Anyone here uses linux?

[insilica]

Show Image

Oddly, I think I actually got laid like 1000000 times more often than I had to reboot my computer that had Linux on it.

Lol. Good one :D

Please don't use Blizzard games on Battle Net in wine. They banned D3 accounts for using wine under the explanation it was being used in an unintended way.

[tipo33]

I generaly use Mint on my laptops, Arch on main desktops, my HTPC rusn XBMS on Ubuntu, and I have an ancient FreeBSD machine chugging along as my router.  I first played around with gentoo a loooong time ago, and finaly switched to *nix only when XP SP2 came out. 

[godly_music]

Long story short, if you're not looking to switch out of some conviction, you're better off sticking with Windows. Linux is less approachable, will break on you, will be harder to fix and has little advantage for the average user who asks lazy questions such as our OP.

Linux has a number of merits, but they're really only merits if you put principles over practicability. Or you enjoy tinkering. Or have a job in programming.

[SpAmRaY]

Show Image

Oddly, I think I actually got laid like 1000000 times more often than I had to reboot my computer that had Linux on it.

Is that one of those trick math problems like when somebody says they'll give you a million dollars per unicorn horn but it's obvious that $1 million x 0 is still 0?

 

I have played with and run it off and on for almost 15 years and administrated a server with it for 2/3rds that time.

Linux is like this... (ignoring games)
If it works for you out of the box, GREAT! No problem.  If not... Big Problem.
Getting unsupported or partially supported hardware working can be difficult and time consuming. Once running though, Linux can be quite good, I just wish people could come up with some better names than "Yet another....", good god, you people are geeks, you can do better than that. 50 programs all with the same name, gee, thanks.



And YES, you can get Autcad running on Linux.
http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=86

Hmmm....interesting, looks like nothing recent however. But if I ever wanted to go back to 08 or maybe 06 or something.

[CommunistWitchDr]

Long story short, if you're not looking to switch out of some conviction, you're better off sticking with Windows. Linux is less approachable, will break on you, will be harder to fix and has little advantage for the average user who asks lazy questions such as our OP.

Linux has a number of merits, but they're really only merits if you put principles over practicability. Or you enjoy tinkering. Or have a job in programming.

Totally disagree. Look at something like package management. On windows you have to search out and manually install each piece of software. And updating can be worse with some software. On a beginner friendly distro like ubuntu there's an insanely easy to use software center from which you can install/update pretty much anything you're liable to need. I consider anything without a decent package manager totally unusable.

[SpAmRaY]

Long story short, if you're not looking to switch out of some conviction, you're better off sticking with Windows. Linux is less approachable, will break on you, will be harder to fix and has little advantage for the average user who asks lazy questions such as our OP.

Linux has a number of merits, but they're really only merits if you put principles over practicability. Or you enjoy tinkering. Or have a job in programming.

Totally disagree. Look at something like package management. On windows you have to search out and manually install each piece of software. And updating can be worse with some software. On a beginner friendly distro like ubuntu there's an insanely easy to use software center from which you can install/update pretty much anything you're liable to need. I consider anything without a decent package manager totally unusable.

One thing I've found very useful and I know it's almost apples to oranges but at work I use a lot of portable apps, especially if I'm having to go between machines or whatever and the portable apps menu makes it easy to add multiple apps at once, and it can keep them updated.

And again, its not the same I know but ninite.com is very useful for new installs.

[jspark]

I haven't used linux with GUI desktop. I'm running two linux servers though. Linux is good since you can access every file system easily if you know what to do with it. Since I haven't used linux desktop, I cannot say anything about running a gui application on linux.

[godly_music]

Linux programs in general don't satisfy me. Quality is all over the place. Programs may show weird bugs, quirky behavior or incompatibility with 'popular' closed-source formats, even high-profile software in some cases. I remember fileroller and another popular archiving tool both handling my 7zips and some archive operations in the same ****ty way with no obvious way to fix it. I'm not blaming this all on the free software community, but it makes for a frustrating experience. Package management and smooth updates are great, I agree, but they don't help if the content itself is lacking.

If you're a console junkie, you can do everything in beautifully elegant ways, sure. But then we're back to that bold statement that says "Linux is ready for the desktop". At its core, it isn't, unfortunately. As long as problem-solving remains obscure, it won't be.

[Thimplum]

Linux is the best
No one ever uses it
Refrigerator

[alaricljs]

Nearly everyone uses it and quite a bit...

Just not where they think.

[Thimplum]

Nearly everyone uses it and quite a bit...

Just not where they think.

I know.

You can't fit much info into a haiku...

[SpAmRaY]

Linux is the best
No one ever uses it
Refrigerator

I bet there are some refrigerators running linux!!

[Thimplum]

Linux is the best
No one ever uses it
Refrigerator

I bet there are some refrigerators running linux!!

LG makes many that do I think.

[SpAmRaY]

Linux is the best
No one ever uses it
Refrigerator

I bet there are some refrigerators running linux!!

LG makes many that do I think.

Honestly Linux makes a lot of things in the world possible, where would we be without it.

[funkymeeba]

MTS traffic signal controllers are probably all over your city (if you're in the US), and many of those are Linux powered. I have no really good reason for having found that information.

I really like Linux (specifically Funtoo) because I've been able to put together the perfect workflow for me. Windows does not easily let me do the things Linux lets me do. e17 window manager is pretty sweet, by the way. Try it!

[Leslieann]

Totally disagree. Look at something like package management. On windows you have to search out and manually install each piece of software. And updating can be worse with some software. On a beginner friendly distro like ubuntu there's an insanely easy to use software center from which you can install/update pretty much anything you're liable to need. I consider anything without a decent package manager totally unusable.

Updating Windows never broke my boot loader, like Ubuntu has done every single time on my tablet since version 9. I finally gave up and left it running ubuntu 9.
Searching up a program doesn't return 50 programs all named "Yet Another ____".  That or they give them names that have absolutely nothing to do with what they pertain to, or is similar to a Windows program but has an entirely different function.

You also may have to go chase down some inanely hard to find required packages. Myth TV used to be a massive nightmare to install and update due to all of the packages and dependencies. Even if you find them, you have to make sure those versions are all compatible with each other. Package management relies on too many outside sources to be effective long term. Repo down, awww too bad. Developer decided to quit, oh well.

Searching up Windows errors doesn't return 500,000,000 pages all saying "RTFM NOOB!" or "Use the search!" which is useless because every post says to search.  Granted, Ubuntu forums have helped stop this, but for a long time, @ssholes like that, were the bane of new Linux converts the world over.


Don't get me wrong, Linux is good, but I'm just saying what you describe, isn't all roses.

[Thimplum]

[domoaligato]

You can't play many retail games on linux.

That's it.

yes you can. check out the steam client for linux.

http://media.steampowered.com/client/installer/steam.deb

http://steamforlinux.com/

http://store.steampowered.com/browse/linux/

[Thimplum]

You can't play many retail games on linux.

That's it.

yes you can. check out the steam client for linux.

http://media.steampowered.com/client/installer/steam.deb

http://steamforlinux.com/

http://store.steampowered.com/browse/linux/

To be [un]fair, there aren't a lot of compatible games yet.

[linziyi]

Who needs "retail games" when you have Dota2 and Quake 3?

[TheQsanity]

Who needs "retail games" when you have Dota2 and Quake 3?

LoL? I don't like Dota2

[Thimplum]

Who needs "retail games" when you have Dota2 and Quake 3?

And Jedi Academy.

[inteli722]

pff. Everyone knows Nexuiz/Xonotic is the best Linux game!

[Thimplum]

pff. Everyone knows Nexuiz/Xonotic is the best Linux game!

Whatever you say...

[linziyi]

pff. Everyone knows Nexuiz/Xonotic is the best Linux game!

 

[hashbaz]

I've used Linux on and off at home since the 90s (I tried the same Mandrake distribution that spamray posted, as well as Slackware), and all day every day at work.  For software development, I love it.  Tiling window managers minimize my mouse use, and the power of the command line interface is indispensable.

My sense is that even Ubuntu is still not ready for primetime as a serious Windows/OS X replacement though.  I still prefer (and use) both for general purpose web browsing and games, which is 90% of my non-work computer use.

[smknjoe]

Take games out of the equation for a moment. I can't think of anything that I have to customize (other than turning off Unity) or that I'm missing with a fresh installation of Ubuntu 12.04. If you are not a gamer how is it not ready for primetime? In general, I think it's definitely a viable alternative unless you have some application that won't run on Linux. I have some accounting software that will only run in Windows. So, in that case I just fire up a VM when I need to use that software.

[Leslieann]

Take games out of the equation for a moment. I can't think of anything that I have to customize (other than turning off Unity) or that I'm missing with a fresh installation of Ubuntu 12.04. If you are not a gamer how is it not ready for primetime? In general, I think it's definitely a viable alternative unless you have some application that won't run on Linux. I have some accounting software that will only run in Windows. So, in that case I just fire up a VM when I need to use that software.

On both Lenovo netbooks (x100e, S10e) it runs great. Like it was made for them.
My Sony laptop, the power management is horrendous on Linux. It won't even sleep when the lid is closed. No brightness controls, no FN buttons. (Core2Duo)
My Gateway laptop, the sound system refuses to work. (Core2duo)
My file server, no nic. (core 2 duo)
Older file server had a working nic, but only at 33MBs max, which is only about 1/3rd the gigabit (100+) speeds it should have had.
Desktop has issues with nic and some sata ports. (Intel P68/Core I7)
Tablet, boot loader will not work on anything newer than Ubuntu 9 (so far), due to deprecated commands. It runs Photoshop CS4 through Wine. I hate Gimp.

[smknjoe]

I have no problems with Ubuntu 12.04 64bit on:

(desktop installations on all but the server hardware)
Acer Netbook atom (32bit)
IBM/Lenovo Core2
Toshiba Ultrabook i3
Asus Laptop i7
Acer Laptop core2
Gateway Desktop core2
HP Proliant ?
Multiple Supermicro Xeon
Multiple IBM Xeon
Multiple Sun AMD
...and on and on...

I really can't think of any recent issues with Ubuntu 10.10 64bit or 12.04 64bit. They all just worked (some after installing updates of course.)

Now pre-10.10 was a different story. What versions of Linux were you using? If I'm not sure about hardware compatibility I'll just boot a live USB first to see how it runs before trying a full installation.

Edit: I've installed it on a few Macbooks too. A couple of the machines may have needed slight tweaking, but nothing that a quick Google search couldn't fix.

[SpAmRaY]

Just wondering if the OP has learned anything yet?

[Burz]

Just wondering if the OP has learned anything yet?

Probably very little. Just a bunch of offhand comments that assume the OP wanted to talk about a kernel.

I think Linux enthusiasts tend to assume too much when thinking and talking about the software as an operating system. That's a big reason why most consumers tend to walk away from your typical desktop distro (all of them, actually): Even if you set it up and coach them and act as their on-call repairman, they start to feel that the environment is too unsettling for them. Too many features not properly expressed in the GUI (need to use CLI); too many shifts in the GUI ("uh, KDE became weird and unstable this year... gotta learn and use Gnome for a while"... then Gnome jumps the shark too); audio that still sucks (bad); the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"; hardware snafus and the discovery that "the freeware driver wasn't written for quite this model" or similar idiocy; the ridiculous expectation that enthusiasts give prospective users that they can switch to a Linux desktop if a live CD seems to work for 5 min. on their hardware (then later, all the things that don't work surface one by one until the user realizes they wasted weeks of their time).

Amazingly, the impediments to app developers are nearly as onerous.

None of the above is any real barrier for people who work as sysadmins (esp. for Internet/web services). The big mistake is in thinking you can take hacker and server room culture and make it useable to average consumers by adding a candy coating to a noncommittally-supplied raft of UIs. Apple avoided that and Google also did not make that mistake with Android, since underneath the candy there is a philosophy of greater feature-stability, vertical integration, and hardware compatibility tailored to complete systems not individual chips. And you'll notice Google used the Linux kernel but did not incorporate "Linux" anywhere in the marketed Android identity; selling Android as a "Linux" would have confused people and sent most early adopters running in the other direction.

[domoaligato]

You can't play many retail games on linux.

That's it.

yes you can. check out the steam client for linux.

http://media.steampowered.com/client/installer/steam.deb

http://steamforlinux.com/

http://store.steampowered.com/browse/linux/

To be [un]fair, there aren't a lot of compatible games yet.

did you even look at the 249 games listed on steam?

[smknjoe]

Just wondering if the OP has learned anything yet?

Probably very little. Just a bunch of offhand comments that assume the OP wanted to talk about a kernel.

I think Linux enthusiasts tend to assume too much when thinking and talking about the software as an operating system. That's a big reason why most consumers tend to walk away from your typical desktop distro (all of them, actually): Even if you set it up and coach them and act as their on-call repairman, they start to feel that the environment is too unsettling for them. Too many features not properly expressed in the GUI (need to use CLI); too many shifts in the GUI ("uh, KDE became weird and unstable this year... gotta learn and use Gnome for a while"... then Gnome jumps the shark too); audio that still sucks (bad); the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"; hardware snafus and the discovery that "the freeware driver wasn't written for quite this model" or similar idiocy; the ridiculous expectation that enthusiasts give prospective users that they can switch to a Linux desktop if a live CD seems to work for 5 min. on their hardware (then later, all the things that don't work surface one by one until the user realizes they wasted weeks of their time).

Amazingly, the impediments to app developers are nearly as onerous.

None of the above is any real barrier for people who work as sysadmins (esp. for Internet/web services). The big mistake is in thinking you can take hacker and server room culture and make it useable to average consumers by adding a candy coating to a noncommittally-supplied raft of UIs. Apple avoided that and Google also did not make that mistake with Android, since underneath the candy there is a philosophy of greater feature-stability, vertical integration, and hardware compatibility tailored to complete systems not individual chips. And you'll notice Google used the Linux kernel but did not incorporate "Linux" anywhere in the marketed Android identity; selling Android as a "Linux" would have confused people and sent most early adopters running in the other direction.

What a load of BS!

 Other than a few comments, this thread has been mostly filled with user experiences which is what the OP asked for.

[Thimplum]

You can't play many retail games on linux.

That's it.

yes you can. check out the steam client for linux.

http://media.steampowered.com/client/installer/steam.deb

http://steamforlinux.com/

http://store.steampowered.com/browse/linux/

To be [un]fair, there aren't a lot of compatible games yet.

did you even look at the 249 games listed on steam?

SACRED CATTLE!

My impression of Steam for linux was of when it first entered beta, and there was just Left 4 Dead and TF2.

Wow! I should not have posted that without looking at the games first.

I am seriously considering switching to linux...

[Leslieann]

Now pre-10.10 was a different story. What versions of Linux were you using? If I'm not sure about hardware compatibility I'll just boot a live USB first to see how it runs before trying a full installation.

While far from a Linux guru, I've been using and experimenting with Linux off and on since 1997 and nearly every Ubuntu since version 6 or so.
For version 12, I have a system running netbook, desktop, and server.


Most of these errors were from 11 and 12, when I was trying to convert my arsenal over to it once and for all.

[linziyi]

the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"

You think that typing ONE LINE of command to install any programme without worrying it being a malware or fake is difficult? And you think windows or Mac does a better job in this? By trapping users to download malwares?

[domoaligato]

the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"

You think that typing ONE LINE of command to install any programme without worrying it being a malware or fake is difficult? And you think windows or Mac does a better job in this? By trapping users to download malwares?

for most people.... yes

off the shelf doesn't matter anymore.
almost every piece of software most people would use is available in a web application format now. if not there is a alternative in the ubuntu app center.

[xSpartanCx]

Every day, linux is becoming more and more supported by games and software. I personally like it more than Windows, less drivers to install and an easier command line. Sometimes the simple things can get frustrating, like running a .jar, but most of the time it's a much smoother UI with less bugs in my opinion.

[Burz]

the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"

You think that typing ONE LINE of command to install any programme without worrying it being a malware or fake is difficult? And you think windows or Mac does a better job in this? By trapping users to download malwares?

Yeah, that ONE line plus dozens of others required to chase down dependencies and change config options. OS X comes close to getting it right, because most apps behave like simple files and I can choose to make them global or just stored/run under one user with just drag and drop. A typical Linux app is relatively unruly, and installing one that is not packaged for your particular distro+version leads to hijinx (like uninstalling a dependency to get a different build of it in there, only to discover that 1/3 of your OS also got uninstalled or no longer able to get through updates because of broken dependency resolution).

There is also the problem when a user wants to get their feet wet creating apps. If they want to simply share their Linux program with a class or other people they know (i.e. simply copying the program), they are much more likely to fail because apps that rely on high-level services may not be able find/use those services on other distros (and even the same distro will have large incompatibilities in just a few years). They first have to acquire an expert-level of knowledge about which features are common/uncommon on different Linux desktops and/or how to create packages--and even then are still more likely to fail. I think Linux desktops attract people who want to tinker under the hood (inside the OS) and repel people who want to tinker and advance above that layer--this latter set need interface and feature stability.

The right way to do this--before you even get to apps--is to design a rich set of APIs and utilities and make them standard so that most apps only need to check the OS version during install or initialization.

[linziyi]

Yes the dependency in Linux is quite difficult to deal with, but MOST users don't have to worry about them as the system manages it quite well. For example Ubuntu users would only install "ubuntu-ready" programmes using the apt-get command, the server wouldn't give you something for fedora or SUSE. Would there be no version optimized for your distro, you can oftentimes find the source code and compile from there, which is only a few command lines with the automake system.

As for the app creating, different distros of Linux doesn't mean totally different structure, they still use the same foundation (libraries and kernel), just the programme distributing method is different.

TL;DR There is no "different" linux, a programme usable in a certain distro of linux is usable in any other linux.

[funkymeeba]

Sorry, I've now been enlightened. Linux truly sucks because it's not built for a caveman to use.

I'll just go back to bashing my face against the keyboard with any other system.

[godly_music]

Probably very little. Just a bunch of offhand comments that assume the OP wanted to talk about a kernel.

I think Linux enthusiasts tend to assume too much when thinking and talking about the software as an operating system. That's a big reason why most consumers tend to walk away from your typical desktop distro (all of them, actually): Even if you set it up and coach them and act as their on-call repairman, they start to feel that the environment is too unsettling for them. Too many features not properly expressed in the GUI (need to use CLI); too many shifts in the GUI ("uh, KDE became weird and unstable this year... gotta learn and use Gnome for a while"... then Gnome jumps the shark too); audio that still sucks (bad); the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"; hardware snafus and the discovery that "the freeware driver wasn't written for quite this model" or similar idiocy; the ridiculous expectation that enthusiasts give prospective users that they can switch to a Linux desktop if a live CD seems to work for 5 min. on their hardware (then later, all the things that don't work surface one by one until the user realizes they wasted weeks of their time).

Amazingly, the impediments to app developers are nearly as onerous.

None of the above is any real barrier for people who work as sysadmins (esp. for Internet/web services). The big mistake is in thinking you can take hacker and server room culture and make it useable to average consumers by adding a candy coating to a noncommittally-supplied raft of UIs. Apple avoided that and Google also did not make that mistake with Android, since underneath the candy there is a philosophy of greater feature-stability, vertical integration, and hardware compatibility tailored to complete systems not individual chips. And you'll notice Google used the Linux kernel but did not incorporate "Linux" anywhere in the marketed Android identity; selling Android as a "Linux" would have confused people and sent most early adopters running in the other direction.

Very well put. Even as someone who digs what Linux does and how you have to operate it, I can't agree with most of its preachers for exactly those reasons. You've gotta keep a clear head and be critical of a thing you love.

[Leslieann]

Probably very little. Just a bunch of offhand comments that assume the OP wanted to talk about a kernel.

I think Linux enthusiasts tend to assume too much when thinking and talking about the software as an operating system. That's a big reason why most consumers tend to walk away from your typical desktop distro (all of them, actually): Even if you set it up and coach them and act as their on-call repairman, they start to feel that the environment is too unsettling for them. Too many features not properly expressed in the GUI (need to use CLI); too many shifts in the GUI ("uh, KDE became weird and unstable this year... gotta learn and use Gnome for a while"... then Gnome jumps the shark too); audio that still sucks (bad); the near impossibility of installing 'off the shelf' independently-downloaded apps and the weird cult-like reverence that Linux techies have for "the repository"; hardware snafus and the discovery that "the freeware driver wasn't written for quite this model" or similar idiocy; the ridiculous expectation that enthusiasts give prospective users that they can switch to a Linux desktop if a live CD seems to work for 5 min. on their hardware (then later, all the things that don't work surface one by one until the user realizes they wasted weeks of their time).

Amazingly, the impediments to app developers are nearly as onerous.

None of the above is any real barrier for people who work as sysadmins (esp. for Internet/web services). The big mistake is in thinking you can take hacker and server room culture and make it useable to average consumers by adding a candy coating to a noncommittally-supplied raft of UIs. Apple avoided that and Google also did not make that mistake with Android, since underneath the candy there is a philosophy of greater feature-stability, vertical integration, and hardware compatibility tailored to complete systems not individual chips. And you'll notice Google used the Linux kernel but did not incorporate "Linux" anywhere in the marketed Android identity; selling Android as a "Linux" would have confused people and sent most early adopters running in the other direction.

I'm not so sure about learning very little, but the rest I agree with (though I have VERY serious issues with Android from a developer standpoint  ).

Linux users tend to greatly over sell  how easy it is, and completely over estimate peoples willingness to not only learn, but also tolerate. While you may be willing to drop to command line, 99.9999% of my customers call me to fix EVERYTHING. I had one call me in on a friday night to press a reset button so their computer would be running on Monday... And you expect them to drop to a command line and actually type in a command? 

Unless you work with the actual masses, it's EXTREMELY easy to over estimate the "average" user.  What we think of as average is super geek level to them. Remember these are people who can barely work their Tivo system (they often ask me to hook up tv systems... No). The other day, I had to explain to a web designer what AMD and Intel were, not the difference, but that they were two different manufacturers.

There is a good reason tech support starts with reset your modem and check the cables.

[Lighthouse1]

The other day, I had to explain to a web designer what AMD and Intel were, not the difference, but that they were two different manufacturers.

Indeed its not just non tech savvy people who suffer from that sort of blind spot.

Reminds me of a conversation I had with a supplier..we had bought some foolish code (save money everyone, go to stupid tiny companies who employ the cast of the muppets) and when it arrived we reported a load of defects. Got on a conference call and explained the defects were in Firefox version X whatever it was then (before they went to the rapid release model anyway).

"What's that?" said the developer.

I replied it was a version of Firefox.

There was a pause..

"What's Firefox?"

On the other hand I actually have some sympathy with people who don't want to have to understand an OS or the inner workings of a PC..its a tool, an interface between them and work. Unless you have a leaning to these things why should anyone have to actually have technical knowledge to use something marketed as an office essential and the effective replacement of the typing pool.

PCs etc are actually too complex for most people. Still, keeps the pounds rolling in.

[smknjoe]

Still calling BS. I have installed Ubuntu on PCs for family members that use Apple and they have no problem using it. There is absolutely no need for the average user to use the command line or even install software. When updates are ready you just hit the Install Updates button. That's it.

[linziyi]

Still calling BS. I have installed Ubuntu on PCs for family members that use Apple and they have no problem using it. There is absolutely no need for the average user to use the command line or even install software. When updates are ready you just hit the Install Updates button. That's it.

Yes, no need for average user to use command line.

[rowdy]

Still calling BS. I have installed Ubuntu on PCs for family members that use Apple and they have no problem using it. There is absolutely no need for the average user to use the command line or even install software. When updates are ready you just hit the Install Updates button. That's it.

Yes, no need for average user to use command line.

No need for average user to get HHKB

[Leslieann]

On the other hand I actually have some sympathy with people who don't want to have to understand an OS or the inner workings of a PC..its a tool, an interface between them and work. Unless you have a leaning to these things why should anyone have to actually have technical knowledge to use something marketed as an office essential and the effective replacement of the typing pool.

This is what many most geeks fail to understand.
People want their PC to work like their washing machine. Turn it, it does the job, you turn it off. If it breaks, call a repair man. I've gotten to where I even handle billing like a repair man, makes it easier for people to understand.

That's it, nothing more, like you said, it's a tool for them, not a lifestyle. This is why people love Iphones, it works like an appliance.

Still calling BS. I have installed Ubuntu on PCs for family members that use Apple and they have no problem using it. There is absolutely no need for the average user to use the command line or even install software. When updates are ready you just hit the Install Updates button. That's it.

Inevitably, they want to install an HP printer with a scanner... Wirelessly. All I can say to you at that point is have fun.
The same goes for external backups with automated software, something I am seeing more and more of.

Printer/scanner combos are the bane of my existence, particularly if they are HP or (F'me), both HP and Wireless.

[linziyi]

This is what many most geeks fail to understand.
People want their PC to work like their washing machine. Turn it, it does the job, you turn it off.

Puppy linux.

[smknjoe]

On the other hand I actually have some sympathy with people who don't want to have to understand an OS or the inner workings of a PC..its a tool, an interface between them and work. Unless you have a leaning to these things why should anyone have to actually have technical knowledge to use something marketed as an office essential and the effective replacement of the typing pool.

This is what many most geeks fail to understand.
People want their PC to work like their washing machine. Turn it, it does the job, you turn it off. If it breaks, call a repair man. I've gotten to where I even handle billing like a repair man, makes it easier for people to understand.

That's it, nothing more, like you said, it's a tool for them, not a lifestyle. This is why people love Iphones, it works like an appliance.

Still calling BS. I have installed Ubuntu on PCs for family members that use Apple and they have no problem using it. There is absolutely no need for the average user to use the command line or even install software. When updates are ready you just hit the Install Updates button. That's it.

Inevitably, they want to install an HP printer with a scanner... Wirelessly. All I can say to you at that point is have fun.
The same goes for external backups with automated software, something I am seeing more and more of.

Printer/scanner combos are the bane of my existence, particularly if they are HP or (F'me), both HP and Wireless.

While you may not be able to use the HP software you can still set up a printer and scanner easily for them. Ubuntu has some sort of backup software they push now but I just set up rysnc and forget about it. You can do this for your clients as well without the need for them to do anything but make sure their backup drive is plugged in (or if off-site just make sure the PC is on a connected to the Internet.)

Edit: I'm not saying it's a solution for everyone, but for the most basic needs it functions quite well. And in some cases is even better since you will rarely, if ever, have to deal with mal-ware.