linux general in future???

[GEJOE DANIEL]

Let me tell that as this is about Linux in general,I write it here...
this should not be mistaken for anti-linux or pro-windows message...
These are the things that I have understood so far...

1.Compared to windows ,linux has got lesser attractive interface(I know that even though Windows is attractive it has got technical weaknesses and also its blackbox policy...);but linux being technically efficient it should be a flawless OS.May be this is because iwm using only Fedora...Suse may be more user-friendly with default players and things like that...(iam not for debate...i just want to ask you whether anyone is there to take these feedbacks so that they will improve the future versions to be more attactive and user-friendly!!!!)KDE and gnome are for sure plus points of LINUX...

2.Mozilla firefox and Open office takes more time compared to corresponding softwares in Windows(mine is Amd64 with AsusK8S motherboard)..i don know whether it's because of
my architecture...but generally in many systems i saw open office taking so much of time to open..
Again for something positive in fututre and not -ve of Windows..

3.Without internet i see that installing players ,mp3 plugins and other linux softwares
is a bit herculian task..so people without internet finds trouble because they can't use YUm or Apt to automatically update or install from net....

4.When we install some softwares from net like MPlayers,etc...sometimes we find that some libraries are missing and they are needed...then we go searching for those libraries in net and get after a long time....

I know that a windows system is technically poor compared to Linux especially about virus attacks...but from a normal view point it's natural that people need an OS to be userfriendly in many aspects...if we speak of technical stuff in Linux,a normal user just ignores those things and opts for user friendly OS...(Windows) and on seeing thses things iam speaking..iam a 3rd year Engg student(IT) and am a fan of LINUX for which my friends use to make fun of me....i had enough trouble in configuring my Sis190 lan driver in fedora but being an IT engg it's a good thing but what about non-Computer professionals??

Tell me whether i've said anything wrong lest please convey the message to developers...

Gejoe D

[techieMoe]

1.Compared to windows ,linux has got lesser attractive interface(

According to whom? Also, to which interface are you referring. Keep in mind that not only does Linux have dozens of possible "interfaces" (KDE, Gnome, IceWM, FVWM, XFce, Fluxbox, WindowMaker, etc, etc) but "attractive" from a user perspective is a very subjective question. Some folks like raspberry, others like vanilla. Can you be more specific?

2.Mozilla firefox and Open office takes more time compared to corresponding softwares in Windows(mine is Amd64 with AsusK8S motherboard)..i don know whether it's because of
my architecture...but generally in many systems i saw open office taking so much of time to open..
Again for something positive in fututre and not -ve of Windows..

Do you have hard numbers on this? Also, what types of background processes are running when you run these applications? There are any number of reasons why a program would run faster or slower on one PC or OS than another.

3.Without internet i see that installing players ,mp3 plugins and other linux softwares is a bit herculian task..so people without internet finds trouble because they can't use YUm or Apt to automatically update or install from net....

Absolutely. I find lots of Linux distributions useless to me because I don't have access to broadband at home.

4.When we install some softwares from net like MPlayers,etc...sometimes we find that some libraries are missing and they are needed...then we go searching for those libraries in net and get after a long time....

Was there a question here? Are you bothered by dependencies in general? There is no "standard" set of libraries that all Linuxes come with, which makes it impossible for any developer to make a package that "just works" on all possible system configurations.

...but from a normal view point it's natural that people need an OS to be userfriendly in many aspects...

Again, according to whom? "User-friendly" is just a subjective as "attractive". Perhaps you really mean "looks and works like MS Windows?"

I suggest you read this article, "Linux is not Microsoft Windows":

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

[oz]

I'm thinking that even if Linux did take a path to be more Windows-like, there would be someone out there that would create yet another OS that is different, and you'd find lots of users flocking to it just the way they have been with Linux.

Sure... Linux is far from perfect, but it's already much better than Windows, at least in my opinion.

[GNOME_n00b]

2.Mozilla firefox and Open office takes more time compared to corresponding softwares in Windows(mine is Amd64 with AsusK8S motherboard)..i don know whether it's because of
my architecture...but generally in many systems i saw open office taking so much of time to open..
Again for something positive in fututre and not -ve of Windows..

if you're comparing with IE, there is a logical reason for this. IE is already preloaded because its built into the kernel. hence the quick start up speed. i think its a little unfair to compare the 2 on a windows platform.

[djap]

I suggest you read this article, "Linux is not Microsoft Windows":

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

This is litle off topic but I was wondering if they want a finnish translation of that site.
Oh well, I'm going to try translating it anyway. Good practise for my language skills

[oosterhouse]

Well, I think techiemoe and ozar are right about this, and why would we use linux if we didn't like it more than windows?

[carlosponti]

i can attest to the fact that slackware runs much better on my old 650 mhz notebook than windows 98 or 2000 ever did. browsers in thier load time are slow but really i dont have problems with the loading of most pages. also for software without broadband you do have the option of buying it from vendors. open office can be bought on CD over the internet. there is a cd of commonly used open source software called http://www.theopencd.org/ you can buy that cd as well. even all distros you can buy like this as well. a computer is only worth you put in. i have seen some peoples desktops that looked awesome on linux and others the boring default.

[Weedman]

if you're comparing with IE, there is a logical reason for this. IE is already preloaded because its built into the kernel. hence the quick start up speed. i think its a little unfair to compare the 2 on a windows platform.

i didnt know that ie was built into the kernel. now i fully understand why windows is soo damn unstable.

thanks GNOME_n00b!

/weed

[a12ctic]

Linux is not windows... Moe how come you didnt lock this ****?

[Tommaso]

1.Compared to windows ,linux has got lesser attractive interface(I know that even though Windows is attractive it has got technical weaknesses and also its blackbox policy...);but linux being technically efficient it should be a flawless OS.May be this is because iwm using only Fedora...Suse may be more user-friendly with default players and things like that...(iam not for debate...i just want to ask you whether anyone is there to take these feedbacks so that they will improve the future versions to be more attactive and user-friendly!!!!)KDE and gnome are for sure plus points of LINUX...

I personaly like my GNOME desktop more than my windows desktop. It looks more serious than windows. Some peope like the less serious, but flashier look of windows, but i personally don't.

2.Mozilla firefox and Open office takes more time compared to corresponding softwares in Windows(mine is Amd64 with AsusK8S motherboard)..i don know whether it's because of
my architecture...but generally in many systems i saw open office taking so much of time to open..
Again for something positive in fututre and not -ve of Windows..

I will disagree with you again. I find that applications like firefox open a little faster on my pentium II 333Mhz running linux, than my 454Mhz pentium III running windows. However, Open Office is slower than MS Office. This is probably because OO requires java, which is nice, but a little slow. I think it depends on the application and the senario.

3.Without internet i see that installing players ,mp3 plugins and other linux softwares
is a bit herculian task..so people without internet finds trouble because they can't use YUm or Apt to automatically update or install from net....

Unfortunately, open source software cannot afford to put everything on disks. The costs would be emmense. without the internet, it would be possible that open source would not exist. So, you need an internet connection to get most software. Notice that the only open source software that gives away cd's (for money) are large companies, like Sun, and Firefox.

4.When we install some softwares from net like MPlayers,etc...sometimes we find that some libraries are missing and they are needed...then we go searching for those libraries in net and get after a long time....

Here i agree with you. I have had a few issues with missing libraries, and they are not very friendly for newbies like me. we can only hope that libraries will be easier to use in the future.