[SATLUG] Video Drivers

[Alan L. Lesmerises]

You echoed some of the same observations I've made with my ***limited*** Linux experience (but was holding off saying anything yet).

As for being ready for the desktop, I just keep thinking of people like my mother-in-law and my wife who are both very technologically challenged.  The idea that someone would have to recompile the kernel and/or manually edit some configuration file to install a driver or something is a little challenging for me -- with over 20 years of computer experience -- I can't envision my wife or mother-in-law being capable of handling anything close to that.

As a result, I think the benefits of Linux won't be realized except by the people who are the most computer literate.  That also means that the people least capable of dealing with the consequences of crashes, viruses, etc. on their own will be relegated to using MS Windows -- an operating system that's much more vulnerable to those hazards.

IMO, if it isn't push-button easy and idiot-proof, it surely won't be ready for widespread desktop use.

BTW -- thanks everyone for your inputs.

Geoff wrote:
> Daniel J. Givens wrote:
>>
>>
>> ALSA and NetworkManager have both addressed these fairly well. Granted
>> they aren't seemless, but they are pretty good. When it comes to
>> wireless, I've had more difficulties with Windows. Do you use the
>> Windows wireless manager or do you use the manufacturer's utility.
>> Sometimes, things don't work correctly unless you use one or the other
>> depending on the device. Maybe I've just figured out how to deal with
>> the bumps in the road to the point that I just don't notice them as much.
>>   
> 
> Not that anyone asked, but here's -My- opinion.
> 
> If you want a gui'ed desktop system, with all the latest fancy bells, 
> whistles whizz-bang doo-dads and so forth... Go with Microsoft.
> The trade off is, Linux has -much- tighter security, in that the layers 
> around the ip socket inherently make Linux one of the most secure OS's 
> available on the open market.  M$ is coming around, but it's taking a 
> long time.
> On the other hand, their desktop display management is second to none.  
> I suppose it's whatever you get used to, but I've got a gui'd linux 
> system running Knoppix (installed)... I guess it's just me, but I've 
> never been a fan of the linux desktop.  In general, the fonts are too 
> small to read.  By the time you've got 'em big enough to see, you've 
> distorted them so that the text is out of it's container and not all 
> visible.
> 
> I've got two monitors on my desk top, two keyboards, and two mice, and 
> three machines. (one being the server, which runs SuSE Linux (for now - 
> it'll probably get changed to a debian based product in the future) so 
> this is a side-by-side comparison.  the Windows gui has it all over the 
> Linux gui, in -my- opinion.
> Do I trust M$?  Certainly not!  It is, after all, behind a -linux- 
> firewall ;-)
> 
> However, sound works better without having to futz with much, Video 
> cards have better support, there's more general hardware support for 
> Windows than Linux (although that's changing and I welcome it!), it's 
> just that to me, I can get along with a M$ gui -much- better than gnome, 
> kde, flux, or any other linux wm.
> 
> I think the -hard-core- Linux users beat their chest and drum so loudly 
> about Linux, is not because Linux is superior (in some ways, yes - in 
> others, no) but rather because there's a hatred for M$, what it stands 
> for, how it was started, blah-blah-blah.
> The Bottom line is, what works for you?  For me, my printer, scanner, 
> video and sound card work in XP, natively.  The OS found those 
> peripherals when it was loading.  Linux still doesn't support my 
> printer, my sound card needs to be manipulated and massaged evertime the 
> linux gui is booted, and the network card had problems, but that's now 
> corrected.
> 
> Is Linux ready for the desktop?
> I think my answer is "It depends on how badly the user hates Microsoft".
> 
> -- 
> -Geoff
>