can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Message

Bfskinnerpunk · #1 Post by **Bfskinnerpunk** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:10 pm

I know very little of digging into the guts of an operating system, but I love the idea Linux.

Windows is very 'establishment' and the virus/trojan worries have become a fetish that I'd rather avoid.

Apple has become annoyingly Boutique-ish losing whatever it had left of it's rebellious nature. Kinda like a yuppie buying an off-the-rack Harley.

So here I am looking to be a Linux hipster. Perhaps the arcane nature of Linux is what keeps joe-blows like me out of the picture, but perhaps Linux OS's have matured to the point that I can begin taking another look.

So what do you think? Can novices get involved yet?

I have a T61 set to arrive Monday and I'd love to have Linux on it. The DPE version sounds really cool.

[side note: I'm getting a T61 integrated graphics with the "Intel Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN" card in it.... does Linux have a driver for it?"]

I'd like to either set up a dual boot or but an extra hard drive in the computer and just run Linux off of that. What option is easier?

To start, I'm thinking of doing a total hard drive wipe on my 8 yr old Sony Vaio notebook & making it fully pcLinuxos. In this way, I can get familiar with the system before taking the risk of messing up my T61.

One day, I can be a nerd-hipster too!

#2 Post by **jdhurst** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:31 pm

There is nothing bad about Windows (rock solid and stable), and there is nothing hip about Linux (just another OS that works with a bunch of distros to choose from). Just do whatever you wish.
... JDH

aaa · #3 Post by **aaa** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:46 pm

Well that depends:

* on if the hardware is (easily) supported. Like whether it will work automatically without you doing a thing, or if it requires some work on your part, or if it's not supported at all.

* on what kind of stuff you plan to do, is there a certain application and is there a good enough equivalent easily obtainable on Linux.

* on how much work you plan to put into this, if you encounter problems with the above. Then again, if you're lucky, everything might work without effort.

I can say, on my (older, I must emphasize) T40, all the hardware works automatically, no driver work or anything.

However, I think the support is spotty (needs work to install) for the 4965 wireless. At least right now, anyways, I think the newer Ubuntu 8.04 (still beta) will support it automatically.

Anyways, the easiest way to find out is to try. I would recommend a dual boot, as that is more widely used and convenient. Do it right when you get the laptop, so if you mess up you can use the restore cds (make sure you create those first).

Bfskinnerpunk · #4 Post by **Bfskinnerpunk** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:52 pm

Thanks aaa... I'll give it a try.

Surely, there are folks in this forum that have installed some version of Linux on their T61. I was hoping that I could get a direct confirmation about the ups and downs of it an install.

I kinda joking about the "hip" thing, but in the sense that Linux is a departure from the usual choices... it actually does have a coolness to it.

The fact that it slurps up fewer system resources is really nice.

Paul Unger · #5 Post by **Paul Unger** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:21 pm

I tried a few flavours (pclinuxos, mint, mandriva) and finally settled on <sigh> ubuntu (does that still qualify as "hip"? It almost seems mainstream these days . . . ). I'm new to linux, so the largish community with the support they could provide was a major factor in my decision. Despite numerous claims to the effect that "It just works", my experience is that it doesn't--some things require tweaking (wireless and display drivers spring immediately to mind [I have the Atheros a/b/g/n and Nvidia 140n]; oh, and wireless mice [Logitech v450 and vx revolution]). While that could be viewed as a bad thing, it has provided me the incentive to poke around and learn a few things (which is never a bad thing). I can say everything works now.

Rather than jumping right into a dual-boot setup, I assume you've tried booting linux--regardless of flavour--from a CD first? It's a very unobtrusive way to give things a try.

There was also an excellent writeup here a few months ago by someone who tested a number of distros on a T60 (iirc) and his experience with each. "Distro hopping" comes to mind as part of the title; search for it. Have fun, whatever you decide!

Bfskinnerpunk · #6 Post by **Bfskinnerpunk** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 3:43 pm

Thanks, I'll check into the hopping thread.

I'm trying to get a grip on the linux lingo:

Distros? repositories?

I understand Distro to some extent, but not quite sure what it's about. It's all Linux, but are they all compatible in terms of the software that they can run?

Is anyone aware of a Linux for Newbies web site or faq? I'm off to google for it.

So why is it that Linux "snobs" tend to look down on Ubuntu? I saw another comment about it in another forum. Nothing specific, but it was like "oh, how common." sort of a vibe.

tylerwylie · #7 Post by **tylerwylie** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 3:52 pm

A repository is an online server that holds packages that can be installed by a package manager. In Linux package managers are essential for maintaining what is and isn't installed on your machine, and most modern distributions have their own package managers. I have a new Thinkpad T61, with Intel Wireless, the GMA X3100, etc and Fedora 8, Ubuntu, and OpenSUSE have picked up my hardware out of the box.

Bfskinnerpunk · #8 Post by **Bfskinnerpunk** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:05 pm

Thanks!

I'll look into those. rm is suggesting pcLinuxOs minime with a pile digital photography stuff "DPE"... which sounds very cool.

I would be more than happy to buy a second hard drive with all Linux on it... so is this possible with a PATA hd? Is PATA a bad thing for Linux?

#9 Post by **jdhurst** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:38 pm

Bfskinnerpunk wrote:<snip>
So why is it that Linux "snobs" tend to look down on Ubuntu? I saw another comment about it in another forum. Nothing specific, but it was like "oh, how common." sort of a vibe.

There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu that I can see. Works for me. I have RedHat, SuSe and Ubuntu machines here and there across my two computers and they all work. I could never make Gentoo work, but I also was not prepared to invest the time needed (I am far too busy with work to muck around compiling a kernel for no other reason than to make an OS work).

I think you should choose the OS that meets your needs and not worry about anyone else. ... JDH

#10 Post by **carbon_unit** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:05 pm

jdhurst wrote: I think you should choose the OS that meets your needs and not worry about anyone else. ... JDH

And that's the bottom line.....My thoughts exactly.
I don't care what the Linux snobs think. I use whatever works for me whether it is a newbie distro or plain Debian. I take no pride in the struggle.
They all have a GIU (Graphical User Interface) and they all have a CLI (Command Line Interface). The main difference in distros is the pre-installed package base (software), and the support base (forums).

Bfskinnerpunk · #11 Post by **Bfskinnerpunk** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 4:35 pm

I hear ya.

I'm not worried about what others think in a "peer pressure" sorta way, but I'm trying to determine if there are actual reasons for turning your nose up at Ubuntu (or whatever)... or if it is really is just a snob thing.

So far, I'm thinking of pcLinuxOs DPE since there is already a member here who has gone through the efforst of putting it on a T61.

As I said, this is all new to me, but I'm very enthusiastic about the extent and depth of software available.

Is Linux just a hobby for computer techies?.... or is somebody making money? I don't get it.

#12 Post by **jdhurst** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:03 pm

Bfskinnerpunk wrote:<snip>
Is Linux just a hobby for computer techies?.... or is somebody making money? I don't get it.

Some people make money at it. Vendors make money by selling boxed sets and support for Linux. Consultants and employees make money by supporting it. If paid software exists for Windows and gets ported to Linux, then those Software vendors make money by selling software.

It is precisely the same dynamic as for Windows, except much, much smaller. I make money in the Windows world as a Consultant, and while I see the odd Mac in my travels, I never see a Linux machine, but I see most everyone using Windows machines, so I can make money providing the services I do. I suspect the going would be much leaner if I only supported Linux. It is a supply and demand thing. It has nothing to do with what we choose to use as individuals - as I keep reiterating, use whatever you wish. ... JDH

Paul Unger · #13 Post by **Paul Unger** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 6:30 pm

Bfskinnerpunk wrote:Is Linux just a hobby for computer techies?.... or is somebody making money? I don't get it.

There are two groups to answer this question for: developers and users (though surely there is overlap between the two). I'm becoming a user because of the context in which I work: my Solomon Island colleagues could never afford commercial software. Open / free software is a blessing of significant proportion! I cannot answer for the developers, but I'm grateful for the spirit and the product of their work.

chili555 · #14 Post by **chili555** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 7:15 pm

is somebody making money? I don't get it.

Not everything is being done so someone can make a dollar on it. Think, for example, of Habitat for Humanity. If you bring your own hammer, they will let you sweat all day building a house. Thousands of volunteers donate much time and money for the privilege of doing so. There are hundreds of volunteer groups that work just the same. Linux developers are quite similar. If you are interested in the development and maintenance of some part of the system, take the 4965 wireless driver, for example, learn some perl or python or C# and go to work.

I installed Ubuntu on a new T60 about a year ago. It took about 30 minutes. My ipw3945 wireless worked out of the box. I have not tried Bluetooth nor the modem and I do not have a fingerprint reader, but I'd suspect I could get them going fairly quickly. I did purchase a new harddrive so I could set the XP drive aside for future use, like taxes etc.

There is nothing bad about Windows

Not even virii, malware and spyware? I respectfully disagree.

Stargate199 · #15 Post by **Stargate199** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 7:22 pm

Hmm, good question. I would have to say from an end-user perspective, Linux is not for the novice user. Though Ubuntu provides great support and installing programs is getting better, you still need to be able to use and know how to operate a command line interface. For the majority of my Linux use, most app packages install in the gui, but I have had to use the terminal to install other applications I needed.

#16 Post by **jdhurst** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 7:59 pm

chili555 wrote:<snip>
There is nothing bad about Windows
Not even virii, malware and spyware? I respectfully disagree.

You may respectfully disagree, of course, but I have had Windows (NT4, 2000 and XP Pro) running non-stop, connected over a high-speed link for years on end (since 1999). No crashes, no instability, no viruses, no spyware, no rootkits, nothing - nada.

Recent stories in the technical news have shown how malware writers no longer respect OS boundaries, so whatever OS you use, you need to use your head, your common sense and protect it. People who do silly things get screwed no matter what they are running.

Still - and always - use whatever you wish. ... JDH

chili555 · #17 Post by **chili555** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:32 pm

People who do silly things get screwed no matter what they are running.

I respectfully disagree. Will you please document a currently active "in the wild" virus that runs on any Linux system being run as 'user', not 'root'?

On the other hand, maybe you'd like to help me de-louse my brother-in-law's. my wife's best friend's and my next door neighbor's computers. All have been so infested, their computers would barely crawl. Despite my protestations that I know little about Windows, all asked for a free three hour fix while they sipped soda and gossiped with my wife.

My 60-something wife runs Ubuntu with no fear or limitations on what to open or download. No virii.

My empirical evidence suggests there may be something wrong with Windows.

By the way, was your upgrade from NT4 to 2000 to XP Pro free and accomplished over the web while you sipped a soda? Or did you get a new computer?

I have no desire to start a Windows vs. Linux flame war, so I will end this with an enthusiastic agreement:

Still - and always - use whatever you wish

aaa · #18 Post by **aaa** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 9:50 pm

chili555 wrote:
People who do silly things get screwed no matter what they are running.
I respectfully disagree. Will you please document a currently active "in the wild" virus that runs on any Linux system being run as 'user', not 'root'?

He said silly things. For example, there was someone who opened up the ftp on his mac to the whole world. Of course he was hijacked, even though there's "virtually" no viruses for mac.

His point is, if you know what you're doing you rarely get viruses, even on Windows. You tend to know what your doing if you're considering a linux install.

#19 Post by **jdhurst** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 6:28 am

chili555 wrote:<snip>
1. On the other hand, maybe you'd like to help me de-louse my brother-in-law's. my wife's best friend's and my next door neighbor's computers. All have been so infested, their computers would barely crawl. <snip>
<snip>
2. My empirical evidence suggests there may be something wrong with Windows.

3. By the way, was your upgrade from NT4 to 2000 to XP Pro free and accomplished over the web while you sipped a soda? Or did you get a new computer?
<snip>

1. I did - I posted a well-used thread in this forum on how to do it.
2. Emperical evidence is sometimes wrong. I would not use an OS as faulty as suggested. I need complete reliability in my work.
3. Two computers across 3 OS's. The first IBM box ran NT4 and Windows 2000 reliably (and is still running in the basement). The second IBM box came with XP Pro and is still running in my home office. My T41 goes with me to clients.

... JDH

JonathanGennick · #20 Post by **JonathanGennick** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 7:16 am

Bfskinnerpunk wrote:So what do you think? Can novices get involved yet?

Sure. But I'll add the proviso that "it depends".

My wife ran Suse for two years with nary a problem. She's as non-technical as one can get. All she needed was web + email + word processing, and Linux delivered all of those just fine.

Then one day she bought some pattern-making software for her sewing hobby. That software ran under Windows. I received orders to "get it working," and so I reinstalled Windows for her.

So "it depends" upon what you plan to do with the computer. My experience is that run-of-the-mill functionality like email, web, word-processing is solid under both Windows and Linux. But if you plan to buy specialty software such as from Adobe, for example, then you may find that Windows or Mac OS X work better for you.

rm · #21 Post by rm » Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:16 am

JonathanGennick wrote: Then one day she bought some pattern-making software for her sewing hobby. That software ran under Windows. I received orders to "get it working," and so I reinstalled Windows for her.

Why didn't you install a Windows VMware VM instead?

Any way, for the OP, I recommend that you try to understand a little bit about the origins of Linux and its underpinning philosophy. Even if you don't agree or completely agree with it, it is good to understand it so that you know where the flow is coming from from and where it is heading. First of all, understand what free software means:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-soft ... eedom.html

Once you read that, I recommend that you also read this:

http://catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral ... al-bazaar/

At that point you will understand what this Linux thing is all about. You will then need practical knowledge. This is a good start I think:

http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/2007 ... -to-linux/

From there you can then ask more specific questions and we will be more than happy to help.

JonathanGennick · #22 Post by **JonathanGennick** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:35 pm

rm wrote:Why didn't you install a Windows VMware VM instead?

I took the path of least-resistance and implemented the simplest solution at hand.

My wife has no particular interest in Linux. I'm sure she'd have zero interest in VMWare, Wine, etc. And that's really the beauty of it. People who are not predisposed to liking Linux can be perfectly happy with it. The trick is to recognize the boundaries within which that can occur.

#23 Post by **carbon_unit** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 3:10 pm

My Wife and Daughter are the same way. They don't care if it is windows or Linux as long as it does what they want it to do. They surf all the myspace/facebook/youtube they want and I spend 0 minutes a month cleaning up spyware/virus. We are both happy.
When they get different requirements I will re-evaluate the Win-Lin situation.

jwriter · #24 Post by **jwriter** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:42 am

I hope bfskinnerpunk is still reading this thread (still there bud?) Somebody needs to mention Puppy Linux as a ridiculously easy way to start Linux.

I was given a live CD that booted up perfectly on my T30. All I had to do was specify the keyboard style and my screen resolution during boot up. It's an easy graphical interface, although you can enter commands if you prefer.

There are tons of apps - I was writing documents, browsing the web, watching multimedia in no time. Best of all, *this is all happening in RAM* - that's how compact this is. I didn't even need to mount the hard drive to the system, but you can if you want. Try it - it's amazing and it gives new meaning why people call the other operating systems bloatware. Hope this helps.

jamesqf · #25 Post by **jamesqf** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 12:49 pm

rm wrote:Any way, for the OP, I recommend that you try to understand a little bit about the origins of Linux and its underpinning philosophy. Even if you don't agree or completely agree with it, it is good to understand it so that you know where the flow is coming from from and where it is heading. First of all, understand what free software means:

I have to disagree. The Linux/Unix philosophy is about how the user interfaces with the system. It has no inherent connection to free/open software. It's true that Linux is an example of open software, but there's plenty of open software in the Windows world, and likewise commercial Unix operating systems. If Windows was free and Linux cost money, I'd gladly pay for Linux.

For the original poster, it all depends on what you want to do as a pure end user. I have Linux running on several T60 & 61 machines, but I'm not a typical end user. I don't know what you want to do. Run a web browser? Linux does that. Word processing? Yes, though if it's not Latex, I can't help you much. Listen to music, watch DVDs, other "multimedia" stuff? On that I'm clueless. Compile C code? Linux does that far better than Windoze

rm · #26 Post by rm » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:40 pm

jamesqf wrote: I have to disagree. The Linux/Unix philosophy is about how the user interfaces with the system.

You leave me scratching my head here.

jamesqf wrote: It has no inherent connection to free/open software.

Now I'm really lost.

jamesqf wrote: It's true that Linux is an example of open software, but there's plenty of open software in the Windows world, and likewise commercial Unix operating systems.

OK, I think I understand this sentence, but I fail to see the point in relation to the thread.

jamesqf wrote: If Windows was free and Linux cost money, I'd gladly pay for Linux.

Ha, ha. Now you see why people have to read the link I mentioned? Free software has nothing to do with how much it costs!

teetee · #27 Post by **teetee** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:09 pm

rm wrote:
jamesqf wrote: If Windows was free and Linux cost money, I'd gladly pay for Linux.
Ha, ha. Now you see why people have to read the link I mentioned? Free software has nothing to do with how much it costs!

I think jamesqf was just trying to say that he prefers linux over windows. It probably doesn't have anything to do with free software or "free" software.

Basically I don't think linux is good for end user if the definition of "end user" is: everything should just work without reading anything, typing in any commands, or knowing anything more than a typical windows user.

I am not trying to be mean or sarcastic. From my experience that's usually the way it is.

If anyone who starts using linux without much guidance ("click here and then click that") and can learn an habit of reading manuals, doing online search, and developing his own style of solving problems after a month, then he probably is more than just an end user.

My opinion is that it's hard to switch to something new and it's even harder if you don't have the motivation/time for it. I think that's all there is for a frustrated linux beginner.

to rm: nice article on 7sqz@PCLinuxOS. I was just thinking that 7z probably took reference on arj/lha's command/option set because they look so similar.

teetee

rm · #28 Post by rm » Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:17 am

teetee wrote: I think jamesqf was just trying to say that he prefers linux over windows. It probably doesn't have anything to do with free software or "free" software.

You may be right. I had a hard time following his line of thought. Reading his comments over again, I now think that he thought I was referring to the Unix philosophy instead of the Free Software philosophy.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html

While Linux has been influenced by both set of philosophies, the context should have made it clear that that I was referring to the Free Software philosophy.

teetee wrote: Basically I don't think linux is good for end user if the definition of "end user" is: everything should just work without reading anything, typing in any commands, or knowing anything more than a typical windows user.

The reason typical Windows users don't know what a driver is is because the OS came pre-installed for them. Now that Linux pre-installed, consumer oriented, systems are starting to become popular, the number of non-techie users will increase.

teetee wrote: I am not trying to be mean or sarcastic. From my experience that's usually the way it is.

My opinion is that it's hard to switch to something new and it's even harder if you don't have the motivation/time for it. I think that's all there is for a frustrated linux beginner.

I agree. That is why I encourage new Linux users to become familiar with the Free Software movement. My hope is that by doing that they will gain the needed motivation to stick with it when the run up against a difficulty.

I also wrote this two pieces to encourage them:

http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/2007 ... use-linux/

http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/2007 ... -to-linux/

teetee wrote: If anyone who starts using linux without much guidance ("click here and then click that") and can learn an habit of reading manuals, doing online search, and developing his own style of solving problems after a month, then he probably is more than just an end user.

There are distros that are easier to use than others for sure. In my opinion Ubuntu requires too much use of the command line and of Google. That is why for new Linux users I recommend PCLinuxOS first.

teetee wrote: to rm: nice article on 7sqz@PCLinuxOS. I was just thinking that 7z probably took reference on arj/lha's command/option set because they look so similar.

teetee

Have you tried it? I know a lot of people have downloaded it, but I have had zero feedback from it. I guess I should be happy that I am not flooded with bug reports.

jamesqf · #29 Post by **jamesqf** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:23 pm

rm wrote:
jamesqf wrote: If Windows was free and Linux cost money, I'd gladly pay for Linux.
Ha, ha. Now you see why people have to read the link I mentioned? Free software has nothing to do with how much it costs!

Well, that's a philosophical argument, and quite beside my point. If present reality was inverted, so that Windows was free software - in every sense you want - and Linux was the closed-source commercial product of a corporate monopoly, I'd still prefer Linux.

It's primarily a matter of user interface. For example, to erase a file, I want to simply type "erase name_of_file", not have to drag a picture that's supposed to "intuitively" represent that file to another picture that's supposed to be a trash can, and which somehow (here's that word again) "intuitively" represents the operation of erasing the file - except of course that it really doesn't erase it, just moves it to a different, semi-hidden place.

The bottom line is that I just don't think the way Microsoft apparently expects its users (and developers) to think. Trying to work in Windows, or in one of the ersatz-Windows desktops* like Gnome or KDE, is so frustrating that if that was my only option, I'd be hunting for a different line of work.

*And there's a prime example of what I hate. My computer is (usually) on my desktop, not the other way around.

rm · #30 Post by rm » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:50 pm

jamesqf wrote: Well, that's a philosophical argument, and quite beside my point. If present reality was inverted, so that Windows was free software - in every sense you want - and Linux was the closed-source commercial product of a corporate monopoly, I'd still prefer Linux.

It's primarily a matter of user interface. ...

James,

I hear you and I see your point, now. I certainly respect your opinion. However, I believe that the fact that Linux can be used without a graphical interface is not the reason it has become so popular with users and developers alike. FreeBSD has that too. The most important difference between Unix, including FreeBSD, and Linux is the GPL license. And at the root of that license lies the Free Software philosophy.

From the very beginning people (users and, most importantly, developers) have put up with any practical disadvantages of running Linux because of their affinity with the license. This is the motivation that has allowed for those practical disadvantages to slowly, methodically, and relentlessly disappear.

So you see, the interface is infinitely less important than the license.

"unix_philosophy" < "free_software_philosophy"

can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Re: can a pure "end user" switch to Linux?

Who is online