Who do newcomers give up on Linux?

[microchip8]

Originally Posted by dragonbite

So when the kernel itself crashes, what are the indicators? screen goes blank? dump into CLI?

Plus, I was told when my system did this during installation it was a kernel panic. That's not a crash?

That depends on how the kernel crashes. A kernel oops will be seen on console and will abruptly halt the system (as in, freeze it). A panic is similar to an oops, actually results from an oops, but can allow the kernel (or at least some parts of it) to function further

More info: Linux kernel oops - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Kernel oops: Kernel oops bugcount

[ahmedelsayed]

Originally Posted by brassy

ahmedelsayed wrote:
> as I said before this is based on my short experience with linux
> My computer is set to dual boot, when I boot into linux everything
> seems to be hazy or blurry and not as sharp as windows I wonder why, and
> colors are not as vivid as they are on windows.

this is a "chat" forum...not the place to get setup advice...so, let
me suggest you post over in the applications forum
<http://forums.opensuse.org/applications/> you question of why things
are hazy in Linux and not in Redmond's finest..

i guess someone over there might be able to help you sort out the BEST
driver from your graphics card, and lead you down a path of adjusting
dots per inch, maybe contrast and blah blah blah

--
brassy

I didn't ask anyone to help me sort this out so that you tell me this is not a place for advice did I ?!!
I'm saying - from my perspective- what could set back newcomers from using linux.

and for people saying a system crash is very different from an application crash, maybe technically but for me as a user I see no difference, for both ways any unsaved data gets lost, also when the windows manager (like compiz) hangs I consider it very similar to a whole system crash/hang

[microchip8]

Originally Posted by ahmedelsayed

and for people saying a system crash is very different from an application crash, maybe technically but for me as a user I see no difference, for both ways any unsaved data gets lost, also when the windows manager (like compiz) hangs I consider it very similar to a whole system crash/hang

That's because you don't understand the difference (nor do I expect you to) and thus spread misinformation or believe in misinformation

If an application crashes, depending on the application itself, it *can* save your data while a severe kernel crash will not (or chances are much higher it will not)

As I explained, a crashing system is *not* the same as a crashing application/window manager/etc. If your window manager crashes you can still use your system with no problems by using the CLI. If the whole system crashes you neither can use your window manager nor the CLI (with a few exceptions)

both look similar but are NOT one and the same thing, thus from a user's cluelessness it gives him a FALSE perception

[dragonbite]

Hmm . Whatever.

[69_rs_ss]

Originally Posted by microchip8

That's because you don't understand the difference (nor do I expect you to) and thus spread misinformation or believe in misinformation

If an application crashes, depending on the application itself, it *can* save your data while a severe kernel crash will not (or chances are much higher it will not)

As I explained, a crashing system is *not* the same as a crashing application/window manager/etc. If your window manager crashes you can still use your system with no problems by using the CLI. If the whole system crashes you neither can use your window manager nor the CLI (with a few exceptions)

both look similar but are NOT one and the same thing, thus from a user's cluelessness it gives him a FALSE perception

But ahmedelsayed has a point, for a newcomer to linux this is a stopping issue. It will stop the newcomer in their tracks and most likely send them back to the OS they were using originally. I think this is a valid reason why some newcomers don't stick with linux.

[microchip8]

Originally Posted by 69_rs_ss

But ahmedelsayed has a point, for a newcomer to linux this is a stopping issue. It will stop the newcomer in their tracks and most likely send them back to the OS they were using originally. I think this is a valid reason why some newcomers don't stick with linux.

Of course he has a point. I wasn't debating this. I was only debating that what he wrote are two different things which from his uninformed POV look the same as they offer very similar effect. A "normal" users who just uses this computer for "normal" things and doesn't really understand how it all works, nor is interested to understand it, will perceive what happened as one and the same thing, thus thinking that Linux "crashes" all the time or some stuff like that.

As for the valid reason. It's both funny and ironic at the same time. People have kept up with Windows crashes, hangs, weird behavior, etc for many MANY years and still continue to use it and most don't care, yet when they jump on Linux, as soon as they experience a hang or whatever, they all blame Linux without actually thinking for a bit (man, does thinking hurt ) how or why it happened? Is it really Linux' fault? Maybe it's a faulty memory in my system that causes such things? etc, etc....

I don't know how or why, but many think that Linux is some magic or holy grail that will save them all and doesn't have problems on it own. Of course it has problems. No OS is free from them or from bugs and weird unexpected behavior but it also has its advantages which many people like.

> I didn't ask anyone to help me sort this out so that you tell me this
> is not a place for advice did I ?!!
> I'm saying - from my perspective- what could set back newcomers from
> using linux.

sorry, i wasn't trying to say that you had done WRONG for posting it
in this thread (i know why you did here, as an example of problems
with Linux) what i was TRYING to do was just to let you know that it
probably can be better than it is now for you because, as Jim
mentioned, the same monitor, graphics card etc _can_ produce exactly
the same colors, etc for Linux, MS, Apple, BeOS, etc etc etc....but,
only *if* it is 'tuned' to do so (via drivers, etc)..

if don't want help to tune it, then that is your business....just
don't go around saying that Linux is fuzzy and the colors are washed
out...instead you can say that for any of several reasons you are
unable to tune your specific monitor and graphics card to the same
level of capability on Linux as it is on Windows....

those are two different things, see?

--
brassy

[ahmedelsayed]

Originally Posted by brassy

> I didn't ask anyone to help me sort this out so that you tell me this
> is not a place for advice did I ?!!
> I'm saying - from my perspective- what could set back newcomers from
> using linux.

sorry, i wasn't trying to say that you had done WRONG for posting it
in this thread (i know why you did here, as an example of problems
with Linux) what i was TRYING to do was just to let you know that it
probably can be better than it is now for you because, as Jim
mentioned, the same monitor, graphics card etc _can_ produce exactly
the same colors, etc for Linux, MS, Apple, BeOS, etc etc etc....but,
only *if* it is 'tuned' to do so (via drivers, etc)..

if don't want help to tune it, then that is your business....just
don't go around saying that Linux is fuzzy and the colors are washed
out...instead you can say that for any of several reasons you are
unable to tune your specific monitor and graphics card to the same
level of capability on Linux as it is on Windows....

those are two different things, see?

--
brassy

"Tuning" the video card is not an easy task for a newbie who knows nothing about dealing with linux. And since most customers gain their first impression from the way something looks, I believe that this untuned video cards gives them a bad impression and may lead to dumping linux forever. That's my point ,fine?

[consused]

Originally Posted by ahmedelsayed

"Tuning" the video card is not an easy task for a newbie who knows nothing about dealing with linux. And since most customers gain their first impression from the way something looks, I believe that this untuned video cards gives them a bad impression and may lead to dumping linux forever. That's my point ,fine?

I think that is mostly right. However I don't think it is realistic to think of yourself or any user of Linux as a conventional "customer" . Even if you are contributing money in some way to various projects. You are not really buying a product/service. If you purchased a boxed set, that is somewhat different as far as the included media, manuals and time-limited support is concerned. You should certainly take the approach of a customer on those deliverables, but on Linux and all the huge amount of free software - I don't think so.

[DistortedHumor]

Also, someone buys a Linux OS system, or installs it, first of all, many "out of the box" does not have Full Multi-media support, and so if someone goes to youtube and nothing plays, right then They will give up. (Suse at least has a 1-click install of multimedia)

A few years ago, modifying the settings was a PITA for a new user, but that is greatly improved.

While it does not effect me, No iTunes == no Linux for a lot of folks.

I happen to LIKE messing around with computers, but there is a number of people who just want to use it and not mess around with it, and Linux backround as a hobbiest OS will take a little longer before it could be accepted.

However, More and more people are accepting the better open-source products like Firefox, GIMP, Openoffice, ect gain acceptance, Linux hand only gets stronger.