[NTLUG:Discuss] Desktop Linux - From Open Source

[Robert Pearson]

On Jan 31, 2008 10:52 AM, Dennis Rice <dennis at dearroz.com> wrote:
> Have been following the discussion regarding Open Source.  It is one
> topic, but the mags continue to say every year that this will be the
> year of the Linux Desktop.  My response is that I wish it could be.
>
> An issue brought up was the ease of adding applications to Linux.  My
> issue is that this is a very important issue with a variation in
> problems caused by a multitude of distributions, requiring a variation
> of installation procedures.  This is where M$ Windows has a big leg up
> on Linux, one writes software according to their very specific rule book
> (no other comment provided).  M$ does have one problem that Apple has
> overcome, M$ supports a variety of hardware whereas Apple says that the
> software has to run on their OS AND hardware -- nice control.
>
> Linux has the best of all worlds, it lets you do it your way.  And of
> course, you get to have the pleasure of figuring it out.  That means one
> must be intelligent (or at least desire to be).  M$ is designed to be
> operated by the very dumbest user that could not care the least about
> what it takes to make it run.  The user only need to take a list to the
> store and they will provide a system that will support the operation.
> Simple installation GUIs are provided to install every application --
> just a click or two and the application is installed.
>
> There is the "committee" that is attempting to establish standards in
> the Linux world, the Linux Standards Board (LSB), but like any
> committee, there are too many differing opinions and as such I do not
> observe much constancy.  They are like the committee that invented the
> camel, one, two, or no humps (horse).  Best example is Red Hat and
> Debian.    Where are applications installed, what is the procedure
> ......    Does the common user really care?  Do they want to be bothered
> by such issues?
>
> I believe that the common user wants to obtain an application, be it
> proprietary or open source, have an easy method to install it, and an
> easy interface to use it by.  Meet these requirements and we will see
> Linux truly grow into dominance on the desktop, until then, keep buying
> stock in M$.
>
> Dennis


IMHO the best Linux and package management is?/was Debian.
The most powerful and integrated but the least User Friendly.

The most User_Friendly is Ubuntu which is a subset of Debian.
It is User_Friendly because of its integration.
Couple this with the Synaptic Package Manager (SPM) and Users don't
need to know much.
The updates are very fast and very good.

YaST sits in the middle of these two.
Less powerful than Debian, less User_Friendly than Ubuntu + SPM.
I particularly like the way openSUSE is going.
There is a world of difference in the ease of use between openSUSE
10.2 and 10.3.
If openSUSE continues the way they are going they will be the best.

I switched from openSUSE 10.2 to Ubuntu 7.10 Gutsy and was very impressed.
After a few months I began to miss something. No real problems. Ubuntu
was too Windows-like!
I switched to openSUSE 10.3 and after some repository problems I am very happy.

Currently I have one openSUSE 10.2 (my VMware machine), one openSUSE
10.3 (my main machine), and
one Ubuntu 7.10 Gutsy machine (my "play-around" machine).