Considering
that Linux was developed on the Web by programmers from around the
world who needed to stay in constant touch, this is
no surprise!)
- Printing - most standard laser printers, particularly those
from big names like HP, are well-supported. The better inkjet types are
also supported, as are most dot-matrix types (for those of you who
still use multi-part forms). Some low-end inkjet types aren't
supported, but I doubt if you'd want to use a $50 printer in an office,
anyway; you'd spend three times that per month on ink!
- Development - no question, Linux wins, hands down. To start
with, Linux (and most of the included software) is "open source" -- you
get the actual source code. No more guessing! It only gets better, too,
if you're a programmer. You will go insane playing with all of the
goodies included with a good Linux distribution, from complete Visual
Studio-like environments like KDevelop to command line tools for Perl,
Python, Pascal, you name it. I could literally write a complete Web
site just describing all of the stuff that you get.
- The Really Important Stuff - dozens of games and
timewasters, including Solitaire (of course) and plenty of simple board
games. There's even a built-in "boss key" thingie: you can set the
games up on a separate desktop and switch to it when she isn't looking!
Will
Linux Have What I Need (Or Want) For Home Use?
Of course, with home offices becoming so common
nowadays, much of what I just said applies here. But if you're a casual
home user, there's no easy answer.
Home users tend to use the PC for entertainment,
and Windows clearly has the edge here. Linux will play most of the
standard file formats, but I have to be honest: the media players
included with Linux at present are clunky. They're weird-looking and
weird-acting. The MIDI support stinks. Linux is also weak in the
high-powered 3D game department.
I am satisfied with Linux, but I'm a pretty
ordinary guy. I don't do the mega-game thing; I don't even do Internet
chat (though Linux supports that, with several chat programs, in case
you were wondering). I can't say whether you'll be satisfied; all you
can do is try it.
The nice thing is, you can set up Linux to dual
boot -- i.e., assuming you have a large hard drive, you can still have
Windows on the same machine. When you start the computer, you'll get a
prompt asking whether you want to boot into Windows or Linux. This way,
you get the best of both worlds.
(Here's a suggestion: Linux is far more secure
than Windows, especially the older versions such as 98 and ME. Why not
use Linux for browsing the Web, and use Windows for the games and
multimedia stuff?)
Personally, I rarely boot into Windows nowadays.
I can burn my own CDs, I can write reports and spreadsheets for work,
and just about everything else I want to do. The Gimp, a graphics
program, is almost as powerful as Photoshop, and it's free. I love it
(in fact, I used it to reduce the size of the image at the top of this
page -- the original image was a huge background wallpaper included
with the old Mandrake -- now Mandriva -- distribution).
OK? You're intrigued, but you're still wondering
...
Am
I Ready For Linux? Is Linux Ready For ME?
Dec 2008: Boy, how times change! The original
version of this page was written in June of 2003, and I no longer use
Mandrake/Mandriva; I've standardized pretty much on SUSE (and OpenSUSE in
particular). Version 11 of OpenSUSE can handle plug-in USB devices,
wireless networking (with some -- but not all! -- wireless cards), and
a lot more. My guidelines now are as follows:
- If you're familiar
with Unix -- maybe you learned and used it in college -- then Linux (or
one of the BSDs) will fit you like a glove. (In fact, you're probably
using it already.)
- If you're a long time PC/DOS/Windows hacker -- you started
out in DOS and moved to Windows, you've built your own systems from
scratch, you've written software for Windows and have played with the
(maggot-gagging) registry, etc., etc. -- you'll have a learning curve,
but no major problems. You're definitely ready for Linux.
- If you're an experienced Windows user, particularly if
you're the gal whom everyone calls when they're having trouble, your
learning curve will be steeper, but you should still be ready. Give it
a try. You can dual-boot between Windows and Linux while you learn.
- At the opposite end of the spectrum, if your Windows
experience has been limited to clicking the pretty icon-thingies, and
particularly if you view the DOS prompt as something from a demonic
realm, you are probably not ready for Linux. However, OpenSUSE 11, in
particular, is quite easy to use, and given that you can install it on
a Windows system and choose whether to boot into Windows or Linux, I
strongly suggest that you give it a try.
These are rough guidelines only; you'll have to
decide where you fit. Now: Drum roll, please!
There
Is A HUGE Difference In Distributions For Former Windows Users!
The most popular, as of this writing,
is Ubuntu.
It's a very good distro, too; a lot of people love it and use it. My
personal preference is OpenSUSE, for reasons that I will now explain (at the risk of exposing myself to endless flames).
For
a long-time Windows user, KDE is going to feel more comfortable than
Gnome, which is the standard desktop in Ubuntu. I say that based on a
great deal of experience in helping people switch to GNU/Linux from
Windows, too; that's not just an opinion that I pulled out of the air.
For example (this is by no means an exhaustive list):
- KDE has the little "?" help icon on most dialogs. This will immediately be familiar to a Windows user.
- KDE
has the familiar "up," "back" and "forward" arrow icons to more easily
browse through folders. Gnome expects you to know that you should click
the ".." at the top of a file listing to move back one directory. This
is NOT what Windows users expect.
- KDE's
default file browser (Konqueror in older versions, Dolphin in the more
recent releases) looks, feels and acts very much like Windows Explorer
-- another thing that will be very familiar to a long time Windows user.
Note: Ubuntu offers a version that standardizes on KDE; it's called "Kubuntu." You might try that as well.
What
About My Hardware? Will Linux Work With It?
First, the general requirements.
Linux
is a high-performance system, designed
by long-haired, Jolt cola-guzzlin' Ubergeeks who think in binary.
Regardless of what might be stated on the software box, if you plan to
use Linux with a desktop environment such as KDE (and you will), don't
even think about running it with less than 256 Meg of RAM (and 512 Meg
is
much better). You should also have a fast Pentium-class processor and a
hard drive with at least 20 Gig of free space. You can get by with less
(in fact, there are special, "lightweight" distributions of Linux that
are specifically designed for older machines with limited memory), but
the more, the merrier!
(Fortunately, if you have a late-model PC with Windows XP or Vista on it, you probably already meet these requirements.)
You'll want a large monitor and a video
system with plenty of resolution as well. One of my biggest complaints,
in fact, is that some of the dialogs and windows in KDE and Gnome assume
that you have at least 1024x768 resolution. If (for whatever reason) you use
a lower resolution, some windows will run off the edge of the screen.
Here's a workaround/tip: you can hold the
ALT key and the left mouse button and use the mouse pointer to drag the
entire window around so that you can get to the buttons. I was a
miserable man until I found out about that one!
As for peripherals -- scanners, cameras,
mice, etc. -- here's another major difference between the WinTel world
and Linux. You can generally buy a goodie at the local clone shop and
expect it to work under Windows. That is not always the case with
Linux!
As a general rule, hardware that uses
standard interfaces and/or which is self-contained will give little
trouble. Hardware that requires special drivers, on the other hand, is
much more of a problem. Winmodems are the classic example; most of
these will not work under Linux, because the modem
stuff is actually done in a special Windows driver. External modems, on
the other hand, which are self-contained, usually work fine.
Because of its heritage, you can expect
great support for hard drives, RAID controllers, SCSI, and things like
that. Most of you will be using Serial ATA ("SATA") or IDE drives; I have yet to
meet one (including DVD, CD-R and CD-RW types) that Linux couldn't handle.
Mice and keyboards are so standardized now, it's hard to imagine one of
these that wouldn't work, too (again, I've yet to see one).
But
all is not roses. You may find that some
stuff works, but with limited function. For example, my Turtle Beach
sound card can play back WAVs and MP3's, but not MIDI files. Most
full-blown Linux distributions include tools such as the Timidity
synth that can be used, but to be honest, they're clunky and sound
like crap (when they work at all).
Be
prepared to tinker with the
video, especially if you have a high-powered NVidia or ATI card.
Drivers are available for many of these, but getting them to work can
sometimes be problematic.
The
good news is, a great deal of stuff does work with Linux now. I don't
want to scare you off; the Ubuntu or OpenSUSE installer will probably sort out most of your
hardware, certainly enough for you to use it. The really good news is
that the equipment manufacturers are becoming more "Linux aware." Look for that on the box when you make a purchase.
Daily
Use: Be Prepared For Some Drastic Differences
Windows users will notice many similarities,
particularly if you take my recommendation and use KDE as opposed to
Gnome. But Linux comes from a completely different architecture and
philosophy. Free software is mostly written by Ubergeek volunteers who
are creating what they would like to use. Most of
them work at a command prompt, and it shows.
The Unix heritage shows throughout -- in
increased security, endless configurability -- even in the fact that
the simplest command (such as "ls," or "list files" -- the Unix version
of the DOS "DIR" command) can have dozens and dozens of options, many
of which you may not even understand.
Unix started out in enterprise environments
for multiple users and was scaled down to fit PCs. DOS/Windows started
out on personal computers with single users and were scaled UP to fit
the enterprise. This has implications that may not become clear until
you make The Big Switch, too.
Take, for example, that infamous "mount"
thingie. To "mount" a drive simply means to make it available for use.
DOS and Windows have automatically mounted local drives from the
beginning; historically, Unix hasn't. You had to specifically mount a
diskette, for example, before you could read it.
The
latest versions of Linux feature
programs like Automount, which are supposed to make this more
transparent to the user. Fortunately, the latest releases of Ubuntu and Suse seem to handle this
a lot better, but there are still occasional glitches (for example, using "safely remove" when you're finished with a USB drive).
Little things like this aren't
show-stoppers; they're annoyances. But they do underscore the fact
that, at present, Linux isn't quite ready for all Windows users. It's
improving all the time, but be prepared to fiddle and faddle with it
now and again -- as in this example.
Linux also seems to make huge use of
"wrapper" (or "front end") programs. To give you an idea of what these
are, suppose someone writes a very good DOS program, but their clients
want a Windows version. Where I come from, one typically writes a
completely new Windows program for them. In the Linux world, the
response is often to write a GUI "wrapper" for that command-line
program.
All of the CD-burning utilities for KDE and
Gnome, for example, use a command-line tool named "cdrecord" to do the
actual burning. When you run X-CD-Roast under KDE, it simply translates
your mouse clicks into command-line arguments. Likewise, many configuration tools are "wrappers" around command-line
programs and shell scripts.
This approach normally works OK, but I hope
that it's just an interim solution. I sincerely hope that one day, most
of these tools will be rewritten as 100% native KDE or Gnome
applications. Besides being slower, wrappers can have really strange
bugs, if they don't recognize what the command-line program is saying!
OK, enough technogeek stuff. But this
command-line/text-based heritage has another (unintended) consequence
for Windows users, and this is a big negative:
The
Help System Needs ... Help
KDE is a bit better than Gnome here (another
reason why I recommend it); many dialogs have the familiar "?" icon in
the upper right corner and you can sometimes get context-sensitive,
pop-up help with that. But believe me, if you're a Windows user, this
will be the #1 thing that you miss: hitting F1 and getting specific
help, or searching Windows Help with generic terms like, "floppy" and
"dial up" and getting several topics, all cross-referenced and
cross-linked.
Most of the documentation included with a Linux
distribution is in the form of text, "how-tos" and the like. Some of it
is out of date, but in general, it's very comprehensive -- which
strength is also a weakness: you'll typically have to wade through a
mountain of stuff just to find the info that you need on a single,
simple command. And boy, will there be info: Unix commands are far more
powerful than their DOS counterparts, so they have many more options!
At a command prompt, you can enter "man
[command_name]" or "info [command_name]" and get tons of information,
but you have to know the name of the command that you want to use!
This
is being improved all the time, and (flame-bait opinion alert!) KDE is
considerably better than Gnome at this (at least as of this writing).
But be
warned: if you want to do more advanced things with Linux (or even just
things that Suse or Ubuntu didn't anticipate that you might want to
do!), be
prepared to read a ton of material.
General
Observation: Why I Wrote This
I wrote this (lengthy, verbose, opinionated)
screed for a reason. I read reviews myself and have found many of them
unhelpful. Pro-Linux reviews are generally written by people who love
Linux and are willing to overlook its flaws. Anti-Linux reviews are
written either by Windows adherents or those who've tried the wrong
distribution, or who aren't willing to face the learning curve required
to get a usable system.
(Quite often, the review will basically boil
down to how much trouble the reviewer had on his/her own hardware. If
that reviewer has never tried Linux before, and happened to choose a
"difficult" distribution for a machine with weird video and sound
cards, you'll get a Very Bad Review.)
As an aside: if you frequent online fora
such as Slashdot
and OSNews,
you'll see that some people complain when reviewers focus on the
installers for free/open software. My response? Whaddya expect? For
most of its existence, free software has been Freddy Krueger's own
nightmare to install! Reviewers should describe the
installation and first-use experience to people like me, because I'm
not going to buy or use software that won't at least work out of the
box.
Hey,
I'm perfectly willing to RTM (that's "read the manual," in case you
didn't know) and tinker to make that software do what I want (hey, I do
that all the time now). But I still need to know, up front, how much
RTM'ing I'm going to have to do just to get the stuff to work in the
first place! If it's too much, I won't use the software.
My
experience with OpenSUSE Linux is precisely why I recommend their
distribution.
Why
I Changed To Linux
Three reasons, roughly in order.
First, Windows 98 -- by far my favorite
of the various incarnations from Redmond -- was getting long in the
tooth. It was great in its day and I loved it; but it was time to move
on. I hated Windows ME, didn't like Windows 2000 and refused to try XP
... and that brings me to the second reason.
I am inalterably opposed to the idea that
software must be "activated" prior to use. Key codes are bad enough
(have you ever misplaced the sleeve for a CD?), but having to dial up
before I can use software that I've paid for? No, thank you.
As Elder Bush might have said, "not gonna
do it."
I do not abuse copyright laws. I realize
that some people think that there's nothing wrong with making copies of
every CD in their library and sharing them with every friend on the
block; I'm not one of them. My disagreement with on-line activation
doesn't stem from any desire to break the law, but from inherent
libertarianism: I don't think anyone has a right to snoop in my
computer, or even to know when I decide to junk an old computer and
move my software to a new machine. It's none of their business. Period.
Third, there's another ominous trend in
proprietary software: closed data formats. I like Open Source and open
standards. The data on my computer is MINE. I own it. I created it.
When I write a letter to a friend, I have a right to know how that
letter is encoded. When I email that letter, I have a right to know how
it's transmitted.
Microsoft (and most proprietary vendors)
think that these things should be hidden from varlets and plebeians
like yours truly. I disagree, so I use Linux, even though it's really
not as easy as Windows at the present time. With Linux, not only are
the data formats well published on the Web, I can get the source code
for the software that works with it.
My
General Impressions After Several Years Of Use
The system is incredibly stable compared to Windows. XP and Vista are certainly more rugged than the old
Windows 95/98 (Windows ME, having been stillborn at release, doesn't
count), but still, it is
breathtaking to be able to leave Linux running for weeks on end without
trouble. When I want to kill an application or shut down, it happens; I
don't have to wade through endless "this program is not responding"
boxes. When I make changes to my networking or install or remove a
program, I don't have to reboot. It happens on the fly.
The amount of software included in a
typical distribution is nothing short of amazing. I have seen reviews
that complain about this; why so many editors, why so many email
clients? Not me! Not a day passes that I don't discover something new
under Linux. I am intelligent enough to select one terminal out of
four, or to try several different editors to find my favorite (which is
GEdit, for those who care; it's what I'm using to write this).
Those who say this usually have my very
audience in mind: those who want to switch from Windows. I've got news
for them: the lack of up-to-date, online, context-sensitive, cross-referenced and
hyperlinked help is a far more
serious stumbling block, trust me.
Don't believe me? Have a look sometime at
a friend's Windows system. If it has been used for a year or two, there
will be icons everywhere: on the desktop, on the taskbar, in the Start
menu, in the kitchen and in the bathroom. Zillions of icons. It will be
LOADED with junk, some of which the user won't even recognize or
remember! This is a non-issue; focus on the stuff that matters!
Beware The Free Software Purists
You've never experienced these in Windows,
but you'll run across (stumble over) (constantly dodge) them all the
time with Linux. When you least expect it, a guy named Richard Stallman
may parachute into your home and begin lecturing you (at length)
(endlessly) (make coffee, he'll be there a while) about why you should
use Free Software, and only Free Software.
(That's "free as in speech, not free beer.")
I absolutely love KDE for
any number of reasons. Gnome itself looks good -- some would argue that
it's prettier than KDE, at first glance -- but (just to name one) its
dialogs are ugly and clunky. KDE's dialogs are eye candy, with folder
icons that make it easy to navigate through your file system. (In my
opinion, they're actually better than the dialogs in my beloved Windows
98.) Some Free Software Purists have scolded me for saying this. "You
should support and use Gnome, because it's 100% Free software!" (Even
though KDE for Linux is free, it's based on a toolkit from Trolltech, a
commercial company.)
Likewise, the Purist will scowl at you for
using Acrobat Reader (Adobe is a commercial company, but the Reader for
Linux is available for free). "It's commercial software! You should use
xpdf or ghostview!"
Bullcrap. Acrobat Reader is just plain
better. My technical manuals come in PDF form, and I need the ability
to search through these files and navigate with a table of contents.
Most distributions include PDF readers such as Ghostview and Xpdf, but
simply put, they are NOT Acrobat Reader. They don't even come close.
Xpdf has a (very) rudimentary search feature, but it's totally inadequate for what people like me need.
Ghostview doesn't even have that ... and (just being honest here) it's a steaming turd, anyway. It's ugly,
clunky, and the way it scrolls through pages gives me whiplash.
I am not going to limit myself just to
maintain the Purity Of The Revolution, and you shouldn't either. You,
dear reader, should use what works and don't let anyone bother you
about it.
Other
Annoyances
There are other annoyances, especially for
a long-time use of Windows.
For one, Unix has supported long file
names since Moby Dick was a minnow, and yet, most programs are given
short, cryptic, non-descriptive names like "glame" and "gimp." There
seems to be a competition to come up with the most clever contraction
-- "'glump' is 'GNU's Little Underwear Management Program!'" -- which
strikes me as silly and unhelpful.
(If you come up with a recursive
acronym -- "GNU's Not Unix" is the classic example -- you get extra
credit and instant membership in the Ubergeek Society.)
I don't mind short names, but could they
at least make them vaguely suggestive of what the software actually
does? How in the world am I supposed to know that "gimp" means
"graphics manipulation software?"
There are other annoyances with the
documentation that I didn't discuss above. Many of the How-Tos haven't
been updated in ages, and some of the README docs say little more than,
"if you've ever played Blitzmewhack, this is just like it!" or "M'GINK
is just like CLINK but with better gnarlie-widgels!"
Wuh. OK ... what about those of us who've
never played Blitzmewhack or used CLINK?
Summary:
Final Thoughts
Is
Linux ready for the desktop? For most users, yes. The popular
distributions such as Suse and Ubuntu have great installers, great
support online and most of the features and software that you'll need.
Only those of you who specifically require a Windows-only software package will have
problems.
I
hardly ever boot into Windows anymore. (The two big exceptions,
touching on what I just said, are (1), tax preparation software and (2)
a music-editing program that only comes in a Windows flavor, and that
I've used for years; I don't feel like learning a different package!).
On those occasions when I have
no choice, I feel ... limited. I've been spoiled by KDE and
miss it when I can't use it!
Proof
that I'm a True Convert(tm) and that Aunt Maude's fruitcake didn't ruin
me after all!
Note:
the trademarks used here, including Microsoft, Windows, Office, IBM,
Hewlett Packard/HP, Ximian, Suse, Ubuntu and others, are the properties of
their respective owners.
Back to the main
page