Linux 'desktop' still too geeky for mainstream users?

[markone]

Originally Posted by bkorb

I use wallpapers to indicate which desk top I'm using. In KDE 3.x, of course. The feature was removed for 4.X. Many complain of this, but I'm afraid the KDE developers are too busy improving the features that amuse themselves.

I've complained about this myself; many people may not care, but for me, it is serious.

I disagree however with you analysis of how this has come about: I believe that the kde devs have a vision of how things are going to work in the future (even if its not a fully worked out vision) and are pushing towards this. Unfortunately, they've not told the rest of us what this vision is and how, eventually, it will benefit us ... and are surprised when they see less than complete enthusiasm when we see what has worked ripped up for stuff that may or may not do something for us in the future.

Driver support in linux isn't too bad.

Well, that's true, in the terms that you state it, but:

• it gets into the issue of installing stuff in Linux vs installing things in some OS without a proper installer. The number of 'I have downloaded the .exe file, and it doesn't work/I don't know what to with it under Linux' posts that I have seen is difficult to believe. Any distro that ships without some kind of opened-on-first-install file that says, amongst other things, 'use the app installer' is asking for trouble.
• And its usually not as simple as just 'install this and it works'. You usually have to configure (you can do this, I (sometimes) can do this, can a newbie?).
• Sometimes you have to understand deep voodoo (relatively) about how things work (eg, networking) before you even have much chance of knowing how to configure things. this is a difficult problem to solve, and the more 'easy' distros try to hide anything even vaguely complex from the end-user, the more its difficult to solve. OTOH, if you do expect non-mavens to be able to do stuff, there has to be a 'gentle learning curve' way of getting there.

...codecs...

bleurgh!

I think this is always going to be a problem, but, my suggestion for minimising the impact of this problem is to ask, during installation, 'do you want proprietary/licensed/dubious stuff, or do you want to keep your system 'pure'?' That sets a system-wide/user-wide status bit that determines how those things are handled (which can later be changed, of course).
Any time this is set or changed you get a brief lecture on what this means, but once you have accepted this, codecs are made freely available to download (ie, appropriate repository change is made) and maybe even downloaded by default if the selection of apps justifies it.

Sometimes I wonder if the big push to capture more "average users" makes sense right now. Perhaps the community would be better served trying to get more of some other user type, since the "average user" seems to be defined as "knows Windows enough to use it, can't be bothered to learn something else".

Its certainly a point worth considering. I'm not sure we are near the point where anybody's grannie, can, without assistance install and configure a distro on a blank computer and get it working with her peripherals; there will be exceptions, of course, but a techie/geek/grandson still seems like a worthwhile precaution.

One issue is that anyone with a few years of getting by under windows (or other OSs) believes that they know computers, and when something different, whether its better or not, comes along, they will tend to blame the new system for them being unable to get things done. its not that they don't want a system that works differently, in ability to resist malware, but they haven't been persuaded of the necessity to think differently and learn new 'tricks' in order to get it to happen.

[Caracalla]

Kooking at Opensuse, i'd say yes. And the problem should not even be that hard to solve. Just have a window pop up after installation asking the user whether they want to install codecs/drivers/flash/etc (explainging what they are for of course). That should go a long way. Enabling a few more repos (like Packman)by default would also be a good idea IMO.

Unacceptable beheviour like dropping the user to command line after installation should also not happen, of course. I know the crappy state of Ati drivers was to blame in my case but if Ubuntu can get that part right, why not opensuse?

Originally Posted by bkorb

Just to be clear: I love the thoroughness of the SuSE distribution and the fact it is rock solid and the ease of managing patches. I surely do wish someone would run down that paper size thing though.....

Does configure desktop->regional&language->other->paper format not help?

[growbag]

Originally Posted by Caracalla

Kooking at Opensuse, i'd say yes. And the problem should not even be that hard to solve. Just have a window pop up after installation asking the user whether they want to install codecs/drivers/flash/etc (explainging what they are for of course). That should go a long way. Enabling a few more repos (like Packman)by default would also be a good idea IMO.

The problem is that these are not seen as problems in openSUSE. You have to realise that openSUSE is owned and distributed by a US corporation, and as such these things will NEVER EVER be incorporated due to having to comply with US (real and perceived) patent laws.

Novell also has to keep on Microsoft's good side or risk being sued out of existence.

We (openSUSE users) also need to understand and accept that we are simply testers for the features that may be incorporated into the Commercial SLED product.

Why do you think we have to accept a EULA?

As such, I would even go as far as to declare that openSUSE is not really a Linux distribution in it's own right, merely of a testing ground for a commercial application.

I say that because openSUSE is not in existence to further it's own existence for it's own good, and to provide the best Linux O/S for it's users.

That might sound way off, but when you read all the material on the Novell website, you start to get a clearer picture.

[microchip8]

Originally Posted by growbag

The problem is that these are not seen as problems in openSUSE. You have to realise that openSUSE is owned and distributed by a US corporation, and as such these things will NEVER EVER be incorporated due to having to comply with US (real and perceived) patent laws.

Having a popup which asks users if they want to add additional codecs does not violate any patents. If such a popup violates them then we might as well say that the wiki also violates them since it instructs the user how to add said codecs.

We (openSUSE users) also need to understand and accept that we are simply testers for the features that may be incorporated into the Commercial SLED product.

Why do you think we have to accept a EULA?

as far as my memory serves, openSUSE got rid of the EULA acceptance in 11.1

As such, I would even go as far as to declare that openSUSE is not really a Linux distribution in it's own right, merely of a testing ground for a commercial application.

I say that because openSUSE is not in existence to further it's own existence for it's own good, and to provide the best Linux O/S for it's users.

That might sound way off, but when you read all the material on the Novell website, you start to get a clearer picture.

Just because a company takes a distro developed/tested by users and then makes a commercial product out of it, does not mean that what they take is not a distro on its own right. openSUSE and Fedora, which RH also uses for its commercial offerings, are very much distros in their own right. Users can discuss future development, request features to be added, improve cerrtain areas, etc. Why do you think we have openFATE? Do you think FATE is only focusing to improve Novell's future SLES/SLED offerings?

[microchip8]

hmmm, why I can't edit my post in this thread? O.o

[growbag]

Originally Posted by microchip8

Having a popup which asks users if they want to add additional codecs does not violate any patents. If such a popup violates them then we might as well say that the wiki also violates them since it instructs the user how to add said codecs.

But the wiki is not actually included in the product, hence a level of claimable separation. The wiki is "produced by the community", openSUSE is produced by Novell Inc.

as far as my memory serves, openSUSE got rid of the EULA acceptance in 11.1

On casual glance, yes, but it is still binding even though you don't have to click on anything. Plus a EULA window pops up on doing the first online update .

Just because a company takes a distro developed/tested by users and then makes a commercial product out of it, does not mean that what they take is not a distro on its own right. openSUSE and Fedora, which RH also uses for its commercial offerings, are very much distros in their own right. Users can discuss future development, request features to be added, improve cerrtain areas, etc. Why do you think we have openFATE? Do you think FATE is only focusing to improve Novell's future SLES/SLED offerings?

I have no idea what FATE or openFATE is, but I have to disagree with you there (no disrespect meant), this is my opinion and view based on what I have read and experienced.

Don't get me wrong, I love openSUSE, but I stand by my conclusions. You can ask and demand until you are blue in the face, but certain (ie codec) features will never be implemented because it could possibly bring openSUSE into the sights of certain concerned bodies thereby opening Novell up to possible lawsuits.

Is that in "the interests of openSUSE" as a distribution? Does that contribute to "make openSUSE the "world's most useable Linux*"?

I would say categorically "no", it is in the interests of Novell Inc.

* source http://en.opensuse.org/Welcome_to_openSUSE.org

[FeatherMonkey]

The wiki is "produced by the community

You made me look so is the distro.. Guiding Principles - openSUSE

Novell provides the openSUSE community with resources to maintain and release the openSUSE distribution. Novell supports openSUSE through sponsoring of infrastructure, human resources and funding. It continuously maintains infrastructure and software.

Now I'm no lawyer/solicitor etc, but can the sponsoring entity be held accountable? Surely if that is the case then AMD and IP exchange are accountable to.

[microchip8]

Originally Posted by growbag

But the wiki is not actually included in the product, hence a level of claimable separation. The wiki is "produced by the community", openSUSE is produced by Novell Inc.

How is this different from a popup written by a openSUSE user? I can start coding right now and after finished, commit my work to openSUSE (under GPL) and they add it to the next release. Patents are not involved here (unless I use a patented algo) since the popup is NOT infringing on any patents, but only offers to install codecs, which the user decides to allow it or not. Since patent laws differ per country, the end user has to know if by installing a certain codec, this breaks the law in his country. It is his responsibility to research, not mine. There is no patent infringement in my code of the popup, eg, it does not encode anything, does not force the user to install anything (only suggests) and so on. By your logic, one can sue google for displaying torrent files which violate certain copyrights and possible patents since the torrent may point to a file which is encoded in MPEG-4 Part 10 format (for example) which is patented and the MPEGLA collects royalties for it. Or in another example, it's like saying that by placing a IRC icon on the user desktop so he can get help in a chat room if needed, will get you in legal trouble since the IRC name translation protocol is patented ( IRC name translation protocol - Patent 6446112 ) and thus by placing an IRC icon, eventhough it only points to a patented protocol and does not carry the protocol itself, can get you in trouble since a user can use the link to enter IRC, which has patented stuff

On casual glance, yes, but it is still binding even though you don't have to click on anything. Plus a EULA window pops up on doing the first online update .

I haven't read it ever so can't comment much on it, just click next and do my install. You're nitpicking too much

I have no idea what FATE or openFATE is, but I have to disagree with you there (no disrespect meant), this is my opinion and view based on what I have read and experienced.

Don't get me wrong, I love openSUSE, but I stand by my conclusions. You can ask and demand until you are blue in the face, but certain (ie codec) features will never be implemented because it could possibly bring openSUSE into the sights of certain concerned bodies thereby opening Novell up to possible lawsuits.

Is that in "the interests of openSUSE" as a distribution? Does that contribute to "make openSUSE the "world's most useable Linux*"?

I would say categorically "no", it is in the interests of Novell Inc.

* source Welcome to openSUSE.org - openSUSE

openFATE https://features.opensuse.org/ is a place where *regular* users can request a feature to be added in the next release. Based on how many people support the feature request and if it's actually useful/doable, it either passes or gets rejected. When it passes, there's very high probability you'll have it in the next release.

As for adding codecs, a popup does *not* distribute any of them. Only offers to install or at least add a repo from where one can get them. Just like a torrent file only carries hash and tracker info, but not the actual content which one can get from the torrent file if one chooses to since it holds that information

[growbag]

Fine, then prove me wrong and get the codec installer in the next, or for that fact, ANY openSUSE release.

I would be both ecstatically happy and also very surprised at the same time .

But I challenge you to report here the responses you get from the devs .

[microchip8]

Originally Posted by growbag

Fine, then prove me wrong and get the codec installer in the next, or for that fact, ANY openSUSE release.

I would be both ecstatically happy and also very surprised at the same time .

But I challenge you to report here the responses you get from the devs .

That wasn't the point I was trying to make and I don't care if a popup gets added to openSUSE or not since I do not use the standard way of installing my codecs as I use patched version of almost all codec carriers (mplayer, ffmpeg, x264, xvid, lame, etc) which needs compiling after patching.

The point is that if such a popup, by offering the user to activate a repo which offers said codecs, violates patents then so does openSUSE already since if you go to YaST -> Software Repositories you'll find a "Community Repositories" button which you can check and select from the predefined list, among others, the Packman repo and the VLC one which one can get the said codecs from.