 |
Aardvark
Aardvark Forums
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bruce Simpson
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 6060
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:32 am Post subject: Ubuntu is no Windows XP (31 Mar 2009) |
 |
|
This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2009/0331.shtml
Perhaps it's unfair to suggest that linux == Ubuntu but certainly this distribution has been widely touted as one of the most user-friendliest and most "shrink-wrapped" from an install perspective so are my observations and comments fair?
Why was Ubuntu so difficult to install when compared to XP?
Why was their no useful help for things like the partition manager and network configuration utilities?
Why are they shipping a buggy set of network configuration utilities?
Why are simple things like setting up a desktop shortcut to an executable so hard?
How do Ubuntu users update their copy of Firefox to the latest one so as to avoid the latest critical vulnerabilities?
Is Ubuntu really a practical alternative to Windows for the average PC user?
I'd have to say no -- but they're getting frustratingly close. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Peter
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 2355
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| For Linux distros to become mainstream it's not the upgrades that matter so much. It's whether new PC's are sold with it working out of the box. I doubt many "average users" would ever think of let alone bother upgrading the OS on their PC, especially not changing to an entirely different OS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
k1500
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 947
Location: Wellington
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I think you are overestimating the knowledge of your average windows user - most of them wouldn't have a clue how to install an OS to start with (in fact I'd argue that most of them would actually understand what an OS is). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK, I'm a Linux power user and I don't touch ifconfig except on servers. The way the desktop works is it sees that you have a network cable plugged in, and it uses DHCP to connect to it. You can use the network manager icon to change this if you need to, but again, I never touch that except to select wireless networks. That's the default, and you have to go out of your way to avoid it. If it's getting the netmask wrong, then that's a glitch that I've never seen before, ever.
Now, you mentioned that it stuck past a reboot. It didn't. No change you make with ifconfig will, as it purely changes the state of the running system (this is a characteristic of Linux commands like this: they never store anything anywhere.) The way to make changes to the network configuration outside of the GUI is to edit a config file. The fact that it worked afterwards probably means it was actually working in the first place, or that there was some random hiccough that had stopped it. I bet what would have worked is using the GUI to select the wired connection which, when you're already connected, makes it reconnect (not exactly intuitive, but not something you ever really need to do, either.)
And as for shortcuts on the desktop, here's how: open the menu, find the icon you want, drag it to the desktop. You now have a shortcut there (although, I usually drag them to the panel at the top instead, making my own little quick-launch bar of things I use a lot.) If you have a custom application, you can right-click on the desktop->new launcher.
It checks for updates once a day. You can force it to do so if you want (system->administration->software updates), it might be worth doing before you go to bed or something, there'll be about 200Mb worth. It'll get there soon enough. If it doesn't for a day or two, then have a look in ...administration->software sources and make sure it's being told to. Same with firefox, it'll get upgraded through this.
I'm forced to conclude that, while millions of people successfully use it daily, you are simply not ready for the Linux desktop, and indeed are the worst possible person to test its usability. This is common with Windows power users though (and is something I see a lot of people have problems with): they expect that everything will work identically to windows. It doesn't, and it shouldn't, so please stop thinking it should. The people that have the easiest time with Linux are those that have no (or, at least, minimal) knowledge invested in Windows. Imagine a hard-core OSX person moving to Windows, or visa-versa. It's exactly the same thing.
Try forgetting everything you know about windows and going from there. Don't expect things, just try the more simple ways (‘ooh, I'm administering my system ... surely that's where all my programs get updated ... oh look, software updates’, ‘I want an icon for this program on the desktop...maybe I can just drag it there’.) Unfortunately, doing so is very difficult, so you're going to have a slightly uncomfortable time until you've learnt how it all really works. Just try and not get in your own way with your windows (or even UNIX from days-of-yore) knowledge.
Last edited by Eythian on Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:44 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonmac807
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 25
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am slightly more than a typical Windows user - by your definition at least - and had a really great experience installing Ubuntu Linux on a very old PC. I must admit that I did choose the manual option for partitioning the HDD but other than that it went like a breeze.
I then tried - for the hell of it - to install the Connexant modem that was in the box. Gave up after several hours of trying to find a suitable driver. As these "soft modems" rely the Microsoft code you have to find the correct Linux drivers and install them. Not a breeze!
My other great nightmare is trying to install a program! Yes Ubuntu does have the necessary compiler but there are still a lot of programs it wont install. You need to download the compiler and run that. Yuk Give me the simple double click of Windows/Mac anytime.
Also have not found a program that will allow me to play mp3's. Apparently mp3' is a proprietary format or something.
I have spent hours on the help knowledge base at Ubuntu trying to come to terms with this operating system.
Like you - I remain to be convinced that Ubuntu is yet at a point where the "average user" who wants to do a little bit more than surf the net and clear e-mails can handle it.
I did my first "computer" course as a young soldier at the School of Signals in Waiouru in 1968 so confess to being a dinosaur! Maybe I am past it?
Having said that I like Ubuntu for its speed etc. I intend to persevere with it when time permits |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce Simpson
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 6060
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eythian wrote: | | OK, I'm a Linux power user and I don't touch ifconfig except on servers. The way the desktop works is it sees that you have a network cable plugged in, and it uses DHCP to connect to it. You can use the network manager icon to change this if you need to, but again, I never touch that except to select wireless networks. That's the default, and you have to go out of your way to avoid it. If it's getting the netmask wrong, then that's a glitch that I've never seen before, ever. |
Well even now, if I go into the network configuration utility, the netmask value shows up as 24 instead of the value I typed in.
It's not an Ubuntu bug per se but it is counter-intuitive and very confusing (what is displayed is *not* what you typed) and it has confused others). The fact that the "hint" for the netmask field is totally wrong doesn't help. These are the kind of things that keep Linux "almost there".
If they're going to use that field as bit-count rather than an IP field then why not say so?
| Quote: | | I bet what would have worked is using the GUI to select the wired connection which, when you're already connected, makes it reconnect (not exactly intuitive, but not something you ever really need to do, either.) |
Although the wired connection showed up in the network configuration screen (eth0) the network tools displayed no configuration for eth0. No MTU, no card address, -- nothing.
Chances are that the ifconfig didn't change anything because I was getting errors "unable to assign" when issuing a simple command like ipconfig eth0 netstat 255.255.255.0
The strange thing is that this command worked perfectly fine (without errors) when used when running from the CD (and yes, I used sudo to raise my permission to the required level).
The first thing I tried was to set the network to DHCP Auto and enter the router's IP address but it would not connect. I then set things to manual and set the IP address to the one the router would have handed out. That gave me connectivity to the modem (but not beyond). Then, while that connection was still active, I changed to DHCP auto and entered the router's address again and saved. That's when it stuck.
| Quote: | | I'm forced to conclude that, while millions of people successfully use it daily, you are simply not ready for the Linux desktop, and indeed are the worst possible person to test its usability. This is common with Windows power users though (and is something I see a lot of people have problems with): they expect that everything will work identically to windows. It doesn't, and it shouldn't, so please stop thinking it should. |
But this is *exactly* the kind of person that needs to be given a good linux experience if the product is to gain any kind of foothold. Let's face it, most people already have Windows experience so they'll be using a set of preconceived assumptions when dealing with Linux. The designers ought to take that into account if they expect people to change.
Nobody would launch a new car on the market and expect it to do well if it had the accelerator pedal on the left and the indicator switch on the gear-lever would they?
And the "it's just different" claim isn't quite as strong as you might think. I found very few Windows users who didn't take to the Mac interface like a fish to water when given the chance. If Apple could make a non-Windows environment interface that was intuitive, simple and easy to use -- why can't Linux?
| Quote: | | The people that have the easiest time with Linux are those that have no (or, at least, minimal) knowledge invested in Windows. Imagine a hard-core OSX person moving to Windows, or visa-versa. It's exactly the same thing. |
It is -- except that Windows error messages tend to be site more useful (IMHO) and access to interactive help tends to be more prolific, well targeted and accurate.
The fact that the Ubuntu "help" for network issues involves opening a terminal window and delving into shell commands is a perfect example of the difference between Windows and Linux. When was the last time you saw Windows suggesting you start using a command-line interface to do basic fault-finding and remedy?
As I said... it's infuriatingly close -- but that's been the case for a while now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jonmac807 wrote: | | I then tried - for the hell of it - to install the Connexant modem that was in the box. Gave up after several hours of trying to find a suitable driver. As these "soft modems" rely the Microsoft code you have to find the correct Linux drivers and install them. Not a breeze! |
Unfortunately, there's not much that can be done about that, although I hear it is getting better. The only company with drivers refuses to allow them to be distributed I think. About all you can do is not buy modems from companies that try to strong-arm you. But, often it's too late.
| Quote: | | My other great nightmare is trying to install a program! Yes Ubuntu does have the necessary compiler but there are still a lot of programs it wont install. You need to download the compiler and run that. Yuk Give me the simple double click of Windows/Mac anytime. |
Please don't. Applications->Add/Remove... — you'll find a list of a huge number of programs. Don't think “oh, it's Linux so I'll need to compile things!” That way lies madness.
| Quote: | | Also have not found a program that will allow me to play mp3's. Apparently mp3' is a proprietary format or something. |
It is, it's patented. You'd no longer be able to get Linux for free if they included it. But, to play one: double click on it. It'll pop up and say ‘searching for codecs’ or similar, and then install them, and then play your MP3. The same works for xvid codecs, and pretty much anything else. Last I saw, Windows couldn't do that and you had to hunt down codec packs and hope they didn't have viruses.
| Quote: | | Like you - I remain to be convinced that Ubuntu is yet at a point where the "average user" who wants to do a little bit more than surf the net and clear e-mails can handle it. |
I can't go back to Windows for any length of time. It's a painfully non-straightforward system, it doesn't have gnome-do to access everything with, it can't play most of my music out of the box (why can't it auto-download a Vorbis codec? They are as free as it is possible to get), same with movie files. Why do I have to find the website of every single program I want in order to download it? Why can't they all be in one place? Why can't the system update everything on it, instead of only the microsoft bits? Why do I have to have special knowledge to go on the internet without getting infected with something? Why can't I sit on my couch with my laptop and send the audio from it to the speakers on my desktop? And don't get me started on the lack of useful developer tools! Clearly, windows isn't ready for the people who want to do useful things with their computer either. The thing is, you know how to work around these limitations. Linux presents a different set. It isn't windows.
Interestingly, there is a thing in Ubuntu called ‘popcon’ that sends a summary of packages you have installed so that the devs know where they should focus efforts. For obvious privacy reasons, it must be turned on manually. It just hit a million submissions (http://popcon.ubuntu.com/). So, there are clearly a lot of people happily using it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hiro Protagonist
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 146
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:10 am Post subject: Re: Ubuntu is no Windows XP (31 Mar 2009) |
|
|
| Bruce Simpson wrote: |
Why are simple things like setting up a desktop shortcut to an executable so hard?
|
It's not so much hard, it's just different. You might be more comfortable with Kubuntu, which uses the K Desktop Environment instead of Gnome. KDE works in ways more familiar to you.
To create a desktop 'shortcut' [we call it a link], in KDE, either:
a) right-click the desktop, select Create New/Link to Application, then select the Application tab & browse. or:
b) Open the Konqueror file manager, find the application, drag to the desktop, and select 'Link here' from the popup.
c) From the K menu, right-click the application and select 'Add item to desktop'
Now tell me that's 'hard'.
Last edited by Hiro Protagonist on Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:14 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Simon
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
Posts: 457
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
One of the big problems with Linux and a lot of open source software is arrogance.
You see it in the software itself. The lack of useful help or error messages. And often very poor documentation. It usually seems to be written by people who obviously know how to use the software but have little ability to explain it to non users (good technical documentation people are hard to find for any software).
Then there is the fact that Linux is quite a technical OS to use properly. Of course they are trying to make it easier to use all the time but I always get this feeling they are dumbing it down for the average user but that they don't want them to forget this. A kind of "we're so clever we can use this thing but here, we've made it simple for you stupid people" attitude that comes across all too readily.
You also see this in the comments you get from open source/Linux people. A kind of arrogance where the average user or even Windows users are looked down upon. They need to get over that and then I think Linux will be a much nicer, easier to use product. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce Simpson wrote: | | Well even now, if I go into the network configuration utility, the netmask value shows up as 24 instead of the value I typed in. |
Right, so it's not actually showing the wrong value. It's showing the right value, but in a form you don't expect. Which, admittedly, it shouldn't.
On the other hand, I have no idea where you're looking. I right-click on the network icon, go to connection info, and see my netmask as 255.255.255.0
| Quote: | | Although the wired connection showed up in the network configuration screen (eth0) the network tools displayed no configuration for eth0. No MTU, no card address, -- nothing. |
Erm. Right-click on the network icon, go to connection info, and I can see my MAC address, and various other bits of info. Not the MTU, but that's fine. Why would your average user want that anyway?
| Quote: | | Chances are that the ifconfig didn't change anything because I was getting errors "unable to assign" when issuing a simple command like ipconfig eth0 netstat 255.255.255.0 |
That's not a real command. To start with, 'ipconfig' doesn't exist, secondly 'netstat' is a command on its own, thirdly, if eth0 existed and you said 'ifconfig' and 'netmask', then it would have worked. But, stop doing that. It isn't necessary. If you _really_ need to be messing with that, right-click the network icon, edit networks. But don't do that either. In a properly set up network the defaults will work perfectly well.
| Quote: | | The first thing I tried was to set the network to DHCP Auto and enter the router's IP address but it would not connect. |
Well of course it wouldn't. That makes no sense. Try doing that on Windows and it wouldn't work either. Either that, or (perhaps most likely) the IP address you enter is overridden by the DHCP.
| Quote: | | I then set things to manual and set the IP address to the one the router would have handed out. That gave me connectivity to the modem (but not beyond). |
This also wouldn't work on Windows because you haven't provided a default gateway.
| Quote: | | Then, while that connection was still active, I changed to DHCP auto and entered the router's address again and saved. That's when it stuck. |
Actually, I suspect there is something differing in your explanations there. However, to force it to reconnect left-click the network manager icon, select the one that says 'auto eth0', which will be there by default.
I think you're likely to cause more problems than you would solve by trying to apply your windows knowledge to the problem. Just look at the network manage icon in the top right. If it shows two computers, it's connected, if it shows them with a red 'x', it's not. If it's two lights with a spinner, it's connecting. If it's a blue bar graph, it's on wireless and telling you your signal strength. Left click to show your networks. Selecting a network here activates (or re-activates) the connection. Right click to configure it or get information.
| Quote: | | But this is *exactly* the kind of person that needs to be given a good linux experience if the product is to gain any kind of foothold. Let's face it, most people already have Windows experience so they'll be using a set of preconceived assumptions when dealing with Linux. The designers ought to take that into account if they expect people to change. |
What? So, you expect everyone currently using it to change the way we've found things to work best so that you have an easier time adjusting? This is in noone's long-term interests. To start with, it hurts all the people that are currently using, and it hurts everyone who moves to it too as they get an inferior system.
| Quote: | | Nobody would launch a new car on the market and expect it to do well if it had the accelerator pedal on the left and the indicator switch on the gear-lever would they? |
Really? Why would you expect an F1 car to have exactly the same control layout as your Ford Pinto? 
| Quote: | | And the "it's just different" claim isn't quite as strong as you might think. I found very few Windows users who didn't take to the Mac interface like a fish to water when given the chance. If Apple could make a non-Windows environment interface that was intuitive, simple and easy to use -- why can't Linux? |
Maybe there's more difference? Maybe it's because people come along and say ‘I'm good at Windows, but I can't get to grips with Linux, therefore it's too hard for the average user’ giving them preconceived notions? Perhaps it's because Mac OS does more things in a similar way to Windows, and has the same problems. (Vorbis files? XviD out of the box? Having to go to a website to download programs?)
| Quote: | | It is -- except that Windows error messages tend to be site more useful (IMHO) and access to interactive help tends to be more prolific, well targeted and accurate. |
Prolific certainly, that's why people are trained to click on OK all the time.
| Quote: | | The fact that the Ubuntu "help" for network issues involves opening a terminal window and delving into shell commands is a perfect example of the difference between Windows and Linux. When was the last time you saw Windows suggesting you start using a command-line interface to do basic fault-finding and remedy? |
Huh? The help uses the command line as an alternative tool. You can do more at the command line than you can through the GUI. It's always going to be like that. But, you are wrong about it requiring the command line, and if you'll pardon my language:
| Ubuntu help wrote: |
If your network connection is managed by Network Manager the connection should be enabled automatically.
Als de verbinding niet automatisch is ingeschakeld:
1. Zoek het netwerkbeheer-pictogram in het meldingengebied. Het hoort eruit te zien als een kleine signaalsterkte-indicator of als een computermonitor en bevindt zich waarschijnlijk naast de klok.
...
|
That starts “If the connection is not automatically enabled: Look for the network manager icon in the notification area...” After a bunch of stuff about network manager, it then references using the command line as another option. This is all in the “Netwerken voor beginners” section.
(It does however look like they need to be a bit more consistent in their translation, but at least you don't have to buy a whole new version for a different language)
| Quote: | | As I said... it's infuriatingly close -- but that's been the case for a while now. |
My opinion is that it's long shot past. Windows doesn't even come with an office suite out of the box. How dark ages is that?
You're fighting the operating system because you think you know better. Don't do that. Just sit back and let it do things its way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwin
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 1230
Location: Wellington
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bruce you are right on the money today!
Linux is not ready for the mass market. Hey - I've been a long-time BSD user and very comfortable in the command line. But most users find that difficult and counter-intuitive because there's no such thing as a command line in the real world (maybe God uses one to control the universe - who knows!).
In Linux (and BSD) when things are going fine, users are generally happy. The thing that lets it down is when the user gets stuck they have trouble finding a solution. The help messages are not always useful to them, and unfortunately those experiences are what users will judge an OS on.
My missus switched from Windows to Mac and adapted very well. She'd be what you call an average user. She has no interest in computers and only uses them for what tasks she wants to accomplish. Sometimes she gets stuck on something and asks. She's not so good at using the online help but I think it's because it's just easier to ask me. Most things I only need to show her once.
It would be at interesting experiment to put her in front of Linux and see how she fares.
Simon also has a point. Linux developers know their product well but are the worst at explaining them to users. They have failed to realise that the presentation, support and documentation is just as important as the bells and whistles the software boasts.
I no longer run BSD because I have a Mac which has BSD under the bonnet (and I run Windows and Ubuntu as virtual machines to play around with from time to time). If I want to do powerful geeky-type thing in a command line, I can. But when I want to set the coordinates of each of my photos in iPhoto (my camera does not have a GPS built in unfortunately), it's a breeze through Apple's intuitive interface. And that's what the experience should be. Why can't Linux do it? Pride? Or perhaps a lack of understanding business needs?
By the way, some years ago I used to create all sorts of little utilities and applications which I thought were really cool. I built in lots of features and thought people would love what I'd created. 10 years on, I look back and realise that I was doing what Linux people did: ignoring the business side. Technically my products were probably great. But the business side was lacking. Who's gonna want to compile their own app, and add configuration parameters to a config file? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Simon wrote: | | And often very poor documentation. It usually seems to be written by people who obviously know how to use the software but have little ability to explain it to non users (good technical documentation people are hard to find for any software). |
I disagree that that is arrogance. I think that's more that being a technical writer is a particular profession that many people think they can do but really can't. System->Help... in Ubuntu is surprisingly helpful I've found.
| Quote: | | You also see this in the comments you get from open source/Linux people. A kind of arrogance where the average user or even Windows users are looked down upon. They need to get over that and then I think Linux will be a much nicer, easier to use product. |
How about people coming from the other direction: “if I can't use it, then anybody less good than me obviously can't either.”?
I do agree it's an issue in some circles, but as more and more people come along, it's getting better. Check out the ubuntu forums, it's in general pretty good in that respect.
Last edited by Eythian on Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
digidog
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 189
Location: Queenstown
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know my way around Windows but preferred DOS 5 (there's a clue to my
age). A couple of months ago I was setting up an old PC for my daughter
and decided to whack on a copy of Ubunto. I ran the install CD and made
it a dual boot system. Less than an hour later I had my network manually
connected, FireFox working fine and we were playing with Open Office.
My experience sounds less complicated than yours Bruce, but I couldn't
believe how easy the process was and how little tech knowledge it required. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edwin wrote: | | But when I want to set the coordinates of each of my photos in iPhoto (my camera does not have a GPS built in unfortunately), it's a breeze through Apple's intuitive interface. And that's what the experience should be. Why can't Linux do it? Pride? Or perhaps a lack of understanding business needs? |
Have you told them that it's necessary to you (a big difference between open source and proprietary software is that requests like that are encouraged)? Maybe they just don't know that people would find it handy. Although, looking around, I found that this looks like what you're after. So, neither pride nor lack of understanding, but already implemented.
| Quote: | | Who's gonna want to compile their own app, and add configuration parameters to a config file? |
The people who make distributions, that's who. They they pass those utils on to everyone else as compiled and boxed programs. That's why a complete set of the debian project takes a good number of DVDs full. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| digidog wrote: | | A couple of months ago I was setting up an old PC for my daughter and decided to whack on a copy of Ubunto. |
How old is your daughter? If she's younger, perhaps install the 'edubuntu-desktop' package, which you can get through 'System->Administration->Synaptic Package Manager'. This will install a large number of education-oriented things aimed for children. This distro is aimed at schools and so on (it's possible to mix-and-match distro components like that fairly happily, so you can turn your regular desktop into an edubuntu desktop just by installing the package.)
Oh, Bruce, I reopened that bug. Perhaps it'll get fixed and you will have contributed to making Ubuntu better |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce Simpson
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 6060
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eythian wrote: | | On the other hand, I have no idea where you're looking. I right-click on the network icon, go to connection info, and see my netmask as 255.255.255.0 |
I used the network tools and network configuration utilities from the admin and system menus.
One would assume that such tools would do the job they claim to.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Although the wired connection showed up in the network configuration screen (eth0) the network tools displayed no configuration for eth0. No MTU, no card address, -- nothing. |
Erm. Right-click on the network icon, go to connection info, and I can see my MAC address, and various other bits of info. Not the MTU, but that's fine. Why would your average user want that anyway? |
Again, I used the tools provided from the menus.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Chances are that the ifconfig didn't change anything because I was getting errors "unable to assign" when issuing a simple command like ipconfig eth0 netstat 255.255.255.0 |
That's not a real command. To start with, 'ipconfig' doesn't exist, secondly 'netstat' is a command on its own, |
mea culpa -- I meant "netmask" not netstat.
| Quote: | | thirdly, if eth0 existed and you said 'ifconfig' and 'netmask', then it would have worked. But, stop doing that. It isn't necessary. If you _really_ need to be messing with that, right-click the network icon, edit networks. But don't do that either. In a properly set up network the defaults will work perfectly well. |
The defaults didn't work at all -- I couldn't even ping the DSL modem.
For a start -- there was no address associated with the DHCP server so I had to enter one and even then it wouldn't connect.
| Quote: | | Actually, I suspect there is something differing in your explanations there. However, to force it to reconnect left-click the network manager icon, select the one that says 'auto eth0', which will be there by default. |
Here's how it went:
1. after the install, no network connection (eth0 exists but the Gnome Nettool utility provided as a part of the install bundle fails to see any of the parameters associated with eth0). Attempts to connect to the network (which is checked "auto" anyway) fail.
2. I check that DHCP is set to auto (which it is) but there's no address in the DHCP server field.
3. I add the router's address to that field -- nothing changes. An attempt is made to connect to the network and after about 30 seconds comes back "disconnected".
4. I switch to manual and enter the IP address that I know my DHCP hands out on this port. Immediately the network connects and I can talk to the modem but there's no DNS resolution (because there's no DNS server defined of course).
5. While the network is in "connected" status, I switch back to DHCP auto and viola -- the world wide web works.
6. I shut down and restart -- viola -- the WWW is still there!
Why wouldn't it talk to the modem right from the get-go? I don't know but I did initially try rebooting a couple of times in case it was a hardware hiccup but to no avail.
It works now though.
| Quote: | | I think you're likely to cause more problems than you would solve by trying to apply your windows knowledge to the problem. Just look at the network manage icon in the top right. If it shows two computers, it's connected, if it shows them with a red 'x', it's not. If it's two lights with a spinner, it's connecting. If it's a blue bar graph, it's on wireless and telling you your signal strength. Left click to show your networks. Selecting a network here activates (or re-activates) the connection. Right click to configure it or get information. |
So why include a couple of lame utilities that do not seem to work properly?
Again, it's a case of "no polish" and the kind of lack of cohesion that sometimes trips up even the best OSS project.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Nobody would launch a new car on the market and expect it to do well if it had the accelerator pedal on the left and the indicator switch on the gear-lever would they? |
Really? Why would you expect an F1 car to have exactly the same control layout as your Ford Pinto? |
But we're talking about the goal of the linux community to grow its numbers and challenge Windows aren't we?
You can't challenge the Ford Falcon's market dominance by trying to sell people an F1 car for their every-day road use can you? One of the keys to success is identifying people's expectations and meeting them, something Linux still falls short on.
I wonder if part of the problem is that (like many OSS projects) Linux is still largely driven by programmers rather than people who are more expert in analysing the market's needs, wants and expectations?
The void between geek and user is a wide one that very few geeks can bridge without assistance. I recall seeing some incredibly bad software written by fresh comp-sci graduates. They did exactly what was asked for by the specification -- but made no allowance for the fact that there would be real live *people* using them. When a user complained that a single mistake in a data-entry screen required that *all* data be re-entered, the programmer would say "don't make mistakes then" and think that was a satisfactory solution.
Linux still has a whiff of that I fear.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | It is -- except that Windows error messages tend to be site more useful (IMHO) and access to interactive help tends to be more prolific, well targeted and accurate. |
Prolific certainly, that's why people are trained to click on OK all the time. |
And where's my Blue Screen of Death??
| Quote: | | Quote: | | As I said... it's infuriatingly close -- but that's been the case for a while now. |
My opinion is that it's long shot past. Windows doesn't even come with an office suite out of the box. How dark ages is that? |
An OS is an OS, applications are applications. The fact that one OS comes with more applications doesn't necessarily mean that the OS itself is better.
| Quote: | | You're fighting the operating system because you think you know better. Don't do that. Just sit back and let it do things its way. |
If that were the case, I'd still be watching the little network icon spinning for 30 seconds and the coming up with "disconnected".
I'd also be searching (in futility) to find out why 255.255.255.0 turns into 24 when you recall that screen in the network configuration screen. That's because the only reference I found for that anomaly is online and if your network connection isn't working -- you can't find it
Now my latest experience...
I went to YouTube and (as expected) was prompted to download the latest Flash player.
Off to Adobe, choose the correct version/package and everything runs smoothly.
Now I can see YT videos (and horrible Flash ads) but boy is it *SLOW*.
A machine that worked perfectly well under XP when viewing YT vids in full-screen is now dropping frames and when you move the mouse it stalls momentarily. Switching to HQ is an utter waste of time -- the system then completely ignores any attempts to switch back to normal size or quality until the vid finishes playing.
Okay, this may be an issue with Adobe's Linux version of Flash -- or maybe it's a video driver but purely from a "new user" perspective it says "this isn't as good as my Windows experience".
Any ideas how to improve things? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
digidog
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 189
Location: Queenstown
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eythian wrote: | | How old is your daughter? |
She's sixteen and reasonably computer savvy. She's been using PhotoShop
for 3 years, built a couple of basic websites and is helpful when her IT
teacher gets stuck from time to time.
What impressed me was the way she dived into Linux without fear or any
great expectations. It just worked for her from day one. I'm sure that the
average punter won't touch Linux unless it comes pre-installed with their
computer. But this is the sort of thing we should be teaching in schools. The
easiest way to learn another language is to start young and immerse your-
self. I suspect that the same is true of operating systems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smorf
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
your experience surprises me, people tell me all of the time (being the windows biggot that I admitidly am) about how easy it is.
I am however reminded of the time I first setup a Windows Server 2008 box.
slap the disk in, click the mouse two or three times, walk away to come back to a login prompt.
then it got hard, I had to figure out a password that was strong enough to let me in.
i was at least expecting to have to fuff around with raid drivers (previous bad experience with an older os).
linux is getting better, much better than the last time I actually tried to install it (years ago) but it has got a long way to go before it becomes usable to my mother. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sophocles
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 880
Location: Auckland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| smorf wrote: |
it has got a long way to go before it becomes usable to my mother.
|
My mother was computer illiterate but has been using Linux for 8 years. She's 85. Don't denigrate your mother so. She may just surprise you, even more than mine surprised me ...
| Bruce wrote: |
First step was to download the latest Ubuntu Linux LiveCD
|
Um, well no. The URL you gave brings down the desktop installation CD which is the correct one to use. I've not tried installing ubuntu from it's live CD and I don't recommend it for any linux distro. The latest Ubuntu is 8.10 which does have some bugs. I recommend 8.04: it's more stable.
Were you using an ADSL modem or a dial up? As you looked for the Internet the way you did, I assume you are on ADSL, which means your modem may have a DHCP server within. Check its manual. If it has and it was set to run, then your networking installation would have gone smoothly. All you need to do is set the size of the pool of addresses it can allocate and start it. For a home network, 10 is more than adequate. You can administer your modem through a web browser. Setting this up before you dived in on the linux installation would have made things quite painless. Not setting it up for any OS can create some interesting hair pulling when you have to do the networking by hand: windows, os X, linux, it doesn't matter which one.
As for Linux: was your network card correctly detected? It needs a device driver in the kernel before any of the network commands will work. The command line command (yes!)
dmesg | less
will show you the kernel bootup messages. Less is a pager, a program which displays a page of text and allows you to scroll backwards and forwards through a full text file. You leave it by typing q (quit). Use it to scroll through the text to look for eth0 ---that's what your network card will be known as. If it's a wireless card, it will be something else. If it's there, you can connect to a network and ifconfig will work. (I haven't read through all the responses and counter responses ...).
I will point out that any installation of any networked operating system requires a little forethought and preparation before starting the installation. You went in worse than one of my students and they certainly charge in!
Looking at the calibre of the help you have available, I will step to one side and watch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nzchrise
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 15
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:13 pm Post subject: Linux Install |
|
|
I used the Wubi programme to install Ubuntu inside my XP computer. Once downloaded, the install was very straight forward - asked me for a user name and pass word - up and running after a couple of reboots. Found my router, my printer. told me there were updates which i installed. Came with OpenOffice sans the data base module. Firefox runs fine.
I only have two gripes - 1. every time i boot into Ubuntu it changes my system clock time by adding an hour or more and 2. I can't seem to install the latest flash player that is wanted for You Tube.
Otherwise... it does everything windows does and it's FREE. if i need to reserect an old pc i'll use Ubuntu.
Cheers
Chris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sophocles
Joined: 18 Nov 2006
Posts: 880
Location: Auckland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good on you for having a try. Keep with it.
All problems can be solved but you have to analyse them, and order them.
Then you can prioritise and solve them.
You mentioned something about setting up links on the desktop: I run the KDE desktop, not the Gnome one which is the default in Ubuntu. To set a link on the desktop you should be able to find the app in the main menu (click on the footprint button) and click and drag the app's mini-icon onto your desktop. Dropping it brings up a small menu from which you select
Copy Here
and that's it. Easy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce Simpson
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 6060
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sophocles wrote: | | Um, well no. The URL you gave brings down the desktop installation CD which is the correct one to use. I've not tried installing ubuntu from it's live CD and I don't recommend it for any linux distro. The latest Ubuntu is 8.10 which does have some bugs. |
If it's not recommended (for whatever reason) why provide it as an option?
| Quote: | | Were you using an ADSL modem... |
Yes it's a four-port DSL modem with NAT and a DHCP server that has worked just fine when adding new Windows machines to the network -- never a problem -- plug and play.
Not the case with Ubuntu though 
| Quote: | | As for Linux: was your network card correctly detected? |
Must have been. ifconfig showed the correct data for the card but nothing related to TCP/IP. The card was recognised and worked but Linux wasn't working through it at a TCP/IP level.
And, the interesting thing is that after I got it to work by *not* using DHCP it then works after switching back to DHCP and now continues to work just fine.
I think this is one of the things that many people talk about with Linux distros -- they're 99% great but all too often get tripped up by something like this.
The next step will be locating some applications (the stuff on offer through the add/remove option is *very* limited in scope) and seeing if the missus can work out how to install them. She has no problems with Windows installs thanks to the nice consistent interface and lack of "challenging" questions posed.
Any suggestions as to worthwhile apps? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce Simpson
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 6060
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sophocles wrote: | You mentioned something about setting up links on the desktop: I run the KDE desktop, not the Gnome one which is the default in Ubuntu. To set a link on the desktop you should be able to find the app in the main menu (click on the footprint button) and click and drag the app's mini-icon onto your desktop. Dropping it brings up a small menu from which you select
Copy Here
and that's it. Easy. |
I found out how to create a shortcut for an item on the menus - right click on the menu selection and it offers to make itself a desktop shortcut. That's nice and simple after all.
Do I assume that when a third-party application is installed that it will automatically appear in the menus (as with Windows) or offer a desktop shortcut option?
That's the kind of functionality that people have come to expect from a desktop PC OS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malcolm
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 71
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why were you trying to enter the ip for your router if it provides dhcp?
Click here to view image.
That is all the setting up you need to make ubuntu go live on a network with DHCP enabled. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 2355
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| edwin wrote: | | there's no such thing as a command line in the real world (maybe God uses one to control the universe - who knows!). |
I must be from a different world then. I use XP mostly and use the command line extensively. And I deal with clients who mostly use XP or Vista, and I get them to use the command line when doing phone support, it is much faster and more accurate especially when dealing with less literate users believe it or not. I can tell them exactly what to type. It's difficult to direct verbally when they use a GUI at the other end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwin
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 1230
Location: Wellington
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter wrote: | | edwin wrote: | | there's no such thing as a command line in the real world (maybe God uses one to control the universe - who knows!). |
I must be from a different world then. I use XP mostly and use the command line extensively. And I deal with clients who mostly use XP or Vista, and I get them to use the command line when doing phone support, it is much faster and more accurate especially when dealing with less literate users believe it or not. I can tell them exactly what to type. It's difficult to direct verbally when they use a GUI at the other end. |
I was referring to the real world as in outside of computers. Like, making a cup of coffee, opening and closing doors, putting books on shelves, taking groceries and putting them in your shopping trolley. That's what I meant by "real world".
But anyway, I agree with troubleshooting using the command line - when I did Desktop Support I got users to do the same thing. That's fine for following instructions from IT support people, but I doubt an average user trying to help themselves is going to think "now... I wonder why it won't connect - maybe I should do a ifconfig in the command line" Instead they might think "hmm... what if I click on/hover over the network icon - maybe it'll show me a status of some sort". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce Simpson wrote: | | For a start -- there was no address associated with the DHCP server so I had to enter one and even then it wouldn't connect. |
You never (YMMV:)) have to do that. I've never seen (most of) the problems you describe. The best idea I have is that there was something weird about your configuration, or just a bit of bad luck. On all my computers, I plug in the network cable (or, turn the computer on) and it works it all out itself. That's how it's supposed to work, and how it does in all the cases I've seen.
| Quote: | | So why include a couple of lame utilities that do not seem to work properly? |
They do work, they're for setting up non-standard configurations.
| Quote: | | Again, it's a case of "no polish" and the kind of lack of cohesion that sometimes trips up even the best OSS project. |
I don't think there's anything special about OSS in that respect. Windows has them too, you're just used to them so ignore them. I undoubtedly do the same in reverse. For example, in Vista if you share a folder on an external harddrive and then remove the drive, when you replug the drive in, the share has gone and must be manually put back. Or, vista machines that can't find the drivers to access my (perfectly normal) memory stick. That's lack of polish too.
| Quote: | | You can't challenge the Ford Falcon's market dominance by trying to sell people an F1 car for their every-day road use can you? One of the keys to success is identifying people's expectations and meeting them, something Linux still falls short on. |
To a point. There's a certain lack of desire to make things worse just to make things more like what people are used to, because that's a short term gain, long term loss.
| Quote: | | And where's my Blue Screen of Death?? |
Why, the BSOD screensaver, of course
| Quote: | | An OS is an OS, applications are applications. The fact that one OS comes with more applications doesn't necessarily mean that the OS itself is better. |
Not these days it isn't. It's the kernel and everything on top of it.
| Quote: | | I went to YouTube and (as expected) was prompted to download the latest Flash player. |
That's unfortunately due to youtube. They detect that you don't have flash and do that. If you go to a site that doesn't do flash detection, the plugin manager will pop up instead, and offer to install flash from within the OS. In fact, I'd suggest you remove what you manually installed and go Applications->Add/Remove and install flash from there. That way you get updates too.
What I think would be an option is for the browser to detect that it's youtube and intercept its 'go to adobe and download it' thing. But it doesn't.
| Quote: | | Okay, this may be an issue with Adobe's Linux version of Flash -- or maybe it's a video driver but purely from a "new user" perspective it says "this isn't as good as my Windows experience". |
That's why some people don't like closed source software. We can't fix that, only Adobe can. For the record, I have flash running just fine here. It may be a video driver issue - what brand of card do you have? Perhaps if you have a look in the 'restricted drivers' thing, it'll suggest one, although it should do that on first startup if it finds something useful.
| digidog wrote: | | She's sixteen and reasonably computer savvy. She's been using PhotoShop for 3 years, built a couple of basic websites and is helpful when her IT teacher gets stuck from time to time. |
edubuntu is probably not so useful then
| smorf wrote: | | linux is getting better, much better than the last time I actually tried to install it (years ago) but it has got a long way to go before it becomes usable to my mother. |
My parents use it just fine. Can your mother stop her windows machine getting infected with the next virus that comes along?
| Sophocles wrote: | | Um, well no. The URL you gave brings down the desktop installation CD which is the correct one to use. I've not tried installing ubuntu from it's live CD and I don't recommend it for any linux distro. The latest Ubuntu is 8.10 which does have some bugs. I recommend 8.04: it's more stable. |
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you here. The live CD is the way to go. It lets you check your hardware first, and then installs quickly because it just chucks an image of a working system onto your drive. As for 8.10 vs. 8.04, I would put 8.10 on a desktop, and 8.04 on servers. Desktop users like the new things, and it has better hardware support.
The alternate (non-live) CD is useful for dealing with situations that the live CD can't, but they tend to be rare.
| Sophocles wrote: | | As for Linux: was your network card correctly detected? It needs a device driver in the kernel before any of the network commands will work. The command line command (yes!) |
I'd be very very surprised to see it not detect a wired network card unless it was having hardware issues. You don't really need to go to dmesg for such things, unless you really know what you're looking for, there's too much information. It is, however, good for sending to someone else to help find a problem. Just get them to paste the contents of it into a message for you, and you can see everything.
Aside, that's why so many things show command-line commands, you can copy and paste them, which is easier than 'click here, and click here and the look for this, and click on that'.
| Bruce Simpson wrote: | | The next step will be locating some applications (the stuff on offer through the add/remove option is *very* limited in scope) |
It's not that limited. But if you want to see everything, use the synaptic package manager. Keep in mind though that it's more of a power user tool for when the end user ones can't do whatever it is that's needed.
| Quote: | | and seeing if the missus can work out how to install them. She has no problems with Windows installs thanks to the nice consistent interface and lack of "challenging" questions posed. |
Ask her to install an antivirus on windows - see if she ends up with 'antivirus 2009'. The idea of actually downloading something from a potentially untrusted website, running the .exe, and answering its questions is a strange one when you're not used to it.
| Quote: | | I found out how to create a shortcut for an item on the menus - right click on the menu selection and it offers to make itself a desktop shortcut. That's nice and simple after all. |
Or...drag it and drop it. That seems far and away the most obvious to me. But, right-clicking on it is a good one too. I hadn't seen that before.
| Quote: | | Do I assume that when a third-party application is installed that it will automatically appear in the menus (as with Windows) or offer a desktop shortcut option? |
If it's an application that should have a menu item, it'll appear. It won't appear on your desktop, but if you want it there, you can put it there yourself. Or, as I mentioned, in the panel at the top which is my own preference.
| Quote: | | That's the kind of functionality that people have come to expect from a desktop PC OS. |
Not on the desktop, but in the menu, yes. Putting icons on the desktop is very much a windows thing. And you have the option. I don't put them there, my desktop ends up cluttered with files enough as it is.
And now that Telecom has fixed their exchange, and give me ADSL back, time for work |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eythian
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 442
Location: Dunedin
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| edwin wrote: | | I was referring to the real world as in outside of computers. |
Well, there's no computers in the real world outside of computers either, so that's alright |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
copper
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:17 pm Post subject: Ubuntu not ready indeed |
|
|
Bruce
I'm with you on this.
I had an old PC, downloaded and burnt the install disk.
Installed OK on the older PC and got it to work.
Got the updates running and even managed to install a few programmes such as Opera.
But never figured out how to add shortcuts or create a 'quick launch' type toolbar.
Also never got the CD drive to work correctly (ie play music).
An interesting example of a problem I had. The network cable fell out of the plug in the back of the PC (unseen by me). Windows would simply tell you, not so with Ubuntu. The error messages I got lead me a long way down the wrong track in trying to trace down an incorrect network setting.
Then one day after installing the latest updates/patches it would no longer boot to the GUI.
Went looking for a recovery console to roll back patches, or try even newer patches, but found myself with a command line that would not talk to the internet,
and despite reading a number of forums and other useful information on the web (from my WXP machine!) have never got it to go again.
I found it frustrating, because although much of the user software manages to be agnostic to the OS the desktop was not, and didn't offer any help for newbies (albeit experienced with computers), and frustrating because I put a reasonable amount of time into learning it.
I think I'll put OS/2 on it.
Perhaps readers can suggest other better, more windows like, or newbie friendly, distributions |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malcolm
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 71
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| edwin wrote: |
I was referring to the real world as in outside of computers. Like, making a cup of coffee, opening and closing doors, putting books on shelves, taking groceries and putting them in your shopping trolley. That's what I meant by "real world".
|
I have never seen a mouse driven GUI to handle those tasks either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
